2007/1/7, Frederick Noronha fred@bytesforall.org:
I'm not contesting your point... just saying that there needs to be
some discerning criteria. Thanks for your patience! FN
I don't think there can be any other criterium than common sense. The types of subjects that come up on Wikipedia is too diverse to set a single rule for all of them.
Google can be useful, but a single cut-off value is not. For some subjects a single hit that proves existence is enough, for others 1000 hits are still a very low number. For example, I once saved [[William Gott]] based on a single Google hit of about 30 that existed then (4000 now) - he did indeed exist, and that was enough. On the other hand, getting 800 hits for a web-based program was a 'strong delete' vote.
Maybe even more important than the number of Google hits, is their nature. Suppose you have a current painter. If they have many Google hits, but many consisting of places where it seems the painter could have submitted the material himself, it doesn't count for much. If you have the same number, but with a number of those links being galleries in various countries announcing their expositions, it is a clear reason for keeping the article.