Deletion of Art of Memory (company)

Comment: I've added references from several |independent, reliable sources to Art of Memory and its works. Seems to meet  now
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS||WP:COMPANY)

Comment: per quote from : "''Information on products and services should generally be included in the article on the company itself, unless the company article is so large that this would make the article unwieldy''", and the following observation: That the product is notable has both been asserted by the article and backed by the references. A separate article on the product ("The Story of Glass") is not feasible considering the quote from the policy above. So the only solution is to keep the company article, as the policy does not cover the possibility of a non-notable company producing a notable product. But pls correct me if I'm wrong
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:COMPANY)

Comment: The references provided in the article contain no link to their corresponding web pages, so it is difficult to |verify the depth of coverage about this company. I found links for the first two references, and neither are sufficient. http://www.accessmylibrary.com/coms2/summary_0286-9289838_ITM The first source and http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/content~content=a776272489~db=all~order=page the second source don't even mention this company. As a result, I didn't even bother to check the other sources. I did a http://news.google.com/archivesearch?q=%22Art+of+Memory%22+company&btnG=Search&um=1&ned=us&hl=en&scoring=a Google News Archive search but have been unable to find reliable sources. If Cantingle lists which sources s/he thinks prove this company pass , I would recommend that they link to those sources here. Then, I might reconsider my vote
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Verifiability (WP:V||WP:COMPANY)