As a criterion for new articles, I agree. But the trouble is that people use it for pushing junk into existing articles. Take [[Ark of the Covenant]] recently: should a sensible article like this include stuff about it being an extraterrestrial communications device and an early example of a capacitor, just because its verifiable that people have said it was? There is a junk science / psuedo science problem.
If the sources are credible, then yes. If it gets too big, make a daughter article. Problem solved.
Ryan