lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Interdisciplinary

message: Shaun, interdisciplinarity passes the Google test, it's in several dictionaries, and it's  well known to people in interdisciplinary fields. In addition, Wikipedia article names should be constructed from nouns, not adjectives (see Naming conventions. Accordingly, I am planning to undo your reversion. I will also try to address the question you posed above (it is a good question). Bryan 16:36, 18 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Interdisciplinarity
Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Rocks and minerals

message: Mercury (element) has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 20:21, 21 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Good article reassessment for [[Mercury (element)]] 

message: The page Calomel is currently a mix of a rocks and minerals page and a page about a historical medical substance. This is really confusing - should these be two separate pages? I am very much not an expert on rocks and minerals, but also wonder whether calomel and Mercury(I) chloride should be merged? Lijil (talk) 11:46, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Should calomel be split into two pages?
Talk:Punch (drink)

message: Link to punch recipes at the WikiCookbook? --Dante Alighieri 19:40, 4 Feb 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Link to WikiCookbook? 

message: See Talk:Drink re: Squash (drink). —msh210 05:23, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge 

message: Does punch is equal to sangria? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 150.128.43.131 (talk • contribs) 12:59, 9 May 2006
:Sangria is a kind of red wine punch, but there are many kinds of punch that aren't sangria. Mindspillage (spill yours?) 21:26, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sangria 

message: That generic multi-flavored stuff that hillbillies buy, that comes in plain translucent milk jugs. It's, like, liquid fla-vor-ice or knockoff Hi-C or something.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.122.63.142 (talk) 15:54, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  What is the name for 

message: I don't think this has chicken juice in it!  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.72.191.239 (talk) 05:37, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pimms Cup 

message: The long-unreferenced article spodi apparently regards a drink which is simply an alternative regional term for punch, with little or no significant difference, certainly insufficient for a separate article. The term may be worth mentioning in this article however. Mutt Lunker (talk) 12:24, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: *Per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Spodi (2nd nomination) that term now redirects here, but none of the content was merged because none of it was attributed to a source. Beeblebrox (talk) 15:27, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  The redirects should be removed or a reference to the term needs to be included. As it stands now, Spodiodi and Spodi and Spodee redirect here, but no mention is made of any of those terms. 75.37.20.28 (talk) 06:52, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  merge Spodi in to this article 

message: What is the source for the claim that punch is widely consumed at parties involving college-aged people?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.224.98.35 (talk) 18:25, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ubiquity at college parties 

message: Golden Glow redirects here, but there is nothing in the text to explain why.  Any ideas?  --Theodore Kloba (talk) 16:00, 7 June 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Golden Glow? 

message: "Hairy buffalo" redirects to this page, but there is no mention of it anywhere in the article.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.95.43.253 (talk) 00:22, 15 December 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hairy Buffalo 

message: Mention Ernest P. Worrell's many "Superb" drinking from punch bowl scenes. Jidanni (talk) 13:23, 11 October 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: The Merry Widow composer 207.44.14.244 (talk) 12:18, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ernest cultural references
Talk:Ingólfr Arnarson

message: As far as I can remember the quote from Eyrbyggja saga describes Þórolfr Mostraskegg, not Ingolfr Arnarson. And I'm not sure if we should use the modern spelling for the page title. Haukurth 01:49, 27 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Eyrbyggja saga?
Talk:Latter Day Saint movement

message: in the paragraph leading up to reference 20, there's some confusion around the relationship between mormonism and "christianity" is the trinity…could the reason this is confusing to the authors be because of this https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arianism ? maybe "christianity" don't deal with heresy the same way since the reformation, and most of the big protestant mobs that came from that didn't have much of a focus on the nature of the trinity?  Kikila mai Tawhiti (talk) 07:34, 11 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  relationship with christianity
Talk:Magnus Carlsen

message: FIrst, the WCC is more significant than the Tata Steel tournament, and also the image shows him more clearly. Jishiboka1 (talk) 05:26, 20 April 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed, this new photo is significantly worse. There's no need to only use the latest photo available, and particularly not if it's a bad one. Even using this one from 2016 seems quite okay. 157.157.164.20 (talk) 11:46, 5 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Image dispute - 2021 WCC image is better 

message: In my opinion, the information from the 'Notes: interactive games' tab should be merged with the information from the main 'Notes' tab and then the 'Notes: interactive games' tab should be deleted as in my opinion it is pointless having 2 notes tabs. Xboxsponge15 (talk) 18:43, 29 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  The 'Notes: interactive games' tab should be merged with the main 'Notes' tab 

message: Carlsen's peak in both blitz and rapid chess (according to FIDE) is the highest in history but I couldn't find a single mention of it. Isn't that worth of a mention..? Vehvilæinen (talk) 17:31, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: feel free to go ahead and add a mention to the article. LittlePuppers (talk) 01:40, 17 August 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: The fact that it's a record does not imply that it needs to be mentioned in the article.  There is no hard-and-fast criterion for what to put into the article and what not to, but one useful criterion is notability.  If you can find one or more articles in the chess press (print or online) that mention his record-high blitz and/or rapid ratings, you can mention them in the article, and cite the article(s).  On the other hand, if you can't find such an article, chances are the rest of the world just does not care about these high ratings, and mentioning them in the article would be just nerdy. Bruce leverett (talk) 02:03, 17 August 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I think you are right. It seems that the internet had very little interest in it. However, can't see it as nerdy... Vehvilæinen (talk) 08:31, 18 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  All-time highest-rated blitz and rapid player = no mention 

message: 1989 in the introduction and 1990 later.  76.236.30.55 (talk) 02:53, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Two different birth years 

message: Under the personal life section there should be something about his girlfriend. Briaboru (talk) 06:55, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: See talk:magnus Carlson/Archive 2#Love life. Bruce leverett (talk) 21:35, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Girlfriend  

message: Is mentioned at the start of the 2004 and 2006 sections.  In the 2005 section, it is missing.
The phrasing at the start of the 2006 section can be mistaken as his first group B was in 2006.  His finish in the 2004 group C allowed him to play in group B for the first time in 2005. Tbuonodono (talk) 04:27, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tata Steel Chess Tournament
Talk:Meagan Good

message: This changing/removing of a quote by Good is getting very tiresome. The entire quote was put in about her heritage because someone complained about Wikipedia attempting to make Good white or some other nonsense. To remedy that, we included exactly what Good said about her heritage so the content would be presented in her very own words. If she got something wrong or used incorrect terminology, oh well. Those are her exact words and they should not be corrected or edited in any way. Quotes should never be edited unless done so for clarity and that is not the case here. The quote has stood for quite some time so I've no idea why it's so problematic now. Pinkadelica♣ 06:55, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Quote 

message: That content is so large and dominant that it violates WP:Undue. It needs to be reduced to a couple short paragraphs. -- Brangifer (talk) 04:37, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Undue and the Blue Dress Controversy 

message: Is this comment about her sex life really relevant or appropriate here? Isn't it enough to say who she's married to? "They have stated that they remained chaste prior to their marriage."81.202.188.33 (talk) 02:13, 9 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Comment about her sex life - relevance?
Talk:Legendre transformation

message: In the definition, I would switch the x^* to \varphi (or something else) for clarity. Hvstms (talk) 10:48, 19 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  <math>x^* \rightarrow \varphi</math> for clarity 

message: The definitions provided are phrased in a confusing way, with the domain of the function f_* depending on f_* itself. One can avoid this by saying, for example, 'defined where this supremum is finite', or simply by repeating the function's definition in the definition for I_*, ie I_* = \{y \in \mathbb{R} : \sup_{x \in \mathbb{R}}\{ xy - f(x)\} < \infty\}. Happy to make this edit myself if others agree, but this is not my area of expertise and if this circularity is common in related texts and papers it probably makes sense to keep it here. Corlio5994 (talk) 06:16, 16 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Circularity in definition
Talk:M. King Hubbert

message: I removed several external links because they violated EL.  Some of them may be useful as sources for the article:
*Ron Schuler's Parlour Tricks: M. King Hubbert
*Technocracy, Hubbert and peak oil Article from The North American Technocrat
*M. King Hubbert as a Teacher, Fred Meissner Paper at GSA Annual Meeting 2003
*Hubbert Quorum, annual forum held by United States Geological Survey (USGS) (has some sources about Hubbert linked at the bottom)
-NJGW (talk) 17:24, 7 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links
Talk:Edward Weston (photographer)

message: Kim, Gina, and Zack Weston now live in Edward's home at Wildcat Creek just south of Carmel, CA. Kim is the son of Cole and grandson of Edward. He is a superb photographer as well. Gina is his wife and Zack is their young son.  http://www.kimweston.com/.
Weston use 2 cameras : a 8x10 view and Graflex 4x3. The camera on the photo seems to be the 8x10 view not the Graflex ?
See here http://www.kimweston.com/history/history_ew_camera2.htm.
--Ericd 02:41, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Cole Weston could probably use an article of his own. Him and another one of EW's sons are famous photographers in their own right. --DanielCD 22:09, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes. Go for it. -Will Beback 00:39, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's on my list. I might do a brief starter if I can find time this weekend. --DanielCD 14:36, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

text: Yes, him too. -Will Beback 20:23, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Update: there are now a pages on Cole Weston and Brett Weston. --DanielCD 18:14, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Cole Weston

message: Nobody ever calls the subject "Edward Henry Weston". I propose we move the article to "Edward Weston (photographer)" instead. This is consistent with the naming conventions, WP:NC.  ·:· Will Beback  ·:· 20:12, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think that's a fine idea, and encourage you to just go ahead and implement it. Thanks. Hertz1888 20:18, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: On further investigation, I'm not sure why this was moved from "Edward Weston", as that redirected to this articel anyway. This EW has far more inbound links than the other two, so I've moved it back to the plain name.  ·:· Will Beback  ·:· 20:36, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Page name
Talk:Check

message: *Applicable parts of this page cut and pasted to Talk:Check (finance). knoodelhed 07:07, 12 Dec 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: New article, raincheck, created. knoodelhed 18:11, 9 Nov 2004 (UTC)

message: A discussion is taking place to address the redirect :Checkk. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 December 12#Checkk until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.  Lithopsian (talk) 14:12, 12 December 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Checkk" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]]
Talk:Roscoe H. Hillenkoetter

message: (this comment moved from article space where the comment did not belong) - This link is a secondary, unverifiable source that cites as it's source a site you have to pay to access is not of enclyclopedic quality. There is no author listed and no way to verify it is from the NY Times. This link should be deleted and, therefore, the part of the article that it supposedly supports. Bmccarren (talk) 04:29, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Comment about link 

message: This guy, the first director of the CIA, goes public saying the military knows about UFOs and is covering it up, and the Wikipedia article doesn't mention it until the 4th paragraph...
Do people just not want to admit that there's an overwhelming amount of evidence supporting UFOs? Are we trying to brush the whole UFO thing under the rug? Would having hundreds of people, miles apart seeing the same enormous object in the sky convince people? Stephenville, Texas#2008 UFO sightings. How about an ex-astronaut? Edgar Mitchell. --Calibas (talk) 22:52, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  UFOs 

message: I'd like to offer some assistance to help others who have commented in the past. It could be pointed out that reference 18 has a misspelling (AIR FORGE instead of the correct AIR FORCE) in the title of the New York Times article.  This is because that is how it is spelled in the online version of the NYT database.  However,  the original paper version of the 28 February 1960 New York Times article has the correct spelling.  The NYT has had plenty of time to correct this misspelling, and thus the misspelling may have been effective at limiting the number of times this article is presented to various search requests.  TAOsaucer (talk) 21:24, 10 September 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  New York Times Article Typo 

message: On 9 September 2019, the National Archive released this article showing that Roscoe H. Hillenkoetter had briefed President Truman on 9 September 1949 about the detection of the Soviet detonation of RDS-1 on 29 August 1949.  WB-29 aircraft had picked up radioactive samples.  
Document 12
Memorandum from Director of Central Intelligence Rear Admiral R. H. Hillenkoetter, 9 September 1949, Top Secret, Excised copy (currently under request for review at CIA)
In this closely held memorandum, DCI Hillenkoetter notified the White House of the detection of radioactive materials in the Northern Pacific but cautioned that the intelligence community was still trying to determine whether it had found evidence of “an atomic explosion” or of some other phenomenon (volcanic activities, effluents from the Hanford production reactor, or an atomic accident in Russia). According to George Elsey’s interview with NSC Executive Secretary Sidney Souers [See document 16B], the latter showed this document to President Truman.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by TAOsaucer (talk • contribs) 21:22, 10 September 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  9 September 1949 Memo to Harry Truman
Talk:Epictetus

message: I agree that they should have been removed.
However, the statement is true; Epictetus would have loved wikipedia :)
I added a significant amount of new info, and revised the setup a bit.--Venerable Bede 01:58, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Good idea 

message: I replaced the rather short and garbled stuff (see above) on Epictetus' philosophy with an account drawn (mostly) from Heinrich Ritter. This is an old source now, but I was quite selective in picking which bits from his 25 page account of Epictetus to use, and there are plenty of primary references to back it up. Ritter was the main source used for the philosophy section for the Musonius Rufus page, and it worked quite well there, so I thought a similar approach would represent an improvement on the silly ataraxia stuff we had on this page. Singinglemon (talk) 22:50, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Great Eagle120160 (talk) 14:50, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Not a good idea; refer to my comment under the topic Thought - Part 2 below on this Talk Page. 182.239.146.18 (talk) 12:15, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Thought 

message: Despite the Thought topic from 2010 above on this Talk Page, which introduces the work of Heinrich Ritter, Alexander James William Morrison, (1846), The History of Ancient Philosophy, Volume 4 into the Thought section of the article, the only person who should be cited for the thoughts of Epictetus is Epictetus himself, not someone else's reference to it. 182.239.146.18 (talk) 12:13, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Thought - Part 2
Talk:John Scarlett

message: Should have a category and a predecessor-sucessor template.
: Need to fill in the following, then:
Preceded by:?	Head of JIC2001–2004	Followed by:?
: James F. (talk) 02:53, 13 Sep 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Heads of MI6 

message: I fail to see why the section headed "Biography" would start with the pronouncement that Scarlett is fluent in French and Russian. While it is worthy of note, surely the opening lines of a biography traditionally - and logically - tend to refer to the early life of the subject.
:I agree, the remark does sound like peacock wording. It is not worth an edit war over it.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.125.209.109 (talk) 14:35, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Fluency in French and Russian..." as the start of the biography? 

message: In the box on the top right, we are told about Scarlett's allegiance. This does not occur in, say, the boxes for Einstein or Newton.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.97.194.200 (talk) 16:21, 12 September 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: The box for Sawyers has his paper nationality and place of birth, but nothing else.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.97.194.200 (talk) 16:43, 12 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unusual  
Talk:List of mayors of Fort Wayne, Indiana

message: I notice that a mayor's reelection to a second non-consecutive term, it shows up as number dash, not an actual consecutive number. Contrast with President Grover Cleveland, who is generally given the numbers 22nd and 24th. Is there some sort of tradition difference between municipal elected offices and federal elected offices in the United States? --Damian Yerrick (☎) 01:36, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Number -"? 
Talk:Abdul Rahman Munif

message: I think the external link is of no use because you cannot access the obituary ("This article is available in full to Independent Portfolio subscribers. Access it through BT click&buy"). <KF> 01:34, 5 Feb 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: He was actually a member of the National Command of the Ba'th Party, wasn't he? I presume the one who was, and was also from Jordan, was the same Abd al-Rahman Munif. Palmiro | Talk 15:57, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ba'th party 

message: Vintage, his English language publisher, renders his name as "Abdelrahman Munif".  Shouldn't that be what we use? john k (talk) 02:54, 29 September 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Quartet Books, another publisher of his works in English, uses "Abd al-Rahman Munif". His obituary in The Guardian uses "Abdul-Rahman Mounif". Wikipedia really ought to have a preferred Romanization of Arabic, but alas. In this case it doesn't look as if any specific romanization is more common or standard than the other. Gabbe (talk) 17:35, 3 October 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: The version used here is used by the New York Times, seemingly.  I do think that it would be better to use a spelling that is actually used by one of his English publishers, although I don't know how to decide between them. john k (talk) 20:46, 7 October 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: The best thing to do would be to have a redirects from every possible spelling of his name. Madler (talk) 16:10, 30 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Name 
Talk:Henry George

message: I added a source for Smith, Ricardo, Proudhon, and Lasalle being influences, and it is all the same source, but the way I did it now ends up with it being listed 4 times in the sources, with 4 different numbers, and I don't know how to fix it so that the source just shows up once and the correct number-reference for it shows up at each of the appropriate places.
I'm also not entirely sure if I formatted the source/reference correctly.
If anyone could fix this, or tell me how to fix it, it would be greatly appreciated. 217.105.19.119 (talk) 19:17, 12 July 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: The citation tag has been properly formatted and consolidated. Thank you for adding it. A. Randomdude0000 (talk) 20:40, 12 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Help with sources 

message: It was titled "Our Land and National Policy" and actually the first book that he wrote which also proposed a tax on land values. This is not generally appreciated. It was published in 1871. Macrocompassion (talk) 14:25, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Henry George's First Book
Talk:List of Have I Got News for You episodes

message: I invite you to, at least in part, rethink your reversion of my edits to this article. With these edits I:
*Converted the footnotes to use the correct footnote template (rather than repurposed reference tagging), which allows references/tags to be included within them.
*Removed trivial information from the notes, such as the arbitrary counting of every 50 episodes of the show (which is not signalled onscreen on at least most of these occasions). A column counting up total episode numbers could be added as an alternative to this.
*Added citation needed tags to unsourced information, which is a fundamental Wikipedia content policy.
I fail to see how any of this can be considered controversial, let alone vandalism. U-Mos (talk) 15:01, 27 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Restoring some aspects is fine; that's how editing works. A blanket restore and bad faith accusations are not. You've just now encountered yourself how you cannot place a reference inside a reference tag, hence the footnote template. And regardless, they're aesthetically the same, so what's the justification for undoing that? Remember too that sources and the cutting down of trivia were the specific improvements discussed in last year's AfD discussion. U-Mos (talk) 15:35, 27 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Restructure of notes and citation needed tags