From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Abortion, which collaborates on articles related to abortion, abortion law, the abortion debate, and the history of abortion. For more information, visit the project page.
Stub	This article has been rated as Stub-class on the quality scale.

	Film Portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Films. This project is a central gathering of editors working to build comprehensive and detailed articles for film topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Stub This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the quality scale. ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the priority scale.
Editing Guidelines Please remember these guidelines when editing a film article: If a non-film article already exists with the name of the film that you are trying to create an article for, disambiguate and use (film) in the title: Film Title (film) For more information see: Wikipedia:Naming conventions (films) When writing an article about a particular film, the general format should be a concise lead section, followed by a plot summary of no more than 900 words, production details, a cast list, a reception section, and references. Create an Infobox that tells all pertinent information about the film. Article upgrading needed: You can help! WP:IA   Stub to Start-Class Upgrading Instructions for Films Note that instructions for articles on other types of film topics within the scope of WikiProject Films are currently under development. To contribute in upgrading this stub article to Start class, the following requirements must be met: Significant intro (list the title, alternate titles, year released, director, actors starring in the film, summary of headings, etc.) Film infobox ({{infobox film}}) Picture: Consult WikiProject Free Images for freely released images from a film shoot, opening, or other relevant free image. Non-free and unlicensed images are to be avoided if at all possible, but if used should include a detailed fair use rationale. (An image is not required for start class if unavailable.) Plot summary Include cast and crew information. At least two other developed sections of information (production, reception (including box office figures), awards and honors, themes, differences from novel or TV show, soundtrack, sequels, DVD release, etc.) Categories (by year, country, language, and genre(s))  Helpful links: WP:BETTER, WP:LEAD, WP:REF, WP:WAF Once this article has fulfilled these requirements, the film can be reassessed to Start class and this template will be removed automatically.
Additional Information: This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar: not checked Supporting materials: not checked To fill out this checklist, please add the following to the template call: <!-- 1. It is suitably referenced, and all major points are appropriately cited. --> |B-Class-1=yes/no <!-- 2. It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain major omissions or inaccuracies. --> |B-Class-2=yes/no <!-- 3. It has a defined structure, including a lead section and one or more sections of content. --> |B-Class-3=yes/no <!-- 4. It is free from major grammatical errors. --> |B-Class-4=yes/no <!-- 5. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams. --> |B-Class-5=yes/no This article may need an appropriate infobox template.

This article needs an image (preferably free) related to the subject, such as a picture of the set or a film poster. A possibility for American films from before 1964 would be a screenshot from the trailer, as these are now in the public domain. Please make sure fair use is properly observed, or the image will be removed. See WP:Films MOS for image guidelines and assistance in uploading.

A plot summary needs to be added to this film article, or the current one needs to be expanded.

Contents 1 Catergories 2 Counter Strike Clan 2.1 Neutrality 2.2 Neutrality 2.3 The Silent Scream versus Silent Scream

[edit] Catergories

Could someone take the liberty of catergorizing this article? Obviously, some choices would be abortion, etc.

[edit] Counter Strike Clan

It turns out that someone by the name of Iced Liquid is advertising his counter strike clan here. If you all see it again, please edit it out. Thanks.

[edit] Neutrality

Since the page has been nominated to be checked for neutrality, I thought it would be useful to start a discussion here before changing or reverting the article in a manner that might start an editing war. Regardless, the article's last paragraph clearly needs to be cleaned up extensively if not removed altogether:

However, Planned parenthood's credibility in these "scientific" statements should be questioned. Planned parenthood loses money when people don't make the choice they want. It has been known to slant the truth by denying women the right to see an ultrasound, run clinics under unhealthful, unsanitary conditions, and not advise women of abortion alternatives lest they lose business from women who might otherwise chose to keep their babies. There was a lot more detail on these before that content was removed from this article, probably by someone allergic to any truth that costs them money. Scientists who don't work for planned parenthood will tell a different story. There are lots more like it at www.priestsforlife.org

This portion of the article obviously violates NPOV standards, and contains an irrelevant personal attack against editors who removed similar content in previous edits -- not to mention the endorsement of a website (and, presumably, its ideology) within the body of an article. I'd very much like to remove this portion of the article, as it is far below Wikipedia's quality standards, but I wanted to open up a discussion first in order to prevent the same kind of "angry edits" seen here from cropping up again. SporkIt (talk) 16:25, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

After an IP added more stuff to promote's priestsforlife.org's attack on Planned Parenthood[1] I took the liberty of removing those additions, along with the self-referential stuff -- any arguments about the article's content ought to take place on the talk page, with the NPOV tag directing any who want to join the discussion.

However, I'm unsure we ought to be using Planned Parenthood as a direct source for discussing the film. The URL currently directs people to a page which asks for donations, rather than any actual critique. --Tom Tresser (talk) 15:17, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

_{Since I wrote that last part, the proper page has been restored. --Tom Tresser (talk) 15:20, 24 December 2007 (UTC)}

[edit] Neutrality

This article presented only planned parenthood's opinion that the movie was bogus. It was not neutral so long as it did not present the Pro-life, and the scientific position as well. There were no references to check on Planned parenthood's opinion and confirm it as a scientific one. Most Wikipedia articles have references so you can go to the original sources and check the facts for yourself. The only references for this movie that are given is a single book written from planned parenthood's perspective. In so doing, this article was about as neutral as a classroom history text on the civil war written by a Southern plantation slave owner. Pro life opinions were added to present the other side of the debate and then were removed by someone else. Priests for life presents the other side of the story, but priests for life has been subsequently described as "attacking Planned parenthood." Planned parenthood is never described as "attacking pro-life." It's almost as if someone has arbitrarily decided to censor anything negative said about planned parenthood-as if they are beyond reproach and every word they say is gospel. If references are given to prove that the claims being made about planned parenthood's business practices are true, or if references are added confirming the scientific validity of the movie under discussion, they are taken out as "lacking neutrality." This is sloppy scholarship, and it is not an honest report of the facts. It is an an attempt to control how people think about an issue by slanting the issue so that only one side of the argument is ever heard. This article will only be truly neutral when the truth is allowed to be told along with the counterarguments that other side of the debate wishes us to be aware of. To only tell the truth planned parenthood wants us to hear, and not the scientists, medical doctors, or the film makers, is to slant it with a very dishonest kind of bias commonly known in the communist world as propaganda. --Dave M.D.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.3.38.158 (talk • contribs) 12:01, 1 January 2008

Instead of complaining here about infallible communist slavers, you could follow the usual Wikipedia processes for very controversial subjects. The second thing to read is probably Wikipedia:Dispute resolution. There is a whole grueling tedious process to deal with this. The first thing to read is Wikipedia:Verifiability. If you were the editor who contributed the bit above that was removed, I'd note as a newcomer that it contained several opinions and no citations from reliable published sources as per the WP:V rules. Tempshill (talk) 04:51, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] The Silent Scream versus Silent Scream

Currently the article Silent Scream is about a straight-to-DVD horror movie. I think the anti-abortion movie The Silent Scream is the notable work that should be in its place. Tempshill (talk) 04:51, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

I moved the 2005 film to Silent Scream (2005 film) and moved the Silent Scream disambiguation page to Silent Scream. The issue is no more. Tempshill (talk) 05:03, 15 January 2008 (UTC)