FANDOM

Welcome, Benjay2345! Edit

Hello, and welcome to Wookieepedia! I hope you like the place and choose to join our work. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

General help

Site policies

Contribution help

Wookiees-Transparent

Wookieepedia aspires to be a reliable source for all Star Wars fans to read and draw information from, and as such, fan-created continuity and fan fiction are not allowed within our articles. All in-universe material must be attributable to a reliable, published source.

Do not remove talk page and forum comments, including your own, as they are part of the public record. Remember that you should always sign your comments on talk and vote pages using four tildes, like this: ~~~~.

For an optimal viewing experience, Wookieepedia recommends using the Monobook skin. For help changing your skin preference, see Help:Skin.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wookieepedian! If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the Senate Hall, visit our official IRC channel, or ask me on my talk page. May the Force be with you! —Omicron(Leave a message at the BEEP!) 21:04, July 9, 2015 (UTC)

ImageEdit

I know its kind of weird or foolish that I'm doing that but per Forum:SH:Image policy I need to do that --DarthRuiz30 (talk) 01:14, June 8, 2017 (UTC)

Appreciate the help uploading images, but please source the images with links to the articles. Thanks. See they way I did it for Nute or Beru--DarthRuiz30 (talk) 04:33, June 8, 2017 (UTC)

Fill all the infoEdit

Hi, I've seen you've been uploading images, please fill the categories space if you don't know or aren't sure please go to a similar image and see how its done--DarthRuiz30 (talk) 05:38, June 9, 2017 (UTC)

  • Again thanks for helping uploading images, but please add the categories to the images, its not that hard to do. Thanks--DarthRuiz30 (talk) 06:04, June 10, 2017 (UTC)

ImagesEdit

Hi again, please when you're uploading a photo that already exists in the wiki, don't uploaded as a new photo, update the previous image so we don't have multiple photos and all pages using them update as well--DarthRuiz30 (talk) 18:53, June 10, 2017 (UTC)

NuteEdit

I left a message on the page talk, please leave your opinion there before doing anything else and hear the community--DarthRuiz30 (talk) 06:59, June 13, 2017 (UTC)

CTEdit

Hi, just to let you know as you told me to, that there's a concensus page regarding the image problem that its going around. If you want just go and vote, if you do it, please remember to sign that comment. --DarthRuiz30 (talk) 22:03, June 20, 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for letting me know. --Benjay2345 (talk) 16:02, June 21, 2017 (UTC)

Images 2Edit

Hi, next time be sure that you're not uploading an image that its already uploaded and used on another page. Thanks--DarthRuiz30 (talk) 20:27, July 8, 2017 (UTC)

    • Okay. I checked beforehand I must have just missed it. Thanks.--Benjay2345 (talk) 03:25, July 9, 2017 (UTC)

Rey image Edit

Hi. Please stop reverting the removal of the recent Rey image. If you disagree with it replacing the previous image, please raise the issue on Talk:Rey. Thanks. - Brandon Rhea(talk) 22:34, July 21, 2017 (UTC)

Kylo Ren immageEdit

Put a diferent image on Kylo Ren's page if you have a better quality image of his later appearance. He looks diferent in the current image, with his scar and a diferent hairstyle.--ZapikCZ (talk) 22:06, September 1, 2017 (UTC)

Finn imageEdit

The image has already been uploaded as File:Finn_Advanced_Graphics_Standee.png. Don't upload a new image and just replace the old one. I'll mark yours for deletion.--ZapikCZ (talk) 17:43, September 4, 2017 (UTC)

  • If you want to change the image bring it up on the talk page --Lewisr (talk) 01:43, September 6, 2017 (UTC)
  • What did you change about the Snoke image?--ZapikCZ (talk) 06:28, September 7, 2017 (UTC)
    • The color was darker than the actual card. I made the color more accurate. --Benjay2345 (talk) 02:22, September 8, 2017 (UTC)

Archiving CTs Edit

Please do not attempt to archive Consensus Track votes. That is the right and the duty of administrators, and it is regulated by our Consensus policy. Thank you. Imperators II(Talk) 08:35, September 16, 2017 (UTC)

ThanksEdit

Thanks for uploading the pictures of the LEGO versions of Hera Syndulla, Boba Fett, and Leia Organa. I'm glad that we're able to put our differences aside and focus on creating articles related to the Freemakers tag. I'll go and reverse my edits to the other LEGO Star Wars TV shows. May the Force be with you. Andykatib 05:52, September 17, 2017 (UTC)

    • You are very welcome! I guess this whole thing just gave me a shock but I understand the need for it now. Thank you for helping me understand. May the Force be With You as well. --Benjay2345 (talk) 05:53, September 17, 2017 (UTC)

Re: LEGO CTEdit

Yeah, I'm considering it already. It'll need to wait until the current one is done, though. MasterFredCommerce Guild(Whatever) 01:52, September 18, 2017 (UTC)

Finn Edit

Hi, Benjay! Hope things are well! I noticed you uploaded a new version of the Finn Advanced Graphics image. However, while the current version has a higher resolution, it is of much lower quality than the original upload; if you zoom in on the image, it quickly becomes pixelated. Since the proper resolution for the image appears to be the 256x321 version, I would recommend reverting to that. Or, better yet, I would utilize the previous Fathead photo, which is a clearer image. - Cwedin(talk) 04:20, September 20, 2017 (UTC)

CT durations Edit

In response to your query on Toprawa's talk page: Consensus Track votes have a standard duration of 14 days, as per WP:CON. 1358 (Talk) 21:48, September 24, 2017 (UTC)

  • Okay, thanks for clarifying that for me.--Benjay2345 (talk) 21:53, September 24, 2017 (UTC)

RE:Quadnocs Edit

No problem. It happens from time to time--DarthRuiz30 (talk) 22:14, September 24, 2017 (UTC)

RE: LukeEdit

They are appearing in the correct placements for me, is it happening on any other pages for you? --Lewisr (talk) 04:05, September 27, 2017 (UTC)

  • It was doing it on Han's page too but now it isn't. Must have just been an internet connection problem.--Benjay2345 (talk) 04:06, September 27, 2017 (UTC)
    • Maybe so! Glad to hear its all good now --Lewisr (talk) 04:09, September 27, 2017 (UTC)

Categories Edit

Please at the moment of uploading an image link the information to the pages like Plo Koon instead of just Plo Koon. Also try to fill the categories. Thanks--DarthRuiz30 (talk) 04:21, September 27, 2017 (UTC)

  • Okay, will try and do a better job of this! Thanks for the reminder.--Benjay2345 (talk) 04:22, September 27, 2017 (UTC)

RE:New Version of Rebels Poster Edit

Hi, from Jedi News, Lucasfilm sent them the poster, not sure if other websites got the poster too.--DarthRuiz30 (talk) 04:37, September 27, 2017 (UTC)

Paige BlasterEdit

It looks like you cut off the barrel of Paige's blaster in the new File:Paige Tico Hasbro.png (it looks like this: https://www.flickr.com/photos/quarax/25574488544/in/album-72157664378916743/), and there's still a bit of red showing near the front of it, but you did a good job on the rest of the crop.----Toa Quarax(Talk) 06:32, October 23, 2017 (UTC)

Poe/FinnEdit

Where did you find those high quality images? Do they have Leia or the others?--ZapikCZ (talk) 08:00, October 31, 2017 (UTC)

  • I found them using the Tin-Eye reverse image lookup website. It didn't have a source for them just a file. I haven't found any for any of the others yet though. --Benjay2345 (talk) 19:56, October 31, 2017 (UTC)
    • Very nice!--ZapikCZ (talk) 20:11, October 31, 2017 (UTC)

Images Edit

When you upload images you are supposed to fill out all the info you can on the table including the cat licensee, cat subject and cat type sections, please make sure that you do when upload stuff in the future --Lewisr (talk) 21:13, November 5, 2017 (UTC)

  • You still aren't doing it. Its really not that hard to do if you just take a bit of time --Lewisr (talk) 00:56, November 6, 2017 (UTC)
    • You could have done it before you uploaded it, but just make sure you remember to fill it out from now on --Lewisr (talk) 00:58, November 6, 2017 (UTC)
      • I will make sure I do. --Benjay2345 (talk) 00:58, November 6, 2017 (UTC)
        • Thank you! --Lewisr (talk) 00:59, November 6, 2017 (UTC)

Rey image Edit

The image is currently protected to prevent users engaging in a reversion war, which you (and others) had been participating in whenever users uploaded newer versions. You constantly reverted it to the wider crop when it was apparent that several users (including myself) felt that the closer crop was more appropriate for the infobox. As such, to prevent further back and forth, I have uploaded an unmodified image. I also believe that the image should not have been modified from the original source with a transparent background. - Sir Cavalier of OneFarStar(Squadron channel) 22:19, November 5, 2017 (UTC)

Images should not be modified from the original source in any significant way. Removing an image from its background counts as this. Whether or not that image is reused multiple times on different backgrounds, the image should retain the background. Also, when it comes to image quality, bigger does not mean it is better quality. The Poe and Finn standees for instance were blurry when looked at closely. Wookieepedia strives to have the best images it can in the infobox in terms of quality and clarity, and this is doubly true of any main character infobox image. - Sir Cavalier of OneFarStar(Squadron channel) 23:20, November 5, 2017 (UTC)

Vanity Fair photos Edit

Hey. Beyond the image quality issue—it's very blurry; bigger does not mean better, and blowing up an image to make it larger generally hurts an image's quality—the Vanity Fair photos like File:Poe Dameron Vanity Fair The Last Jedi.png are photos of the actors. It's better to think of that image as a photo of Oscar Isaac as Poe Dameron, not a photo of Poe Dameron. For that reason those photo shoot images should not be used as in-universe portrayals of the characters. - Brandon Rhea(talk) 03:56, November 6, 2017 (UTC)

Backgrounds Edit

Please stop messing around with the images, you were told that removing the backgrounds was changing an image in a significant way from the original source, which isn't really allowed. --Lewisr (talk) 04:18, November 7, 2017 (UTC)

  • I did not know that this applied for all images. There are tons of images very similar to the one of Chopper on this wiki that have backgrounds removed for the sake of a better infobox image. It seems that this rule has either been nonexistent or not been enforced. Why is this all of the sudden a big deal?--Benjay2345 (talk) 04:20, November 7, 2017 (UTC)
    • I don't know, just I noticed it was said to you but you still was doing it, also Brandon said this as well to you but I agree it is better to have the backgrounds rather than a generic white background. It probably isn't a big deal but you kept reverting images and doing all these crops etc which drew attention to it all --Lewisr (talk) 04:28, November 7, 2017 (UTC)
      • Okay, I understand. I see how backgrounds are the much better option in many cases but in the case of the Chopper image the grey background just seems a little bit awkward. I think there are lots of people on this wiki that would think that the white background in certain situations such as when it is a promotional posed photograph such as the ones of Sabine, Ezra, and in this case Chopper that the transparent backgrounds look better. In the end it seems that its just personal preference. I'll leave the Chopper photo be but I think that the transparent background should at least be considered.--Benjay2345 (talk) 04:32, November 7, 2017 (UTC)
        • I think the Chopper one looks better with the background, its a bit more engaging and you could probably miss the image if it was just a white background. As you say it kinda comes down to personal preference but I'm sure all options are open to consideration --Lewisr (talk) 04:54, November 7, 2017 (UTC)

Rey crop Edit

Hi Benjay -- I have uploaded a new version that I took directly from the source but cropped in the same way as you had it. I could not upload your version directly to the image as it was .jpg file while the original was a .png file; the system does not allow you to replace images with different file extensions. I have also deleted the placeholder image since it is no longer needed. - Sir Cavalier of OneFarStar(Squadron channel) 17:27, November 7, 2017 (UTC)

The new version is now live, and the placeholder deleted. I sincerely hope this is the last I hear about this image, and I will not be uploading any more versions or crops. I commend and encourage your desire to contribute to help make this site as complete as possible, but I believe that focusing on this one single issue is not a productive use of anyone's time. I look forward to seeing your future contributions on the site. If you need any future help or advice, please feel free to contact me. - Sir Cavalier of OneFarStar(Squadron channel) 22:32, November 8, 2017 (UTC)

StopEdit

You should stop changing infobox pictures. Instead ask on the talk page to see if anyone agrees. You keep saying "better crop", "less distracting", but some users already expressed that those are personal views. Not everyone agree on that, to see if they agree ask on the talk page of the article. Like the rule says Wookieepedia:Consensus "Certain article talk-page votes, which may be held on a case-by-case basis to determine such particulars as an article's main infobox image", although is not necessary to do votes, Just Ask and stop with uneccessary changes--189.222.70.81 02:23, November 11, 2017 (UTC)

  • I opened a discussion on the Shmi talk page but I just had thought that since the image was clearly higher quality and forward facing instead of slightly to the side that it would obviously be a better infobox image. My bad.--Benjay2345 (talk) 02:36, November 11, 2017 (UTC)

Uploading images Edit

Hey when you upload images please check you are filling out the template correct, you put some stuff in the wrong place but I changed them for you, cat license is for category:images from blah blah and cat type is category:live action images etc, hope this makes sense --Lewisr (talk) 19:54, November 12, 2017 (UTC)

  • Okay I'll be sure to do it correctly. Thanks for the reminder.--Benjay2345 (talk) 20:11, November 12, 2017 (UTC)

Larger images Edit

Higher dimensions does not equal higher quality. Such as with File:Hos.png. Yes, when you click view the image to get the following link https://lumiere-a.akamaihd.net/v1/images/hosnian-prime-16-9_1d77d3d3.jpeg?region=69%2C0%2C1422%2C800&width=768 you can change the numerical value of 768 width to as high as 4000, but that is just artificially enlarging the image. To actually see the image its full-size, native resolution, you need to remove everything after the .jpeg and hit enter. That is the true size of the image. And in this image's case, that resolution is 1560x800 pixels. Just wanted to give you that head's up as to why I reverted it back. - JMAS Jolly Trooper Hey, it's me! 02:05, November 13, 2017 (UTC)

  • Okay thanks for clarifying. Also on the Starkiller Base image I meant to just put a plain black background but I must have accidentally clicked the wrong image to use as the background. Sorry about that. --Benjay2345 (talk) 02:37, November 13, 2017 (UTC)

It is preferred to center the subjects head/face in an infobox image, as Shmi's head was centered in my crop. The way you have it cropped, her head is more left and not centered. - JMAS Jolly Trooper Hey, it's me! 05:28, November 13, 2017 (UTC)

Paige Tico Edit

You were the one who uploaded the previous image on Paige's page, why do you keep messing about with images and removing backgrounds and then say we should avoid using images with transparent backgrounds? --Lewisr (talk) 02:31, December 4, 2017 (UTC)

    • I uploaded it before the discussion about the Leia image. If the transparent Paige image is allowed (which I am ultimately fine with) then the Leia one should be too. I was just doing as I was told in trying to avoid transparent background.--Benjay2345 (talk) 02:35, December 4, 2017 (UTC)
      • Read Cavalier comment, he locked an image of Rey because besides the infinite cropping, the background was removed, he gave this reason "Images should not be modified from the original source in any significant way. Removing an image from its background counts as this." If the admin got confused and this doesn't apply to all images then we can put it back until then I would say wait for the answer, Because that got confusing--DarthRuiz30 (talk) 02:38, December 4, 2017 (UTC)
        • To my understanding that was allowed and agree that it looks better, but Cav comments made them see it like it wasn't okay. --DarthRuiz30 (talk) 02:41, December 4, 2017 (UTC)
          • Removing the background of an image that does not depict any sort of identifiable scene or location is perfectly acceptable and not violating any sort of policy. For example, if someone were to remove the background from this image of Leia where the background is clearly the Resistance base of D'Qar, then that would be significantly altering the background. But, as is the example from countless images from Star Wars: Card Trader where the background was simply the character with a starscape background, and a whitish glow surrounding the character, removing the background is actually beneficial and improves how the image appears. And it is not "altering" the canonicity of the image, because a person cannot survive in space, so having a space background is ridiculous. As in the case of the image where Paige was isolated from the background of a book cover, where the background was nothing more than a black haze surrounding her and a bunch of red lines, there is absolutely nothing wrong with or against policy in isolating the character from that background. Period. - JMAS Jolly Trooper Hey, it's me! 02:53, December 4, 2017 (UTC)
            • No offense, but I take the word of an admin more than from an user, I know is ridiculous, but that last time bunch of images got deleted because of that plus an image got locked, so a clarification about it would be nice--DarthRuiz30 (talk) 02:58, December 4, 2017 (UTC)
              • I agree with JMAS. Images with backgrounds are preferred when there's something visually interesting or identifiable in that background. But in the case of the Paige Tico image, removing a random/generic/nothing background and replacing it with a transparent background is fine. This obsession with changing images for the sake of changing images has really got to stop. - Brandon Rhea(talk) 03:37, December 4, 2017 (UTC)
                • Still, maybe the admin got confused, Benjay already send a message to the admin to clarify what he meant. And I think after that we will return to normal and just remove the background of it. Maybe even add to the policy under what circumstances is okay to remove it, since its not clear. I support removing the random background, but that doesn't mean we can't seek a clarification about that.--DarthRuiz30 (talk) 04:01, December 4, 2017 (UTC)

Image resolution. Edit

Image dimensions do not equal higher resolution. Every single image I have uploaded from TLJ Special Edition magazine are at resolution of 300 dpi (pixels/inch). Your uploads are at a resolution of 72 dpi. Less than 1/4 the quality. So regardless that your uploads may have seemingly higher resolution, they do, in fact, have lower quality. This clearly evident when you look at the images at full size, and look at the details around lines, or edges of garments, etc. - JMAS Jolly Trooper Hey, it's me! 05:25, December 31, 2017 (UTC)

  • I don't know why you are telling me this again. I simply moved your higher dpi Finn image to a revision of the duplicate Finn image which is how you are supposed to upload a higher quality version of an image that has already been uploaded, and then cropped the Phasma image tighter because it looks better that way in the infobox. Your images have not been taken down so I don't know why you are telling me this again. And also, just out of curiosity, what is your method for getting the higher resolution images?--Benjay2345 (talk) 05:32, December 31, 2017 (UTC)
    • The Finn upload was an accident on both our parts. You asked me to upload it on my talk page. I did as requested, and saw that you had already uploaded one. Once that was done and we had duplicate images, per Wookieepdia policy, your image, the one of lower quality, should have been marked for deletion, and the higher quality image used. Regarding the Phasma, image, the crop was fine. It was discussed a as a community many years ago, that the best dimensions for a portrait of an individual for an infobox is 3x4. This makes for the best appearance in the infobox and doesn't elongate the infobox with very narrowly cropped images. - JMAS Jolly Trooper Hey, it's me! 05:40, December 31, 2017 (UTC)
      • I must agree here, the unnecessary "better crop" is getting too far, follow the policy. Also for main infoboxes, sometimes getting a concensus for certain articles is better than just removing it. Phasma photo I feel that one is better than the one you're suggesting, I can see that image being used on the P&T section or a similar section, maybe I'm wrong, but asking is never a bad thing to do.--DarthRuiz30 (talk) 05:44, December 31, 2017 (UTC)
        • Unless the TLJ image of Phasma overwhelmingly gets more votes than the current TFA image, then it will default to "no change" per policy and the current image will remain. If that happens, I will just upload the high DPI resolution version of the full image, and as you suggested, put it in the P&T section. - JMAS Jolly Trooper Hey, it's me! 01:50, January 1, 2018 (UTC)

Contents box Edit

Hey sorry I just saw this, when you say contents box do you mean an infobox? --Lewisr (talk) 13:42, December 31, 2017 (UTC)

Leaked Lego Edit

Please, don't use leaked information as a source Thanks--DarthRuiz30 (talk) 21:18, January 5, 2018 (UTC)

  • Reddit is also not a legitimate and reliable source so in future don't use that as a source --Lewisr (talk) 21:20, January 5, 2018 (UTC)
    • Isn't a Lego leak technically a legitimate source? The leak is clearly legitimate. Is it actual policy to have to wait until character names are officially released to change the name here. I seem to remember Orson Krennic's name leaking viaa a leaked Edelweiss catalogue and it being changed on Wookieepedia sourced to that leak. I thought that if the leak was clearly legitimate that it was fine to change the name. It seems odd to have a page with a character's incorrect name.--Benjay2345 (talk) 21:23, January 5, 2018 (UTC)
      • Leaks are generally not legal, regardless of whether they're true. We only use legitimately released information on Wookieepedia. - Brandon Rhea(talk) 21:25, January 5, 2018 (UTC)
        • Okay thats fine I'll be sure not to do it again. The Krennic situation from back in 2016 just made me think that it was okay. Sorry.--Benjay2345 (talk) 21:27, January 5, 2018 (UTC)
          • That wasn't a leak, that was a released preview and those are fair game to be used --Lewisr (talk) 21:31, January 5, 2018 (UTC)
            • Oh, I could have sworn that was a leak. Guess I was wrong. Again, sorry.--Benjay2345 (talk) 21:32, January 5, 2018 (UTC)
              • If the information about the set is available in lego.com or an online retailer then yes, since we can assume they are aware of the image--DarthRuiz30 (talk) 21:34, January 5, 2018 (UTC)

Book titles Edit

Hello. Please stop moving book articles, since it's clear you have no idea what you're doing. We have a detailed codified policy for how to name book articles with regards to when and when not to include the Star Wars prefix. You should leave this to editors who are familiar with these policies. Thank you. Toprawa and Ralltiir (talk) 23:55, January 5, 2018 (UTC)

  • I was literally moving them back to where they would fit the policy. User:JMAS had moved The Force Awakens storybook to where it had Star Wars in the title so I changed The Last Jedi one to match it. I then looked at the policy concerning this and then changed the one I had changed to fit the policy and then changed the one User:JMAS had changed back to where it would fit the policy. He is who you should be telling about the policy. --Benjay2345 (talk) 00:16, January 6, 2018 (UTC)

Image source Edit

Please add the correct source for this image from wherever you found it or it will be deleted in accordance with our image policy. Thank you. Toprawa and Ralltiir (talk) 02:25, January 6, 2018 (UTC)

  • No, it's not acceptable to upload your own image to Imgur and call it a "source." If you do that again, you will be blocked for falsifying your sources. Toprawa and Ralltiir (talk) 03:02, January 6, 2018 (UTC)
    • I did not do that. That isn't my Imgur. That's literally where I found the image. I did a reverse image search and that person's Imgur popped up. Why are you accusing me of things I didn't do?--Benjay2345 (talk) 03:04, January 6, 2018 (UTC)
      • That Imgur URL tells viewers when the image was uploaded -- 19 minutes ago, as I type this, right about the time you added the URL to the file page in response to my request to source it. Either you uploaded it yourself, or I'm mistaken and that's one hell of a coincidence. In any event, it's impossible that you found this image there when you first uploaded it over 60 minutes ago. Toprawa and Ralltiir (talk) 03:14, January 6, 2018 (UTC)
        • I didn't upload it because that isn't my Imgur account but that is a different Imgur account than the one I found it on now that I look closer. The one that I found it on originally had many more posts than that. I can't seem to find the Imgur account that it was posted on before but I can assure that that isn't my Imgur account and I would never intentionally falsify my sources. Delete the image if you want to I guess but it is better than the one that was on the page before. I'll look and see again if I can find the Imgur account it was originally uploaded to.--Benjay2345 (talk) 03:19, January 6, 2018 (UTC)

Tallie Images Edit

Hi, please don't modify any of Tallie images I appreciate you're trying to help, but besides I'm using them for the article and my workbench its already been said larger is not higher quality--DarthRuiz30 (talk) 21:54, January 7, 2018 (UTC)

    • Okay, actually I was just about to revert the Tallie image back to how it had been. I found a scan of the VD online and it looked like it was in higher quality but then I analyzed the DPI of the image and noticed it wasn't. I'll revert it. Sorry.--Benjay2345 (talk) 21:56, January 7, 2018 (UTC)

Advice Edit

Instead of arguing in the summary comments because you disagree for an image punctuation use talk pages that's why they're there, right now Connix page has 12 changes just because you and another use disagree on punctuation. Mistakes happen and especially grammatical mistakes, but instead of just reverting and making an edit war. Ask the user on his talk page his reason or motives before coming to the 12 changes, maybe he's wrong or maybe its you, but without dialogue and asking you will never know. --DarthRuiz30 (talk) 04:21, January 11, 2018 (UTC)

  • I explained to him on his talk page concerning the proper grammar for the situation. In my opinion, the one who is correct is not the one creating the edit war the one who keeps reverting the correct grammar is the one edit warring. Grammar is not a subjective idea and is either correct or incorrect. My edit of the caption is the correct version and my explanation on User:JRT2010's talk page should clear that up. As far as mistakes go, I understand completely but after it is explained on someone's talk page and they continue to revert it, it is no longer a mistake.--Benjay2345 (talk) 04:26, January 11, 2018 (UTC)
    • Wookieepedia's three revert rule does not have any exceptions for being correct. Once you revert an article more than 3 times in 24 hours, you're in violation of the policy. You should be contacting an admin to help resolve the disagreement rather than engaging in back and forth reversions. - Brandon Rhea(talk) 04:28, January 11, 2018 (UTC)
      • As far as I am aware I don't believe I am in violation of the 3 revert rule as I was aware of this rule and I believe I only made 2 reversions but simply edited the caption multiple times which isn't against the rule as it only applies to reversions. I am indeed in the process of contacting an administrator. --Benjay2345 (talk) 04:31, January 11, 2018 (UTC)
        • The problem is that you contacted him after several revertions/corrections, but as I said try to contact the user before that happen, not suggesting you're wrong just an advice that will be helpful on the future, since this type of problems are common. Good luck and thanks--DarthRuiz30 (talk) 04:39, January 11, 2018 (UTC)

RE: Images bleeding into behind the scenes sectionEdit

"Connix sporting her blonde buns and a junior controller's uniform" is not grammatically correct, not if you want to add the full stop (i.e. period) at the end. The correct form would be "Connix sported blonde buns and a junior controller's uniform" or "Connix, sporting her blonde buns and a junior controller's uniform, was a Resistance officer during the Starkiller crisis."

Frankly, I'm not interested in having an edit war over one image, but both DarthRuiz and I feel that the article was better off while you're the only one resetting it back to the way you recently edited it. In the future, please take whatever disagreements you have to the talk page of the user or article in question as you are close to violating the three revert rule. JRT2010 (talk) 04:55, January 11, 2018 (UTC)

  • I took the disagreements I had to your talk page and you didn't respond for an extended amount of time. I gave you an extended explanation about exactly how the sentence was grammatically correct and you have offered no other information concerning this other than saying I am wrong. If you think I am wrong please explain why you think that. I may be mistaken but if I am just telling me I am wrong without any explanation helps nothing. Also, it seems a bit hypocritical to mention the fact that I was close to violating the three revert rule as you also were reverting it to the way you thought it would be. Both parties engaging in an "edit war" are at fault. I am sorry that I didn't take my disagreements to the talk page sooner and will do so next time. I am sorry if I made you feel bad in anyway and apologize for any misunderstanding this may have caused. Have a wonderful day!--Benjay2345 (talk) 19:13, January 11, 2018 (UTC)

Snoke's slippers Edit

Hey Benjay, I hope I didn't come off as too harsh when I reverted you earlier. You were indeed correct about the article's original image, but if an article is {{Inuse}}, I highly recommend that you talk to the article's editor via his or her talk page to discuss issues rather than reverting him or her. In any case, I hope my expansion of Snoke's slippers brings warm feelings to your heart. :P JangFett (Talk) 05:54, January 11, 2018 (UTC)

Delete Edit

Don't just tag for delete if the image is on use in more than one page, you can look for it (As sometimes I do when this happens), ask the user who uploaded, leave a message on the image talk page. Help instead of just rushing--DarthRuiz30 (talk) 23:27, January 12, 2018 (UTC)

  • On the talk page for Phasma an admin already expressed interest in deleting the image. As I said before the way I did it I had seen done many times before without the warning so I did it that way but I'll do it the way you have suggested next time.--Benjay2345 (talk) 23:29, January 12, 2018 (UTC)
    • Archived pages don't work as a normal page, for example the zoom in is not available on a archived page which is this case. If you have any doubts ask JMAS about the specifics. The image is sourced, please stop with it. --DarthRuiz30 (talk) 00:00, January 13, 2018 (UTC)
      • If you look at Fathead images on their website currently the zoom feature does not contain that high of quality of image and it never has. This image was found somewhere else and if the Fathead source is simply used as the source that should be considered falsifying sources.--Benjay2345 (talk) 00:03, January 13, 2018 (UTC)
        • As I said before here and last message of advice, don't engage on edit wars just for that. Ask the user, I haven't see you asking JMAS about it, go and ask him. The source given is the one I used just had to look for an actual working archive page. Go and ask the user if the image was taken from there if he modified the image, if maybe there was something not seen on the archive where he took the picture, it will not take you more than 5 minutes and instead of "correcting" the source which is there already--DarthRuiz30 (talk) 00:08, January 13, 2018 (UTC)
          • Except you aren't the one who uploaded the image so you don't know where the image came from. I will ask JMAS where he got the picture. I'm not saying your source is inherently wrong I just think we should leave the no source notices on the image until he confirms it which I believe is how it is supposed to be done instead of putting an unconfirmed source as the source. I have seen this done multiple times until the uploader confirms where the image is from. What's the issue putting the notices on the image just to make sure we verify the source? That is what the notices are made for.--Benjay2345 (talk) 00:11, January 13, 2018 (UTC)
            • Because the source that was there it was an actual source back then, fathead cleans the merchandise after periods for example if you go to the main page on an archived version of fathead it will be different for example Rogue One material which now is not available and all links with Rogue One content redirect to Fathead only, that's what happened there was a source, I didn't just looked for the image on the internet I wouldn't have find it that fast, the link that was there had the link to it and I just needed to look for the Phasma he posted since it went to a search url or at least that's how archive lead me to. Its not an unconfirmed source since the image is there, any variation is listed on other sources. For example an image from Fathead that later comes out on a book but cropped, both sources are valid. The only thing worth adding is the cropped note--DarthRuiz30 (talk) 00:19, January 13, 2018 (UTC)
              • This is not only a crop issue though. The image that was uploaded by User:JMAS seems much higher quality than any image that was ever available on Fathead's page. Again, not saying your wrong just being cautious. I have contacted JMAS concerning the source. Just wait to do anything else until he replies, maybe he'll have the actual source of the high quality image. --Benjay2345 (talk) 00:26, January 13, 2018 (UTC)

Blocked Edit

Dialog-error You have been blocked from editing for 2 hours for persistent edit-warring, a violation of Wookieepedia's 3RR policy. If you have a disagreement over an article with another user, the solution is not to engage in a back-and-forth reversion war. Take the issue to the article's talk page, the other user's talk page, or find an administrator to intervene. To contest this block, please contact the blocking administrator with the reason you believe the block is unjustified. Toprawa and Ralltiir (talk) 00:50, January 13, 2018 (UTC)

  • Hi, Benjay. Can you please come back on IRC if you're still around? Thanks. Toprawa and Ralltiir (talk) 01:34, January 13, 2018 (UTC)

Wookieepedia Twitter Edit

Hey, did you block the Wookieepedia Twitter account on your own account? I saw you were tweeting to Matt Martin but now all of a sudden I can't see your tweets anymore (including a recent reply), and it says the account is blocked. - Brandon Rhea(talk) 09:18, January 14, 2018 (UTC)

  • Whoops sorry. Didn't mean to do that. I've fixed it. Just curious why did you intervene in that thread saying that it was way more overblown than it needs to be. Its not really your decision what I invoke the Story Group over. I was just curious why you intervened in the thread. I was honestly just curious of their thematic intentions concerning the duel. --Benjay2345 (talk) 09:21, January 14, 2018 (UTC)
    • I happen to know some of the members of the Story Group, Matt in particular, and I can tell you that they are never going to tell you what Wookieepedia should do about something. Invoking Wookiepeedia is a surefire way of ensuring that they don't answer your question. They, rightly, do not approach canon and the minutiae of storytelling in the way that Wookieepedia does. - Brandon Rhea(talk) 09:24, January 14, 2018 (UTC)
      • I didn't ask them what Wookieepedia should do I simply just asked what their intentions were surrounding the duel. I wasn't intending to invoke Wookieepedia as why I wanted to know but was rather just stating that was where I saw the discussion creep up concerning the duel. It still didn't seem very professional of you in my opinion to simply reply to the thread discounting the question I had asked. --Benjay2345 (talk) 09:27, January 14, 2018 (UTC)
        • By saying it's a topic of "controversy" on Wookieepedia, you invoked Wookieepedia and made it about Wookieepedia whether you intended to or not. I and the admins of Wookieepedia would appreciate that, if you want to tweet questions at the Story Group, you do not invoke Wookieepedia while doing so because it reflects back onto the wiki when you do so. - Brandon Rhea(talk) 09:30, January 14, 2018 (UTC)
          • I would beg to differ that the Story Group isn't going to just simply think that this is a question coming from Wookieepedia itself when someone on his personal Twitter asks about something and simply cites Wookieepedia as the source of the controversy. Unless it comes directly from the Wookieepedia account I think it should be safely assumed that I am asking for my own knowledge. Either way, can you please just try not to be condescending if you reply to a tweet of mine. It doesn't reflect well on me and I don't appreciate it. Sorry if I seemed to invoke Wookieepedia but I don't think that the mere mention of Wookieepedia in my tweet should be enough for the Story Group to think I'm tweeting on behalf of them.--Benjay2345 (talk) 09:34, January 14, 2018 (UTC)
            • Sorry if this comes across as rude, but I'm more concerned about what they think of Wookieepedia than what they think of you. Whether you agree with it or not, when Wookieepedia is invoked, it reflects back on Wookieepedia. - Brandon Rhea(talk) 09:36, January 14, 2018 (UTC)
              • Don't apologize if you are just going to say something rude anyways lol. All things aside, and nothing personal, you just seem to come across as condescending a lot of times and I don't know if that's your intention or not so I don't judge. I'll be sure to never mention Wookieepedia in a tweet to the story group again as I wasn't aware of the drama it would cause.--Benjay2345 (talk) 09:39, January 14, 2018 (UTC)
                • Hey, just curious though, what do you think about the topic? Haha. Do you care if we call it a duel?--Benjay2345 (talk) 09:43, January 14, 2018 (UTC)
                  • Honestly? I couldn't care less. Calling it Dueling or Confronting or whatever doesn't matter to me. To me, what matters in a section header—like an introduction, or an infobox image—should be whatever calls the most attention to the subject. The lore is what goes within the section, not what you title it IMO. We have to remember that this is a wiki that caters to readers and what is interesting to readers, rather than what caters to our whims as people who know the lore inside and out. - Brandon Rhea(talk) 09:49, January 14, 2018 (UTC)
                    • Fair! I'll keep in mind all the things you said.--Benjay2345 (talk) 10:08, January 14, 2018 (UTC)

Solo poster Edit

Hi Benjay, you need to add a reliable source for that image, so far that person is not a source because it doesn't seems to work with Lucasfilm, Disney, fan sites, etc. You need a good source or something that says that poster was scanned or how he got it--DarthRuiz30 (talk) 20:46, January 15, 2018 (UTC)

  • Updated links.--Benjay2345 (talk) 20:53, January 15, 2018 (UTC)

RE:Images Edit

Sadly yes, images from a legends source can't be used on canon articles. Canon articles can only use canon source images--DarthRuiz30 (talk) 21:42, January 15, 2018 (UTC)

  • Has there been a CT to repeal this?--Benjay2345 (talk) 21:44, January 15, 2018 (UTC)
    • Yes, it was unsuccessful.--DarthRuiz30 (talk) 21:46, January 15, 2018 (UTC)
      • How long ago was that?--Benjay2345 (talk) 21:46, January 15, 2018 (UTC)
        • Not that long around 5 months--DarthRuiz30 (talk) 21:58, January 15, 2018 (UTC)
          • Okay, I was thinking of starting another CT but I'll wait a while longer.--Benjay2345 (talk) 22:13, January 15, 2018 (UTC)

Alternating Edit

If you're going to add images to a page, please at least go through and alternate the images left and right as per the layout guide --Lewisr (talk) 21:30, February 6, 2018 (UTC)

Images Edit

Don't forget to update the source for all your high quality additions, as you said to me before if the current link don't show the high quality image then it could be considered falsifying sources--DarthRuiz30 (talk) 03:19, February 18, 2018 (UTC)

Images Edit

No is not an improvement, you got the idea that a "higher"/larger quality is better for infoboxes, the film screenshot is better since its has a more clear shot of her face plus is looking to the front a requirement for infobox pictures. She's not even looking in front that picture plus is blurry, that image would be better for the P&T section, not the infobox. --DarthRuiz30 (talk) 02:18, February 23, 2018 (UTC)

Duel on Mustafar Edit

I'm not sure why there's any need to change the image, its been there since 2015. I'm also not quite sure what you mean, the image you're adding comes from a legends source and makes no mention about a poster --Lewisr (talk) 18:26, April 19, 2018 (UTC)

  • If you look at the bottom of the theatrical poster for ROTS (which is canon) there image of Anakin and Obi-Wan is clearly sourced from the image in question. My question is, if a canon image uses an image from a legends source as reference shouldn't that canonize the image itself? And as for changing the image its a much better infobox image as it clearly shows the duel.--Benjay2345 (talk) 00:56, April 20, 2018 (UTC)
    • That image is definitely not from the poster, just compare the two and you'll easily see why --Lewisr (talk) 01:01, April 20, 2018 (UTC)
      • If you look at the two the image was definitely used as reference for the illustration. Anakin is exactly the sane. The only difference is Obi-Wan's stance but there is no doubt that Struzan used this promotional image as reference for his illustration. I think that should make this image canon. --Benjay2345 (talk) 01:03, April 20, 2018 (UTC)
        • Not quite sure that's how it works, if you can get a better image from the film then feel free to change it but the other image is from a legends source and until a canon source uses it we can't use it on a canon page except in BTS --Lewisr (talk) 01:06, April 20, 2018 (UTC)

Advice Edit

Please stop removing the image, you've already broken the 3RR and that could lead to a cooldown block. The issue is already on discussion, feel free to give your opinion. Thanks!--DarthRuiz30 (talk) 06:02, April 21, 2018 (UTC)

  • Sorry for the misunderstanding but I was making sure that the original image stayed put until the discussion was finished because that is how it is supposed to happen. NightLily kept trying to change the image so I directed him to the discussion page.--Benjay2345 (talk) 06:05, April 21, 2018 (UTC)
    • All good. Just keep in mind that it won't hurt anyone to keep an image while the issue is discussed, that way you avoid the risk of any block or warning.--DarthRuiz30 (talk) 06:08, April 21, 2018 (UTC)

Tonnika sisters‎‎Edit

Where are the Tonnika sisters‎‎ mentioned in Solo? --Lewisr (talk) 06:22, May 26, 2018 (UTC)

  • I believe that they were mentioned when Val said she could have hired either Bossk or them. --Benjay2345 (talk) 06:44, May 26, 2018 (UTC)
    • Figured it would be there, but that's the Xan sisters --Lewisr (talk) 06:46, May 26, 2018 (UTC)
      • Oops, forgive my mistake. Got my sisters mixed up lol.--Benjay2345 (talk) 06:51, May 26, 2018 (UTC)
        • Haha no worries, we all do those kinda things at times --Lewisr (talk) 06:53, May 26, 2018 (UTC)

Old Luke image Edit

Hey Benjay. Couple of things:

  1. There's currently a bug that is breaking files when you upload a new version over it. By uploading a new version of the Luke image over the current one, the bug is breaking the image.
  2. Additionally, the previous one is the version that 9 people have so far voted on, so it's inappropriate to change it unless everyone who has voted agrees to it.

Thanks. - Brandon Rhea(talk) 01:46, August 1, 2018 (UTC)

  • Okay, I won't change it, sorry, hadn't considered that. Also, I only tried to change it once and for some reason it shows a bunch of uploads so I'm not sure what that's all about, must be something to do with that bug.--Benjay2345 (talk) 01:49, August 1, 2018 (UTC)

User image policyEdit

Please be advised that although the general image policy specifies that uploads for article use should be of the highest quality available, the user image policy specifies that the total file size of userpage images cannot exceed 500 kilobytes. You have uploaded a user image that exceeds this limit by more than ten times, thus it has been deleted per policy. You may reupload your user image once this is corrected. -- Darth Culator (Talk) 00:13, October 19, 2018 (UTC)

Lightsaber duelsEdit

Look through the history before you keep reverting, it was deleted 3 times before so why all of a sudden would it be okay to keep now? I don't care about the Luke/Kylo thing, that has nothing to do with anything, there's a category for duels so its already redundant to list every single one --Lewisr (talk) 20:54, January 8, 2019 (UTC)

  • The fact that multiple people keep reverting it shows that there is disagreement among the masses about it. I suggested you bring it the talk page before changing it which would be the proper thing to do. Figure out what the masses on here what rather than just editing to what you think should be. Not trying to be rude, just think taking it to the talk page which be a much more mature way of handling it.--Benjay2345 (talk) 20:56, January 8, 2019 (UTC)
    • 2 people is not really a big consensus to determine that I shouldn't revert it, at that point it is your opinion/my opinion and the original editors opinion. There's no guarantee that taking to the talk page would even get a resolution so its best to do what's been done previously and just remove the lists and leave it to the duels category --Lewisr (talk) 21:02, January 8, 2019 (UTC)

I’m Trevor Jaco. 71.209.218.252 20:40, May 27, 2019 (UTC)

ImagesEdit

I'll let you know, that you're the only one that want it to change. There's no need to add the other one, that one VF image looks perfectly fine and its better for the infobox. In all cases, you're the one that needs to take it to the talk page.--DarthRuiz30 (talk) 07:46, July 20, 2019 (UTC)

  • First of all, you have never brought it up on the talk page so you wouldn't know if I'm the only one who wants it as that image. And no I don't need to bring it up on a talk page because the image I reverted it to is the image of old Lando that was originally used in the infobox. To change it you should have brought it up on the talk page.Why would we want to use as low of quality of image as that Vanity Fair one for the infobox? Also, see comment above on my talk page by Brandon Rhea in section "Vanity Fair Photos" where he explicitly states that low quality Vanity Fair images should not be used and should be taken as photos of the actors not the characters. The only time this is allowed is when no higher quality image exists or when no other image of the character exists (such as Pryde or Zorri Bliss). --Benjay2345 (talk) 07:49, July 20, 2019 (UTC)
    • First of all, calm down. If you want it so bad changed ask on the talk page, you're known for causing this revert wars with editors for simple images. I recommend you to go to the talk page and ask before reverting. As I said, in my opinion, this way better suited for an infobox, so I ask you to go to the talk page and ask. You can't wait a couple of days to hear opinions? Its been there for way too long, that a couple of days wouldn't hurt. As an admin, I ask you to please take it to the talk page, to see everybody's opinion.--DarthRuiz30 (talk) 07:56, July 20, 2019 (UTC)
      • Why are you telling me to calm down? You are have also been know for getting into revert wars for the same reason so you're kind of like the pot calling the kettle black in this situation. Just because you're an admin now doesn't change your past scuffles (I seem to remember you getting temporarily banned for something like this. You'd think now that you're an admin you'd be a little more mature about it.) Go ahead and leave it but I'm not sure why exactly previous rules about Vanity Fair images are just getting tossed out of the window this time around? And this isn't exactly a simple image. Its the inbox image of one of an important character in the saga. These images used to be taken very seriously and never used to be allowed to have such low quality images as this one.--Benjay2345 (talk) 08:02, July 20, 2019 (UTC)
      • Your fist comment I felt it a little bit aggresive so that's why, I apologize if I misinterpreted your message. I'm not shining an admin badge and saying You can't do it and it stays like that, I'm just asking to ask before doing it, as you said is one of the main characters, so I think that VF looks better than a trailer shot to represent him, even if its "lower" quality. Again, I apologize if I came aggressive to you or if you misunderstood my words.--DarthRuiz30 (talk) 08:15, July 20, 2019 (UTC)
        • I accept your apology and I apologize if I came off aggressive to start with, tbh it did seem like you were flashing your admin badge lol sorry I misinterpreted that.I might actually see if I can find a higher quality version of that Vanity Fair shot. I think one might exist. Sorry again for any misinterpretation or perceived aggressiveness. Was not my intentions. Just want the pages to look their best which I'm sure is your mission as well! Hope there is no hard feelings. --Benjay2345 (talk) 08:18, July 20, 2019 (UTC)
          • I'm sorry it seemed that way. Absolutely, there's a reason of why all of us end up in this website, we just want to see this place get better. And no hard feelings, we all are part of this community and work together to improve it. That could be really useful and hopefully there's one higher quality--DarthRuiz30 (talk) 08:25, July 20, 2019 (UTC)

ImagesEdit

As you can see here, here and here, I've done this for several users, its not my fault that you did the same thing. The Jedi-Bibliothek thing is how I've enforced several times, so don't believe that's a "Personal" thing, not my fault that you see it that way. Just because something exists already like that, it doesn't mean that it should continue to be done like that. You think that because someone added fanon years ago, and hasn't been discovered, someone should continue to do it today? I know that Jedi-Bibliothek exists, I follow them, but that doesn't make me go immediately and grab the image, I know that in two or one day Penguin Random House will update their website and add the image. So don't think that its something unique that if we don't get it now its going to dissapear. The cover is fine, it can be used for the meantime while an official source updates their website. "You are going to make it where contributors like myself won't want to contribute", that's up to you, I'm just enforcing the rule how I've done it for several times--DarthRuiz30 (talk) 01:21, July 22, 2019 (UTC)

  • The reason people tend to use Jedi Bibliotek and why it has been allowed before is because they tend to have much higher quality images of the covers. There shouldn't be anything wrong with adding it as a source (and in fact many times people have gotten reverted for not putting the exact source of the higher quality image). To me it seems like you are enforcing this rule (a rule that's been played fast and loose) just for the sake of enforcing the rule. That goes back to the "flashing your admin badge" that we had discussed before lol. Is there actual any rule that specifically states we can't use Jedi Bibliotek? Also, wouldn't it be nice to add that source to the image just so its 100 percent known where the higher quality version of the image originated?--Benjay2345 (talk) 01:27, July 22, 2019 (UTC)
    • Jedi-Bibliothek has been reverted by myself (even without adminship) and other admins and users, so stop suggesting that "for the sake of enforcing the rule" and "flashing my admin badge" otherwise it could be considered rudeness (incivility). Just because it was done doesn't mean its okay to continue, that's why users enforce the no-JediBibliothek as a source. Why the obsession to have a high quality now, when its going to be there in two days with an official source. While writing this I found a Peguin Random House website with the image, so why can't you do the same? Why grab the first image you see and just run with it? We try to link at all officials websites, such as publishers, SW.com, Websites with exclusives (comics previews), artists, etc. I'm going to delete both the obsolete and the one you uploaded so I can add the new one and its archive link. --DarthRuiz30 (talk) 01:37, July 22, 2019 (UTC)
      • FYI, Brandon is not an admin.--DarthRuiz30 (talk) 01:38, July 22, 2019 (UTC)
        • I didn't say that Brandon was an admin? I simply asked him a question because I know he has been around this wiki for a long time (longer than both of us). What's the point of deleting the other images? Just add a new version of the image? And if the Penguin one isn't as high of quality why add it. It has always been the mission of this sub to try and have the highest quality images possible. When did this change? The version of the book cover that I posted is higher quality. Even if it is from a source that isn't considered credible it is visibly the exact same image as the official one and that has always been enough. Remember when you accused me of being "known for causing this revert wars with editors for simple images." That seems pretty rude to me and your entire behavior towards me seems more rude than anything I've said to you. If the image must be the exact same image as the one from an official source you better go check every image on this wiki because countless images on here (including other Visual Dictionary covers) are sourced to official sources but then use a higher quality version of the same image. That png version should not be deleted. It is sourced to an official source and simply uses a higher quality image of the cover. That is and always has been fine. --Benjay2345 (talk) 01:44, July 22, 2019 (UTC)
          • Asking Brandon gives the appearance of appealing to Wikia Staff as if they are a higher authority, which is frowned upon here. Even if he took your side, nobody would be likely to be swayed by his support. And we do prefer higher quality images, but only if they can be traced to a proper source. Except in exceptionally limited circumstances, one wiki is not a source for another wiki. Whataboutism is also not an excuse, and eventually all improperly sourced images will either be properly sourced or deleted. Ruiz may or may not have been singling you out, but thanks to your attitude, now I will be. Good job. -- Darth Culator (Talk) 01:51, July 22, 2019 (UTC)
            • As I noted on my talk page, even if I disagreed with Ruiz and Culator (which I do not), I have no grounds on which to overrule them. Even if I was an admin, admins here have administrative autonomy. So just to be clear, I don't have anything else to add to this convo beyond that. - Brandon Rhea(talk) 01:59, July 22, 2019 (UTC)
            • I am sorry that I offended you or something when I asked Brandon but I really wasn't trying to overstep your authority or anything of the likes. I was simply asking someone who I have been in contact with on here before about the rule. I didn't say you were wrong I was just trying to figure out exactly what rule I was breaking by source it to Jedi Bibliotek. You guys are talking to me about my attitude when you are being sarcastic and rude to me more than I am to you. Its just my opinion but it seems to me that as admins you wouldn't "single me out" even if I had an attitude (which I don't, I am simply making observations that you guys are mad at me about). What exactly are you singling me out for? Trying to upload the highest quality images possible which for as long as I remember was protocol? What exactly is the problem with uploading an image that is exactly identical (other than the resolution) to an officially sourced image? Will you tell me why this action (which has been done since I've been on this wiki) is suddenly so taboo? I thought that admins were supposed to be mature about disagreements not threatening to "single me out" because I disagree with them. All that aside, I just want to know why exactly we can't use higher quality images if they are identical to officially sourced images?--Benjay2345 (talk) 02:03, July 22, 2019 (UTC)
              • It's not about the quality. It's about the source. Jedi Bibliotek is a fan site, not a primary source, so your source should be wherever they got it. Using Jedi Bibliotek would be like using Wookieepedia as a source. We're just compiling primary sources, but we're not a source unto ourselves. - Brandon Rhea(talk) 02:06, July 22, 2019 (UTC)
                • So by that logic the current higher quality version of File:The Rise of Skywalker Visual Dictionary Cover.jpg should be reverted for falsified sourcing information because it didn't actually come from StarWars.com? The one on StarWars.com isn't that high of resolution. --Benjay2345 (talk) 02:10, July 22, 2019 (UTC)
                  • I can't speak to that since I'm not familiar with the sourcing involved, but as Culator told you, two wrongs don't make a right. "By that logic" is by matter of Wookieepedia policy. - Brandon Rhea(talk) 02:11, July 22, 2019 (UTC)
                    • Just to end this, I've found the exact same image from Bibliothek in a official Random House website, I will upload it soon and replace the current one. That's my final word in this.--DarthRuiz30 (talk) 02:12, July 22, 2019 (UTC)
                      • Given that I can't add edit summaries in file's reverts. That TFA Visual Dic image can be found in the website originally sourced. You need to click the image and download the High Res image.--DarthRuiz30 (talk) 02:32, July 22, 2019 (UTC)

TFA Vis DicEdit

Can you give me the reason of why this should be deleted?? Is the exact same image, both of them gotten from their respective website (I've downloaded both images from both websites). So, whats the reason?--DarthRuiz30 (talk) 02:52, July 22, 2019 (UTC)

  • You reverted the source on the original image which I thought meant it had the same bug as the Allegiance image you deleted yesterday. If not why did you change the source?--Benjay2345 (talk) 02:57, July 22, 2019 (UTC)
    • That wasn't what I meant. I'm asking why you reuploaded the same image that was gotten from two different websites, this has the correct source, and you're just reuploading it with the newly discovered website. I don't see the point of deleting it, if you're just uploading it again.--DarthRuiz30 (talk) 03:00, July 22, 2019 (UTC)
      • It doesn't have the correct source. The original image is sourced to a website that doesn't have the "Download High Quality" button so the image didn't come from that website. Also, since I re uploaded it with because of the bug wouldn't we want to delete the duplicate as we normally do?--Benjay2345 (talk) 03:04, July 22, 2019 (UTC)
        • It does have the image, there's a link in that website to download it, I'm going to delete your upload since the orginal was the first one. To see the image move your pointer to the lower right of the image int he website and there's a clickable thingy, then there's a a Download Hig Res.--DarthRuiz30 (talk) 03:07, July 22, 2019 (UTC)
          • Oh, dang! Sorry I didn't see that before. It wouldn't pop up until I refreshed my page for some reason. My bad.--Benjay2345 (talk) 03:10, July 22, 2019 (UTC)
            • No worries. Good you know now.--DarthRuiz30 (talk) 03:11, July 22, 2019 (UTC)

Cite webEdit

If you're going to post links to external links, rather than lazily just putting the url, you need to use the actual template and fill it out. --Lewisr (talk) 23:58, August 29, 2019 (UTC)

  • Hey, sorry about that! I had somehow forgotten about these templates. I've fixed the one on the Jannah image and will be sure to keep doing that.--Benjay2345 (talk) 03:39, August 30, 2019 (UTC)
    • No worries its cool! Thanks for fixing it --Lewisr (talk) 03:44, August 30, 2019 (UTC)
      • Due to an issue with Fandom, within the Information template on images after it has been uploaded, a new link that contains http:// or https:// cannot be added. They have not figured out why or how to fix it. So in the future, before you upload the image, please complete the {{Cite web}} web template with an archive link to the source website using either The Wayback Machine or Archive Today. Thanks. - JMAS Jolly Trooper Hey, it's me! 03:52, August 30, 2019 (UTC)
        • Besides what JMAS has told you, please give your files proper names, not just random numbers. Per policy you can see that you can see that "Filenames should preferably be relevant to the subject matter." and "Do not simply name your file as a random alphanumeric string." As you can read File:Jannah-TheRiseofSkywalker.jpg is way more useful and informative than File:StarWars95d6842c0e32e3.jpg. So keep that in mind--DarthRuiz30 (talk) 04:59, August 30, 2019 (UTC)
Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.

Stream the best stories.