[WikiEN-l] Article quality deterioration (was: a valid criticism)

[uninvited at nerstrand.net]

I too have noticed this phenomenon.  It is not limited to biographical
articles.  It can be observed in any general-interest article where
there is considerable public controversy.

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.

Such changes should really be reverted when they are made, with a kind
note offered to the other editor.

But Responsible Wikipedians Don't Revert Changes.  They compromise, and
discuss, and don't bite the newbies, and revert as a last resort. 
Especially not on articles where there are POV warriors already
reverting each other, because in that case it is too easy for a good
editor trying to organize the article to be mistaken for a POV warrior.

I ran into this on [[cult]] and [[surrealism]].  In each case I did some
real-world research, at a library where they had books (you know, paper
ones).  Both articles are awful and I have given up because I'm not
willing to become a revert warrior for the sake of these articles.

We have a culture of egalitarianism and a culture where reverting
changes is strongly discouraged.  These are important elements of our
culture and I am not suggesting that we weaken them.  But if we hope to
understand what happens to this class of articles we best consider these
factors.