Deletion of Dungeons & Dragons creatures

Comment: Just because you are not interested in Dungeons & Dragons does not mean that D&D-related articles are not notable. Clearly people who have zero amount of fame or are only famous in their neighborhoods are not notable enough to be in an encyclopedia, even an online encyclopedia with hundreds of thousands of articles and a seemingly unlimited amount of space; that's what user pages are for. Fan fiction is also usually not considered notable. These articles, however, ''are'' notable. There are hundreds of thousands of other people, perhaps even millions, who ''are'' interested in Dungeons & Dragons. Let's look at the advantages and disadvantages of keeping or deleting these articles.'''Advantages of keeping''': These are creatures that frequently appear in numerous popular novels (such as the best-selling and widely popular Drizzt Do'Urden novels, as well as hundreds of other novels) and games (computer and video games and also old-fashioned pen, paper, and dice games); these articles have helpful, interesting, and detailed background information for those wishing to know more about the creatures; and the casual person browsing Wikipedia who knows nothing of the subject but wants to can easily learn by reading these articles or by simply scanning the first paragraph (for example, I was interested in the Star Wars Expanded Universe but knew absolutely nothing about it, so I read various articles that some editors are want to call "not notable" or "fancruft" and quickly became quite educated on the subject).'''Disadvantages of keeping''': It increases Wikipedia's bandwidth by an infinitesimal amount, or perhaps the subjects of these creature articles might feel offended by how they are represented in the articles and sue for libel. Also, perhaps some religious zealots might think these articles are blasphemy.'''Advantages of deleting''': Are there any? Perhaps appeasing editors who like to delete things or have a grudge against fiction, or perhaps to follow a ''#Bureaucracy|guideline'' such as Wikipedia:Notability or . But how will that benefit Wikipedia?'''Disadvantages of deleting''': Basically, people will be deprived of everything I mentioned in "Advantages of keeping."'''Merging''': Not a good idea. This would create a giant page that would take forever to load and, when loaded, would slow down computers. Some might advise greatly condensing the information so that the page of merges is smaller, but that is completely unnecessary. People could easily find these articles by using the search engine, typing the name in the URL, following a link from another article, or looking at :Category:Dungeons & Dragons creatures. They don't need to be condensed and merged into a single page
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOT||WP:FICT)