Deletion of Christopher Locke

Comment: It should be noted that the above comment was written by the re-creator of the article, and is also the major contributor to it. Possibly a case of 
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Conflict of interest (WP:COI)

Comment: Please refrain from accusing us of "personal grudges" without foundation, remember 
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Assume good faith (WP:AGF)

Comment: subject of article does not meet . Should probably slap a protect to stop recreation as well. A bit more research suggests that the subject possibly meets , but his page needs severe cleanup
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:BIO||WP:BIO)

Comment: Per  Needs mention in mainstream media, interviews with other bloggers is not enough.  requires especially careful requirements for  than other subjects. However, given this individual's authorship of multiple articles in mainstream publication, notability could well be established and  on first appearances is inappropriate here.  Article should not be deleted simply because it contains promotional materials in its current form. Wikipedia's criterion is objectively |verifiable |notability, not subjective intentions. This individual may well be a notable professional promoter.  The fact that marketing and promotion is his business is irrelevant. We can certainly tone down the article to make more POV|neutral and less self-promoting, remove improper links, and deal with anyone who repeatedly attempts to remove critical material or adds puffery, but these are not reasons for deletion
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons (WP:BLP||WP:BLP||WP:RS||WP:SNOW||WP:V||WP:N||WP:NPOV)