Haza-w@enwiki wrote:
Steve Summit wrote:
Just so. We should remember that "notability", and our attempts to objectify it via reference to second-party reliable sources, are only means to an end. The end goal is: utility to our readers. Get hung up on notability if you like, but the encyclopedic inclusivity criterion I like to use is, "Might someone ever look this up and expect/want/need to find this information?
Surely WP:IINFO applies here, however? Wikipedia cannot be an all-inclusive cornucopia of useful tidbits of information. Adding a plethora of stubs which feature little more than co-ordinates, a region link and a map thumbnail are effective going to make Wikipedia an online map searching facility.
Not really. What makes you think that we would limit these small articles to geographical ones?
These stubs become the basis for future expansion or writing more about the subject. I admit that many of these will stay small for a very long time, but I don't see how encouraging comprehensiveness can be damaging to the 'pedia.
Ec