lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:The Victorian Internet

message: Whn was this term coined? I've thrown in "late 20th C" for now, but was it in fact late 90s or early 2000s?
"mid-1800s" -- surely if "victorian", this would mean midway in teh century? On wikipedia, 1800s is a decade preceding the 1810s. Could someone who knows which the article means to refer to please clean up? -- Tarquin 22:30 Oct 6, 2002 (UTC)
Means Mid 19th century, will fix
dml
:For that matter, did Standage actually coin the term? I've just checked NewsBank, and the earliest references I can find are August 1998, in articles about his book. Tearlach 10:56, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Coining of term

message: This edit added the contention that global, as opposed to earlier mere long-range communication had been "just a quantitative shift" too. To my knowledge, that claim is not made in the book. Admittedly, whether for a communications system greater range is a qualitative or quantitative shift is somewhat debatable. 
I guess you could call a communication method's greater range a quantitative shift, but unless we were to distinguish between e.g. intercity and transatlantic telegraph infrastructure in particular, the wide adoption of telegraph communications, as opposed to earlier methods, was a qualitative shift. Also, while the range extension aspect to the telegraph is a quantitative metric, the much more common understanding of the change brought by the telegraph is that of a qualitative shift due to its immediacy. While not technically incorrect in detail, there is little point in adopting the uncommon understanding of a mere quantitative shift, since that reduces the analysis to the point of absurdity: After all, just about every qualitative change implies some kind of quantitative change also, once you get down to minutiae. So I don't think the contributed analysis really holds water, and as much as I think Wikipedians are often too quick to cry original research, this really is, however it pains me to say it, just some contributor's original analysis, which again, to the best of my knowledge is not in the book. Correct me if I'm wrong. 
I'm not sure if it's useful or appropriate to leave a message on the relevant IP user's currently non-existing Talk page, so I haven't done that myself, but I'm not opposed to someone else doing that either, if appropriate.—ReadOnlyAccount (talk) 20:18, 17 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Global communication "just a quantitative shift"?
Talk:Dial-up

message: I changed this to a redirect because the other meanings besides dial-up access didn't have articles or even red links and it is unclear whether articles will ever be created on those subjects. Here's part of the manual of style for disambiguation pages.
:Redlinks (links to articles not yet written) may be included only if you are confident that an encyclopedia article could be written on the subject. Don't include dictionary definitions (see below for how to include Wiktionary links). 
The articles are unwritten and the disambiguation page was just giving dictionary definitions of the other subjects. -- Kjkolb 08:50, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Redirect 

message: It's a pity that dial-up (and/or "dial-up access") redirect to the sole "internet connection". uucp, bbs and many other lemmas look less reliable if the "dial-up" lemma refers only to internet access. --Xoristzatziki (talk) 15:38, 31 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Redirection
Talk:Four color theorem

message: I agree with  that adding an entire section as a gallery to simply present different countries with their colorings is a bit overkill (especially with the map of America's at the beginning). I was thinking, though, of re-adding at least one of them to the section "Use outside of mathematics," since it seems apt. I was originally just going to place the Germany one in, but maybe adding a picture of a real-life exclave forcing 5-colors would be nice. In any case, I don't think it hurts to add a second picture illustrating how it works, since non-math inclined people are probably going to be interested in (more than one) examples of these type. I didn't want to just make the edit immediately though since the similar one had just been reverted. What do other people think?  Integral Python click here to argue with me 21:58, 24 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Re: the recent added images of colorings of different countries  

message: The article says "Forcing two separate regions to have the same color can be modelled by adding a 'handle' joining them outside the plane.  Such construction makes the problem equivalent to coloring a map on a torus (a surface of genus 1), which requires up to 7 colors for an arbitrary map."  That seems to imply that there's a planar map with just one noncontiguous region that requires 7 colors.  But you can 4-color the contiguous countries and then use 1 more color for the noncontiguous one, so you only need 5 colors.
I don't know how this should be rewritten. Nylimb (talk) 14:41, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Equivalence to torus coloring is wrong 

message: In the section on three-coloring, it is stated that "A cubic map can be colored with only three colors if and only if each interior region has an even number of neighboring regions." but I can't find any easily available explanation of what a cubic map is. Maybe this should be explained, rather than requiring people to pass a paywall to read the cited article before they can understand what that sentence means? MasterHigure (talk) 11:33, 4 January 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: I've added a wikilink.  Joule36e5 (talk) 00:23, 20 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cubic map 

message: Maybe a sentence added to the lead, to the effect of "It is impossible to draw five bodies that are all touching each other, which would be required for the theorem to be disproven", would help more practically-minded people to grasp it intuitively. :) --Kraligor (talk) 16:07, 19 February 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: That would be incorrect. It is a very standard misunderstanding of the theorem. The actual theorem is not about the impossibility of five regions touching each other (for which see Kuratowski's theorem). Minimal graphs that require five colors do not have to have five vertices, just as minimal graphs that require three colors can be cycles of any odd length, not just triangles. —David Eppstein (talk) 18:15, 19 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Alternative non-mathematical explanation
Talk:Bix Beiderbecke

message: Between this edit and the current iteration of the article, I managed to create a citation error.  I can't find it.  I apologize. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 14:31, 13 February 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: 7&6=thirteen (☎) 14:37, 13 February 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: Citation error

message: Citation upper alpha L, Y and Z are the same.  I don't know how to format that.  Help needed.  7&6=thirteen (☎) 16:24, 13 February 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Notes, like references, need to be named if they are to be re-used. . Primefac (talk) 16:50, 13 February 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: Citation Consolidation
Talk:Fayette County, Indiana

message: new website is http://connersvillecommunity.com/fayette_county
co.fayette.in.us is obsolete
69.174.171.59 (talk)
Fixed. Sbalfour (talk) 17:33, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Website 

message: On 15 Jan 2015, Yamaguchi redacted 1937 bytes of valid (and verifiable) material from the article with the comment "redacted unsourced claim".  No talk page entry supporting the decision to arbitrarily delete some unsourced material from the article,
and not other unsourced material was made.  I'd rather editors spend their time providing sources for such material as they can,
or challenge the factual accuracy of the material in specifics here in the talk page, so that other editors can correct or perhaps replace the material.  Deletions that lose material from the encyclopedia are heavily disfavored; the material in question
is a good faith edit.  I propose restoring the material, sourcing so much of it as I can, and adding a maintenance tag for
any material not readily sourced.  If Yamaguchi can provide any contrary evidence to the factual accuracy or neutrality of
the material deleted, here in the talk page is the right place to say it.Sbalfour (talk) 16:06, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  redacted material for restoration 

message: County articles get short shrift, because every town and city in a county will have its own article, and every event (like a battle, hurricane, drought) that happened in the county will also have its own article. what else is there to say?  In particular, a county is a large place, and has a history that in all cases preceded the coming of European settlement and political organization. Its history extends back to the geology of the last ice age before humans appeared on the scene. Hardly ever do I see any of that.  Also, a county isn't mostly towns, it's mostly farms, pastures and open space.  What about ecology and agronomy? Sbalfour (talk) 17:46, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  county articles
Talk:Opus Dei

message: Someone removed a quote from Patrice de Plunkett in the Support part of Controversy. He was editor of Le Figaro, one of the most prominent news sources in France. 
He has written many books - https://www.google.com/search?tbs=bks:1&q=%22Patrice+de+Plunkett%22+-wikipedia
And appears in Google scholar - https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=%22Patrice+de+Plunkett%22 124.104.115.5 (talk) 08:45, 12 July 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Plunkett quote removed? 

message: The Focolare movement has a good section on its members who have been proposed for sainthood. A similar section here would be great. 
Here's the Focolare example. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Focolare_Movement 2600:4040:279C:2700:6C00:5E7A:8D15:832D (talk) 02:42, 20 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Members proposed for sainthood  

message: Opus Dei Awareness Network
https://odan.org/ Murphy1492 (talk) 22:57, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Problems with Opus, first person testimony  

message: Is there any reason why the supporting view section is mentioned first? Normally, the criticism is brought up first, and then the counter-arguments are presented. 
If no convincing arguments are presented within the next few days, I will rearrange them. 
Ideally, however, the entire criticism sections needs to be rewritten and joined together. If anyone has the time and expertise to do so, go ahead. Arsaces (talk) 18:52, 24 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Changing the order of the "criticism" and "Supporting views" sections
Talk:Toyotomi Hideyoshi

message: The article needs an image of his coat of arms.--Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 01:44, 15 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Kamon

message: That's not standard in Japanese (reference: https://culturalatlas.sbs.com.au/japanese-culture/japanese-culture-naming)... so why is it being done here?--KimYunmi (talk) 16:42, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Not an issue. Even the Japanese Wikipedia does that in the first paragraph of every single article about a person. 93.124.52.134 (talk) 23:21, 26 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: spaces in his Japanese names?
Talk:Dymaxion

message: From memory. May need to be tweaked (or demolished and rebuilt). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.165.239.234 (talk) 16:40, 7 October 2002 (UTC)
replies: text: That's possible, but the source currently in the article is fairly specific about how the name was derived. Can you find another reference of similar specificity that claims it came from "tension"? The BFI site is a pretty good indicator, but I'd like something that has more-obvious backing behind it, like an actual quote from Fuller.--SarekOfVulcan (talk) 18:29, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Sputnik 1

message: There seems to be some confusion as to the proper formatting of the name. Most occurrences in this article are in normal type, but some are italicized. Which is correct?--Khajidha (talk) 11:17, 4 October 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: I think that it should be italicized according to the Wikipedia Manual of Style/Titles. See MOS:T Section 1.2. Names of ships, including spaceships, should be italicized. PopularOutcast talk2me 18:00, 4 October 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: , should mentions of Sputnik and Sputnik 1 be in italics? --- Coffeeandcrumbs 01:47, 3 February 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Sputnik 1 should be in italics. When referring to the Sputnik rocket, Sputnik should not be italicized. When referring to the Sputnik satellite program, it should not be italicized. When referring to Sputnik 1 (or any of the others), and shortened to Sputnik, it should be italicized. Kees08 (Talk) 01:54, 3 February 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Italics 

message: The article is a bit far from GA as it is; the cleanup tag notwithstanding, there are a lot of paragraphs that are uncited. I recommend you try to get them cited before someone picks up the review, or else it might fail a little quickly. Kees08 (Talk) 08:05, 6 December 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  GA work 

message: I find the current citation style really hard to work with; would you be amenable to changing it to either sfn, harvnb, or similar? I think sfn is the simplest of those types personally, but I am sure not all agree. Kees08 (Talk) 07:52, 14 July 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed. Choose which ever you like. --- Coffeeandcrumbs 09:34, 14 July 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Citation style 

message: I think there's room in this article to explain objects 1957 Alpha 1, 1957 Alpha 2, and 1957 Alpha 3, and why they were named that, since it was the first designation for an artificial satellite. Sources:
*Comments on Satellites
*NYT
Plan to incorporate them later, but if anyone beats me to it feel free. I made a similar edit to International Designator just now which has some explanation. Kees08 (Talk) 07:09, 30 March 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Harvard designator 

message: I made a , and this change has a copy/paste mistake. But in the second part of this change, I believe, it was constructive change. My change was reverted (and I agree, because of copy/paste mistake). In order to avoid WP:EW I am not tried to implement my changes again (in their right part). Let's discuss here. I'll send a message in your page. What do you think about my change overall (not in the part of copy/paste mistake)? SHaggY caT (talk) 02:52, 20 June 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: The new vaccine name Sputnick V is clearly intended to remind people of Sputnick 1, but how important is this vaccine to the actual topic of Sputnick 1? To me, it looks peripheral. It doesn't change how people think of Sputnick 1. Binksternet (talk) 18:00, 20 June 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Propaganda
Talk:Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution

message: Trump's DoJ asked Congress to allow chief judges to detain people indefinitely without trial during emergencies. 
In one request, the DoJ asked Congress to give the attorney general (William Barr, implied in ref) and top judges broad powers that would allow them to pause court proceedings during emergencies or “whenever the district court is fully or partially closed by virtue of any natural disaster, civil disobedience, or other emergency situation.” These new powers would apply to “any statutes or rules of procedure otherwise affecting pre-arrest, post-arrest, pre-trial, trial, and post-trial procedures in criminal and juvenile proceedings and all civil process and proceedings.” 
The DoJ’s requests are unlikely to make it through a Democratic-led House. 
* Betsy Woodruff Swan, DOJ seeks new emergency powers amid coronavirus pandemic; One of the requests to Congress would allow the department to petition a judge to indefinitely detain someone during an emergency. March 21, 2020 Politico.com
X1\ (talk) 20:46, 23 March 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Held indefinitely without trial Trump DoJ request, add here ?
Talk:Sturmabteilung

message: The list of leaders states that Emil Maurice was the leader of the Sturmabteilung from 1920 to 1921. But the text says that the group was formed by Hitler in 1921. Is this correct?  If so, it should be addressed in the text somehow. Tablesaw 19:33, Feb 27, 2004 (UTC)
The page on Ernst_R%F6hm states "At the end of the war, Roehm founded the "Freikorps", a right-wing militia, in Munich. In 1920, he became an Nazi-party member and the Freikorps became Hitler's Brownshirts - the Sturmabteilung (SA)." The information on this page appears to be incorrect. Refer . - porge 06:56, 10 Jun 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Date conflict? 

message: In the article it is written:
 A masterstroke was to claim that Gregor Strasser, whom Hitler hated, was part of the planned conspiracy against him. 
Could someone provide a source where Hitler says, in his own words, that he hated Gregor Strasser? It seems from an historical perspective that Strasser and Adolf Hitler got along actually rather well, and some would even go so far as to say that Strasser remained loyal to Hitler to the very end, and was killed because Heinrich Himmler and his associates wanted him gone. Oogalee Boogalee (talk) 22:19, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: There were two different periods in Strasser's relations to Hitler. From early on, and even after Hitler ousted  his brother Otto Strasser from the party, Strasser was a high official in the party, holding many and varied positions, and Hitler trusted him then, but once Gregor Strasser began to respond to Schleicher's overtures to join a coalition authoritarian government (hopefully bringing the Nazi Party along with him), and then Strasser resigned all his party offices, but remained a member of the party, things changed. Hitler -- who despised anyone who he felt had betrayed him -- turned 180 degrees against Strasser -- which ended up with Strasser being murdered in the Night of the Long Knives.  That could not possibly have occurred without Hitler's approval, so I think that "hated" is an appropriate summary description.  I doubt that we'll find any direct quote of Hitler saying "I hate Gregor Strasser", any more than we'll ever find a memo from Hitler saying "Kill all the Jews", but that was the situation nonetheless. Beyond My Ken (talk) 23:01, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: "...whom Hitler felt had betrayed him..." would be directly supported by Kershaw (2008) p.249, if others agree with the OP that "hated" is inappropriate. Beyond My Ken (talk) 23:19, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: BMK, I agree with your language as cited to Kershaw. Kierzek (talk) 17:35, 26 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hitler hated Strasser? 

message: In the infobox, I've queried a no. of more than 4 million members during the war Billsmith60 (talk) 22:02, 9 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Membership
Talk:Al-Darazi

message: Is it right to call the Druzes a sect of Islam.
I think that neither they themselves or Muslims consider Druzism Islam.
What about founder of the Druze derivation of Islam.
--Error 00:15, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Islamic sect?

message: GreenEcho the book im referencing is a documentary that was written by more than one person. wikiperdia's NPOV policy states that you can balance the Article by other sources than having only one POV. and I balanced the article for you so please don't revert before checking the article and the policy. « Hiram111ΔTalK Δ 10:25, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I added a cite and cleaned up the writing - it was/is kind of poorly written and needs grammarnatin'.  Naahid بنت الغلان Click to talk 13:02, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: About the Hakim section

message: I personally hate this kinds of arguments but we really have to make this thing clear. Sources needs to support his Turkic identity. Every other sources I've found mentions Iranian identity, so does his name 'Anushtakin'. 
Even if he was from a Turkic identity it doesn't mean he was a Turk. 'Turk' should be changed with word 'Turkic'. I'm editing and deleting the word Turk until sources are added.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.182.186.148 (talk) 12:29, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Turk? or Iranian?

message: Incredible that it needs posting, but the article currently says "Ad-Darazi is one of the seven prophets of the Druze". It is an obvious mistake to anyone who knows a little bit about the Druze faith. It seems to have been a mistake - someone clearly mistook Muhammad ibn Isma'il (the founder of the Ismaili sect), one of the Druze's prophets, for Ad-Darazi, whose first and third names where also Muhammad and Ismail, but who is a totally distinct character and an antagonist to the Druze. The Ad-Darazi itself starts saying he is considered an heretic by the Druze. So I simply removed the second paragraph that says that Ad-Darazi is one of the seven prophets of the Druze, but it has been added three times back to the article, so I am just leaving this here for posterity so other people who stumble upon such blatant mistake in the Article's lead in the future will know they are not the only ones who laughed at it, but sometimes Wikipedia users like to keep Wikipedia wrong. Dan Palraz (talk) 22:55, 13 November 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ad-Darazi as one of the seven prophets of the Druze (sic)
Talk:Foreign policy doctrine

message: Is it not rather pro-Republican to list the doctrine of a Presidential candidate? I'm sure Obama and Hilary have their own 'doctrine', but like McCain, these are not yet established enough to warrant a page. I would suggest that this blank link is removed from the list. --Woodgreener (talk) 19:40, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It's not an inappropriate link because John McCain's stance on foreign policy is not only well-known, and well-evolved, but because he has had an involved career in foreign relations as a Senator.  A link to the Biden Doctrine (Senator Joe Biden) would, by that same token, not be inappropriate. 76.111.80.228 (talk) 19:25, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I argue that it is inappropriate to include Sen. McCain's positions on foreign policy in this list of historical US foreign policy doctrines. Sen. McCain, while serving in the foreign policy arena for many years, never dictated the foreign policy of the United States and therefore can not set doctrine for the nation's foreign policy. The fact that the link goes to a page listing Sen. McCain's policy positions rather than a formal definition of his "doctrine" emphasizes my point. Adding a "McCain Doctrine" or "Biden Doctrine" degrades the quality and usefulness of this list. 71.252.100.85 (talk) 21:09, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Sooo, you don't think Senators are quite powerful enough to set the nation's foreign policy?  You do know he was U.S. rather than a State Senator.  Don't you?  Better yet, if an ambassador is relevant here, then surely a senator is. 76.111.80.228 (talk) 00:46, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: McCain Doctrine