lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Saint Paul Public Library

message: Since the James J. Hill Reference Library is now the Saint Paul Central Library, I think these topics can easily be covered in one article.--Appraiser (talk) 18:46, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The James J. Hill Reference Library is a fee-based business library that has no affiliation with the St Paul Public Library other than sharing a building with one of SPPL's 14 locations.  They are two completely separate organizations and the articles should not be merged.  Remember, this article is not about the building on W. 4th St, it is about the public library of St Paul, which encompasses the Central Library, 12 branches, a bookmobile, and numerous outreach services.  The James J. Hill Reference Library is a separate entity.  McGhiever (talk) 00:57, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

text: The James J. Hill Reference Library is not the Saint Paul Central Library. The Hill Library is a private organization that happens to share a building (actually, two buildings that fit together to appear as one) in downtown Saint Paul. As this article is about the Saint Paul Public Library system, it would be confusing and misleading to merge the articles. Jclarson (talk)  —Preceding comment was added at 16:21, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge proposal

message: The Hmong name is apparently Saint Paul tsev qiv ntawv or qiv ntawv nyob hauv nroog St. Paul - there is no Hmong Wikipedia, but this could be helpful for Commons image names
Maktabadda Dadweynaha Saint Paul is the Somali name
WhisperToMe (talk) 15:53, 27 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Other language names
Talk:1972 Pittsburgh Pirates season

message: Who wrote this? First off the 1970 NLCS between the Pirates and Reds were 3 nailbiters of which the first game was scoreless into the 10th. This story said The Pirates almost pulled off a big upset in 72. May I remind you that in 1972 The Pirates were the defending World Champs with a 96-69 record. If they had gotten the final 3 outs that was in no way an upset of any kind! 65.126.166.2 (talk) 23:32, 13 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  72 NLCS
Talk:Juries in England and Wales

message: *Name - I have chosen the name so that it's easy to link from "jury" in the text. My intention is that "jury" will link here in E&W articles. I have called it "Jury" rather than "Jury trial" as it's about the jury, the trial is a bigger thing.
*Currency - I am pretty happy that this is up to date as of 16 July 2007.
I'm sure that there's till plenty to add here.Cutler 19:17, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: New article

message: Is the current text on Affirming v. oath accurate?  Specifically, this article [ http://atheism.about.com/od/ideasforatheistactivism/a/AffirmSwear.htm ] suggests (but does not actually state) that Christians also have the right to choose to affirm rather than swear an oath to God.  I refer specifically to this paragraph:
"This is not an issue that only affects atheists. Many religious believers, including some Christians, object to swearing oaths to God and would prefer to affirm that they will tell the truth. Britain has guaranteed a right to affirm rather than swear an oath since 1695. In America, the Constitution specifically references affirming alongside swearing at four different points."
Although I have never been called upon to swear an oath in court, if I were, as a Christian, I would prefer to affirm rather than swear. To swear an Oath to God under such circumstances seems to me to be highly disrespectful to God as well as disrespectful and demeaning to me - using a person's religion and a trick of language to try to bind/manipulate/control them. My relationship with my maker is a private matter, between him & me (nor would any opinion from any "Christian leader", such as the Pope/Archbishop, allay my concern). While historically that device, the oath to God, has been used, I for one now find it highly offensive and inappropriate.  Put all witnesses on an equal standing and have them all affirm - God will judge them (or not) all the same.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 135.196.5.146 (talk) 12:55, 14 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Affirming v. Oath

message: I don't see any mention of the so-called Special Juries http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special_jury  which have now been abolished, but existed in some cases up to 1971.31.49.95.174 (talk) 15:24, 17 March 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Special Juries 

message: I seem to recall that one criticism of the jury service system was that the social composition of juries was skewed towards those members of society least able to avoid taking part; the middle classes successfully argued that they were unavailable or would be professionally disadvantaged. The relatively low financial recompense paid to jurors was a possible factor, I think. (Today, the maximum claim for the first 10 days is £64.95 per day (including childcare!) plus small allowances for food and travel. Jury Service: What you can claim) Is this worth mentioning, and has it been addressed? JezGrove (talk) 22:40, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Social composition / financial recompense
Talk:Downtown Tunnel

message: Engineering Wonder?: I seem to remember that a year or so after the first tube of the Downtown Tunnel was opened it was designated as one of the Seven Engineering Wonders of the Modern World.  I think the reason was that it was the first underwater tunnel ever built by sinking and connecting pre-formed concrete sections rather than being dug.  I'm pretty sure there was an article in The Virginian-Pilot at the time about this.
I don't have the time or competence to track down citations for this, hopefully someone does.
AlanATL (talk) 21:02, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Comments
Talk:Bryce Canyon Lodge

message: Having worked at Bryce Canyon Lodge in 1980 and 1981, the Lodge was listed even THEN on The National Register of Historic Places.
I hope modernity and technology have not adversely affected the peaceful isolation of the place!
I could swear the elevation of the Lodge was 8300'.  Is it Sinking?
Very fond memories, even 41 years expo facto.
Henry "Chip" Szych
Hatfield, MA
Chipszych@gmail.com  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:193:8302:6F90:71A5:80CE:3FF5:D2B6 (talk) 19:03, 7 August 2022 (UTC)
Talk:St. Michan's Church, Dublin

message: This article needs to make up its mind; it's either about a civil parish or it's about a particular piece of bricks and mortar currently controlled by a particular denomination. If the former, then it needs to contain information about the civil parish, barony and county. The name should also reflect that purpose e.g. "St. X (civil parish)" or "Civil parish of St. X". On the other hand, if the article's purpose is closer to the latter, then why does it have a category of civil parish? If the article deals exclusively with the bricks and mortar aspect, then it's other legal function is no more than a co-incidence. Laurel Lodged (talk) 20:58, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: This issue has been taken to WikiProject Ireland for decision. An inadequate (and highly personal) response was given by the originating editor. The discussion is at a state where this needs to be decided soon. It would be preferable if the originating editor took out the pruning knife himself. Laurel Lodged (talk) 11:03, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: How can an article "make up its mind"? This appears to be a senseless and bullying tactic by the above editor. Blue Luger (talk) 13:59, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: The original article was posted nearly a month ago. No response has been forthcoming on this page. What would the User:Blue Luger deem to be a reasonable period in which to receive a response? 4 days? 4 weeks ? 4 months ? The only bullying that I can see is by User:Blue Luger who has taken it upon himself to stalk my contributions over sundry pages in order to make as much mischief as possible. If he doesn't desist, he'll find himself the object of a formal complaint. Laurel Lodged (talk) 14:40, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: This discussion has been here for almost a month with no input from the main editor. There is a discussion on the WikiIreland talk page where that editor has made contributions. These have been found to be generally lacking in merit. Another editor has given notice that he intends to take action on the inappropriate categirisation. This is to give notice that I intend to remove the civil parishe category in 2 days time. Laurel Lodged (talk) 19:04, 13 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Civil parish or Denominational Church?
Talk:St Mary's Church, Mary Street, Dublin

message: This article needs to make up its mind; it's either about a civil parish or it's about a particular piece of bricks and mortar currently controlled by a particular denomination. If the former, then it needs to contain information about the civil parish, barony and county. The name should also reflect that purpose e.g. "St. X (civil parish)" or "Civil parish of St. X". On the other hand, if the article's purpose is closer to the latter, then why does it have a category of civil parish? If the article deals exclusively with the bricks and mortar aspect, then it's other legal function is no more than a co-incidence. Laurel Lodged (talk) 20:51, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: This discussion has been here for almost a month with no input from the main editor. There is a discussion on the WikiIreland talk page where that editor has made contributions. These have been found to be generally lacking in merit. Another editor has given notice that he intends to take action on the inappropriate categirisation. This is to give notice that I intend to remove the civil parishe category in 2 days time. Laurel Lodged (talk) 19:01, 13 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Civil parish or Denominational Church?
Talk:Piaggio P.119

message: In the 'Engine' section the propellor diameter is stated as 10.8 ft. What is .8 of a foot? Or does it mean 10 ft 8 ins'? 
The capacity of the fuel tanks are also less than clear, ie '330 (90 US gal) in each wing' and '340 (90 US gal), giving a total of 1000L (260 US gal)'.  RASAM (talk) 15:37, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Just a conversion from metric by somebody not familiar with feet and inches, I have changed it to 10ft 10in. Not sure what the problem with fuel tanks, three tanks, 330, 330 and 340 (1000) in litres or 90, 90 90 (270) in us galls. Near enough with rounding errors. MilborneOne (talk) 20:16, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Clarity

message: "The engine and the weapons were built under foreign license"
Really not. The Piaggio P.XI was a licence built Gnome et Rhone 14K, but, if the base tecnology was the same, Gnome et Rhone never built someting similar to, nor sold the licence of, the 18 cylinders P.XII and P.XV, given the failure of their 18L.
Of the weapons produced by Breda, only the 13.2mm Breda 31 was an Hotchkiss licence. Nor the 7.7mm / 12.7mm Breda SAFAT, nor the 20mm Breda 20/65 were foreign licences, havig the first only superficial resemblances with the Browning M2 (but functioning with a completely different breechlock system), and having the second in common with the Hotchkiss only the fact of being gas operated.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 31.195.30.228 (talk) 09:10, 10 May 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  foreign licence
Talk:Kangsi Coming

message: Hm...I am not sure if somebody should tag the Wiki China Portal here. The program is aired in Taiwan (R.O.C.) only and many viewers can only watch on via sites like YouTube. 
On the other hand, you can argue that it's in Chinese Language leave the tag it here. I am not sure if we should remove it. TheAsianGURU (talk) 18:47, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Not really; its completely viewable in Mainland China on the range of channels run by the STAR TV network. -- 李博杰  | —Talk contribs email 03:57, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  WPCHINA Tag 

message: *Alice Xin Liu, March 31, 2010, Kangxi is Coming: impressions on a popular Taiwan TV show, Danwei
Regards, -- 李博杰  | —Talk contribs email 04:11, 3 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Yellow/Green controversy 
Talk:Maria Skłodowska-Curie Medallion

message: Is this enough notability, or is more needed? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Starwarsbuffyccg (talk • contribs) 14:51, September 20, 2007
:I think more; this may need to be merged into Józef Mazur or University of Buffalo pages.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk  14:21, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: A work of art may stand independently as the subject of an article.  See "Mona Lisa" and "Winged Victory of Samothrace."  The notability of the Skłodowska-Curie Medallion is attested by its artistic qualities and its history.  Nihil novi (talk) 08:02, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Notability

message: Shouldn't it be Marie Curie-Skłodowska, as visible on the panel?--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk  14:18, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Name

message: This is a stained-glass object.  Should it have a "Painting" infobox?  Is there a "stained-glass" infobox?  Nihil novi (talk) 20:03, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: "Painting"
Talk:Alpha Boys' School

message: According to a few reliable-looking sources ( ) the name of the school is actually "Alpha Cottage School".  I propose that this article be moved with this page redirecting to Alpha Cottage School.  Any objections?--Michig 19:56, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Name of school/name of article 
Talk:Mill Creek High School

message: Please do not delete part of the page, seeing as how it is a stub and can be expanded.  Feel free to add names to the sections and add sections if neccessary,
but please refrain from adding students to the page as there are too many for a neutral evaluation or listing of all.  Please only provide public information on the page, as some private information is not suitable for encyclopedic reference.
座区 20:07, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: expand stub

message: Please don't add non-notable faculty names to this article.  See WP:BIO.  Corvus cornix 20:17, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Faculty

message: Please understand that Wikipedia requires 3rd party, independent verifiable sources for articles. WP:Verify ScarianTalk 20:19, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: References

message: I have deleted the death section, as there has been plenty of deaths in mill creek high school and jamie mobley is no special then any other student. If she is mentioned, then it would be only fair to add more deaths of mill creek high school, that being said there are too many deaths to include in this article, and there shouldn't be just one  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.92.172.251 (talk) 21:37, 22 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  death 
Talk:Myleofibrosis

message: I created this page in error because of a typo, but I believe this addresses some things that are not on the Myelofibrosis page.  My father died of pneumonia as a complication of myelofibrosis last week.  I modified what I posted here out of a Word document that he e-mailed to me when he was diagnosed.  Thus, I suggested a merge rather than a speedy delete. --Scottandrewhutchins 20:07, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge
Talk:WUNH

message: "every single presidential candidate to stop by for interviews and appearances" seems a bit odd to me.  How can one "appear" on radio?  Also, as nice as this sounds, I don't recall ever hearing such an interview and I've been listening to WUNH for 30-odd years (some odder than others).  A citation for this would be nice. Huw Powell (talk) 00:43, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Presidents

message: Is there any justification to mentioning some of the prominent, longer-running shows on the station? Huw Powell (talk) 00:43, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Shows
Talk:Kawasaki Vulcan

message: The info panel says 125cc and up, but we have no information on any models smaller than 400. Could this be an inadvertent mistake given the largest engine is 125 cubic inches? Alehanro999 (talk) 18:04, 8 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Displacements
Talk:Wage curve

message: As this article is about a curve, a plot of the relationship would be useful.
--Selach (talk) 13:36, 28 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  plotting the curve 

message: This is very poor. The examples and the language are not clear.
I am not sufficiently familiar with the subject as yet to edit but there are far too many varables quoted Y, B, A, etc to make a good article.
Please revise.
=== response ===
Variables quoted A & B are random numbers, obviously. Any number you fill in will do fine as long as they're in accordance with the logistic operators (>, <, =). Nothing to revise about it. Some things are just too hard to explain in a simple manner and need some expertise on the matter to comprehend. Even in wikipedia  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.118.50.26 (talk) 15:55, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  something someone unidentified said 

message: Variables quoted A & B are random numbers, obviously. Any number you fill in will do fine as long as they're in accordance with the logistic operators (>, <, =). Nothing to revise about it. Some things are just too hard to explain in a simple manner and need some expertise on the matter to comprehend. Even in wikipedia  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.118.50.26 (talk) 15:55, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  response 

message: The "explanation" provided is poorly explained and not entirely relevant. 
No-Shirking Model
Compensating wage differentials
Union Bargaining models
are the three commonly accepted explanations for the existence of the wage curve, of which the last one is the one that got most empirical support over the past couple of decades.
What you have stated is a criticism on the wage curve, rather than an underlying theory.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.58.253.57 (talk) 11:44, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  response on response
Template talk:Paignton & Dartmouth Steam Railway

message: User:SilkTork has renamed  to  claiming this to be the correct name.  As I read it they are both the correct name, however WP:& states that the word "and" is preferable and so I feel this move should be revertd Geof Sheppard (talk) 12:54, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Article name
Template talk:Peak Rail

message: This template will be regularly updated to show the current status of the construction process.
Unfortunately, due to constraints in the template software, the template may not show the layout with accuracy. Osarius : T : C : Been CSD'd? 21:27, 28 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Things don't seem right arround matlock, the current map shows no join between peak rail and national rail and doesn't show a passing loop for national rail. My memory of the layout is shown below (dimmed out stuff exists but is not in regular use). If I don't get any objections (i'm not sure which side of the cawdaw way bridge some stuff is) I will update the template to reflect it (also I seem unable to dim out the track under the bridge, can anyone help with that). Plugwash (talk) 14:11, 29 July 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  I see where you're coming from, but for clarity's sake, it might be best to leave it as it is. Osarius :T : C : Been CSD'd? 19:17, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

text: In the end I went for a different edit that is more consistent with other templates for heritage railways changing the derwent valley line back to "regular rail" color and showing all lines that are available for use (but not nessacerally in regular user) as non-dimmed. I also marked the peak rail platform at matlock as disabled accessible (it is accessed by ramps). Plugwash (talk) 12:26, 23 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  During construction of Matlock Extension 

message: Mileage is given, but no indication of where MP 0.00 is. Useddenim (talk) 23:55, 25 November 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mileage
Talk:Claude Reeds

message: , I reverted your last few edits here regarding Central Oklahoma's 1934 record. The Central Oklahoma media guide appears to be in error on page 78. It has the season finale against East Central ending in a 7–7 tie , but contemporary newspaper accounts (e.g. https://www.newspapers.com/clip/120819436/muskogee-times-democrat/) and the East Central media guide] (page 24) have the game as a 7–0 victory for the Bronchos. Jweiss11 (talk) 02:23, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Hey, I won't complain about that! Thanks.-UCO2009bluejay (talk) 02:41, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  1934 record
Talk:Quorum of Seventy Evangelists

message: If this page is expanding in the direction it is, does it not make more sense for it to be called Quorum of Seventy Evangelists than it's current name? It appears this article is not so much about the office itself but the groups of people who have served in the office and quorum. The more general article about the office would be more appropriate at Evangelist (Latter Day Saints). This more corresponds with Quorum of Twelve Apostles (The Church of Jesus Christ), and that page is not called Apostle (The Church of  Jesus Christ). Rich Uncle Skeleton (talk) 23:06, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That is the section of the page I have been expanding -- hopefully eventually the page expands further on the office itself.  Hold your breath.  Maybe lets give it some time before we reexamine.  If it does not progress that way then absolutely lets move it.  Jcg5029 23:17, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well if your intention is to develop in a more office-oriented way, this information should be included at the office-specific article, which right now is Evangelist (Latter Day Saints). We can't have it both ways and I see little reason to have Evangelist (Latter Day Saints) as well as a denomination-specific article for the office of evangelist in TCOJC. If this article was about the Quorum of Seventy Evangelists specifically, then I can understand the separate article. Rich Uncle Skeleton (talk) 23:22, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well hold on to your britches and lets see how it develops.  We can look at it once its complete (note I haven't linked it to anything yet because its not ready)  and decide what should be done with it.  If it needs renamed we can rename it.  If it needs moved we can move it.  Boundless opportunities that I am all open to.  Please be patient, or help with the information -- hmm.  71.58.63.246 14:58, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

text: Forgot to sign in, that was me (no sockwhatevering) before the rumors start spreading.  Jcg5029 14:59, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

text: My whole point though was that there's no point in waiting because this will either be worth becoming part of Evangelist (Latter Day Saints) or to be renamed Quorum of Seventy Evangelists. Since Evangelist (Latter Day Saints) already exists, it may as well be renamed Quorum of Seventy Evangelists. As that page, it can either remain or be merged with and redirected to Evangelist (Latter Day Saints). There's simply no justificiation for keeping the present name, now or later. Rich Uncle Skeleton (talk) 20:45, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

text: And my britches are well-held, thank you. Rich Uncle Skeleton (talk) 20:46, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Haha sorry, thats great.  I support the move.  Jcg5029 00:37, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Name of page