Proposal: Subject notability guidelines act as complementary criteria to the general notability guideline. Meeting SNG criteria does not exempt an article from merge discussions or other common means of reaching consensus about content. Instead, they offer criteria that support a reasonable presumption that sufficient sources exist to support an article. Failed efforts to find appropriate sources should be weighed on balance with the presumption that they exist.
Rationale: There is no deadline, so rational suppositions about article potential are appropriate. Notability is the presumption that sufficient independent sources exist to satisfy the content principles of Wikipedia. The general notability guideline is the most direct way of forming that presumption. The subject guidelines provide additional sensible reasons for holding such a presumption. SNGs were originally written by experienced AfD editors reviewing their institutional memory, noting general indicators of article viability. A merge consensus is probably a viable option in cases where time has been allowed for improvement, editors have exercised due diligence in searching for sources, and it seems evidents that sufficient sources are not available (e.g. the Pokemon character merge).
