lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Academic Word List

message: Recent articles suggest that the AWL may not be as 'academic' as the name suggests.  In fact, by assuming that the GSL represented the 'common' words in English, the words that appeared frequently in Coxhead's corpus analysis were, by default, 'academic'.  In fact, to a great degree, Coxhead actually provided some well-needed updates to the GSL.  'JOB' is just one of many examples.
Further research that I conducted with my colleague Ali Billuroglu lead us to the conclusion that there was no 'academic' word list, but rather what is warranted is an expanded 'general' word list, especially in the context of teaching English as a foreign language.  For example, 'study', 'research' and 'report' are words in the GSL, but they are also very high frequency words in any academic corpus.  Dividing a list into 'general' and 'academic' words seems inappropriate and only serves to fragment the approach to lexis taken by EFL teachers.  See our article at http://www.lextutor.ca/vp/bnl/BNL_Rationale.doc for a full discussion of this.
More recently, Hyland and Tse (Hyland, K., & Tse, P. (June 2007). Is there an "Academic Vocabulary"? TESOL Quarterly, Volume 41, Number 2, pp. 235-253.) argue that the AWL needs to be treated with a good deal of caution in its application in materials design or EFL teaching.  Their justification in criticism about Coxhead's corpus design in particular, and the notion of an 'academic word list' as being unattainable, has a good degree of validity.
Steve.neufeld (talk) 15:11, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

message: Note: I've placed this here to get more people involved. To read about or discuss this issue, please go to Template talk:Frequency list, in the section of the same name. Thanks! --Geekdiva (talk) 21:01, 17 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why does Template:Frequency list put Academic Word List under Add-ons? 

message: With the revision of the GSL to the NGSL, there is also a NAWL, for which the English Wikipedia has no entry.  At the very least, its existence should be mentioned in this article. Kdammers (talk) 19:06, 21 January 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Please note that although Coxhead's article's title says "new ...," it is referring to her original AWL; the NAWL was developed in the teens. Kdammers (talk) 19:12, 21 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  NAWL
Talk:Rodger Brulotte

message: I think unless he retired this year, but he is still doing analyst on RDS/RIS baseball games (the rare games (mostly the playoffs) the networks aires since the Expos are gone, so I don't think he is a former analyst, but will wait for a response or own observation before change it.--JForget  02:43, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Still a broadcaster?
Talk:Rodney Davies

message: I find it laughable that Rodney Davies was nominated for speedy deletion. The lad is likely to wear the wallaby jumper after he leaves the Broncos.Londo06 (talk) 19:22, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, but wikipedia is not a crystal ball. Does he play at the highest level with the Broncos now? The article said he was at a lower level. Mostlyharmless (talk) 20:06, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: You can't play a first grade game at the minute because the season hasn't started yet.
*article and image showing Davies training with his teammates
*played for Broncos in Feb 2007
*Australian youth representative level
*Davies a name to remember
Will work to improve the article over the coming days.Londo06 (talk) 20:17, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

text: He was a contracted player for 2007 but did not play at NRL level - a pre-season trial does not count to an actual NRL career - despite the article's praise. •Florrie•leave a note• 21:44, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

text: Well as long as you have heard of him, he must be notable. That's settled. And really, you and Alexsanderson don't need to explain how you come across these discussions, it is Wikipedia after all. •Florrie•leave a note• 04:23, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Tahina spectabilis

message: the photo and description of the  new palm found in madagaskar matches with the Talipot palm (Corypha umbraculifera). refer to the article on talipot pant available on wikipedia and many other internet locations. this may not be a new palm but the same talipot palm commonly found in Western Ghats, India. the leaves of the plant are used for thatching roofs of houses and its trunk is harvested  before flowering for extracting edible starch.Gmandapam (talk) 08:17, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  new species of forgotten talipot plant 
Talk:Morgase Trakand

message: The first vote here, mine, is agree. It's just one long paragraph that does not deserve one page on its own. Morgase does have some role in the books, but so many more have as much. She doesn't have that much data to put in. Merging it into a more viewed section will lead more potential attention and help to it as well. The worst problem here is that it's not cited with verified contents. Though I actually know some of them, it's not added here. And it's very unlikely that it will meet the notability requirement. Anthonydraco (talk) 09:24, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Fictional characters that are "major" figures in literature are fine to stand alone. But... all your points aside, she's at most a borderline character in the context of the series--somewhere between a secondary and tertiary character. I'd say merge her content into the larger article. rootology/equality 00:15, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree as well, if anyone's counting.  Nutiketaiel (talk) 11:15, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge?
File talk:East-Hem 476ad.jpg

message: This page allows you to discuss this map. If you have any suggestions regarding the map, post them below. If you see any errors in map boundries or information, please post them below ALONG WITH source information to back up your claim. I cannot make corrections unless you include your source information!
: I think it would be interesting to apply semi-transparent colours to regions. It's a little hard to get a more or less full picture of the world the way it currently is. --Humanophage (talk) 07:27, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

message: Were Khoisan ever farmers??? СЛУЖБА (talk) 15:25, 4 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Khoisan farmers"
Talk:Roger Ford (journalist)

message: There's another Roger Ford who has more prominance than this one I think. He's a film producer and has worked on The Chronicles of Narnia film series. I Could we make the page and make a disambig page for roger ford? --76.115.86.108 (talk) 18:20, 18 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Other Roger Ford 

message: Although the article I wrote entitled Bionic Duckweed was rejected by Wikipedia reviewers, I have updated the references to indicate increased usage of the term even by The Financial Times. This phrase was off course coined by Roger Ford. GRALISTAIR (talk) 19:49, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bionic Duckweed
Talk:Roger Hammond (actor)

message: Future Loop Foundation, aka Mark Barrott
http://www.myspace.com/futureloopfoundation
have recently worked with Hammond. He does a rather wonderful and wistful voice-over on their latest track "A Very English Summer'" (?). Anyway, it's bloody good, and he pitches it so right, it's like aural version of a  tall glass of Pimm's.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.162.68.73 (talk) 14:14, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Future Loop Foundation 

message: I feel sure the John Wood he appeared with at Cambridge became well known as John Fortune.  Wood was John Fortune's real name and he had to change it because of the established actor John Wood.   Rogersansom (talk) 22:22, 30 August 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  John Wood?
Talk:Roger Ingebrigtsen

message: I am against using the name of the  woman he started a sexual relationship with in 2004 (when she was 17). The dominant media in Norway has not mentioned the name; exeption is a nb. 2 local newspaper and a internetbased site. From WP:BLPNAME "Caution should be applied when identifying individuals who are discussed primarily in terms of a single event. When the name of a private individual has not been widely disseminated or has been intentionally concealed, such as in certain court cases or occupations, it is often preferable to omit it. "
NB: Please don´t use the woman´s name in this discussion, before a consensus to use it has been reached. "BLP applies to all material about living persons anywhere on Wikipedia, including talk pages" Regards, Iselilja (talk) 01:33, 7 December 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: The name is not that important, but that the woman in question is a public person who hold public office and until recently ran for parliament is imo more important. Her identity has been revealed though by the mainstream media through her spot on the nomination ticket, which is unambiguous. --Roghue 01:47, 7 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  2012: The woman´s name 
Talk:Roger J. Beaujard

message: I have been unable to find any reliable sources to support any of the personal information in this article, and question whether this musician is independently notable. Without sources, it seems best to just redirect to :Mortician (band). Schazjmd (talk) 00:30, 3 September 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: , please see notability requirements for people and the verifiability policy. This article had no sources to support notability or to support any of the information that was in the article. I could not find any reliable sources on this person. Schazjmd (talk) 14:23, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Redirect to [[:Mortician (band)]]?
Talk:Roger Millward

message: This article has been reclassified as a start due to its level of detail. Capitalistroadster (talk) 08:45, 3 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Reclassified as a start
Talk:Roger Parker

message: Gresham College has recently released a set of three short YouTube videos extracted from a recent lecture of Professor Parker's: http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=4D9BDE6748B9C7A2 I think that this would be a nice link, as it shows Professor Parker's style of speaking and it is his particular topic of interest (Opera). I only don't add the link myself due to the possible accusation of a conflict of interest through my association with the college. Jamesfranklingresham (talk) 15:23, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Link suggestion to Lecture Extracts
Talk:Necropolis (Horowitz novel)

message: You need to re-name this article, as it is no longer named "Necropolis: City of the Dead". If you look on Anthoy's oficial site, or amazon.com, the cover and the author both state it is only called "Necropolis". Souce is Anthony's official site, www.anthonyhorowitz.com/. Okay? Nearly forgot to sign it lol. 90.198.220.174 (talk) 21:43, 7 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  NEW TITLE 

message: The title is in need of URGENT altering, as the cover and official website state it is now just called "Necropolis", not "Necropolis: City of the Dead". Please, someone rename this before it gets publish on Obtober 30th... 90.198.220.125 (talk) 22:19, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  New Title - URGENT ATTENTION 

message: Sweet Jesus! This needs shortening! (Aurumpotestasest (talk) 11:30, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Plot Length 

message: Under WP: TRIVIA I am merging the two 'bits' into the plot section. On another note, we will need references for reviews of the book (that we can put in the reception section). I would do this myself but I don't know where to find reviews & which ones are best for the article. (i.e. reviews from sources with some clout). Some assisstance would be greatly appreciated. Finally we will need a 'background' section on which we can write about when Horowitz confirmed the book and perhaps describe the background to the novel, from Nightrise and the series. I am sure my wording would be poor so could someone do that. Thank you. Peace. (Aurumpotestasest (talk) 14:33, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Trivia and pentagram section 

message: Just found an article that may be of use - it details some of the character conception of Scarlett. Anthony Horowitz: why I'm writing about girls. Iciac (talk) 02:45, 28 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  References 

message: I'll delete he inconsistencies. Not needed and cannot be incorporated into the plot section which needs to be drastically shortened anyway. (Aurumpotestasest (talk) 11:06, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Plot inconsistencies (sp) 

message: Can someone shorten the plot secton. I'm no good at shortening articles and would be unsure as to what to leave out/keep in. Thanks. (Aurumpotestasest (talk) 11:11, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article length
Talk:Littorinidae

message: This article has been revised as part of the large-scale clean-up project of a massive copyright infringement on Wikipedia. Earlier text must not be restored, unless it can be verified to be free of infringement. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions must be deleted. Contributors may use sources as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously.
For more information on this situation, which involved a single contributor liberally copying material from print and internet sources into several thousand articles, please see the two administrators' noticeboard discussions of the matter,  here and here, as well as the the cleanup task force subpage. Thank you.  -- ascidian | talk-to-me 18:45, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copyright problem 
Talk:Littorina

message: "DNA analysis shows there is a significant genetic differentiation - not enough to consider these to be different species"
There is no absolute "cut-off" level of "enough" genetic distinctness that could be considered a "species threshold". It was once believed, but that theory is bullshit for a lot of reasons (in a nutshell, evolution does not work to suit researchers' desires of "clean" thresholds).
But the main point: "significant genetic differentiation", on its own, would imply that species status must seriously considered. So what's going on here? Genetic paraphyly? That's not a valid argument against species status (it is actually common between sister species). The question would have to be approached by a population-wide thorough sample, and if this shows at least some degree of genetic lineage sorting and consistent morphological distinctness, species status is more likely than not. Essentially, "distinct species" means "under natural conditions, reproductive isolation is dominant over gene flow". Thus, two recently-deverged species may be very similar genetically, but what counts is that they'll become ever more distinct as time progresses. And before species are reciprocally monophyletic, they are usually morphologically very distinct already (because morphological traits usually become established an order of magnitude faster than the sequences one studies in popgen/molphyl).
The source is unfortunately not accessible to me. I presume it lays out the case in more detail. Dysmorodrepanis (talk) 18:55, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Self-contradict
Talk:Roland Pöntinen

message: Using the Internet Archive#Wayback Machine I was able to verify that the information in this biography existed on or before (1 Sep 2007)  ]  and predates the creation (4 Oct 2007) of this Wikipedia article, i.e., the information cannot have come from the Wikipedia. Robert.Allen (talk) 01:10, 22 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Biography at bach-cantatas.com
Talk:Rolando Hinojosa-Smith

message: Is it really necessary to make the title of all his books dead links?  If he is notable as an author but his books do not warrant entries then leave out the links.  The only blue link is just a redirect back to the author page, which doesn't seem to make sense either.  206.76.106.202 (talk) 15:25, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: untitled
Talk:Rolf-Dieter Heuer

message: I have an updated image from the Melbourne ICHEP (Physics Conference). Are there any objections if I update that image? Illusional (talk) 07:59, 14 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Image 
Talk:Rolf Noskwith

message: Rolf Noskwith is mentioned as being an alumni of Trinity College at one point but is in the list of alumni of Christ College at the end.
2.30.128.158 (talk) 18:45, 5 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  re alumni of which college? 

message: The name of the company "Charnos" is formed from his father's anglicised name CHArles NOSkwith.
2.30.128.158 (talk) 18:52, 5 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  re the name Charnos 

message: Rudd, Bramwell PhD. Editor Noskwith Private Papers (2017)
Rolf Noskwith was never, at any time, a soldier.
He was a civilian working on cryptology and translation at Bletchley Park from 1941-1945.
He stayed at the future GCHQ until joining the family business, CHARNOS, in late 1946.
He became non-executive chairman in July 1999. (added by--Abebenjoe (talk) 22:03, 18 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Was Noskwith classified as a soldier or civilian?
Talk:Romeo Alaeff

message: These were moved from the main article page to here. Calliopejen1 (talk) 17:52, 8 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Possible sources for article

message: Appears that Romeo Alaeff may not meet the general criteria for notability on Wikipedia. Also there is a lack of quality citations on this page. Templates added/updated today to reflect this. Jooojay (talk) 02:31, 17 December 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Possible issue with COI on this article, which is why it is written like an advertisement. Jooojay (talk) 21:38, 15 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Issues with article

message: added citations and relevant historical work information.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Risdwiki (talk • contribs) 07:10, 16 August 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Risdwiki What is your relationship to the subject of the article, Romeo Alaeff? You have been using primary sourcing for the citations, which is not ideal on WP. Jooojay (talk) 19:15, 16 August 2017 (UTC)
replies: text:  Hi Risdwiki - you seem very interested in this article based on all of your edits. I suggest visiting Wikipedia:Teahouse to get help with WP editing, to learn more about proper citations, notability and general other questions. Please do not remove the templates without guidance and improvements. Thanks! Jooojay (talk) 05:49, 18 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  coi
Category talk:Wikipedia article assistance

message: I think a category like this can be extremely helpful, and in fact is long overdue. feel free to leave any thoughts or comments here. thanks. 
By the way, conceivably, we could change the category name, such as to "article advice", article help", etc. --Steve, Sm8900 (talk) 15:33, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Category scope
Talk:Ronald Baecker

message: How do you say that name? Becker or Baker? Rardaede (talk) 17:13, 21 November 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  pronunciation? 
Talk:Ron Calderon

message: Citation: 
Interesting article, but it may seem POV to include without some response or broader analysis. Maybe the gifts he received is not excessive. Maybe as vice-chair of the Latino Caucus he has to work with lobbies more. The article actually lists all his gifts since 2000. Richard-of-Earth (talk) 18:44, 5 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sacramento Bee article claims Calderon accepted more gifts then most. 
Talk:Rose Falcon

message: Added notability tag as I am unsure of her suitability for inclusion in Wiki. Her father Billy Falcon is more notable due to the songs he has written for performers but I don't think Rose herself has any press or songs worthy of an encyclopedia entry. Possibly fold in with Billy's entry? LovelyLillith (talk) 11:17, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Notability
File talk:Electoral map.svg

message: sorry
no problem homes  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 170.215.128.197 (talk) 22:35, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

message: I see that Main and Nebraska have what look like references to annotations numbered 1, 2, and 3. However, I don't see corresponding notes anywhere. It seems to me that either the annotations ought to be deleted or their meanings explained. Im I missing something here?
 Annotations in Maine and Nebraska in  :File:Electoral_map.svg. Wtmitchell  (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 21:17, 9 July 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: These are to denote that Maine and Nebraska can sometimes split their electoral votes by Congressional district. I agree that the current method of illustrating this is a little opaque, though. —Scott5114↗ [EXACT CHANGE ONLY] 03:56, 10 July 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Annotations in Maine and Nebraska
Talk:Rovenia M. Brock

message: The article is so out of date and undersourced. Notability may be an issue. I will look for sources that adequately cover Dr. Brock or otherwise show her contributions and keep removing uncited and redundant information. Disclaiming that this is not my niche. If it is yours, please jump in. DiamondRemley39 (talk) 19:15, 9 November 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Update: I found a book review and a few other items in Newsbank that make me think she may be notable. I removed all unsourced claims and related tags. --DiamondRemley39 (talk) 22:13, 29 December 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Notability
Talk:Roy Drinkard

message: This person is unimportant and there's no way he warrants his own Wikipedia page. 
I would be willing to bet that he put this up by himself (although, who knows). 
This whole page seems insane.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.0.48.49 (talk) 20:32, 19 December 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  This whole article should be deleted
Talk:Rubén Pulido (footballer, born 1979)

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: Pages moved. (closed by non-admin page mover)  Jerm (talk) 02:20, 16 July 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related page moves. GiantSnowman 18:33, 9 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 9 July 2021
Talk:Rudi Gutendorf

message: Why we can see Samoa National Team here?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 31.210.179.82 (talk) 21:05, 5 September 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: What do you mean? GiantSnowman 07:07, 6 September 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Samoa

message: Sources seem to miss off one or both of Bermuda and Samoa. Think total should be 19 sides: 1 Bermuda, 2 Chile, 3 Bolivia, 4 Venezuela, 5 Trinidad & Tobago, 6 Grenada, 7 Antigua & Barbuda, 8 Botswana, 9 Australia, 10 New Caledonia, 11 Nepal (twice), 12 Tonga, 13 Tanzania, 14 Ghana, 15 Fiji, 16 Zimbabwe, 17 Mauritius, 18 Rwanda and 19 Samoa. 
 - 2.26.150.142 11:14, 9 October 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: two sources say 18 - and don't seem to include Bermuda. Do you have any reliable sources confirming his position as Bermuda manager? GiantSnowman 15:45, 9 October 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Wait, found this, which includes Bermuda but stll only says 18... GiantSnowman 15:46, 9 October 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Number of national sides managed
Talk:Rudolf Jaenisch

message: The "Rudolph Jaenisch" link at the end of the article seems odd to me. I was expecting the website of the Jaenisch lab or a CV or something. Instead it links to a Jove publication where R. Jaenisch was the last author. 93.129.122.145 (talk) 18:20, 1 May 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with you. If nobody else has a good explanation for this, I suggest to remove this entry. SchreyP  (messages) 21:43, 1 May 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Enternal links

message: Acerase (talk) 19:01, 26 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  update