[Diederich]

Of the dozens of contributions I've made over the decades, some recent, either zero or one of them have been reverted.

[FireBeyond]

Some of the garbage I've been involved with that I either had to avoid or bail out of an edit or revert war:

* A claim on "Fisting" that "seasoned fisters can insert their arm up to the shoulder into the anus", "supported" by a deleted PornHub video.

* Fighting on a Production Car top ten list when Tesla announced that Ludicrous Mode was coming the next year and "expected" to have certain performance stats, where multiple editors fell over each other to make sure it stayed at the top of the list, even when they eventually had to add a column just for Tesla where every other result had "Actual Results" and the Tesla had "Projected/Expected Results".

* A collation of John Deere tractors that described multiple models as "light years ahead of the competition".

* An article on an Australian drug smuggler where exhibits from court case were being removed as "biased".

[amiga386]

Were any on these topics?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Contentious_topics#L...

[bawolff]

I love how this list goes: Arab-Israel conflict, abortion, ...

All making sense so far. But then:

Article title capitalization.

Somehow this is peak wikipedia.

[portaouflop]

Why the hell is Yasuke so controversial oO

[consumer451]

What percentage of Wikipedia does that cover?

The entire world's knowledge has some controversial topics? Oh my! Burn it! Burn it all!!

The librarians of Alexandria would have killed for Wikipedia. It's easily our greatest digital achievement.

This is a hill on which I would happily fight to my metaphorical death, here and now. If you disagree, let's discuss please.

[adamsb6]

I have contributed inconsequential lies to clown on a friend and they persisted for years.

[morshu9001]

In middle school, I pretended my friend was a famous rapper and snuck his name onto random articles. Some of those stuck around really long.

[peab]

what topics did you make contributions to? From what I understand, it's mostly political and/or controversial topics that have this issue.

[Analemma_]

I also have problems with Wikipedia's favoritism of insiders who have learned how to navigate its bureaucracy, but the fact that most edits of political and/or controversial topics are immediately reverted is not in itself evidence of a problem. A priori, I would expect that the majority of edits to political and controversial topics are bad and should be reverted.

[nobodywillobsrv]

I've had tax stuff reverted even. eventually was allowed I think. Wikipedia has problems.

[WastedCucumber]

I don't have an extensive wikipedia career, but I've found that even my few edits to political topics have been accepted.

What did get reverted was a trivial [citation needed] fix, for a musician's page, for a sentence stating they were involved in scoring a film. I found a relevant citation and this was promptly reverted, for reasons that were explained but, at least for me, utterly incomprehensible

[spelk]

You're not really considered a veteran editor until you've won at least 10 Request for Comments outquoting your detractors with at least 100 obscure Wikipedia guidelines and policies.

[chris_wot]

Or you could make significant contributions, then get banned because of ignorant sociopaths like BrownHairedGirl and her coterie of followers.

[Gander5739]

She was banned a few years ago.