I realize I'm biased, but considering the amount of extremely obscure people on Wikipedia it didn't seem like that much of a stretch.
I look at it this way: if I'm driving down the highway and see a giant bronze monument and I go to ask wikipedia about the artist, I'd just expect to find that information (regardless of how obscure they are).
Just some quick examples:
Texas A&M campus, there's a statue there honoring the lives lost in the bonfire collapse, wikipedia has no idea who the artist is.
A statue of Michael E. Debakey outside the DeBakey Museum and Library at Baylor College of Medicine... Wikipedia has no idea who the artist is.
A 27ft tall monument in the middle of Colorado Springs that millions of people pass a year, Wikipedia has no idea who the artist is.
A 22ft tall, 200ft monument outside NRG Park where the Houston Texans play, wikipedia has no idea who the artist is.
To me its more a case of "general information" I'd want to learn vs "oh this person is famous enough" to learn about.
I look at it this way: if I'm driving down the highway and see a giant bronze monument and I go to ask wikipedia about the artist, I'd just expect to find that information (regardless of how obscure they are).
Just some quick examples:
Texas A&M campus, there's a statue there honoring the lives lost in the bonfire collapse, wikipedia has no idea who the artist is.
A statue of Michael E. Debakey outside the DeBakey Museum and Library at Baylor College of Medicine... Wikipedia has no idea who the artist is.
A 27ft tall monument in the middle of Colorado Springs that millions of people pass a year, Wikipedia has no idea who the artist is.
A 22ft tall, 200ft monument outside NRG Park where the Houston Texans play, wikipedia has no idea who the artist is.
To me its more a case of "general information" I'd want to learn vs "oh this person is famous enough" to learn about.