Talk:Female Prisoner 701: Scorpion

Contradiction
The title and the intro calls the film "Female Convict [#]701: Scorpion, but the bulk of the refs refer to Female Prisoner #701: Scorpion. This discrepancy needs to be addressed. --Tenebrae (talk) 22:39, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Having, by serendipity, just seen another article with the same hash mark issue, I am able to resolve the seeming contradiction. I hope (and am happy that) this resolves the concern.  Contradiction tag now gone.--S. Rich (talk) 10:12, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
 * WormTT has pointed out to me the actual basis for the contradiction tag -- Prisoner vs Convict. I'm sorry I did not read more carefully.  Well, it is really a translation issue that the different resources use. "女囚" translates out to either "female prisoner" or "female convict".  Just as easily, it could translate out to "woman prisoner" or "woman convict". "女" means woman or female and "囚" means convict or prisoner (see the little "人" inside the box?)  "囚人" translates to "convict" or "prisoner" and "女" makes it female.  In English we might get wrapped around the axle because while all convicts are prisoners, not all prisoners are convicts.  Solution for this article?  Simply add something that says "aka Female Prisoner 701". --S. Rich (talk) 14:20, 24 February 2011 (UTC)
 * I'd be happy with this solution, and I bow down to your expert knowledge of foreign languages... they're just squiggles to me, which is where I got stuck!  Worm    TT   14:40, 24 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia doesn't decide the names of foreign language films in English, and it has absolutely no right to do such a thing. If an English version of the film exists, use the title in English. If no English version exists, use the name of the film in Japanese in romanized letters. JoshuSasori (talk) 06:49, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

Issues with citation
The article makes reference to 'features not incorporated in other women's prison films' however the nature of these elements is not discussed. Also, the article describes how the film is artistic but once again does not elaborate. I edited these sentences to improve clarity but perhaps they should be removed? Kittet (talk) 20:41, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes, they should be removed, as should all the fansite reviews and other misleading stuff. JoshuSasori (talk) 02:41, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

Image
The image on the article was for a different film! On the left of the poster was very clearly Bunjaku Han but she is not in the film. When I looked at this more closely, the film is actually the 1976 version, not this one, so I've removed the image. JoshuSasori (talk) 02:41, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

Bogus or mistaken reference
The review in the text doesn't appear in the list here, and web searches only show up copies of wikipedia pages.

http://www.bfi.org.uk/sightandsound/issue/200704



I have removed it from the article. JoshuSasori (talk) 06:33, 6 April 2012 (UTC)