lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Gordian III

message: The article Temple of Janus (Roman Forum) doesn't say Gordian III closed the doors, why is that? --AW 15:43, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Closing the temple doors 

message: The page currently suggests that Philip did not want Gordian to be deified, but that was quite the opposite. Philip wanted to try and halt rumors that he had a part in Gordian's death. Therefore he rushed Gordian's ashes back to Rome and demanded his deification. See Pat Southern's The Roman Empire: From Severus to Constantine (Routledge, 2001).
Jerzul 04:24, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gordian and deification 

message: It says in the article that Gordian III was the youngest emperor of the united Roman Empire. However, according to the dates given, he would have been thirteen years and one hundred ninety one days old when he became emperor while, according to the article on Alexander Severus, Alexander Severus was thirteen years and one hundred forty one days old when he took the throne. Perhaps this should be corrected?— Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.164.156.186 (talk) 19:17, 19 May 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Youngest?
Talk:Trebonianus Gallus

message: I placed the "unreferenced" tag not only because of the lack of any reference (primary or secondary) but also because Gallus is a controversial emperor (some primary sources and modern scholars, in contrast with the article, consider him quite incapable or lazy).  Dipa1965 (talk) 12:55, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: fixed it by adding some citations--Dipa1965 (talk) 08:39, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  the article is unreliable, we need references 

message: ...in 250 was made governor of the Roman province of Moesia Superior. He is mentioned  in the List of Roman governors of Lower Moesia (Peluba (talk) 08:18, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Governor of the Roman province of Moesia Superior,
Talk:CAC Winjeel

message: In August 2008 Bidgee inserted an image of the CAC Winjeel on display at the RAAF Museum in Wagga Wagga.  The image was based on a photograph taken by Bidgee in 2008.  This image was inserted in the Infobox.  Another image of a Winjeel in flight, circa 1980,  was also added at this time by Bidgee.
Bidgee’s photograph of the Winjeel in the RAAF Museum is a relatively high resolution image, and it fills the frame.  However, I find it unsatisfactory as the leading image in this article for the following reasons:
*The image shows nothing of the planform of the Winjeel
*The rudder appears to be missing
*The paint scheme is indeterminate - some residue of a camouflage scheme; engine cowls in Day-Glo orange as used in training role
*All the windows appear to be blackened
*The image is cluttered by a background of trees, lawn, a warning sign, a rope barrier and a steel picket.
In contrast, the 1980 image of a Winjeel in flight appears to me to be superior for the purpose of showing what a Winjeel looks like.
*The image shows the planform of the Winjeel
*The paint scheme is that used in the Forward Air Control role
*The aircraft is surrounded by blue sky and there is nothing else to detract from the silhouette of the aircraft.
*True, the image is not particularly high resolution, but it is clearly an excellent view of a Winjeel doing what Winjeels were designed to do - fly!
On 28 February I swapped the two images so that the image in the Infobox (the leading image in the article) is the one of the Winjeel in flight.  I demoted the image of the RAAF Museum Winjeel to the spot where the in-flight image was previously.
Bidgee disagreed with my attempt to improve the quality of the article, and restored  his image to the Infobox, writing One flying is poor in resolution and there is more sky than aircraft.  It is clear that the views of other Users should be sought as to which image should occupy the Infobox in this article.  What do people think? Dolphin51 (talk) 12:20, 1 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I deem this issue as solved, thanks goes to naemick who licensed this photo under CC-BY-2.0, I feel the image has better feel to it then the other images. Bidgee (talk) 07:53, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: The new photo is fantastic. Nick-D (talk) 09:37, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

text: I agree that the new image is a wonderful tribute to the Winjeel.  It is the ideal leading image in this article. Dolphin51 (talk) 09:48, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Request for comments about photographs
Talk:Tacitus (emperor)

message: :The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. 
The result of the move request was: Page moved. The was a suggestion to move the page to Emperor Tacitus but didn't gain support. (closed by non-admin page mover)  Jerm (talk) 16:10, 18 April 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Marcus Claudius Tacitus →  – Most sources, such as Britannica refers to him simply as Tacitus, suggesting that that is his :Wikipedia:COMMONNAME. 2601:241:300:B610:C072:E2FF:A43F:6722 (talk) 15:07, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 11 April 2021 

message: wikipedia page about Emperor Tacitus is certainly well sourced but is also unsufferably ambiguous about his life due to multiple sources that are cited by wikipedia editors contradict each other. my suggestion would be removing historia augusta as a source considering it's believed to be unreliable by modern historians Nedim Sancar (talk) 15:06, 25 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  ambiguous
Talk:Botrytis cinerea

message: i doubt that is fungus is an ascomycota, since the Botrytis genus is located in the eumycota filum. --200.119.47.108 05:31, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Comments

message: The merger discussion is here. Moonraker12 11:07, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Merger

message: I have changed the mention of Botrytis magnoceps to Botrytis cineria because I think it was made in error and the latter was what was intended. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 07:32, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Botrytis magnoceps

message: Please consider incorporating material from the above draft submission into this article. Drafts are eligible for deletion after 6 months of inactivity. ~Kvng (talk) 23:32, 27 January 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Draft:Botrytis blight]]

message: I have declined a draft on the blight as mostly duplicating information in this article and the genus.  However, I think that we should consider having a separate article on the blight, as distinguished from the genus and any species.  Robert McClenon (talk) 22:43, 31 December 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Draft:Botrytis Blight]] 

message: Botrytis cinerea and Botryotinia fuckeliana are anamorph and teleomorph.    Invasive Spices (talk) 31 July 2022 (UTC)
: Klbrain (talk) 05:58, 13 November 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge
Talk:George Cary (Georgia politician)

message: This article was started using public domain information from the Biographical Directory of the United States Congress. LarryQ 02:53, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

message: No mention of slave-owning. I feel that this category should be restricted to people whose slave-owning history was notable in itself. Valetude (talk) 19:58, 21 April 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Category:American slave owners
Talk:RJ61

message: I don't like the idea of merging.  RJ11, RJ12, RJ14, and RJ25 have something in common: the 6 position modular connectors.  RJ61 uses the 8 position one.  The pin numbers aren't comparable between the two, because the two "additional" pins of the 8 are on the edges (pins 2-7 of 8P are equivalent to 1-6 of 6P).
The information in the RJ61 article is all quite unique to RJ61.  There is also the registered jack article for what they all have in common, and the modular connector article too.  The RJ11, etc. article does contain a lot of stuff that shouldn't be there because it isn't specific to those 4 registered jacks, and is redundant with the aforementioned articles.  I will clean that up.  Bryan Henderson 02:53, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge with RJ11, etc. article
Talk:Schloss Johannisberg

message: I just want to give kudos for the work done on this article. It looks really great. AgneCheese/Wine 19:19, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Great work on article

message: Louis made 6000 liter wine himself ?!? --Symposiarch (talk) 13:35, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: A royal estate does not create an association with the Church. Who donated the estate to the Church?--Wetman (talk) 01:04, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  King of the Franks 

message: Franz indeed gifted Johannesburg to Metternich in 1816, but not as Kaiser of the Holy Roman Empire, which met its end in 1806. 2600:1700:CDA:87E0:3156:BFD6:5260:54BB (talk) 00:07, 9 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Holy Roman Empire
Talk:Thomas F. Byrnes

message: I was pleased to see an article on Inspector Byrnes. He was an interesting person and well worth an article. I am concerned, however, that the sites liked to are not really all that great. Just some guy's website selling a copy of a reprint of a book is not a good idea at all for a reference, and some blog saying someone coined a term isn't an encyclopedic reference either. A number of the other external links sprinkled through the article are similar. It'd be nice if someone cleaned that all up. 172.128.225.40 03:10, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Just renamed the page, but if anyone disagrees with it, I'm willing to discuss.  In my opinion, I don't think "policeman" is needed.  He was more than just a policeman, but was a detective and had other roles.  Also, references to him often include his middle initial, including numerous books, NY Times and other newspaper articles. --Aude (talk) 23:20, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Fine by me.  He is certainly the most prominent Thomas Byrnes, with all due respect to the Aussie politician.--Wehwalt 00:41, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Page move 

message: "which was apparently coined by Byrnes". This isn't a referenced, and I have a contradictory reference. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 00:49, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: There are also a lot of contradictory references when it comes to word and phrase origins. We'd have to balance the weight to see if the claim is even worth mentioning and the cite the claim to a source so we don't give people the idea that it's something everyone says. In the meantime maybe it should be deleted from this article. (Incidentally, what does your ref says?)  DreamGuy (talk) 14:10, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Coined term 
Talk:Canadair CC-109 Cosmopolitan

message: Having a "a cited and sourced statement" was my goal here. Why would I dispute that? - BillCJ 16:42, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Whoops , I think there may have been an inadvertent deletion of a passage, my apologies, BillCJ. Onward and upward... You sure are right about the Eland article; there's really nothing there and yet this was an interesting engine programme Bzuk 20:08, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: "Edit warring"
Talk:RMS Alcantara (1926)

message: HMS Alcantara is a redirect to RMS Alcantara (1913). I presume this one was also an HMS in military service? Then this should bei addressed in a disambiguation. --KnightMove (talk) 07:23, 3 April 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Good point. Done. Pol098 (talk) 20:09, 12 December 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Incoming wikilinks should also be fixed, because they now point to a dab page instead of being redirected to where they expect.  Lithopsian (talk) 20:35, 12 December 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  HMS?
Talk:The Very Best of Steely Dan: Reelin' In the Years

message: There is, to my mind, a very questionable edit on this page by user Dolph ludger on 8 November 2011.
The user makes the fairly remarkable claim that "There are two Steely Dan compilation albums, identically named The Very Best of Steely Dan: Reelin' In the Years and with identical record covers, but with different songs. The first was released in 1985 and the latter in 1987."
Actually, there was a compilation released in 1987, called "The Very Best of Steely Dan: Do It Again". The album art is different to "The Very Best of Steely Dan: Reelin' In the Years", but the track listing is identical to that cited by Dolph ludger for this mysterious second version of "The Very Best of Steely Dan: Reelin' In the Years"
I'm sure that Dolph is confused, and would like to see a source that backs up his/her claim. RossBig (talk) 12:13, 8 June 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: You may be correct. The 1987 version as shown has the same track listing as The Very Best of Steely Dan: Do It Again see also https://www.discogs.com/Steely-Dan-The-Very-Best-Of-Steely-Dan-Do-It-Again/master/241586 -- Beardo (talk) 01:29, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

text: Yeah, this makes no sense. I'm going to remove it. DancesWithGrues (talk) 12:36, 18 July 2023 (UTC)
Talk:RMS Baltic (1903)

message: The broadside schematic of the Baltic is labeled as being from 1903. This is unlikely as the drawing shows the ship configured with a large number of lifeboats which were added in the wake of the Titanic disaster (1912). It is therefor likely that the drawing was made not earlier than 1912.
Ad Orientem (talk) 05:22, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Misdated photograph 
Talk:Canadair CL-44

message: Why does this article use British English, instead of Canadian English? Surely, this should use Canadian English... 70.24.244.248 (talk) 04:25, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I have changed the notice. MilborneOne (talk) 20:06, 24 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  English 

message: Is it a fact that the tank capacity was reduced regarding the CL-44J?
I have been as a child and teenager often a passenger in the "Rolls Royce 400" on the way to and from Iceland.
I was sometimes visiting the pilots in the cockpit. One pilot was a friend of the family.
I remember being told that the range of the stretched version was the same as the short one, and that the stretch had rather extended the range than decreased it. The stretched version was said to go slightly faster and use slightly less fuel for the same distance.Jochum (talk) 15:40, 11 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  regarding tanks on the CL-44J
Talk:HMS Black Prince (81)

message: https://timespanner.blogspot.com/2010/01/day-new-zealand-bombarded-australia.html
This article says the HMS Black Prince bombed the village of Currarong NSW coast. Might be an interesting piece of information to add to this Wikipedia article?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 118.92.164.60 (talk) 07:44, 14 March 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Unattributed blog ... would need RS's (newspapers, books) to back it up before it could be added. One of the referenced websites has now been deleted - the cache can be found. 50.111.22.12 (talk) 02:05, 1 April 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  NZ bombs Australia 

message: Any particular reason why the Early 1945 - Mid 1946 configuration and New Zealand service armaments were removed?
Aeris97 (talk) 20:44, 26 September 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: They're better covered in the main body as the infobox is otherwise too long.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 21:21, 26 September 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  NZ service armament
Talk:SS Britannic (1874)

message: Is it interesting? On 5th June 1880 American Psychologist and Philosopher William James (1842-1910) got onboard the Britannic for Liverpool and arrived there on 14th June. (Skrupskelis, Ignas K.; Berkeley, Elizabeth M. (Ed.): The Correspondence of William James. Vol 5. 1878-1884. Charlottesville / London 1997. 101; 103.
I apologize that my English might not be too well. Monsventosus (talk) 06:22, 18 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  A prominent passenger 
Talk:Sol Star

message: The existing article cites a book that mentions Star among those buried in Mount Moriah Cemetery in Deadwood, but other sources indicate that after his funeral in Deadwood, his body was taken to St. Louis, Missouri to be interred; see this page at FindAGrave.com. 
The book seems to only be a passing mention, and more likely to be erroneous, but I'm not sure if it's appropriate to remove it, since it's a claim from a verifiable source and it's not totally clear which is correct and which isn't -- what's the best way to handle this? 2601:586:8101:A710:0:0:0:2 (talk) 02:18, 9 February 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Burial place?
Talk:HMS Leander (F109)

message: Really? This didn't stop the use of Ikara in the Niteroi-class frigates built for Brazil - definitely not a member of the Commonwealth.Nigel Ish (talk) 20:36, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Leander was not sold to another navy due to Australia prohibiting the sale of the Ikara ASW missile to non-Commonwealth nations. 

message: What does "Qui patitur vincit" mean? I know it was the ship's motto, but it would be nice for ignoramuses like me to have an English translation in brackets after the Latin.
RASAM (talk) 23:24, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Motto
Talk:19th Street station (SEPTA)

message: This article mentions that turnstiles will be installed in the future as part of the SEPTA NPT project. However, SEPTA Key is in use and payment units were installed on the actual trolleys themselves. Does anyone know for sure if there are still plans to put turnstiles at the trolley stations?--Overturn 91 (talk) 04:31, 11 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Turnstiles
Talk:2nd Street station (SEPTA)

message: Google Maps calls this station "Penns Landing" station. Should the name be changed? ----DanTD (talk) 19:07, 24 November 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think so, SEPTA calls the station 2nd Street so it should stay the same. — Gfoley4 Wanna chat? 21:36, 30 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay, but how can we explain that alternate name? ----DanTD (talk) 12:53, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Alternate name(former or replacement)
Talk:HMS Penelope (97)

message: I think the article about the nickname should stay as it is part of the ships history and is why the ship is famous someone took it of the page saying it was a rambling story but its not it is an article on where the nickname comes from and calling it a rambling story is an insult to the men who where there on the ship as this ship done so much in world war 2 and everything in the article happened as fact --Carsie100 (talk) 04:02, 20 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The editor who removed it the first time was in the right. The section you added was long, and full of unencyclopaedic detail, with lashings of points of view, apparent original research, and other unsourced and supported assertions. I've cut it down to the salient facts. This article is not an article on how the ship got its nickname, it is an article on the ship and its history in its entirety, so WP:UNDUE also applies here. Furthermore wikipedia is not a memorial, calling the removal of the section 'an insult to the men who where there on the ship as this ship done so much in world war 2' is an overreaction, and writing a section from this intention is not a good way to begin. Finally though it may well be all true, everything on wikipedia has to be verifiable for inclusion. Benea (talk) 12:45, 20 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  HMS Pepperpot nickname section 

message: Could somebody please explain what possible use empty section could have? Thanks.  --91.10.19.237 (talk) 15:08, 1 May 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Empty Section
Talk:Confédération nationale du travail

message: Nowadays two completely separate organizations, so there's absolutely no way we can cover them in a single article. It definitely needs to be split, even if it is short. --PanchoS (talk) 02:10, 9 December 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed, I've tagged the article to reflect this proposal. Sadly I know little of either organization, and this article doesn't much help that. djr13 (talk) 09:36, 10 May 2015 (UTC)
replies: text:  Need sources in order to warrant the split czar 04:55, 20 February 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article needs to be split 

message: The original French CNT itself had meager influence and most of the coverage of the split isn't in-depth enough to warrant its own article. It would be best to cover the article within the parent article  and split out in summary style only when warranted to avoid undue weight. czar 05:24, 29 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Scope
Talk:RFA Fort Victoria

message: Come come James, she did more than 20 knots when we whizzed across the Atlantic in 1997! 
Your own book quotes 22.Dmgerrard 17:38, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: http://news.sky.com/home/world-news/article/16148826 Twobells (talk) 13:04, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Piracy Captures 13/01/12 

message: http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/News-and-Events/Latest-News/2013/March/28/130328-Fort-Victoria-GulfPhd8511 (talk) 17:21, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  update 

message: see http://www.marinetraffic.com/en/ais/details/ships/shipid:184838/mmsi:233135000/vessel:FORT%20VICTORIA
Cantab1985 (talk) 06:41, 13 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Taking over from RFA Mounts Bay 

message: Does anyone have any updates on the planned change from the GAM-B01 (20mm) mount to another mount type - assumed to be MSI DS30 or similar? I understand the Royal Navy plans to take all GAM-B01 mounts out of service by March/April 2023. Sjhedger (talk) 11:56, 8 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Weapons Upgrade - GAM-B01
Talk:Fisher College of Business

message: Shouldn't the Fisher College of Business article contain information about the Undergraduate business programs offered? --Scotsworth 03:38, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, and read less like an admissions offer brochure... --JD79 20:28, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Heh, I just re-read this article for the first time in a long while.  There's still insufficient info on the undergrad programs. --JD79 20:32, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Undergrad info

message: Do we want a list of notable alumni from the college?  From what I've seen, "notable alumni" means that they graduated from Fisher and are notable by Wikipedia notability standards. OlYellerTalktome 17:09, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I just noticed that Ohio State has its own list of notable people.  That being the case, a list just for Fisher might not be warranted. OlYellerTalktome 19:03, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Notable Alumni