It would definitely have been better without WW. As it was, it had so many tasteless elements that just don't belong in the Wonder Woman comics. Amazon rapists, misogynist Orion, The First Born's bestiality, a large focus on men rather than women... the list goes on.
A little bit of A, a little bit of B. I think creative teams usually fall into three categories:Why does it seem so rare that we get a Wonder Woman run that is well liked by her fans? Why does it seem so easy to get Wonder Woman wrong? Is it because the writers assigned to her aren't fans of the character? Is it because of editorial interferance?
1. Creators who have little to no knowledge of Wonder Woman or her mythos so they create their own stuff and ignore anything from the past because they simply don't know or care about it. Examples: J. Michael Stracyznski, Brian Azzarello, Geoff Johns.
2. Creators who are die-hard fans of Wonder Woman but aren't able to execute amazing and prominent stories using the knowledge that they have. Examples: Phil Jimenez, Steve Orlando. (NOTE: That's not to say these runs are bad, just not as noteworthy as Rucka or Perez. I love both runs, but even I can admit they are "average".)
3. Creators who are forced to use (or not use) elements from DC editorial that otherwise botch what could've been a great run. Examples: Mariko Tamaki, Gail Simone, James Robinson.