As a slight frame challenge to the question, I have a suggestion. Step back from the argument, and determine what meaningful objective you and your team can focus on.
The reason why you're all disagreeing on how "good" the reports need to be is that there doesn't seem to be any correlation between report quality and any goal or objective you have. Ask yourselves:
- Why do we produce these reports?
- Who is the intended audience?
- What use does that audience have for these reports?
- What is the overall context for that use?
Are they required by some regulation? Are they meant to be basic documentation for reference, after the fact? Are they meant to be part of a client-facing deliverable? Are they used by your support team? Are they referenced by new hires, as part of their onboarding?
Once you can all agree on why you're making the reports, and who cares about them, the argument should evaporate. You may find yourselves faced with the fact that no one cares, and there's no strong argument to even continue doing the reporting. If that's the case, you should stop. Or, you may find that someone really does care about them - in which case, your argument for improving quality may become much easier to win.
Arguing about report quality without understanding the context of the report is like a bunch of builders sitting around arguing about how high a wall should be. Well, what are the requirements? Who even wants the wall, and what purpose do they have in mind? Are you just building the wall because that's what your team always does? Is there anyone outside your team that is actually asking for a wall to be built in the first place? How can any of the builders justify their argument for wall height without knowing these things? There's no point to even having the discussion until you know the answers to those questions.