User talk:Ingfbruno

Welcome!

Hello, Ingfbruno, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome! RJFJR (talk) 15:21, 16 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

July 2013

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. Regarding your edits to United States Supreme Court Building, it is recommended that you use the preview button before you save; this helps you find any errors you have made, reduces edit conflicts, and prevents clogging up recent changes and the page history. Thank you. – S. Rich (talk) 00:56, 18 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ingfbruno, you are invited to the Teahouse

Hi Ingfbruno! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from peers and experienced editors. I hope to see you there! Ushau97 (I'm a Teahouse host)

Visit the Teahouse

This message was delivered automatically by your robot friend, HostBot (talk) 01:18, 20 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Spam images

Your signed images are neither needed or neutral and read as spam.

Please do not add inappropriate external links to Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not a collection of links, nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Inappropriate links include, but are not limited to, links to personal websites, links to websites with which you are affiliated, and links that attract visitors to a website or promote a product. See the external links guideline and spam guideline for further explanations. Because Wikipedia uses the nofollow attribute value, its external links are disregarded by most search engines. If you feel the link should be added to the page, please discuss it on the associated talk page rather than re-adding it. Thank you....Modernist (talk) 19:43, 20 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Per WP:NOTIMAGE #4, please refrain from overloading articles (such as Harvard University, Memorial Church of Harvard University, and Financial District, Boston) with excessive numbers of images. Photos should be added very sparingly, and only when caption information and subject matter relates to the article text. Hertz1888 (talk) 12:33, 30 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, we are not an image gallery, we are an encyclopedia, and all images in articles should either illustrate something in the text, or provide additional information on their own. With great frequency, your images are identified with only the most general information. For instance, the picture captioned "Boston at night", which I just removed from the Boston article. OK, so it's building, it's in Boston, and it's at night. What building is it? Is all of Boston like that at night, or just that particular place? Without that kind of information, the image is just a "beauty" shot, and should not be in the article - which I why I removed it.

So, some advice for you:

Please do your best to identify as specifically as possible the subject of your photograph. Not just "New York Public Library, 2013", but "The main reading room of the NYPL". This starts with the name you give the image when you upload it to Commons.
Next, please categorize your photos on Commons after uploading them. The categorization system on Commons is not all that complex, and it's better to at least put an image in a general category rather than in no category at all.
Please stop assuming that every photograph you've uploaded needs to go into an article: they don't. Look at your image, and look at the article it fits into, if there's already a decent photo there, and yours doesn't add anything, don't put it in the article, if the article has a lot of images, and yours are repetitive or, again, don't add anything, don't put them in the article.
Image galleries are not meant to carry every single image on the subject that happened to have been uploaded to the Commons, but a representative sampling of important visual aspects of the subject not already covered in the article. If your images don't provide additional information, or duplicate, or near-duplicate other images, don't put them in the gallery.
In short any image - including your images - should not be added to an article unless it enhances the article in some concrete way. Simply being a good photo (and yours are good) is not enough. We're not interested in beautiful images per se, we're interested in informative, educational and presentational images that raise the quality of our articles - if they happen to be good as an image that's great, icing on the cake, but the first is a prerequisite.

Thanks, Beyond My Ken (talk) 03:34, 30 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Redundant images

Please do not add images to articles which basically duplicate images already there, and do not add images which unnecesarily distort the article's layout. As noted above, you need to be more circumspect about adding your images. Thanks, Beyond My Ken (talk) 20:40, 12 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is intended to be a collaborative, collegial project to create an online encyclopedia. As such, editors are expected to talk to each other when concerns are raised. So far, you have failed to respond to any of the concerns that have been raised here, and have not changed your editing behavior based on those concerns. I've been around here for 8 years, and I've seen numerous occasions where an editor has been indefinitely blocked from editing simply because the editor never responded to the concerns of other editors. So far, I have not found it necessary to bring your lack of intercourse to the attention of an admin, but I will be forced to do so soon unless you respond here to the concerns that I and other have raised. Please do not take the risk of being blocked from editing, reply to the concerns that have been raised here about your editing behavior. Thanks. Beyond My Ken (talk) 16:44, 13 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Let me amend what I wrote above to say that you have actually adjusted your editing to the extent that you no longer seem prone to "stuff" articles with your photos, so I commend you for that. Beyond My Ken (talk) 17:27, 13 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Beyond My Ken. Actually my intention is to collaborate with this great encyclopedia. Sorry if I make mistakes...Ingfbruno

We all make mistakes, especially at first, and I'm pleased that your goal is to improve the encyclopedia - after all, we're all here for that! Just take a little more care in placing you images in articles, please. Best, Beyond My Ken (talk) 18:51, 13 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:02, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]