Deletion of List of gadgets in the Spy Fox series

Comment: back to parent article where it and its content (except for any analysis/intepretation per ) would be a valid internal article list. '''Keep''' per , , , , , etc.   and  are not valid reasons in and of themselves for deletion; both require one or more ACTUAL policy guidelines which support deletion.  is not good enough (i.e., "Delete as cruft"). Merging all of these (one more not listed here) back into the main article may make that article 
Stance: merge
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No original research (WP:PRIMARY||WP:CSC||WP:FICT||WP:AOAL||WP:SALAT||WP:LC||WP:FANCRUFT||WP:INUNIVERSE||WP:IDONTLIKEIT||WP:TOOLONG)

Comment: The idea that we can have a non-notable list of non-notable entries simply flies against the spirit of our guidelines even if some of them haven't been thought through thoroughly enough.  clearly says " Wikipedia articles cover notable topics—those that have gained sufficiently significant attention by the world at large and over a period of time, and are not outside the scope of Wikipedia." The other guidelines were never meant to overrule that
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)

Comment: Pretty easily per  and .  VMS Mosaic's keep rationale is wholly unconvincing
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOT||WP:LIST)

Comment: Has even less coverage than the Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Spy Fox characters|characters article.) Article topic lacks |significant coverage from |reliable, |independent sources. (|?) The items are minor/peripheral, with no coverage in /RS|video game reliable sources. There is nothing to merge back to the article because there is nothing able to be sourced. (It's kind of silly to argue that anything that was once a list is worthy to be merged back to its parent article, especially when there's zero notability for the elements of the list.) Please ping me if significant offline sources show in the future. File:Eye close font awesome.svg|14px|link=user:czar/watching|I am no longer watching this page—whisperback if you'd like a response&nbsp;czar&nbsp
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:RS||WP:IS||WP:42||WP:VG)

Comment: Unreferenced, no indication of notability of any of the individual list entries, and notability is not inherited. Per  no evidence that this content has been discussed as a group or set by independent reliable sources, so no evidence of other notability. In addition, the content is in large part how-to/original research
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:LISTN)

Comment: both as not passing  with multiple reliable independent in-depth sources focused on the topic (''list'' of gadgets/locations). A more lax  with topic not necessarily passing GNG, but having notable entries does not fit, as individual gadgets/location don't have coverage either. The material is also , which makes it unsuitable for a split from the main article(s) due to size unless it has reliable coverage. Beyond that, this fails  more than anything with no real-world context, rather just in-game cruft. As an editorial decision, I don't see anything to merge--readers don't need such detail to understand the game in question, and a couple paragraphs of quality prose would suffice. —&nbsp;&nbsp
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:LISTN||WP:GAMECRUFT||WP:WAF)