User talk:Batavier2.0

Leave a new message.

April 2011
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Engagement, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and read the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Please do not place images in a position where it distorts the layout - more than enough better quality images in this article Denniss (talk) 11:54, 8 April 2011 (UTC)


 * Hi. You appear to be adding a number of old (presumably out of copyright images) to Wikipedia. Whilst it is good to see archive material being used to illustrate articles, such images should only be added when they make a significant addition to the encyclopaedic value of the article.


 * At present it looks as though you are adding images wherever you can find a place even if the context is very tenuous. Unfortunately, the only result will be removal of the images which benefits nobody, neither you nor the editor who (correctly) removes them. Regrettably you have tagged some of these reverts as vandalism - they are not.


 * New editors are always most welcome, but I do suggest that you look at those articles that can be improved by the addition of an image rather than those articles into which you can shoe-horn a particular image.  Velella  Velella Talk 12:04, 8 April 2011 (UTC)
 * In some pages I must not have added the article. But in general I don't believe I did anything wrong. I hate it that my good edits keep getting reverted. All I want is illustrate the articles in a good way. I mean no harm whatsoever. Batavier2.0 (talk) 12:06, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

Images
I'm taking this discussion off of User talk:Denniss because it really involves your use of images.

What tried to tell you above, and what  tried to impose without discussing, is that images are to be used judiciously at Wikipedia. A picture of two people, whom you claim to be engaged, but who do not show any special signs of being engaged (such as displaying an engagement ring) does not really enhance anyone's understanding of the concept of engagement. A 90 year old picture of an actor smoking a cigarette does not enhance anyone's understanding of the concept of a cigarette. (I will say that that particular image might find a useful place in a discussion of the portrayal of smoking through history as relates to changing attitudes toward smoking, but it is not appropriate as part of the lead of the cigarette article.) Simply because you "like" an image is not a reason to include it; it really must enhance the article in question. WikiDan61 ChatMe!ReadMe!! 12:37, 8 April 2011 (UTC)


 * But why then remove ALL these images? With a better caption or at a different place in the article, they would be appropriate. For example: move the image of the smoking man to a better section, instead of in the lead. That type of knowledge I lack, for I am only a newbie. Batavier2.0 (talk) 12:40, 8 April 2011 (UTC)


 * We have a group of users (who may be one person) spaming this persons image across Wikipedia. SPI report filled  Doc James  (talk · contribs · email) 13:37, 8 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Sigh, you are using multiple accounts to attempt to add this actors images to dozens of pages . Many of the additions where not properly formatted, some of the pages did not need further images. The addition where not WP:DUE Doc James  (talk · contribs · email) 20:11, 8 April 2011 (UTC)