Alphax wrote:
I have the hypothesis that "[[WP:NOR]] and [[WP:V]] dictate perfectly what should and should not be in WP". Someone prove that wrong
Well, I know that the hypothesis is false at present,
Aaah. Well, that casts quite a different light on your stance.
If overnight [...]
So now we're talking about a what-if, i.e. a hypothetical scenario. Yes, if overnight we suddenly agreed on everything and there was no longer any need for any discussion, then Wikipedia (and indeed the whole world) would be a much more pleasant environment (and a much easier one to be productive in). But people don't all agree and never will.
would the hypothesis then be true?
That question is tautologous. :)
That's because we haven't tried it yet. Take a snapshot, go through and remove everything which violates [[WP:NOR]] or [[WP:V]] (and include everything which meets both) and tell me what you have. Then we will see if the hypothesis is true or not.
It's your parenthesis that is the important part. I don't think there is much that violates NOR or V at the moment, so there's not much to remove. But including everything which meets both means including a lot of things (schools, roads, people, etc.) that people quite vocally deem _not notable_. NOR and V are relatively objective criteria, but notability is quite a lot less so, and there will never be a hard-and-fast rule (algorithm) that determines boolean notability.
Timwi