Deletion of Hood 2 Hood: The Blockumentary

Comment: per |general notability guidelines that are met by virtue of http://www.eastbayexpress.com/news/hood_tv/Content?oid=290581 East Bay Express and http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2005/oct/13/film-appearance-may-be-bad-exposure-for-suspect/ Las Vegas Sun articles. Both of the above articles meet 's stated requirements of "Significant coverage" which asks that the "sources address the subject directly in detail, and no |original research is needed to extract the content". Both of those articles address the subject in detail and the information is stated explicitly so that  is not violated. The criteria for  requires that the sources used are "credible published materials with a reliable publication process". The circulation of a publication does not have any direct correlation with the editorial process and fact checking so we shouldn't discount the ''East Bay Express'' due to its sales. The ''Las Vegas Sun'' is also a reliable source. Since it has already come up that the ''Sun''{{'}}s article mentions the film in relation to another event, please note that GNG guidelines specifically state that the subject of the article "need not be the main topic of the source material" in order to qualify as significant coverage. If additional sources exist, they certainly should be used to expand the article further but the above two sources are enough to satisfy the notability guidelines
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N||WP:OR||WP:RS)