Deletion of Doctor Who 2008 Christmas special

Comment: To quote  "Scheduled or expected future events should be included if the event is notable and almost certain to take place."... production has been completed on this episode as evidenced by the sources... therefore it is almost certain to take place. Why do people always quote CRYSTAL without having actually read it. It is also acuratly marked as a tub|stub and will be further expanded when more info becomes available. Otherwise... all stubs should be deleted due to small content... this idea that an artilce can't exist simply because a title hasn't been released is really getting ridiculous
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:CRYSTAL||WP:S)

Comment: Confirmed production, completed and promoted by the BBC and multiple non-trivial sources. Will be renamed once the BBC announces the title. No  issue at all. This is no different than us having an article called Bond 22 for a year before the title Quantum of Solace was announced because it is a confirmed production for an undeniably major entertainment franchise. if this is deleted then Star Trek (film) would have to be deleted as well. Definitely looks like a  scenario to me right now
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:CRYSTAL||WP:SNOW)

Comment:  says that it's okay to have future events providing there is significant coverage by secondary sources.  Elections are a good example.  A trailer is not a sufficiently reliable/verifiable/source, and in the absence of further coverage, I suggest this is recreated nearer the time.  Fails  for that reason
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:CRYSTAL)

Comment: The relevant guideline is . Satisfies that guideline, for me. Principal photography has clearly commenced, obviously notable subject, enough reliably sourced material to have some meaningful content in the article
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NFF)

Comment: Would  apply yet
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Snowball clause (WP:SNOW)

Comment: The villain, air time, guest stars and the Doctor are confirmed... how many people may have seen the trailer, or that Ten Pound Hammer hasn't seen it, is irrelevant, it is verifiable and was seen on the BBC by millions. The article contains other printed sources, and interest in the episode will be high. Certainly not in the spirit of  which does not apply here, there is no speculative information therein
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:CRYSTAL)

Comment: Virtually certain not only to occur, but also be covered in an increasing number of reliable sources.  In addition, the subject is "... of sufficiently wide interest that it would merit an article if the event had already occurred." (
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:CRYSTAL)

Comment: meets  through production status being substantially complete
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NFF)

Comment: Per .  As with other Doctor Who episodes, this would be considered notable (Dragons Flight has provided secondary coverage in addition).  The only question is whether the show will take place.  Just as presumably we'll see the 2016 elections, I think that we'll also end up seeing this in Christmas 2008
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:CRYSTAL)