For the benefit of those who may be following this discussion, I'll post my clarification from your talk page:

"Looking at the games in order of best sales, they'd be VII, X, VIII, IX, X-2, VI, etc. Obviously Sephiroth merits his own article, and Seymour probably makes sense as well, but out of the next titles, Kuja's got one while Ultimecia, Kefka and Shuyin don't. Given this and Kuja's already substantial section on the list of FFIX's characters, as well as the fact that describing IX's story comprehensively will require a pretty thorough explanation of him anyway (sales figures aside, he is the central conflict of the game, really; the same can't really be said of Seifer with VIII or Seymour in X; in order for them to get proper coverage, they'd have to get their own articles), it seems to me like him having his own article's kind of unnecessary. Any discussion of him is really a discussion of the game's story, and any discussion of the game's story is going to largely be a discussion of him, so I just think it will probably make for some somewhat unnecessary reiteration across the three articles (Final Fantasy IX, List of Final Fantasy IX characters and Kuja).

He's certainly a notable villain, though. I'm just saying that in light of the treatment of most of the other notable villains and given the already thorough treatment of Kuja's role, it seems somewhat unnecessary for him to have his own article."

By the way, I would say we're always POV in how we decide such matters. Deciding matters of inclusion is inherently going to be based on POV. However, that isn't a problem, as policy for neutral point of view only applies to how information's presented, not how it's selected. By necessity, selecting information for inclusion is a half-POV/half-NPOV matter, based on notability (POV) and verifiability (NPOV).