lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:The Garden (journal)

message: A recent editor changed the title of this page to The Garden (magazine), the reason given being that it was "more appropriate". The Garden is, however, still described as "Journal of the Royal Horticultural Society" on its "flannel panel" (the list of staff members, addresses, printers etc on the first page of each issue) even though the phrase no longer appears above or below the title on the cover (as it did until December 2006). On  the society's website you will find The Garden under Plants>RHS Publications>Journals>The Garden. I have reverted the change, leaving The Garden (magazine) as a redirect. 91.84.177.144 (talk) 18:23, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The previous comment was added by me; Wikipedia suddenly decided not to recognise me for some reason! SiGarb | (Talk) 18:59, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Journal or magazine?
Talk:Babycham

message: Surely the picture should be of the actual bottle?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.129.96.56 (talk) 11:30, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Picture

message: This link is completely irrelevant, surely.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.93.131.10 (talk) 14:02, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Indeed it was.Mezigue (talk) 22:04, 15 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Babyshambles
Talk:Milford Mill Road

message: Would be good to dig up some old county master plans (or whatever they're called) to see how this area was originally designed. I've heard that Slade was supposed to be continuous, with the then-unpaved but now-paved-and-widened arterial road curving around to meet the same-named stub. DMacks 20:07, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've been quite curious about the history of this road myself. I had hoped when I wrote this article that someone else would have information on the rest. I do remember the changes made in 1987, since I lived in this area at that time. I have also heard about some changes made near Liberty Road, I think in the 1960s, but without verifiable accurate information, I do not plan to include it in this article. Sebwite 20:20, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Slade Ave history 
Talk:Triumph Rocket III

message: How fast will it go? The Real Walrus 20:06, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: See trivia in article - in 2004 the Rocket III set the world land speed record for a production motorcycle over 2000cc eaching it's electronically set limiter of 140.3 mph. I've had an indicated 130mph two up on the French motorway but never really pushed it solo - its more about grunt than top end thoughTony (talk) 04:50, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

message: This article was checked and validated by the designer of the Rocket III John Mockett on the 14th April 2008.  He was kind enough to comment that "it reads very well." Tony (talk) 04:54, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Validation by R3 designer John Mockett  

message: As part of the Motorcycling WikiProject I am working though all the missing articles and stubs for British Bikes.  To make things easier to sort out I have created a category for British motorcycles.   Please will you add to any British motorcycle pages you find or create.  It will also help to keep things organised if you use the Template:Infobox Motorcycle or add it where it is missing.  I've linked the Category to the Commons British Motorcycles so you could help with matching pics to articles or adding the missing images to the Commons - take your camera next time you go to a rally!  Thanks  Tony (talk) 13:24, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  New Category for British Motorcycles 

message: I believe Triumph's claims are a mixture of humor and the usual manufacturer hyperbole.  I'm pretty sure the 2.5 second 0-60 mph time contains at least a full second of wishful thinking, and not only is it not faster than most sport bikes, it isn't even faster than the main competition, the Yamaha V-Max.  Needs to be sorted out and have better citations.  And the peacock adjectives need to go. --Dbratland (talk) 17:03, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Is that better?  {I've owned one since the launch and can confirm that despite its size it is as fast as most sports bikes - and most sports cars - but if you do wheelies it burns out the clutch....) Thruxton (talk) 18:27, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

text: It says "mass production". --Dennis Bratland (talk) 15:04, 23 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Misleading claims on performance and press-release peacock language 

message: I just bought the bike. Did I do the right thing. 2009 registered Rocket 2700 km on the clock 105.245.116.31 (talk) 19:41, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rocket 3 Touring bike 

message: The first sentence is not grammatically correct  and doesn't scan or make sense at the end, after the last comma. 118.149.82.15 (talk) 00:12, 10 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  First sentence is not grammatically correct
Talk:ICMJE recommendations

message: This seems to be the same as Vancouver guidelines and also Vancouver system.  If they are the same, then these pages ought to be merged.  WhatamIdoing (talk) 23:44, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge proposal

message: Additionally, it seems that ICMJE doesn't publish the Uniform requirements any more - they have been replaced with the "Recommendations for the Conduct, Reporting, Editing, and Publication of Scholarly work in Medical Journals.". Unfortunately the link to ICMJE at the bopttom of this page says it leads to the Uniform Requirements, but it does not. It leads to the ICMJE page which now offers the "Recommendations for the Conduct, Reporting, Editing, and Publication of Scholarly work in Medical Journals." and has no0 mention of the Uniform Requirements.
THis article is therefore now historic and someone who knows what they're doing should archive a copy of the Uniform Requirements and alter the link, prior to including a new link to ICMJE that is correctly labeled and mention the change in the text. 201.34.147.99 (talk) 10:28, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: . I've now updated the article title and the mentioned link Mikael Häggström (talk) 15:05, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Out of Date
Talk:University of Pennsylvania Journal of International Law

message: :University of Pennsylvania Journal of International Economic Law → University of Pennsylvania Journal of International Law — This will reflect the current name of the publication, which used to be called "Journal of Economic Law. (This is uncontroversial).  A redirect should also be created from "University of Pennsylvania Journal of International Economic Law."  Thanks. —ballpointzen (talk) 23:24, 16 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 

message: To the anonymous IPs who keep changing the journal abbreviation: the journal abbreviation field (as explained in the doc with the infobox template) is intended for the ISO abbreviation. This is an internationally, standardized way of abbreviation journal names. Here is a site that explains how that works (that this is a chemistry library really is immaterial). Journalseek does not include this journal, but it includes the University  of Pennsylvania Journal of International Economic Law and the University  of Pennsylvania Journal of International Business Law. For these two, it lists as standard abbreviations "Univ Penn J Int Econ Law" and "Univ Penn J Int Bus Law", respectively. Following the ISO standards, the abbreviation of this journal is "Univ Penn J Int Law", NOT "U. Pa. J. Int'l L." Please do not revert without giving an adequate rationale --Crusio (talk) 21:36, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Journal abbreviation 

message: This article has seven inline citations, and good detail, far better than a stub. --DThomsen8 (talk) 03:15, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Class=C
Talk:Poland Act

message: This article is a duplicate of Poland Act and should be merged and redirected there. –SESmith 00:44, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: copied from Talk:Poland Law of 1874 -- 159.182.1.4 20:16, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Duplicate article

message: A major restructuring proposal for all polygamy articles related to Mormonism has been made at Talk:Joseph Smith, Jr. and polygamy#Series and Restructuring proposal.  Please visit and give your two cents. --Descartes1979 (talk) 04:39, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Major restructuring proposal 

message: The article does not say how the Act came to be named Poland ? 81.156.0.55 (talk) 19:48, 3 December 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: It's in the second sentence: "Sponsored by Senator Luke P. Poland..." -- 208.81.184.4 (talk) 17:46, 15 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Name - Poland
Talk:Aromobates nocturnus

message: I've added a reference to back up the fact that it's endangered but I hope there's a better reference than I've used.  Free free to substitute. Mrs.EasterBunny (talk) 18:52, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

message: The term 'Aromobatidae' redirects to this article mentioning one single species and claiming it's the only species of the genus Aromobates, and apparently also of the whole family Aromobatidae. This is absolutely not true. According to a current list of the AMNH, the genus Aromobates contains twelve species, and the family Aromobatidae consists of three subfamilies with five genera and 104 species altogether.
To fix this, the redirect from Aromobatidae to this article has to be removed, a new article 'Aromobatidae' to be written, and the article 'Skunk Frog' renamed to 'Skunk Frogs' and extended to contain twelve species of Aromobates. Here's an overview:
Family: Aromobatidae (104 sp.)
:Subfamily: Allobatinae (46 sp.)
::Genus Allobates (46 sp.)
:Subfamily: Anomaloglossinae (26 sp.)
::Genus Anomaloglossus (24 sp.)
::Genus Rheobates (2 sp.)
:Subfamily: Aromobatinae (31 sp.)
::Genus Aromobates (12 sp.)
::Genus Mannophryne (19 sp.)  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bwiesem (talk • contribs) 01:30, 11 November 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: This is now a proper species article, and the genus-level article has been amended. Micromesistius (talk) 19:20, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Most definitely not the only species
Talk:British U-class submarine

message: Why revert to this awkward form HMS Unique from this efficient form ? Regards Keith-264 (talk) 19:14, 1 March 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: If I don't get a reply, can I take it that no-one objects to me altering the former to the latter? Regards Keith-264 (talk) 08:43, 3 March 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: No frenzy. I reverted your changes by accident and put them back within minutes. Gaius Cornelius (talk) 16:58, 4 March 2022 (UTC)
replies: text:  Not recognising your name, I thought that was a third party, apols. Keith-264 (talk) 17:35, 4 March 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recent revert frenzy 

message: The sources I have use different definitions of the groups, which is awfully confusing. Any suggestions? Regards Keith-264 (talk) 20:45, 8 October 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: What sources are you using? I’ve got Conway, which has sections for the Undine class (Group I here) and for the U class War Emergency and 1940/41 short hull programmes, (Groups II and III), while the V class are listed as U class 1941 long hull and 1942 programmes. I don’t know the source for the separate orders. Xyl 54 (talk) 23:46, 12 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Groups I, II and III 

message: I've noticed this article has almost no information about underwater endurance. This is a noticeable omission compared to almost all other articles regarding submarines in general and especially WW2 submarine classes.
Only 1 sub type has something listed and it just gives the range, with no information about what speed that endurance can be achieved. 103.106.91.178 (talk) 15:28, 25 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Submerged Endurance and Speed
Talk:Bonzo's Montreux

message: Can't you also hear that squeak at the very beginning of "The Rover"? Gspong (talk) 05:01, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Rover 

message: Why are guitars and bass credited? There are just effects and no bass. Saemikneu (talk) 00:45, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Personnel
Talk:Boris the Spider

message: I have just removed the The Beatles template from this song. How the heck did it get here? Please discuss before re-adding. --Richhoncho (talk) 14:15, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

message: Does anyone have any idea where the quote stating that the Entwistle song 'My Size' is a sequel to this song? It's cited in a few places online but no source is given. As far as I can tell the first mention of it online is when the quote was added to this page in 2013. There's no clear results for it online, so I assume the user who added it typed it out from a book or magazine, or transcribed it from a video interview. Any help would be appreciated, this is driving me insane. --Herr Katze (talk) 19:39, 15 December 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  'My Size' Sequel
Talk:List of Melbourne Storm records

message: I'll challenge the assertion the Storm should be allocated the Wooden Spoon for the year of the salary cap breach. The Wooden Spoon is for the team that finishes last.  To use a running or swimming race as an analogy, the Storm were "disqualified" or "did not finish", which is completely different to finishing last. The Melbourne Storm, by virtue of not being able to accumulate premiership points were effectively excluded from the competition. The team that finished with the fewest number of premiership points was the North Queensland Cowboys. Comes.amanuensis (talk) 02:11, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: While I agree with you I believe NRL stats at large show Storm as being the Wooden spoon recipients because they were forced into last place, so win it by default. Anderch (talk) 07:47, 7 August 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wooden Spoon? 

message: This is just a general note for anyone updating this page. Please update the stats in the whole page not just an individual statistic. Including the Current as at date at the top as this is then more beneficial for anyone reading the page.Anderch (talk) 07:47, 7 August 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Page updates

message: Proposition to split this page into two articles - keep this page as the statistic records (club, individual, season, stadium etc) and have a new page titled Melbourne Storm Honours with the Grand finals, coaches/captains, awards, life members etc. with links where appropriate between the articles and the individual season pages.  I've seen some of the other NRL club pages have been set out this way (Brisbane, Dragons, Souths).
Would love to know your thoughts , especially on where to put the trivial stuff like the uniform/sponsor table.  We could also bring back the overall record against teams for this page to be updated at the end of each season. Storm machine (talk) 01:39, 19 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Split - Honours/Records
Talk:Exercise Robin Sage

message: The article lacks detail. It refers many times to the "mission" or "missions", but never defines what those are (or even give examples, for that matter). It only briefly lists what the exercise evaluates, without presenting any information on how they are evaluated.
If this information can be obtained, it should be included. Of course, this article is ranked Start class, so there very well may not be. 24.15.197.87 (talk) 02:06, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Improvements
Talk:Breadfan

message: This is without question the best Metallica song ever.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.138.120.36 (talk) 07:27, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Do you have a citation for that?
===== Lyrics =====
The lyrics are from the Metallica version and differs from the original lyrics of the Budgie version.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.67.117.1 (talk) 15:40, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: The lyrics are from the Metallica version and differs from the original lyrics of the Budgie version.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.67.117.1 (talk) 15:40, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lyrics 

message: Does anyone have any info on why this is on the song? was it a quote from a movie? is it something someone's kid asked about a family pet? Was it in reference to the original song?  --Billy Nair (talk) 20:38, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Where's Fluffy? 

message: I love "Breadfan" (it has one of the best riffs ever in heavy metal), but with that long slow section in the middle does it really count as thrash?
Meltingpot (talk) 06:15, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Thrash metal

message: Bastille Day by Rush has not the same riff. I've just listened to the song. Its not even similar.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.33.80.73 (talk) 05:34, 13 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  RUSH =

message: The version(s) I have of their take on this song have the English title “Hell's Mountain Of Needles”. The band's Wiki page says the same. Mr Larrington (talk) 11:51, 15 February 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ningen Isu
Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/J. J. Dewey

message: All I need to have explained to me is what can and cannot be on this page--and have no problem with having whatever is objectionable deleted--or deleting what I am told to delete.
I am however, curious as to how would you describe what was on this page prior to this?
It's obvious that I have no voice or choice in the matter but to do what I am instructed to do?  And I have no problem with complying, however, I am unsure what it is that I am being asked to do--and why this wasn't required of the person or persons who started this page and/or worked on it prior to me?
Like I said before--I did NOT start the page--and there was nothing but inaccurate information and bad links to non-existent documents, or documents that had nothing to do with the material for which is was supposed to support--and has been this way for YEARS--and yet, there was no objections by anyone?  
Why is it that now there are objections when all I have done is to expand (correct, improve and annotate) on what was ALREADY there!?!?!
I removed some of the sentences, and even put back the suggested naming convention for this person.
I do not see any "harm" or misrepresentations in what is there at present, and it appears to me that I am being punished for some reason other than what is being represented here.  Not saying that that is true--just that this is what I feel like is happening.
It basically sounds as if the objection is to the style or tone or writing versus anything else.  If this is the case I would be more than happy to change, alter or delete whatever it is that is being perceived as being "vain."
If it a matter of "format"--meaning, that the present "body" needs to be broken into sub-categories, then again, I am open to hear any suggestions. 
Regards,
Smithgiant 20:31, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Anyone can comment on the deletion discussion page.  What the article needs, though, is secondary sources to show that Dewey is notable.  If there are none, then he is not an appropriate subject for a Wikipedia article (in which case the article shouldn't have been created in the first place).  17Drew 20:40, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
Talk:East Lake Golf Club

message: The last part of the lede - "which has helped transform one of the nation's worst public housing projects into a thriving community.[5]" sounds like advertisement and doesn't directly pertain to the East Lake Golf Club. Would it be appropriate to remove this sentence, since it already links to the East Lake Foundation which has this information in it? ChunyangD (talk) 04:10, 24 September 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Closing sentence in lede
Talk:Newell-Fonda High School

message: Victuallers 20:35, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

message: This article needs citations and references.
There is too much detail on sports - only state championships should be listed, not appearances.
Individuals are not to be named - WP: Notability.   RickH86 (talk) 16:52, 19 July 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cleanup
Talk:Buddy Holly discography

message: Why isn't "Everyday" on here? Kdammers (talk) 09:55, 15 July 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I added it today (in the Singles chart/table with "Peggy Sue."  Not a very elegant solution though - I'm not sure the best way to identify "notable" B-sides in this table format.  Maybe someone else can figure out a better way to present "Everyday" in the Singles chart? Pugetbill (talk) 15:27, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Here's a curious thing.  My 78rpm recording of 'Peggy Sue' had 'Well all right' on the b-side, although every other version I've seen of it has featured 'Everyday'.  Does anyone know if the 78 was different to the 45, or if the b-side was changed after release? --Deke42 (talk) 02:33, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Everyday
Talk:By-Tor and the Snow Dog

message: You piece on By-Tor and The Snow Dog is good but the description of the infinite bells is a bit confusing.  The term for this infinitely playing loop on the inside of a record is called a "Locked Groove" not a "fadeout Groove".  See .  This may be a bit picky but it would make the article much clearer.
Ramon LP4 18:54, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  The infinite audio loop you describe is called a "Locked Groove"
Talk:Smithtown Central School District

message: If it had refs added in next 2 days then it could go on the front page of wikipedia .... if you do it then Victuallers 20:42, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Refs

message: Proposing a split of this section into two separate article (one for East and another for West) because there is a lot more information to be contained within separate articles instead of a large section in the District page.--Cheers, Mazeau (talk) 15:00, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  SHS article split 

message: The page notes the Walt Whitman taught at the school in the late 1890's but he died in 1892.  The reference notes his teaching in 1837.  Needs editing and possible further research.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mtveter (talk • contribs) 22:37, 14 March 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Walt whitman 

message: "The student population grew again, which caused Smithtown Middle School to be split again"
What year was this?
1992 is mentioned multiple times as the consolidation year but the end of this consolidation is never mentioned  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.60.219.125 (talk) 19:27, 29 January 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  WHEN re-split?
Talk:Tuloso-Midway High School

message: Have revised and cleaned up article/added school info.  Indyjrg1762 (talk) 02:43, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: This article appears to be promotional; could somebody clean it up?  I'm working on the grammar and excessive bolding.  Jwoodward48wiki (talk) 17:10, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Promotional
Talk:Can't Stop Now

message: 1. The first chords of the intro are: F - Am -Bbmaj7 - Bm7(b5) (or B half diminished). It is not B minor seventh. In fact you can hear the piano strumming over the fa note during that chord, therefore eliminating the possibility of a B minor chord(which requires fa sharp).
2. There is no progression in G minor. If you are talking about the verse, the Eb chord is just a temporary chord borrowed from an adjacent tonality. On the other hand, the first three notes of the melody in the verse are fa mi re, while a G minor tonality requires mi flat.
3. Almost all of the songs in this album are based on piano riffs, it is not a particular aspect of this song. And by the way there are synthesizers in the chorus, just before the final section. It is true, however, that they are not as important as in other songs of the album, but there are 4 measures in the song were the strings take the lead.
Carlositurriaga (talk) 03:31, 15 October 2008 (UTC)