So an article I started is being AfD'd for notability. So like most responsible Wikipedians, I come here to this list to bitch about both AfD and notability in general.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Invincible_Snow...
The argument seems to go something like this: "There are 30 ski areas in NZ. 29 of them are notable and deserve articles. This one isn't. And doesn't".
The whole concept of notability just seems to be letting us down. Why delete an article which completes the comprehensiveness of a topic, is harmless (ie, is not causing us any headaches), and is not a slippery sope - there's only one of them. I can think of lots of good reasons to delete non-notable articles: - There are so many that maintaining them is impossible - They are magnets for spam, defamation and the like - The people adding them have a vested interest which is constantly fighting against the neutrality of Wikipedia - They are poorly written and researched, because serious editors don't care to spend any time or effort on them
But I don't see how any of those apply here. It's one single article about a single ski area. Surely the interests of comprehensiveness outweigh those of strictly enforcing a controversial guideline (not policy)?
Steve