Talk:The Savage Innocents

Fair use rationale for Image:Nicholas Ray - The Savage Innocents.jpg

Image:Nicholas Ray - The Savage Innocents.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 16:32, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject class rating

This article was automatically assessed because at least one article was rated and this bot brought all the other ratings up to at least that level. BetacommandBot 08:14, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Murder or accident?

Some reviewers of this film say Quinn was accused of murder because "he accidently killed the priest because he wouldn't sleep with his wife". It was either deliberate (murder) or an accident. It cannot be both. What was it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.197.15.138 (talk) 07:26, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Repeated attempts to bring up high school in Downe's Grove, IL

There's no real point to it, no sources, and it just reads like a vanity edit. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.165.150.220 (talk) 02:08, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:The Savage Innocents/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

Comment(s)

Press [show] to view →

Rating a film from 1959 with the standards of its day is no less a challenge than rating it with standards of nearly 50 years later. If the film were made today, in order to satisfy PETA requirements, it would surely have to include, "No animals were harmed in the making of this picture." Very unlikely, since faking spearing them through the ice, butchering them and eating their raw bloody internal organs would be easy to fake, but does faking it tell the truth? The trouble I see is the use of the term eskimo. Since it appears so many times in the film, it may be inappropriate to judge it by modern standards. The story is depicted in Canada, where today such an exonym is considered pejorative, the term Inuit being preferred. The most difficult consideration is the area of sex. Since Inuit, Yupik, Aleut and Aluutiq cultures believe sharing of sex partners is polite, and refusing to share is the utimate breach of etiquette, modern Christians would never be able to rate it less than "X."--W8IMP 17:56, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Last edited at 17:56, 11 April 2007 (UTC). Substituted at 08:23, 30 April 2016 (UTC)