I am frequently surprised to find Wikipedia articles about very narrow, highly-specialized technical concepts. For example, there is a Wikipedia page about iso646.h in the C language standard (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iso646.h). If you're wondering why you never heard of iso646.h before, it's because it is only useful if you are programming in C on a system that does not support cutting-edge characters like "&" or "|". This is esoterica that does not have any measurable impact on the world. And this isn't even an article about ISO 646 per se, it's about a header file.
I find such articles extremely useful, so I'm not advocating that they be deleted. But surely the wedding gown worn by a British Monarch who is widely known for her fashion sense is at least as relevant to the world at large.
I think a lot of these articles fall into the "benign neglect" category. They collect dust in a corner somewhere, and most people who run across them don't understand the content enough to feel like they should offer an opinion. It's with recent pop culture where everyone has an opinion one way or the other.
There's also a bit more scrutiny given to anything about currently living people, as opposed to articles on inanimate technical subjects, because of the potential for libel, though I'm not sure that was relevant here.
That is not a good encyclopedic. Encyclopedia's are to document and archive for current and future generations. They are a store of knowledge for knowledge's sake. You include stuff that may not be relevant today because it may be relevant tomorrow.
I find such articles extremely useful, so I'm not advocating that they be deleted. But surely the wedding gown worn by a British Monarch who is widely known for her fashion sense is at least as relevant to the world at large.