The result was Speedy Keep, sourced, notable, this seems to be a BF nom. Tawker 04:36, 3 December 2006 (UTC) reply
completely insignificant, fails inclusion standards. Poorly written amatuerish fluff about a non-notable story. Rubbish article about a rubbish film. Mr Bullockx 03:31, 3 December 2006 (UTC) reply
(edit conflict)*Keep and expand, while movie has a whopping 4 reviews on www.rottentomatoes.com, it does have a New York Times review [6]. B.Wind 04:17, 3 December 2006 (UTC) reply
The result was Speedy Keep, sourced, notable, this seems to be a BF nom. Tawker 04:36, 3 December 2006 (UTC) reply
completely insignificant, fails inclusion standards. Poorly written amatuerish fluff about a non-notable story. Rubbish article about a rubbish film. Mr Bullockx 03:31, 3 December 2006 (UTC) reply
(edit conflict)*Keep and expand, while movie has a whopping 4 reviews on www.rottentomatoes.com, it does have a New York Times review [6]. B.Wind 04:17, 3 December 2006 (UTC) reply