If it&#x27;s up to standard, any article is welcome. The trouble is readers and new editors don&#x27;t know these standards and since they see articles on every common topic, assume that Wikipedia is all-encompassing. Wikipedia relies on the concept of &quot;notability&quot;, (whether something warrants an article) which in turn is informed by the presence of &quot;reliable sources&quot; for the purpose of &quot;verifiability&quot;. These are the main  reasons why Karen can&#x27;t have a Wikipedia article: there is not enough written about her in published sources to write a verifiable article. You might ask how come it can&#x27;t all just be based on the Pokemon universe and information in the episodes? That&#x27;s a valid question. However, Wikipedia is an encyclopedia which needs to include real-world information such as what critics think of something, publication details, themes, etcetera... You can&#x27;t have that without reliable sources and relying on fiction alone would lead to &quot;original research&quot;. (Things in quotes are official Wikipedia policies which you can read by typing the &quot;WP:&quot; prefix and the term in the search box)<p>As for how the system evolved, it started getting more strict as Wikipedia got more popular and was scrutinized. The Seigenthaler incident[0] in particular led to a restriction on new editors creating articles. No system can grow unchecked in my opinion; it was only natural that as Wikipedia grew more prominent, it became less inclusive.<p>[0]: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Wikipedia_Seigenthaler_biography_incident" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Wikipedia_Seigenthaler_biograp...</a>