I see, thanks!

Reading the article about the movie, I can kind of see both sides here.

Probably a veteran Wikipedia contributor could draw the lines best, but it seems reasonable to say that the incident itself would not be relevant enough unless it had been made into a movie.

The article about the movie clearly states that it's a true story.

i mean, there are often "curiosity" stories reported by multiple newspapers that are still not really historical events warranting their own article.

I'd draw the line depending on the volume of coverage and publicity in such cases.

And this case doesn't appear to me as if it was a major cultural thing that everyone knew about when it happened (unless they were interested in the movie).

I'm not in the US though, so I can only tell what I see in search results and that the story hasn't really crossed the atlantic into any notable publicity here.