It hardly requires any sort of radical "Wikipedia
isn't paper"
justification to include hotels and actresses in an encyclopedia. Even
the most staid, old-fashioned encyclopedias of eras past, like
Britannica's famous 1911 edition, included both. What exactly is the
objection here?
Different people have their own ideas as to what is "encyclopedic",
and what is "notable".
So if they want to exclude something, they claim it is
"unencyclopedic" or not notable. Since neither of these are
objective, there's no rational argument for or against.
So some of us spend more time in "discussions" over notability of
policy, than on time adding or improving articles.
Regards,
Ian Tresman
www.plasma-universe.com