lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Chédiak–Higashi syndrome

message: the intro paragraph lists White tigers as an animal that can have this syndrome.
but in White_tiger#Genetic_defects it says (in the 2nd last paragraph of the section, 
This condition has been observed in domestic cats, but there has never been a case of a white tiger having Chédiak-Higashi syndrome.
this statement doesn't have a reference, but  a later sentence is cited, and i'm not sure if it covers the paragraph, or just the sentence. they're books from the mid to late 80s. so i have no idea if something has changed since? i'm not a biologist. i just stumbled across this (potential) discrepancy. ≈Sensorsweep (talk) 01:46, 24 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  white tigers 

message: why the various names?  Chédiak–Higashi syndrome, Béguez-Chédiak–Higashi syndrome, Béguez-Higashi syndrome all occur in the lede. Béguez is not explained in the article. --2607:FEA8:FF01:4E54:D102:AFD3:629C:3C20 (talk) 13:22, 9 February 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  name of syndrome 

message: "Dental practitioners ... should consider making a referral ...."  Is this encyclopedic? --2607:FEA8:FF01:4E54:D102:AFD3:629C:3C20 (talk) 13:24, 9 February 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  medical advice in lead
Talk:Cherry angioma

message: The term hemangioma should be restricted to hemangioma of infancy.  Angioma is a better term for acquired benign vascular proliferations.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Philbek (talk • contribs) 01:41, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hemangioma - wrong usage, 
Talk:Linda Wolf

message: I would like to ask how can I join you guys I'm really inspired and its really touching me Yassyn Brown (talk) 13:34, 14 December 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi Yassyn Brown. Who is "you guys"? -Lopifalko (talk) 14:09, 14 December 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hello
Talk:Congenital melanocytic nevus

message: This article was initially categorized based on scheme outlined at WP:DERM:CAT. kilbad (talk) 22:03, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article categorization 

message: Hello to all! I am proposing a merge from the following articles into this article:
* Giant pigmented nevus
* Medium-sized congenital nevocytic nevus
* Small-sized congenital nevocytic nevus
This is for the following reasons:
* The main article would benefit significantly from having all this information in one place.
* These articles are very short in length (1-2 sentences) and have not been edited significantly in 3-4 years.
* This knowledge shouldn't be obscured from readers of this article by virtue of being isolated in an obscure article of 1-2 lines.
* These topics may receive more attention by being mentioned in the main article.
* The articles, if needs be, could be re-expanded at a later date.
Kind Regards, LT90001 (talk) 05:45, 24 August 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: With no objections, I have merged these three articles. LT90001 (talk) 00:26, 1 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed merge
Talk:Missile launch control center

message: ==General Information==
This section contains information which does not correspond with my experience working as an airman in the 91st SMW at Minot AFB, ND during 1984-88. I cannot confirm if this is accurate or not because, of course, that was in the days of SAC and things could be different nowadays. But of course, this material is unsourced and requires some authentic citations.Wikkileaker (talk) 16:25, 12 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Anyone have information on Atlas LCCs?[[User:Tdrss|TDRSS]] 23:39, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

message: This section contains information which does not correspond with my experience working as an airman in the 91st SMW at Minot AFB, ND during 1984-88. I cannot confirm if this is accurate or not because, of course, that was in the days of SAC and things could be different nowadays. But of course, this material is unsourced and requires some authentic citations.Wikkileaker (talk) 16:25, 12 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: General Information
Talk:Dermis

message: Im editing wikipedia! 
This bot has detected that this page contains an image, :Image:Skin.jpg, in a raster format. A replacement is available as a Scalable vector graphic (SVG) at :File:Skin.svg. If the replacement image is suitable please edit the article to use the vector version. Scalable vector graphics should be used in preference to raster for images that can easily represented in a vector graphic format. If this bot is in error, you may leave a bug report at its talk page Thanks SVnaGBot1 (talk) 09:24, 26 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: [[:Image:Skin.jpg]] 

message: Needlessly fragmented to have as a separate stub article. Better presented in the context of the 'dermis' article. Tom (LT) (talk) 23:32, 13 October 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: --Tilifa Ocaufa (talk) 14:34, 29 December 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed merge with [[Papillary dermis]] 

message: As above Tom (LT) (talk) 23:34, 13 October 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: – Copyedit will follow. --Tilifa Ocaufa (talk) 14:34, 29 December 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed merge with [[Reticular dermis]] 

message: As above. By having this in a single article this makes the content much more easy to understand for readers, and stops needlessly fragmenting the topic into 4 separate tiny articles Tom (LT) (talk) 23:35, 13 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed merge with [[Dermal papillae]] 

message: under the subtitle 'Papillary dermis' is
The papillary dermis is the uppermost layer of the dermis.
suggest replace with...
The papillary dermis is the outermost layer of the dermis.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.66.97.91 (talk) 13:57, 17 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Papillary dermis 

message: Imagine Reason (talk) 13:22, 20 September 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Friction ridge]] redirects here but no mention
Talk:Electrocoagulation

message: This could be B-class if someone would add some references.  WhatamIdoing (talk) 06:39, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Refs

message: This article focus on wastewater treatment only, whereas electrocoagulation also is important in various medical treatments. Disambiguation and addition of material on the medical applications would be very useful. I hope an editor with medical expertise will read this.
Uffe (talk) 00:51, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Medical uses of Electrocoagulation. 

message: This article should also have a discussion of the different types of EC reactors; as well as a discussion of the disadvantages of EC in general, as well as the disadvantages of various types of EC. Else, this article reads too much like a sale pitch for EC, and not enough like an Encyclopaedia article.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.149.184.44 (talk) 03:47, 15 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Types of EC reactors; and Disadvantages of EC

message: While the information may be valid, this page does not come across as very objective.  It reads like an advertisement brochure.
--DavidPT40 (talk) 14:11, 17 August 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Objectivity 
Talk:Extramammary Paget's disease

message: I placed a technical tag on this article several months ago. The article has changed since then and someone removed the tag, but I think that removal was not appropriate. The first two paragraphs of the article use the words "epithelium," "lactiferous," "erythematous," and "eczematous." I have a (non-medical) graduate-level education and do not know what any of those words mean. The second sentence defines it with reference to "Mammary Paget’s disease," which, again, is extremely unhelpful to a lay reader. Going deeper into the article, it only gets worse. It starts talking about "adenocarcinoma" (again, couldn't define that if you asked me) without explanation. 
This article needs serious cleanup to make it understandable to people outside the medical field. I understand that this is a complicated topic, but there are lots of complicated topics on Wikipedia. This article should not be impenetrable. agtx 17:55, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Technical tag
Talk:Ferriman–Gallwey score

message: There's simply no reason that this article needs to stand alone.  Its content needs to be merged to Hirsutism, and this turned into a redirect to the same. 98.82.87.19 (talk) 14:26, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  merge to Hirsutism 

message: Hi, apologies if this is not the correct way of reporting - the second citation contains an old/broken link.  If anybody know how to sort this, please do (as I don't!)  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 152.78.236.164 (talk) 15:09, 24 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: link broken
Talk:Gestational pemphigoid

message: External links on Wikipedia are supposed to be "encyclopedic in nature" and useful to a worldwide audience.  Please read the external links policy (and perhaps the specific rules for medicine-related articles) before adding more external links.  
The following kinds of links are inappropriate:
*  Online discussion groups or chat forums
*  Personal webpages and blogs
*  Multiple links to the same website
*  Fundraising events or groups
*  Websites that are recruiting for clinical trials
*  Websites that are selling things (e.g., books or memberships)
I realize that some links are helpful to certain users, but they still do not comply with Wikipedia policy, and therefore must not be included in the article.  WhatamIdoing (talk) 05:40, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: External links

message: If cause unknown how do we know it's autoimmune? Kevin McCready (talk) 19:21, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cause
Talk:Lamellar ichthyosis

message: This article was categorized based on scheme outlined at WP:DERM:CAT. kilbad (talk) 00:24, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article categorization 

message: I think collodion baby ought to go back to having it's own article. Not all collodion babies go on to have lamelar ichthyosis - that is merely the most common cause (and probably why OMIM gives them the same classifiation but I don't think this is a reason to put them together). The section called "Long term course" looks particularly silly since it describes all the different skin disorders that can cause collodion baby.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.178.79.42 (talk) 21:29, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Collodion baby 
Talk:Juvenile dermatomyositis

message: - review. JFW | T@lk 21:25, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lancet 

message: One of the criterial for diagnosing IBM is that the patient is at least 45 years of age. There is no such condition as juvenile IBM.
--162.129.251.219 (talk) 14:29, 15 September 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  juvenile IBM 
Talk:Koebner phenomenon

message: Perhaps someone could add citations to this article? Kilbad (talk) 20:21, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: References Needed

message: Question: is "reverse koebnerization", mentioned in the Heinrich Koebner article, the same thing as the Renbök phenomenon? -- The Anome (talk) 12:27, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Reverse Koebnerization"?
Talk:Liquid bandage

message: There are two references to super glue in the article that seem to contradict eachother. Thoughtbox (talk) 23:59, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: SUPER GLUE

message: This article completely mixes up two different things, and it´s never clear about which it is in every sentence.
One is a simple polymer solution, giving a spray-on plaster thing, that can be used for all kind of little bruises.
The other thing are cyanacrylate glues, that are a stitching replacement, for deep cuts and also for use in surgery. These polymerize anionically upon contact with water.
--Maxus96 (talk) 23:11, 3 November 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bad mixup
Talk:Lutz-Jeanselme syndrome

message: I have found some refs with google that supports its existence.  http://74.125.95.132/search?q=cache:qStNaxKGXg0J:memorias.ioc.fiocruz.br/pdf/Tomo41/tomo41(f3)_529-533.pdf+Lutz-Jeanselme+syndrome+emedicine&cd=13&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=ca  
It is an old term for syphilitic juxta articular nodes. http://sti.bmj.com/cgi/pdf_extract/29/2/71 --Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 03:37, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Unfortunately the text was an almost perfect copy of http://www.whonamedit.com/synd.cfm/1600.html, so I've deleted that as a copyright violation. I've redirected this to Syphilis for now. Tim Vickers (talk) 19:15, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes someone need to actually write something.--Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 14:50, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Refs
Talk:PUVA therapy

message: There was a comment under the See Also section which was a personal anecdote about someone's treatment with PUVA and a personal recommendation for minimising nausea. This was followed by "Source: me, after decades of suffering". This is obviously not the sort of thing that's appropriate for a WP article, so I've removed it. 82.10.75.117 (talk) 15:43, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Personal anecdote

message: I added that PUVA is also used to treat Graft-versus-host disease, but do not know how to add a reference. I found the following article on the internet at nature.com, january, 1999, volume 23, number 2, pages 151-155 ; www.nature.com/bmt/journal/v23/n2/abs/1701537a.html , thanks tony.barban@att.net  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.113.244.66 (talk) 13:55, 16 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Help please! 

message: UVA radiation says "Due to the potential of psoralens to cause damage to the liver, PUVA may be used only a limited number of times over a patient's lifetime." but it's not mentioned here but perhaps should be if a good source can be found. - Rod57 (talk) 01:33, 24 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Liver damage limits use
Talk:Paget's disease of the breast

message: Yeah, the does Paget's Disease affect only females? Because I seem to have a lump behind the left aveola (spelling?) Any help would be apprieciated. Thanks --~PogoNoodle~ (talk) 01:36, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This is probably not the best place to ask medical advice.  I would advise you to see your doctor if you have anything you are concerned about. (D.c.camero (talk) 03:55, 3 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Female Only? 

message: The intro states "Paget cells are not believed to be cancerous". Section "Treatment" states "Paget's disease of the breast is a type of cancer". An editor knowledgeable in this field needs to review the whole article--Gciriani (talk) 23:38, 11 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Conflicting Information
Talk:Pagetoid

message: Pagetoid mycosis fungioides is related to T-cell lymphoma. Someone should do something about that. I'm doing this instead of listening in lecture, which is horribly disorganized and patchy anyway, which is why personally I don't underestand the connection. (Why do you think I'm on Wikipedia during lecture?!)  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dr.queso (talk • contribs) 19:14, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
Talk:Chemotherapy-induced acral erythema

message: This article was categorized based on scheme outlined at WP:DERM:CAT. kilbad (talk) 02:17, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article categorization 

message: Shoul  be mentioned? It's a single case report, but it has received quite a bit of attention in the press. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 03:10, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Loss of fingerprints 

message: This reads like a journal article from JAMA. It could do with being redrafted into a more general syle suitable for a lay audience - ie. the target Wikipeida audience. I would also suggest that it be retitled. Only a medic would look for "chemotherapy induced acral erythema". Suggest we retitle it as Hand-Foot syndrome, which is probably how most people (esp. sufferers) would recognise it.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 148.177.128.81 (talk) 08:49, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: There are two sections that are lifted directly from Cancer.Net. Although the two quotations are disclosed upfront, I think the quotations are too long to be acceptable. It escapes me how the numbering appears as if it were a bibliographic reference, which it is not.--Gciriani (talk) 22:06, 28 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rename?
Talk:Panniculitis

message: This article was initially categorized based on scheme outlined at WP:DERM:CAT. kilbad (talk) 20:46, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article categorization 

message: Hello to all! I am proposing a merge from the following articles into this article:
* Cytophagic histiocytic panniculitis
* Factitial panniculitis
* Gouty panniculitis
* Pancreatic panniculitis
* Traumatic panniculitis
* Cold panniculitis
This is for the following reasons:
* The main article would benefit significantly from having all this information in one place.
* These articles are very short in length (1-2 sentences) and have not been edited significantly in 3-4 years.
* This knowledge shouldn't be obscured from readers of this article by virtue of being isolated in an obscure article of 1-2 lines.
* These topics may receive more attention by being mentioned in the main article.
* The articles, if needs be, could be re-expanded at a later date.
Kind Regards, LT90001 (talk) 02:05, 25 August 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I have completed this merge. LT910001 (talk) 00:32, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed merge
Talk:Pemphigoid

message: Could someone make it so that word redirects here when it's searched for?
http://www.entusa.com/oral_photos.htm
http://www.eyesite.co.za/magazine/september2006/columns4.asp?mainbutton=columns&navbutton=columns4
These are examples showing it being used.  You can tell they mean the same thing by the context.  They must be two different ways of expressing the same thing.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mizower (talk • contribs) 20:14, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Phemphigoid is another word for this disorder 

message: There was a 'Split' template posted in January but no place to discuss. Some items such as Bullous pemphigoid and Cicatricial pemphigoid were not linked; seems like there is a lot of duplicated info that could be merged if needed to the other entry pages.? Iztwoz (talk) 08:41, 21 July 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: agree--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 04:35, 29 October 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: As per my path book, "Traditionally, this group of diseases has been classified into two main clinical subgroups; bullous pemphigoid, which usually involves skin but 30% of the time involves oral mucous membranes as well; and cictricial pemphigoid (mucous membrane pemphigoid), which involves mucous membranes (usually oral and /or conjunctival) and skin to a lesser extent (20%) and with less severity.  Today, this group of diseases is categorized into two main clinical groups: cutaneous pemphigoid and mucosal phemphigoid.  The mucosal phemphigoids are subclassified into three subgroups as follow: cicatricial, oral mucous membrane, and ocular."  The entire section of the section is titled, "The pemphigoid group and other basement membrane autoimmue diseases" (pemphigoids being b cell-mediated) Ian Furst (talk) 01:25, 8 June 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Bullous pemphigoid is still in common use. ? --Iztwoz (talk) 22:16, 9 June 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed split
Talk:Pili multigemini

message: This article was categorized based on scheme outlined at WP:DERM:CAT. kilbad (talk) 18:23, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article categorization 

message: Is there any way this can be treated? 173.74.242.224 (talk) 18:35, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Tweezers.  68.62.222.212 (talk) 07:59, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cure? 

message: Could someone qualified to do so please clarify what features distinguish Pili Multigemini from Trichostasis Spinulosa? AmigoNico (talk) 04:26, 18 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  vs. Trichostasis Spinulosa? 

message: Not explained in text. 86.179.191.90 (talk) 01:11, 8 February 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why does "polytrichia" redirect here?
Talk:Meath Hospital

message: The following coordinate fixes are needed for
Meath hospital isn't here. Its a park. 
—89.101.200.254 (talk) 19:01, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: I changed the coordinates to correspond to those of the building shown in the article's image. The post-1998 location in Tallaght would seem to be hereabouts. Deor (talk) 15:13, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Coordinate error
Talk:The Portico

message: though short lived, an important journal in its time. Most of them were shortlived.  And there's very little information available about it online unless you have academic journal access. (Fishwick's 1951 article makes the case for it as the understudied most important contributor to American literary nationalism).  perhaps would be better as part of a longer article on Early American Magazines, but no one has written that...perhaps i will if i find time. not sure i understand what "context for inclusion" means. i added this page because i have been editing John Neal and Neal was a major contributor to The Portico.  
but- my first try at creating an article--if it should be deleted, so be it! i'll save a text file and use the info in the longer article if i get around to it.....
thanks, --BalsoSnell8 00:01, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
Talk:Ruth May Fox

message: The dates of her service as first counselor are incorrect.
76.23.14.207 (talk) 21:14, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok, then what is the correct dates, and what reliable source are you getting those dates from? -- 208.81.184.4 (talk) 16:18, 8 October 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I made this change; I think the years in the infobox is all that the user meant. Good Ol’factory (talk) 21:21, 8 October 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Admete

message: Shouldn't it be a disambiguation page? --Meldor (talk) 12:54, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Not really since this article is concentrated on Greek mythology. In other words, why create two Admete articles when the theme that ties both together is the same? There is no need to create more articles than necessary. However, when the time comes that some modern reference of Admete is established, then we can talk about creating a disambiguation page. Deucalionite (talk) 03:56, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Comments
Talk:Daumants Dreiškens

message: In the body of the page its' written "earning a silver medal in the four-man event at Sochi in 2014." but from the infobox and from sources it results he earned a gold medal. What is the reason of this conflict? --Luckyz (talk) 19:19, 31 January 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  silver or gold
Talk:Aurelia Spencer Rogers

message: I just changed statement "(In)... 1851... Aurelia married Thomas Rogers in the Salt Lake Temple" to "... in Salt Lake City."  The Salt Lake Temple did not begin hosting marriages until its dedication in 1893 (see article "Salt Lake Temple").  I understand it also would be impossible for the marriage to have been in the Endowment House (a temporary temple that was used while the permanent temple was under construction), it was not constructed till 1852-1855 (see article "Endowment House").  Or is the 1851 date wrong?  I have been unable to find accurate information on date+location of the marriage, if someone else can find verifiable information, please correct this article further.
Hersbruck (talk) 02:08, 27 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  need accurate information on Aurelia Rogers' marriage 
Talk:Julia Sears

message: Major article changes, several new sections have been added. This source: Pengilly, Joan Forssmark (1996-04-10). The First Female President of a Co-Educational Public Institution of Higher Education: An Historical Examination of the Presidential Tenure of Julia Ann Sears, 1872-1873 has much more information. I was not able to add the last two sections listed on the overview. The next sections to add to the article should be about Sear's time at Peabody and then a section on her retirement and life after Peabody. It may also be appropriate to add a feminist legacy section as well. EckerdGeologist (talk) 03:27, 9 May 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  New Source found and added 