lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Three Theban plays

message: My book of Sophocles (going back to the library tomorrow) says that the three Theban plays are unified by nothing besides their subject, and in fact have contradictions.  Smack 22:05 4 Jun 2003 (UTC)
Subject, yes, as well as some important themes SparkNotes has a good way of explaining it.
These plays should be written on the main page as Sophokles wrote them, not in the story chronology.
::No way. The series definitely has enough significance, enough outside sources, enough real world importance, etc. to merit its own page.Bsimmons666 (talk) 01:55, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Ordering

message: I notice that the only sources for this article are the original texts of the trilogy.  Much of the textual criticism, therefore, is unsourced and in contravention of WP:OR.  I'll try to find some sources--there must be scads of them out there, I'm sure.
As an aside, what do people think of renaming the article?  "Three Theban plays" doesn't have much of a ring to it, and I've always heard of these plays as the Theban Trilogy, or occasionally the Oedipus plays.  AnturiaethwrTalk 22:13, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: "The Three Theban Plays" is how the Fagles Penguin translation dubs them. I would find "the Theban Trilogy" to be misleading and a poor choice. I don't have a problem with how the article is currently titled. — goethean ॐ 22:31, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

text: Looking at the article more closely, I think that it could be merged with Sophocles, where there is already a section devoted to the topic. I don't see the point of having a separate article on the subject. — goethean ॐ 22:34, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, I suppose you're right: a merge would be in order unless and until we get some good, sourced information on these plays' significance other than as works of Sophocles.  As for the title, I'd be open to any number of possible titles; "Theban Trilogy" is just a suggestion, based on what my English teacher called it.  The section you linked to has "Oedipus Cycle" as an alternate name, for instance, and my copy ("a new translation by Paul Roche," for what it's worth) is titled The Oedipus Plays of Sophocles.  I just think anything would be better than "Three Theban plays;" it's far too vague, and there must be a more descriptive title.  AnturiaethwrTalk 18:13, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I think that "Oedipus Cycle" is also misleading and should be avoided, since these plays were each part of seperate trilogies. — goethean ॐ 19:54, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Original research?
Talk:Macrobiotic diet

message: Give me strength ...  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.12.97.111 (talk) 21:40, 3 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pulses ARE vegetables 

message: I just archived an evidence free rant per WP:NOTFORUM, but the software didn't allow me to leave an edsum. It would have said "Evidence free rant removed per WP:NOTFORUM" and wanted you all to know. The archives are easily viewed using the links to the archives of the page provided. - Roxy the dog  16:29, 21 December 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Evidence free rant?? 

message: Why isn't Christoph Wilhelm Hufeland mentioned?
He published "Makrobiotik oder Die Kunst, das menschliche Leben zu verlängern" (1796), 54 years before Sagen Ishizuka was born, and 97 years before George Ohsawa!?!
Perhaps the latter 2 formalised the 'diet', but it's surprising to not see any reference to what it seems to be the origin of he term. Adler Looks Jorge (talk) 21:18, 19 April 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: As the article shows, macrobiotic treatment of diet is based on yin/yang analysis. Some compare it to an acid/base scale in chemistry. Hufeland, though a vegetarian proponent, may not have had this analysis in his work. The term "macrobiology" is called out by microbiology, so various interpretations may be expected. — Rgdboer (talk) 01:23, 22 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Origin, founder 

message: Why is this page locked? This is very unusual for such a niche diet-related page.
Anyways it's clearly written in a very negatively biased way and we should do something about it. Pages like this, that are clearly influenced by some sort of industry bias, make Wikipedia look bad. If you archive this thread you're just proving my point. Jay855a (talk) 02:37, 12 June 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Locked due to drive by IPs and new accounts making POV edits and putting vandalism onto the article. Psychologist Guy (talk) 07:37, 12 June 2023 (UTC)
replies: text:  LOL. The whole article is vandalism and bias and propaganda.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.12.97.111 (talk) 21:42, 3 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Locked?
Talk:Barry Bonds

message: The section sucks, it consists of a single badly worded pop cultural reference. Joeletaylor (talk) 21:05, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Delete “legacy” section?  

message: Under "====1995 season====", it reads "In 1994, he appeared in a small role as himself in the television film Jane's House, starring James Woods and Anne Archer.". That has absolutely nothing to do with Barry Bonds' 1995 season.
Can we please add this to a new section titled "===Filmography===" and list every appearance Bonds has made in movies and on television? His appearances are listed on IMDb: https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0482787/ 173.196.222.8 (talk) 20:09, 30 August 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done for now: WP:IMDB is not a reliable source. Edward-Woodrow :) [talk] 21:55, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 30 August 2023 

message: Change: Bonds was never well-liked by reporters or fans while in Pittsburgh, despite winning two MVP awards
To: Bonds was never well-liked by reporters or fans while in Pittsburgh, despite winning two MVP awards, because of his consistently negative interactions with them. Reporters and fans alike have complained about his negative attitude towards them, often denying autographs or ignoring them. Jakeschock (talk) 00:18, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. ayakanaa ( t · c ) 03:31, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 2 November 2023 

message: Under the "records shared" heading, the article incorrectly states that Bonds shares the record for home runs in a single postseason with 8. That record was broken by Randy Arozarena in 2020. 68.144.225.97 (talk) 06:33, 16 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Outdated information in records section
Talk:Transwarp

message: *There were several wikipedia articles about Star Trek transwarp drive, mostly stubs, and an article about TransWarp drive, from the game TradeWars (2002).  The redirect situation is a mess because all of the Tradewars articles link to TransWarp drive with the capital W which wikipedia recognizes as a different word than Transwarp.  Since there was already a disambiguation link at TransWarp (tradewars) sending Trekker to Warp drive, I merged all the transwarp info into the main warp drive article and turned this into a redirect page as well. Thatcher131 01:19, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge and redirect
Talk:Being for the Benefit of Mr. Kite!

message: We usually don't post lyrics as there may be copyright issues. Rob 16:26, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Lyrics

message: Just a small note, the line "turn on, tune in, drop out" should be "tune in, turn on, drop out." That's how it's spoken in the cited materials.
Centrisian (talk) 16:53, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Discrepancies 

message: I have just spent several months recreating this poster and know for a fact that the poster shown on this page is not the original one (the most obvious giveaway is that it uses Futura - a typeface designed in the 1920s - for the 'Mr. Kite' line. Unfortunately, there is no good, copyright-free version of the original poster available to use online. Although if you wanted to use the version I have created and cite it as a modern reproduction of the original, that would be fine. That picture is available here: kiteprint.com ... Also, the text of the poster, as given on this page, has some inaccuracies – mainly punctuation and capitalisation. Having studied a decent enough photo of the original, I believe the wording on my version to be accurate. That text is also on the same page referenced above, under the 'Poster text' tab. My Wikipedia-editing skills are poor unfortunately, but I'd be interested to hear what others think of my suggestions. Pjdiddy (talk) 18:28, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  The poster image used in this article and its wording 

message: I added "primarily" to the statement about John Lennon composing the song. By adding this word, the reader is informed that he did not write all of the song, but he was the primary author. This interpretation is supported by the remainder of the sentence, along with various other sentences within the article, which state that McCartney also participated in the writing. 
Someone reverted this addition. I am adding it back.
Mister Tog (talk) 12:29, 24 July 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Use of "primarily" 

message: > "John Henderson did perform with his wife Agnes, the daughter of circus owner Henry Hengler. "
>
> http://www.theglasgowstory.com/image/?inum=TGSA00108
>
> however, states that Henry was not a circus owner, but his son Frederick Charles Hengler (1820-1887) was!  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.163.176.155 (talk) 11:42, 30 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  erratum Hengler 

message: I'd been told, by reliable authority, that the song was a political lampoon of then Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchev, he being the "Mr. K" challenging the world. Albeit spurious, it fits: give it a listen with that in mind.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mfryc (talk • contribs) 17:32, 25 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Colo(u)r Me Disappointed
Talk:Terry Puhl

message: The piece states, "... the best performance ever by a hitter in a play-off series (It has since been superseded).[citation needed]..."  So, we are assuming that whoever wrote "it has since been superseded" is up on their facts and we will just take it for granted that they got it right...even though they couldn't bother telling us who did the superseding. We could also write things like, "Terry Puhl hit three home runs off the speakers suspended from the roof of the Astrodome in three successive at bats during his rookie year...citation needed."  And just by writing "citation needed" everything is OK and nobody questions the validity of the statement. Wikipedia is not an encyclopedia by a long shot -- but man, oh man, is it a hoot!  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.38.150.146 (talk) 04:06, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Citation Needed, Indeed
Talk:June 4

message: Here, vanity, not vandalism although pop-up showed a lot of text deleted. -- Borameer ™ 18:01, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: My edit on 03.09.07

message: Crusades by Thomas F Madden states that the SEljuks besieged Antioch on the 4th of June. Tourskin 04:03, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Kerbogh 

message: Events:
International Day of Trolling. Set in the year 2012 (This year) after the death of Eduard Khil.
85.65.218.190 (talk) 17:49, 18 June 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: please be more specific about what needs to be changed.—cyberpower ChatLimited Access 18:01, 18 June 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit request on 18 June 2012 

message: Please add Edwin Waterhouse's Birth date as well.
He was one of the founders of Price Waterhouse (which is now Pricewaterhouse Coopers, one of the Big 4 Audit Firms in the world).
He was born 4th June 1841.
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edwin_Waterhouse)
Thank you..
Iwansyah Iskandar (talk) 04:52, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't know. I think the birth date is unsourced, but I'm not sure. Floating Boat (the user formerly known as AndieM) 06:15, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

text: . This may need consensus, not and edit request.--Canoe1967 (talk) 06:24, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit request on 19 July 2012 

message: no Wiki article, and not mentioned at Public holidays in Kazakhstan 142.163.194.49 (talk) 15:37, 4 June 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  H&O - day of state symbols Kazakhstan 

message: This is notable, occured on June 4, I don't know why no one has added it on here in the past 20 years. Buildershed (talk) 22:26, 4 June 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: @Buildershed, please feel free to do so yourself. As per WP:DOYCITE, you must have a reliable source. Thanks, Kiwipete (talk) 04:56, 5 June 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Marvin Heemeyer/Killdozer in Granby Colorado, 2004
Talk:Aegukga

message: Can anyone upload the actual song of the national anthem, so people can click on it to listen? 69.144.184.243 07:25, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  The actual song 

message: I think this (see page history) might have been the words of the Korean national anthem in Korean.  Any translators out there? -- Heron
has the copyright thing been finally resolved yet? Appleby 01:10, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes. See the article and the last external link and you will find that the widow of the composer of the melody has granted the copyright to the South Korean Government.--Jusjih 08:24, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Translation and Copyright 

message: Isn't this supposed to be spelled 하나님?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 37.191.214.93 (talk) 09:58, 23 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  하느님? 
Talk:Couplet

message: The correct spelling is "distich" in the Webster dictionary, not "distych."  Dave1999
: Fixed. :) Martin
: After REDIRECTions this couplet is a complet confusion!:-*  Maybe we need to specify at least in this page after each example what kind of distich it is (paradoxist, dualistic, tautological). Lit-sci
But if the while I think on thee, dear friend,
All loses are restored and sorrows end    amanda sabalauskas
                                        
-----------------------------------------------
I found a poem within the section called Couplets in Western Poetry. You're welcome to cross-check the words! I cheated a little and doubled back with "Traditionally, Western Couplets are dumb rhyme" but came up with this:
Couplets describe many things of which you deal in daily life.
Western couplets are dumb rhyme,
although not all couplets rhyme.
Rhyming couplets are one
of the simplest rhyme schemes
in poetry. Traditionally,
Western couplets are dumb.
Both the rhyme and the idea
come to a quick close in two lines;
the sense as well as the sound rhymes.
-----cbo------------------------  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.215.28.47 (talk) 04:46, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: The sentence at the top about african tribes seemed suspicious, so I checked who added it. It was added in April 3 by an IP who also vandalized the page before and after (probably). A pity it managed to linger in the article for so long... Uffish (talk) 14:56, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  African tribes 

message: This page should be returned to the base name "Couplet" because this is the primary usage. I have moved the new dab page to Couplet (disambiguation) to make room for this move. PamD (talk) 11:05, 15 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Requested move

message: are these seemingly random examples even necessary, since a fine example is given in the beginning of the article? ViniTheHat (talk) 16:12, 8 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  examples section
Talk:Abingdon-on-Thames

message: The portions regarding the current and future redevelopments of the town need a bit of rewriting to make them flow better...   — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.85.45.41 (talk) 22:45, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Leisure and Media 

message: The text "known just as Abingdon between 1974 and 2012" may technically be true, but seems rather pedantic and confusing: the town was and is almost universally referred to as "Abingdon", before, during and after that period. I'm not sure what the solution is; perhaps "Abingdon (formally Abingdon-on-Thames since 1974) is..."? It would be interesting to know where the Brittanica got its information from and whether anything formally changed in 1974 and 2012. This level of detail seems inappropriately prominent for the lead, when the change (if it happened at all) is a piece of bureaucratic trivia rather than any significant change in usage. Dave.Dunford (talk) 19:27, 18 February 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed, undue prominence for the lead. Even in the body of the article a good source would be needed for 'known just as Abingdon between 1974 and 2012' rather than some PoV for it to have been "known" as anything else. As far as I can tell it has been known as Abingdon (simple) for centuries.SovalValtos (talk) 20:07, 18 February 2020 (UTC)
replies: text:  It was Abingdon in the Doomsday Book https://opendomesday.org/place/SU4997/abingdon/. It was Abingdon on Ordnance Survey maps (1888-1913)  https://www.archiuk.com/cgi-bin/build_nls_historic_map.pl?search_location=%2C%20Abingdon%2C%20Oxfordshire&os_series=1&latitude=51.669644&longitude=-1.292859&postcode= . And in 1947 https://www.francisfrith.com/abingdon-on-thames/map-of-abingdon-on-thames-1947_npo619163 It seems no to be "on Thames" in current OS maps https://getoutside.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/local/abingdon-on-thames-vale-of-white-horse Billlion (talk) 15:29, 21 February 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree - whilst I can find a couple of historic references to "Abingdon-on-Thames" in pre-1974 newspaper adverts, all contemporary official records naming the borough prior to 1974 seem to agree that it was just called Abingdon. I'm not clear where Brittanica got its information from. I have therefore simplified the lead on this point and added more discussion with contemporary sources on the name at the end of the history section. Stortford (talk) 07:36, 22 March 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Name 

message: I am having difficulty keeping up with unregistered  User:Robin75aw's multiple edits, but I wonder whether he has studied the article about "Linking" MOS:LINK and understands about "Overlinking" MOS:OVERLINK. Do others share this concern?--TedColes (talk) 09:38, 12 October 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Overlinking? 

message: I propose merging Abingdon Borough Police in to Abingdon-on-Thames. There is no significant coverage of Abingdon Borough Police per WP:SIGCOV. The short history already present in the article can easily be merged in to the history section of the Abingdon-on-Thames article. Tim Landy (talk) 14:25, 8 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  merge proposal: Abingdon Borough Police in to Abingdon-on-Thames
Talk:Albert Camus: The Absurd Hero

message: Assuming that it was the author who placed this article on the encyclopaedia, I don't think it is either appropriately titled or formatted.  However, I can't think of any reason it shouldn't be here.  Does anyone else have any views? Deb 18:38 5 Jun 2003 (UTC)
----
I first checked that the article was indeed by Bob Lane. I then asked him by email:
:Did you submit the article, authorise submission, or release the article to public domain?
To which he replied:
:Yes, I did release the article and you have my pemission to post it.
That's good enough for me. It should probably be listed on Wikipedia:Pages needing attention rather than VFD, now that the copyright status is clear. 
-- Tim Starling 15:33 14 Jun 2003 (UTC)
----
This still seems dubious; I should be able to edit this, add my own insights, etc, right?  But then it's no longer Bob Lane's essay that was published somewhere else... Stan 13:33, 5 Sep 2003 (UTC)
Talk:Neighbours

message: Per this policy,  is false, as 2023 is the present. And stating "no other soap does this" is false, and it also continues to set a negative presedence on soap articles that they do not follow MOS policies, which they should. MOS is a must follow. This has also been established at several other articles within the Wikipedia:WikiProject Soap Operas and ignoring the MOS is violating Wikipedia's policies.  infers we are not in 2023, when in fact, we are. Many like to ignore the MOS, when it must be followed. Needing to discuss whether to follow MOS, which must be followed, seems futile, and would also classify as a WP:LOCALCONSENSUS, which soap groups, or Neighbours-related articles cannot senselessly do, especially in order to avoid adhering to an established MOS policy. If one so chooses,  would be more appropriate, as it establishes an on-going establishment of time. livelikemusic (TALK!) 01:16, 23 September 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: We need to be clear on what DATETOPRES actually says. It does not forbid using –present for date ranges; it quotes WP:DATED to say this should "usually be avoided". DATED is discussing prose writing, whereas DATETOPRES also considers tables and infoboxes, which is where this range is being used in Neighbours articles. DATETOPRES also makes no distinction for ongoing circumstances that begin in the current year, so please stop claiming it does. It does, however, give us the clear alternative of "Since 2023" (or any other year), which I don't have any objection to. I would be happy to switch to that in infoboxes, although probably not at List of Neighbours characters. U-Mos (talk) 08:38, 23 September 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you, User:U-Mos. I was about to comment this myself. - Therealscorp1an (talk) 10:41, 23 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[MOS:DATETOPRES]] 

message: Under 'Original release', Networks are noted as Seven Network, Network 10, 10 Peach and Amazon Freevee. Both the wholesale network swap of 1986 and the switch to 10 Peach in 2011 are covered within the article. However I feel  that it's erroneous to refer to 10 Peach in this section, as it's not a Network in and of itself, it's just one of several Network 10 digital multichannels. I would argue that this section need only reference Network 10 once for the period January 20, 1986 to July 28, 2022, and that the standalone reference to 10 Peach airdates be removed. Is this too granular or semantics? I've never proposed a change or posed a question like this before, so not sure if this is an appropriate level of detail. Tinascousin (talk) 04:50, 3 February 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: You're absolutely right, according to Template:Infobox television (which uses Fox Broadcasting Company as an exemplar). I'll make the change. U-Mos (talk) 09:59, 3 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Network vs Channel
Talk:Copperhead

message: Why is the cottonmouth listed here? I've never heard anyone refer to it as anything but "cottonmouth" or "water moccasin." It is closely related to a copperhead but they're two different snakes.
:Because "copperhead" is listed as one of the many common names used to refer to Agkistrodon p. piscivorus in Wright & Wright (1957). Perhaps that's because piscivorus looks a lot like contortrix in its juvenile color phase. According to the same book, both species have also been referred to as "highland moccasin", "moccasin" and "viper". Common names are... not very accurate. --Jwinius 01:28, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Cottonmouth?

message: An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect :Copperhead (snake) and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 May 5#Copperhead (snake) until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.  Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 18:10, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Copperhead (snake)" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]]