Deletion of Hitz Radio (2nd nomination)

Comment: the above comment seems to me to be more issues with the subject than with the references.   The references, at least the good ones, are largely newspaper articles, they are only going to go so deep on the subject. Both the Sunday Times and Daily Record articles focus solely on the subject of this wikipedia article (not just a trivial mention).  Coverage has also been demonstrated over a sufficient period here.  If you are looking for book length coverage of this topic, you aren't going to find it, but that's not necessary to meet |general notability guidelines.  Reiterating a comment from the first AFD, internet radio stations usually aren't notable because there is scant if any coverage in reliable sources, this is one of the few that rises above that
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)

Comment: This AFD is turning into an "and another thing" type argument very quickly.  The nominator has questioned the validity of national and local newspapers as reliable sources, when that argument met resistance they switched to arguing that the article covered a single event, when that met resistence they switched to questioning the depth of coverage.  While appreciate the nominator's eagerness to defend their position that the article does not belong, things are getting |pointy here.  It would be nice have some other editor opinions here as well. Hopefully the lists
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Do not disrupt Wikipedia to illustrate a point (WP:POINT)

Comment: Obviously as a quite vocal nominator I am biased, but could some people not involved in the topic please make their opinions known in this debate? Whether you support deletion or not, it would be very unfortunate for this to purely be voted on by those heavily invested in radio subjects, rather than those that can view this as a non-notable organisation and failure of 
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:BROADCAST)

Comment: This subject has sufficient coverage in reliable 3rd party sources to meet wikipedia's notability guidelines.  These are not just passing mentions but reasonably in depth about the station itself. This article has survived 2 other AFDs with coverage in 3rd party sources playing a large part in the discussion. I'm not seeing  as applying here.  The article, and its references cover several years of activities.  While this article wont be featured on the front page anytime soon, it meets guidelines for inclusion
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:1EVENT)