Apparently, how their vandalism detector works right now is by automatically reverting any edits done by anonymous editors.
I've seen signs of that too. Not always ... but often enough to have acquired a rather negative understanding of the role of some folk with admin privileges at WP. It's clear when they haven't even bothered to read (much less understand!) the edits they revert. Or that they just revert anything that offends an ideology they want WP to present on any particular topics. They think NPV shouldn't apply to their gloriously elevated selves. (And refuse to acknowledge when their ideology is showing.)
That's on top of editors just flagging articles as sub-par but without saying specifically why, or responding to queries about WTF they meant. Not every article should consist of 50% citations and 50% content ... if you're going to say there aren't enough citations, just be specific about which statements you think need citations; that's easy to do. And maybe ... read the citations which are already there. Or even use the Talk: page appropriately, to discuss such issues, if you can't yet be specific enough to be actionable.
The messages some admins give is that if you're not part of their particular club, Please Go Away. Some are even quite public that they object to edits from folk without accounts ... regardless of the content of those edits. Way too many obnoxious A**hats have admin privs there.
How about letting us flag such editors/admins as comment spammers? It's not like their volume of vague and un-actionable criticisms, or inappropriate reversions, really helps improve WP. While unlike real spammers, their negative effects are actually hard to correct.