lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:The Den (stadium 1993)

message: "The scheme whilst detering the "hooligan element", also detered decent law abiding fans who were reluctant to hand over sensitive personal information in order to watch a game of football."  This may well be true but needs verification and is certainly POV as it stands. Lfh 17:48, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, it the POV of Toby Porter, Chief Sports writer of the  South London Press. Please feel free to insert it into the article Lion King 02:25, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Membership scheme 

message: I know it is in SE16 and next to South Bermondsey railway station, but it is also in the London Borough of Lewisham which to me is Deptford (ex-Kent) rather than Bermondsey (ex-Surrey). --Henrygb 00:41, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It is in the Postal District of Bermondsey,(SE16 3LN)  but within the Electoral boundary of Lewisham. Hope this helps. Lion King 02:16, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Indeed, though SE16 is centred on Rotherhithe and only has half of Bermondsey.--Henrygb 15:24, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: And Zampa Road falls within that half of Bermondsey. Lion King 18:43, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: ish. The west end of Zampa Road   was in Rotherhithe ward 5 years ago (now in Livesey ward which a local councillor calls "parts of Rotherhithe and East Peckham") but the east end and the New Den I think is in New Cross ward i.e. Deptford. --Henrygb 01:42, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, that's quite correct New Cross Ward London Borough of Lewisham, but it is not in New Cross SE14, nor Deptford SE8 which are also, (except for the north east part of Deptford, which is in the London Borough of Greenwich, which of course, doesn't make it part of Greenwich SE10, but still Deptford SE8) in The London Borough of Lewisham. Catford SE6, is also in LB but it is not in Lewisham SE13. I live in Bermondsey SE16, Millwall Football Club is in Bermondsey SE16. New Cross Ward is an electoral ward, not an area of London. Best wishes, Lion King 15:11, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Bermondsey?
Talk:Islamophobia/Archive 4

message: This article has been kept following this VFD debate. Sjakkalle (Check!) 09:25, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: i'm sad to see it was rejected. this article is doomed to perpetual POV based on its very nature. J. Parker Stone 07:48, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Votes for deletion debate 

message: The subject is quite controversial as is manifest from all reversions. Germen and Axon seem not to be able to reach a conclusion and descend to a childish level. I suggest some third party investigates the claims of both and mediates. User:130.89.6.66
:Germen we all know the anon IP is you.  It traces to the same University.Yuber(talk) 18:44, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mediation
Talk:Order (group theory)

message: Are there any WP articles currently which explain why any element of a finite group has finite order? (I don't need it explained to me; I'm just concerned it doesn't seem to be discussed anywhere, and is not immediately obvious to a group theory newcomer.) Dmharvey  Talk 5 July 2005 18:14 (UTC)
:Isn't that a finite group is defined as a group whose order is finite? -- Taku 11:00, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: No, a finite group is one which has a finite number of elements. It follows that every element has finite order, so it may mean the same thing, but it's not, strictly speaking, defined as such. J•A•K 13:19, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Erm, the order of a group is the number of elements.  Did Taku mean to ask whether a finite group was defined as a group all of whose elements are finite? Shawn M. O'Hare 23:20, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why does a any element of a finite group have a finite order? 

message: Am I the only one who feels strange about the fact that many well-known facts about finite groups (like how a group order is divided) are put here instead of finite group? Since when the order is infinite, little can be said so why don't we move the stuff to finite group and redirect this to group (mathematics)? -- Taku 11:19, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Moving to finite group? 

message: Is the order of the symmetry group the same as the symmetry number (symmetry order)? Or order of a symmetry group has a broader meaning than symmetry number? Kazkaskazkasako (talk) 11:39, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Order of [[symmetry group]] vs. [[symmetry number]]

message: These two concepts are closely related but they are two different concepts.--Malore (talk) 16:17, 31 May 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: * Shouldn't an article talk about only one concept? I ask it because Wikidata assumes that every item represents a specific concept.--Malore (talk) 00:57, 1 June 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Split into "Group order" and "Order of a group element"
Talk:List of teams and cyclists in the 2005 Tour de France

message: It correctly says here and here, too List_of_teams_and_cyclists_in_the_2005_Tour_de_France that Lance A on the Discovery Channel team raced and won the 2005 tour, yet if you go to Lance A's WP page, it now says in the prominent infobox that his 2005 team was the U.S. Postal Service. This is WP user's Kevin McE's idea, and not a good one in my opinion. The USPS did not sponsor their team (read, put up big $$$$) past 2004. Discovery Channel put up the money and should get the credit, but one WP editor wants to change those facts on WP because of some twisted "team continuity" logic. I think this is a bad idea in general and a bad precedent for consistency. Jack B108 (talk) 02:21, 12 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not sure why you have posted this here and I see you have also posted at Talk:Lance Armstrong. I would ask anybody who wishes to add to this discussion to add there rather than here to keep all discussion in one place. Even better would be to discuss this at WT:CYCLING as this affects hundreds or perhaps thousands of riders Wikipedia has biographies on rather than just Armstrong. SeveroTC 08:43, 12 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  I tried to make the cross-article 'consistency' concern of mine clear. If it wasn't, that is why this concern is posted on the two pages with sometimes conflicting information (they had in fact concurred on the Discovery Channel 2005 team for a long time, until Jan 2011). I appreciate the WT:CYCLING suggestion, though. Jack B108 (talk) 00:38, 13 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Posting exactly the same thing on two discussion pages raises the possibility of two discussions about the same thing. It's better to leave a note (possibly quoting what you wrote, perhaps using ) on the second page (i.e. this one) about the discussion at the first and invite people to take part in the discussion there. SeveroTC 09:00, 13 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Consistency across WP
Talk:Rom (Star Trek)

message: I just caught part of the Star Trek: TNG season 5 episode, 'The Perfect Mate', and I'm nearly certain one of the Ferengi was Max Grodénchik.  I didn't catch his name though, so I don't know if he's supposed to be Rom.  Can someone confirm?  --Gero 23:46, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You are correct. Max Grodénchik is one of those Ferengi, but he's not Rom. 69.152.192.130 (talk) 13:53, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  First Appearance? 

message: Why is the segment on Little Green Men on this article. It's little more than a brief episode summary and serves no purpose towards Rom's character. 69.152.192.130 (talk) 13:55, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Little Green Men 

message: Interview in Starlog 244 https://archive.org/details/starlog_magazine-244/page/n66/mode/1up -- 109.78.198.237 (talk) 05:38, 25 October 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sources 

message: Rom shows up in lower decks season 4 episode 6 also voiced by Max Grondenchik. Should the article be updated to include that appearance or is this strictly for the Deep Space Nine entries for Rom 70.73.125.166 (talk) 04:46, 9 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Star Trek Lower decks Appearance
Talk:Stone circle (Iron Age)

message: I think this page should be merged with Stone Circles. Any thoughts? NickW 14:37, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge with Stone Circles?
Talk:Chicago Bears

message: Typo. 78.174.52.181 (talk) 16:50, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Shadow311 (talk) 17:12, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 8 February 2024
Template talk:International keelboats

message: Do we really need this template?  Wouldn't a plain link to List of international classes work just as well?  On many of the individual class articles, this (plus Classes of Keelboats (Worldwide List)) take up more space than the article itself.  I propose we turn both of thse into just plain lists, or even better, categories.
It also seems a little silly to just list keelboats.  Is there yet another template for International Dingies?  And International Iceboats?  --RoySmith 5 July 2005 18:38 (UTC)
*There are templates for both international keelboats and international dinghies.  There are currently no iceboats recognised as an International class.  In the context of sail boats the term 'international' refers to classes of sail boat recognised as International Classes by the ISAF which is the worldwide governing body.  The 'worldwide list' of keelboats and list of dinghies list sail boats which do not have International Status granted by the ISAF.  In the context of sailboats, changing to using categories becomes unwieldy because there are potentially too many categories and a reader/researcher does not get a full view.  Some of the lists I access have become too unwieldy because they grow to many pages and are unwieldy  Using the template makes navigation very easy and allows the reader/researcher an instant view of the information depending on which tempates the author has included in the article.  Using a template allows all articles to include the latest info.  Finally some of these lists have been in place for sometime without negative comment. rgds User:Boatman  6 July 2005
I fixed 5.5 metre, which is NOT mR boat, unlike 6 and 8 metre etc. --Mikoyan21 22:03, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: 'R' means that the class is registered at Lloyd's. Neither 5m or 5.5m are. In addition, neither of them actually use International Rule formula (though it is similar). You may note that 5.5 metre class association does not use '5.5mR' anywhere on it's website.--Mikoyan21 21:20, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
Talk:Jacksonville Jaguars

message: Note: I am proposing this edit for FleishmanHillard on behalf of Tony Khan (football executive). 
We would like to add a link to Tony Khan's name in section nine ('Current coaching staff') that links to his Wikipedia page. His page is Tony Khan (football executive). Thanks! Alec Voss (talk) 03:11, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit Request 

message: The information affected by this edit request resides not in the article itself, but rather, within a separate template. Thus for future reference, requests should be made on the template's talk page. .spintendo  17:07, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Reply 21-MAY-2018

message: I see the color combination in the templates and infoboxes has changed from black and teal to black and gold. Is there a specific reason for this change? It's my understanding that these should be the primary and secondary colors of a franchise, which would be black and teal in the case of the Jaguars, not black and gold. DragonFury (talk) 19:16, 13 January 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Correct, according to the Jaguars logo slick at nflcommunications.com (registration required), the team's colours are (in order) black, teal and gold. – PeeJay 19:55, 13 January 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Change in template colors
Talk:Kansas City Chiefs

message: Since Branson, Mo is the vacation destination of the team, what are the chances of getting a What-A-Burger here so everyone could see the big orange/white "W" on the north side of town when tourists & fans come into our area? 173.218.36.91 (talk) 03:03, 12 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  What-A-Burger 

message: Suggesting if the Reid/Mahomes era should be split to its own article similar to Patriots since it’s now recognized as one Btomblinson (talk) 09:32, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dynasty  

message: The nickname 'The Big Red Machine' needs to be added for the 2019-current dynasty. 47.17.243.81 (talk) 20:05, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: You'll need a reliable source indicating that's a well-known nickname for the Chiefs. OhNoitsJamie Talk 20:22, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 5 March 2024 

message: This is an older GA promotion listed at the ongoing GA sweeps. Most of the post-2012 content is uncited, which is unfortunate as this time span is one of the most important in Chiefs history. Additionally, other portions of the article are uncited, such as the entire retired numbers table and the hall of famers section. The entire article needs a fine-toothed comb for various less obvious issues as well, such as giving ticket prices as of 2009,  is cited entirely to sources from before 2010 and while this is still going to be true I expect, this needs newer sources to continue to support this content. The section about the rivalry with the Rams has accreted non-obvious uncited text - the three sources for this section are two sources focusing on the 2018 game and a source from before the Rams left St. Louis.  from that section particularly needs better sourcing, as both of the sources about that game in this paragraph are from the teams involved's official websites, so independent sourcing proclaiming this is necessary. There are going to be similar issues uncovered in a close look-over the whole article - if work does not occur, a good article reassessment will be necessary. Hog Farm  Talk 19:32, 13 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  GA status
Talk:Los Angeles Chargers

message: The section chronicling the Chargers' disastrous 2017 logo change was deleted with the explanation "there was no "new logo" introduced in 2017; it was just a Twitter avatar".  That assertion is contradicted by the many sources that had been cited cited - the new mark was announced by the team as an alternate logo.  Not a uniform logo, but a logo "for marketing purposes", which is still a logo.  Given the national media attention generated by the alternate logo, its inclusion on this page seems more than justified.  SixFourThree (talk) 15:30, 24 December 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  New "LA" logo section deleted 

message: A discussion is taking place to address the redirect :San Diego Chargers Depth Chart. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 October 9#San Diego Chargers Depth Chart until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.  Hog Farm  Bacon 22:37, 9 October 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  "San Diego Chargers Depth Chart" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]] 

message: Hi, does the community think that the font color for the infobox (including the Franchise, coaches, players etc) should be changed from the dark navy blue to white if possible? I'm referring to the infobox with the gold outline and powder blue interior (I.E. the first one on the article, the one that says "Los Angeles Chargers"). I think the navy blue font and powder blue background is visually unappealing and hard to read. 198.255.227.122 (talk) 02:51, 4 January 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Looks more like black than navy. In any event, the black here is a bit hard to read.  I suspect that some colors can meet MOS:CONTRAST for disabilities but also be problematic for reader's with normal vision.  I sometimes see this with black fonts on some darker color backgrounds.—Bagumba (talk) 05:13, 4 January 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Infobox font color change 

message: How could they omit Don Coreyell under coaches and staff but have Al Davis? 2600:387:8:F:0:0:0:B3 (talk) 21:45, 7 January 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Don Coryell isn't yet officially a Hall of Famer, as he needs to pass a final vote of approval (which looks a formality). The announcement will come the day before the Super Bowl. Harper J. Cole (talk) 12:01, 8 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Coaches and staff 

message: update new general manager of the los angeles chargers 47.146.213.35 (talk) 23:06, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. RudolfRed (talk) 03:21, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 29 January 2024
Talk:Seattle Seahawks

message: Under the Conference Championship's the AFC Championship vs the Raiders is not listed. Seattle has been to 4 Conference championship games 3 NFC and 1 AFC Mrmopar41 (talk) 18:01, 24 January 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: If you are looking at the right sidebar box, it lists championships won, not appearances. Same with Super Bowl titles directly above it, and division championships immediately below it. Zzyzx11 (talk) 18:19, 24 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  AFC Championship  

message: The citation for "The name Seattle Seahawks ("Seahawk" is another name for Osprey) was selected on June 17, 1975 after a public naming contest which drew more than 20,000 entries and over 1,700 names." is https://www.seahawks.com/news/the-a-z-on-how-the-seahawks-got-their-name-95956 -- it currently says "citation needed". Mushroomreuben (talk) 20:55, 30 May 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: !  GoingBatty (talk) 22:27, 30 May 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 30 May 2020 

message: The Wolf Gray color kit for the Seahawks is no longer in use as of a few weeks ago.
https://www.si.com/nfl/seahawks/news/seattle-seahawks-wolf-grey-jerseys-throwback-uniforms-reveal
https://seahawkswire.usatoday.com/2023/07/19/seahawks-to-ditch-wolf-gray-alternate-uniforms/
https://www.seahawks.com/news/2023-throwback-90s-uniform-announcement Americvn (talk) 12:57, 29 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Update the jerseys - Wolf Gray has been discontinued, Throwbacks have been implemented for use 

message: Typo in the All-Decade team section at bottom:  He retired in '87.  Please edit. 184.157.246.215 (talk) 01:12, 27 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Kenny Easley – 1980s (1981–1997)"
Category talk:National Football League teams

message: Hello, not sure if proposed teams that never played (specifically the Memphis Hound Dogs, St. Louis Stallions, and Baltimore Bombers (proposed NFL team)) should go in :Category:Defunct National Football League teams or into a new category. I don't think it makes sense for them to remain with the active teams. What do you think? Sorry to bring this here, but I'm not confident what the best categorization is here and I figured it was better to ask than to mess something up. Thanks in advance for the help :)  Crunchydillpickle🥒 (talk) 02:47, 5 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Where to put proposed NFL teams?
Talk:AFC Championship Game

message: Why, exactly, do we need to specify the Tennessee Oilers, Los Angeles Raiders, and Baltimore Colts in the Most common matchups section if those particular versions of those teams never played in a certain year? The Baltimore Colts never faced the Patriots, the Los Angeles Raiders never faced the Steelers, and the Tennessee Oilers certainly never faced anyone in the AFC Championship Game. I'm certainly for including the current version of the teams (Las Vegas Raiders/Tennessee Titans) but otherwise it's just a bunch of unnecessary clutter. We may as well start inserting the Dallas Texans or Boston Patriots if that's the case. PointGiven (talk) 00:31, 25 January 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: I always thought about that myself. I guess there is some kind of consensus at WT:NFL of which I am not aware of. Therefore, I just restored the accepted version. However, I do agree with you that incarnations should not be listed unless they appear in the AFC Championship Game. – Sabbatino (talk) 15:24, 25 January 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Clutter in the Most common matchups section 

message: Consider adding a section  "Records by division", just like the "AFC Championship Game" article. Alielmi1207 (talk) 03:11, 22 July 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: @Alielmi1207 I added the table in "Records by division" section just like the one in the "NFC Championship Game" article. I think it looks good for the most part but let me know if there are any inaccuracies in the table or in the footnotes. Other than that I think it's up to date. Ccai2053 (talk) 05:46, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Records by division 

message: 2002-present 2620:8D:8000:10C5:70CF:FA59:ED05:5283 (talk) 03:12, 4 December 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Liu1126 (talk) 11:12, 4 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 4 December 2023 

message: Would it be possible to change the text from "Arrowhead Stadium" to "GEHA Field at Arrowhead Stadium"? It is the official name of the stadium, and "(GEHA Field at) Arrowhead Stadium" would work as well. 136.33.182.23 (talk) 05:07, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: No, "Arrowhead Stadium" is just fine since the article title on Wikipedia is called Arrowhead Stadium and it was still called "Arrowhead Stadium" when the Chiefs hosted the 2018, 2019, and 2020 AFC Championship games prior to the 2021 game. Also we go by common names when it comes to most Wikipedia article titles. See WP:COMMONNAME, WP:OFFICIALNAME, and Talk:Arrowhead Stadium#Requested move 5 March 2021 for further information. Ccai2053 (talk) 06:33, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Arrowhead Stadium Name 
Talk:Patan, Gujarat

message: The following coordinate fixes are needed for
Although I am checking for Patan in GJ, google pointer locates to Jharkhand which is grossly wrong.
This are the coordinates which the map marked on the site points to.
https://maps.google.com/maps?ll=24.204542,84.179143&q=24.204542,84.179143&hl=en&t=m&z=12
Pls check and rectify.
—116.75.232.130 (talk) 13:57, 2 August 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for pointing out the error. Deor (talk) 17:42, 2 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Coordinate error
Talk:Jetliner position

message: I only found one relevant result for "jetliner position" on Google and I don't know whether the site is trustworthy. If it were being used, I would expect many more results, anyway. Does anyone else know anything about it? Kjkolb 12:33, August 25, 2005 (UTC)
Seems like I used to do this for strength training in fencing lessons.  I suppose that it could be used for torture (try it yourself, it quickly starts to hurt like a mother), but this needs citing not conjecture.
The reference that Kjkolb mentioned is simply a wikipedia mirror / leech site. --128.175.141.185 04:36, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Evidence 

message: I know this under two other names: "Samson's chair" and "Sitting on a wall."  While the first is self-explanatory to most people, I think, the second, though not precisely accurate, reflects both the idea that one is in a sitting position against a wall, and that the position is similar to when one is sitting on a wall or ledge with one's legs dangling over.  Under both these names it is considered either a test of strength/endurance or a form of exercise, not as torture.  --Cromwellt|talk|contribs 03:34, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Other names 

message: Added a diagram. Egmason (talk) 10:37, 18 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Diagram added 

message: The article Wall sit seemingly refers to the same position, but from the perspective of sports and fitness.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by AVM2019 (talk • contribs) 23:08, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wall sit