No. No. No. You have it wrong, my friend. The entire thing, like systemd and wayland, is a glorified excuse to reinvent the wheel so that a fresh batch of wizards can continue the cycle.
X11 is garbage which nobody wants to maintain, let alone develop. It's a very archaic design which is patched via extensions to sorta support some modern concepts which negate the network transparency anyway.
Both Wayland and systemd have a very wide developer consensus, because they finally provide a maintainable solution to their respective problems. The drama is constructed by a small minority of contrarians.
Wayland might have some developer consensus for the base protocol. Not so much for extensions to make it actually usable on a desktop. By the time it does it will be a patchwork as complex as X11 - it's already getting there with things like requiring PipeWire for simple things like capturing the screen.
When rewriting apps, people have a tendency to say: "well, Oldversion provides X. We could make a Newversion that provides X better, but that's hard so maybe X is actually bad? We should provide Y instead." Then they're confused when nobody with X needs wants to use Newversion.
It's OK to use X until Wayland has support for the missing features. I don't really care what I'm running. But it's clear that X is not in shape to see significant development (e.g. to support new needs) in the coming decades.