lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Liu Boming (taikonaut)

message: When Shenzhou 12 landed on 17 September 2021, Chinese sources here said it was his birthday . So there might be an error here: is he born in September 1966? Hektor (talk) 09:52, 17 September 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Birth date
Talk:Trohmania

message: Worst. Description. Ever. Whoever wrote this article is a complete failure. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.242.55.128 (talk • contribs) 
Definitely. Another thing: This really should be merged with Joe Trohman, because it's something that he created, and it's only a stub, which is written badly, so we could probably shorten it to a couple sentences. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bobman700 (talk • contribs) 
Absolute garbage. And sign your comments. --Phant 06:08, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
Talk:Duke of Zhou

message: There is real doubt whether King Chen was indeed too young to rule (some sources claims that he was about 22 or 23 years old at the time of his father's death). Even if he really was too young, the most obvious candidate for regency was Guanshu Xian, next in line of seniority after King Wu himself. So it can easy be arguable that Duke of Chou was usurper and his brothers were right in their rebel
Sources: Wang Hui "Zhou chu Tangshu shou feng shiji san kao" in Xi Zhou shi lunwenji; The Cambridge History of Ancient China - From the Origins of Civilisation to 221 B.C. p. 310-311
89.77.32.230 (talk) 20:05, 1 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed corrections to main text 

message: I changed "China's only empress" because in English, Ci Xi is also often called just Empress, and she acted as empress. Evangeline (talk) 17:46, 7 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Legacy
Talk:Emperor Gaozong of Tang

message: http://books.google.com/books?id=m7Qf-bjLfA4C&pg=PT17&dq=Tang+dynasty+veil+omen&hl=en&sa=X&ei=QWiIUMD9CKre0gGEsoH4Cw&ved=0CDIQ6AEwAA
http://books.google.com/books?id=JbdS-R3y72MC&pg=PA291&dq=Tang+dynasty+veil+omen&hl=en&sa=X&ei=QWiIUMD9CKre0gGEsoH4Cw&ved=0CDcQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q=Tang%20dynasty%20veil%20omen&f=false
:1)SIGN your posts, 2)a long list of links is not productive 50.111.5.65 (talk) 14:04, 5 June 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gaozong's edict enforcing veiling of women 

message: This article is not written in a detached tone. For example, the phrase “Consort Wu was intelligent and full of machinations” is weirdly judgmental and gendered. From the rest of the article, it sounds like the entire court was full of schemers. Dandelionlily (talk) 17:18, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Overtly biased 

message: It seems unlikely that we have genuine quotations of what the Emperor and Empress said over a thousand years ago, as is asserted in section “Middle reign: Empress Wu's aggrandization of power”. It seems more like historical fiction than an encyclopedia article. Dandelionlily (talk) 17:37, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Quotations
Talk:Dollar-Denominated Negotiable Certificate

message: Is this the same as an American Depositary Share? Sparky132 00:24, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Removed redirect to ADR - A Dollar-Denominated Negotiable Certificate is the same as an ADR. A share or similar equity interest such as an ADR, that is issued by a corporation, and traded on a public exchange, is a security. As a security that is represented by a registered security certificate (not a bearer instrument), an ADR is governed under in the Uniform Commercial Code under Article 8 - Investment Securities. There is specific language in Article 8 explaining why negotiable certificates are not securities and as such, cannot be governed under Article 8. Negotiable certificates are governed under Article 3 instead. I don't think this article should have ever been redirected to ADR.  I removed the redirect. See Talk:American depositary receipt page, where I wrote this out in more detail and cited sources to support my reasoning.--FeralOink (talk) 16:15, 8 April 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Next, I think this remaining no-content stub, titled Dollar-Denominated Negotiable Certificate should be deleted. The subject is already covered accurately by the current, broader-scoped Negotiable Instrument article. I will also check to see if there is any clean up to do in disambiguation pages, if I can figure out how to get this all to work correctly!--FeralOink (talk) 16:15, 8 April 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Instead of deleting this page, I redirected it to Negotiable Instrument. I anchored the redirect to the "In the U.S." section Negotiable_instrument#In_the_United_States, since this article (Dollar-Denominated Negotiable Certificate) referred specifically to U.S. dollars. Next, I will check that everything works right, and will clean up any loose ends.--FeralOink (talk) 17:13, 8 April 2017 (UTC)
Talk:Duke Huan of Qi

message: Request for citation? Please go read Records of the Grand Historian (in which, a common punishment is to make someone into minced meat (醢(hǎi)), New Book of Tang, Manjianghong by Yue Fei (literary work still taught in high schools with reference of the author's desire of eating the enemies), Zhengqige by Wen Tianxiang (literatary work still taught in high schools which praised a historical "patriotic" cannibalistic event), Cairen'ai (菜人哀) (The Misery of the "Food-human") by Qu Dajun (屈大均), History of Cannibalism in China (中國食人史) by Huang Wenxiong (黃文雄(Ko Bunyu)), and so on.
Also refer to the article 中國食人史 in Chinese Wikipedia. Don't be lazy! The fact that literatary works which contain "patriotic" cannibalistic events which have really happened in history are still taught and praised in high schools in Chinese societies (mainland China, Taiwan, and so on) can be a proof that cannibalism is not a strict taboo in Chinese culture. Qrfqr (talk) 09:46, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  About Taboo on Cannibalism 

message: Is zhwiki a feature article?
Newone (talk) 10:59, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Zhwiki
Talk:Grid fin

message: I'm thinking the Sea Sparrow picture ought to be removed. I know it's meant to contrast grid fins with "normal" missile fins, but it could just as easily be misconstrued as being a type of grid fin. —Masterblooregard (talk) 00:37, 10 May 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Remove Sea Sparrow picture? 

message: Most of the article is uncited and parts of it contradict published data on grid vs planar fins. For instance I have never seen data that shows grid fins to have a lower axial force coefficient than planar fins.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.102.33.163 (talk) 07:45, 29 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Uncited/Incorrect information 

message: Consider Blue Origin's landing of the New Shepard, in which the powered stage separated and landed. I'm not aware of whether or not it used grid fins, but that's irrelevant to the question of whether or not the Falcon 9 landing can be referred to as the first.
CitrusEllipsis (talk) 06:11, 5 January 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: The Blue Origin rocket wasn't a booster, no?  Midgley (talk) 00:54, 20 June 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Can SpaceX's landing be referred to as the "first successful booster stage landing in spaceflight history?" 

message: For instance almost all of the information seems to relate to Soviet Russian-era research and deployment, yet I know there are many, many instances of grid fin constructions on a whole array of munitions and other devices. Could a lot more examples be included that would enable a fuller treatment?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bpolhemus (talk • contribs) 20:15, 13 April 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Hello Bpolhemus ! I have greatly expanded the French article, with a lot of images and graphs : https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ailette_en_grille#Invention. Maybe it will interest you. In fact, there are many misconceptions about fine grids. Sincerely, Bernard de Go Mars (talk) 15:17, 16 January 2020 (UTC)

text: One example of incompleteness is that I've seen photos of a Chinese ICBM with grid fins at the bottom of the 1st stage, which certainly is why Chinese rocket startups use them on their ICBM-derived small solid launchers. 81.33.4.5 (talk) 11:56, 23 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  This Article Seems To Be An Important Topic But The Discussion Is Very Narrow
Talk:Just Nuisance

message: Great story.
Suspect the cap in the photo came from HMAS Canberra.
59.167.40.111 06:52, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Great story 

message: "Amused travellers would occasionally offer to pay his fares, but the railway company eventually warned Chaney that Nuisance would have to be put down unless he was kept under control to prevent him boarding the trains or had his fares paid."--Filll (talk) 18:48, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  A sentence that doesnt make much sense 

message: Article reassessed and graded as start class. --dashiellx (talk) 18:59, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Tag & Assess 2008 
Talk:Stephen Colletti

message: Regarding his birthdate- it is February 13, 1986, not February 7, despite what that "Family Tree Records" site says. Stephen replied to an inquiry I made regarding this (on his fan myspace), and he replied personally that it is February 13th. Further, he has a picture of his California driver license on his myspace that clearly says his birthdate is 2/13/86.--Cg41386 21:47, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
Talk:Li Zhisui

message: In the Wikipedia article on his book on Mao, it is claimed that he joined the medical team for Mao et al, after returning to China after medical training in Australia - but this is not mentioned at all on his bio page.  Did he study in Australia, or not?  If so, was that in medicine and during what years? etc...  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:569:7CF1:6C00:213B:CBEE:F3D1:AA48 (talk) 17:36, 13 July 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Australian Training
Talk:Code: Version 2.0

message: * I recently added an edit to this page, as I was surprised that it was not more extensive.  I thought maybe it was not b/c of the external link available to the book's website and wanted to see if there was any opposition to beginning more substantial edits on this page.  JohnAndrewB 00:29, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: It says in the article:
"The original argument that Lessig took issue with was weakened in the years following the book's release, as it became widely acknowledged that government regulation of the Internet was imminent"
This sounds rather contradictory to me, as government regulation of the Internet is exactly what Lessig claimed would happen, in the first version of this book?
Any thoughts? Jellevc (talk) 10:56, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Contradiction 
Talk:Public Works Department (Western Australia)

message: Looks like this should be moved to Public Works Department, Western Australia - soon as there are strange links to pwd's in other english speaking places not of western australian connections.  Will leave this message for other users to aggree or disagree- and will do a move in a day or so if there is the usual silence:) SatuSuro 13:08, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: potential disambig issues
Talk:Roc (Dungeons & Dragons)

message: Having recently started a List of Dungeons & Dragons monsters, I am trying to determine which monster articles should be redirected into the lists.  I believe this article may be a suitable candidate to be merged and redirected into List of Dungeons & Dragons monsters (1974-1976), as that is when it first debuted in the Dungeons & Dragons game.  Please discuss reasons for or against such a merge.  If no discussion has taken place 5 days from now, I will redirect this article to that list; otherwise I will follow whatever discussion takes place here.  Thank you!  :) BOZ (talk) 02:52, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge

message: As there were no responses, I redirected this article to the list page.  Since no response is also no consensus, any editor may restore this article at any time. However, rather than simply reverting, I urge you to use this space to develop some form of consensus regarding the article, lest another editor put this article up for deletion. BOZ (talk) 02:40, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Redirected

message: I am restoring this article to add a publication history section.  If, afterwards, it is believed that this article should be redirected once again, you may do so. BOZ (talk) 17:29, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Restored
Talk:Fudge cake

message: You wrote that fudge cake "its own thing with its own history", but this isn't true: you added one link about Wellesley fudge cake, which is made with Dutch-processed cocoa powder, buttermilk, and granulated sugar, and another link about tunnel-of-fudge cake, which is made with natural cocoa powder, more eggs but no milk, and dark brown sugar. The latter article says that Dutch-processed cocoa is "a disaster for you" and that "dark brown sugar brings out a fudgy taste in chocolate." These are different cakes that just happen to use the same word in their names, you can't say it's "its own thing" in one article. "Fudge cake received another popularity boost in 1966" is blatantly false because Ella Rita Helfrich's recipe merely "used a fudge icing mix" and was entirely different, there's no indication the same cake received a boost! Sure, there are a variety of recipes that are called "fudge", but there's simply no basis for a standalone article that brings together such different cakes. Therefore, since there are so many ways to adapt a chocolate cake and this is not a specific product, this should redirect there. Reywas92Talk 00:08, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay, I won't fight you any further on this, it might have been a stretch to group those two cakes in one article. I do still think that both Wellesley fudge cake and Tunnel of Fudge cake are notable in their own right, perhaps as subsections in chocolate cake (which needs to be expanded anyway). Pachyderminator (talk) 20:26, 15 May 2024 (UTC)

text: @Reywas92 I would like to comment, however, that you did not perform the merge properly. You simply redirected the article without copying the information I added, which was well sourced. Pachyderminator (talk) 11:24, 16 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merging
Talk:Spex (theatre)

message: The spex tradition of Umeå starts in 1983. not very old compared to the others... --Oskila 00:41, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Untitled 
Talk:Dry fire

message: In response to that request I took a peek. It looks technically sound but has wiki-problems. It's written in an instructional tone and is weak on sourcing. I'll try to help a bit here.North8000 (talk) 01:57, 9 February 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Request at Project Firearms

message: I reverted on addition as unsourced and generally incorrect. Contrary to the appearance of the fps wording, time per frame is not simply the inverse of the frame rate. It's typically the inverse of the frame rate plus the exposure time. North8000 (talk) 20:07, 18 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Frame rate vs frame duration

message: Is it good for the trigger or the firing pin to be repeatedly "dry fired" . Pulling trigger over and over? 2601:3C3:302:F60:AE83:BEA2:5C8B:F099 (talk) 05:41, 12 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dry firing/shooting  

message: The laser systems section seems to go off topic for an article about dry firing - the description of laser frequency and pulse duration, for example. (Hohum @) 18:22, 19 January 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: I concur; it seems a previous author had this page focused specifically around the practice of using dry firing with firearms for training purposes, rather than as a general knowledge article re: dry firing itself. Would it make sense to make another article for the laser stuff? I don't think it's necessarily too out of place as long as it's well contextualized. (DesertEagle_PWN User talk:DesertEagle_PWN) 18:22, 19 January 2024 (UTC)
replies: text:  :Laser pistol (sport) already exists. (Hohum @) 19:08, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

text:  (edit conflict)  Looks like something that should be covered somewhere.  Use of a particular company name in there would need a closer look.  But as a separate article it would need sources so that it doesn't get merged back into this one at AFD.  :-) North8000 (talk) 19:12, 19 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Laser systems
Talk:Smoke ring

message: There seems to be a little contradiction on the number of ways to blow a smoke ring:
The third is to form the 'O' with the lips, then gently say just the very first millisecond of 'Oh'. The third technique differs from the previous two in that one does not need to fill up the mouth with smoke beforehand because the smoke is actually being expelled from the lungs, not the mouth. It should be noted that most smokers blow rings using some combination of these three techniques.
I'm going to fix it to refer to four ways. Mattman00000 00:43, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The methods of creating it should be defined by the physics involved, not the devices. --168.156.1.178 (talk) 18:36, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lost count? 

message: This article needs a bit of cleaning. Kind of looks like a bunch of information copy/pasted from random sources. Might do it myself in a few days, after I get some other projects done. ~ Wakanda's Black Panther! (contribs) 04:47, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Wash me!

message: The recently active volcano on Iceland also produces smoke rings. Maybe some nice additional reference material. See http://news.discovery.com/earth/iceland-volcano-smoke-ring.html  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.211.151.236 (talk) 10:38, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Another volcano smoke ring 

message: I'm not sure how to subdivide an article, but I think this needs it! The skill of blowing smoke rings and these other (more topical/important) subjects sure feel conflated.
Some users searching for "smoke rings" may be interested in the tradition and practice of smoke rings as a tobaccania activity. I'm just amazed that tobacco pipes are not
mentioned here. There are many tricks you can form with rings. Although you can do some of them with cigars and cigarettes, the categories I've seen in example are slightly
mutually-exclusive: French-inhales with a pipe may be possible, but not popular; a cigar can offer a single Great Ring, but...; a pipe provides the flexibility required by
experts. I will not quantify or elaborate on these right now, please don't flame me for it: it's a consciousness-raising effort. :-)  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.94.235.246 (talk) 10:03, 29 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Huh? 
Talk:McLean Group of Companies

message: The prod of this article is being discussed at WP:BC.  See WP:ORG for notability guidelines for companies. --KenWalker | Talk 04:09, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I have deprodded it as I can't see how a 1 billion dollar group isn't notable?Smallman12q (talk) 23:21, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: See below re further notability, although also noting that the US dollar figure given shoudl be in Canadian dollars; last time I looked Vancouver was still in Canada...(so far).Skookum1 (talk) 14:40, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed Deletion 

message: Re the background to the McLean family of Vancouver - is this the family of former Mayor McLean, one of the city's first (the first??)?Skookum1 (talk) 14:40, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: McLean family origins

message: David McLean's name has surfaced in relation to the Railgate scandal, in his being seen with the Premier and Patrick Kinsella during the bidding, in his capacity as chair of CN Rail.....shouldn't CN rail be mentioned here?  Or is his role in the McLean Group distinct from his role on the board of CN?  Also while it's not normal procedure on Wikipedia pages to chart political donations by companies, I found this last night which was at least of some passing interest here, I'd think....Skookum1 (talk) 14:40, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Ties to BC Liberals and relationship to CN
Talk:Uri Lupolianski

message: I have removed:
:Lupolianski is opposed by many Ultra-Orthodox Jews due to what is considered his treason by joining the Zionist forces, of which the Torah forbids. Many protests have been made against him, chiefly by the Neturei Karta and others. Other groups, such as Satmar and Toldos Aharon are also fighting against him, and publicly him, but would not, for example, organize protest demonstrations against him.
since it is an unsourced statement per WP:BLP.  Please find sources for it before including it again. Jon513 13:48, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  added material 

message: I deleted most of the history for this article because it was a copyright violation from a variety of sites including this one (the information is originally from the website for the Jerusalem municipality). -- tariqabjotu 23:22, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copyrighted material 

message: Lupolianski is the mayor of Jerusalem and deserves an article, but this one is written by his buddies and supporters. It needs to be rewritten, with proper sources.--Gilabrand 11:30, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Not neutral
Talk:Warsaw University.

message: This page contains the former content of "Warsaw University" page. For the history along with the authors and their contributions see therein.
The main entry is now the "University of Warsaw" and anyone searching for "Warsaw University" is redirected here.
The reason for redirecting is that the name "Warsaw University" is not the correct one - in spite of the recent tendency of the authorities of the university iteself to promote it. Most probably it has been modelled on the names of universities that are named after people, like Yale, Harvard or, in Poland, Adam Mickiewicz -- which are, accordingly, called Yale, Harvard or Adam Mickiewicz University -- instead of the names such as
the University of Oxford, the University of Cambridge or the University of California, Los Angeles.
Fon 00:56, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  The name of the "Uniwersytet Warszawski" in English