In this task, you're given passages that contain mentions of names of people, places, or things. Some of these mentions refer to the same person, place, or thing. Your job is to write questions that evaluate one's understanding of such references. Good questions are expected to link pronouns (she, her, him, his, their, etc.) or other mentions to people, places, or things to which they may refer. Do not ask questions that can be answered correctly without understanding the paragraph or having multiple answers. Avoid questions that do not link phrases referring to the same entity. For each of your questions, the answer should be one or more phrases in the paragraph, and it should be unambiguous.

Q: Passage: Teenaged brothers Zach and Gray Mitchell visit Jurassic World, a dinosaur theme park at the original Jurassic Park site on Isla Nublar. Their aunt, Claire Dearing, is the operations manager. Claire assigns her assistant, Zara, as the boys' guide but they soon evade her. Elsewhere on the island, U.S. Navy veteran and ethologist Owen Grady has been training and researching four Velociraptors. Based on the raptors' ability to follow commands, Vic Hoskins, the head of InGen Security, believes the animals can be weaponized, an idea Owen and his assistant Barry strongly oppose.
Prior to its opening, Claire and park owner Simon Masrani inspect the park's newest attraction, Indominus rex, a genetically-engineered dinosaur created by geneticist Dr. Henry Wu. Masrani tasks Owen with evaluating the enclosure. Owen warns Claire the Indominus lacks social skills, making it more dangerous and unpredictable. When it appears the Indominus has escaped, Owen and two park workers enter the enclosure. The Indominus, which can camouflage itself and mask its heat signature, suddenly appears. Owen survives the attack, but it kills the other two men before escaping into the island's interior. Owen tells Masrani to have the Indominus killed; to protect his company's investment, Masrani instead dispatches a specialized unit to subdue it with non-lethal weaponry. After most of the unit is wiped out, Claire orders the evacuation of the island's northern sector.

A: Who does the boy's aunt have look after her nephews?
****
Q: Passage: When Scranton agreed to take on Steamtown, U.S.A., it was estimated that the museum and excursion business would attract 200,000 to 400,000 visitors to the city every year. In anticipation of this economic boon, the city and a private developer spent $13 million to renovate the Delaware, Lackawanna and Western Railroad (DL&W) station and transform it into a Hilton hotel, at a time when the unemployment rate in the city was 13 percent. Only 60,000 visitors showed up at Steamtown in 1987, and the 1988 excursions were canceled. After only three years, it was $2.2 million in debt and facing bankruptcy. Part of the problem was the cost of restoration of the new property and the deteriorating equipment. In addition, while the tourists in Vermont had enjoyed the sights of cornfields, farms, covered bridges, a waterfall and a gorge on a Steamtown excursion, the Scranton trip to Moscow, Pennsylvania, cut through one of the nation's largest junkyards, an eyesore described by Ralph Nader as "the eighth wonder of the world".In 1986, the U.S. House of Representatives, under the urging of Scranton native, Representative Joseph M. McDade, voted to approve the spending of $8 million to study the collection and to begin the process of making it a National Historic Site. By 1995, Steamtown was acquired and developed by the National Park Service (NPS) at a total cost of $66 million, and opened as Steamtown National Historic Site the same year. In preparation for its acquisition of the collection, the NPS had conducted historical research during 1987 and 1988 on the equipment that still remained in the foundation's possession. This research was used for a Scope of Collections Statement for Steamtown National Historic Site and was published in 1991 under the title Steamtown Special History Study. Aside from providing concise histories of the equipment, the report also made recommendations as to whether or not each piece belonged in the now government-funded collection. Historical significance to the United States was a criterion of the recommendations. Many of the pieces of equipment that did not meet the report's recommendations were sold or traded for pieces that had historical significance to the DL&W grounds on which the site is located.

A: What city was expecting to have an economic boon?
****
Q: Passage: The NSWCA were outraged by Lord Harris's letter and convened a special meeting to consider their response and subsequently had their honorary secretary, Mr J.M. Gibson, write to The Daily Telegraph in reply. Gibson argued that "the misconduct of those who took possession of the wickets has been exaggerated" and that Lord Harris's account was "universally regarded here as both inaccurate and ungenerous." The letter said that "We cannot allow a libel upon the people of New South Wales so utterly unfounded as this to pass without challenge". It went on to accuse Harris of omitting certain facts in his account, which according to the NSWCA, depicted Australia and the cricket authorities in a poor light. These included an accusation that Harris had failed to note that the NSWCA and the media had immediately and strongly condemned the disturbance and treatment of the English visitors. Gibson also criticised Lord Harris for claiming that Coulthard was "competent", while "admitting 'he had made two mistakes in our innings'", especially as Coulthard's not out ruling against Lord Harris "was openly admitted by his lordship to be a mistake" that favoured the Englishmen. The letter further denied the claim that those who incited the riot were associated with the NSWCA and accused Harris of inflammatory conduct during the disorder.
Certainly the conduct of Lord Harris did not tend to calm the general excitement. His lordship elbowed his way out through the crowd in a manner so violent as to invite assault. He kept his men 'exposed to the fury of the mob' for about an hour and a half upon the absurd and insulting plea that if he did not 'the other side would claim the match!'. But not one of the team received a scratch, and Mr. Hornby dragged a supposed offender of very diminutive stature through the mass to the pavilion, a hundred yards away, in triumph, and amidst general applause, with only a torn shirt as the penalty of his heroism.
Spofforth, Australia's leading bowler, commented on the incident in an 1891 cricket magazine interview, but put a different slant on the cause. He thought that the English team were victims of intercolonial rivalry between New South Wales and Victoria:
Then the crowd could stand it no longer and rushed on to the field, refusing to budge until the umpire was removed. I have no wish to dwell on this painful occurrence, but I should like to point out that the feeling aroused was almost entirely due to the spirit of the rivalry between the Colonies ... The umpire was Victorian, and the party spirit in the crowd was too strong, 'Let an Englishman stand umpire,' they cried; 'we don't mind any of them. We won't have a Victorian.' There was not the slightest animosity against Lord Harris or any of his team; the whole disturbance was based on the fact that the offender was a Victorian. But Lord Harris stood by his umpire; and as a result, the match had to be abandoned till the following day.

A:
What is the profession of Coulthard?
****