Contributing to Wikipedia is quite fun and not enough people do it. You don't even need to make an account.
I contribute to Wikipedia already by improving maths articles, so I know the process. Your comment appears to have incorrectly assumed certain things, and worse still, you've tried to educate me in a rather patronising manner. I don't think that's in the spirit of HN.
How is this not in the spirit of HN? Sure you might already know, but are we not to share knowledge/opinion because readers might already know it?
Plus, other people (like me) also read these comments, and they might lack relevant knowledge... educating is not a bad thing.
If the OP's comment is for the good of the wider community, it should probably not contain a friendly yet subtle insult to the tune of "rather than just criticising, get off your backside and do something about it, you might even enjoy it".
And I'd be very surprised if someone reading HN is unaware that Wikipedia can be edited...
While their language is mild and friendly, their message is utterly patronising.
To me, that is not patronizing. Just like your original comment about the photos and the original reply, this is all subjective.
That you chose to take offense to subjective, measured comments is something you may want to spend time considering.
> you could go find better examples (with a free license) or take your own and add them to the article.
That
> they decide to explain to me that I can edit Wikipedia!
is simply untrue. Had that been the case, I’m sure everyone would agree it was patronising.
However it does not say "you can edit Wikipedia," more like "if you think there is a problem, you are free to fix the problem."
Indeed English can be ambiguous, but I do not think that can be interpreted as patronizing.