I 100% agree. They also apply rules inconsistently, where the handful of times I've tried to make an article on well-known scientists (h-index 70+) years ago, t

I 100% agree. They also apply rules inconsistently, where the handful of times I've tried to make an article on well-known scientists (h-index 70+) years ago, the editors rejected it despite some secondary sources. On the other hand there are many articles being created by some editor on scientists who have almost no track record. Wikipedia is already one of the best data sources for training LLMs, and if they were less stringent, it could even be a better resource.