lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:EPOC (computing)

message: I don't feel able to coherently explain this all on the main page, but the page should reflect the fact that the Psion OS was always called EPOC, such as explained here http://www.scss.com.au/family/andrew/pdas/psion/sibo/ amongst other places. The wiki page suggests that EPOC began only with the Series 5... This is half-true -- EPOC16 and EPOC32 are very different, but the EPOC name predates EPOC32. EPOC32 is no doubt based on EPOC16 but just substantially improved!
SIBO redirects to here, but technically SIBO *and* EPOC should both redirect to Symbian OS because they're the same operating system, EPOC32 far more so of course.
And it really does mean Electronic Piece of Cheese? :) hehe. EPOC is a lovely system really...
:Indeed, this article needs restructuring. The original naming is EPOC for 16-bit EPOC, and EPOC32 for 32-bit EPOC. Arny 12:28, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  EPOC naming history 

message: 1. The History of Psion 
2. EPOC's page at guidebookgallery.org 
3. Psion and Symbian links from 3lib.ukonline.co.uk 
Lubboy 22:07, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  There are some links
Talk:Train

message: Since this article is written in American English, all instances of "railway" should be changed to "railroad" since that’s the American term. 150.250.5.20 (talk) 00:20, 13 November 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the  template. I see no indication that one is British and another American. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 01:47, 13 November 2021 (UTC)

text: Because this article is top-level, some use of both terms is needed to maintain a global perspective, despite it being in American English (I'm the one who put the American English template up, by the way). Railway and railroad are both used in American English, though the latter is more common. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 01:57, 13 November 2021 (UTC)

text: To add onto User:Trainsandotherthings comment, “railway” is not exclusively a British term; most notably, English speaking countries such as Australia and New Zealand also use the term railway to refer to a network of tracks which trains operate on. Accordingly, the article should not be written exclusively using American English terminology. Jotrain G (talk) 02:42, 21 April 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Sure, but why are you pinging me about a discussion that was concluded a year and a half ago? Trainsandotherthings (talk) 03:28, 21 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 12 November 2021 

message: HI Friends, sorry if my photo edits were indeed taken from YouTube screenshots, To be honest I just want to help, I'm still in the learning stage to become a Wiki admin, forgive me for my wrong actions I didn't mean to put copyright infringement files on This train article, I hope you will understand my actions, I promise this time I will use my own photos. 
Greetings from historians128 Historian128 (talk) 20:22, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: So you're admitting User:Sejarawan128 is also your account? You do realize that operating multiple accounts without disclosing the connection is sockpuppetry, and you can be blocked for it? Trainsandotherthings (talk) 20:50, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Don't suspect me, the reason I have more than one account is not meant to be a sockpupperty, this is a replacement account for my previous account which was in the band until 2024  Sejarawan128 (talk) 20:53, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  About image copyright
Talk:Forest raven

message: HANZAB doesn't mention the Relict Raven, so I assume that the elevation to species status has been rescinded. Unfortunately volume 7 has not been published yet, so I can't look it up. The latest Australian field guide I have lists it as a subspecies: Corvus tasmanicus boreus. Any further information would be of interest. 
Nice work on the raven articles, by the way. Tannin
I would like to get comments from other users but I do not believe Forest Raven ever has white spots on the wings and tail. Also the illustration of the bird with white spots is NOT Forest Raven but Black Currawong (Strepera fuliginosa).
The distribution section is incomplete as this species also occurs patchily in South Australia.
The sanguine vulture (talk) 02:19, 21 April 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks! now removed. Casliber (talk · contribs) 08:28, 9 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Note to self (from email from Graeme Chapman bit below) - need to chase refs which support the following....cool.....Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 08:15, 30 August 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Note from Graeme Chapman 

message: * and  Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 05:43, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  For checking 

message: * "Birds breed later in Tasmania than mainland Australia, though that species has been little-studied. "  Which species?
::hmmm, didn't think I put "that" in the beginning, but "the" as just means the forest raven - was reluctant to write "forest raven" as it sound a bit repetitive after the previous sentence Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 09:55, 27 March 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: changed to "while" as slighlty contrastive Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 09:55, 27 March 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Clarification needed, prose needs copyediting. 

message: In my opinion, we can do better than the third photo - it is difficult to see the bird in the photo due to glare (or whatever the technical term is) and the bird is also rather small in the photo, with various other things such as a cow within the frame that do not add to the understanding of the article. I would therefore recommend subbing in :File:Forest Raven - Tasmania S4E6196 (21764640094).jpg which shows the bird more clearly. For reference the 'third photo' is currently: :File:Corvus tasmanicus-04.JPG. Would like to know everyone's thoughts. ‡ El cid, el campeador talk  22:01, 9 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Photo discussion
Talk:Patricia Reilly Giff

message: The following section is obviously taken from a website:
Giff (Lily s Crossing; All the Way Home) again introduces a carefully delineated and sympathetic heroine in this quiet contemporary novel. Artistically talented Hollis Woods, age 12, has made a habit of running away from foster homes, but she s found a place on Long Island where she wants to stay for a while. She immediately bonds with Josie, her new guardian, who is a slightly eccentric, retired art teacher. Yet Hollis is far from content. She worries about Josie s increasing forgetfulness, and she sorely misses her last foster family, the Regans, whom she left under tense circumstances that are only gradually made clear. Giff intersperses tender scenes demonstrating Hollis s growing affection for Josie with memories of the Regans, whose images Hollis preserves in her sketchbook. Pictures of motherly Izzy Regan, her architect husband and their mischievous yet compassionate son, Steven, sensitively express the young artist s conception of a perfect family. As readers become intimately acquainted with Hollis, they will come to understand her fears, regrets and longings, and will root for her as she pursues her dream of finding a home where she belongs. Ages 8-13. Copyright 2002 Reed Business Information, Inc.
This is copyrighting.  It even has a copyright on the bottom.  Come one guys, this is illegal!  I am going to delete the parts that are in bold unless someone objects. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 66.227.158.43 (talk) 13:36, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copied from a website 

message: This article has been tagged as an unreferenced Biography since December 2007.  I have removed that tag for now. Subject is sufficiently notable but the article falls a long way short of meeting Wikipedia's standards. It reads as though it has been written by the publisher or copies from the publisher's blurbs.  The biographical information needs expansion, clarification and updating in all sections and it needs reliable third-part references adding to support the content.  I've added one reference and a References list but that's not really enough.  Help required to fix.--Plad2 (talk) 19:00, 14 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  This article has a number of issues 

message: Many of These books have very "In Depth" plotlines and historical references. I am not a contributor to Wikipedia but I was surfing this site to get an indepth plot for Nory Ryan's Song and all I got was this little, barely a paragraph, summary. There's much more to that book than just that. I trust that Wikipedia will make the right changes. Please make it quick because I'm tired of waiting.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.174.234.2 (talk) 18:15, 2 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why Doesn't Some Of These Books Have Their Own Article?
Talk:Michelle Branch

message: Michelle Branch (under her solo act) has released five albums, one non-remix EP, and one non-album single, as well as one re-recorded album. There's currently an inconsistency on Wikipedia regarding the status of her first album, "Broken Bracelet", possibly because it was not a major label album and did not chart anywhere near as high as her second album, "The Spirit Room"; i.e. in some instances, BB is regarded as the "first of five albums", whereas in other instances, TSR is regarded as the "first of four albums". In terms of the contents of the two albums, BB contains 10 unique songs. 4 of the songs in BB are re-recorded for TSR, which contains 11-12 unique songs (12th is MB's cover of "Life on Mars" in the deluxe version). So, around 1/3rd of the songs in TSR are re-recorded versions of songs that were originally released in BB. Nonetheless, BB contains 6 songs that are not found in TSR. Subsequently, MB re-recorded TSR in 2021, and she included a bonus track, "Paper Pieces", which was originally from BB. Overall, I'm seeking a consensus as to how we should classify and number these albums, because it is currently inconsistent across the various relevant Wikipedia articles. Jargo Nautilus (talk) 17:09, 1 December 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Inconsistency - "number of studio albums"
Talk:Riverside Park (Manhattan)

message: I removed a whole section of unsourced pop-culture entries. epicgenius (talk) 18:53, 21 August 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: In popular culture
Talk:USS Iowa (BB-61)

message: and I had a conversation over this debate and decided that 2nd commission was the correct term, but I just wanted to make sure everyone else agrees before changing the wording on an article I did not help create A 10 fireplane (talk) 20:34, 25 April 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Anyone who is interested, the conversation A 10 fireplane references took place here:  Talk:USS Oregon (BB-3)  Participation is welcomed for a solid consensus on the issue.--->  Darryl.P.Pike (talk) 21:33, 25 April 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Re-commission vs. 2nd commission 

message: After reading the documentation for Talk:FAQs this morning I looked at a few random FAs for examples of good multi-question FAQ subpages. I was not surprised to see the page length, but I was surprised how 2006 and non-subject-specific some of the questions are. I was going to BOLDLY remove some, but decided this deserved at least a courtesy discussion. BusterD (talk) 16:13, 11 July 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Suggest removing per your post. North8000 (talk) 17:12, 11 July 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  About this talk page FAQ, aren't several questions just general Wikipedia Help stuff? 

message: there is a point in the article where it states "In April 1989, an explosion of undetermined origin wrecked her No. 2 gun turret, killing 47 sailors."
The inaccuracy I'd like to address is the supposedly unknown origin of the fire. It is my understanding that the Navy determined that the explosion was caused by 2 main factors.
1 Being the use of old and unsafe propellant to fire a round as per the orders of one of the officers on board while conducting a firing exercise.
The second factor being that the unstable bag of propellant was likely over-rammed during the loading process which likely put it under too much pressure causing it to ignite prematurely before the breach had been sealed allowing the inferno to engulf the room and all the crew inside.
If anyone else can comment on this and either confirm that I have the correct information (I want to make sure before I edit anything) or cite a source explaining why I'm wrong (which is very possible) I would appreciate the second opinion. Camandersol (talk) 07:07, 26 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Inaccurate information on turret explosion?
Talk:Tom Pendergast

message: Many problems with this article:
#It's hardly NPOV
#The name should be at Thomas Pendergast
#It really needs to be wikified.
-- Zoe (posted April 18, 2003)
:I would assume that since the name that he is known by is Tom Pendergast, that should be the location as well. I will put a redirect at Thomas Pendergast.
Cimon avaro (posted April 18, 2003)
I'd like to see this article redone. i know there's more to the story than this. Preschooler.at.heart 01:59, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Problems with article

message: I've never been comfortable with the subheads.  Pendergast's peak of power was as "Chairman of the Jackson County Democratic Club," which was not really an elected position in the sense of a mayor or congressman but rather head of a Democratic Party faction.  I changed it to more accurately reflect this title.  Americasroof 15:28, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: In office

message: I've never been comfortable with the opponents section.  I think it is inaccurate (e.g., Cookingham only came to power after Pendergast left).  A list is troublesome because opponents often switched sides and never opposed Pendergast from the start.  For the record I am including what I nuked here.
*L. P. Cookingham
*Harold Luhnow
*R. E. McDonnell
*Samuel S. Mayerberg
*Loren Miller
*Maurice M. Milligan
*Spencer Salisbury
Discussions of the opponents should be done by paragraph discussion rather than just listing them.  Americasroof 15:34, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Opponents
Talk:Bézout's theorem

message: Who was Bezout? -- Zoe
:I think it was Etienne Bézout. -- Anon.
This article could also be made a whole lot clearer: at the moment, it's very imprecise, and confusing. -- Anon.
: What do you find imprecise and confusing? --Bernard Helmstetter 18:43, 20 Dec 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I think it is A hyperbola. --Bernard Helmstetter 18:43, 20 Dec 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Untitled 

message: The text begins with a somewhat vague definition of the theorem in mathematics in general, and then only in algebraic geometry. I don't understand this distinction; to me, the theorem is really about algebraic geometry. --Bernard Helmstetter 18:31, 20 Dec 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  why speak about mathematics in general before algebraic geometry ? 

message: Yo, one of the examples is wrong (the one w/ the longer ellipse). That has an intersection of multiplicity 2 at (-1,0), one of multiplicity 1 at (0,1), and one of multiplicity one at (17/8,-15/8*I). 66.71.125.103 (talk) 22:42, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  July 2013 

message: The sketch begins by rewriting the 2 curves, X and Y, and somehow they're now inexplicably univariate polynomials in terms of z when they where in terms of x and y. If they're now in homogeneous coordinates then they should be in terms of x, y, and z. This, however, seems incompatible with the rest of the proof. Can someone add an example (or a link to the missing background material) for how this polynomial rewriting is supposed to happen such that x and y are no longer present, or, if such a rewriting does not exist, provide a real proof? Snydej2 (talk) 09:52, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: I see where my confusion was (what looked like coefficients are actually polynomials in which the x's and y's are hiding. This was stated but I misunderstood it.) and I will add the example I was in need of. Once I understand the proof and have clarified any other stumbling blocks I run into I'll remove the confusion banner I added. Snydej2 (talk) 10:37, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

text: I agree that to make it useful much more detail should be added, even if it's just a sketch. As of now I can't make sense of it 148.88.247.135 (talk) 09:48, 19 November 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proof Sketch Confusion
Talk:List of birds of Australia, New Zealand and Antarctica

message: On the Birds of Australia article it says that this is an "offical list". Who was this list compiled by?--Peta 06:09, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Official in the sense that it is not the Birds Australia unofficial working list...  The source list was originally compiled for HANZAB, the pre-eminent scientific reference on Australian Birds (seven volumes published between 1991 and 2006).  The current HANZAB list is maintained by Birds Australia, the peak Australian NGO, and includes subsequent revisions.  --Glen Fergus 01:26, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There should probably be a referece to that somewhere on the page.--Peta 00:56, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

text: I see you have added that.--Peta 00:57, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Official

message: "Australasian" is an ill-defined term, implying some asian content (perhaps PNG, Indonesia) that isn't there.  Perhaps "List of Australian, New Zealand and Antarctic birds"?  Long-winded, but accurate. --Glen Fergus 22:53, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Move?

message: Think I've tidied all the Polbot naming glitches now.  Let me know if I've missed any.--Gergyl 09:10, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Polbot

message: Much needed is a List of birds of New Guinea, which could stand alone or, preferably, be added to this list. Apart from its intrinsic value, this would make sense of the redirected term 'List of birds of Australasia'. It would be important to include the whole island of New Guinea, not its political segments, because (obviously) living things occupy geographical areas. The relevance of lists of fauna of Australasia is that these land masses were part of old Gondwana, and of central interest to geographical distribution and evolution. Macdonald-ross (talk) 10:24, 28 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lacking New Guinea 
Talk:24 (TV series)

message: When a TV series includes gay characters (or lesbian, bisexual, transgender), the category identifying the inclusion is added to the article. It does not render the series a "Gay" or LGBT series. It only acknowledges that the TV series includes L, or G, or B, or T characters. In regards to this series:
24 just introduced a badass terrorist-fighting gay couple
Nick Duffy
14 February 2017
PinkNews
http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2017/02/14/24-just-introduced-a-badass-terrorist-fighting-gay-couple/
Pyxis Solitary talk 07:21, 26 November 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: @Pyxis Solitary That article is referring to 24: Legacy which is a seperate show from 24. 74thClarkBarHG (talk) 07:47, 26 November 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you for your explanation. :-)  Pyxis Solitary talk 08:24, 26 November 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: There are clearly LGBT characters in 24 proper like Mandy in season 1 and Heller's son in season 4. Connor Behan (talk) 00:59, 30 December 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gay characters 

message: What picture format had this series?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2003:E6:1F0A:A401:21E9:65D8:69BA:B7D1 (talk) 07:58, 19 November 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Release 

message: An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect :24 (televisionseries) and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 December 2#24 (televisionseries) until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.  Regards, SONIC678 16:15, 2 December 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  "24 (televisionseries)" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]]
Talk:Louise Brooks

message: 
: .... 0mtwb9gd5wx (talk) 19:52, 6 September 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Over the phone 1983 Louise Brooks...more interview... 

message: Following recent edits by , I looked at WPFilm which says: “The project generally considers all articles directly related to film to be within its scope, except that it does not include articles about actors, directors and filmmakers, which are within the scope of the Biography WikiProject and specifically the Actors and Filmmakers and Screenwriters projects.” It looks as if this page is not in the scope of the project. —Northernhenge (talk) 08:27, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Articles can be in the scope of more than one project. This article is definitely within the scope of the film project. Beyond My Ken (talk) 23:25, 29 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  WPFilm
Talk:Wheatear

message: Please could an expert add seasonal geographic range to each bird in this article in order that the casual seeker after knowledge can start to rifle target which bird may be the one they have seen?  Fiddle Faddle 23:09, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi Tim. Each species article should have the range. In Sussex (or anywhere in the UK/northern Europe) anything other than Northern Wheatear is very rare. jimfbleak 06:00, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Geographic range
Talk:Lists of writers

message: Does anybody else think it is strange that in :Category:Writers by language there is no subcategory for English-language writers?  The current categorization scheme has these writers in American, Canadian, Australian, Irish, English, Welsh and Scottish categories, but these are not just English-language writers but also include many other languages. There is also no List of English-language writers. -- Samuel Wantman 07:39, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  English-language writers 

message: I was wondering how I would go about adding a new book about the Falls of Western Civilizations through-out history.  I want to make sure I put it in the right place and don't mess up anything that is happening here.  This is a huge directory and very valuable so I want to make sure I contribute correctly.  The book is here if that info helps: http://larrykelley.com/book/ User:RomieGalaxy 12:39, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Adding new novel about western civilizations 

message: I am considering creating a page with the list of Ukrainian language writers, and would appreciate some advice and help. --Internetyev (talk) 23:05, 8 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Adding Ukrainian language writers
Talk:Shearwater

message: Jim, my HANZAB list has the Fluttering and Hutton's Shearwaters as seperate species. Excuse me taking so long to reply. Tannin 08:01 Apr 18, 2003 (UTC)
:no problem-I saw the change. jimfbleak 11:47 Apr 18, 2003 (UTC)
Someone pliiiis update the taxonomy. Shearwaters are paraphyletic. But it would be good to give a historical abstract, e.g. S/A is "radically different" in many things; I'd like to have details.Dysmorodrepanis 22:48, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's on my 'to do list.' Which is an epic to rival the Norse Sagas. I'd show you it, but actually typing it out is also on my to do list, and way down. But I'll try and move this one up the list. Sabine's Sunbird  talk 06:12, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: comment

message: @User:SchreiberBike,  I undid your edit because I think you have misunderstood what was meant. The sooty shearwater breeds at a specific location on the Falklands (lat and long given) but reaches as far north as a band between 65 to 70N (latitude only, because we are only indicating how far north it reaches, longitude isn't relevant). It may not be elegantly phrased, but it's not wrong Jimfbleak - talk to me? 05:40, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you ; I'm glad you were looking over my shoulder. I completely misinterpreted that. Do you think it would be more clear if it said "... from their breeding colony on the Falkland Islands (52°S 60°W) north to 65°-70°N as far as 70° north latitude in the North Atlantic Ocean off north Norway."? (New text underlined.) Thanks, SchreiberBike talk 05:56, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: @User:SchreiberBike, I've amended per your suggestion, it's clearer now, thanks Jimfbleak - talk to me? 06:01, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Sooty Shearwater