Deletion of Annie's Coming Out

Comment: per #1, no valid deletion rationale has been given, and no one other than the nominator has recommended deletion. NFRINGE does not say that {{tq|notability of fringe subjects must be established with sources skeptical of the fringe view}}. It merely says that fringe subjects are held to the same notability standard as everything else: they must be {{tq|referenced extensively, and in a serious and reliable manner, by major publications that are independent of their promulgators and popularizers.}} It does say that {{tq|references that debunk or disparage the fringe view can be adequate}}, but in no way does it say that they are the only sources that count. Therefore as long as the movie has received sufficient coverage (of any kind) in reliable sources, which the nominator does not argue against, the article should be kept. The sources currently in the article perhaps aren't the greatest, but those plus https://www.tvguide.com/movies/annies-coming-out/review/114564/ TV Guide, https://www.nytimes.com/1985/03/29/movies/test-of-love-from-australia.html NY Times, https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1985-04-19-ca-15134-story.html LA Times plus many others are more than sufficient
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Speedy keep (WP:SK)

Comment: That the article as is promotes FC uncritically might very well be a violation of |FRINGE and |NPOV, but such concerns have no bearing on the film's notability. &ndash
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Fringe theories (WP:FRINGE||WP:NPOV)

Comment: WP:NFRINGE is about the notability of fringe theories and not necessarily about the notability of media that advances a fringe theory. This film does appear to meet 
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NMOVIE)

Comment: As stated, the nomination does not give a valid argument for deletion.  This is a fictionalized version of a supposed true story, and thus does not fall under the guidelines set under .  In addition, the argument that the article "gives no hint that the subject's communication is not legitimate" is not a valid argument for deletion, as that, if it is a problem, could be very easily solved via normal editing.  Regardless, searching brings up plenty of sources discussing the film, so it is clearly notable
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Fringe theories (WP:FRINGE)