The difference with Wonder Woman is that even her writers don't care about what she actually IS, but just what they want her to be, because they don't see her as a character, but as a symbol. So each writer will come along and change it to whatever they think represents feminism the best, because they don't care. And frankly, they don't have much reason to care. Even the Earth-One version, while consistent, never had anything to actually make her interesting. So they can lean on the Greek mythology stuff, but it was never actually the biggest part of the old stories, and it isn't the biggest part of what the character is in the public consciousness, so none of it rings true. They lean on feminism, but that was never actually a major part of her stories either, even though it is a major part of why she's popular, so you're in a double bind. You're damned if you lean into the feminism, because it isn't actually like the stories that made her popular, but you're damned if you don't, because the casuals who like her think that's all she is, or at least they want her to be that, but she really isn't. She isn't anything.
What needs to be done, and what several writers have tried and failed to do, is have some autist like Geoff Johns come along and really drill down to what the core of the character is. Green Lantern was never the most successful series. It got cancelled in the '70s and had to share a book with Green Arrow, then it became a backup series in The Flash, then got fully cancelled for a few years. And even after it came back, it kept floundering, switching stars and being about John Stewart, and then having Hal go evil and completely erasing most of the world that he operated in when Kyle took over. And in a way, he had similar problems the whole time. Now we see Hal as a pilot, and I bet most of you don't even know that he spent a very large part of his history as a traveling toy salesman. Kind of a weird thing to think about when you remember his whole stint as an open child molester with Arisia later on. But my point is that they never really nailed down what his character was. Then turbo-autist Geoff Johns came along and defined him more strongly. He added a lot of new stuff to do it, like the emotional spectrum, but it was all based on old stories and elements. Green Lanterns need willpower and were always said to be without fear. So then Green represents willpower and yellow, already their weakness, represents fear, which it already is traditionally associated with in wider culture. So Hal is fearless and willful, and that makes sense with being a test pilot, a very dangerous and scary job. This bit was around in his origin story, but never leaned on heavily in his later stories, so much so that they made him a Toy Salesman instead. The willful part made sense with how he was already a bit of a rebel in the corps, not to mention an Anti-Monitor-tier supervillain, so it all fit. After that, the emotional spectrum stuff could add a lot to the lore, and it was still largely based on previous things. Star Sapphire was always one of his arch enemies, and was always either Carol Ferris or one of his other love interests, so if emotions are part of this, then they represent love. Atrocitus is built out of an Alan Moore backup story from the '80s. idk about the other colors, but note that these were the first ones he worked on. By the time he got that far, his run on the series was acclaimed and the emotional spectrum thing was popular and well established, so he could introduce new stuff for the other colors. He earned the reader's respect for it fist, and established that it was all tied to established lore.
So let's do this with Wonder Woman. What are some core elements of herself, her supporting characters and concepts, and her antagonists, that we can use to tie together the whole franchise? Well if you can tell me anything that Cheetah, Ares, Baroness Von Gunther, Dr. Psycho, and Angle Man have in common, then I'd be happy to hear it. If you can give me a good explanation for Diana's wildly different personalities over the decades, which had never been explained as character development in-universe, then do so.
But it's all moot, because anyone who tries to write Wonder Woman is in a double bind of making her feminist enough to appease feminists, but not overbearing. Any of her modern so called fans who say she needs to be very feminist would never like her old comics, because they weren't feminist enough. Of course they were feminist, but it's never enough for them. Never enough until you're telling your audience to not buy your book, and if they do buy it, then it had better be calling them all shitlords.