Fortress of Amerikkka: I can't find significant coverage.  Guy ( help! - typo? ) 17:29, 15 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Arts-related deletion discussions .  Guy ( help! - typo? ) 17:29, 15 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions .  Hey man im josh ( talk ) 17:41, 15 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Strong keep , there is the review mentioned above (and other, some that were removed just before this discussion started and one that is now on the page).  There is a review/analysis in 80s Action Movies on the Cheap 284 Low Budget, High Impact Pictures (2017), p. 219 (the book comes on top of a Gg books search).  At least but that is perfectly enough to show notability.  And, on top of that, this film is quite important in Kaufman's career as in Louzil's; and in the production of Troma in general (as an attempt (serious or not) at dealing with a more political topic; Kaufman saying about the film: "It was about a futuristic society where everyone in the world hates America. What a preposterous idea that is! " ( Produce your own damn movie! ) Which makes it notable in another way. — MY, OH, MY !  20:00, 15 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The ones that I removed were user-generated content.  The one review cited by Rotten Tomatoes is from "DVDTalk", which is not a usable site - and that's the only professional review that appears to exist.  The German one also looks like UGC and is in any case a directory.  Inclusion in IMDB does not count for notability either.  Ask yourself this: a movie *this* bad that doesn't even get a mention in articles about bad movies?  Seriously?  Guy ( help! - typo? ) 15:49, 25 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] DVD Talk is an acceptable source for a film review, imv Atlantic306 ( talk ) 22:27, 29 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep based on review cited in article, and sources identified by Mushy Yank.  Donald D23 talk to me 00:37, 20 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Sandstein 12:45, 28 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources .  Price, Mark (1989-10-13).  "A Low-Budget, Action-Adventure Mishap" .  The Fayetteville Observer .  Archived from the original on 2023-06-05 .  Retrieved 2023-06-05 .  The review notes: "Still, it's hard to imagine even the most bubble-headed fan of gratuitous violence being able to sit through the incoherent plot of "Fortress of Amerikkka," an action-adventure mishap which opened today at the Westwood Cinema and Eutaw Movies. To list everything wrong with this poorly-written, poorly-staged venture would be difficult, not to mention exhausting. Perhaps it will suffice to say what is right: Everyone speaks English, and they all know how to look at the camera."  Lor (1989-05-17).  "Fortress Of Amerikka".  Variety .  Vol.  335, no. 5.  p. 38.  ProQuest 1438514907 .  The review notes: ""Fortress Of Amerikkka," a.ka.  "The Mercenaries," is an old-fashioned sexploitation film that will appeal to that fringe which enjoys truly bad acting, t&a and gore effects.  Secdon Troma release from filmmaker Eric Louzil, pic is a slight step from his "Lust for Freedom," but still suffers from awkward direction and the annoying Troma practice of adding hokey dialog and sound effects to fill up dead air.  ...  Apart from scenic views of forests and mountains, film's technical credits are weak.  The background score is extremely poor. " Gibron, Bill (2004-03-30). "Fortress of Amerikkka" . DVD Talk . Archived from the original on 2023-06-05 . Retrieved 2023-06-05 . The review notes: "There may be some of you in the audience for oddities that will be more forgiving to this miserable misfire.  But Fortress of Amerikkka stands for the proposition that even the more determined democratic drivel will sink like the Bismarck if its not supported by a bevy of bare babes and some viscous vats of vivisected vitals.  This land may indeed be your land, but it's hard to imagine anyone claiming this claptrap salute to it anytime soon. " Budnik, Daniel R. (2017). '80s Action Movies on the Cheap: 284 Low Budget, High Impact Pictures . Jefferson, North Carolina: McFarland & Company . p. 219. ISBN 978-0-7864-9741-6 . Retrieved 2023-06-05 – via Google Books . The review notes: "The film is maybe a little too long and some of the scenes of the partying mercenaries might have been trimmed.  Or some of the more obvious scenes with the racist sheriff could have hit the road.  But once the sheriff and some fat vigilantes storm the mercenaries and all hell breaks loose, it become worthwhile.  Then the narration returns and one cannot figure out what the hell Troma is up to.  But it's nice that they tried it.  Whatever it is. " Nowlan, Robert A.; Nowlan, Gwendolyn Wright (1991). The Films of the Eighties: A Complete, Qualitative Filmography to Over 3400 Feature-Length English Language Films, Theatrical and Video-Only, Released Between January 1, 1980, and December 31, 1989 . Jefferson, North Carolina: McFarland & Company . p. 201. ISBN 0-89950-560-0 . Retrieved 2023-06-05 – via Internet Archive . The review notes: "In a weak sexploitation film, Indian halfbreed Gene LeBrok is just out of jail and hot on the trail of sheriff David Crane who cold-bloodedly killed LeBrok's brother.  His crusade is complicated by a band of mercenary soldiers, the "Fortress of Amerikkka" led by William J. Kulzer, whose game is killing.  The acting is horrible and even all the topless busty actresses don't help matters. " There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow Fortress of Amerikkka to pass Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline , which requires "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject".  Cunard ( talk ) 10:02, 5 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: keep