Talk:The Seven Minutes (film)

message: There are a number of decent critical reviews of this film film to be found in Google Archives.. Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 21:41, 3 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Right. Probably each one of Russ Meyers' films could be worked up to FA quality-- there's that much info out there on them. I've often thought about working seriously on one of his film articles, but this particular one doesn't interest me all that much... I'll add what I can later on though, between work on Japanese sexploitation cinema... Dekkappai (talk) 18:55, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: It would appear that the film exists in both R-rated and PG-rated versions, with the latter missing about 10 minutes of footage. Has anyone done a comparison of the two versions? Muzilon (talk) 14:14, 16 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  improving this article... 

message: Tabercil left a note that we should discuss whether the mention of the actress' nude scene should be in the article. I think it's pretty obviously a "Yes".
# It's reliably sourced to an article whose main subject is the nude scene
# Nudity is a significant part of Russ Meyer's work, since he was primarily known for sexploitation, and this was one of his few films in mainstream Hollywood.
# The actress was not known for nude appearances, which fact alone makes this nude scene worth mentioning
# The nude scene itself was the subject of at least one news story, almost qualifying it for stand-alone "notability", and far surpassing the "notability" of most individual facts in most articles.
# The nude appearance is in this film, so of course it belongs both here and in the article on the actress, much more so than it would in a generic "nudity in film" article, in which this particular appearance would be borderline trivial.
I'm sure many more points could be made. The main point is, there's no real reason to exclude mention of it, and it is completely relevant to the film, the actress' career, and any non-censored article on either would incomplete without mention of it. Dekkappai (talk) 18:55, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Absent any reliable sources that the supposed nude scene is actually in this film, a point several editors conspicuously ignore, there's nothing to discuss here. And if "being the subject of at least one news story" demonstrates notability, then my neighbor's daughter's iguana deserves a Wikipedia article. And it was on TV, too. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 19:49, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: No. Whether the scene made the final cut is entirely irrelevant to whether it belongs in an article on the film. Scenes that wound up on the cutting room floor are constantly and appropriately mentioned in such articles. If your neighbor's daughter's iguana had a major role in a film produced by a major studio, directed by a major director, then sure s/he's notable. If not, this is a tired and absurd argument. Dekkappai (talk) 20:05, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Get real. The claim in the article is that the supposed scene in the film supposedly attracted media attention. The only supporting source for this is a wire service article about SAG's position on nudity in film, published well before the film was released, mentioning the film in passing. And the "tired and absurd" argument was yours; I simply pointed out the absurdity, and now you're running away from your own argument, tossing invective around rather than admitting error. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 20:36, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: HB, you're all worked up over something, but I can't see what it is. If you had an argument here, I could reply to it. Instead you make absurd statements. The claim is that the actress appeared nude for the film. This is backed up by a reliable source. The fact that the article is about that scene in that role is evidence that it attracted media attention. But that's not an important point anyway. Your claiming that I'm running away from my own argument is so blisteringly absurd, based on your own non-argument, that I see no reason-- indeed no way-- to reply to it. Based on your behavior both on the article's history, and here, I believe you have a hidden agenda you are not stating upfront, and therefore cannot be reasoned with. I'll help improve the article once consensus has been settled. Based on your own editing history I highly doubt you will attempt to do the same. Dekkappai (talk) 23:20, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

text: The term "conspicuously ignore" is a sword that cuts both ways, as reliable sources are easily available to those who search. In order to serve our readers and give the article proper encyclopedic balance, and most specially as the nudity by this actress in this film was noted as significant by sources, et al, I believe it merits more than a one-word mention in one short sentence.  While the one New York Times review left in the article showed that that one reviewer may have felt the nudity was "minimal", even minimal was quite exceptional for an American mainstream feature film of that era (how times have changed). Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 20:10, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text:  The first source you cite doesn't actually say the actress had a nude scene; the second is an unreliable SPS; the third is just another copy of the wire service article, predating the film by months, without any information about what was actually included in the film. And you/'re simply, utterly, unmistakeably wrong about your film history, film nudity by notable actresses was probably more common in the late 1960s/early 1970s than it is now; for example, both Glenda Jackson and Jane Fonda won Best Actress Oscars for 1970 and 1971 for roles involving nudity (a point not mentioned in any of the pertinent Wikipedia articles, making one wonder about the encyclopedic significance of detailing onscreen nudity in general). Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 21:02, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

text: Again, "conspicuously ignore" is a sword that cuts both ways.  I will not speculate upon why an editor might not do a source search himself, nor speculate upon dismissiveness of a UPI article that was itself picked up because of its significance.  And without WAXing or OSEing or speaking about your daughter's iguana, we're discussing THIS one film, by a porn director as a mainstream effort, the director's and the involved actor's attitudes toward nudity and in THIS film in particular, and nudity in it by an actress who had never done nudity before. I will not presume that readers have no need or wish to know that nudity exists in film, nor that as an aspect of this film it is for some unfathomable reason not worth inclusion.  Expanding the reader's encyclopeic understanding of this subject as treated in context to this film, improves the project.  Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 21:31, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Actress' nude scene 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on The Seven Minutes (film). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080105152713/http://www.fmcinema.com:80/russmeyer/ebert.html to http://www.fmcinema.com/russmeyer/ebert.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:09, 2 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified