It would be so bad if opinionated knobs keep showing up with a point-of-view agenda to push, which requires a so-called "cabals" of editors to form and keep a watch for repeated bias. As an example: creationist editors seeking to espouse their non-scientific, minority views on everybody regarding the age of the Earth and evolution. The minute the edit is removed because of non-compliance with Wikipedia policy on such matters, up come the arguments about "edit warring", "ownership", and so forth. It's a load of bull crap.
You might think a little differently if the shoe were on the other foot.