At the moment, the substance of the article all appears to come from ogrecave.com and gibberish.com, neither of which is particularly notable.  Further, it's circular for the article to say, "John Smith, head of xyz.com, is famous.  For proof, check his bio on xyz.com, where it says that he's famous."  That kind of thing runs afoul of autobiography guidelines.  In order for someone to have a claim of being "prominent," they need to have other people refer to them that way.  The Wikipedia page needs to supply links to book, magazine and newspaper articles which verify descriptions such as Sugarbaker's "prominence" or the podcast being "popular."  For more info, check Wikipedia:Verifiability. As it is, there are so few references on the article, it's actually in danger of being nominated for deletion, but general practice is to give a new article some time to breathe, to see if additional references can be added.