Astounding,
Your response to my latest post is as follows, ““This is overwrought given the relatively few delays.” The use of the term “overwrought” does not fit my work. This is your opinion and not mine. I do not believe I am being “overwrought,” I believe I am acting in good faith with civility. I believe what I have to say is very relevant to a vast many users of wiki. While the delays to this topic might be irrelevant to you, they are very relevant to other users and worth noting.
If I may butt in, you're taking it far too seriously. I don't see how calling something overwrought is questioning your good faith or civility; it just means the writing was more elaborate than it needed to be. By submitting work to a wiki you're agreeing to have it be revised, and we admins try to guide (if not make) those revisions to be as user-friendly as possible. Having a dense paragraph about every delay the show's ever had right at the top of the page is not that. Once we have pages for all of the story arcs, people will be able to see for themselves what dates everything was uploaded on.
If you would like to work on those arc pages, many of which are currently sandboxed, that would be a more productive use of your time.
Les,
With all due respect I disagree. There have been a couple of occasions you have corrected my submissions, and I don’t have a problem with that. None of us our perfect. My issue is Astounding displays a constant pattern with me as well as many others, following and correcting context and meaning to our words. It is inappropriate. Overwrought is just an example. Your overwrought when your life is in shambles, you’re not overwrought when you’re explaining a simple fact that a series of shows from Toho are behind schedule. Maybe he is, but I’m not.
overwrought
adjective
The link you provided shows the following for overwrought
You chose to highlight #2 not #1.
adjective
1. in a state of nervous excitement or anxiety.
2. (of a piece of writing or a work of art) too elaborate or complicated in design or construction.
Nothing in my original post was elaborate or complicated in structure.
"You chose to highlight #2 not #1"
Because that's how words work... You're going out of your way to be offended by a word because one of its multiple definitions, which isn't the one that was intended and doesn't even apply to the situation, is unsavory to you. I'd also like to point out that you quoted ABB's comment in your first message of this thread, where he's clearly describing the writing as what's overwrought, but then in your second message totally ignore that and say he was calling you overwrought (complete with spiteful "Maybe he is, but I'm not").
It reads to me more like you have a vendetta against him than he has one against you. It was meant to be a fairly innocuous comment that your paragraph was too dense/overwritten/overinformative/etc., which I agree with and explained to you why.
Les
I have Autism, and often times, it is hard to explain frustrations I have especially in a virtual setting. That has happened here. My intention was not to start something with yourself or Astounding. I am going to give Astounding an example as he is asking for; to illustrate the frustration I feel with his editing. I appreciate that he is willing to talk to me about it. I also appreciate the time you took to intervene in this situation.
That is indeed the definition I had in mind.
Gojo, I'm happy to discuss the reasoning behind my edits in more detail - within reason - but I'm unclear what I'm doing in my patroling that's so distinct from Les and that you find so offensive.
Les approaches users with constructive criticism. He gives suggestions on different things to try.
In regards to this specific piece of work, it was in no way overwrought. You simply could have come in and asked me to shorten what I had to say and suggest I work on the sandbox areas.
In regards to your editing of mine and others work, you are coming across as personal, controlling and change the content in such a way that affects the meaning.
You wrote one sentence. It is not realistic to expect detailed feedback for every edit from any moderator. (I can't speak for the others, but I work on this site in between two jobs.) I think your read on myself and Les's editing styles is deeply ungenerous, but at the same time, you're not giving me many specifics to respond to.
https://wikizilla.org/wiki/File:Astounding_edit_example_-1.jpg#metadata
The above link I accidentally uploaded. After you look at it if you could delete it. It is an example of an edit you did to my work that I feel changed the meaning entirely. I had it as one sentence that described it as it needed to be but you took it and broke it off as into two different paragraphs that disjointed the point I was making. Thank you for talking to me about it.
Whatever I was trying to do I must have accidentally published before I finished, because I just straight up did not finish the sentence beginning with "Their logo is absent". Surprised no one else caught that until now. Let me take care of that.
