Deletion of Bowser and Blitz

Comment: Nothing but |plot summary and |original research
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:PLOT||WP:OR)

Comment: Major/main character in a notable series is a suitable spin out article. As usual a route of less confrontational and thoughtful discussion should have efore|preceded this but we're here now. There is a reasonable point that our readers may benefit from a reorganization where instead of one main and multiple individual character articles that a main article plus several supplemental articles combining many of the major characters and likewise for the minor characters. This would also be a useful suggestion for writing about fictional series if we are doling out suggestions for other editors
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Bots (WP:B)

Comment: or merge there is a lack of reliable third person sources which discuss the character to demonstrate significant coverage of the character to justify an article and the YouTube videos fall foul of copyright usage use per 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:External links (WP:YOUTUBE)

Comment: In reading the above comments in this debate, I haven't seen a single person even ''attempt'' to justify this article's inclusion based on the |standard criteria for inclusion. I suspect this is because there is no way to actually justify including this article based on |notability. In fact, I more than suspect this -- a GNews, GScholar and GHits search confirms this beyond a shadow of a doubt. I mean, it doesn't even get more than 2 or 3 ''Google hits'' that are about the topic and aren't mirrors or Wiki products. The two GNews hits are the character names appearing in credits or a plot summary (and one mention per hit), and there are no Scholar hits at all. '''Clarifying''': I support a redirect/merge of content as well, although any merge needs to be handled carefully and with an eye toward not overwhelming the target article with a ton of information on one character
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NOTABLE||WP:NOTABLE)

Comment: I'll make a similar comment here as I did on the related AfD for Squeeky Clean (since closed and deleted). What you describe above is not a reason to keep. Notability of each character is not inherited by having appeared in a notable show -- them's the rules. There needs to be evidence of |notability, plain and simple. I have looked for some, and am turning up literally nothing. I would support merging a ''small'' amount of this content into the COPS article, but this article should be deleted if nobody can find literally any reliable sourcing to demonstrate notability (I have tried -- it's just not out there, although if someone finds something I'll naturally change my vote!). By "small" I mean that the character descriptions could be fleshed out a bit, similar to many other TV show articles on Wikipedia
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NOTABLE)