lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Queen Elizabeth-class battleship

message: "they forced the Germans to alter the armament of the Bayern class armament from its original 12 inch (305 mm) guns to 15 inch (381 mm)"
I have removed the following sentence from the introduction as it is fatually incorrect.  Most sources suggest that the Germans started developing their 15 inch gun prior the Royal Navy, but could not get the gun into service nearly as fast as the British.  I have replaced the sentence with a Quote from the 1919 edition of Janes.  Getztashida 15:29, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Factual Inaccuracy

message: HMS Malay, not Malaya  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.107.21.84 (talk) 00:38, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: No, HMS Malaya, not Malay. (Colledge, p.213; Janes, p. 35; Massie, p. 586; here, here and here). Benea (talk) 03:10, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wrong name 

message: Queen Elizabeth class battleship:
75,000 shp with 27,500 tons standard and 24 knots
Revenge class battleship:
26,500 shp with 29,150 tons standard and 21 knots
I think 75,000 shp can not be correct.
188.23.86.150 (talk) 21:38, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: It takes a lot of power to get relatively small increases in speed.  The numbers are about right195.217.166.8 (talk) 12:48, 15 December 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: The number struck me as a bit excessive, too. Speed goes very roughly as the cube root of shaft horsepower, assuming similar hull form. By that (admittedly rough) formula, the speed ratio 24/21 requires a power ratio of not quite 1.5, considerably less than the nearly 3 to 1 ratio in these numbers. Looking around the Web, I find at http://www.worldwar1.co.uk/battleship/hms-queen-elizabeth.html that the 75,000 shp figure is maximum overload while the normal maximum is 56,000 -- still considerably greater than the cube law would suggest, but it makes me wonder if the problem is an oranges/apples comparison. Yaush (talk) 14:57, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

text: Revenge design legend was 31,000 shp on 25,500 tons 2.100.193.184 (talk) 11:21, 14 June 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: for 21 knots 2.100.193.184 (talk) 11:22, 14 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Propulsion 

message: HMS Queen Elizabeth did have 16 6" guns. If the remainder of the vessels did not have 16 6" guns then shouldn't the table say 12- 16 6" guns? Wandavianempire (talk) 18:22, 13 February 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Secondary Armament 

message: When I, and probably many other readers, link to the page about a class of ships, it is usually to find out which ships were in that class. Therefore I suggest putting the names in the introduction. Granted, that might not be possible for ships with many examples. I considered making this edit myself, but I suspect some sort of standard exists. So I won’t meddle. Humphrey Tribble (talk) 05:43, 21 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Put names up front
Talk:Victoria, Princess Royal

message: She may be an accomplished amateur, that does not mean she is notable as an artist. Such does not belong in such categories. They are non-defining. DrKay (talk) 20:24, 1 July 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: She is a notable German artist. She received classes from two notable painters. She devoted much of her later life to painting. Her paintings if sold would be worth a great deal of money. This is more than enough. Most artists are amateurs; that has never been part of the definition of artist on wikipedia. Being paid or not is not a factor. She must be part of the category 19th-century German women artists. Helpfulwikieditoryay (talk) 21:02, 1 July 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Read CAREFULLY what Kay stated. NOTABLE.  She most certainly is NOT notable as an artist.  Her paintings would sell for a high price because of her history as a German royal.  If Biden doodled and decided to sell it, that too would go for $$ due to who he is, not because he has the slightest talent as an artist or a competent president.  Her amateur dabblings in art are only found in biographies, not in the world of art.  Agree with the removal. HammerFilmFan (talk) 21:39, 25 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Artist 

message: The redirect Draft:Victoria Adelaide Mary Louisa has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at  until a consensus is reached.  Keivan.fTalk 03:25, 29 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  "[[:Draft:Victoria Adelaide Mary Louisa]]" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]]
Talk:Operation Aerial

message: Aerial or Ariel? - difference sources give different names - Mmartins
:It's Aerial in the Admiralty War Diary and Ariel in the official campaign history (see links at the foot of the main article). Alansplodge (talk) 21:54, 7 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: The section with Operation Cycle is unsatisfactory but I've decided to re-do that article and then put a better synopsis here.Keith-264 (talk) 18:41, 19 September 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: thanks for your edits; which source did you use pls? Regards Keith-264 (talk) 17:32, 20 March 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recent edits 

message: Thank you for your message, I am sorry I can't figure out how to reply directly. Aerial is the name on TNA files WO106/1615 and WO 197/105, it was often called Plan Aerial. I can find no primary sources with Ariel. It is difficult to confirm the number evacuated from the south of France during the period of Aerial, there were 27,538 from 'unknown ports'. I have listed the ships involved in Aerial, in my book Ebb and Flow. About half of those I listed for the south of France lifted just over 6,000; I don't have figures for the others. Poor official records for the time, W Somerset Maugham was on one of the ships and wrote about it in Strictly Personal. Roy V Martin. Droxford Navigator 20 March 2018 Droxford Navigator (talk) 18:03, 20 March 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks very much for the reply, this is the place to discuss Aerial/Ariel; primary sources are difficult on Wiki, we risk original research if we rely solely on them. I will go through my sources to see if I can find justification in a secondary source instead. If you're an author you'll need to be careful about an imputation that you're advertising your works or yourself too. PS do you sail under the flag of Roy V. Martin? ;O) Regards Keith-264 (talk) 18:38, 20 March 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: I've just tried look inside on Amazon but the pages on view don't have the material to cite, worst luck. Regards Keith-264 (talk) 18:43, 20 March 2018 (UTC)

text: I found the passage in Roskill, cited the 10,000 and removed the reference to the website for the moment. The evacuation is definitely called Aerial in the OH so perhaps the title should be re-spelled and Ariel given as an alternative name?Keith-264 (talk) 11:29, 21 March 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  For Keith-264
Talk:Rana Hussein

message: Template: has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you.   — Jeff G. (talk|contribs) 17:12, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  TfD nomination of [[:Template:{{ucfirst:PD-Old regime Iraq}}]]
Talk:Jacqueline, Countess of Hainaut

message: Was she killed? Or did she die of tuberculosis, as is stated in the Dutch article? 62.194.114.150 17:40, 23 Oct 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: There are no legitimate sources I could find that suggest she was murdered or poisoned. All academic literature I've read say she died of an illness which resembles tuberculoses. Gadifere (talk) 19:14, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Untitled 

message: There needs to be more sources or references added to this article, otherwise I see no reason this can't go to GA.  Lankiveil 03:32, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sources 

message: There was a lot of redundant information in this article, and at some places a very confused chronology or false information. Also, almost no citations, so I've added as much as I could. I'd like it if someone could check my English as I'm no native speaker. Gadifere (talk) 19:17, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah it needs work - thanks a lot for making edits. I'll swing through again and check the writing but it does need sourcing first. Truthkeeper (talk) 13:37, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  added sources & edited article
Talk:Degenerate star

message: This article says the existence of neutron stars is inconclusive, but goes on further to say under the "neutron star" section (which neutron star also says) that their existence was observed in 1968. As it is, this article seems to contradict itself. I'm guessing that there's truth to both parts, it's just not coming across very clearly. - Furrykef 18:09, 23 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Talk:Teochew Min

message: Where does the POJ spelling “Tiê-chiu-uē” come from? Shouldn’t it be “Tiâu-tsiu-uē”? (I think the final -ie does not even exist in POJ.) — Babel fish (talk) 12:49, 18 February 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't speak Hokkien so I wouldn't know about the Tiê to Tiâu, but I do know that it should be chiu not tsiu because POJ doesn't have the initial 'ch' (Tai-lo uses 'ts' though}. 三葉草SanYeCao · Talk 00:28, 17 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  POJ 

message: Swatow dialect is not Teochew dialect, it is different language and accents. 
Teochew dialect and Swatow dialect are a dialect of a branch called Chaoshan combination of (Chaozhou from Teochew) and {Shantou from Swatow) hence it is called Teo-swa language in mandarin it is called Chaoshan, it is very selfish to call Swatow dialect as Teochew dialect. 
Like calling Portuguese language and Spanish language alike, when they are not the same, differ usage of grammar and words 2406:3003:2001:54A3:F9E6:B188:F6FC:3018 (talk) 14:50, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Please read the merge discussion above. The word "Teochew" in Teochew people and Teochew Min refers not to the modern Teochew/Chaozhou prefecture-level city in PRC, but to the historical Teochew/Chaozhou prefecture (see the map). This prefecture included both modern Chaozhou and Shantou cities, among others. Of course, now this region is known as Teo-Swa/Chaoshan in China, but in English, "Teochew" is the established name for the entire language spoken in this region. --QuestionableAnswers (talk) 15:02, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Swatow dialect is not Teochew dialect
Talk:Swern oxidation

message: I think the statement "one of the most foul odors known in organic chemistry." is overdone. See the article on dimethyl sulfide for a more realistic description.  The detection limit of ppb also seems low.ChemistHans (talk) 19:00, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Considerations

message: *
*--Stone (talk) 18:01, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Daniel Swern

message: The reaction table proposed for this article does not contain any new information. The link to the rsc page does not provide any information, info in the box is duplicated from the article itself. Focus really should be on generating new content. Discussion V8rik (talk) 18:23, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll relay this to template talk:Reactionbox.  --Dirk Beetstra T C 08:02, 4 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  reaction table
Talk:Martin O'Neill (footballer)

message: Just to clarify, O'Neill never actually had talks with Leeds - although there was much speculation he was on his way, leading to the protest, O'Neill later confirmed his chairman hadn't agreed to let him talk to Peter Ridsdale at Leeds.
Also, hasn't he successfully sued a couple of newspapers for suggesting he's had secret talks with English Premiership clubs while at Celtic?
S tyers 18:36, 23 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Talk:American submarine NR-1

message: Large sections of the article appear to be copied, wholesale, from the military site http://www.csg2.navy.mil/NR1.htm as listed in the document text.  While public military records are free to use, I would hope Wiki members would actually write their own articles instead of copying text.
67.189.246.211 (talk) 02:48, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Plagiarism?

message: http://www.navytimes.com/news/2008/11/navy_nr1retires_113008w/
This article needs a rewrite to incorporate the retirement of the vessel.Trojancowboy (talk) 02:25, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Retired?

message: Isn't this one of the subs that the CIA used for espionage, especially hacking into Soviet seafloor communication lines?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.165.40.135 (talk) 19:40, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Have a need to know? 8^) 70.36.176.224 (talk) 07:28, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Former Spy History?

message: Article should probably note disposition. The reactor is likely sealed up and currently buried at Hanford. Was the hull recycled? Disposition of other subs is generally known. 66.122.34.11 (talk) 19:17, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Current location/disposition? 

message: The MV Carolyn Chouest is mentioned as the NR-1 support ship. However the MV Carolyn Chouest was build in 1994. Before then what was the support vessel for the NR-1?
Wfoj2 (talk) 03:09, 11 November 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Support Ship /Vessel "Carolyn Chouest" 

message: Article lacks reference to operating and test depths. Sure it's classified, but that has not stopped anyone. 137.229.91.203 (talk) 08:45, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Operating depth 

message: It would be nice to know more about the reactor, but of course I can't find anything online. It must have had the world's smallest reactor given that it had a 4 knot top speed for a 400 ton vessel. Certainly less than a megawatt; 400 ton fishing trawlers have engines that size and go three times as fast. Kendall-K1 (talk) 17:03, 8 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Installed power 

message: * http://www.public.navy.mil/subfor/underseawarfaremagazine/Issues/Archives/issue_17/nr1s.html  —  fourthords | =Λ= |  21:02, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  source(s) 

message: Two questions: (a) Given that NR-1 isn't this vessel's name, but rather a designation, should it be italicized IAW WP:ITALICS?  (b) Since there is nothing at NR-1 but a redirect here, shouldn't this article be at that page?  —  fourthords | =Λ= |  21:12, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: The designation for the ship is italicized when the ship has no name. Like PT-109 or MS 22 per policy. Llammakey (talk) 11:24, 27 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  page name & italics 

message: The many August 2018 citation needed tags have been fixed with actual citations. --Lent (talk) 09:13, 30 January 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  citation need no longer
Talk:Mystic-class deep-submergence rescue vehicle

message: main page, external link to navy web site- nothing found 15 Jan 2007. 
Wiki Links are related pages in respect to DSRV, make no mention of planned Decommissioning of these vessels. There are plans, I have not found a US Navy web site yet to mention this. This information was included with realted news from the Krusk (Russian Oscar class SSGN) tragedy several years ago. 
On http://www.chinfo.navy.mil/navpalib/cno/n87/usw/issue_12/rescue_exercise.html referes the the Mystic as "SEDGEMOOR began as realistically as any real-world rescue mission. Mystic, the Navy's only DSRV, was delivered from San Diego to the Royal Air Force base at Prestwick on a U.S. Air Force C-5 Galaxy and then trucked to Kyle of Lochalsh, Scotland.". Unfortunately this page does not list a date. Go up a page in site implies this is frma a magizine dated in Summer of 2001. 
Wfoj2 17:56, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: DSRV Status

message: There is no wiki yet on the SRDRS, the new US Navy Submarine Rescue System replacing the DSRVs.  I'm not sure if this is the appropriate place to bring this up, but I think it is a wiki worth adding.--Bg10117 (talk) 17:44, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Mystic Class Replacement - no wiki
Talk:Yu Shan

message: Posted on WP:RD: 
My Webster's Geographical Dictionary gives Yu Shan's height at 13,113 feet (3,997 meters) when the article Jade Mountain says it is 12,962 feet (3,952 meters).  Anyone clarify?  PedanticallySpeaking 18:53, Oct 23, 2004 (UTC)
Two replies posted there: 
*Britannica (2002) says 13,113 feet also.  Incidentally, they spell it with an umlaut over the u. - John Fader
:*Although both the Chinese and Japanese wikipedias say 3952m.  Maybe one number is a result of a re-survey? - John Fader
Posted on WP:RD: 
*I went through my books and found many disagreeing answers.  The following sources had these listed for its height:
::#Columbia Encyclopedia, 1st ed. (1940), "over 14,000 feet" in the article "Niitakayama"
::#Colubmia Encyclopedia, 1st ed. (1940), "about 14,000 feet" in the article "Mount Morrison"
::#Brittanica (1941):  12,939 feet in the atlas
::#Brittanica (1941): 14,720 feet in the article "Formosa" (v. 9, p. 514)
::#Webster's New Int'l Dict., 2d ed. (1957):  13,599 feet
::#New Catholic Encyclopedia:  13,599 feet (v. 13, p. 916)
::#Brittanica (1974):  3997 meters
::#Hammond World Atlas (1989): 3997 meters/13,113 feet
::#Times Atlas, 8th ed. (1990):  3997 meters
::#National Geographic Atlas, 7th ed. (1990):  3997 meters
::#Columbia Encyclopedia, 5th ed. (1993):  3997 meters/13,113 feet
::#Whitaker's Almanac (1996):  13,035 feet
Finally, the official Central Geological Survey of Taiwan's site (here) says 3952 meters, which is what the original article says and the Taiwanese should know.  But isn't remarkable the range of these answers, varying by 1,700 feet?  PedanticallySpeaking 14:34, Oct 26, 2004 (UTC)
: I remember reading in a Taiwanese newspaper a decade ago that the Jade Mt is getting shorten because its peak is melting/crumbling, or something.......I cannot remember why or any details at all. --Menchi 00:49, 29 Oct 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: The Columbia Encylc has separate articles on Mt Morrison and Niitakayama? Aren't they the same thing? --Menchi 00:51, 29 Oct 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: How High Is Yu Shan in Taiwan?

message: "Japanese called the mountain Niitakayama (新高山)"
I was under the impression, after reading the page on Mt Fuji, that the appellation 'yama' was an old incorrect translation that refuses to die. Edit? Mang 10:05, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This is the case for "Fujiyama" (should be "Fujisan"), but not necessarily for all other mountains. Bubbha 17:36, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think the history of the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor is significant evidence that "Niitakayama" was correct. The Japanese would hardly have used the wrong name for what was (at the time) their highest mountain. Jsc1973 (talk) 20:01, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  山: 'Yama' or 'San'?

message: More about the mountain's names and history at the Taiwan Today source for the Mt Morrison info. — LlywelynII 06:07, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Sources for future article expansion

message: — Preceding unsigned comment added by 118.150.131.136 (talk) 18:42, 6 November 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  References
Talk:The Frugal Gourmet

message: so was this entry copied from http://www.jumptheshark.com/f/frugalgourmet.htm or the other way around?
Yes, it is suspicious that this article was created with the philly cheese steak paragraph fully formed and identical to jumptheshark, while the rest of the article was a stub. But you never know if the same person contributed to both sites, since jumptheshark is unsigned and undated. GUllman 01:32, 27 Oct 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: The questionable paragraph should be deleted and rewritten, with specifics (year at least, please) and from a good source (not "Jumptheshark.com").  In addition to the questionable copyright the paragraph lacks important details.  It says "some PBS channels dumped him" because of this incident — who is "some"?  WHYY (Philadelphia region) was still airing the show in mid-1998, when most others had dropped it due to the sexual harassment allegations against Smith.   Good luck finding sources online though, most copy or cite Jumptheshark/Wikipedia regarding this incident. --Mrwojo 19:44, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

text: P.S. — the Internet Archive confirms that Jumptheshark.com had that paragraph as early as February 2002.  This article was created in January 2004. --Mrwojo 19:51, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
Talk:The Gulf War Did Not Take Place

message: This article looks more like a book review than an encyclopedic article. 85.64.15.133 18:50, 13 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why Do You Hate Freedom? 

message: His/her sex changes from male to female halfway through the article.  Drew3D 16:43, 2 Nov 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: He's male. Article fixed Deadlock 16:57, 2 Nov 2004 (UTC)

text: The phrase "Contrary to the provocative title, the author does believe that the events and violence of the 'Gulf War' actually took place." is dull, this seems quite obvious, don't you think ? Arronax50 23:18, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Author male or female? 

message: This article is poorly written.  It does indeed ramble, because the author seems not to have had any structure in mind when writing it.  The last two paragraphs meander pointlessly and are difficult to understand.  For instance: "This point also works in with another of Baudrillard claims that the war was so heavily edited when it was shown on television that what Americans saw wasn't even close to the real war."  What in the world did the English language ever do to become the recipient of a massacre like that?  Also, the phrase "to absolutely believe" is a split infinitive.  I have corrected it where it once appeared in the second to last paragraph.
72.78.159.161 01:21, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Clean up desperately needed! 

message: The argument here is that because the Americans barely suffered casualties, it was not a real war? The Sound and the Fury (talk) 18:13, 25 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  The argument 

message: should be mentioned in the article. 95.31.177.9 (talk) 06:04, 20 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wag the dog
Talk:Periosteum

message: Does anyone have a good photo of an example of periosteum in a person?  That would be a good link, and I'm interested in seeing it, as well as reading more about the definition.  Thanks.
:Any picture of the exterior of a bone is essentially a picture of the periosteum.  It's the white coating on the outside of a bone.  WLU 22:56, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Photo

message: The illustration accompanying this article is called "meninges of the CNS." As neither "CNS" nor "meninges" are defined, or even mentioned, in the article, one must wonder why it was posted. 172.166.3.113 15:42, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Wikilinks added to the caption; the periosteum is the second layer in the illustration, and I'm guessing it's hard to find an image that singles out or even identifies the periosteum.  WLU 15:52, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: illustration

message: Teeth!  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.73.70.113 (talk) 03:40, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Other bones with no periosteum 

message: Not explained in article. Is it a disease of some kind? 109.157.79.50 (talk) 00:36, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: A specific search at PubMed for titles with "periostosis" retrieved one recent article in English , and the next one is about 45 years old. I'm doubtful though, because the abstract says that infantile cortical periostosis is also called Caffey's disease, but a search for Caffey's disease (which does retrieve some recent free review articles) showed that the synonym is in fact "infantile cortical hyperostosis" . There seems to be a wide overlapping of the terms (periostosis and hyperostosis), altough periostosis should refer only to excessive periostial bone formation. There is a Wikipedia article for pachydermoperiostosis (which is better characterized), and in fact Periostosis of long bones redirects to it, so I'm redirecting Periostosis to pachydermoperiostosis to keep it consistent. Thanks for pointing this out ;). --Tilifa Ocaufa (talk) 05:20, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why does "periostosis" redirect here?