Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Pizza Boy


 * 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. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont)  18:07, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

The Pizza Boy

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Non-notable film, with no significant coverage at all in independent reliable sources. Fails WP:NFILM. pinktoebeans (talk) 19:16, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions.  pinktoebeans  (talk) 19:16, 2 April 2021 (UTC)


 * Delete. A search didn't bring up much to show that this film is notable, as it looks like this went the way of most indie budget films - it received little to no notice in the media. The claims of being first low budget film to premiere in a given area is also kind of dubious, as I'd wager that a lot of low to no budget films premiere in midtown Manhattan. Given the creative output that goes on in NYC, I'd be very surprised if there weren't films with lower budgets that have premiered in one form or another. Looking at the sourcing in the article, it's not really enough to establish notability. Here are my issues:
 * The BWW link is a press release and the only source we have for the Queens Chronicle review. A look on the newspaper's website only brings up an article announcing that the film will screen.
 * A look at the one link we have for the QC shows that the writer is a "Chronicle Contributor". This brings up the question of whether or not contributor pieces are given any sort of editorial oversight or if they're like Forbes's contributor pieces, where they give absolutely zero oversight. In my experience the term "contributor" typically means the latter, no editorial oversight. This makes the news source unusable unless it can be shown otherwise with the paper.
 * The Richard Propes (Independent Critic) should be usable, he's typically seen as a RS on Wikipedia.
 * So that leaves us with only one source that's really usable to establish notability, which isn't enough. If the QC contributor post could be proven to be usable it would help this meet the bare minimum threshold of notability, but then we'd also need to be able to locate said review. I'm very leery about using PR posts to back up reviews, as it's not uncommon for articles to sometimes be misrepresented. It's entirely possible that this was an offhand quote rather than a traditional review. ReaderofthePack (formerly Tokyogirl79)  (｡◕‿◕｡)  20:00, 2 April 2021 (UTC)


 * Weak delete I would expect more sources for the lowest budget film to be screened in Midtown Manhattan but I'm not finding enough to establish notability. Spudlace (talk) 05:13, 7 April 2021 (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.