Deletion of Dale Gribble

Comment: the articles per nominator, they are overcoverage. And you can't build articles out of OR. Redirecting leaves article history intact and if someone wants to merge they can do so. Also, keep this discussion open because  and a proposed group redirect is not different from deletion. Arguing to forcibly close a discussion for technical reasons appears as through there's no objective argument to keep the articles and so other methods to keep them from being deleted or redirected need be employed. And Reyk's argument is pertinent as well, RE: a centralized location where a broader consensus can be obtained
Stance: merge
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOTBURO)

Comment: as per nom. As a meta-argument, I don't think this should be speedy closed. The reason is that centralized discussion venues are superior to localized discussions, because experience has shown that any policy-grounded arguments can be vetoed by a small |clique of enthusiasts. This is especially true of pop culture articles. Using AfD to obtain consensus for or against merging from neutral editors is to be preferred
Stance: merge
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Consensus (WP:LOCALCONSENSUS)