Rebecca wrote
I haven't seen the cases at hand, but knowing recent events, I'd guess that they were probably substubs. And that's where they don't help Wikipedia, because they contribute precisely nothing (and diminish our credibility, by showing us to prefer quantity over quality).
They were: [[taut submanifold]], [[isometric immersion]], [[Riemannian submanifold]] and [[critical point]].
The whole deletionist/inclusionist thing is a red herring here (though obviously a debate waiting to happen). All I wanted to point out, was that existing, accepted policies were not being applied with care.
As for all that: I would consider myself deletionist when it comes to the sciences, inclusionist for the humanities, and not otherwise very engaged in the debate (no ads, vanity pages, etc.) .
I'm a stubophile, though. I don't think there is enough agreement about the 'quality' we are supposed to prefer over quantity. I signed up, not entirely convinced about the premise, with the SystemicBias WikiProject; the way Danny's competition is going now seems designed to make their case for them. What you would do, to correct the slant towards (for example) well-fed people who appear on TV in the USA, would be to post articles about significant other kinds of people, even if information was harder to find.
Charles