uninvited(a)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