2 ms·

You were editing religious articles. And you're complaining about bickering. What exactly did you expect? Around 07 I made the first few edits to the wiki pa

You were editing religious articles. And you're complaining about bickering. What exactly did you expect? Around 07 I made the first few edits to the wiki page for the small town I grew up (added the first 2 sentances of custom text) and updated the census statistics. It's now at 1600 words -- and I don't think has ever had any acronyms thrown at it (the only discussion page text is my question about census data from 2007) For most articles -- for people who act as contributors -- the bureaucracy just isn't there.

cookiecaper 16y ago
It wasn't only religion articles, I experience the same on almost any topic of general interest. Niche articles that are primarily regurgitation of statistics like articles about small towns (which consist primarily of weather and census data) obviously don't get much attention or controversy because there's not much interesting going on there. "Hard science" articles are harder to bicker about, but it still happens there occasionally. And everywhere outside of that this useless bureaucracy, reversion, and bickering cycle is the predominant activity on Wikipedia.
- scott_s 16y ago
  But general purpose topics are going to be popular for people to modify. As the modifications on something increase, the more infrastructure and procedures you'll need in order to ensure that the the end-product is always good.