Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kickboxer 2
as |notability is not temporary. One can easily understand that as the second in a successful series of films, that it would have been covered at the time of its release 18 years ago, and there were multiple comparisons made to its predecessor. That fact that these pre-internet/pre-wikipedia reviews or commentaries are now difficult to find, does not mean that they did not then exist. However, I did find a few lengthy reviews... http://www.ew.com/ew/article/0,,307597,00.html Entertainment Weekly, http://movies.tvguide.com/kickboxer-2-road/review/128650 TV GUIDE, http://www.badmovieknights.com/2007/01/post.html Bad Movie Knights, http://movies.tvguide.com/kickboxer-2-road/review/128650 Kung Fu Cinema, and others at http://www.michaeldvd.com.au/Reviews/Reviews.asp?ReviewID=1848http://www.epinions.com/review/mvie_mu-1034957/content_131536817796... With respects to the nom. its a keeper
— User:MichaelQSchmidt, 20:37, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
Stance: keep
Cited policy: WP:NTEMP (Wikipedia:Notability)