Jraymond425

Welcome!

Hello, Jraymond425, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, such as File:Shooting Foul Shot.jpg, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's content policies and may not be retained. In short, the topic of an article must be notable and have already been the subject of publication by reliable and independent sources.

Please review Your first article for an overview of the article creation process. The Article Wizard is available to help you create an article, where it will be reviewed and considered for publication. For information on how to request a new article that can be created by someone else, see Requested articles. If you are stuck, come to the Teahouse, where experienced Wikipedians can help you through the processes.

New to Wikipedia? Please consider taking a look at the our introductory tutorial or reviewing the contributing to Wikipedia page to learn the basics about editing. Below are a few other good pages about article creation.

• Article development
• Standard layout
• Lead section
• How to write a great article
• The perfect article

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions ask me on my talk page or you can just type {{help me}} on this page, followed by your question, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! Praxidicae (talk) 11:59, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Shooting Foul Shot.jpg

A tag has been placed on File:Shooting Foul Shot.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F9 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the file appears to be a blatant copyright infringement of https://www.gettyimages.com/photos/val-whiting. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images taken from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use it — which means allowing other people to use it for any reason — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. The same holds if you are not the owner but have their permission. If you are not the owner and do not have permission, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for how you may obtain it. You might want to look at Wikipedia's copyright policy for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Praxidicae (talk) 11:59, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

August 2020

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted.

• If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively, you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
• If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. — Blablubbs ^{(talk • contribs)} 18:13, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

Please stop your disruptive editing.

• If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
• If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing. — Blablubbs ^{(talk • contribs)} 18:15, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at Val Whiting. Praxidicae (talk) 18:20, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

@Jraymond425: I do not know how better to alert you to the issues that you keep restoring. You've been warned, so I suggest you thoroughly read through this page before you get blocked. No one is trying to hide anything, no one is vandalizing the article. We are trying to maintain integrity here and follow policy that does not allow for unsourced content about living persons. Additionally, we do not allow advertorial material. Praxidicae (talk) 18:30, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Val Whiting Minnesota Lynx.jpg

A tag has been placed on File:Val Whiting Minnesota Lynx.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F9 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the file appears to be a blatant copyright infringement of https://www.gettyimages.com/photos/val-whiting. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images taken from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use it — which means allowing other people to use it for any reason — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. The same holds if you are not the owner but have their permission. If you are not the owner and do not have permission, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for how you may obtain it. You might want to look at Wikipedia's copyright policy for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Praxidicae (talk) 18:21, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

August 2020

You have been blocked from editing from certain pages (Val Whiting) for a period of 48 hours for edit warring. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  GeneralNotability (talk) 18:29, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

You were partially blocked from Val Whiting in order to allow for civil discussion on the article talk page, not to allow you to go to individual user talk pages to personally attack them. Stop now, or the block will be changed to site wide.-- Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 18:55, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 48 hours for abuse of editing privileges. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 19:18, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

• As you are making unfounded accustions against other editors to the point of hounding as opposed to actually reviewing the policy-based reasons for the revert of your edits, I've changed your block to be site wide. Please take this time to review all the messages provided to you by various editors above as well as here and here and ensure you discuss your proposed changes on the article talk page once the block expires as opposed to continuing to edit war. Here are two core policies to get you started: WP:BLP and WP:V.-- Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 19:18, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
• @GeneralNotability:, please note the block modification and let me know if you have any concerns.-- Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 19:18, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

  Ponyo, thanks for the ping, no objections here. GeneralNotability (talk) 19:28, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

I didn't hound anyone. I replied to two messages. A user deliberately deleting info that was sourced and replaced it with unsourced info and I'm the problem? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jraymond425 (talk • contribs) 19:52, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

Jraymond425, please sign your talk page posts by typing four tildes (~~~~) at the end of your comment. The block of content you repeatedly tried to add had no sources whatsoever. It may be based on a source, but you're required to provide a reference when you add contested information to any biography of a living person; see our policy on that matter. You also may not repeatedly undo other editors' edits; wee WP:3RR for our policy on that. Calling another editor a "vandal" is a personal attack and not allowed. Fourth and finally, it is a very bad idea to ignore warnings from administrators on your talk page. Please keep these things in mind when your block expires; editors who reoffend are not treated kindly. Thank you. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 20:22, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

I added a reference and the person deleted it anyway AND added false info. Why is that ok? And I didnt see the warnings bc I never been on the talk page before today. I thought the person was a vandal bc he/she deleted info and replaced with false info AFTER I replaced it w info and a source. The person undid my edits repeatedly and people have been vandalizing this page so the timing is suspect.Jraymond425 (talk) 20:31, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

I literally explained to you on my own talk page which you edited, here which you also edited and in every single edit summary. You continued insisting that I had an ulterior motive and that I was a vandal when I pointed you directly to policies that would help you. You never once provided a source for the content and you are still insisting that editors who are abiding by policy are out to get you/Val Whiting when it's the opposite; we're here to try and preserve the integrity of Wikipedia and prevent unsourced content from being introduced into her article. You'll also notice that I even sourced some of the current content since you failed to do so. Praxidicae (talk) 20:37, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

I literally put the source next to her scoring averages in the chart. That was something I did this morning.. IT was from this source: https://www.statscrew.com/womensbasketball/stats/p-whitiva01w Go look at the change. Nww you have completely deleted it IF you are not out to get her, why replace the scoring information with fake numbers then? DOesn't make sense. That negatively affects her sports rep. You deleted information that is known about this player. Like having a child in the off-season for example or winning 4 state championships in high school . That's not integrity. Remember the internet was not around for the majority of her career. You yourself said you dont know anything about "sportsball" but you want to edit an article of an athlete. smhJraymond425 (talk) 20:49, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

No, you did not. Did something about when I said "the block of content you repeatedly tried to add had no sources whatsoever" lead you to believe that I did not look at it? This edit, which you restored seven times, and does not have a source in it? If you intended to provide a source but did not, then perhaps a mistake has been made and we can move forward. But as of right now no source has been provided for this information. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 20:51, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

First of all, your source doesn't even support the content or the scores. I don't have to know anything about a particular sport to be able to read a source and assess whether it's correct or not. Secondly this is not a reliable source and third, the large swaths of unsourced promotional text never had a source. I'll also note that this article doesn't appear to have ever been vandalized, so you'll need to apologize to several editors for that. Your continued insinuation that others are out to get Val Whiting is also unacceptable and I suggest you take in what you're being told rather than continuing to argue. Praxidicae (talk) 20:52, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

And perhaps instead of doing the internet equivalent of screaming at someone, you could use this as a teachable/learning moment and listen to the advice of at least 5 very experienced editors who have been editing Wikipedia for a combined total that goes beyond 3 decades. Praxidicae (talk) 20:57, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

I am assuming my answer keeps not coming through bc of the block. BUt Vals page was vandalized. She is being bullied online. Her height was changed to 4'11" two times during that period Here is the article about her getting bullied for reference : https://www.king5.com/article/news/local/val-whiting-tiktok-bullying/281-a6f27a4a-9a66-47ef-bf9b-78c9938b2034 Second the source for the stats are valid and are supported. I dont think you know how to read stats. You might be looking at the total and not the averages which is the second chart. Why replace w bogus numbers? How is that better that what I was doing? Thats totally disrespectful to the athlete. Here is the page I edited where the source was ignored in the scoring section: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Val_Whiting&oldid=971530356 Jraymond425 (talk) 21:47, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

Jraymond425 Have you read any of the policies or links provided to you? Praxidicae (talk) 00:18, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

Val Whiting

I also saw the King5 story about Val Whiting being targeted by TikTok bullies. If her bio has been targeted by vandals it would be good to protect it. My impression is that Jayraymond425 is a novice editor who could use some help to fulfill the potential to be a successful editor. I want to try to improve the Val Whiting article using RS, of which there are several that can improve the article, IMO. I don't know much about basketball, so I hope Jayraymond425 will also advise me about improvements to the article. HouseOfChange (talk) 23:56, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

HouseOfChange I'd normally agree with you but I went through nearly every edit in the articles history and there is no vandalism to be found. Let's not encourage this accusation. Praxidicae (talk) 00:17, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

They may have been referring to some other page being vandalized? Tiktok for instance? ((Update: One person did vandalize height (July 29). Height got changed a second time to 4'11" by Jay Raymond undoing his own edit before fixing it at 6'3"))Praxidicae First, I greatly respect and admire your work on Wikipedia. That's how I ended up your talkpage stalker and heard about this kerfluffle. But it reminded me a lot of a different episode recently elsewhere when a novice editor who identified as a person of color arrived to "right a great wrong," got knuckles rapped, got mad, ended up blocked. I am hoping not to see that sequence again here. I am hoping we can all improve this article in a way that benefits Wikipedia. HouseOfChange (talk) 02:34, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

References

I am actually Val Whiting's son and yes I am a novice. And yes the site was vandalized when kids went in and changed the height to 4'11". I changed it back 2 times. My mom is very stressed right now because of the harassment and bullying. When I saw all the info erased, I assumed it was the kids messing with her page again. Look at the height here: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Val_Whiting&oldid=970184319 I believe this is another person changing my mother's point total and saaying it was a typo and it wasn't. Changed it to really low amounts and she is accomplished: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Val_Whiting&oldid=971044509 THen undid my revision and changed her height again: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Val_Whiting&oldid=970198380Jraymond425 (talk) 02:46, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia, Val Whiting's son :) you have a cool mom who has obviously had a notable career and is still going strong. It will be great to improve her article, but we need to follow Wikipedia rules about sources and language to accomplish that. The best way for you to participate will be to make suggestions on the article talk page, for two reasons. First, since you are a novice your good ideas probably need to be "translated" (using Wikipedia rules) into sentences for an encyclopedia article. Second, since you are close to Val Whiting that creates what Wikipedia calls a "conflict of interest." (Basically, the "interest" of Wikipedia is to have neutral encyclopedia articles and the "interest" of biography subjects and their friends is usually to have warm, enthusiastic colorful articles that read like a magazine profile.) Anyway, Praxidicae who is a very experienced and good editor and even an administrator here has your mom's article on her watchlist and so do I (much less experienced than she is but on the other hand a person who spends a ton of time every day on Wikipedia) so any of those 4'11" vandals won't last long. My experience with vandals is that they usually get bored attacking somebody fairly soon and go off to try to upset somebody else, so I hope this will happen for your mom very soon. I am sure it makes her feel better that you want to help her. HouseOfChange (talk) 03:33, 7 August 2020 (UTC)