[watashiato]

> Wikipedia is already full of boring and random stubs, I don't see the obsession editors have with making sure that a person is "important enough" to have an article. I feel like the bar should be lowered - not too low, obviously.

I agree that there's a lot of chaff on wikipedia, but your complaint is immediately followed by a method to make the problem worse. One of the bigger problems I've observed when the (high?) bar isn't enforced is things like people writing their own articles for the sake of self promotion.

[concinds]

Wikipedia is so huge that it's hard for editors to police effectively. All new articles are reviewed by one editor, but they'll likely be low-traffic enough that 90%+ of the page will be written by one person, and pages that are non-notable may survive for many years.

Look at how awful some of Wikipedia's "1000 most vital articles" are (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Vital_articles) and you'll get an idea for how neglected Wikipedia is. Most of these articles haven't seen significant content edits since 2010, when Wikipedia had far more editors.