Define
"intrinsically encyclopedic".
Empirically this can be defined as "having a calculable likelihood, as a
class of subjects, to sustain an article that wouldn't end up being
deleted if listed on VfD." In general it seems to be pretty difficult to
get consensus to delete a school article, of instance, even one about a
little-known high school about which nothing much is known, whereas if I
wrote an article about a random human, my friend's brother say, when
listed on VfD it would die a mercifully quick death.
The reason it is hard to delete school articles is two-fold;
1) Wikipedia deletion rules are stacked in favour of inclusion; at least
two-thirds of voters (and often more) must vote to delete for it to happen,
and votes to re-direct are interpreted as "keep", though the obvious intent
is that the article should not stand on its own.
2) School inclusionists are now organized, and have set up a "Schoolwatch"
page to ensure that all schools are kept. These people vote to keep every
single school, usually with cut and paste comments. Thus a group of a dozen
or so inclusionists can easily force Wikipedia to keep every single school
article, no matter how silly, uninformative, trivial or unverifiable they
are. And, in fact, that's exactly what they do. However, whether these
dozen people represent the consensus of Wikipedia is another question.
Jay.