Deletion of Atlantean language

Comment: The argument that it's OR doesn't hold up as the majority of content is sourced (although the vocabulary section isn't and should probably go). Notability is tricky to assess as it's not always obvious which of the sources are reliable. http://www.usatoday.com/life/movies/2001-05-24-atlantis-lingo.htm USA Today is fine, and http://www.moviehabit.com/essays/AtlantisInDepth8.shtml this one looks acceptable, so the topic would appear to just about meet 
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)

Comment: as not indescriminate and |covered in multiple independent reliable sources.  If it was such a minor element, one has to wonder at the quantity of in-depth critical commentary this "minor" element has.  And while yes, the coverage is in relationship to ''Atlantis: The Lost Empire'', so what?  One would |certainly expect that sources discussing a fictional element would need to and be required to do so in context to the |notable film of which the element is a part. It meets ... |just as does Starship Enterprise and Millenium Falcon... and this article is far better sourced that either of those notable elements
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:COMMONSENSE||WP:NF||WP:GNG||WP:WAX)