User talk:Joobee98

Welcome!

Hi Joobee98! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Happy editing! Joyous! Noise! 00:07, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

May 2024

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. _signed,Willondon (talk) 17:59, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing. Stop replacing the pictures in articles with vandalized versions of them. _signed,Willondon (talk) 18:10, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I want to make it clear that I have not engaged in any form of vandalism or disruptive editing. The fact that such accusations have been directed at me without any supporting evidence or specific instances is deeply unsettling. I deeply value the platform's mission of providing reliable and verifiable information.

If there's any misunderstandings of my edits, I'm more than open to engaging in dialogue to resolve any issues. I've consistently followed Wikipedia's guidelines and policies, ensuring that my edits contribute positively to the platform. Every modification I've made to articles has been undertaken in good faith. Joobee98 (talk) 04:15, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'll bite. Explain to me what your good intentions here were. miranda ^:3 04:24, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

And explain why you reuploaded someone else's image on Commons? miranda ^:3 04:27, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There are many reasons to want to reupload any given image to Wikipedia Commons (increasing image quality, ensuring that the image complies with copyright laws, etc), but this case pertains to only one: more accurately representing the subject found in the photo. Joobee98 (talk) 04:34, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You didn't attribute the image to its original creator, which is a violation of copyright law. Careless edits such as these are disruptive. miranda ^:3 04:37, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I figured... it was a bizzare edit this user made on the Cats in New Zealand page. No attribution, also the other image has an uncertain status. Alexeyevitch^(talk) 04:42, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia pages of public figures usually feature a profile image. I noticed that this specific page was lacking one, so I took the initiative to contribute by adding it. Joobee98 (talk) 04:28, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Why would you upload the image of a completely different person? You said that you were "ensuring that [your] edits contribute positively to the platform", but you couldn't even pay enough attention to realize that that wasn't a photo of the article subject? Competence is required to edit on Wikipedia. miranda ^:3 04:35, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If I can defend my own competence for a moment.

"the ability to communicate with other editors and abide by consensus." appears to be one of the requirements of a competent Wikipedia editor, one which I feel I'm entirely capable of meeting as I now see I'm outnumbered and need to make the changes which abide by the consensus reached.

"the ability to understand their own abilities and competencies, and avoid editing in areas where their lack of skill or knowledge causes them to create significant errors for others to clean up." I'm quite new to the role of Wikipedia editor and this exchange has allowed to me to much better understand my own limitations with regard to my article editing skills.

"the ability to read sources and assess their reliability. " I've admittedly failed in this regard.

"the ability to read and write English well enough [...]" I don't believe this is an issue with me.

I'd say that 3/4 isn't catastrophic for a beginner like myself. Now is this so incompetent as to merit restrictions, I hope not. Joobee98 (talk) 04:54, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The problem isn't your competancy, it's your vandalism. It looks like your vandalized images have been deleted, but: the first two picture edits [1], [2] replace the photo with a copy with a different name. An exact copy? There may be subtle differences I didn't notice. The next [3] replaced the image of art students poised in front of their easels with one where their paint brushes have been removed. Next [4], a picture of a dancing couple is defaced with an extended grimace drawn on the man's face. Next [5], the photo of the article subject is replaced with one where the lips have been grotesquely enlarged. Next [6], a photo for the article's subject is added: a picture of someone totally unrelated to the article. The fact that such accusations have been directed at me without any supporting evidence or specific instances is deeply unsettling. I deeply value the platform's mission of providing reliable and verifiable information. Put me down as unconvinced of your sincerity. _signed,Willondon (talk) 16:38, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your image was inserted successfully on the page Shoe0nHead, but because it appeared to be irrelevant to the article or violated the image use policy, it has been reverted or removed. Please use your sandbox for any tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. Thank you. miranda ^:3 03:58, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]