It goes hand in hand with Wikipedia's stricter source requirements. You would need to source all the information from books and news articles (from a select choice of reliable sites decided by wikipedia editors). Essentially Wikipedia's definition of notable is 3 reliable sources writing about the topic. So it's really more about reliability (or, what Wikipedia admins consider reliable) than notability.
Partly unrelated, but I wonder how Wikipedia's source requirements will move in the future as:
- more "reputable" news sources AI generate their articles
- traditional publications are facing existential threats as their revenue source is drying out ("Google Zero"), and we can't expect their number to grow in the future
- more experts and analysts are gatekeeping their work under subscription paywalls and alternative services. Paid mailing lists for instance won't be a valid and verifiable source
It feels like at some point Wikipedia could be basically frozen if they can't adapt to the new landscape, but from the outside it doesn't look like an organization that can sensibly move on and change core parts in a pragmatic way.
