User talk:Einsof

Archives

Index Archive 1

This page has archives. Topics inactive for 365 days are automatically archived by ClueBot III if there are more than 5.

Welcome! (We can't say that loudly enough!)

Hello, Einsof, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages you might find helpful:

• Be Bold!
• Learn from others
• Be kind to others
• Contribute, Contribute, Contribute!
• Tell us a bit about yourself
• Our great guide to Wikipedia

If you have any questions or problems, no matter what they are, leave me a message on my talk page. Or, please come to the new contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{Help me}} on your user talk page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions.

Please sign your name on talk pages and votes by typing four tildes (~~~~); our software automatically converts it to your username and the date.

We're so glad you're here! Meatsgains (talk) 02:53, 31 August 2017 (UTC)Reply

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Charlie Kirk, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A bare URL and missing title error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 22:01, 10 September 2025 (UTC)Reply

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Shooting of Charlie Kirk, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A missing title error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 04:08, 11 September 2025 (UTC)Reply

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Rebecca Kutler, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A bare URL and missing title error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 14:29, 11 September 2025 (UTC)Reply

In my edit summary for this edit[1], by "the article", I meant "this Wikipedia article". The source mentioned it in the headline, but that has nothing to do with whether this is suitable material for the lead of a Wikipedia article. Anyways, I've opened a section on the talk page if you'd like to discuss it further. Please do not reinsert challenged material without consensus. Red Rock Canyon (talk) 06:19, 18 September 2025 (UTC)Reply

You already received the ping, but because it's ANI I'm dotting i's and crossing t's with this notification: see the relevant ANI section. As you were involved in the disputes leading up to this ANI thread, you may find it of interest to participate aside from my criticism of one of your comments at RobertoBriago's talk page. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 17:59, 23 October 2025 (UTC)Reply

Fair point regarding this. Do you think it merits mentioning on the MTA Bridges and Tunnels article? Epicgenius (talk) 01:02, 2 November 2025 (UTC)Reply

It may belong somewhere where the MTA tolling schemes are talked about more generally. The other issue I had is that the point of that source seems to be that some drivers claimed to have not received sufficient notification of tolls owed, or that the MTA's process for forgiving toll/fee debt is nontransparent. That is not the same as tolls/fees being assessed incorrectly. Those also seem like claims that are broad enough that they ought to be reflected in multiple sources. Einsof (talk) 11:12, 2 November 2025 (UTC)Reply

I give you credit for completely confusing me. You think that the coverage at Globalize the Intifada is too long, yet at the same time you think that the [proposed] coverage in the Zohran Mamdani article is too short?
I guess you like to keep people on their toes? 😊 Green Montanan (talk) 22:59, 2 November 2025 (UTC)Reply

It will be less confusing if you read the sections of the NPOV policy on due weight and balance. Einsof (talk) 03:39, 3 November 2025 (UTC)Reply

Deciding what's due and what's undue is obviously subjective. That's why you confused me. Green Montanan (talk) 03:49, 3 November 2025 (UTC)Reply

The redirect "Merrily We Roll Along" (DuPont Show of the Week) has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 November 17 § "Merrily We Roll Along" (DuPont Show of the Week) until a consensus is reached. Happy Editing -- IAmChaos 22:22, 17 November 2025 (UTC)Reply

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Neutral point of view/Noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Coretheapple (talk) 19:25, 1 January 2026 (UTC)Reply

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page 2026 United States strikes in Venezuela, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A missing title error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 19:25, 3 January 2026 (UTC)Reply

Please stop. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy by adding commentary and your personal analysis into articles, as you did at Killing of Renée Good, you may be blocked from editing. You need to stop adding "widely" and "widely debunked" to the lead in opposition to more neutral wording. Veggies (talk) 01:20, 9 January 2026 (UTC)Reply

Veggies, if you are referring to Special:Diff/1331940736, you should have noticed from the edit summary that it was accidental due to intervening edits. Do not make accusations like this against me without sufficient evidence in the future. Einsof (talk) 01:24, 9 January 2026 (UTC)Reply

I'm getting close to calling you a liar. Your edit above was not a reversion to some prior edit, it was manually done. Additionally, you've been trying to add "debunked" and "widely debunked" repeatedly already from more neutral terms. -- Veggies (talk) 01:30, 9 January 2026 (UTC)Reply

The word "widely" was removed Special:Diff/1331940585 two minutes before I hit the "publish changes" button. It took me longer than two minutes to reduce the text in the subsection that I was editing. Einsof (talk) 01:50, 9 January 2026 (UTC)Reply

You would have received an edit-conflict notice if that were true, warning you about intermediate edits. -- Veggies (talk) 09:55, 9 January 2026 (UTC)Reply

When I made my mistakes in the same article, i did not get EC notice. Interestingly to note: the user itself got blocked. Amtiss, SNAFU ? 15:49, 11 January 2026 (UTC)Reply

can‘t edit Even the Talk Page

Eyewitnesses for conflicting orders are three; Three: NYT; Mr Janeksela „agents yelled at her to move“, Huffpost Heller "screaming at her to ‘move, move, move," MPR Callenson: "but ICE gave her orders to leave"

NYT and Huffington Post: ^[1][2]

Regards--Ossobe (talk) 11:20, 14 January 2026 (UTC)Reply

Thanks. I think in this case we need a source saying explicitly that the orders were conflicting. It seems like the MPR source does that; not sure about the Huffington Post or NYT sources. Einsof (talk) 13:14, 14 January 2026 (UTC)Reply

I can see your point.

how about presenting this on the talk page to let more authors weigh up whether the information in the article (with one witness) can be called correct

Regards--Ossobe (talk) 15:29, 15 January 2026 (UTC)Reply

The source for my addition is the cited paper itself. Have you read it? If you had, you would see that the paper itself is verification. Pamela Miller (talk) 01:52, 16 January 2026 (UTC)Reply

The study says, "For context, background levels in the New York City metropolitan area during the study period averaged ~8–9 μg/m³, meaning the observed reduction represents ~22% decline from the counterfactual mean of 13.8 μg/m³ that would have occurred in the absence of the policy." Separately, there is a paragraph later on that describes their controls. This is not *discounting* background levels. This is *accounting for* background levels. Einsof (talk) 02:49, 16 January 2026 (UTC)Reply

Later on is this paragraph:

To isolate local emissions from regional background pollution, we selected four upwind background monitoring sites. These stations were chosen based on two criteria: (1) their persistent positioning upwind of the CRZ under dominant west and northwest wind conditions, as shown in seasonal wind rose patterns (Fig. 3A); and (2) their minimal influence from proximate traffic or industrial emission sources. consistent representation of transported background PM2.5 levels, which were subtracted from city-wide measurements to calculate net PM2.5, thus isolating the local-scale impact of congestion pricing on ambient air quality.

Background pollution levels were "subtracted," i.e. they were discounted. Pamela Miller (talk) 03:08, 16 January 2026 (UTC)Reply

Background pollution levels were subtracted in order to arrive at the net PM_2.5 generated within the CRZ. As per the sentence I cited earlier, the background levels are brought in again to compute the percentage decrease in peak pollution. Einsof (talk) 16:05, 16 January 2026 (UTC)Reply

Background levels were subtracted in order to heighten the alleged local-scale impact. In the paragraph you quoted from, a counterfactual of 13.8 μg/m³ with a background of 8-9 μg/m³ implies a local concentration of 5.8-4.8 μg/m³. A reduction of 3.05 μg/m³ means a reduction of 52%-64% in local PM2.5 concentration, which includes PM2.5 from building boilers, power plants, etc. The paper also claims a -4.9 μg/m³ change by week 20, implying a local-scale reduction of 84%-100%. Something is wrong here. But rather than debate what, I would rather drop the offending sentence and go back to the 09:48, January 6, 2026, version which had references to two other papers that came to the opposite conclusion, i.e. that congestion pricing had little to no effect on air pollution. Pamela Miller (talk) 20:09, 16 January 2026 (UTC)Reply

3.05 µg/m³ is the value given within the CRZ specifically; 8–9 µg/m³ is a value range given for the NYC metropolitan area in aggregate. Einsof (talk) 22:01, 16 January 2026 (UTC)Reply

You lost me there. Background levels average 8-9 μg/m³ in the CRZ just as everywhere else. Peak PM2.5 averages 13.8 μg/m³ in the CRZ, and so the the net PM2.5 from local sources averages 5.8-4.8 μg/m³. A large proportion of the local sources are building boilers and electric generation equipment. So a reduction of 3.05 μg/m³ due to small traffic changes associated with congestion pricing hardly seems plausible; a reduction of 4.9 μg/m³ seems impossible.

But, as I wrote, let's drop any analysis of that paper and restore citations to other papers that came to the opposite conclusion. Pamela Miller (talk) 22:46, 16 January 2026 (UTC)Reply

The study says, "Average daily maximum PM2.5 concentrations within the CRZ decreased by 3.05 μg/m³ (SE = 0.022). For context, background levels in the New York City metropolitan area during the study period averaged ~8–9 μg/m³". Einsof (talk) 22:52, 16 January 2026 (UTC)Reply

The 8-9 μg/m³ average represents "transported background PM2.5 levels" with "minimal influence from proximate traffic or industrial emission sources." PM2.5 is transported into the metropolitan area from distant sources, e.g. cities in other areas, smoke from fires. Background concentrations are assumed to be uniform over the metropolitan area, including the CRZ. As you wrote previously, "the background levels are brought in again to compute the percentage decrease in peak pollution." Pamela Miller (talk) 23:30, 16 January 2026 (UTC)Reply

The 22% figure is found by dividing 3.05 μg/m³ of net PM_2.5 by the projected 13.8 μg/m³, the latter of which includes background. I did not literally mean that the 8–9 μg/m³ average background was used to do the arithmetic. Einsof (talk) 23:37, 16 January 2026 (UTC)Reply

You didn't use 8-9 μg/m³ to do the arithmetic, but the authors had already added a background to a net PM2.5 concentration to get the 13.8 μg/m³ counterfactual concentration. Pamela Miller (talk) 04:13, 17 January 2026 (UTC)Reply

I added a reference to a second published study. This should hopefully settle the matter. Pamela Miller (talk) 14:37, 17 January 2026 (UTC)Reply

for your helpful comment at Talk:Killing of Alex Pretti. ~2026-16343-3 (talk) 21:59, 24 January 2026 (UTC)Reply

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Expatriate, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A bare URL and missing title error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 01:23, 2 May 2026 (UTC)Reply

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Pedestrian safety through vehicle design, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A missing title error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 09:31, 8 May 2026 (UTC)Reply

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page New York Penn Station, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A missing title error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 03:39, 14 May 2026 (UTC)Reply

You are invited to participate in Wiki Loves Fútbol! We're running it during the 2026 World Cup, starting now until July 19. Help us edit pages on everything futbol: think national teams from across Latin America, players, host cities, and the stuff around the cup that usually gets short shrift, like the immigration and culture angles. We're working in both English and Spanish.

Here's the fun part: it's set up like a Panini sticker album. You collect stamps for different kinds of contributions: editing an article, adding a photo over on Wikimedia Commons, doing a translation, or starting a Wikidata item. Fill the album first to win $200. That’s not all: we are also giving out $25 prizes to the “Player of the Match” every week the contest runs. You don't have to be a power editor to play. Everyone is welcome!

If you're a little curious, come take a look at our target articles. Do you think we are missing some good articles? We are open to suggestions! The best place to actually get going is our WikiLatinos Discord, that's where the article missions will live, where the leaderboard is, and where someone can point you to a good first edit if you want one.

Hope you'll jump in. Oscar_. (talk) 19:29, 10 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

Hello,

I am writing this as I did try to explain that the way I wrote it out shows basketball in NBA rather than the way you write it which is rather clinky. I think National Basketball Association is self explanatory in what it is. Also, the NBA as a whole has a rather global audience so we don't have to specify much, just as we don't write "English Premier League", we just say Premier League and everyone will know what it is anyways. HalfOfAnOrange (talk) 04:07, 15 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

You changed the subsection title back to just say "Knicks fans". Again, why are readers on a World Cup article supposed to know what Knicks are? Einsof (talk) 11:33, 15 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

Because the description in the subsection explains what it is. Do you assume people not know the Knicks are a basketball team? HalfOfAnOrange (talk) 13:53, 15 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

Yes, just 13% of people in the UK and India follow the NBA, which are the two countries after the US with the most page views on the English Wikipedia. World Cup articles are almost certainly skewed even more highly toward a non-US readership given the relative popularity of the sport inside versus outside the US. You are writing for an international readership, not just Ameriburgers. Einsof (talk) 00:25, 16 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

Yet the NBA is well known in mainland Europe too where much of the readers are. Basketball isn’t that different in name, it’s self explanatory. There is no alternate basketball, it is one kind. But also because this is in the United States, guidelines say to follow American words and conventions. HalfOfAnOrange (talk) 02:57, 16 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

The contention was, specifically, that you removed "basketball" from the subsection heading. Einsof (talk) 03:02, 16 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

I included it in the description where it is more fitting and explains better. Having a clunky heading benefits no one. HalfOfAnOrange (talk) 05:27, 16 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page 2013 Muzaffarnagar riots, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A bare URL and missing title error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 19:56, 20 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

its pretty obvious that by adding personal details about a prior arrest of David Hearn you are trying to make him look bad, in the style of the Newspaper you are quoting Martijn Scheffer (talk) 13:04, 23 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

That is not at all obvious, since I actually think it makes the park police look bad to not know what jurisdiction they're in, and also arresting someone for canoeing in a river sounds like petty behavior. I think (as always) the way I originally wrote it was superior, and if you don't like how it's currently written then I suggest you bring it up on that article's talk page. Einsof (talk) 13:12, 23 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A missing title error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 00:40, 26 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A bare URL and missing title error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 01:16, 26 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Millennial grey, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Millennial grey until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:01, 18 July 2026 (UTC)Reply

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page 2026 Delhi Jantar Mantar protests, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A bare URL and missing title error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help). Below are the references causing this error:

• • https://www.deccanchronicle.com/southern-states/kerala/kerala-police-book-100-including-popular-rapper-vedan-for-holding-a-meet-in-support-of-cjp-1973635. {{cite news}}: Missing or empty |title= (help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 10:35, 29 July 2026 (UTC)Reply

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A bare URL and missing title error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help). Below are the references causing this error:

• • Farenthold, David. https://www.nytimes.com/2026/07/31/us/politics/david-hearn-reflecting-pool-vandalism-charges.html. {{cite news}}: Missing or empty |title= (help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 02:11, 1 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

My edit apparently drew your attention and caused this [2] which is the right move and a bolder edit than mine which I support. There are so many reasons that this kind of prose is problematic. Thanks! Tduk (talk) 17:43, 8 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

Indeed. Thanks for kicking this to the top of my watchlist. Einsof (talk) 18:08, 8 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Presidential Fitness Test, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A bare URL and missing title error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help). Below are the references causing this error:
  • https://www.kcur.org/podcast/up-to-date/2025-10-01/trump-presidential-fitness-test. {{cite news}}: Missing or empty |title= (help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 04:50, 13 August 2026 (UTC)Reply