Deletion of Key (company) visual novel character lists

Comment: Let's just be clear, these character lists (and others like them) are simply poorly sourced. Even for something like List of Clannad characters which has 30 or so of characters could be cleaned up and well sourced if reviews that discuss these characters were gleamed for such information. ''Clannad'' was made into 2 anime series, an anime film, and the original game was just recently released in English by Sekai Project, so there's no way that enough sourced material could not be collected in order to improve that article, even if you had to remove 90% of the plot bloat. That would still leave voice actors, cursory character descriptions, and any reception to those characters that could all be sourced if someone put in the work. And all of that, I believe, could easily be applied to all of the other articles on this AFD because all of them have anime adaptations which will always have reviews that discuss character interactions and reception based on those characters. If these articles are guilty of anything, it's plotbloat, but as the saying goes, you don't throw the baby out with the bathwater when there is at least some relevant, notability-establishing content that could be added if someone made the effort. Need I remind that Wikipedia does not have a |deadline
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:There is no deadline (WP:DEADLINE)

Comment: These seem to be part of an aggressive redirecting process of character articles by the nominator. I make no comment on their motives or faith but I feel they are being rather too literal with the guidelines here. Character articles have long been considered acceptable if they are of the ensemble "cast", chances are any reviews of the material will discuss the characters so notability arguments are not as straightforward as suggested. The process should be to discuss if  is objected to, not to take them straight to AFD as this may have further repercussions on hundreds of articles. I'm not happy with the bundling of these articles together, they should be considered on their own merits as i'm willing to bet that some of them are easier to source than others. Ultimately I feel that the discussion over what qualifies a character list as a worthwhile article should be taking place at nime (and possibly at other wiki projects) and not through the bold mass redirecting or AFD of normally accepted lists articles. Attempt to set a consensus through constructive discussion rather than take it straight to AFD at the first objection. Also, AFD isn't clean up , which is just as much part of the arguement as the debate over notability
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Be bold (WP:BOLD||WP:A)

Comment: per TheFarix and Juhachi - I'd personally argue that fictional character lists are subarticles split off from their parents to avoid the video novel pages from becoming too cluttered; thus, they aren't stand-alone articles in the strictest sense and  doesn't apply. Instead, their notability is tied to the notability of the visual novels themselves. (I will admit this opinion isn't based the strongest on policy, though there are numerous examples of previous such articles being kept to set precedent, hence the 'weak' part of my !vote
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:NOTINHERITED)