Wikipedia:Refactoring as the essential Wikipedia process
 | This page is currently inactive and is retained for historical reference. Either the page is no longer relevant or consensus on its purpose has become unclear. To revive discussion, seek broader input via a forum such as the village pump. |
It is very nice when someone adds a complete, well-written, final draft of an article to Wikipedia. This should never be discouraged.
However, one great advantage of the Wiki system is that incomplete, poorly written, first drafts of articles can evolve into polished, presentable masterpieces through the process of collaborative refactoring. If this does give our system an advantage over other systems of producing similar end-products, then it would be very wise and desirable to encourage this process as much as possible.
One person can start an article off with an overview or a few random facts. Someone else can add the opinion of some small minority. The next person can round off the article with additional opinions. Someone else can play up an angle that has been neglected. The next person might have a list of facts and figures to include.
As all this material is added, anyone can jump in and refactor to turn it into a more cohesive whole. Then more stuff will be added, then more refactoring, and the article will spiral ever-closer to the perfect final draft.
During this process, the article might look like a first draft, or worse, a random collection of notes and factoids. Rather than being horrifed by this ugliness, we should rejoice in its potential, and have faith that the refactoring process will turn it into beautiful prose.
For more considerations about this subject, see also the "Integrate Changes" rule under RulesToConsider, as well as the integrate changes debate page; and the be bold in updating pages page.