Thread:Wikiwalker11291/@comment-17964257-20190516193005/@comment-17964257-20190517173942

> As I've devoted a great time of time into the wiki, I feel rather obligated to see it through to the end, and I've grown exasperated with the amount of work I still feel can be done compared to how much progress I had hoped to make when I first started adding to the wiki

It should be clear that we all share the same passion. We are all here to contribute and none of us are happy about the little amount of content we get to add. I've been making jokes about finishing the Fatal Bullet page before Reki finishes the entire Progressive series because of how frustrated I am at the pace I am allowed to contribute. And I have to make it very clear here so excuse me being blunt, but the amount you keep piling up onto the backlog is coming at the expense of us, the editors who actually do care about respecting the time of the one person who reviews the edits. Every single day I see a new edit in the Recent Activity from you, I feel obliged to take it to Gsi to balance out his reviews. He is constantly forced to review your edits due to you being unable to control your will to contribute and throws us back into the backlog. Your new additions result in us getting more and more frustrated every single time due to its effect on our edit reviews.

> Not sure I can deviate from my schedule of commemorative edits, since that might drastically reduce my contribution rate to much slower that a snail's pace

Not sure you get a grasp of the situation here. You make edits at most 3 days separated from each other. I did not get a chance to make a proper edit since September 2018, while trying to find ways to improve the Wikia without putting much work on Gsi instead. And my edit from September 2018 was 20 paragraphs. In 9 months, I received about 10 paragraphs worth of review. Whereas at your pace, you are forcing Gsi to review 10 paragraphs in the span of a week, just because you are not willing to listen to his "Please slow down" warnings. You know what happens if I do exactly what you are doing, adding brand new edits, 10 paragraphs a week? This place becomes unmanageable. That is why we try to remain silent, but at a certain point, you need to understand the circumstances.

> I can try to reduce the size of most of my edits, but as I may have said before, it's rather very difficult for me to properly estimate how big or small they'll end up.

Your sizing issue is not a matter of actual size, it's the amount of unneeded information. What I'm referring to here is the constant new additions to pages everywhere. That is the reason why I am urging you to stop adding new stuff every single day, but rather look back at stuff reviewed by Gsi, so they can actually get improved and shown on pages. Most of your edits are commented out, invisible on the pages, because you keep adding new stuff, without looking back at what Gsi deemed unacceptable, thus all your effort puffs out into nothing. Added information is worthless if they are not presentable.

> I feel a little wary about making edits to the same article too close to each other

You shouldn't. When Gsi completes editing an article with direct feedback to you, that means you can now go there, read his feedback, learn and improve. When your edits are so obviously reviewed, with a changelog of your mistakes and comments on the style, then you do not need to wait until the next birthday to fix that paragraph. Instead of constantly adding new content and piling up more heavy work on Gsi, focus your free time on correcting your already reviewed edits. That way, we won't have 100 pages with out-commented content, but 5 pages with actually acceptable content.

> he woud still be irritated with my shenanigans either way

He is irritated by all of our shenanigans. He is more irritated by your shenanigans because you keep ignoring his requests of slowing down and keep edit spamming, while we have to take a stance and annoy him further for constantly reviewing your stuff in favor of ours.

> I'll see about going over my edits from up until now, but I can't make any promises.

I don't see why it is easier for you to add new content than improve on the content that has direct feedback on it. Gsi literally leaves comments as to what is wrong with the paragraph. Instead of going over to random articles and conjuring up new paragraphs, just go to your own profile/contributions screen, click on one of your contributions and see if Gsi reviewed it or not. I genuinely don't understand the concern here... Is writing new paragraphs that will be outcommented by Gsi and make all your progress for naught, really better than looking back at your earlier edits that have received direct feedback and improving them so something acceptable can be featured on the article?