I don't think removing notability guidelines is the right call either. I think treating the guidelines as
guidelines is the right, simple and obvious call.
Unfortunately, notability guidelines are treated like gospel by the deletionists. In cases where stuff is wrongfully deleted, the entire discussion will center around notability, usually with source material references being dismissed out of hand by an overzealous admin.
I'm sure there should be some kind of penalty of some sort or another for editor types who habitually flag AfD and then have them overturned, and that would remedy some of it. But to be honest, speculative discussions about how the foundation could and should deal with the issue have gone nowhere for the better part of half a decade.
Possibly. I've never actually tried editing wikipedia, only reading it.
You really should sometime. I've had things deleted so fast that I didn't even have time to save my edit, then move down to the references section to paste in my references, I swear there are just bots now that monitor new edits and immediately revoke any changes.
It's a pity really.
Good luck reading all the articles! I usually get lost of an extended tour of interesting links whenever I go to the WP.