Deletion of Climate Refugees (film)

Comment: Several online, reputable film critics have reports still up on-line for viewing for the subject of this discussion. I checked against  criterias before I wikified and sourced this article
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NFILM)

Comment: per topic meeting . It seems the https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Climate_Refugees_%28film%29&type=revision&diff=698973825&oldid=698928341 initially nominated article was brought her because of |how it looked, but what was perhaps overlooked was |due diligence and  finding the topic subject actually worthy of note (really a bit hard to miss if one actually looks)... IE: http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/review/climate-refugees-film-review-29784 ''Hollywood Reporter'', http://variety.com/2010/film/markets-festivals/climate-refugees-1117942065/ ''Variety'', http://green.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/08/12/film-on-climate-refugees-strikes-a-chord/?_r=1 ''The New York Times'' (1), http://dotearth.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/09/16/video-view-climate-refugees/ ''The New York Times'' (2), http://grist.org/article/2010-01-29-the-best-green-films-at-sundance/ ''Grist'',http://www.huffingtonpost.com/news/climate-refugees/ ''Huffington Post'', as enough to |establish notability (though there are many more). And though |AFD is not to force cleanup, it is https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Climate_Refugees_%28film%29&type=revision&diff=699265515&oldid=698973825 '''currently''' receiving policy and guideline preferred |editorial attention, and we have no reason to delete this notable topic
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NF||WP:UGLY||WP:BEFORE||WP:NRVE||WP:BURDEN||WP:NOTCLEANUP||WP:IMPROVE)