lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Dutch Shepherd

message: Shouldn't this article be moved to Dutch Shepherd Dog in order to conform with the naming conventions? Why is it called Hollandse Herder in the first place? --Pharaoh Hound (talk) 14:24, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Correct name is Dutch Shepherd. Like the articles on German Shepherd or Belgian Shepherd use the name without "Dog". In the Netherlands they also call it Dutch Shepherd (Hollandse Herder). Shepherd Dog is more of a description, as in "that's a shepherd's dog". Karel Adriaan (talk) 04:09, 12 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article name 

message: This article is poorly written...I changed one paragraph that had a sentence that was in 2nd person, but the whole page needs an edit or redo.  Encyclopedia articles are supposed to be factual and unbiased; it is not written as such.  The writing about health needs sources to back up the fact...I don't know if the information about hip dysplasia is true, or if those  reasonswhy  they are preferred by the police are true.  Many working GSDs are on the smaller side, and no bigger than Dutch Shepherds.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.19.75.5 (talk) 04:43, 22 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Citations 

message: The history section title was removed and I returned it. I suspect it was a good faith edit but it was without explanation. Nor were the three subsections of history rewritten as stand alone sections. But perhaps the should be? Jemmaca (talk) 20:50, 9 December 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  History 

message: This reads more like a brochure from the UKC than an encyclopedia entry. Archolman | User talk:Archolman 16:56, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  7.2 The Dutch Shepherd in the USA 
Talk:Stoned in Love

message: Beat part sounds similar (and partly taken from WoWy U2), test yourself at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e96w-0RcmLE  78.94.87.233 (talk)  —Preceding undated comment added 10:03, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Take Me To The Clouds Above 
Talk:Baby Elephant Walk

message: Just listened to this song. The entire song is in a 12-bar blues foremat! The introduction doesn't go through the chord changes, stays on one chord, but that creates tension, and sets up the song very well. Will contact other editors to see about somehow incorporating this into the article. Tapered (talk) 22:20, 17 February 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Can we possibly find a source that says this? bd2412 T 22:31, 17 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: 12 Bar Blues!

message: Though it is possible, I am pretty sure that Bill Haley didn't make records in 1964 with Orfeon Records at Turkey, but at the label Orfeón (Mexican record label). Someone else could confirm this and correct the link to the record company page.187.240.89.78 (talk) 04:49, 28 November 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bill Haley at Discos Orfeón
Talk:2006 Yanjin earthquake

message: Why an article about such a minor earthquake?--TheFEARgod 14:28, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Having a natural event kill people is minor to you? I am sickened. Daniel.Bryant 23:52, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

text: everyone has the right to express it's POV--TheFEARgod 08:33, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: pulling back that POV after 1,5 yrs--TheFEARgod (Ч) 22:07, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:The Battle of New Orleans

message: Perhaps this should be renamed "The Battle of New Orleans (Song)" and the disambig page should be turned to the actual battle. I think that more people would be looking for the battle. —ScouterSig 20:01, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Disambig 

message: Why isnt the text of the song given in the article? 78.147.245.55 (talk) 11:32, 30 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Usually either copyright concerns, and/or because such texts would be more suitable to Wikisource... AnonMoos (talk) 00:24, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Where's the text? 

message: In the early 70´s a Mexican group called "La Tropa Loca" recorded a cover of this song tell the history of the Battle of Cinco de Mayo and tituled with that name: La Batalla de Cinco de Mayo.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nekko09 (talk • contribs) 07:12, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  An Spanish cover of "The Battle of New Orleans" 

message: How did the song do in Britain?  Jokem (talk) 07:36, 13 October 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Read the article.  "In Britain, Lonnie Donegan and his Skiffle Group's 1959 version competed with Horton's and achieved greater success, peaking at number two. This version includes a spoken introduction, in which Donegan explains that the British were on the losing side."  Ghmyrtle (talk) 08:04, 13 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  UK
Talk:Leslie Halliwell

message: :The DNB has a different date for his death.  
::He died of cancer on 21 January 1989 in the Princess Alice Hospice, Esher, Surrey.
:--jmb 14:31, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Date of death

message: "Shaped domestic tastes"?  The very idea of having someone as a buyer of movies for television stations whose own appreciation of cinema is so supremely stuck in the 1940s and who regards anything vaguely modern as instantly second rate is plain stupid.  The guy was a waste of space and the sort of snob that stifles any inventiveness.  Tosser.
--I love that comment above, I only wish it was possible to cut and paste it into the main article.  I viewed this article after becoming perplexed by 'Halliwell's Film Guide' reviews used at a video rental web site that I often view.  It seems to throw up reviews which hilariously miss the point and are often utterly at odds with other amateur and professional reviews, allbeit not actually written by the man himself. 82.70.155.252 (talk) 11:52, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: ?

message: I disagree that "the spread of four-star films across the decades clearly demonstrated a bias towards older films". It actually reflects a decline in the standard of films since the 1960's. Moreover the accusation of bias is itself a form of bias. The one-sided reporting of criticism is POVRoyalcourtier (talk) 02:10, 22 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Allegation of bias
Category talk:Metaphysics

message: I believe that Postmodernism should be included here. Postmodern literature and art (especially, the way Derrida, and Foucault perform their 'work' is deeply literary and philosophical, often reaching into metaphysical abstractions of thought.Drakonicon 14:32, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Postmodernism is certainly an important issue, but I think calling it 'metaphysics' is stretching the notion to breaking point: metaphysics means a a lot more, and is a lot more specific, than just being literary and philosophical, or reaching into abstractions of thought. Cheers, Sam Clark 09:55, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Relevant links

message: I am taking Meta-ethics out of Metaphysics. It is a branch of philoophy on its own. It only belongs in Metaphysics in the sense that most branches of philosophy belong in metaphysics - e.g. philosophy of science, philosophy of art, etc. If you really dsiagree, revert and I won't protest (well, not on the computer!) Anarchia 11:08, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think about 7 of the 27 articles in the category should not be in metaphysics, the other ones fit. My only concern is getting a bot to tag these with the metaphysics=yes tag. It's so few articles it doesn't matter. Gregbard 11:39, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Meta-ethics

message: Kant is in this category, as is Descartes. Shouldn't Hegel, Heidegger and Aristotle also be in it? If people are, then three of the most critical commentators on Metaphysics should be up there.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 169.233.12.193 (talk) 16:12, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hegel/Heidegger/Aristotle 

message: I noticed that :Category:Metaphysics is a subcategory of :Category:Reality, which is a sub-subcategory of :Category:Metaphysics. This seems wrong. bd2412 T 16:49, 5 July 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Category structure 

message: I remove because metaphysique category isn't a philosophical theory's subcategory.Zipodu (talk) 14:40, 26 July 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  I remove philosophical theory category
Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Dante Arthurs

message: For many people, the rumour that Arthurs may be Thompson has NOT been disproven conclusively. If you want, I can put together a conspiracy theory page featuring Arthurs, Thompson and the Governments of Australia and Western Australia with hard evidence far more noxious to you than what is currently featured in this article. The evidence I have is fully sourced and can be forwarded to Wikipedia editors before positng if you would prefer that. The only reason why I have not posted this information so far is for fear of jeopardising the trial.
The rumour exists and Dante Arthurs is the central character. Those are undeniable facts. If you believe there is no further basis for this rumour, let me know and I will forward what I have to Wikipedia and let them decide. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Elpocoloco (talk • contribs) 
You are still basing your rationale for the page on this discredited rumour. If Dante Arthurs turns out to be one of the killers of James Bulger, the story worthy of a Wikipedia page will be the conspiracy story concerning the national and relevant local governments and Police of both Australia and UK, who have all denied this ridiculous rumour. What is this so-called 'hard evidence?'. If it exists, please post it here, and also send it to me at tlaingyorbATkriocouckeDOTmailexpireDOTcom
If by any amazing turn of events, there is some substance here, then it will be the correct time to feature it on a page.
Centrepull 06:18, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
Talk:Bring It On Home to Me

message: The chronology in the last paragraph needs serious work. Cooke recorded the song in 1961, but Brown's 1962 "I Wanna Go Home" was "several years prior to Cooke's song"? Cooke died in 1964, but he "invited Brown to play piano on the 1965 Bring It On Home session"? I'm having trouble tracking down when Brown (who had a much closer relationship with Cooke than the entry implies) actually recorded "I Wanna Go Home" -- otherwise I'd rewrite the section myself. [words_and_music, 12/09]  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Words and music (talk • contribs) 22:22, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I've gone ahead and removed the entire paragraph. It's been over a year and a half, and no one has provided any correction or source. If there's anything to this, someone should find a reliable source, preferably one that doesn't have all the dates wrong. Brettalan (talk) 03:29, 23 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: I have added this article to this category as Bill Haley recorded a version of it in 1972 for his album Just Rock and Roll. Normally I would add a mention of this to the article, however the article is formatted such that only successful recordings are being mentioned there, and the Haley version wasn't a success. However I am adding the category to all songs (with articles) that Haley recorded (as a prelude to a possible Wikiproject) so I decided to post this note to explain why the category is there. 23skidoo 14:38, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Bill Haley songs category

message: In the "Yeah" echoes, it sounds like there are two voices responding to Cooke. Was there another backing vocalist, or is that Lou Rawls overdubbed?Ulmanor (talk) 11:50, 14 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Backing Vocals
Talk:Carolina in the Morning

message: The song is not risque. The lyrics read "Nothing could be finer than to be in Caroline IN THE MORNING"; "Nothing could be sweeter than my baby when I meet her IN THE MORNING" Therefore, he wants to be in Caroline in the morning so he can meet his girlfriend.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.66.8.173 (talk) 01:36, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
Talk:Charmaine (song)

message: The infobox heavily leans towards The Bachelors. Their version was not a very successful one, Guy Lombardo did much better. This is a very popular song, perhaps, a no-name infobox will be more appropriate? Викидим (talk) 20:11, 4 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why the "Bachelors"?
Talk:Cold, Cold Heart

message: What is the word Miaja doing at the beginning of this article? And who died at the age of 39? Certainly not Norah Jones. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 82.38.141.175 (talk) 23:41, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Miaja? 

message: Those additions should be challenged. This is re-writing history. Hank has been credited as the sole writers for 70 years! You allow some unreliable source to come forward and change that? Mind you the source admits all evidence is BURNED ! And all who could challenge it are dead. This is disgraceful. No wonder why Wikipedia is not considered a scholarly source. You should ban yourself for allowing this history to be falsely re-written Rockojr2488 (talk) 04:45, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: I am reverting all of your removals because of your violation of the hard policy WP:Neutral point of view. Binksternet (talk) 05:01, 11 December 2018 (UTC)

text: I fully agree. The article should be reverted to its former state. And then this part can probably be added as an "Alternate history", "Authorship controversy" or something like that. --Moscow Connection (talk) 14:05, 18 December 2018 (UTC)

text: Unfortunately, when I came to this article a couple of days ago, I didn't notice this discussion and didn't know that that strange paragraph I saw in the lead was added very recently. I just saw that the lead section contradicted the rest of the article and tried to do something about it. Now, when I know that the paragraph was a very recent addition (and I also think that its placement in the lead violated WP:NPV), I think the article should be reverted to its former state and then this new paragraph can be added as a separate section somewhere below. --Moscow Connection (talk) 14:25, 18 December 2018 (UTC)

text: Since there are objections to the new version, I reverted to the pre-October 26 one. Binksternet's October 26 addition is also retained. I just moved it to a new "Controversy" section. --Moscow Connection (talk) 19:13, 14 January 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Paul jargon needs to be deleted.  

message: This article has to comply with WP:FRINGE if it is to include any material on alternative authorship that departs significantly from the prevailing views or mainstream views. Of course I am referring to the Paul Gilley material, which cannot be given undue weight disproportionate to its coverage in mainstream scholastic sources. I'm not even sure if it can be included at all. Tom Reedy (talk) 23:52, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wikipedia policy 

message: I added a ref to a statement that had been deleted on the grounds of WP:OR. User Binksternet immediately deleted it with no explanation other than "blog." While blogs are usually not acceptable sources for most WP pages, WP:Parity gives greater leeway in discussing fringe claims such as this, so I have reverted the revert. Tom Reedy (talk) 06:23, 26 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  OR discussion.
Talk:Delonix regia

message: I'd like to debate that line about there being 'lilac' poincianas in Puerto Rico.  Without documentation, I doubt such a colour variation is possible, and I think the writer is getting the flamboyants mixed up with jacarandas - they have a very similar leaf and umbrella, but the flowers are of a completely different shape and the branch growth is rather different on closer examination.
Pending somebody coming up with a photograph, I'm editing that phrase out.
Corgi 22:56, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lilac poincianas?? 

message: I live with the plants for about 40 years in the mascareignes & consider it necessary to review the leaves/season section. To my experience, the tree is planted mainly for decorative purposes and not so much for shade as it possesses average amount of leaves which are tiny. It is rivalled by may other trees for shade. All its leaves are lost during the relatively cold season when there is little rainfall in the southern hemisphere.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.222.99.45 (talk) 16:45, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Leaves & season 

message: I have a quick suggestion. The quality of the main photo is pretty low and it might be a good idea to replace it with a better one to improve the quality of the article. Kobitate94 (talk) 13:34, 14 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Main photograph quality
Talk:Battle of Emridy Meadows

message: I'm aware that the drow goddess's name is spelled both ways depending on whether you're a drow or not, but as the main article on Lolth is spelled with the l's separated by the 'o' instead of together, and the article states that "Lloth" is drow dialect and not the spelling in Common, I changed the spelling in this article from "Lloth" to "Lolth" to match.  --Jemiller226 21:02, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lolth/Lloth
Talk:Magas

message: Are the population numbers in thousands?—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.162.154.176 (talk • contribs) .
:No.  The actual population is currently around 300 people.——Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 13:53, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Population?

message: The WPCities importance=high derives from its political status not its population. Folks at 137 (talk) 18:56, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: WPCities
File talk:Doom gibs.png

message: Is this screenshot from fury.wad? Looks familiar.
If it is, I am the map's author! (And you have my permission to keep the pic. :))—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.196.212.30 (talk • contribs) .
:It looks to me like part of one of the Ultimate Doom levels. I haven't played through UD in a long time though. Also, even if it is your level, your ownership extends only to the level layout, not to any other resources you do not own (the retail textures, sprites, other graphics, etc.) that are present in the picture. Hence, most of what can be seen isn't yours (depending on how you think about it :P).--Drat (Talk) 17:54, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's E4M8: Fear of Ultimate Doom. -- 193.60.171.126
Yep it's the first Doom, my best friend and I are massive fans. YBK
It's from the final level in chapter 4 in DooM. 96.236.175.95 (talk) 01:45, 25 August 2009 (UTC)
Talk:Heartaches by the Number

message: please included if somebody should come around here to revise this page, thanks. 77.10.115.237 (talk) 19:05, 30 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Also recorded by Johnny Tillotson in 1965 

message: Please, who can tell the words?    --213.225.2.64 (talk) 14:14, 20 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Words of the song 

message: "This would be Guy's second pop chart topper (after "Singing the Blues"); ironically, it would also be his last top-40 single in the Billboard charts."
What is ironic about this? Chris Martin (talk) 09:00, 29 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ironic
Talk:Drew Stanton

message: the Umich obsession with Drew Stanton continues, nice vandalism by the classy wolverine fanbase. enough already SnapRat (talk) 14:59, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Vandalism

message: "He went 0-5 against the University of Michigan in his career, and given his on- and off-the-field obsessive hatred of the Michigan Wolverines, this will surely haunt him for the rest of his life" 
*This is an opinion and not a fact. This is not what Wikipedia is about, and will be removed. Wolverineh8ter (talk)01:40, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Bias in article

message: can someone find a new picture for the article? LukeTheSpook (talk) 05:20, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: New Picture

message: Talk about football(American) 2600:1011:B161:FE2C:1D99:923C:913A:1F4C (talk) 22:35, 28 November 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Football
Talk:Dungeonland

message: "a fungi forest" > "a mushroom-dominated forest" or "a forest of mushrooms" ? R. Henrik Nilsson (talk) 16:32, 28 September 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Hard to know! Maybe whoever wrote that into the plot summary knew what they were talking about... 2601:240:E200:3B60:124:D29F:D3C6:CFE (talk) 22:20, 28 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  "a fungi forest" > "a mushroom-dominated forest" or "a forest of mushrooms" ?
Talk:I Got a Woman

message: *Chart position : #1 R&B
*Category : R&B
*Writers : Ray Charles, Renald Richard
*Label and number : Atlantic 1050, New York City
*Flipside (A-side) : Come back baby, #4 R&B
*When and where recorded : November 18, 1954, in Atlanta, Georgia
*When released : late December 1954
*Why important : in many respects it brought down the curtain on '50s R&B and heralded in a new, heavily gospel-inflected music that would involve into early '60s soul.  
*Important remakes : Presley, POP #1, 1956; Eddie Bond and the Stompers "I've got a woman", Mercury 70826X45 (matrix YW1 2674, Progressive Music (BMI), March 1956, vocal by Eddie Bond, DNC, A-side of Rockin' Daddy written by Sonny Fisher; Sammy Davis, Jr., 1960, DNC; Jimmy McGriff, POP #20, 1962; Ricky Nelson, POP #49, 1963; Freddie Scott, POP #48, 1963; Ray Charles himself, POP #79, 1965.  Stephan KŒNIG 13:52, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  I' VE GOT A WOMAN...instead of I got a woman 

message: This sentence: "Fifty years later, rapper Kanye West would sample "I Got a Woman" for his #1 US hit, "Gold Digger", in 2005, bringing Charles back into the charts (with help from Jamie Foxx, who played Charles in the biopic, Ray, and imitated him in the intro), only this time credited as a songwriter of his own #1 hit posthumously after his June 2004 death."  is too long and confusing to read.  It needs to be rewritten possibly as 2 or 3 sentences.
Dom316 03:57, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  rewrite 

message: I thought this is based on "It must be Jesus" by The Southern Tunes? Came out 1954, too. If Ray recorded it in December, I guess that one was before, and it involves the same chord pattern.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.239.22.114 (talk) 16:04, 26 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Orgin of the tune 

message: Added: Fact> Charles found a recording studio for his song 'I Got a Woman' at Georgia Tech's radio station WGST. (Not added: Legend> Charles had difficulty finding a willing studio in Georgia, black or white, due to the song's lyrics, and it being a riff on a gospel tune. Student staff members at Georgia Tech's radio station, however, quickly grasped the intrinsic beauties of the song and—it was later bragged among Tech students—slipped the import of the recording session past the attention of Tech's administrative officials, part of a long tradition of tomfoolery practiced by Tech students vis-a-vis the administration. In general, the Tech student body—it was all-male at the time—loved their unique connection to Charles and his song 'recorded on the Tech campus' (the recording studios were actually located downtown); and 'the Man' and his music were extremely popular on the Tech campus for years/decades to follow.)--Jbeans (talk) 09:05, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Ray Charles recording at Georgia Tech (1954)
Talk:Team racing

message: See 2012/13 Updates section below for current activity - the comments immediately below have been addressed in recent updates.--Anthony Butler 15:12, 26 October 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Historic Talk 

message: I have taken the initiative to clean up this Team racing page: adding historic background; improving readability;  removing redundant and overly-complex material and irrelevant photographs; and adding relevant detail to all sections - particularly the history section, explaining the central role of the UK in promoting the sport.  The task is now complete as of December 2013.Anthony Butler 10:01, 19 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  2012/13 Updates 

message: You should know about this and comment.  One of our editors has systematically depopulated it (from this article among many others), and thinks that is a good reason to delete it. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 12:24, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Contested deletion [[Category talk:Yachting races]]