Even if I understand why the rule/criterion exists, notability is a particularly problematic Wikipedia rule. Just about everything is notable if you get local enough (whether in terms of location, field, community, etc.) And the proofs of notability, such as they are, end up being (ironically) rather rooted in things like publication in dead tree periodicals or books even if that makes actual verification difficult.

So you end up with notability being rather arbitrarily decided by admins who see nothing wrong with long articles on obscure pieces of geek fandom while being unconvinced about the notability of people like influential executives at major companies, journalists, and the like.