lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Ordre des Arts et des Lettres

message: What is the nomination process for this Order ?  Is it simply the gift of the President of France or is there some sort of Advisory council ? Dowew 01:25, 3 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Nominations are done by the Minister of Culture after advice of the order council. There aren't any numerus clausus and in practice little oversight on the nominations. --Geo115fr 23:28, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Nomination process

message: Does anyone know if it is possible to check the list of the former recipients of the order online? Grandmaster 07:07, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: i agree with your pointing out the necessity of verifying this list, as i've spotted some dubious looking line items. i would even go further and delete the list altogether...at least the names that cannot be corroborated. --emerson7 | Talk 23:55, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Online list 

message: How is this award related to the Légion d'honneur?  --Kimon 18:42, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It is a minor award granted at ministerial level whereas the Legion d'Honneur is the first French award and granted by the President (and government). The former award has been given to many foreign actors, merely as a good photo opportunity for any Culture Minister... 
--Geo115fr 23:16, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Relation to [[Légion d'honneur]] 

message: Is there scope for some recipient Categories here ?
GrahamHardy (talk) 16:51, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. Instead of this unwieldy list, there should be a  analogous to  as a subcategory of . The two projects listed on this page (France & Orders, Decorations, and Medals) should probably be consulted. Michael Bednarek (talk) 06:46, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I created the category last week, but came upon this discussion only today! Jay (talk) 07:31, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

text: I disagree. It would add extra category-clutter to the articles about all those people. It seems getting this medal is not a very defining attribute for most recipients. --Apoc2400 (talk) 11:20, 19 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Categories ? 

message: Can a recipient who has been conferred with a higher grade (Commander) be again conferred with a lower grade (Chevalier) order? This is the query at the reference desk. Jay (talk) 07:35, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Confusion about de-grading 
Talk:Rajput/Archive 6

message: Shiv,
First of all I never suggested that arabs/turks could be considered rajput. I think being a rajput is simply a matter of who your father is and nothing more.
Secondly, I don't take Akbar's killing of 30,000 people as Islamic nor do I advocate it. I however don't cry over "collateral damage". By taking the pride of being a member of a "Martial" race, one shall not be whining about such incidents. Being killed by an adversary is nothing to whine about at all. At least I don't think so. A warrior has the right to kill its adversary but so does his adversary. 
As far as appreciation of Rajput history is concerned, I like the Rajput characteristics. Things that make one a Rajput. Things like truthfulness, trusworthiness, bravery and honesty to name a few. Remember, being brave is not only the name of ability to face certain death, it requires a lot more courage to accept that you were wrong than facing a hungry wild tiger. I don't know what history of Rajput were you referring to, but to me the history of Rajputs is their behavior everything else is insignificant.
Finally my friend, it doesn't matter if you accept me as a Rajput or not (and why should it matter at all?) I was born a Rajput and will die a Rajput and I need no certification for that.
Khurram
:I agree with khurram.it doesnt matter - you accept us or not الثاقب (WiseSabre| talk) 22:31, 15 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: To Shivraj
Talk:Katō (surname)

message: As this surname index article is specifically about the Japanese surname 加藤 and a) there are other people with name Kato list in the Kato (name) index article and b) there are people listed in this article with surname spelled "Kato", I suggest this page be moved to Katō (Japanese surname).  This reflects the Anthroponymy standard of using a demonym (see WP:APOTITLE) to differentiate between the page with people with surname Kato who are named 加藤 and people with surname Kato who are not named 加藤. I would also suggest including a hatnote in this article pointing back to (name) article for people named Kato (and not 加藤). Coastside (talk) 23:00, 1 February 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Move to Katō (Japanese surname)
Talk:Aversives

message: can some one tell me da difference between risk averse and action oriented individuals? —Preceding unsigned comment added by  (talk • contribs) 
:Wrong use of aversive, and talk pages aren't here to answer questions.  Try the reference desk.  WLU (talk) 15:23, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: question

message: :People have wildly edited this page with no discussion.  The controversial aspects of using aversives on autistic people needs to be included.  The previous sections were not NPOV.  It's hard to be NPOV on a technique which many consider torture, but it is possible.  I will attempt it.  People who use Wikipedia deserve to read all aspects of a subject, whether practitioners like it or not.  Berkeleysappho (talk) 05:16, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Editing without discussion is common when the edits are not challenged.  Be sure to document any potentially controversial additions using relialbe sources.  WLU (talk) 15:22, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: autism
Talk:A-Teens

message: Why doesn`t Amit have an own Wikipedia arcticle while all the other members do? ArcticleCreater (talk) 13:21, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I looked as why Amit Sebastian Paul does not have his own Wikipedia Article is because it was deleted way back in 2004 alongside, Sara Helena Lumholdt, and yet, Sara Lumholdt, has her own wikipedia page. Plus, by now Amit Sebastian Paul would have his own Article since he did attempt to have a solo career but he is known for being a member of A-Teens but does have individual merits that needs to searched for because I unable to at the moment look up sources. Azndrumsticks (talk) 00:09, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Amit`s arcticle?
Talk:Rajput/Archive 9

message: Shivraj's claims on this page cannot be proven, and don't belong here. The burden of proof in a Wikipedia article is on the one who claims something to be a fact, not on everyone else. If I write "it is proven that the moon is made of green cheese", I should be able to provide documentation that the moon is indeed made of green cheese; it is not up to everyone else to prove to me that it is not. To say that "if there were no Rajputs in India then India would be just like Iraq/Iran/Turkey/Pakistan in terms of religion" is not a "fact", it is just speculation. There are many parts of india--most of India, in fact--where there are few or no Rajputs, yet the these regions do not have a Muslim majority today; if Rajputs are the only thing keeping a country from becoming Muslim, then why is South India, with no significant Rajput presence, still Hindu? What about Spain, or Serbia, or Bulgaria, that were subject to centuries of Muslim rule, who, in the absence of Rajputs, didn't become Muslim? And what about Sind, which was ruled by Rajputs before the Muslim conquest--why did it become Muslim, despite the presence of Rajputs? If one wanted to prove one's theory that the presence of Rajputs is the only thing that prevented mass conversion to Islam, it would be necessary to prove that 1) No region with Rajputs ever became majority muslim; and that 2) all regions without Rajputs became majority muslim. The historical record doesn't support either claim; furthermore it is extremely insulting to the vast majority of Hindus who happen not to be Rajputs to claim that, but for the Rajputs, they would have given up their religion. Lots of non-Rajputs showed enormous bravery in keeping Hinduism alive during periods of Muslim rule, and it is also well documented that many Rajput leaders showed less bravery in collaborating with their Muslim rulers.
Second, to assert that "A point to note here is that lot of Muslims and some hindu historians like Romila Thapar think that Islam/Muslims did not do conversion of Hindus by sword. The argument they give is that there are so many hindus still today in India. This is completely wrong because most muslim rulers in India tried to convert as many as they could but it was the strength of rajput sword that kept hinduism alive in India." is patently absurd. What makes Shivraj the definitive authority on Indian history, able to dismiss scholars such as Romila Thapar as "completely wrong"? It is totally fair to say that scholarly opinions differ, or to avoid speculation altogether, but to state that eminent historians "are completely wrong" without offering some compelling evidence is sloppy scholarship that has no place on Wikipedia. Tom Radulovich 07:45, 29 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: hands up, you are in firing range lol الثاقب (WiseSabre| talk) 16:01, 29 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: POV pushing and speculation
Talk:Wheel of Time/Dark One

message: From WP:RfD:
* Wheel of Time/Dark One
* Wheel of Time/Ogier
* Wheel of Time/al'Lan Mandragoran
* Useless redirects that clutter the Wheel Of Time Characters category —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gherald (talk • contribs) 19:30, 26 September 2005
** Ah, if you put a ':' in front of the category target, they won't show up in the category. But is the category the right target anyway? I see there's an article on Dark One - why not point the first one there? Etc, etc... Noel (talk) 20:19, 26 September 2005 (UTC)
Template talk:Arena Football League

message: Since this template includes teams actually set to play next year, please do not insist on including the VooDoo without making a valid argument for their inclusion.  As it stands now, the franchise is suspended for the 2006 season. Uvaduck 03:13, 3 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  New Orleans VooDoo 

message: Would someone please shrink the size of the top half of the table?  The table is too big in my opinion. --PS2pcGAMER (talk) 02:40, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I went ahead and figured out how to decrease the table height quite significantly.  I hope no one minds the changes I made. --PS2pcGAMER (talk) 03:30, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Table Size
Talk:Ada Verdun Howell

message: Can any one tell me where i can find a copy ( or pass on the text?) of 'Exit Strategies'? Melbob 03:28, 3 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Whereabouts

message: The references listed on this page don't appear to validate Ada's existence. None of her works can be located, nor her birth records. 
Any comment from the creators of the page?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sonic echidna (talk • contribs) 00:58, 26 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hoax?
Talk:Foot cavalry

message: Hlj moved this from foot calvary to foot cavalry, as cavalry is dudes on horses but calvary is a hill near Jerusalem.  Unless this is some weird archaic spelling, I guess the DYK entry should also be fixed. -- Finlay McWalter |  Talk 11:38, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Calvary?

message: Why are these in the See also? I'm sure that it was because Jackson used them,  but neither article mentions it. --Habap 15:56, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Rockfish Gap and Blue Ridge Tunnel

message: I added some sources, but this article needs to be polished, I do not have the ability to do so. but I do know that the information in here is accurate. -Robert Short,Sr.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.248.244.2 (talk) 05:56, 17 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  added some sources
Talk:USS Schmitt

message: Does anyone have any common sense here?
This article includes text from the public domain Dictionary of American Naval Fighting Ships.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_domain
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dictionary_of_American_Naval_Fighting_Ships
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. 
"The Dictionary of American Naval Fighting Ships (DANFS for short) is the primary reference work for the basic facts about every ship ever used by the United States Navy. (Although called a "dictionary," it is more accurately described as a specialized encyclopedia.)
It was published by the Navy (thus its content is in the public domain) in nine volumes, between 1959 and 1991. The volumes were completed in alphabetical order, so the service histories of ships still in service at the time of writing end at dates dependent on their names, and subsequent information must come from elsewhere."
Come on y'all!!!!!!!!!1
Just because a Wiki editor found the Schmitt info on 
http://www.multied.com//Navy/DE/schmitt.html
does not mean it's copyrighted!!!!!!!!!!!! My god, where is the common sense here?!!
http://www.history.navy.mil/danfs/s7/schmitt.htm
LOOK here---it's not copyrighted, it's public domain material from the US Government, under Wiki TOS, as previously cited, it's public domain and can be cut and pasted on Wiki.  MY god y'all!!!!!!!! 
No sir, ":You can add that material, but the rest is copyrighted. ≈ jossi ≈ 03:51, 3 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: You can add that material, but the rest is copyrighted. ≈ jossi ≈ 03:51, 3 October 2005 (UTC)
Template talk:Wikipedia vandalism

message: Argh! I saved it prematurely! I'm still working on this, thanx 68.39.174.238 03:53, 3 October 2005 (UTC)

message: OK, does this thing actually do any good? Unfortunately I can quite imagine that a few trolls would be delighted to get one of these slapped onto their user accounts. Maybe something less low key would be more appropriate? chowells 00:53, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: It's not supposed to go on peoples pages, it's just a navigation template so vandalism-related pages can be easily linked. 68.39.174.238 20:31, 26 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Any good? 

message: For a discussion about the edit link see the  talk page.
For issues like align=right (floating), colour scheme, width, and line
breaks see the  talk page, it's more or
less the same problem for various "sidebar" templates.  -- Omniplex 06:12, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Layout questions 

message: Where this link goes??? wikipedia having any commercial promise with this website(the links given) --Jigesh (talk) 10:13, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I've removed the link from this template. There are many more all over wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:LinkSearch&target=http%3A%2F%2Fdnsstuff.com&limit=500&offset=0 --thunderboltz(TALK) 07:58, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: IP WHOIS LOOKUP

message: So, with the merger of Vandalism studies and the CVU, I'd like to see if consensus has changed in regards to listing the CVU on this template. I've taken a strong interest in seeing the CVU become something that it wasn't, back when those MFDs were lobbied and it was removed from this template. Right now it looks like we're going to reorganize into 4 branches. The Think Tank (which will turn into a 'Village Pump' kind of place, to coordinate counter-vandalism), The Academy (to train new counter-vandals), Vandalism studies (to continue the work they've been doing), and the Task Force (though I'm not 100% sure what they do). Given our new focus on collaboration, education, and coordination, would it make sense to put a link to the CVU in the "Resources & assistance" section? Achowat (talk) 20:10, 16 April 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Without objection, I'm going to Be Bold and add it. Achowat (talk) 00:09, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Relisting CVU
Talk:Ludlow Monument

message: I recently [September 2005] stopped by to see the restored Monument and I left feeling both good and bad - which is supposed to be impossible.  I felt good because the figures had been restored, but bad because the scars on the statures are there to be seen and they are not pretty.  Someone has put a scarf around the neck of the female figure, a cosmetic touch that I felt was a good idea, but the scene was none-the-less rather disturbing.  Still, two heads are better than none, and that is what is at Ludlow now.  I'll perhaps post another picture or two here if I ever get them developed. Carptrash 03:59, 3 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  visit to the Ludlow Monument 
Talk:Lucius Fairchild

message: I don't have really strong feelings about it, but why use a cropped pic rather than the full John Singer Sargent portrait.  It's a nice portrait without extraneous characters in it and I don't see a lot of other works cropped like that.  -- Asdasdasdff (talk) 19:02, 27 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  portrait in infobox
Talk:Matthew 5:3

message: In a Bible Study on the Beatitudes that I am attending, this caused some interesting conversation. 
I know what the interpreters say, but what is YOUR definition of "Poor in Spirit"?
"Blessed are the poor" by Luke was much straightforward.The addition "in spirit" by Mathew merely confuses the issue and might have been done deleberately to appeal to a different/wider audience.And it did the job.Look at the hundreds of pages written on it.It carries no meaning whatsoever to me.
--
Interestingly enough the original Greek admits a completely different translation, namely "blessed the simpleminded". Dianelos (talk) 20:46, 25 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  

message: The "Analysis" section comes across not as analysis but as quasi-literate proselytizing and "instructions" on how someone thinks others should behave and think about God. 
"Being poor in spirit also infers us to devoid of our spiritual arrogance & to regard ourselves as insignificant and thereby glorify GOD."
"Infers us?" "Devoid" as a verb?? Huh???
Um, these are not the words you're looking for. While this may be an attempt to sound "intelligent," it's also nonsensical. 
Why is God in all caps -- twice, no less?
This article deserves better.Madscribbler (talk) 16:48, 7 December 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Analysis"?
Talk:Lakin, Kansas

message: Please review the following to get a better idea of what you should add to this article:
# Please follow the Wikipedia USCITY guideline for layout and content.
# Please examine these great articles for ideas: Lock Haven, Pennsylvania / Stephens City, Virginia / Kent, Ohio / Tulsa, Oklahoma / Grand Forks, North Dakota.
# Please ensure a person meets Wikipedia Notability requirements before adding to the "Notable People" section.
Please review the following before editing:
# Please document your source by citing a reference to prove your text is verifiable.
# Please add text that has a neutral point of view instead of sounding like an advertisement.
# Please read the "Editing, Creating, and Maintaining Articles" chapter from the book Wikipedia : The Missing Manual, .
Sbmeirow (talk) 09:06, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Important Notes Before Editing This Article 
Talk:Hydrogen line

message: I've read through the source quoted for the currently stated value of the hyperfine transition of hydrogen, and while it is mentioned, the IEEE source actually recommends a different value which is the average of the two results obtained (aka 1 420 405 751.768(2) Hz).
I've also found another article from Nature Communications that states the other value as the 'literature value' here.
Can I go change the current value (1 420 405 751.7667(9) Hz) to the value recommended by the IEEE publication (1 420 405 751.768(2) Hz)?
I'm new here, so sorry if this is a silly question or anything. Also, I can't find the Wikipedia policies for writing measured values (or, at least, it's not immediately obvious) - can somebody show me where it is? 
:MeasureWell (talk) 07:40, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recommended value stated in the IEEE publication (1 420 405 751.768(2) Hz) doesn't match with the one shown (1 420 405 751.7667(9) Hz)
Talk:First International Bahá'í Council

message: Were the officer roles of the first International Baha'i Council assigned by Shoghi Effendi or did the Council elect officers among themselves?  --Occamy 05:46, 3 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Officers 

message: It seems like International Bahá'í Council is a much better name anyway, and the information is repeated in the two articles. Cuñado  - Talk 22:27, 22 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge
Talk:The Neverending Story

message: Both the part called History of Origin and Publication and the part called Interpretation were translated from the German wikipedia page on the neverending story. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Superpanda55 (talk • contribs) 11:06, 21 June 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Translation

message: Someone has put a great deal of effort into the "Interpretation" section. For this, I salute you! But there's a problem. This section contains numerous statements which conflict with Wikipedia policies (explained here) regarding verifiability and citations. For example, see the fourth, fifth and sixth paragraphs. These statements are someone's interpretation of the novel, but whose? There are no citations to support them. If they are interpretations that have been published somewhere, citations should be added. If these are a Wikipedia editor's interpretations, such statements (no matter how well-reasoned) should be deleted. Wikipedia is not the place for original work, archival findings that have not been published, or evidence from any source that has not been published, as stated in the link above. BuzzWeiser196 (talk) 11:53, 22 June 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Looks like it was translated from the German Wikipedia, which does seem to cite sources.--LaukkuTheGreit (Talk•Contribs) 16:39, 26 October 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Editors' translations cannot be used. They certainly cannot be turned into a wall of text without citations. There's already a reception section where some of this could have been worked in, judiciously, not dumped wholesale as it is. OP is correct. If no one is going to rewrite it according to style and with proper citations, it cannot remain. The History and Origin (?) section likewise has no sections and is by the same editor, quoting out of thin air. The Editions section too. ZarhanFastfire (talk) 04:49, 26 November 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Does not meet Wikipedia policies 

message: I came here to correct a statement in the "Editions" section and ended up substantially revising the page, including a near-complete rewrite of the summary. The previous summary struck me as focusing heavily on the first third of the novel, on which the 1983 film is based (a film that Ende detested), and thus glossing over the vast majority of the book. Mozby (talk) 12:26, 11 December 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Made substantial revisions 

message: He ist not strange, he is a quiet kid, who loves to read and is bullied by other kids. KhlavKhalash (talk) 16:49, 2 December 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: I hope you have seen the correction I've done to that then.  I agree with you wholeheartedly.  Main problem now is that this must be condensed and less poetic. Maxcardun (talk) 17:01, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Strange" child?