lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Diocletian's Palace

message: The statement that the basement was buried during the bombardment in WW II is not clear to me and it doesn't appear plausible. Can do author explain?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Neven Karlovac (talk • contribs) 01:27, 7 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: What new sections, or missing gaps in the history could be added to better add in improving this work ✠ Emperor of Byzantium ✠ (talk) 15:06, 18 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  What can we do to improve this article?
Talk:Abraham S. Goldstein

message: Professor Goldstein was a prosecutor in the Criminal Div. of the US Justice Dept. before he taught at Yale. Would somebody care to insert that data? PraeceptorIP (talk) 18:05, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  DOJ 
Talk:Abraham Hirschfeld

message: Someone should update this. 2603:7000:6400:C4AF:3087:5558:9108:E746 (talk) 04:59, 17 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  More than “several” buildings
Talk:Temple of Saturn

message: - what on earth is a linen bent?  pants maybe?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.9.125.180 (talk) 07:15, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

message: Shouldn't this page list its sources, or did I just overlook them? -Lanzenritter42
-12 Tables of Roman Law
Don't you think this ought to mention the 12 tables of Roman law housed in the Temple of Saturn(basically the constitution)? Sir Akroy 22:53, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: From all the literature I have read, the Tables were not housed in this temple.  Maybe I'm wrong...I am no expert in the Forum.  If you can find a reference, that fact can be included in the article. Sonnickboom 23:37, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  12 Tables? 

message: what the "3,000" refers to in the caption of the travel poster, "The Temple of Saturn from a 3000 travel poster?"  Einar aka Carptrash (talk) 15:14, 29 October 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Aargh. Undetected vandalism from June 2011, I blush to say. Cynwolfe (talk) 16:59, 29 October 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Insidious creatures. But blushing becomes you.  Vandals.  As if they didn't already do enough damage in Rome. As a consolation, I just went out a shot a picture of a picture in the greenhouse, relegated there because the glass in the frame broke.  I still like it. Carptrash (talk) 18:03, 29 October 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Can someone tell me 
Talk:Porte de Mars

message: Is the name of the structure "Porte Mars" or "Porte de Mars"?  It appears both ways in the article and photo captions.  Shouldn't it be one or the other consistently?  J. D. Crutchfield | Talk 19:21, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Porte Mars" or "Porte de Mars"?
Talk:Arch of Galerius and Rotunda

message: Surely this article should be split into two separate ones? These are two separate monuments... - PocklingtonDan 11:22, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd wait until there's enough material in both to warrant a split that won't result in 2 stubs. --Mcginnly | Natter 10:28, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  These are closely related in earlier scholarship and are integral elements of the Galerius Complex in Thessaloniki, so I do not see a problem with them remaining together.  I added a note for the Palace, which might profitably have its own section under a Galerius Arch, Palace, and Rotunda article or some such.--Nefasdicere 03:51, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: There is enough information for two articles - separate objects, totally different purposes. I think there should be an article "Complex of Galerius" if you'd like to put everything together.--Алиса Селезньова (talk) 10:48, 4 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Split in two?

message: Although the guidebooks still repeat the idea that this was meant to be a tomb, the current scholarly opinion is that it was a temple (god uncertain).  I will add some biblio later this week for both monuments.  It would be good to rewrite the intro and Rotunda section to reflect current thinking, while preserving reference to the earlier ideas.  I will do this unless there are major objections.--Nefasdicere 03:51, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rotunda was a temple 

message: The page Rotunda of St. George redirects here. But there's also a Rotunda by the same name in Sofia, also built in the 4th century. Zero76 03:26, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rotunda in Bulgaria 

message: Would it be sensible to rename this article the Arch and Rotunda of Galerius? The current word order is a bit off putting.  davidiad.: 02:38, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Title 

message: :This article is currently assessed as B-class. There are some sourcing problems, as well as outdated material, that creates an issue with the WP:B-class criteria #1 and possibly # 2 and/or #4.
:Categories:
*Articles containing potentially dated statements from 2004
*Articles with unsourced statements from December 2010
*Articles with unsourced statements from January 2018  -- Otr500 (talk) 21:30, 11 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Classification
Talk:Baths of Diocletian

message: http://web.tiscali.it/romaonlineguide/Pages/eng/rantica/sAHy4.htm
-JasonSpradlin82 (talk) 00:57, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Possible Source

message: I've recently uploaded the images to the left and right, 17th-century engravings of the Baths of Diocletian by Wenceslas Hollar. Feel free to use or not use. Dcoetzee 10:26, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  New images 

message: I think this would be good to get a layout of the Baths. 
Deaniebean (talk) 05:13, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Possible picture for article 

message: The caption to the picture of the said basilica at the top of the article states it's built in the tepidarium, while the 'Present day' section places it in the frigidarium. The relevant section of the Italian cultural heritage authority says it occupies all the three thermal areas: the frigidarium, the tepidarium  and the caldarium (http://archeoroma.beniculturali.it/musei/museo-nazionale-romano-terme-diocleziano). The Wiki article on the basilica places it in the frigidarium. I'd rely on the Italian authority, but I'm not sure enough to change the article(s) on my own. Igorkon (talk) 18:40, 17 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Localisation of the basilica of Santa Maria degli Angeli e dei Martiri 

message: Moses Jacob Ezekiel, American sculptor, had a studio there 1879-1910 which was quite celebrated -- and visited by luminaries aplenty.--Artaxerxes (talk) 15:53, 11 July 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Moses Jacob Ezekiel
Talk:Santa Costanza

message: There is no mention of an actual date of when the structure was finished. I would assume mid to late 4th century, but the exact date (or accepted estimation) should be found. 70.181.84.243 04:46, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Construction began during the reign of Emperor Constantine I around 350 AD.
According to the Wikipedia article on Constantine I, he died 337. 69.42.3.105 (talk) 00:52, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Constantine reigned after his death? 

message: There are two points made here, 1. that it is a domed structure with an ambulatory  2. that the centre part is light and the ambulatory dark Each of these two things is said at least three times. 
I ant to rewrite this section. Amandajm (talk) 09:18, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Architecture

message: There are serious issues with dates in this article. In the beginning, it says the building is dated to the reign of Julian (360-363 AD). Later, it says it is dated to 350 AD. A date during Julian's reign would GREATLY change the building's purpose and significance, as Julian was a very pagan emperor who would not have built a Christian structure. This should be clarified.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.255.2.36 (talk) 06:51, 9 October 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Chronology Issues
Talk:Chedworth Roman Villa

message: this doesn't look to be covered in the article but seems significant, but I only had quick skim of the article so I might have missed something EdwardLane (talk) 13:24, 22 July 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  glass shard 

message: Hello! During late June, July and some of August, I'm working on a paid project sponsored by the National Trust to review and enhance coverage of NT sites. You can find the pilot edits here, as well as a statement and contact details for the National Trust. I am leaving this message when I make a first edit to a page; please do get in touch if you have any concerns. Lajmmoore (talk) 09:32, 3 July 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  National Trust pilot
Talk:Gică Petrescu

message: Bold text  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.81.76.198 (talk) 11:01, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  erh 
Talk:Agapito Sánchez

message: This page does not belong in the "Unarmed people shot by police" section.  The article states that he was shot by an officer in the Dominican Air Force.  Unless he was a military police officer (which is not articulated), the page is miscategorized.69.12.231.149 (talk) 19:46, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wrong classification 
Talk:Lateran Baptistery

message: The above statement has no citation, and is not accurate.  The Lateran baptistery was probably not even the first in Rome, much less the only one for generations. Pope Damasus built (or possibly rebuilt) a baptistery in or near the old St. Peter's Basilica, and he was pope from 366-384 CE.  See for example Christine Hunnikin-Smith, “POPE DAMASUS' BAPTISTERY IN ST. PETER'S RECONSIDERED * Rivista di archeologia cristiana, vol. 64, 1988 pp. 257-286.Msalt (talk) 16:16, 15 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Inaccurate: "This baptistry was for many generations the only baptistery in Rome"
Talk:Baptistery of Neon

message: ----
I find the following statement concerning the symbolism in octagonal baptistries to be most likely false, i.e. a modern interpretation or someone's uneducated opinion--plus there is no citation: "The octagonal design of the building has symbolic meaning: it represents the seven days of the week plus the Day of the Resurrection and Eternal Life." The octagonal form used for Christian baptistries is derived from the Roman mausoleum.
: I also do not like this sentence. I am in favour of the octagonal shape representing the eight days Christ spent in Jerusalem, from Palm Sunday to the Resurrection (counting, as usual, inclusively). The octagonal form may well be derived from previous architectural tradition (not sure about the link between roman mausoleums and christian baptistries). However, the symbolism placed on top of existing architectural form may take different inspiration. --5telios (talk) 10:50, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: [Untitled]
Talk:Arian Baptistery

message: — Assignment last updated by AJ-Tinkess (talk) 21:22, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: Medieval Art
Talk:Saint Sophia Church, Sofia

message: Hello! This is a note to let the editors of this article know that :File:StSophiaChurch-Sofia-10.jpg will be appearing as picture of the day on September 4, 2012. You can view and edit the POTD blurb at Template:POTD/2012-09-04. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page so Wikipedia doesn't look bad. :) Thanks! —howcheng  {chat} 17:45, 3 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[:File:StSophiaChurch-Sofia-10.jpg]] to appear as POTD soon
Talk:Basilica of Sant'Apollinare in Classe

message: This sentence is unclear:  "In addition, the representation of Apollinaris among the apostles was a legitimation to Maximian as the first bishop of a diocese directly related to the early followers of Jesus, being Apollinaris, according to the legend, a disciple of St. Peter." Dirca palustris (talk) 18:11, 21 November 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unclear reference to Maximian.
Talk:Chapel of St Peter-on-the-Wall

message: I think the title should be reverted to 'Chapel of St Peter-on-the-Wall', see Talk:St Bene't's Church, Cambridge#Titles of articles on Churches. Verbcatcher (talk) 18:20, 22 March 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article title
Talk:Camrose, Alberta

message: There is a move discussion in progress on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Alberta which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. 117Avenue (talk) 00:36, 31 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Move discussion in progress 

message: I don't like the way part of section 7.2 is worded, specifically the part that begins with "as a Faculty of the University of Alberta...", ends with Template:Citation Needed, and sounds like it came straight out of a brochure (no seriously, I can practically hear "Stellaris MegaCorp OST - The March of Profits" while reading it). I think, in order to stay in line with Wikipedia's purpose (and avoid meeting WP:G11 in that section), we should either either resolve the Citation needed to determine if it came from an advertisement, figure out a way to reword it in an unbiased way, or both. 
I saw another page (one about a supposedly "academic" society I'm part of, so I'd be lying if I said I wasn't slightly disappointed with my peers...) get deleted and locked for similar G11 concerns, so while this is only a part of the page and probably not as severe, I'm nonetheless a little concerned. We can do better than this!--Macks2008 (talk) 20:12, 15 October 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Change proposal: Fix the rather suspicious description of the college
Talk:Hokuten'yū Katsuhiko

message: Perhaps this article is an "orphan" because of the apostrophe in the title - who is going to bother putting that in when doing a wikilink. Why is there anyway?--Pawnkingthree (talk) 23:32, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Orphan
Talk:Escomb Church

message: I'm guessing the article is incorrect in saying that that's a Saxon sundial on the south porch. Judging from the photo, it's obviously later. There is a much more ancient-looking and weathered sundial on the south wall of the nave, which I imagine is more likely to date from Saxon times. The church's own web site says that there is a Saxon sundial on the south wall. Perhaps someone who knows for sure could fix this as appropriate? C0pernicus (talk) 14:10, 7 February 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: Sundial
Talk:Joseph K. Mansfield

message: These photos were taken by John Coho on October 8, 2011. If some slumbering progeny of General Mansfield or child of Connecticut ever cares, there is only one stipulation regarding reproduction of these photographs: The caption must cite John Coho and must state that John Coho of the 125th PA Volunteers removed the wounded Mansfield from his horse.
File:H:\DCIM\101CANON\IMG_0615.jpg|House on George Line's Farm where Mansfield died
File:H:\DCIM\101CANON\IMG_0615.jpg|Historical marker nearer house
: You need to upload the photos to Wikimedia Commons (see http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:UploadWizard) before they can be used in Wikipedia. However, the license you must grant to use these photos does not allow stipulations of mandatory captions such as you suggest. Hal Jespersen (talk) 01:32, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: photos
Talk:Hagios Demetrios

message: What is the reasoning behind the transliteration used here? I think it's slightly inconsistent and should be either Hagios Demetrios, Agios Dimitrios or Ayios Dimitrios. See also Transliteration of Greek to the Latin alphabet.--Tekleni 08:27, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You are free to change it as you think correct. --Ghirla -трёп- 09:19, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks, I moved it to Hagios Demetrios (it rhymes better with Hagia Sophia).--Tekleni 11:03, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Name 

message: The church looks like the very devil from the outside. I suspect that it was restored "on a budget." Inside, it looks great. But one of the ugliest churches from the outside that I have ever seen that was "famous!" Student7 21:18, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Appearance

message: What are the other monuments in this group designated by UNESCO? All should be listed together or linked.Parkwells (talk) 22:22, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Other Monuments of World Heritage Site?
Talk:Lorsch Abbey

message: This statement is marked with "citation needed". 
I doubt that the gatehouse is the oldest monument of Carolingian architecture. This text published by the Lorsch Abbey states that "the date of construction is estimated as the late 9th century". This contradicts the article Carolingian architecture that claims that it was "built around 800".
The german Wikipedia contains a List of Carolingian monuments with lists various older buildings. However, most of them are ruins or only fragments.
Therefore, my suggestion is to change the text into something like "one of the few well-preserved monuments of Carolingian architecture". --TeKaBe (talk) 09:06, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Oldest monument of Carolingian architecture?
Talk:Portunus (mythology)

message: The 17th day before the calends of September is August 16th, not August 17th. See . —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Rwflammang (talk • contribs) 18:10, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Calendar

message: The reason why Portunus was conflated is in his identification with Palaimon, the son of Leucothea. Since Matuta the goddess of dawn had been interpreted as Leucothea her myth implied the story of her and her son Palaimon or Melicerte. Portunus was originally connected with the storing of grains? However his figure was already originally connected with doors and passages as is shown by the key in his hand and the ritual of throwing the keys in fires, which must be very ancient. On the whole he is very similar to Janus.Aldrasto (talk) 12:25, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Interpretatio 

message: My doubts remain. I think the authority on which the contributor draw the information for this article must have confused Portunus and Consus. Consus was the god concerned with the storing of grains and his fetival was held just a few days later on Aug. 21. This is probably the reason of the confusion. Portunus is the god of passages, doors and harbours. He is in a way similar to Janus, though his function is more limited and his rank of course much lower. Janus being considered the initiator of everything, our universe, gods and man. If nobody objects I shall edit the text of the article: of course I will be glad to discuss the topic in advance with previous editors.Aldrasto (talk) 08:50, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Nature of Portunus

message: When and by whom is he called "Portunes? Lewis & Short only lists Portunus & Portumnus. Furius (talk)
: Good question. The page should be moved to "Portunus (mythology)" like other ancient divinities and I nearby propose to do so. - Eponymous-Archon (talk) 18:33, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  -es 
Talk:Tower of the Winds

message: No explanation in the current version how this structure received its name, "Tower of the Winds". -- llywrch (talk) 21:44, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: It's called that because, as described in the article, each of its eight sides depicted one of the eight winds:  Boreas (N), Kaikias (NE), Apeliotes (SE), Eurus (E), Notus (S), Livas (SW), Zephyrus (W), and Skiron (NW). Paul August ☎ 22:12, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
replies: text:  You're right, that information is in the article; however, it is buried. I was looking for something like a sentence beginning, "This structure is called the Tower of the Winds..." which would be easier for our readers to find. Further, there is no indication whether this is its original name, or if its original name is known, or if its current name was created by a modern Classicist based on the names of the eight sides. All details, I assume, that are retrievable thru a search of the relevant secondary literature. -- llywrch (talk) 20:41, 5 March 2015 (UTC)
replies: text:   Fixed. — LlywelynII 20:51, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Omission 

message: and for such a beautiful building and location. I'll fix the odious lead image but, other editors who take this page under their wings, kindly go pull the vastly more attractive and helpful images off of the Greek version of this article. — LlywelynII 20:51, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Ιησούς Χριστός this page is ugly

message: * Time in history
*influence
Johnbod (talk) 17:34, 25 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  links
Talk:Theatre of Marcellus

message: there's a lot of gorgeous pictures on Italian wikipedia about this magnificent, lovely, impressive building. It is my favourite  Roman place. Rohmerin (talk) 14:02, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Photographs 

message: There is a Public Domain photograph available on the National Galleries of Scotland's photostream on Flickr:
*Via de Sugherari, the Theatre of Marcellus, Rome; by Robert Macpherson about 1860
Please download it to en:wikipedia or Wikimedia Commons if you would like to use it on this article.
The most appropriate copyright template is perhaps: ,  or .
--Mais oui! (talk) 19:31, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Public Domain image - [[National Galleries of Scotland]]
Talk:Porticus Octaviae

message: Shouldn't Porticus Octaviae and Porticus Octavia have separate pages (Porticus Octavia redirects to Porticus Octaviae), since both this article and Lacus Curtis make the point that the Porticus Octaviae and the Porticus Octavia are separate but often confused structures?
Electron100 02:13, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Done Neddyseagoon - talk 09:58, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: In the lede it's said that the Sant'Angelo in Pescheria church was built circa 770 AD. Michael Ott wrote in The Catholic Encyclopedia (1913)/Volume 14/St. Symphorosa (see ) that Pope Stephen (II) III transferred the remains of St. Symphorosa to that church in 752. So the church must have been built at least in the first half of the VIII century CE. Carlotm (talk) 20:37, 22 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Imprecision in lede
Talk:Aqua Virgo

message: For the Aqua Virgo article I will be improving, I plan on adding more information on the original usage and origins of the Aqua Virgo during the ancient Roman times. I would also like to add more information regarding the construction of these aqueducts and how they might differ from the other 10 main aqueducts feeding water into Rome. I think that adding some additional comparative information on this aqueduct compared to the other main aqueducts feeding the Roman capital would be useful as well. The sentence on how the aqueduct only sloped a total of four meters over it's entire length was also intriguing to me, so I'd like to add more information on that part as well.
Sources
Bibliography
1.The Aqua Virgo, Euripus and Pons Agrippae, Robert B. Lloyd, American Journal of Archaeology. Vol. 83, No. 2 (Apr., 1979), pp. 193-204
2. The Aqueducts of Ancient Rome, Journal of the Royal Society of Arts, Vol. 61, No. 3175 (SEPTEMBER 26, 1913), p. 987
3. Agrippa's Water Plan, Harry B. Evans, American Journal of Archaeology, Vol. 86, No. 3 (Jul., 1982), pp. 401-411
4. Martial IV. 64, E.H. Alton, The Classical Review, Vol. 38, No. 5/6 (Aug. - Sep., 1924), pp. 111-112-Dbeat87 (talk) 05:53, 6 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Czy markietanki były żonami żołnierzy? 2A00:F41:815:6AC2:57E4:F38C:97B6:403A (talk) 15:23, 26 February 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Markietan