uninvited@nerstrand.net wrote:
The problem is that people come along and make incremental changes each of which, taken alone, is unremarkable -- neither helpful nor especially detrimental to the article. In aggregate, such changes destroy the organization of the article and compromise any stylistic unity that may be present.
Simple technical solution: Each article gets a special counter. After X days, or X edits, or not-minor edits, or X bytes changed, or some combination thereof, the article gets added to a special "review" list. This is for people who like to specialize is style/flow/structure/etc of articles. These can then be reformatted/reworded. Calling it "review" might help to suppress edit wars; after all, this is not because of a special edit, but because some criteria say "this might need restructuring". Also, it is not to remove information, rather to rearrange it into readable form.
Magnus