lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Purépecha language

message: I have included a map which I think improves the article. Unfortunately, I do not know how to place it properly. But I am sure, somebody here will be able to move it.Unoffensive text or character 12:34, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks alot for adding it!Maunus 12:38, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Map

message: De Wolf is a name in the Dutch language; 'de' means 'the'. In Dutch these names are alphabetized under the 'De'. You can see for yourself at the online catalog of the library of the University of Leiden (where he earned his Ph.D.). http://catalogus.leidenuniv.nl/F/CNFQYM6Y8KYK8YD53H659QQ7RSU4191GL2X71NM2REL6BMUGTY-13778?func=find-e&adjacent=N&find_scan_code=SCAN_AUT&request=de+wolf+paul+p&local_base=LDN01W&x=22&y=7 If you search for "Wolf" instead of "De Wolf", you will be redirected. Dale Chock (talk) 16:46, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Alphabetization of the name, De Wolf 

message: Intredasting, I've always read about it as Tarascan language and Tarascan people, even thought people themselves have changed their names. Shouldn't language be left for the historical reason as Tarascan, like Persian/Farsi or Hebrew? Never heard of Purepecha language before. This way people would be less confused, like they're with Nahuatl (Aztec) or Quechua (Incan).  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.72.140.93 (talk) 10:54, 19 November 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree, but we got into a fight over this in the previous thread. — kwami (talk) 16:39, 19 November 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tarascan language 

message: Do we really need a discussion to agree that it's idiotic to say there were 58,299 speakers in 1960, as if anyone knew the exact number and there were no births or deaths that year?
— kwami (talk) 00:39, 8 July 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Can you check if the source really says 58,299? Eldizzino (talk) 00:56, 8 July 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Hardly matters. Even if it does, the statement is false. — kwami (talk) 02:05, 8 July 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Spurious precision 

message: Also, the state was Tarasca, not Purépecha, right? — kwami (talk) 00:39, 8 July 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: It was a state of the people, that are called Purépecha in Wikipedia and called Tarascan/Tarasco/Tarascan Indians by other sources. I read "Tarascan state" as state run by Tarascan people and having Tarascan culture. In Wikipedia the term Tarascan, which is reported to have pejorative connotations, has been voted down for the language and for the people, see Purépecha people and Purépecha language. So, the same rule can be applied to the state. Eldizzino (talk) 00:56, 8 July 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: No, it's the Tarascan state, just like the Aztec and Inca empires. It would be OR to rename them the Nahuatl and Quechua empires just because someone objects to the name. — kwami (talk) 01:28, 8 July 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Where are your sources? Eldizzino (talk) 15:51, 10 July 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Where are yours? You're the one making the unsupported claim. — kwami (talk) 20:44, 10 July 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  State was Tarasca, not Purépecha
Talk:Anaxandridas II

message: Fixed the Leon link, which is supposed to link to the non existant article of his Dad, rather Leon (king of Sparta) links to his more famous son. Otherwise it looks like his son is his dad which would be wierd even for the Greeks...Highlandlord 13:05, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: It said that Anaxandrias' first wife was the niece to Leon, so should we include something on the left of Leon that said "sibling", and then we connect that to the first wife. I don't know how to use this table, and I'm wondering if anyone who does could make that change for me. --AnyGuy (talk) 15:08, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Abou the family tree
Talk:The Experiment

message: While I'm not sure that the  is the right template, the article does not say anything about contents of the show. Oddly, the background information is fairly good. I came here following the link in Stanford prison experiment so I do have a guess what's it about, but it's only a guess. Can someone please write a decent paragraph what the show is about? 13:14, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: No contents

message: There is a video game named (possibly) after this. Should we mention this?-- Vintei  Talk  17:12, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Video game? 

message: I am editing this page for an educational assignment. I'd like to ask anyone to avoid editing this page, but would greatly appreciate any feedback.
Thank you
Kayeedee (talk) 14:48, 28 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Educational Assignment
Talk:William Edington

message: I see some problems here that should be fixed. As this is a short article, it is possible to get these fixed during the “On hold” window of seven days.
:1. It is well written
:To fix
:The lead section states that his reforms “contributed to the English military efficiency in the early stages of the Hundred Years' War”. As the lead section is a summary of the article, there should be a reference to the Hundred Years’ War somewhere in the main sections. I believe that was intended in the phrase “intense war efforts of the last few years”. However, I wasn’t sure. Perhaps you could say “intense efforts of the Hundred Years’ War”? Also when was he born? If unknown, one could state this (b. unknown - d. October 6, 1366). There are also dead Wikilinks. Stubs should be written for them or they should be left as normal text.
:2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
:To fix
:The phrase “The king must have been impressed” sounds like an opinion so it should be cited.
:3. It is broad in its coverage.
:Pass
:4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
:Pass
:5. It is stable
:Pass
:6. It contains images
:To fix
:The first image should have a fair-use rationale. Also it should state the source and author of the image.
I have put the article on hold to let you make the changes before promoting the article to GA status. RelHistBuff 08:43, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for constructive criticism. I’ve addressed your concerns, with one exception. The form (d. October 6, 1366) I believe is self-explanatory to mean that date of birth is unknown. This is also the accepted form according to the manual of style, so I haven’t changed this. Eixo 15:36, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Great and thanks for MoS note. It has been promoted. RelHistBuff 19:22, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: GA status
Talk:Spex (magazine)

message: Simply stating it is prominent doesn't make it so.  We need more content to remove the notability tag. I will attempt to translate from the German. - CobaltBlueTony 13:18, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Apparently my German is alot weaker than it used to be and FreeTranslation.com is NOT helping enough! Help? - CobaltBlueTony 13:49, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
Talk:Catherine Hamlin

message: *Hamlin ... has been nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize. 
Being nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize is an honor, but it is not official or even prestigious. Any national legislator or about a third of the university professors in the world can make a nomination, and there have been as many as 140 some years. Nominators are requested to keep their nominations secret, so it's only those wishing publicity who make announcements, and more often it is impossible to verify. I see no reason to keep it. No offense to the subject, this is a general Nobel Peace Prize "nominees" issue. -Will Beback · † · 09:37, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: While this point about Nobel Peace Prizes may be true, Dr Hamlin's nomination is often used to introduce her and so forms a notable part of her biography. I have added a footnote giving an example of such a usage. Whiteghost.ink 01:41, 29 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nobel Peace Prize nomination 

message: Removed the below list of unreferenced awards from the article to meet quality requirements for posting on Wikipedia's frontpage. - Indefensible (talk) 22:48, 19 March 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Awards
Talk:Catherine Winkworth

message: I have removed the feminist-related categories, since there was nothing in the article describing her as such. Are there any reliable sources that indicate this? Are there any reliable sources that indicate that her promotion of education for women was connected to the issue of women's rights? Pinging User:Bmcln1, who reverted me. StAnselm (talk) 18:41, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Fine. I found a reference calling her a feminist. StAnselm (talk) 20:47, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Feminist?
Talk:Cathleen Falsani

message: I see she went to a Methodist divinity school, but is Cathleen Methodist? -69.134.32.75 (talk) 05:36, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Denomination? 
Talk:Cecil Mack

message: This article, "Richard Cecil McPherson (Cecil Mack)", argues for an 1872 birth date, but I don't think blogger Bill Edwards fits the Wikipedia definition of a reliable source, and although he cites the 1880 census I don't know how to look up his census record to validate Edwards's reasoning. But someone who knows how to look up names in the census may be able to double-check Edwards's reasoning. —Steve98052 (talk) 23:55, 9 April 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: I've used that site before and - although not strictly a reliable source - in my opinion it is, in fact, very well researched and likely to give accurate information (far more likely, in fact, than many supposedly more "reliable" sites like Allmusic).  However, in this case it says only that "The mathematically suggested year of 1872 will be accepted for this essay as the most probable."   There certainly was a Richard McPherson, aged 7, in Portsmouth, Virginia - here if you have an Ancestry.com subscription - in the 1880 census.  However, McPherson's 1936 social security application here gave his date of birth as November 6, 1880.  This says 1883.  This says 1871.  It's the case for many early African-American musicians (for example, blues musicians) that there is considerable uncertainty over their birth details, and what I tend to do in articles is to summarise the conflicting information from sources in the text, or sometimes in a footnote.  I think that's what we should do here.  Ghmyrtle (talk) 10:01, 10 April 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: I got that impression about the blog too. (I've encountered other sites that are strongly researched but not "reliable" by the formal Wikipedia definition.) I assume that the Ancestry site accurately aggregates its sources, but when its sources have conflicting information it's hard to tell. Noting conflicting information in the text or a footnote does seem like good policy. — Steve98052 (talk) 22:43, 7 May 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Birth year
Talk:Chaim Goldberg

message: Because it is causing a Checkwiki error #70: "ISBN with wrong length", I removed the ISBN from the entry:
Vol. #9 - Chaim Goldberg’s Dance, series name: The Complete Works of Chaim Goldberg, by Shalom Goldberg, Bayglow Press, January 2015, ISBN 978-150549028
I have tried unsuccessfully to locate the correct ISBN on the Internet. No hits on WorldCat. Amazon only offers volumes 10 and 11 from The Complete Works of Chaim Goldberg. That's what bothers me. Look at the publication dates in the Catalogues Raisonné Series section. How can volumes 1 and 9 have later publication dates than volumes 10 and 11? I begin to suspect that volume 9 was never published. Knife-in-the-drawer (talk) 19:03, 16 June 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bad ISBN
Talk:Chan Canasta

message: This page was tagged in Nov 2017 for notability, poor references and WP:COI. I've addressed the first two by adding inline citations to two national UK newspapers, a few other refs, clearing out some over-detailed waffle and added a few 'citation needed' tags inline, myself. However, I'm unable to see why a COI tag was placed on this page (apart from a couple of uncited paragraphs added in 2014), so have asked for clarification on this. I propose to come back and remove the COI  tag in a few weeks time if the tagging IP editor is unable to furnish an explain. (Sorry - that sounds far more accusative than it's meant to be - it's an honest question). Obviously, any other editor who has concerns at past COI is free to express them, here too (with diffs if poss, please).  Regards from the UK, Nick Moyes (talk) 01:49, 13 November 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: I've removed the tag. Thincat (talk) 09:39, 3 June 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tag removal 

message: My memory of his 'signature' book trick is somewhat different. He would be alone with a freestanding bookcase perhaps six feet wide and 5 shelves high full of variously sized books of different thicknesses. A member of the audience would be invited to come up and select a book, open it at random and select a word noting the shelf, position on shelf, page, line and position on line and then replacing the book. Then with them both facing each other stage left and right, calling out those details and Chan Canasta would after a very short pause for thought announce the word; ostensibly having memorized 500,000 words.
Now, remember that he was originally a stage magician - I am afraid 'magic' tricks are invariably puerile once explained. A simple method is to have a duplicate bookcase in the wings and an assistant find the word as the details are called out, and chalk the word on a blackboard invisible to the audience and behind the volunteer but in full view of Chan Canasta over their shoulder.
 
Then again perhaps every book was the same, composed of the same block of 2? pages repeated, and he really had remembered 200 words?
86.187.169.96 (talk) 21:44, 5 January 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Book trick
Talk:List of discoveries by Leonhard Euler

message: The purpose of List of discoveries by Leonhard Euler is to comply with Wikipedia:Summary Style. Simply put, discussion of all of Euler's contributions could fill an entire WikiProject, nevermind a Wikipedia article. I intend List of discoveries by Leonhard Euler to be a very complete list of Euler's contributions, and this article should discuss his most important and significant contributions.Borisblue 13:27, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Merger
Talk:UEFA coefficient

message: Currently, the men's club coefficient table shows the highest coefficient for each season in bold. Would it be worth also highlighting the number 2 coefficient for each season, since that association will earn an extra berth in the Champions League? Perhaps highlighting #2 using something other than bold (maybe bold italics). I realize one can just sort the table and see who the top 2 are. But then again, the same can be done to identify the team with the highest coefficient and yet we still have that number in bold. Also, if there's a tie for #2, sorting wouldn't necessarily take tie-breakers into account. I think highlighting #2 in some way would make this information easier to find. Bmf 051 (talk) 21:11, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Isn't that the association coefficient that gives those 2 spots, not the club coefficient? Either way, each league only gets 4 Champions League spots (+ potentially the previous seasons Championship and Europa League winners). I don't see that it's worth trying to indicate which stage teams qualify to; as there's many more beyond this. Also I think note 'b' already covers this. Nfitz (talk) 18:38, 2 March 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Er no, from next season, two leagues will get an extra spot for up to five in total. Tvx1 09:42, 9 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title: Highlighting top 2 teams in men's coefficient table

message: I don't know why we (and UEFA) still report the 5-year Club coefficient when (as far as I know) it has no bearing on anything. Yet the 4-year Club coefficient is now used for determining the qualification to the Club World Cup - and it's not documented anywhere in Wikipedia (I can't even find a good external source for it - though I haven't been too thorough on that). Nfitz (talk) 18:40, 2 March 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: The article explains carefully what it’s used for! Tvx1 00:07, 3 March 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks, @Tvx1 I completely forgot about the seeding. Massive brain fart there! But the article says it IS being used for the Club World Cup - and I'm scratching my head for what - I thought they were only using a 4-year coefficient, not a 5-year one. Nfitz (talk) 00:13, 9 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  4-year Club coefficient 

message: it would be better if someone can make a new map which contains countries that at least one team reaches to group stage of any uefa club competion. (includes champions league , europa league and conference) 176.40.246.182 (talk) 21:11, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  suggestion about a new map
Talk:Prytaneis

message: If someone wants to add or fix or something apparently this is the name of one of the Eurypontid Kings of Sparta Highlandlord 13:34, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Comments

message: "No man was allowed to hold this office more than once, and so probably more than half of all adult male Athenians held it, at one time or another." This can mean either:
# At any time, about half of all male Athenians were serving as foreman
# At some time, about half of all male Athenians were serving as formeman
Both of these are obviously incorrect, so the sentence should at least be changed to say "had held".  Then the ambiguity becomes:
:3. At any time, half of all male Athenians had been foreman at some time during their lives.
:4. The proportion of male Athenians who had been foreman probably reached about 1/2 at some time.
-Pgan002 (talk) 23:47, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  "More than half male Athenians"
Talk:Ball in and out of play

message: I suggest merging all of the different methods of re-starting play with this article as they are all related and the articles on their own are they  not really of a good quality or quantity in terms of information available information.--Lucy-marie (talk) 00:05, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Oppose, a brief look at corner and penalty makes it look like the merged article will be huge. MickMacNee (talk) 14:49, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Some of the content overlaps between the larger articles and some of the articles are too long at the moment. The merger would not be a "Text-Dump" merger, it would be a complete re-write of the articles, consolidating information in one easy to read article.--Lucy-marie (talk) 15:08, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Perhaps post this to WP:football? MickMacNee (talk) 23:33, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

text: Oppose.  No need - the Corner kick article is large enough and has good illustration.  It should stand on its own two feet. The Rambling Man (talk) 13:10, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

text: Oppose. The articles are long enough and re-writing them will effect in loosing significant informations covered by those 83.31.106.162 (talk) 19:33, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

text: Oppose. Direct free kicks, penalty kicks and corner kicks are all important phases of football matches in themselves and should have separate articles. Jmorrison230582 (talk) 20:36, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

text: The articles are more than stubs, and can be improved.  Penalty kick (football) and corner kick at least can be improved, the main problem with them is the lack of references, I don't think the articles are too long.   Also most of these are separate laws.  I think the indirect and direct free kick articles should be combined into one article about free kicks, and maybe dropped-ball combined into ball in and out of play, but the others should stay separate. --Snigbrook (talk) 20:48, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

text: Oppose There are different circumstances in which each applies and it would make no sense to include them under an umbrella term no one's likely to ever use or search for.Awotter (talk) 00:23, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

text: Comment- how about having each one redirect to the specific section rather than having a huge disparity of on information by having loads of separate articles.--Lucy-marie (talk) 19:07, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merger
Talk:Cambridge rules

message: Quote does not match quote in Leader's book which omitted some of the verbiage that I assume is in Jackson's book. --User-duck (talk) 11:45, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Which book by Leader are you referring to?  Thanks. Grover cleveland (talk) 21:33, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cambridge Rules of 1848 quote.
Talk:Edward Livingston

message: The succession box lists Livingston as U.S. Secretary of State during the same years he was serving as Lt. Governor of New York.  All dates need to be confirmed as accurate.  As I've run into this on other Lt. Gov. articles (see DeWitt Clinton), I'm also tagging the List of Governors of New York article with the accuracy tag until such dates are confirmed. --CPAScott 13:36, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: The headers are purely decorative, there can be any number of them. Important is that the user gets a chronological listing at a glance. These articles are supposed to be informative, not decorative. Kraxler (talk) 18:24, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Headers
Talk:Memoirs of Hadrian

message: Add "* Support" or "* Oppose" followed by an optional one-sentence explanation, then sign your opinion with ~~~~
*Support. As per nomination, since it is a noteworthy book with an established English title.--RedMC 13:36, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Survey

message: I would appreciate footnotes giving brief biographies or explanations of the many characters in this story.
Right now, I'm puzzled by Celsus. There were real Celsuses (one in particular wrote an attack on early Christianity), but he does not seem to be Hadrian's feared rival in the novel.
Was Hadrian's Celsus fictional, or a real personnage?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.169.124.181 (talk) 23:26, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Footnotes explaining various characters in Hadrian's Memoirs? 

message: Evanderr54 (talk) 21:43, 5 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Plot summary 

message: The link to IMDB is dead; my search at IMDB was of no avail either. Perhaps plans for the film have been dropped?  Who knows. ?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.30.104.30 (talk) 22:40, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: New: the dead link
Talk:Polydectes

message: There is apparently a Eurypontid King of Sparta with this name any relation anyone know? Highlandlord 13:37, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I assume you mean a redirect?  If so, consider it done.  Ford MF (talk) 21:32, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Comments