Thread:Hackey5/@comment-11060907-20150512022113/@comment-5645428-20150512110040

Thanks for bringing this all to me. It's not too often editors take the time to offer this much feedback. Thank you.

What do you think people want from the wiki? I think people want information about Geometry Dash. Yes, that is our objective, to provide all there is to know about the game. We also seek to present this information as effectively as possible. A bit about my role in this, as an administrator with past experience on two other wikis, I possess knowledge and experience that editors come to develop only after years of learning. For example, I came to this wiki knowing little to nothing about how to use templates, now I can effectively create them. With this capability, I naturally direct my attention away from mainspace (article) editing to manage the things few know how to. And once there are working templates, they can then be used on articles and make them better to read, so there is a reason to the order I set out tasks. The site styling is another thing. Having templates and pretty visuals are not necessary in providing information, but in presenting it, and instinctively people are attracted towards nice-looking things, and that may even attract new editors (although obviously a lot more is involved). So summing this up, there is always a lot to do and a lot going on, yet, this is still but a fraction. Now, in response to your points:

1. As mentioned, mainspace editing is not something I'm actively involved in currently. I know Seth is often reverting counterproductive edits, and 3primetime3 (who is busy studying right now) was always looking to maintain article consistency. But we're just administrators. Articles are and always have been the top edited pages by other editors because they are so easy to edit, and that's great to see. It can be difficult to maintain consistency when everyone is editing them, but sitting down and writing in some solid information tends to stay. So I hear that is the case for earlier levels? I did direct attention towards structuring them a few months back. Try doing so yourself and encourage others to do the same for the later levels. From what I tend to see, it is a collaborative effort that gets pages filled in with content, but a single editor's determination to order and establish a structure for it all.

2. Once more, we are hoping editors will progressively improve articles. Those marked with the Quality template I do monitor to keep them in top form. Keep working other articles and eventually they will reach that stage too.

3. A decision was made with RaonicHero a while ago that we would not be creating pages for map packs. If we did, we would more than double the current amount of articles on the wiki, and it would not be realistically possible to maintain a level of quality that as you said we are still aiming to reach with our present articles. We don't have a clear record of when map packs were added, the discreet changes to difficulty, the random updates being made to levels, and stuff which never even sees itself added to the normal Map Packs article. It's suited as a popular forum topic, but impractical to have individual articles committed to each and every map pack.

4. What articles we do have are related to official game content. Texture packs are relevant, yes, but it is an add-on modification feature, or in other words, a fan feature. I'm not saying an article couldn't be made for it, but it has a differing nature. Link me to your forum topic if you like. I would be open to 'official forum articles' which don't quite qualify for standard articles, but are related enough to have information presented there.

5. Dealing with update content is a frustrating job with a lot of speculation and rumours always flying around the place. It's a similar thing - unofficial or at least not 100% confirmed information. People want to to know about a lot of things, but that doesn't mean we can give them a proper answer. Although there's no one to really judge our credibility, it is certainly better that we don't provide information which is possibly false or misleading.

A lot of the stuff I've been saying is due to the fact that we are not only a fan website, but a wiki, and that is an influence on the ways things are done around here. If it looks simple, we are doing that part right. Of course, complications arise from little things everywhere. Antipating what could potentially become an issue in the future can have me seeming restrictive and controlling, but that is the exact opposite of what I hope to achieve by making those decisions. Once things get out of hand, I can tell you that it's a long way back. That is one reason why I stuck to this wiki, because despite its initial state being a mess, that was just the beginning of what I saw was capable of becoming such a great wiki in the future. The Battle Bears Wiki declined due to a growing lack of editors. The Infinity Blade Wiki declined due to inefficient management following a revival but inability to manage all the existing content. Ensuring planning, organsiation and management is performed efficiently and rigorously is of the utmost importance for a wiki, just as much as supporting its community.

Apologies for the text bombardment, but yes, it's all a pretty big thing. Further feedback welcome!