Deletion of Rust (2010 film)

Comment: per sources found by Michig. The interview sources aren't ideal, but can absolutely still be used as long as there are other solid sources in the mix — Q&A interviews don't ''carry'' a notability pass all by themselves if they're the ''only'' sources that can be found, but they are perfectly acceptable for use as sourcing for stray facts if there are enough quality sources elsewhere in the sourcing pool to cover off passage of  and , which there are in this instance. As I noted above, pre-release production sourcing is only weight-tested if the film is still in the production pipeline as of the time we're checking the sources — if the film ''has'' been released, as this has, then pre-release sourcing doesn't count for less than post-release sourcing anymore. And no, the fact that some of the sources are Christian-specific specialist media doesn't invalidate their use either — we certainly have to be ''cautious'' about using that kind of sourcing in ''some'' instances, such as POV political disputes, but sourcing the content of a Christian-themed film is not a case where their use would be problematic
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:NFILM)

Comment: as has significant coverage in multiple reliable sources as detailed above so that the film passes  and deserves to be included but the article needs much improvement/expansion
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)