Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Entertainment/2018 February 25

= February 25 =

1990s mail-order comic book catalog (US)
I'm looking for the name of a mail-order catalog published in the US in the mid-1990s. They sold recent issues of comic books, trade paperbacks, trading cards, and some other memorabilia. Some of the specific things I remember being promoted in the catalog were Batman Forever, Strangers in Paradise, and Gen 13.

One other thing I remember is that the actual mail-order form would have an illustration of a comics character (like Storm) saying "Rush my order!"

The closest thing I can find with Google is Diamond Comic Distributors' Previews, but that looks too slick and "magaziney". I don't think that's it. Zagal e jo^^^ 08:30, 25 February 2018 (UTC)


 * It started much earlier than the 1990s, but you may be thinking of the ads for Mile High Comics, which frequently took out double-splash page ads in comic books and often would use a superhero or other character as part of the hook. They're on the web now, of course, here. An example of one of their earlier ads is here, though it doesn't happen to be one of the ones with a "spokes hero" shilling. Matt Deres (talk) 16:21, 25 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Ah, I remember Mile High Comics! But after some more searching, I think I found what I had in mind: Entertainment This Month Zagal e jo^^^ 01:36, 26 February 2018 (UTC)

Nickname of Sergio Perez
Why the Force India ,fans even Perez himself refer Perez "Checo"? -- Soundlessbird2 (talk) 09:07, 25 February 2018 (UTC)
 * It is the common Mexican nickname for someone with the first name Sergio. That happens in most languages - in England a person named Margaret was often called Peggy, Elizabeth becomes Lizzie or Betty, and a William may well become Billy. Wymspen (talk) 13:59, 25 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Some of those English examples have an intermediate name, specifically Meg which becomes Peg, and Will which becomes Bill. As for Checo and Sergio, it's like Pepe and Jose. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 14:26, 25 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Here is a more full list of Mexican nicknames. In Spanish these are called "hipocorísticos", which translates to Hypocorism in English.  Hypocorism has a more complete list, but also does not give etymologies.  The article at Spanish Wikipedia does have more etymological information, if you read spanish.  In this specific case, the Sergio --> Checo happens this way 1) Many nicknames in Spanish use the final syllable + a diminutive suffix and 2) A devoicing and/or hardening of as the medial consonant becomes an initial consonant.  So that goes like this "Sergio --> Gio (last sylable) --> Gico (add -co dimmunitive suffix) --> Checo (voiced /dʒ/ becomes unvoiced /tʃ/ ).  This is roughly the same process that produces the more familiar Jesus --> Chuy.  -- Jayron 32 18:21, 26 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Excellent finds! Much of the Spanish Wikipedia article is simply a list, so it would seem feasible to translate the explanatory text there, to supplement the English article where that info is lacking. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 19:01, 26 February 2018 (UTC)

Winter Olympics
Closing ceremony is still ongoing, but does anyone know who the Korean and blond gal standing by bach in that selfie moment was?
 * Also WP does not have the budgetary projections for Pyeongchang, Bejing and even Tokyo...Do you know where to find it? China clearly has the forex and Tokyo spends more than a woman getting married but it would be nice to know.Lihaas (talk) 12:46, 25 February 2018 (UTC)


 * Are you talking about Lindsey Vonn? ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 13:24, 25 February 2018 (UTC)
 * She was the blonde one? Then must be. Although there was the Korean gal beside her.Lihaas (talk) 04:47, 26 February 2018 (UTC)
 * The tall blonde, yes. The one version of that picture I found on Google Images identifies Bach, Vonn, and the shirtless guy. Other than that, no names given, although some of them look familiar. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 10:39, 26 February 2018 (UTC)


 * From the Olympic/IOC website: These athletes "representing all five continents" joined Bach to "express a collective word of thanks to the host nation on behalf of the Olympic family, with a traditional Korean gesture of gratitude": Martin Fourcade, Nao Kodaira, Seun Adigun, Yun Sung-bin, Ryom Tae-ok, Lindsey Vonn, Liu Jiayu, and Pita Taufatofua. However, they only list them in the order in which Bach introduced them on stage; they mixed around when they posed for that selfie. Zzyzx11 (talk) 20:55, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

Determining which scale is the natural minor scale
Why is the Aeolian mode, which has one major interval; as opposed to the Phrygian mode, which has all perfect and minor intervals; considered the natural minor scale?? (Look at the bottom of Talk:Mode (music) for why this is an interesting question.) Georgia guy (talk) 15:18, 25 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Because common-practice tonality demands a perfect triad on the fifth degree of the scale, so that the flattened second of the Phrygian mode is unacceptable (although it does make some sense to view the second degree in minor as variable just like the sixth and seventh degrees). In fact, because the dominant triad needs a leading tone to have a strong dominant function, French theorists have traditionally considered the harmonic minor to be the basic form of the minor scale (cf. for example Chailley and Challan; thank you Basemetal for telling me this at User talk:Double sharp/Archive 11!). Double sharp (talk) 15:27, 25 February 2018 (UTC)
 * You're welcome. Jacques Chailley et Henri Challan, Théorie complète de la musique, Éditions musicales Alphonse Leduc, Paris, 2 volumes; I don't remember the date (it has to be between 1940 and 1954 when Claude Delvincourt was director of the Paris Conservatory, since when he wrote the preface to the work he held that position) but you can find it on the net in PDF format (Scribd, etc.) As Double sharp said, that's a given of French theory. In the context of common practice the "natural" minor is only considered to be the descending form of the melodic minor, it has no autonomy and is never considered on its own. For example in Albert Lavignac's Cours de dictée musicale there's no exercises ("dictées") on the natural minor as such. There's only exercises on major, harmonic minor (which he calls "mineur à 3 1/2 tons") and melodic minor (which he calls "mineur à 2 1/2 tons") in its ascending and descending forms. Now I bet there are common practice pieces that use a real "natural minor" that is the so called Aeolian mode, but the point is it would be used as a mode (like plainchant modes, etc.), like Beethoven uses Lydian, and so on. Certainly not as the prototype of common practice minor, not with no way to have a proper V-i cadence. Historically I believe the minor mode was called minor primarily in reference to its 3rd (i.e. the third between i and III) and nothing else. For example in the title page to the 48 J.S. doesn't even use the phrase "major mode" and "minor mode" but refers to the character of the 3rds as a way to refer to what we would call major and minor keys: "Das Wohltemperirte Clavier oder Praeludia, und Fugen durch alle Tone und Semitonia, so wohl tertiam majorem oder Ut Re Mi anlangend, als auch tertiam minorem oder Re Mi Fa betreffend." Does it look like he cares what the other intervals are? I suppose it was later noticed the major mode had all its intervals with the tonic perfect or major (not, though, for those who use the "minor 4th" instead of perfect 4th terminology, yeah there used to be such people, the augmented 4th they called a "major 4th") but I'm sure that was not the reason it was called major, and the fact that minor does not follow this pattern exactly is not a good reason to switch to an unreasonable terminology (and such a terminology would be unreasonable from a practical point of view, in my opinion). But why are you guys wasting time with such futile matters when we should all be mourning Sridevi? Basemetal  21:16, 25 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Sridevi aside, the primacy of the natural minor in the English-speaking world may also be of more recent vintage, as Ebenezer Prout affirms the primacy of the harmonic minor in his Harmony: Its Theory and Practice (1889, rev. 1901). I don't know if any more modern texts still cling to this older (albeit IMHO more reasonable) view, though. Incidentally Basemetal's reference to "such people" who called C–F and C–F♯ the minor and major 4th respectively includes no less than Mozart (who called C–G♭ and C–G the false and true 5th respectively). Double sharp (talk) 03:56, 26 February 2018 (UTC)
 * I think I've seen more recent examples than Mozart (and of course I meant no disrespect to Mozart). Mozart's terminology is not consistent with the modern rule that the inversion of a minor interval must be major and that of a diminished one be augmented. He doesn't seem to care about being consistent. Maybe the obsession with terminological consistency is a modern thing. I wonder what other intervals Mozart called "false". Intuitively that adjective seems to suggest diminished and augmented intervals. I think the augmented 4th was considered more dissonant than the diminished 5th, so it is also surprising that Mozart doesn't mind calling it major. Basemetal  07:19, 26 February 2018 (UTC)
 * You can see Mozart's terminology here (in Italian) in the exercises he gave to Thomas Attwood (sorry for the mobile link; I'm on my phone). It seems that he reserved the "false" and "true" terminology for the 5ths, as he seems to follow the modern terminology perfectly otherwise (including a diminished fourth of C–F♭ and a marginal question on why there is no "augmented fourth", which in his terminology I suppose would have to be C–F). Perhaps this is because both the perfect and augmented 4ths are dissonances from the common-practice point of view. Incidentally if you look at the first few pages you'll see that Mozart considered the melodic minor to be the basic form of the minor scale. Double sharp (talk) 08:25, 26 February 2018 (UTC)
 * The perfect 4th a harmonic dissonance always or only when it occurs with the bass? Basemetal  08:54, 26 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I spoke imprecisely; only when it occurs with the bass. Like the sixths, the perfect fourth can be a consonance or a dissonance depending on the context. (The Germans have a word for this: Auffassungsdissonanz.) My point (which is admittedly just me speculating) is that the perfect fourth can be dissonant, whereas the perfect unison, fifth, and octave are always consonant, and as a dissonance it pairs more naturally with the augmented fourth than it would otherwise. But we should really look up a text using this terminology that justifies it and its asymmetry. Double sharp (talk) 10:04, 26 February 2018 (UTC)