Deletion of Bikini Cavegirl (2nd nomination)

Comment: If you don't buy the argument that |if topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, it is presumed to satisfy the inclusion criteria for a stand-alone article, then you need to take that up at , because this film has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. If the article survives this AfD, I would think the move would be appropriate too, as the current one refers to its cable TV title. It seems to be better-known by the original release title
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:GNG)

Comment: For anyone looking at the article and its sourcing-- rather than judging its subject from a biased moral or artistic perspective-- I've just added coverage of the http://www.eccentric-cinema.com/ review. Note that this site was selected as one of ''Entertainment Weekly''s http://www.ew.com/ew/article/0,,20165619_20165621_20167518,00.html "Best of the Web" for 2007. That makes-- that we know of so far-- two full-size reviews in reliable sources, and possibly a third one with the ''Video Watchdog'' citation. Easily passes 
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)

Comment: While this film may not be "worthy of note" in the mainstream, it apparently has received the significant coverage in reliable sources that is needed to create a presumption of notability on Wikipedia, per . The review on Eccentric-cinema.com, for example, seems to contribute to that presumption significantly
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N)