Thread:Hackey5/@comment-17897872-20170712201930/@comment-5645428-20170715010148

While Nudsan might like 452's attitude, it's not one that engages a positive or inclusive atmosphere in general. Keep in mind that producing an 'irrefutable' argument is time-consuming for those who have lives outside of the Internet, and truly there is no such thing as an irrefutable argument because when used out of context just to prove some trivial point, all that effort will be either misdirected or largely ignored, and you'll come off as overly serious and stubborn.

Tolerance, understanding and compromise are just as important as perseverance, confidence and certainty.

300+ pages require editing each week? I would be concerned over your use of time if that were the case. And you're saying that they require routine updates meaning you have to keep coming back to check on them? It makes sense that no one wants to work on them. The Candy Crush wiki's structure is very inflated, which would definitely be affecting productivity. After a surface inspection, this is what I suggest:
 * Keep an eye on Popular Pages Insights to gauge which pages are the most demanding of attention, as well as which article series may be insignificant for viewers.
 * Looking at a couple 'reality' levels, I feel that perhaps a more convenient approach would be extracting the core details of these articles (intro paragraph and infobox content usually) and combining them on one collective article which utilises several large tables divided up by tabbers or some similar mechanism. This may be considerably easier to mass edit using the Finder.
 * I noticed subjective strategies are being included on individual articles, which is fine. Once again, perhaps splitting off the more descriptive aspects of levels onto one (or more) large collective article(s) will benefit both viewers and editors who will easily be able to navigate to points of interest without having to sift through too many web pages.