lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Mark Hart

message: Seriously. I have placed a clearer band photo on that page, another of Neil Finn on his page, and yet, the first Mark Hart picture I've seen of only him, in the infobox. Each page showed lack of interest, and most had comments like, "A new album is planned for 2007"! What is that?! Please folks, lets work together. --leahtwosaints (talk) 23:12, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Thought there was a Crowded House workgroup
Talk:Irlam F.C.

message: The image of the Coat of Arms of Irlam UDC removed, as it does not represent the club.Knorrepoes (talk) 17:04, 12 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Coat of arms removed
Talk:Great Langdale

message: This link was added to the article after discussion on the WP Reliable Sources Noticeboard. See: WP:RSN exercise. No information from the CCHT link has been put into the body of the article in the form of citations because it has not yet been verified for 100% accuracy by the Victoria County History project for Cumbria. (This will take some years to do).  Laplacemat (talk) 09:41, 26 February 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  CCHT external link 

message: -- but the waterfall listed as "Dungeon Ghyll Force" is actually one of the long series of cascades on Stickle Ghyll (the next drainage over). Dungeon Ghyll Force, as listed on OS maps, is several kilometers to the west and looks like this (a 50-60' single drop with smaller waterfalls above and below). It seems a bit mean-spirited to replace the other person's image though... I've just edited the caption instead <_< Temevorn 02:11, 6 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  This may seem unnecessarily pedantic -- 

message: After calling the pub, I discovered that the Bunkhouse is now closed. whilst the statement has a reference, it is only to the ODG hotel website, which does not refer to the bunkhouse. I have removed this. Someone who knows more about this than me could add details about the National Trust campsite 'pods'.79.69.108.125 (talk) 21:30, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sticklebarn Bunkhouse -- 

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) 14:03, 1 July 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  National trust pilot
Talk:Over Ashes

message: this band is currently on christian radio staions nationwide. they were on a major record label-selectric records. they have world wide distribution-tag artists. justin glasgow of jeremy camp and justin york of tait and steven curtis chapman produced their debut album. Over Ashes has played with national acts Relient K, The Wedding, Switchfoot, As Cities Burn and countless others. The band is currently on a U.S. tour promoting their album.
*I've changed the speedy delete to a prod based on your assertions above, but you need to (1) make those claims in the article, and (2) support them with reliable independent sources, or the article will end up being deleted. NawlinWiki 04:43, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Phillip Boyce

message: I think that the page could be merged with the Star Trek episode or kept. Snowman 17:30, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge
Talk:Rat Man

message: The first paragraph of the criticism section does not really seem to be related to criticism: 
"The only known case in which Freud's notes survive is that of Ernst Lanzer, the Rat-Man, where they exist for the first third of the treatment.[20] Freud treated him for obsessions, particularly the dread that something terrible would happen to his father and his fiancée. His fear of rats, Freud concluded after elaborate interpretations, was based on disguised anal erotic fantasies.[21] Mr. Stadlen tracked down relatives of Mr. Lanzer who said the account handed down by the family was that Freud had helped him overcome shyness so that he could marry. "
It also repeats the myth, that the rat man was afraid of rats. This was not the case and is not mentioned anywhere in the publication. Freuds interpretations of the "rat-torture" focus the patients desires to punishing those that are dear to him, what he calls a "love-hate complex" and its relationship to sexual desire. The anal erotic fantasies are just a shape that this takes and are only once in the whole text explicitly named as such. I would therefore propose to remove the whole paragraph. I am, of course, open to other forms of dealing with it. 
Metamer (talk) 13:35, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  On the criticism section

message: The 'rat man' portion seems to be lifted from the NYTimes article linked.  Should it be summarized or deleted?
Dmenet (talk) 20:18, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: My suggestion would be that you summarize it, pending a thorough re-write (which it needs for more than one reason). I'll make a start at a re-write, but don't have much time right now... Pfistermeister (talk) 22:02, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Plagarized portion 

message: Article currently reads: "After publishing the case notes in 1909, Freud wrote a letter to Carl Jung, indicating that the Rat Man's problems still remained,McGuire, W: The Freud/Jung Letters, page 255. Princeton University Press, 1974. despite Freud claiming in the case-history that "the patient's rat delirium had disappeared".Freud, p. 100"
Checking the source (McGuire), F actually says: "he is facing life with courage and ability. The one point that still gives him trouble (father-complex and transference) has shown up clearly in my conversations". I am concerned that the article's current construction of this letter may shade WP:NOR and WP:NPOV, and propose hiving off discussion of the success of the treatment to a separate subsection and tagging it accordingly. Jacobisq (talk) 09:34, 24 October 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Is 'Criticism' neutral?
Talk:Wet Earth Colliery

message: I noticed that the original text mentioned the Bolton & Bury canal.  Now my history knowledge isn't precise, so I've changed it to the MB&B canal, which has a wiki page people can read.  My question is, at the time Fletcher built his short canal, was the MB&B canal known by a different name?  Is it correct to call it the MB&B canal at this time? Parrot of Doom 12:26, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Sort of yes and no..... the actual Bury Bolton Canal ran at top level and then approx half way between Bolton and Bury at Nob End, Farnworth, there was a flight of locks (the remains are still there) which dropped into a basin which was the start of the arm leading into Manchester via Agecroft and Salford. The Wet Earth did in fact join the Manchester Arm, so its half and dozen of one, which you call it. I suppose MB&B is more strictly correct.Geotek 23:37, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks Geotek for that clarification.  I am in the process of getting pictures for this page, specifically images of the tunnels and excavations, I'll probably upload them tonight. Parrot of Doom 20:28, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  MB&B canal 

message: Plenty of images for this article located here: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Wet_Earth_Colliery  Parrot of Doom 17:01, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Images 

message: I have proposed Merging Clifton, Greater Manchester with Wet Earth Colliery as they share a lot of the same information. Any thoughts? Richerman 16:58, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Bad idea IMO.  There is much more to Clifton than just the WEC.  Where would you stop?  Parrot of Doom 17:21, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

text: Wet Earth Colliery is a worthy subject in it own right independent of Clifton. I do not agree with the proposal to merge. Martin Cordon 12:31, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merger Proposal 

message: There are several references that are not linked to paragraphs or sections.  I have added reflist to the references section, does anyone know to which parts of the article those references are relevant so that they may be correctly linked? Parrot of Doom (talk) 00:45, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  references
Talk:WAMATA

message: Hello,
I apologize for not being more thorough in the write up on Wamata.  You can also look to Google and see that Wamata is an important organization for Tanzania in the counseling and rehabilitation of persons w/HIV & AIDS.  It is not meant to advertise or spam Wikipedia, but the organization was one of the first of its kind in the country.
I will definitely update the article, and provide more sources to prove the relevance of including this article within the encyclopedia.
Thank you for alerting me; I had no idea this was not thorough enough, and it will be edited for clarity, depth, and the inclusion of additional sources.
Kokutona 12:44, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
File talk:Mizuka One game screenshot.png

message: Dear editor,
From Wikipedia, a linked by my Blog for the first time, and I think that it is honorable.
In addition, on the Blog, the picture concerned is copyrighted material of the Nexton.
That is reproduced with a rule what based on the Tactcs licencing term of the it's first public release("Touri Institute of the Research" are those with the copyright notation to the lower part.).
I should think so what you to read and understand provisions the Japan Copyright Act and the Nexton about reproduction to Wikipedia.
3 suns is about 90.9mm.--Touri Syuusen 12:45, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
Talk:Stanisława Tomczyk

message: Julian Ochorowicz and Wisła, Poland, are real.  The sources listed appear to refer to actual individuals and studies.  Nihil novi 12:47, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This does not seem like a hoax to me, either, so I removed the  tag. ~ Danelo 14:50, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Hoax?
Talk:Galle

message: If the 14th century traveler Ibn Batuta mentions "Qali", it is close to the Tamil name for the city "Gali" since Arabic "Q" is sometimes pronounced as "G" (as in "guard") in many Arab countries. The Dutch arrived in much after the Portuguese who ruled the area until their capitulation in 1658. Apparently Dutch influence should come afterwards. In this case, saying "Another theory is that the word Galle  is  derived from  the Dutch word ‘Gallus’ which means rooster" looks awkward.--Fahim (talk) 16:08, 18 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: old comments on etymology
Talk:Heckler & Koch AG-C/EGLM

message: The Ask.com article refers to it as the L123A3... and so does this very site's AG36 page which, coincidentally, is a cut-and-paste copy of said AG36 page. Wikipedia is, in effect, using itself as a source. I copied over the source for the L123 designation from our AG36 page to at least maintain some commonality and, personally, I view a PDF document from the MoD to be much more credible than Ask.com on the matter. Spartan198 (talk) 07:33, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  AG-C for L85 designation incorrect 

message: The article has been moved from "Heckler & Koch AG-C/GLM" to "Heckler & Koch AG-C/EGLM""(Renamed as per naming guidelines. HK also calls it the EGLM now.)" and back again to "Heckler & Koch AG-C/GLM" "(correct name)". In my research, the sources refer to it as "AG-C/EGLM", plus or minus some punctuation. I'm inclined to move it back to that name, unless there's a good reason to keep it where it is. Rezin (talk) 20:17, 3 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article name 

message: The article states that the AG-C/EGLM is, 1, meant for AR-15 type rifles, and, 2, "attaches in front of the magazine". It also notes, quite correctly, that it is used on the L85A2, which emphatically is NOT an AR-15 type, and is in fact a bullpup. Perhaps some cleaning up is in order? 85.229.55.77 (talk) 08:27, 28 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Attachment
Talk:Moonrakers

message: I am rather puzzled that Moonraker doesn’t redirect here. I think that we are going to be remembered for much longer than the James Bond movie. —Ian Spackman 12:56, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: First comment

message: Somewhere there is a story about a dog(or such animal) with a fish in it's mouth beside a pond.
It sees another fish in the water (real or imagined/reflected?) then proceeds to catch it, but, in its haste, loses the one it had and fails to capture the one in the water.
Seems like the proverb - "a bird in hand is worth two in the bush"(where to try catching them is to risk losing all)but the Moonrakers,of course, has a different message perhaps saying to be more circumspect. JohnsonL623 (talk) 06:34, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: See The Dog and Its Reflection. Moonraker2 (talk) 08:25, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  FYI 

message: User:Moonraker2 points out that, as Bradley writes it, "The apostrophe before "as" is fanciful"—which it is—and 'ee should indeed be  'e. However as we are quoting him directly, we have to go with his version. I've now filled in some of the elisions, which should help. --Old Moonraker (talk) 10:14, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I couldn't agree more that we are quoting Bradley's version and should give it warts and all. My note on the fanciful apostrophe was what lawyers call obiter. The explanation Old Moonraker has added makes everything crystal clear to all, even vurriners. Moonraker2 (talk) 10:39, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that the quotation should be transcribed literally. If a compromise is called for, we could always mention in the footnote that Bradley’s orthography is a little eccentric. Your anonimised Moonraker, Ian Spackman (talk) 10:42, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Good idea: footnote added.--Old Moonraker (talk) 16:28, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bradley's transliteration
Talk:Brian Dutton

message: Matty, I would've thought that Dutts' position would've been simply midfielder for this; he only played in defence for 10 minutes of one game for Weymouth, and I've never seen him play up front. Alexrushfear 10:34, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've put on what I've read on different websites. And I think he's always been playing in defence for York in the pre-season friendlies. Mattythewhite 11:06, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah ok, cheers. Alexrushfear 11:25, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Position
Talk:Paks Nuclear Power Plant

message: In the last revision I edited, I found duplicate named references, i.e. references sharing the same name, but not having the same content. Please check them, as I am not able to fix them automatically :) 
* "HAEA report" :
** 
** 
DumZiBoT (talk) 15:21, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bot report : Found duplicate references !
Talk:Mitchell Froom

message: As opposed to what other side? 'Froom is of Romanian ancestry' is surely sufficient, unless it's known to be his paternal or maternal grandparents, in which case that should be specified. Gwladys24 (talk) 17:47, 7 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Froom is of Romanian ancestry on his grandparents side" ?? 
Talk:Malcolm Green (musician)

message: I think it's a bit of a stretch to include Green in :Category:20th-century New Zealand musicians. To the best of my knowledge, he's not a NZ citizen and has never lived in the country - he has merely toured NZ during his time with Split Enz (which he was the first non-New Zealander to join). Muzilon (talk) 20:01, 23 November 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nationality?
Talk:Acquisition (Star Trek: Enterprise)

message: The appearance of the Ferengi was considered controversial. It is difficult to find reliable sources about audience or fan response but I think I've found it. Star Trek Communicator issue 139 says the episode was controversial for breaking continuity by featuring the Ferengi and 
seemingly contradicting the TNG episode The Last Outpost. 
One of the writers acknowledging that it was controversial but disagreed, and thought that the episode was structured in a way that did not contradict the official continuity. 
Not sure how best to add this detail to the article. Maybe the comments from the writer could be used to present it as a note from the Production perspective, or reaction from fans could perhaps be mentioned in terms of Reception. If someone else could add something about it to the article, in whatever way they think is best, that would be great. -- 109.78.193.228 (talk) 01:17, 21 April 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: (In the aforementioned article above) Fan and Star Trek book author Alex Rozenweig was critical of the decision to introduce the Ferengi. (Page 49 introduces Rozenweig, on page 50 he says "producers walked the line on this one".) From the perspective of writing for Wikipedia it is interesting to me how the article finds a reliable source to act as a voice to establish "fan opinion" but probably will not use that, and instead I'll skip ahead and just add the response from story editor Mike Sussman defending the decision. (The fact that the Production staff were defending the decision already implies there was some negative reaction to defend against.) I'm going to add that bit from Sussman to the Production section, and use the Reception section to respond to it, specifically using part of the review from Tor.com. I am explaining my reasoning here, in case other editors decide to rewrite the Reception section (to try and bring this to Featured Article level) so that hopefully they will consider preserving the underlying intent of setup and response, even if they change the words entirely. -- 109.78.197.28 (talk) 18:37, 15 April 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Continuity
Talk:Civilization (Star Trek: Enterprise)

message: If this article is undergoing revision, the editors handling it would be well-advised to place an under construction or in use template on it until they're done and the article can be reevaluated. Doniago (talk) 19:25, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Under Construction?

message: In an interview from the Star Trek Magazine here], Sussman states that the aliens in this episode were the same race wiped out by the NOMAD space probe in "The Changeling" from TOS. Miyagawa (talk) 18:42, 2 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mike Sussman article 

message: This episode is listed in the introduction as Episode 8. However, technically, it is Episode 9. A few of the other episodes in the season make this same error, so I'm going to change them to match the rest of the articles that follow the sequence on the 1 episode page.
: That happens quite a lot, thanks for fixing it. This is counted the 9th episode because the first episode was a double. Also the production code is 40358-009 for the record. -- 109.78.204.126 (talk) 03:34, 22 April 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Episode sequence 

message: Robert Bianco of USA Today highlighted the episode "What's on TV: Wednesday" (November 14, 2001). 
This week on Enterprise (UPN, tonight, 8 ET/PT), those wacky earthlings disguise themselves as locals to investigate a troubled civilization. Let's hope it goes better than their bumbling visit to a Vulcan sanctuary or last week's near-fatal exploration of a comet. Enterprise is one of my favorite new series — but really, the crew needs to start showing signs of competence. Right now, it's like they're doing McHale's Navy in Space.
It is more a short preview introducing the episode than an actual review. Maybe it could be added to the reception section of last week's episode instead? -- 109.76.142.30 (talk) 07:37, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reception  

message: The template at the top of this page includes "needs picture" request. If anyone ever gets around to it and are considering what image to choose it  might be helpful to see the original publicity images. Three images were posted on the StarTrek.com website for this episode, showing the cast in disguise As these images were already used for publicity image and are very low resolution, they might be an easier choice to ensure the WP:NFCC requirements are met. -- 109.79.64.54 (talk) 04:18, 4 May 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Needs picture
Talk:Breaking the Ice (Star Trek: Enterprise)

message: If you can't understand the tags added to this article mean, then quite simply, it's comprised of nothing that couldn't be summarised in a simple article on this particular season of the show. WikiuserNI (talk) 16:42, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: There's no reason reason to be rude. Collaborative editing not only requires the assumption of good faith, it also requires a minimal amount of civility. The question isn't whether editors 'understand' what a tag means, the question ,in relation to each specific tag, is 'What do you think should be done to improve the article?'   If you don't think the article can or should be improved you should nominate it for deletion, rather than simply tag it. Dlabtot (talk) 17:20, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text:  This Emmy nominated episode was always notable, even if for a long time the the article may have consisted of little more than a plot summary, but it has been substantially improved since then. -- 109.79.172.124 (talk) 15:26, 3 February 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Notability
Talk:Canamar

message: This article needs an image. As this episode was Emmy nominated for prosthetic makeup effects an image showing some of that work would greatly enhance readers understanding and make this a better encyclopedia article. It would have to be a non-free image from the episode itself, no suitable free image would exists for this purpose. TrekCore has a gallery of screenshots from Canamar to choose from, but I would suggest an image showing more than one of the alien prisoners but an image of the alien that bothers Tucker is weirdly interesting as is the Naussican 
Anonymous editors cannot upload image and the rules are complicated, so I leave it to someone else more familiar with the non-free image use policies, but having an image would significantly improve the quality of the article and I hope someone might get around to adding one eventually. -- 109.78.207.72 (talk) 18:58, 10 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: Needs picture
Talk:Dawn (Star Trek: Enterprise)

message: I know these Star Trek things are trivial, but this is in need of a good rewrite.  Once you add crap like "for some reason no one thinks of beaming down a translator, shelter, or even some water" you are well outside the range of plot synopsis and off into snide review. 75.191.151.75 (talk) 03:40, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Plot

message: In case maybe anyone wants to add a little more context later: 
Zap2it overnight fast ratings Enterprise in 5th. (The WB 6th with Birds of Prey rerun.)
Mediaweek report mentions but doesn't say anything significant about Enterprise
Trekweb discusses that the ratings were low, nearly as bad as pre-Thanksgiving episode Vanishing Point but the viewer numbers were not quite as low.
There are a few articles around this time talking about the ratings of the show and the season in general and the hope that the film Nemesis might provide a boost but the fact that UPN president at the time was named "Dawn Ostroff" makes it more difficult to find sources about this specific episode. -- 109.79.167.27 (talk) 12:27, 22 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ratings