Seems that Wikipedia would like editors to not insert their own interpretations, at least not directly, and that's being applied overzealously

This is their policy, you need "reliable" secondary sources that interpret and explain things. This is unfortunate because all "reliable" secondary sources are garbage these days.

I see it as a way of including legitimate criticism. Primary sources will not include it and a lack of secondary sources perhaps shows that this thing doesn’t have enough popularity to be subjected to critical analysis. I feel like this is a good policy, if a little cumbersome for something new.