Deletion of Martian Metals

Comment: the main article and '''merge''' per the above comments since there are  to retain, per  and 
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS||WP:PRESERVE||WP:ATD)

Comment: and '''Merge''' product lines into main article.  The lines themselves clearly fail notability under any standard as mentioned by other editors above but I'm willing to see the articles/reviews in ''Dragon'' as (at least in aggregate) enough evidence of .There's no doubt that ''Dragon'' was both independent of SJG and MM and a  for fantasy gaming at the time.  also applies
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:SIGCOV||WP:RS||WP:NOTTEMP)

Comment: All. I am unable to locate any |significant coverage with |in-depth information on the company and containing |independent content. The test is not merely for "independent sources" or , and guidelines cannot be ignored for "opinion" without proper justification. The criteria for establishing notability for companies/organizations as per  is for multiple sources (at least two) of significant coverage with in-depth information on the company and (this bit is important!) containing "Independent Content". Also, "Independent content", in order to count towards establishing notability, must include original and independent opinion, analysis, investigation, and fact checking that are clearly attributable to a source unaffiliated to the subject. Not a single reference I can find meets this criteria. Topic therefore fails GNG/
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:SIGCOV||WP:CORPDEPTH||WP:ORGIND||WP:RS||WP:NCORP)