Deletion of Ghouls in popular culture

Comment: per .  Uncle G explains the matter well and so policy   applies, "''If editing can improve the page, this should be done rather than deleting the page
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:NOTCLEANUP||WP:ATD)

Comment: Fails  easily
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No original research (WP:OR)

Comment: Per  principle. Could be a potential article but nothing in its current form seems salvageable
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Blow it up and start over (WP:TNT)

Comment: WP:AFDNOTCLEANUP|AFD is not cleanup and the issue presented is an editorial one. Note that no argument based on  or  was presented as part of the nomination rationale. Not complying with MOS guidelines is not a ground for deletion and in no way are the issues presented insurmountable to justify deletion. Per , if the nominator is concerned about the article's content quality but could not be bothered to research from reliable sources and write content for it, I suggest that the nomination be withdrawn or closed as keep, that the article be tagged for cleanup, and leave it for other editors who may be interested but are unaware that there is a content quality issue
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:NLIST||WP:ATD)

Comment: per . UncleG said it perfectly
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:NOTCLEANUP)