Deletionism is like the Myers-Briggs personality types: it's not about what you do all the time, but rather the more common reflex/tendency.
Yes, there should be an upper limit; a wiki page for the sandwich I had last Thursday would go too far. But in a world of quasi-infinite storage, I think inclusionism should be the default, with a strong burden of proof required to delete.
> But in a world of quasi-infinite storage, I think inclusionism should be the default, with a strong burden of proof required to delete.
Its not about storage, its about mission. Wikipedia has a purpose. Many things do not fit that purpose (even many things for which the Wikimedia Foundation is happy to have its storage used, hence why the Foundation has other projects besides Wikipedia.)
Just because its is worth having somewhere on the internet (even in a publicly-editable place on the internet hosted by the Wikimedia Foundation) doesn't mean it belongs on Wikipedia.
There's too much stuff in WP already. Important articles have errors or poor sources. Just noodling through the important articles fixing sources and style and language is too much work.
Doing that for bus routes or every Minecraft block or whatever just invites bitrot.
That would destroy Wikipedia's utility as a reference for stuff that exists in the real world. A website should be allowed to focus on what it does best without being forced to be all things to all people.
Yes, there should be an upper limit; a wiki page for the sandwich I had last Thursday would go too far. But in a world of quasi-infinite storage, I think inclusionism should be the default, with a strong burden of proof required to delete.