User talk:Einsof

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

Hello, Einsof, and

• 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]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 06:16, 11 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• ("cabal of Satan-worshiping pedophiles" is singular) — Good catch.--agr (talk) 13:39, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

An article you recently created,

Did it ever occur to you to drop me a courtesy note to add more references before chucking the article into AfC purgatory? Einsof (talk) 11:58, 22 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Imperial boomerang, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Stub-Class, which is recorded on its

grading scheme

to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now

create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation

if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to

create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation

.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Bkissin (talk) 13:40, 22 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Omar Mohammed, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Battle of Mosul.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:23, 2 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Hobby Lobby smuggling scandal, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bulla.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:14, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello
I see that you have peremptorily split the human stampede section from

You're right, I should have said 'apparently'. Regardless, it was a shoddy piece of work, per that and the other points made; are you planning to address them on the article talk page? Moonraker12 (talk) 18:12, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A false accusation of plagiarism is defamatory, and as such violates

WP:NPA. Anything short of striking the entirety of the false accusation, including the accusation of lack of attribution, and issuing a retraction on Talk:Stampede (wherein you inserted a link to this discussion) is insufficient. Einsof (talk) 18:22, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

Hello! Voting in the

2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users

are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The

topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy

describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review

NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:34, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply

]

Hi, regarding [1], I think it's an iteresting idea but I see a huge problem. I think it would be better to list incidents in the article about the individual interstate highways, and not the article about the system itself. There have been tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands of major accidents on a network of highways tens of thousands of miles long over it's 70 years of existance. This list could explode into an unmanageable pile of spaghetti in a hurry. Would you be open to moving this content to the articles for the individual highways? Dave (talk) 21:51, 18 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The full list of Amtrak incidents is also too long for the main Amtrak article and instead exists in a separate list article. I think that is probably the right solution for the Interstate Highway System as well. If that is still not manageable, we could have separate articles that list incidents by year, as is done for mass shootings in the US. The table on the main IHS page can contain only those events that exceed a certain notability threshold—perhaps only the deadliest events, as is currently done on the top-level page for mass shootings in the United States. Einsof (talk) 23:33, 18 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Our standard approach has been not to list incidents in highway articles unless they resulted in a lasting impact on the design of the highways themselves. Since we rarely list them in the individual highway articles, it's even less likely we'd list them in the system article itself. As a matter of comparison, Michigan State Trunkline Highway System, another highway system article at FA status does not have such a table. Assuming, ad arguendo that we did list them, the table would need citations that it lacked. Statistics are in the list of things that require citations.

For all of these reasons, I have removed the table. Imzadi 1979 → 05:04, 19 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Who exactly is "we" and "our" in this context? If this is some small contingent of editors who focus narrowly on highway content, then perhaps we need an RFC to solicit a wider perspective. I notice you didn't remove the corresponding table on the Amtrak article even though it also lacks citations that you claim are required. Einsof (talk) 05:57, 19 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I started a discussion on the Interstate Highway System article talk for more visibility. I suggest you respond there instead. Einsof (talk) 06:08, 19 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the

2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users

are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The

topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy

describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review

NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:50, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply

]