August 9

When high-school students in movies want to go to certain colleges, were the movie producers paid to mention them? Or quite in contrary, they had to ask the colleges for permission to mention them? Or it's simply the way it is? Bumptump (talk) 15:55, 9 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have any examples? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 17:28, 9 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

In Life in a Year Jaden Smith applies to Harvard.Bumptump (talk) 19:27, 9 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Did they do any filming on campus? Have you reviewed the closing credits to see if there's an acknowledgment of Harvard? Sometimes that's a giveaway for product endorsement. I recall in the 1978 film Superman, there's a brief scene where the youngish Clark Kent is pouring some cereal for breakfast. In the voluminous closing credits, one of the sillier ones I've seen (outside of the Airplane! franchise) was "Corn Flakes by Kellogg's". ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 23:04, 9 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Colleges are an organization, similar to a corporation or a company, and there are multiple ways that a company or organization can be used in a movie. 1) The company or organization can pay the producers for product placement; which is basically a form of in-universe advertising. 2) The movie producers can pay the company or organization a licensing fee to use the name in the movie; the name and logos of an organization are trademarks of the brand, and there are generally restrictions on their use. 3) For brief mentions or incidental uses, there may be a claim of fair use, though fair use has become more restrictive over time. 4) The producers may just use it anyways, and hope no one objects. I think that covers all of the bases, and I'm sure one could come up with any number of examples that meet each of them from the thousands upon thousands of movies that have been made throughout history. --Jayron32 18:03, 9 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed your fair-use link. --174.95.81.219 (talk) 22:21, 9 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know the legalities or finances, but typically it's very much in a school's commercial interest to be used in name or as a set piece in any major media production, even if the production may depict some aspects of the school or its mission in a negative light. There are ideological and practical limits of course: Spike Lee was evicted from all his campus sets during the production of School Daze. SamuelRiv (talk) 22:35, 9 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The powers that be of the University of Missouri initially agreed to let Animal House be filmed on their "premises", but then changed their minds. William Beaty Boyd, president of the University of Oregon, was more receptive, ensuring his place in cinematic history. Clarityfiend (talk) 00:34, 10 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but the University of Oregon is not mentioned, it's known as "Faber College". Some films (Legally Blonde, How High, Rudy, etc.) actually do use real university names in their productions. Others, such as the aforementioned Animal House, PCU, Higher Learning, etc. all used made-up names for their setting. It really comes down to any deals worked out between the university and the producers, and money can go both ways, or not at all, in these kinds of deals. --Jayron32 17:45, 10 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, the only hint in Animal House that the University of Oregon stands in for the fictional "Faber College" is in the closing credits, thanking the people of Eugene. Another example is the fiction "Hudson University", referenced frequently in the Law & Order franchise. I think they use NYU for campus scenes. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 20:10, 10 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A hybrid example: the University of California at Sunnydale, in Buffy the Vampire Slayer (season 4); some exteriors were, if memory serves, shot at UC Los Angeles – though Sunnydale was represented by Santa Barbara in a few shots in earlier seasons. —Tamfang (talk) 01:53, 17 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I am trying to play this piece, (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qbp7hIsvQfg&list=FLwlj9BU0SLXAXar_vner8jA&index=1)

Which I believe is the troisieme prelude from Couperin ( F. COUPERIN: Préludes de L'Art de toucher le Clavecin (Paris, 1716-17))

The sheet music can be found here, and my question probably dosent make much sense unless you're looking at it (http://vmirror.imslp.org/files/imglnks/usimg/0/06/IMSLP03779-ArtToucherCouperin.pdf), (toward the bottom)

Anyways, the first measure has a odd symbol which if I understand is a c clef? (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clef#/media/File:Mensural_c_clef_06.svg) However, I am unclear if it is surrounding the first line of the stave thus making the first line on the top stave a middle c. (Normally an e on the treble clef)

It follows then, I think, that the first note on the right hand (or top stave) should then be a d, however it didn't sound right when I played it on the piano, this might be to tuning differences between the harpsichord, however, I have no way of knowing.

There are numerous other marks I have encountered, and in addition to the above problem would appreciate any resources or directions to a "key" of baroque symbols.

Thank you 2600:1700:7830:DE40:A041:8677:C00:A936 (talk) 17:06, 9 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

What a cool thing! Yes,that's a C clef. Here's another transcription, in more modern notation and a trilingual commentary. The same volume has, at the end, an "explanation of the signs and ornaments of Couperin." [1] --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇} 05:43, 10 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, all, for your help! This guide will be very helpful Gordon. And in response to the other person I wrote it a bit odd but I meant that I inferred the first note ( as in of the actual piece not the stave) of the right hand ( top stave) should be a d. Regardless the aforementioned shared resources appears to be an immense help.

Once again, thank you 2600:1700:7830:DE40:611B:CB5C:6F9C:EA98 (talk) 15:26, 10 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it's a C clef, positioned with the middle C on the bottom of the five lines - called a Soprano clef. I don't know which note you mean, because in the example I'm looking at (on p 19) the first note is a C, on that line. Only the Alto and Tenor versions of the C clef are in use today, and they are used on in particular situations (the Alto for viola music, and the Tenor for cello and bassoon). ColinFine (talk) 09:09, 10 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This C clef was commonly used in baroque (and even early classical) music - see for example the MS of the famous Prelude in C from Bach's Well-tempered Clavier. AndrewWTaylor (talk) 11:04, 10 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Does Lulu's CBE officially make her a Dame? -- 2603:6081:1C00:1187:B877:36EB:FE54:69F8 (talk) 18:10, 9 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

How come Olivia Newton-John (DBE) is a Dame and Lulu (CBE) is not? Is the queen head of state for Australia but not Scottland, or something? 2603:6081:1C00:1187:B877:36EB:FE54:69F8 (talk) 18:43, 9 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The Order of the British Empire is not one of those in the personal gift of the Queen, the awards are made by the Honours Committee and its various sub-committees. Newton-John's DBE was awarded "For services to Charity, to Cancer Research and to Entertainment" [2] This is a British honour as Australia has its own system. As Newton-John was born Cambridge, she may have retained dual-nationality, or perhaps Australians don't really count as foreign. Foreign citizens are often given British honours, but they cannot use the titles that go with them. Alansplodge (talk) 11:48, 10 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

BTW, Lulu's CBE was awarded "For services to Music, to Entertainment and to Charity". [3] Alansplodge (talk) 12:01, 10 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A bit more digging reveals that citizens of countries that have the Queen as the head-of-state are allowed to use British titles. [4] Alansplodge (talk) 12:01, 10 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Though even then it gets complicated. See, for example, the Canadian titles debate (including the section on other Commonwealth countries down at the bottom) and the ruling in Black v Chrétien (2001) for a relatively recent legal case. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 18:49, 10 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Australia is a Commonwealth realm, meaning that it is not only a member of the Commonwealth of Nations but also has the Queen as head of state. We could continue to recommend that the Queen of Australia award knighthoods, but we have chosen not to. British (Imperial) awards such as KBE/DBE/GBE, KCB/DCB/GCB, KT, KG, Knight bachelor have not been recommended by any Australian government since the 1990s. BUT, Australians may still be awarded knighthoods on the recommendation of the UK government to the Queen of the UK, the Papua New Guinea government to the Queen of Papua New Guinea, and so on for all the other Commonwealth realms. And most Living Australian knights and dames are in that category. The Queen of Australia may still award Imperial honours in her own gift to Australian citizens, such as awards of the Royal Victorian Order. The remaining few living people are Knights or Dames of the Order of Australia. The Order has been in existence since 1975, but the Knight/Dame category has come and gone, not once but twice (and during its last incarnation 2014-15, Prince Philip was awarded an AK, which was so controversial here that I'm sure it was the final nail in the coffin for Australian-awarded knighthoods). It is not currently a level of award, but previous recipients get to use Sir or Dame for life. Olivia Newton-John had dual British and Australian citizenship, and her damehood was awarded in her British capacity on the recommendation of the UK government to the Queen of the UK in recognition of her work in the UK (and more broadly). -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 21:40, 10 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

*Why does the OP believe that Lulu is not entitled to use the style "Dame". They appear to have come to that conclusion with zero evidence. No where can I see where here CBE is any different than any other CBE, and as such, she should be entitled to use the styles allowed to the holders of the honour. Order of the British Empire states "The senior two ranks of Knight or Dame Grand Cross, and Knight or Dame Commander, entitle their members to use the title of Sir for men and Dame for women before their forename." (bold mine). Lulu is allowed to use Dame, and the OP has asserted, without any evidence, that she isn't? Can the OP please indicate where they read that she is disallowed from using the normal style? --Jayron32 12:23, 10 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I suspect that the OP is complaining about inconsistency here in WP, not what is happening in real life… the opening sentence of Olivia’s bio article includes the honorific, while the opening sentence of Lulu’s bio article does not. Blueboar (talk) 12:34, 10 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

:::That's not what the OP said. The OP said "How come ... Lulu (CBE) is not?" They have not provided any evidence that she isn't. This has nothing to do with what is written in Wikipedia, which I must note is Wikipedia is not a reliable source. If the OP has drawn a conclusion about something from a Wikipedia article without verifying it with an outside source, that's a bad idea. But the fact remains, the OP has still not said where they read that Lulu is not allowed to use Dame if she so chooses. I can't find that conclusion anywhere. --Jayron32 12:42, 10 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hold on - I got it wrong… The distinction is one of rank. Lulu is just a “Commander” (CBE) while Newton-John was a “Knight/Dame Commander” (DBE) - which is a higher rank. KBE/DBE can use the honorific, but CBE can not. Blueboar (talk) 12:54, 10 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, see Order of the British Empire#Composition: "the rank of... Dame Commander of the Order is the lowest rank of damehood". Alansplodge (talk) 13:45, 10 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, yes, I screwed that up horribly as well. The ranks are MBE, OBE, CBE, K/DBE, and GBE, and only the highest two are entitled to "Dame". Lulu, as a CBE, which is not a rank that earns a "Dame". Olivia Newton-John was a DBE, which does get to use "Dame". Please ignore my earlier posts. Much clearer now. I feel stupid. Sorry all. --Jayron32 14:32, 10 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Understandable, it's ridiculously complicated. Alansplodge (talk) 17:15, 10 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Jayron32, it's best you strike them out, and apologise to the OP for taking them to task for daring not to know the intricacies of British honorifics, when you reveal yourself as an ultracrepidarian of the first water. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 21:57, 10 August 2022 (UTC) [reply]

So done. --Jayron32 11:57, 11 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]