Bryan Derksen wrote:
...But articles about galaxies are Scholarly, so I
anyone's going to purge that particular pile of minutiae any time
soon. Better to go after the stuff that actually _distinguishes_
us from the Traditional and Scholarly encyclopedias.
This is another excellent point, that deserves widespread
forehead-emblazoning, or something.
I wonder if we could add it to WP:NOT: "Wikipedia is not a
traditional encyclopedia. Wikipedia is not *necessarily*
formal and scholarly. Wikipedia is not aiming to be a
drop-in replacement for the Encyclopaedia Britannica."