Deletion of Untitled Tron: Legacy Sequel

Comment: as a topic meeting  or, at minimum, '''Incubate''' as being |so imminent. From its coverage over 4 years, we can easily see that the topic of an anticipated 3rd Tron film exceeds the requisites for coverage as set by the |primary notability guideline.  As  cautions that unmade films should generally not have their own articles, what we need do here is decide whether or not the extensive and persistent coverage of this topic merits it as a|reasonable exception to that SNG.  The project has been in planning since 2009,https://www.google.com/search?q=%22Tron+Legacy+Sequel%22&tbm=nws&tbs=ar:1 and was confirmed at the screening of the ''Tron: Uprising '' promo trailer at 2011 Comicon, Bruce Boxleitner stated plans for a sequel film was "a done deal" and that it could be in theaters as early as 2013.http://www.slashfilm.com/bruce-boxleitner-tron-3-a-deal/http://www.reelz.com/movie-news/11614/tron-3-already-a-done-deal-says-bruce-boxleitner-tron-uprising-promo-trailer/http://www.cinemablend.com/new/Tron-3-Is-A-Done-Deal-According-To-Bruce-Boxleitner-26478.htmlhttp://screenrant.com/tron-3-confirmed-rob-129649/  Yes, he was wrong about the date... but through 2012 there was a great deal of continued independent coverage on planned cast and proposed plot.http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1961642/news?year=2012  Into 2013, the media continues to seek information as the plans firm up... And note: less than a week ago we learn that a finished script is imminent. While the topic of a 3rd Tron film can always be discussed in the various Tron articles, we have enough information to allow this topic its own article... one which will be edited and improved over time and through regular editing as more information finds its way into the press. It is '''not''' policy to disallow articles which speak toward planned projects.   does '''NOT''' state we cannot have a forward looking article... it simply advises that editors must |avoid original research, and through its stating "In forward-looking articles about unreleased products, such as films and games, take special care to avoid advertising and unverified (unsourced)  claims", requiring editors to properly source anything in such articles.  We are less concerned about the truth of what a reliable source might report than we are that it has been reported in a reliable source. Period.   A cogent point is that '''''IF''''' the project were announced today as cancelled, we'd still have an acceptable level of notability established through 4 years of coverage. The key here, as with any article, is topic notability is established through  of that topic. I think it serves the project and those readers seeking such information for us to |allow in this instance and carefully maintain a properly neutral and encyclopedic article on this highly anticipated film. There is no demand for |immediate perfection, just so long as we work toward that goal
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:FFCLARIFY||WP:GNG||WP:NFF||WP:FFCLARIFY||WP:CRYSTAL||WP:NOR||WP:SIGCOV||WP:ATD||WP:IMPERFECT)