I routinely edit articles on Wikipedia without even logging in. The controversial articles, where you are likely to run into problems, are a small minority of what's there.

▲

crote 5 days ago | parent [-]

Wikipedia also tends to suffer from fiefdoms, where even seemingly low-controversy articles become impossible to edit, as someone has decided that article is now their personal pet and they'll spend an absurd amount of time undoing and preventing other people's edits.

The same applies on a larger scale with moderation. There are plenty of poorly-sourced database-like stub entries for STEM subjects, but try to make a page on a "softer" subject and there's a pretty good chance someone will try to nuke it with WP:PROOF, WP:NOTE, and/or WP:OBSCURE if it isn't perfectly fleshed out in the very first draft.

▲

Kim_Bruning 5 days ago | parent [-]

If you encounter that, you can possibly get help to get those articles unstuck. People are not supposed to keep fiefdoms, much of policy prevents it. (and someone with a bit of practice can call in help and clear it up)

▲

ozim 5 days ago | parent [-]

But to do that you have to stop being random and start playing Wikipedia game.

Random people don’t have time for that.

Ergo “it is not a project for random editors anymore”.

I want do an edit or addition and be fairly evaluated without having to call higher instances or fight through bureaucracy.

	▲	Kim_Bruning 5 days ago \| parent [-]
		Fair-ish. It really depends. The last few areas I did anything in (I'm not a regular anymore) basically nothing happened except what I wrote, so I guess the quiet parts are really really quiet and you don't get into much trouble at all.