Deletion of Velvet Love Entertainment

Comment: I'll grant that it's better coverage, however, I still consider an '''employer's website''' (regardless of how much of a |reliable source it may be) to be a |''primary'' source, and #Basic criteria explicitly requires "''secondary source|secondary source material which is Wikipedia:Reliable sources|reliable, intellectually independent, and independent of the subject.''" :-) &mdash;{{User|72.75.72.63
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No original research (WP:PRIMARY||WP:BIO||WP:reliable source)

Comment: I won't deny that an employer's website is OK for |verification of ''some'' facts (''e.g.'' date/place of birth, actual employment there, ''etc.''), but they '''do not''' satisfy ''"has been the subject of published secondary source material"'' ... I view "known to be on cable television" (in itself) as ''noteriety'', not ''|notability'', which (in the case of television "celebrities") is a given ... that's all I'm saying. &mdash;{{User|72.75.72.63
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Verifiability (WP:V||WP:N)

Comment: There are absolutely no |reliable sources for |attribution of their meeting the  notability criteria ... by definition, links to their MySpace pages and biographies on their employer's website '''do not''' qualify as . &mdash;{{User|72.75.72.63
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS||WP:A||WP:BIO||WP:RS)