Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Phoenix Film Critics Society


 * 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 Delete all. No support to keep. UtherSRG (talk) 15:27, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

Phoenix Film Critics Society

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Also:


 * Phoenix Film Critics Society Awards 2000
 * Phoenix Film Critics Society Awards 2001
 * Phoenix Film Critics Society Awards 2002
 * Phoenix Film Critics Society Awards 2003
 * Phoenix Film Critics Society Awards 2004
 * Phoenix Film Critics Society Awards 2005
 * Phoenix Film Critics Society Awards 2006
 * Phoenix Film Critics Society Awards 2007
 * Phoenix Film Critics Society Awards 2008
 * Phoenix Film Critics Society Awards 2009
 * Phoenix Film Critics Society Awards 2010
 * Phoenix Film Critics Society Awards 2011
 * Phoenix Film Critics Society Awards 2012
 * Phoenix Film Critics Society Awards 2013
 * Phoenix Film Critics Society Awards 2014

PROD requested as a non-notable organisation lacking credible independent of significance. has already been deleted once via PROD and restored, so has to go to AfD instead. The article has no substantive content other than lists of films. Guy (Help!) 13:46, 23 March 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete - WP:ORGSIG. Like other small, regional film-critics groups that have been deleted, many of whose members are unpaid amateur critics for penny-shoppers and the like, the Phoenix Film Critics Society is essentially an awards mill whose greatest exposure comes precisely from Wikipedia itself. --Tenebrae (talk) 17:06, 23 March 2015 (UTC)


 * Abstain - unable to find in-depth coverage - keep - The Phoenix Film Critics Society is the official association that represents the movie reviewing press members for the State of Arizona -examiner. also korea times us Jonpatterns (talk) 10:58, 24 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Being the "official" critics' group for an arbitrary geographical location does not confer notability. Nor do press releases promoting films that have won their awards, because that kind of thing happens in every business - just check any trade magazine and you'll see endless references to non-notable awards. Guy (Help!) 15:37, 24 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Arizona-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:28, 24 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:28, 24 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:28, 24 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:29, 24 March 2015 (UTC)
 * I'd additionally note that while the pennyshopper reviewer seems no longer to be there, the membership has a retired person, a local-theater blogger, a writer for the amateur-contributor Examiner.com (which itself tells its contributors "this isn't a 'quit your day job' opportunity"), and, mostly, local radio reviewers of uncertain professional payment. Even if one or two of the members have independent notability, notability isn't transferable. --Tenebrae (talk) 17:10, 24 March 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete per WP:ORGDEPTH as it currently stands. This organization's recognitions are routinely reported in periodicals including Arizona Republic, Variety, and The Hollywood Reporter, but per the guideline, for the organization itself to be notable enough for a stand-alone article, there needs to be in-depth coverage. For example, one of its co-founders is Dave Ramsey, but I could not find any article detailing the organization's founding. There needs to be more coverage so this topic can be more than "a very brief, incomplete stub", as WP:ORGDEPTH says., would you take this into consideration? Erik (talk &#124; contrib) (ping me) 16:59, 24 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the comment. I'm still not convinced the society isn't notable. However, I am unable to find in depth coverage. Therefore, I'm changing my vote to abstain. Jonpatterns (talk) 17:27, 24 March 2015 (UTC)
 * 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.