[ravenstine]

I think there's a few layers to what makes said comments be seen as "toxic." There's definitely some very standoffish individuals in Wikipedia's inner-circle of editors. The decisions of editors also often seems very arbitrary. I've seen many cases where an editor doesn't allow a fact or citation because it's "original research" whilst on other pages the opposite is complained of, which is a big problem when articles are allowed for subjects that are not necessarily going to be written about on CNN/MSNBC/NYT.

And then there are the many talk sections I've seen where a petty editor plays the nuh-uh/yeah-huh game.

I'd contribute to Wikipedia, but I have no energy to bicker with people who are going to play with definitions or semantics just to make articles reflect their world view.