Deletion of Chris Berrow

Comment: The debate going on here seems to be more about who edited what and who listens to the radio station or not rather than whether or not the article meets wikipedia's policies on notability for inclusion, which is what this discussion is supposed to be about. It however does not seem to meet those policies. According to  and , "people are presumed notable if they have received significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject." First, the article has one source, which is primary and according to  primary sources "do not contribute toward proving the notability of a subject." Now, earlier up in this discussion you can find links to 8 sources provided by Chris, however of the provided sources that are secondary, none actually have Chris as their subject, he is just trivially mentioned in them, and our policy on notability for people is quite clear in stating that trivial coverage of a subject by secondary sources is not sufficient to establish notability. Notability is not determined if you can get a name in an article written about something else, but rather if you are notable enough in the real world that independent sources will write about you. If we want to get more specific in terms of notability as a radio show host, we can check our policy  and see again that this article fails it. Thus it is clear to be that this article does not meet our notability guidelines for inclusion and so I am in favour of deletion
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:BASIC||WP:BASIC||WP:ENT)

Comment: Radio personalities are not automatically entitled to have Wikipedia articles just because they exist, or just because they have social networking profiles — the notability test is the ''reception'' of |reliable source coverage ''about them'' in sources ''other'' than their own employer. The sources shown above simply are not good enough: most of them are |primary sources, not reliable or notability-supporting ones, and the very few that are reliable sources just glancingly namecheck his existence in the process of being about something ''other'' than ''him''. This is ''not'' the kind of sourcing it takes to make a radio personality notable. And at any rate, it's not Chris Berrow's prerogative to personally decide for ''himself'' that he gets to have a Wikipedia article — ''our'' inclusion standards and ''our'' rules about sourcing decide whether he gets a Wikipedia article or not, not his own. This is an encyclopedia, not LinkedIn; we are not a site on which people are entitled to place themselves for publicity
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS||WP:PRIMARYSOURCES)

Comment: this reassessment based on all sources offered, those subsequently found, and assessed on how these apply to relevant |WP notability protocol
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:BASIC)