lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Republic of China on Taiwan

message: I'm pretty sure I heard the term "Republic of China on Taiwan" long before Lee uttered it.  Do we have any evidence that he was the first to use it?  Readin (talk) 02:14, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Sure the civil society of Taiwan already mentioned the term or the concept before 1995. But President Lee is the top representative of Taiwanese people and the leader of the government to use the term.--Wildcursive (talk) 03:23, 6 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dubious 

message: This page offers two perspectives on the political naming and status of Taiwan/ROC/ROC on Taiwan but has so far ignored another legitimate stakeholder who are the indigenous peoples. It should not be necessary to prove that they have a right to their political stance, and thus this perspective should be explained alongside the other political perspectives. While the official name is clear, other names exist according to political perspective and that is what the pages describes.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kawa650 (talk • contribs) 07:48, 24 January 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: This page is not about the political status of Taiwan. It is just about a "political term", as mentioned in the first sentence. --Matt Smith (talk) 07:57, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

text: This article is not about an alternative name of Taiwan. If you would like to write about alternative names of Taiwan, please considering creating new articles if you could find supporting reliable sources. --Matt Smith (talk) 12:06, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

text: You can have your own interpretation of the term. Anyway, the article is not for "alternative name of Taiwan". Besides, the "undetermined status of Taiwan" is about the status of geographical entities (Taiwan island and Penghu islands), not about the status of political entity (Republic of China). --Matt Smith (talk) 03:16, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

text: They are two different theories. I don't see the reason to merge them. --Matt Smith (talk) 03:46, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Absent perspective on the naming and status of Taiwan
Talk:Magreglio

message: removed bishop's stortford from twin towns list. town twinning does not work that way. i.e. A twinned with B, B twinned with C does not imply A twinned with C. Check the bishop's stortford town council website, and the bishop's stortford wiki page.
Triangl (talk) 19:13, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Twin towns
Talk:Completion (oil and gas wells)

message: The article has lots of opinion with little referenced. Laser cutting sounds good but no evidence is cited. Some manufacturers hold that laser cutting is too expensive to use, even with the latest lasers. This assertion needs support or else deletion.DLH (talk) 20:56, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Slotted Liner

message: Whoever wrote this article apparently speaks English as their second language. Just look at this article section... Incomplete sentence. bad punctuation, unusual Capitalization. No explain anything, use jargon without definitions or context.
::
===Barefoot completion===
Selective isolation of oil, gas and barefoot section. Its an open hole, but with simple design and low cost. can be used in consolidated formations. It's the technique used by drilling companies in deep wells, Natural fractured reservoirs and Multilateral.
As a non-expert in this field I can't do much to improve this article, but it really needs some serious work explaining in plain English what all this is. Some pictures and diagrams pointing out stuff would be a good idea.
DMahalko (talk) 01:22, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article has a bunch of words... do they mean something? 

message: Selective isolation of oil, gas and barefoot section. Its an open hole, but with simple design and low cost. can be used in consolidated formations. It's the technique used by drilling companies in deep wells, Natural fractured reservoirs and Multilateral.
|}
As a non-expert in this field I can't do much to improve this article, but it really needs some serious work explaining in plain English what all this is. Some pictures and diagrams pointing out stuff would be a good idea.
DMahalko (talk) 01:22, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Barefoot completion

message: The file :File:Perforation.JPG, used on this page, has been deleted from Wikimedia Commons and re-uploaded at :File:Perforation.JPG. It should be reviewed to determine if it is compliant with this project's non-free content policy, or else should be deleted and removed from this page. If no action is taken, it will be deleted after 7 days.  Commons fair use upload bot (talk) 06:55, 27 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fair use candidate from Commons: [[:File:Perforation.JPG]]
Talk:Llanbrynmair

message: Llan on its own is insufficiently significant (judging by the current article) to be a separate article, when it is in fact a part of Llanbrynmair community (see ). There is a Llanbrynmair article, which already lists Llan, and other settlements. Folks at 137 (talk) 18:58, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge proposal

message: Please check scope of project before deleting. The project includes all settlements of whatever size. "Cities" is just a convenient (albeit misleading) title. Folks at 137 (talk) 06:07, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Cities project
Talk:Gil Blas

message: Whoever wrote that sentence about how Gil Blas 'is considered the last masterpiece of the picaresque genre' pulled the idea out of his hat, considering the fact that neither Smollett nor Fielding had yet written anything.  I'm removing it.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.14.250.194 (talk) 21:22, 28 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  last masterpiece?  

message: Does the reader of this article need to know how to pronounce the French title? --134.153.2.40 (talk) 19:16, 1 February 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  pronunciation of title
Talk:North West Kent

message: This is one of those articles which purport to give information and do not - ie they are bullshit. There seems no purpose at all in it: obviously the part of Kent called "North west kent" (and why the non-capitalised "Kent"?) is highly likely to be in the north-west of the county. Separate articles for each of the places mentioned will also say that they are in the north-west of Kent, too. - as will all the others mentioned. I see that someone tried to merge the article, and got it smartly demerged. I wonder why? OK so once it was going to become a unitary authority, but there is no confirmation of that Peter Shearan (talk) 19:12, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: What is the purpose of this article?
Talk:399th Tactical Missile Wing

message: can we move this article title back to the 589th Tactical Missile Group? Buckshot06 (talk) 07:41, 11 May 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: I pondered this recently, but the 399th and 589th Groups seemed fairly balanced as a name, so I left it as it was. Both training units, although the 589th was around longer.--Lineagegeek (talk) 15:53, 11 May 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Move back to 589th TMG
Talk:Rochester Products Division

message: Clarify whether this is in the City of Rochester, in Monroe County, New York, or the Town of Rochester, in Ulster County, New York.66.10.94.35 (talk) 19:29, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Notes

message: Why is the history of this company rated as of low importance? The decline in U.S. manufacturing is directly connected to the record national debt. An understanding of that process is essential to understanding U.S. history. Wake up. Rupertlt (talk) 15:14, 24 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: A large majority of all articles are marked as low importance to their respective WikiProjects, simply because of their scope. Think of it this way. If you were trying to write a book about automobiles (in general) or New York (all of it), how much would you write about the Rochester Products division in particular? You may be pleased to know that that Manufacturing in the United States article is marked as top importance (the highest grade) for WikiProject United States, certainly one of the largest WikiProjects in existence. But as we say, notability is not inherited, so that doesn't mean every American manufacturer will get that treatment. And unfortunately, that article is about as robust as the American manufacturing sector itself... --BDD (talk) 22:22, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

text: It also depends on whether you are from the US or not. Would you be so keen to defend manufacturing in Australia (my country)?  Stepho  talk  23:11, 21 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Low-importance
Category talk:American Ballet Theatre dancers

message: A person should not appear in both :Category:American Ballet Theatre dancers and :Category:American Ballet Theatre; dancers, obviously, should appear in the former. Dancers who are subsequently artistic directors of A.B.T., such as Kevin McKenzie, are exceptions and should appear in the latter but not the former. — Robert Greer (talk) 15:17, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Category:American Ballet Theatre dancers vs. Category:American Ballet Theatre
Talk:St. Mark's Episcopal Church (Washington, D.C.)

message: The NRIS system shows a "St. Mary's Episcopal Church" for this reference number, while the article is named St. Mark's Episcopal Church.  There are known to be errors in NRIS, see wp:NRIS info issues.  Is this an NRIS error or an error in the article?  What is the church's name? doncram (talk) 10:07, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: There is an external link to the church's web site in the article, so unless they don't know the right name either, it's St. Mark's. IFCAR (talk) 13:30, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: My mistake when I created the artice. I used the format for St. Mary's to do St. Mark's but neglected to use the correct address in the lead and in the ownership in the box. I have replaced the infobox with the correct one from Elkman, etc. clariosophic (talk) 21:25, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh, okay, NRIS refnum 73002118 refers to "St. Mary's Episcopal Church" at 730 23rd St., NW., Washington, D.C., covered in St. Mary's Episcopal Church (Washington, D.C.);  NRIS refnum 73002117 refers to "St. Mark's Church" at 3rd and A Sts., SE., Washington, DC.  Thanks for fixing this. doncram (talk) 17:18, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Name of church
Talk:3rd Guards Tank Army

message: The info box contains the role "Breakthrough and deep exploitation". Correct me if I am wrong please....I thought the purpose of tank armies was primarily exploitation, but NOT breakthrough. Breakthrough operations were conducted by Shock Armies or Combined-Arms Armies, with the Tank Armies held in reserve and unleashed (generally) once the breakthrough was made. At least that is my understanding of the doctrine. Its very similar to the doctrine of employment of US armored divisions. Regards, DMorpheus (talk) 13:10, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Breakthrough? 

message: 3rd Guards Mechanised Army was formed into 3rd Guards Tank Army end of 1950s (? when), but if it was renamed (restructured ?) 18th (Combined Arms) Army in 1957 - or as other sources say in 1960 ? - remains unclear. --129.187.244.28 (talk) 10:46, 12 October 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Have clarified the date according to Feskov et al 2013. 3rd GTA appears to not have been reformed at the end of the 1950s.Kges1901 (talk) 10:57, 12 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Naming
Talk:KLF4

message: This article has been revised as part of a large-scale clean-up project of multiple article copyright infringement. (See the investigation subpage.) Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/scisignal.2003335. Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.)
For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, and, if allowed under fair use, may copy sentences and phrases, provided they are included in quotation marks and referenced properly. The material may also be rewritten, provided it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Therefore, such paraphrased portions must provide their source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you.  GreenLipstickLesbian (talk) 02:52, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copyright problem removed
Talk:Alfred Edward Chalon

message: I thank the ones among you who have to correct my French thoughts translated in English. Be careful with this article: my main source is the biography stub on Library and Archives Canada. Avoid rewriting their exact words while trying to reformulate my sentences. Sebjarod (talk) 19:54, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Frenchman trying to write in English 

message: I disagree with adding this category because Chalon did not paint the Queen in order to illustrate postage stamps. Printers chose this portrait afterwards. Sebjarod (talk) 08:35, 29 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[:Category:Stamp designers]]
Talk:Tornatellides subperforata

message: This article was based on Powell A. W. B., New Zealand Mollusca, William Collins Publishers Ltd, Auckland, New Zealand 1979 . It has been revised on this date to eliminate a probable copyright violation of that book. Earlier text must not be restored, unless it can be verified to be free of infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. (For background on this situation, please see the related administrator's noticeboard discussion.) Thank you.  --Moonriddengirl (talk) 15:47, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copyright problem removed
Template talk:Country data Yugoslavia

message: For some reason this template links to Serbia for the national tennis teams. This is unacceptable. Both the Davis Cup team and Fed Cup team have their own articles, which are the ones which should be linked to. --Thewanderer (talk) 19:57, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Link to Serbia?!

message: The flag of the Kingdom of Yugoslavia is not :commons:Image:Flag of the Kingdom of Yugoslavia (civil).svg but instead :commons:Image:Flag of the Kingdom of Yugoslavia.svg.
Somebody, as I see :commons:User:R-41 have brought this distincion of (civil) / (state) in the commons which is not true. There was only one flag of the Kingdom according to the Constitution. It was a blue-white-red banner without any symbols appearing on it.
Lots of info can be found http://www.crwflags.com/fotw/Flags/yu_shs.html
And what someone like R-41 would like everybody to belive that the false "state" flag exist's.
That flag is not the state flag but the naval ensign .
For the sake of correctness this change should be quick because R-41 changed the colours to look like on Flag of Serbia from the period of the Kingdom of Serbia.
Imbris (talk) 01:16, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  kingdom flag 

message: The flag of the Democratic Federal Yugoslavia is not included, this is an error that should be amended. In late 1943, 1944, and 1945 occupied Yugoslavia existed as the Democratic Federal Yugoslavia, governmed (for most of that period) by the joint government formed out of the King's government-in-exile and the republican, left-wing AVNOJ, with Josip Broz Tito as the Prime Minister. The star on its flag was slightly different as is shown on the enclosed image. The 1945 flag with the larger red star was introduced only after the war was over. In any case, it should be included in the country data... --DIREKTOR (TALK) 10:28, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: WWII flag

message: Please replace "Flag of Yugoslavia (1943–1992).svg" with "Flag of Yugoslavia (1946-1992).svg", and replace "Naval Ensign of SFR Yugoslavia.svg" with "Naval Ensign of Yugoslavia (1949-1992).svg". These files have been renamed on Commons. Thank you. Fry1989 eh? 00:19, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Done - FlightTime (open channel) 00:35, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  File name replacement. 

message: Can we add the values | flag alias-shs = Flag of the State of Slovenes, Croats and Serbs.svg and | var1 = shs so we can use the template for the flag of the State of SHS ? — IмSтevan talk 19:37, 10 March 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: . P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 02:21, 11 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Template-protected edit request on 10 March 2024
Talk:Foxhill House

message: I have removed all the unfounded stuff about the occult. It goes back to a clearly tongue-in-cheek website by a former student resident (http://www.nottingham.ac.uk/~ulzkls/personal/foxhill.htm). The decoration in the house is Waterhouse's. The "pentagrams" are probably meant to be AW monograms. AlOgrady (talk) 14:35, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: I am unsure why this features here at all. Foxhill House is quite properly not on this list, as it technically falls within the Borough of Wokingham. The Region 6 War Room on Whiteknights Campus is also listed and falls within the Wokingham Borough, but it does not mention the List of Listed Buildings in Reading.Ntmr (talk) 23:41, 4 December 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: List of Listed Buildings in Reading
Talk:St Bartholomew's Church, Lower Basildon

message: The comment at the end about Jethro Tull's death date is based on a misunderstanding.  At the time when he died, the English year number changed towards the end of March.  Thus, a man who was buried on March 9, 1740, by contemporary reckoning, would have died in 1741 by ours.
David Harley  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.208.29.28 (talk) 20:20, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Wokefield Park

message: Not worthy of comment in the main article, but perhaps of interest to passing researchers, is a auction, by Messrs. Christie, Manson & Woods, on 28 June 1905, “From the cellars of Major Allfrey, deceased, late of Wokefield Park, Mortimer, Berks”. (My picture 20991.) JDAWiseman (talk) 23:15, 16 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wine auction
Talk:Vanilla Sky (band)

message: Hi, Started this page as the Vanilla Sky page had a disambiguation link to the italian page about this group. I have heard a few of their pieces, and personally think they have enough notoriety to warrent a page. I've corrected the disambiguation link on the vanilla sky page so it now points here, as well as gathered some very basic information and entered into one catagory so at least this page is not an orphan. Obviously if people don't agree this group merit an entry, deletion is perfectly reasonable.
DomUK (talk) 20:11, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Start

message: Can we get some sources and rewrite this article from a point of view of a non-fan?
The Black Ash Lad (talk) 04:43, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Sources and rewrite

message: References all seem absurd to me Kap 7 (talk) 02:24, 10 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  References 

message: This page has a lot of text, so I think it would be nice if someone uploaded a picture of them performing. I would if I could, but I have never seen them live and I own no shots of them. Exterscope (talk) 12:14, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Visualizations
Talk:Nelson Ledges Road Course

message: I added a disambiguation link to the Nelson Kennedy Ledges State Park. The reason for this is that Nelson Ledges redirects here, but locally "Nelson Ledges" (or sometimes just "The Ledges") can also refer to Nelson Kennedy Ledges State Park, or also Nelson Ledges Quarry park (for which there is not yet an article).  Windsorwindsor1 (talk) 20:17, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
Talk:University of Missouri

message: Listings of fraternities are not useful because there is so little documentation and so much fluctuation. The Missouri table is badly sourced, since one of the references is a dead end and the other only refers back to a university site. This is weak sourcing and not of value for an encyclopedia. Where have you found other Greek listings as part of a university article? They should be removed and merged with good lists on pages like this one. -- Melchior2006 (talk) 20:25, 6 July 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: In my mind it is a false dichotomy that either there should be so much information about the Greek System that it is its own page or it shouldn't be included at all. With a system this large, it seems like there is more than enough *and* IMO, a primary source would be sufficient as it is not controversial.Naraht (talk) 23:08, 6 July 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi, @Naraht. Pls see WP:UNDUE and the question of reliable sourcing. If it is only a reference back to the university's homepage, that is not a very useful reference. Fraternity listings are usually puff, that is, filler-material. Long tables listing fraternities usually don't provide any information about the fraternity itself, when it was founded, where its house is, how often it has been disciplined, and so on. Greek life is usually not relevant for an encyclopedia because it is comparable to clubs which exist at almost every university. If, however, a fraternity has distinguised itself in some manner, then of course it is relevant. Maybe @GuardianH wants to chime in and give us his view on the matter. -- Melchior2006 (talk) 06:26, 7 July 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll have to take a look at the article, but I don't want to chime in officially because me and Melchior share some of the same views regarding the removal of promotional material and puffery. If @Naraht agrees, I could provide a second opinion. GuardianH (talk) 20:27, 7 July 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: The large majority of the Greek Letter Organizations listed in the article have articles themselves and are notable and it is *rarely* appropriate for articles to exist about the individual chapters. Do you all mind if I alert the Fraternity and Sorority Wikiproject to this, a removal of the of Greek Letter Organizations here would indicate that they would be removed in hundreds of other articles.Naraht (talk) 20:33, 7 July 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, the removal of the Greek Letter Organizations here wouldn't constitute a removal on another article. See WP:OTHER, Wikipedia articles are generally considered uniquely distinct as editors may come to different consensus(es). GuardianH (talk) 20:45, 7 July 2023 (UTC)

text: Since, as @Naraht says, it "is *rarely* appropriate for articles to exist about the individual chapters," it is also not appropriate for them to be listed in the article about the university. There is usually no encyclopedic relevance for individual chapters if there is nothing to cite except a listing on the university's homepage. WP:UNDUE applies. -- Melchior2006 (talk) 06:43, 8 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Greek listings