That certainly is an option. In the inclusionist/deletionist debate, I have sympathy for both philosophies: -Deletionists are trying to preserve the quality and reputation of Wikipedia. There are many topics we simply can't cover thoroughally and with a high-quality. Every sensible delete, therefore, succeeds in increasing the "average article quality" of wikipedia. -Inclusionists, meanwhile, are trying to preserve the breadth of Wikipedia. There are many topics that we can collect information on, and really, every single sentence that is ever entered into a GFDL project is a victory for open content. Every delete, therefore, decreases the overall breadth of Wikipedia. These are _both_ valid philosophies and valid aims. What would it take to set up a new project that has less-stringent notability requirements? I imagine the computational costs (bandwidth and storage) would be negligible. The only concern I would have is "branding"-- an encyclopedia with lower standards absolutely can't be conflated with the Wikipedia we all know and love. It'd have to be distinctly different. Is it worth doing, and if so, how would we go about doing it? Alec On 7/21/08, WJhonson(a)aol.com <WJhonson(a)aol.com> wrote: