Given a paragraph about movies and a set of conversational questions and answers about the paragraph, say whether the passage contains sufficient information to answer the follow-up question. Say Yes if it is answerable; otherwise, say No. The paragraph has the prefix 'CONTEXT:'. Each conversation question has a prefix `Q:` followed by the answer prefix `A:`, and the follow-up question has a prefix `FOLLOWUP_Q:`.

[Q]: CONTEXT: You're probably after Pomysłowy Dobromir from the 70s, a dialogue-free Polish cartoon about a boy who lives with his grandfather and a pet bird and always comes up with inventions. I think the episode you're describing is this one, only it's a hand pump, not a faucet:  <sep>  Q: Russian/East-European/Soviet Cartoon show with 3 main characters
[A]: Yes


[Q]: CONTEXT: The comment prior to the conversation with the astronauts´ wives (in the control center) clearly states that Capricorn 1 is just close enough to Earth to allow the fluent conversation. Only at the most distant point of the mission the conversation gaps reach 21 minutes. Thus, there seems to be no blooper nor plothole. (I am much more worried about the Apollo mission technology used for a journey of at least a year. Could three astronauts just sit in the command module most of the time? I guess even the strongest personalities would have gone mad. There might have been a strong extended/additional stage of a modified Saturn rocket for the outward and return journey. If this stage was equipped with extra rooms, stores etc. it would appear more realistic than what we see in the movie.)  <sep>  Q: How is the fluent conversation with spacecraft possible in Capricorn One? A: The comment prior to the conversation with the astronauts´ wives (in the control center) clearly states that Capricorn 1 is just close enough to Earth to allow the fluent conversation  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: How close was Capricorn One to earth?
[A]: Yes


[Q]: CONTEXT: IMDb credits are generated by the filmmakers themselves (for smaller, independent productions) or representatives for the filmmakers/producers. On occasion crew and cast members get left off the submission form. I speak from experience as I appear as three different entities on IMDb because the filmmakers I worked for neglected to see if I was already represented and created a new page for me each time. This is certainly the case with other actors/crew members, and could go some way to explaining the discrepancies you have discovered. Bottom line is IMDb is not infallible, and it would indeed require some serious cross-checking with other sites in order to confirm the actor you are researching is the right one.  <sep>  Q: How to correctly identify an actor/actresses is in something that is not listed on their IMDB profile? A: it would indeed require some serious cross-checking with other sites  Q: If it's not listed on IMDB or their wiki page, then how can i make sure if the actor/actress is the one I believe they are? A: On occasion crew and cast members get left off the submission form  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: And where would I check?
[A]:
No