Deletion of The Ordinary Radicals

Comment: Since the film was not released until 2008,  criteria for films 5+ years old become inapplicable.  It's always going to be difficult to show notability for a specifically Christian film|Christian-genre film, as they rarely get the distribution or press that do the highly financed and promoted films of major studios...  and are thus unlikely to be reviewed in mainstream press.  It would stand to reason that we'd have to consider it per the  and possible notability to the Christian community.  So, in looking then toward the GNG, I was a bit surprised to find coverage in such as http://www.kentucky.com/2008/10/11/552241/a-film-to-surprise-atheists.html ''Lexington Herald Leader'', http://www.al.com/religion/huntsvilletimes/news.ssf?/base/living/1250241374130230.xml&coll=1 ''The Huntsville Times'', and http://www.waltonian.com/2.3801/ordinary-radicals-sheds-light-on-emerging-evangelical-reform-1.446554 ''The Waltonian''.  Would anyone care to opine whether http://www.ucc.org/ucnews/octnov08/film-review-the-ordinary.html United Church of Christ has a reputation for inaccuracy?  Or offer opinions about (understandably) Christian reviews such as that offered by http://therubicon.org/2009/04/ordinary-radicals-film-review/ ''The Rubicon''? The article could definitely benefit from some judicious editing and proper sourcing
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NF||WP:GNG)

Comment: but expand the article on its main subject, Shane Claiborne. WP has too many articles about sources and not enough about the real-world topics the sources cover. The mere fact that someone made a documentary film is not notable. Probably most of WP's articles about documentary films and non-fiction books should be deleted per oatrack
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Copyrights (WP:C)