Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/The Seventh Victim/archive1


 * The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was archived by Sarastro1 via FACBot (talk) 19:12, 31 May 2017.

The Seventh Victim

 * Nominator(s): Drown Soda (talk) 04:30, 14 April 2017 (UTC)

This article is about the 1943 film noir-horror film The Seventh Victim, directed by Mark Robson. --Drown Soda (talk) 04:30, 14 April 2017 (UTC)

Comments. As always, feel free to revert my copyediting. - Dank (push to talk)
 * See my edit summary on my first edit today; I hope that's okay. - Dank (push to talk) 12:40, 14 April 2017 (UTC)
 * "if scenes weren't cure": ?
 * Support on prose per my standard disclaimer. These are my edits. A quirky film, just the type FAC reviewers will like. - Dank (push to talk) 15:02, 14 April 2017 (UTC)

Comments -- recusing from coord duties, I don't edit or review that many film articles but I'm a sucker for the Val Lewton productions. Oddly enough this is one of the few I haven't seen, so I guess I can be pretty objective here... So far I've done a fairly quick copyedit for prose -- pls feel free to discuss any concerns. I plan to come back later to look at structure, detail and referencing. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 11:24, 16 April 2017 (UTC)
 * , I was considering returning to look over other aspects of the article but I'd like to see you address Sarah's points. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 11:22, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
 * , I just looked over Sarah's points and made some edits/addressed her concerns. Apologies for not getting back to this sooner. I hadn't received a notification and hadn't checked the review archive. Let me know if you see anything outstanding still and I'll try to rework it. --Drown Soda (talk) 18:33, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

Comments from SarahSV
Hi Drown Soda, I've done a copy edit, but please revert anything you don't like (except the names; that did need to be changed). Some feedback:


 * The men were all surnames and the women first names (except for one sentence where all are first names). This isn't only because Mary and Jacqueline share a surname; Natalie Cortez was first name too until I changed it: "Judd [male surname] makes a second visit to Natalie." Even on first reference, Mary and Jacqueline's surnames were left out, while the men were introduced in full. I've changed some of it, but because you have to use first names for Mary and Jacqueline, you might consider using first names for everyone after the first reference.
 * The plot summary was written before you began editing the article, and it isn't that clear. Why did she marry secretly? It says she is suicidal but also that she's refusing to kill herself. Then suddenly she does. The IMDb summary is a little clearer.
 * You describe Mary as naive and mature.
 * What is the "double suicide that ends the film"?
 * "Purportedly Lewton was warned not to make a film with a message, and he replied that this film did have a message: 'Death is good.'" This is the source. It isn't clear to me that the message discussion was about this film.
 * Can you unpack what you mean about it violating the Motion Picture Production Code, and do you have a source?

SarahSV (talk) 19:53, 16 April 2017 (UTC)


 * Re: my suggestion to use first names, I'm not sure this would work with Dr. Judd.
 * Is the school called Miss Highcliffe's? Edmund Bansak calls it Highcliffe Academy.
 * The article doesn't mention the opening line from John Donne: "I run to death, and death meets me as fast / and all my pleasures are like yesterday." It used to include it (e.g. here), but it was removed at some point. SarahSV (talk) 21:26, 16 April 2017 (UTC)


 * The name of the private detective, Irving August, was missing, so I've added it to the plot summary, but he should also be added to the cast and characters. SarahSV (talk) 19:51, 17 April 2017 (UTC)


 * , I believe I have addressed most of these concerns; specifically, the Val Lewton quote about the film's message being "death is good" had to be removed—you are correct, it does not apply to the film. I believe this was in the article before I started working on it. Per the Harvard Film Archive, that message was one Lewton had attributed to I Walk With a Zombie. Let me know if you notice other outstanding issues. --Drown Soda (talk) 18:18, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
 * apologies for the delay in responding. Regarding the double suicide, is the second one seen at the end, and if not how is it stated or implied? SarahSV (talk) 05:28, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

Image review
SarahSV (talk) 16:14, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
 * The link to the source for File:Seventh-victim-poster one sheet.jpg doesn't show the image, but it's listed here too if you want to change the source.
 * How do we know that the copyright of File:Seventh-victim-poster one sheet.jpg and File:Seventh Victim early conceptual artwork.jpg wasn't renewed?
 * Wondering the same about File:Jean Brooks in Seventh Victim trailer.jpg and File:Seventh Victim 1943 shower screenshot.png. Does this mean the film itself is in the public domain?


 * , I will add this to the file pages for clarification, but I have searched the 1971 Copyright Entries database at UPenn which would apply for copyrights from 1943–44 and found nothing under searches in "commercial prints" or "artwork" for the title or for RKO, who published the poster(s). As far as the trailer screenshots goes, my understanding is that trailers published in the U.S. prior to 1964 were not copyrighted (per and ) Let me know if you see anything else and thank you for looking this over--I apologize for taking awhile to address any of these things. I didn't get a notification to check the review archive until today. --Drown Soda (talk) 18:31, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

Closing comment: This has been open now for over six weeks with only one support, not least because it has struggled to attract attention. Therefore, we don't have a consensus to support and this review seems to have stalled with little recent substantial comment. Therefore, I think we are better to archive this and renominate it after the usual 2-week wait. Sarastro1 (talk) 19:12, 31 May 2017 (UTC)

Sarastro1 (talk) 19:12, 31 May 2017 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.