Deletion of Fat Head

Comment: It needs a significant copy edit to delete anything that can't be properly |sourced, but the Houston Chronicle article and the Health Central review are (barely) enough to pass notability, IMO. I wouldn't have an issue with an opposite result to this discussion, however, as I do feel that it's a very thin margin here
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS)

Comment: Available on Amazon Prime" isn't part of our |notability standards. The term "meatpuppet" |while often thought impolite, has a long-established usage. In my opinion, its usage here has not been derogatory of any specific individual, and there is no reason to strike it, but that's just my opinion
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N||WP:SOCK)

Comment: As others have noted,  is not a valid reason for deletion.  It is worth noting that the proposer is a serial namechanger and POV pusher who has now apparently left the project.  A quick research of the film reveals that in addition to the sources that
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:IDONTLIKEIT)

Comment: There just isn't enough |appropriately high-quality sourcing available to write a decent article
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:MEDRS)

Comment: Sufficiently notable. However needs a serious trim as dubious "science" is being ed in via anecdote in the synopsis section
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Coatrack articles (WP:COATRACK)