Deletion of Kin Fables

Comment: as clearly passes  with a substantial piece in the Montreal Gazette which is most certainly not a local hometown newspaper but a major regional source and a national reliable source. Reference one has three paragraphs of prose before the interview, which is admissable as coverage as articles including interviews are not summarily dismissed on that basis if they have valid extra content apart from the interview. Reference four from The Concordian has seven paragraphs in prose about the project before and mixed in with the interview and is clearly substantial coverage, university newspapers are generally reliable sources especially as they do not have the commercial pressure applied to them. Reference nine has six paragraphs of prose directly about the project before the interview section and is clearly substantial coverage. The Montreal Gazette piece documents the two main awards that  the films have won so the awards are being reported on in reliable sources and are therefore notable awards according to the nominators rationale. Also it is not just a three film project it also included an album and written work, and I don't see anything advert like in the tone. The article was more or less abandoned till I published it and the project lost all momentum after the premature death of one of the brothers who created the project so there has been no publicity drive. In conclusion the article passes  and deserves to be included, thanks
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:GNG)

Comment: Unfortunately you seem to be making up the rules as you go along in this case.  The Montreal Gazette is a national source not a local hometown paper and does not cover the more insignificant items or subjects, and I have not read in  that a national reliable source should be excluded because the subject covered happens to be from the area that it is printed. For example an Evening Standard piece reviewing a London West End show is permitted as a reliable source showing notability. Also the  guidelines make it clear that exerpts from a piece can be sufficient for establishing notability; and the prose in an article that includes an interview is not necessarily sourced to the subject at all, that is just your presumption. Major articles in reliable sources most often include interviews particularly for balance and often after negative comment that is obviously not sourced to the subject so interviews can be reliable sources if they contain independent prose content and there is no evidence the prose in these interviews were not the result of independent research before the interview. When the new  rules were being drawn up I specifically asked if prose content from interviews was acceptable for notability and I was told by {{ping|Renata}} that such prose is acceptable even if the main part of the article is an interview so if such sources are acceptable for corpdepth which is much stricter than GNG then such sources such as six paragraphs before an interview are certainly acceptable for  as applied to film articles, regards
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:GNG||WP:CORPDEPTH||WP:GNG)