The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. 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.

The result was Keep as per unanimous consensus and no calls for deletion beyond the nominator. A non-admin closure. - TheMagnificentist 15:31, 29 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Teenage Catgirls in Heat

[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Subject does not meet notability criteria at WP:NOTFILM. Krychek (talk) 17:31, 22 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please also note that the page was created by a sock puppet of the film's production company. Krychek (talk) 17:34, 22 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. I've added reviews from The Austin Chronicle and Joe Bob Briggs, which I'd argue that they just about meet WP:GNG (significant coverage in independent reliable sources, aka 2 sources here). I agree that this stands on somewhat shaky ground. Daß Wölf 17:59, 22 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 18:05, 22 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. I added a review by TV Guide and per this, it looks like it was reviewed in Cinefantastique in 1994. I'm not certain about The Independent Critic as a RS, but the others should be enough to establish notability. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 09:51, 27 December 2016 (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.