Deletion of 180 Documentary

Comment: per nominator. All my researches lead to some promotional articles in extremist/radical Christian blogs/sites, that are not reliable and definitely do not have a neutral point of view. IMDB and major film websites simply ignore the existence of this "film". Meets |WP:Self-promotion and indiscriminate publicity, instead fails ,  and all the criteria of 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:SPIP||WP:N||WP:GNG||WP:MOVIE)

Comment: and continue |improvements, as it does need more. I've changed my mind after beginning some sandblasting and cleanup to begin neutralizing and sourcing the article.http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=180_Documentary&action=historysubmit&diff=460558499&oldid=460224284 More to do, yes... but such is an |addressable issue, specially as not all available sources are blogs, not all sources promote the film, and many of the available sources '''are''' |reliable.http://www.google.com/search?q=%22Ray+Comfort%22+%2B%22180%22&hl=en&rls=com.microsoft%3Aen-us&prmd=ivns&source=lnms&tbm=nws&ei=xEHAToupPKGaiAK6xO2RAw&sa=X&oi=mode_link&ct=mode&cd=4&ved=0CAcQ_AUoAzgK&gs_sm=s&gs_upl=20312l34984l0l36469l49l30l0l0l0l11l282l5286l0.19.11l30l0&oq=%22Ray+Comfort%22+%2B%22180%22&aq=f&aqi=&aql=  Editors should simply not use those that are not.  As the film '''is''' released, and '''is''' receiving commentary and review in enough suitable secondary sources, we '''do''' have a meeting of  and 
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Editing policy (WP:HANDLE||WP:ATD||WP:RS||WP:NF||WP:GNG)