Deletion of Ashes to Ashes (2010 film)

Comment: per http://news.google.com/archivesearch?as_user_ldate=1996&as_user_hdate=2009&q=%22Ashes+to+Ashes%22%2C+Goldie+Hawn&scoring=a&hl=en&ned=us&um=1&q=%22Ashes+to+Ashes%22%2C+Goldie+Hawn&lnav=od&btnG=Go continued coverage in reliable sources since 1996, allowing this as one of those that do meet  per coverage meeting ... specially as it now moves toward filming.  Even with its postponements and it being CRYSTAL, the continuued coverage http://www.variety.com/search/siteall?q=Ashes+to+Ashes%2C+Hawn&s=relevance&x=23&y=12, http://www.aarpmagazine.org/entertainment/goldie_luxe.html,  affirms notability, and allows it to merit an article
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NFF||WP:GNG)

Comment: I'm going with the letter of , which says "Films that have not been confirmed by reliable sources to have commenced principal photography should not have their own articles. … Until the start of principal photography, information on the film can be included in articles about its subject material
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NFF)