I have been working as a postdoc on a theoretical (computational neuroscience) paper as a first author. The funding was over at some point and I have moved to a new position in a different place. By that moment all the (computational) experiments were done and a draft of the draft of the paper was ready.
The PI of my former research group said that he wants to make some edits to the paper. After the scarce comments I got during following 1.5 months it becomes clearer that he tries to rewrite it significantly. Despite the fact the we discussed the structure of the text many times personally and during lab meetings, and I have rewritten it already, following his suggestions, before.
It worries me a bit, since the PI apparently does not have much incentive to work on it (because the funding ended and he told us that he does not plan to apply for a grant in this area soon) and it delays the submission of the article. As I don't have that much first author publications, it is important for me to have one more in nearby future.
I am pretty confident that the text I have written is not bad enough to make its rewriting change the article's value from zero to something large.
Finally, the question: suppose a theoretical paper is shaped according to the target journal standards and has clearly stated results (our model and simulations show that and that). When a rewriting of the text (e.g. changing a point of view or reshuffling the logic) can increase significantly the value/impact of the article?