Talk:Slaughter Disc

Could be a promotional article (that works?)
How widely has this movie been distributed? Where was it shot? This article kind of bugs me in that it seems like too much information about something that, in a way, doesn't exist. I mean, is there any way for me to rent/buy this movie? To even see it at a screening? In a way that was me being a jerk because this article does seem like a promotional article more than anything else (seeing as it's only got 27 votes on IMDB) but also I am interested in seeing this movie... Caroline Pierce! I don't remember her very well, but the Fashionistas is one of my favorite movies (and not just adult!) and so I'd be interested in seeing her acting ability in this! Post a way for us to actually SEE the movie!
 * To answer one of your questions, the movie can be purchased by visiting the Official Slaughter Disc website. At least, that's where I bought my copy from.
 * It won't be available in most stores -- the stigma of having excessive gore/horror in porn (which reminds folks of Snuff films; and folks who want it for the sex might be turned off by the gore, and those who want it for the gore may be offended by the explicit sex) means most places will not carry it. Dr Archeville 18:03, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Should this article be a promotional one? The answer, of course, is no, since Wikipedia is not an advertising venue. --Dr Archeville 14:37, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
 * It certainly isn't a cult movie - just take a look at the IMDB page, those people who give it 10 stars have never commented anything else, they are fakes. It's a cheap porn flick and this wikipedian article is promotional!Turkmenbashy 23:12, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

NPOV
Overall, the tone (especially under "inspiration") reads like a press release. Some of it can be boiled down to facts, but a lot of this otherwise sounds like advertising and marketing copy. If someone can track down an issue of Fangoria magazine in which there are actual quotes and verifiable research, fine. But otherwise, I'm seriously questioning the validity of this whole article to begin with. Toquinha 17:43, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
 * seems ok to me when you compare it to other film articles here, perhaps this is an even better article than some because clearly some people who liked the film have put some degree of effort into writing this page. Though of course an article can always be improved. Mathmo Talk 06:54, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Indeed it's obvious that the article was written by people who like the film--but this actually makes it an inferior article, as the whole point of NPOV is to get rid of such bias. There are plenty of places on the internet to voice personal likes/dislikes on films, e.g. forums; this is not the purpose of an encyclopedia, which by definition must contain *information* which is cited/referenced--NOT a promotional review. The article is highly suspicious to me too.ezgeez 00:32, 8 January 2007 (UTC)