The current system hinges on a singular collaborative article per topic which assumes that a negotiated consensus can capture a truth acceptable to all. What the proposal here suggests is that perhaps consensus itself is the bottleneck and that the pursuit of one composite narrative inevitably filters out entire dimensions of understanding. Multiple competing articles written from declared frameworks would give readers the ability to see the same subject through contrasting lenses and would make the editorial bias of each framework transparent rather than hidden in the illusion of neutrality.