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.

[EX Q]: Passage: Most historians describe the contacts between the Mongol Empire and the Western Europeans as a series of attempts, missed opportunities, and failed negotiations. Christopher Atwood, in the 2004 Encyclopedia of Mongolia and the Mongol Empire, summed up the relations between Western Europe and the Mongols: "Despite numerous envoys and the obvious logic of an alliance against mutual enemies, the papacy and the Crusaders never achieved the often-proposed alliance against Islam."A few other historians argue there was an actual alliance, but do not agree on the details: Jean Richard wrote that an alliance began around 1263. Reuven Amitai stated that the closest thing to actual Mongol-Frankish military coordination was when Prince Edward of England attempted to coordinate activities with Abaga in 1271. Amitai also mentioned the other attempts towards cooperation, but said, "In none of these episodes, however, can we speak of Mongols and troops from the Frankish West being on the Syrian mainland at the same time." Timothy May described the alliance as having its peak at the Council of Lyon in 1274, but that it began to unravel in 1275 with the death of Bohemond, and May too admitted that the forces never engaged in joint operations. Alain Demurger, in his own book The Last Templar, said that an alliance was not sealed until 1300.There also continues to be debate about whether or not an alliance would have been a wise idea, and whether the Crusaders at that point in history were even relevant to the Persian-Mongol conflict. The 20th-century historian Glenn Burger said, "The refusal of the Latin Christian states in the area to follow Hethum's example and adapt to changing conditions by allying themselves with the new Mongol empire must stand as one of the saddest of the many failures of Outremer." This was similar to the view of Steven Runciman, who argued, "Had the Mongol alliance been achieved and honestly implemented by the West, the existence of Outremer would almost certainly have been prolonged. The Mameluks would have been crippled if not destroyed; and the Ilkhanate of Persia would have survived as a power friendly to the Christians and the West". However, David Nicolle, describing the Mongols as "potential allies", said that early historians were writing from the benefit of hindsight, and that overall the major players were the Mamluks and the Mongols, with Christians just "pawns in a greater game.".
[EX A]: Who did Jean Richard claim had an alliance around 1263?

[EX Q]: Passage: Adam, a medical student, is lured to a cabin far from civilization where he volunteers to be repeatedly killed and reanimated by Dr. Franklin Vick, through use of a mysterious serum. While "Subject Two" as he is initially successful, he begins to experience violent seizures and excruciating pain, begging Vick to kill him or committing suicide several times. Adam eventually gains complete immortality and near instantaneous regeneration, but as a consequence he loses the very sense of being alive; he can no longer feel things (including pain) and no longer can have emotions. His eyes turn snow white, and, to compensate for the gradual loss of his sense of self, he becomes violent and depressed, going so far as to kill a hunter that accidentally shoots him rather than risk him exposing the project. Eventually the student leaves Vick, only to become a walking ghost doomed to walk the earth for eternity. After returning home, "Vick" finds the real Dr. Franklin Vick, and it is revealed that the doctor for the course of the entire movie was his assistant, Subject One. Thinking that he had accidentally killed Dr. Vick, Subject One assumed his identity to continue the work, but finds that the serum was initially perfect, and it was only his tampering that gradually changed Adam. Dr. Vick scolds him before strangling him in a similar fashion to Adam, and thus begins the experiment cycle over again. It carries several obvious homages to Frankenstein but explores more the emotional effects of death and pseudo-life.
[EX A]: Whose eyes turn snow white?

[EX Q]: Passage: John Michael Wright, who at the height of his career would interchangeably sign himself "Anglus" or "Scotus", is of uncertain origin. The diarist John Evelyn called him a Scotsman, an epithet repeated by Horace Walpole and tentatively accepted by his later biographer, Verne. However, writing in 1700, the English antiquarian Thomas Hearne claims Wright was born in Shoe Lane, London and, after an adolescent conversion to Roman Catholicism, was taken to Scotland by a priest.  A London birth certainly seems supported by a baptismal record, dated 25 May 1617, for a "Mighell Wryghtt", son of James Wright, described as a tailor and a citizen of London, in St Bride's Church, Fleet Street, London.What is known is that, on 6 April 1636, the 19-year-old Wright was apprenticed to George Jamesone, an Edinburgh portrait painter of some repute. The Edinburgh Register of Apprentices records him as "Michaell, son to James W(right), tailor, citizen of London". The reasons for this move to Scotland are unclear, but may have to do with familial connections (his parents may have been London Scots) or the advent of plague in London. During his apprenticeship, Wright is likely to have lodged at the High Street tenement near the Netherbow Gate that served as Jameson's workplace. The apprenticeship was contracted for five years, but may have been curtailed by Jameson's imprisonment in late 1639. There is no record of any independent work by Wright from this period (his earliest known painting being a small portrait of Robert Bruce, 1st Earl of Ailesbury, painted in the early 1640s during his time in Rome).It is also possible that Wright met his wife during his Scottish residency. Nothing is known of her, except from a statement of thirty years later which describes her as "related to the most noble and distinguished families of Scotland." If this is accurate, it may explain how Wright was later able to find aristocratic patronage. All that is known for certain is that Wright had at least one child by her, a son, Thomas.
[EX A]:
What is the first name of the person Hearne claims was born in Shoe Lane?