Deletion of Not Another B Movie

Comment: per topic meeting the requisites at  by yes... having |multiple reliable secondary sources giving significant coverage. My own |BEFORE found such as DVD Talk, DVD Verdict, Courier News, and JoBlo... emmienently suitable as sources for independent spoof films even if the nominator found them in his own BEFORE and feels them "not reliable or well-known at all". Further, and in appreciateing the nominator bringing us concerns toward the author's COI, it must be noted that the author's last edit to this article was '''six''' months ago on December 29, 2011.http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Not_Another_B_Movie&diff=468306792&oldid=468306391 He's stayed away from it since then. And while sure, the thing |had sat unimproved since then, when an author is made aware of issues and refrains from editing an article, the best way to address issues is through a watch eye and regular editing http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Not_Another_B_Movie&action=history such as THIS. More to do, certainly... and while this is not the "most" notable earth-shaking film ever, it has ''just'' enough coverage as a topic to be notable enough for us. In remembering  and , it is #REASON|rarely required to delete an article on a notable topic '''if''' issues are |otherwise addressable through |regular editing
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NF||WP:GNG||WP:BEFORE||WP:NOEFFORT||WP:IMPERFECT||WP:WIP||WP:DEL||WP:HANDLE||WP:ATD)