Deletion of Relevant Magazine

Comment: the AfD nomination failed to take into account the ''USA Today'' and CNN stories listed in the External links section - sources therefore did exist and there is more secondary coverage available (including the newly-added Newsweek citation to support significant circulation figure for a specialty genre). Concerns over "promotional" nature were not raised at the article itself before AfD, an affront to a due process.  also does not list "poorly formatted" as a valid deletion criterion. Issues are entirely resolvable by regular editing
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Deletion policy (WP:DEL)

Comment: based on the strong secondary coverage provided. Also, since the nominator feels so strongly about being familiar with policy before creating an article, I would recommend some familiarity with  when creating an AFD, particularly point 9. You're not expected to "rewrite the article" if you're not interested in that, just refrain from deletion nomination after checking that sources exist, and leave an appropriate tag
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion (WP:BEFORE)