Deletion of The Big Gay Musical (2nd nomination)

Comment: sufficient to meet otability (films
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N)

Comment: These reviews are all fairly lengthy. I'm pretty anal when it comes to the "significant" criterion and...I mean, this passes, with flying colors (IMO). Additionally, it is standard practice for reviewers to review promotional copies of movies sent to them, just as it's standard practice for reviews of major films to be conducted after free, invite-only press screenings -- the major release equivalent of a free promotional DVD. That in no way violates . Indeed, for all implications of a sullied review by sending a promotional DVD copy, I note with interest that the DVD Verdict review is ''negative.'' Not that that matters, either way
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:SPIP)

Comment: Ignoring that most of those sources are exactly the kind of sourcing I was saying is not valid for proving notability (reviews shorter than your average letter to the editor on some obscure sites are not enough) one of the few that just barely goes beyond is rather revealing in this comment: "DVD Verdict was sent '''a promotional copy''' for The Big Gay Musical . . ." So, what are the chances most of these reviews are also the result of them being given a free copy of the DVD? Notability does not mean, "I managed to find sources" as quite a large number of non-notable things could be kept on that basis. I think what is most telling are the lack of reviews prior to the apparent flurry of promotion before the DVD release. So, just tack on to my rationale . Of the only remaining sources one is an obscure local magazine doing a review around the time of the film's premiere in the city. So, After Elton is really the only decent source in the bunch provided above that goes beyond a trivial or routine mention. Now I think this should be deleted even more
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:SPIP)

Comment: You have got to be kidding me. One of the claims is that the only reason this film was ever reviewed was that the studio sent out promotional copies? Son, if you ever worked in the media, you'd understand that this is how virtually all small indie films (and even some major films) get reviewed. Have you ever noticed that movies are often reviewed before they are released in theaters? Do you think that happens by magic? Also, do you think music critics have to wait for all of the songs on a CD to be played on the radio before the critic reviews the album? Ridiculous, and ignorant. The only reason why I can imagine this particular film being targeted, given the many mentions in the media, is homophobia. Wikipedia is |not censored. I regret having to play that card, but this nomination makes no sense whatsoever
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:CENSOR)

Comment: per |multiple in-depth reviews being available. Too many mainstream sources review the film. Stubby or Start-class status does not mean it should be deleted
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NRVE)

Comment: per |multiple in-depth reviews being available and enough to meet otability (films
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NRVE||WP:N)

Comment: per |multiple in-depth reviews being available. For example, one of the many |easily found sources available to improve the article is a quite decent full-legth review and analysis in http://www.variety.com/review/VE1117941896?refcatid=31 ''Variety''... and we have significant coverage in http://www.afterelton.com/movies/2009/10/big-gay-musical-review Afer Elton and http://www.newyorkcool.com/archives/2009/September/film-reviews.htm#gay ''New York Cool'' and http://www.dvdverdict.com/reviews/biggaymusical.php DVD Verdict and http://www.dvdtalk.com/reviews/42963/big-gay-musical-the/ DVD Talk and http://www.theatermania.com/new-york-city/news/09-2009/the-big-gay-musical-to-get-nyc-premiere-on-septemb_15955.html ''Theater Mania'' and http://www.eyeforfilm.co.uk/reviews.php?id=9227 ''Eye for Film'' and http://thisweekintexas.com/index.php?Itemid=95&id=261&option=com_content&task=view ''Twit Magazine'' and http://www.shadowsonthewall.co.uk/10/i2.htm#bigg Rich Cline and http://www.outimpact.com/entertainment/movies/dvd-reviews/small-review-ithe-big-gay-musicali/ ''Out Impact'' and http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1332100/externalreviews others. We expect such sources, even the less-than-mainstream ones, to review films or genre-specific topics... and the ones I listed by name are '''not''' simply capsule reviews '''nor''' trivial mentions, but are instead in-depth and significant coverage of this film.   and  are soundly met and |addressable issues of an article |needing improvement are rarely sufficient cause for deletion of notable topics, despite their subject matter
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NRVE||WP:BEFORE||WP:GNG||WP:FILM||WP:ATD||WP:UGLY)