lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Dungeon monitor

message: I made a few edits to this page today, some minor, some significant.  "Dungeon Monitor is a title and should thus be capitalized throughout the article, which has been done.  Both words really should be capitalized in the page title as well, but I'm reluctant to create a whole new page over a simple error like that.  Who knows what links might be lost as a result?
The addition of Chief Dungeon Monitors to the article is based upon my own fairly extensive experience as a Dungeon Monitor and occasional event organizer, but I believe that it is general enough to be acceptable.  In fact, it's such common sense that I don't think there's anything questionable about the addition.
CDNRopemaster (talk) 19:55, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: New section

message: As soon as I finish typing this, I'll be removing Dungeon Monitors are normally not permitted to engage in a scene themselves so that they will always remain an outside and objective observer of other players' scenes from the article.  I have been a Dungeon Monitor (DM) for the past 5 years and have reviewed the rules of conduct for DMs, DM Training Manuals and similar documents of a large number of organizations and clubs over the past decade and I have never seen such a restriction.  Obviously DMs are not permitted to engage in a scene themselves while they are on duty, but a typical DM shift is 1-2 hours out of the 4 or more hours a typical event or club night lasts.  The only time I can envision such a rule being in place is if there are not enough DMs available to split up the duty or if the DM team is entirely made up of paid staff.
CDNRopemaster (talk) 20:03, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removed erroneous information
Talk:L'Étudiante (novel)

message: I challenge the speedy deletion of this article, a notable novel (and last, unfinished, novel) by a notable BDSM author, Vanessa Duriès. Vanessa Duriès works have been translated in many languages, including English. I think this can be debated in an AfD, but certainly not a speedy. Hektor (talk) 15:59, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Speedy : no
Talk:Florentine flogging

message: I'm mildly concerned about the wording here, talking about the skin's reaction during warmup, specifically: "The skin will become pink".  I'm not-very-brown, and yet my skin does NOT pink. It has to be checked manually to see that it has actually warmed. Perhaps it would be better to say "in lighter-skinned people, the skin may become pink" or something similar? Granted, I am speaking as ONE data point, but I imagine I might not be the only person in the world whose skin doesn't change color after a warmup.
Batshua (talk) 19:47, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Wording

message: I for one think this is noteworthy enough to warrant a Wikipedia article. Finding references is indeed difficult, but this is an encyclopedic article. KellyCoinGuy (talk) 06:51, 24 October 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Noteability
Talk:List of possible dwarf planets

message: This is listed in the table; should it be removed, given that it does not actually exist? Double sharp (talk) 14:39, 2 July 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Gone. Thank you. Tbayboy (talk) 22:03, 2 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  {{mpl|2006 HH|123}} 

message: Isn't G!kun only 600 km in radius? Please clarify this.PNSMurthy  (talk) 04:33, 21 July 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: That's its diameter. — kwami (talk) 09:25, 2 November 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  G!kun 

message: There are likely several asteroids that were once in HE, such as Vesta, Psyche, Eunomia, Iris. Cherry-picking the icy ones like Interamnia (if indeed it ever was in HE) and then commenting that they're "all" icy bodies strongly implies that the ex-DPs are icy bodies. That's a bizarre bias to introduce into the article when there is no reason for it, so I don't understand why people are edit-warring over it. Also, emphasizing the possibility that Hygiea may be an (ex)-DP, when it's round because it's disrupted, is weird. Sure, it might be, but since another explanation for its roundness is given, it's hardly such a great candidate that it needs to be singled out. — kwami (talk) 09:21, 2 November 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  bias in asteroid belt 

message: What does "identified by IAU" mean? The table and preceding section cites the 2022–2023 annual report as evidence that IAU identifies Quaoar as a dwarf planet. The report does mention Quaoar, and calls it a dwarf planet, but that's mainly because the paper it quotes does so in its title. Should this be seen as endorsement, or is it mainly a report of what the literature is doing? Is IAU expected to not report literature that disagrees with its definition, to avoid confusion? I'd much prefer a secondary source here, rather than the interpretation of Wikipedia editors! For 2015 RR245, we seem to care just as much about what others (in this case, the AGU) are claiming about IAU, rather than what IAU itself is saying about the matter. That's not "identification by IAU", in my opinion.
I only find the column "identified by IAU" useful as a reference for the "official" dwarf planet status. Right now, it's not that. Renerpho (talk) 13:36, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Table, "identified by IAU"
Talk:Genital jewellery

message: Having difficulty finding any reference sources useful in terms of definition of what items constitute valid genital jewellery. However, several sources do use the term, in a manner implying general understanding of the term as descriptive of (at least some of) the objects described in the article. eg. 
* Australasian Society for HIV Medicine, Vol 15., Issue 4., October 2006 
* Richard Crosby et.al. Slips, breaks and ‘falls’: condom errors and problems reported by men attending an STD clinic International Journal of STD and AIDS (2008). 
Other than these, and those already cited in the article, most search results are for sales of these items - where catalogue lists include most, if not all of the items indicated in the article. 
Per the deletion discussion, probably worth holding on to the article to allow additional (useful) references to surface. Best wishes --Haruth (talk) 03:18, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Reading references that have been posted so far, there doesn't seem to be much about jewellery as much as passing mentions related to genital piercing, which is why I boldly made the redirect despite surviving the AfD (without sources to prove notability!). Seems to me, with the lack of material on genital jewellery, the proper course of action should be to merge any relevant content to genital piercing, as its own section, unless there's enough sources to show that genital jewellery not involving piercing exists and is notable.--70.80.234.196 (talk) 12:00, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Reference Sources

message: I can't help but get the feeling that this article exists solely to display the inordinate (yes, three can be inordinate) number of photos that current make up the bulk of the page. Even Wikipedia should be better than this.--172.190.185.19 (talk) 01:18, 18 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Come on! 

message: The unsourced suggestion that “some genital jewelry has been around since the Victorian times” is a plain myth and should be removed from the page. There is no historical evidence for Prince Albert to have had such a piercing and the earliest attribution of such a piercing is attested to the 1960s or 1970s. 2600:1700:C430:22A0:75B6:A213:21F2:46A1 (talk) 17:01, 7 April 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Prince Albert myth
Talk:Humbler (BDSM)

message: This content previously posted under 'Medical Dangers' has been removed, pending sourcing:
Because of the strong muscles and substantial mechanical advantage of the legs, this device can cause permanent physical damage. Damage can also occur if worn for an extended period of time—all the other dangers of the use of testicle cuffs and other forms of physical restraint also apply to this device.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dkalweit (talk • contribs) 07:08, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
Talk:Dum Dum Diddle

message: "Dum Dum Diddle" was a single released by the band ABBA in Argentina to promote their 1976 album Arrival."
I rephrased that slightly - ABBA never chose "Dum Dum Diddle" as a single, they wanted each country to choose their own singles. It would be interesting to see how successful that approach was in this case - was "Dum Dum Diddle" a hit single in Argentina? Juryen (talk) 11:00, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
Talk:The Magic Comic

message: I've never seen this new Magic comic which was supposed to launch last year, does it even exist!?! If not, somebody please remove it from the article. If it does, cite a source. Digifiend (talk) 12:58, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Removed, thanks for the information. ☺  Spiby  ☻ 13:08, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  New Magic 

message: The only external link on this page, http://www.thebeanocomic.com, appears to be an obsolete link. Says something about the domain being for sale... Digifiend (talk) 09:23, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  thebeanocomic.com 

message: To the unregistered user who added this, use the sandbox in future please? I've had to remove the unneeded header. Digifiend (talk) 12:15, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Headline text section 

message: I have removed this from :Category:Magazines established in 1939 and :Category:Magazines disestablished in 1979 as a) Calling the The Magic Comic a Magazine seems a bit of stretch and b) It is already covered by :Category:1939 comics debuts and :Category:1979 comics endings Dunarc (talk) 21:41, 27 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Categories
Talk:HMS Brazen (H80)

message: Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: http://www.naval-history.net/xGM-Chrono-10DD-15B-Brazen.htm. Infringing material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.) For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you.  Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 05:06, 1 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copyright problem removed
File talk:Caboolture-railway-line-map.png

message: Greetings, I found this image and noticed that there is an error. I live near Narangba Station, which is on the Caboolture line, and travel to Brisbane quite regularly. The Station "Nudgee" should actually be Nundah. Refer to the Queensland Transport "TransLink" site for a map of all of the QR CityTrain network. Cheers, GlidingRon (talk) 11:18, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
Talk:Pandora's Box (BDSM)

message: I would like to suggest that this article be nominated for deletion because there are no reliable sources verifying the notability of this facility. As it stands it looks like an advertisement. - Stillwaterising (talk) 22:59, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nomination for Deletion 

message: The first EL (second was removed as being against wp:el as a photo gallery) could be reworked and used as a source.  It still looks like an advertisement to me and will need more sources. - Stillwaterising (talk) 03:18, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sources
Talk:Hunac Ceel

message: See Wik Chichen Itza ("This long-held chronology, however, has been drastically revised in recent years. As archaeologists improve their knowledge of changes in regional ceramics, and more radiocarbon dates arise out of ongoing work at Chichen Itza, the end of this Maya capital is now being pushed back over 200 years. Archaeological data now indicates that Chichen Itza fell by around AD 1000.[7- E. Willys Andrews] This leaves an enigmatic gap between the fall of Chichen Itza and its successor, Mayapan. Ongoing research at the site of Mayapan may help resolve this chronological conundrum.")
This places the whole story of HC into a problematical light.
(I wrote the HC article and this note)Kdammers (talk) 02:54, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Issues

message: It seems the link recently added is "simply" material taken from this article itself. Kdammers (talk) 12:10, 26 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  unnecessary link?
Talk:BMC B-series engine

message: Its an "Austin" engine begun at the time of the creation of BMC that was first used in Morris vehicles MG Magnette and Morris Cowley. So - why Austin? Eddaido (talk) 10:02, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Austin?? that must be wrong 

message: Should include the Austin/ Morris 1800 ADO17.
S C Cheese (talk) 11:50, 28 May 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cars in which it was used
Talk:NATO Eurofighter and Tornado Management Agency

message: I would contest that NETMA, or anyone else, has copyright of these two English language sentences or the facts they contain.
The first create attempt was based on a copy of the reference source for reasons of accuracy. Had I not inserted the web page link, this page would not, or course, have been considered for automatic speedy deletion. So perhaps unreferenced page creation followed by a series of small edits is safer, if not more efficient?
:It was a direct copy and paste, try and expand and add your own words to the phrases <B>RT  </B>| <B>Talk</B> 11:49, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  No, it was not a direct copy and paste. It was edited with my own words and phrases. But that's beside the point. The issue is that a few declarative sentences of English, which contain agreed facts, cannot necessarily enjoy copyright protection just because they aleady appear on a webpage. Maybe a whole essay or a detailed technical description could, but not a few ordinary sentences. Wittlessgenstein (talk) 11:57, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: The NATO Handbook (cited) expands NETMA as "NATO EF 2000 and TORNADO Development Production and Logistics Management Agency". Do we know that our shorter version is correct?
Grant (talk) 11:33, 1 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: The Eurofighter site calls it "NATO Eurofighter and Tornado Management Agency (NETMA)", so the term is in use. - BilCat (talk) 11:59, 1 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: But that site says "For more information, see Nato/Netma". And that expands NETMA consistently as "NATO EF 2000 and Tornado Development, Production & Logistics Management Agency". I think we should at least mention the fuller version. Grant (talk) 16:53, 7 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I've no problem with citing both definitions, as both organizations are credible sources. I do note that government organizations are notouriously slow at updating their sites with current information, but a cite is a cite. - BilCat (talk) 16:59, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

text: "EF 2000" is obviously out of date and "Development Production and Logistics" looks like nothing more than corporate window-dressing. Such large organizations, certainly military ones, are also notorious for contrived and banal acronyns. But, yes, agree both should be included here somehow. Wittlessgenstein (talk) 18:04, 13 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Expansion of abbreviation
Talk:Volvo Modular engine

message: A few source links
* http://volvospeed.com/vs_forum/index.php/topic/127047-need-help-is-this-c70-a-lpt-or-hpt/page__p__1701110&#entry1701110
* http://apps.volvocars.us/ownersdocs/2001/2001_VIN-VIC/vic2001.html
Jdavid net (talk) 17:23, 31 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  source links 

message: this is missing many american engines too, it appears to only cover newer versions.
* B5252FS was a 2-valve 2.5L 5 cyl version used on select early 850s
* B5254FS was a 4-valve 2.5L 5 cyl version used on select early 850s
* B5234FT
* B5234T4
* B5234T5  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.101.82.47 (talk) 10:48, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  missing many engines 

message: I've added quite a few engines, but there are clearly a lot more that need adding, and things such as standardization of the naming need improving (ie, whether Volvo S70 or S70 is the text shown). Lukeno94 (talk) 22:03, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Improvements 

message: It appears there is contention as to when the VVIS system was discontinued from the naturally aspirated cars. I have provided 2 primary sources, both from Volvo cars that the system was used right up to year model 1997 although this has been called insufficient by another party who I can only assume believes that since the system was discontinued in the US in 1994 then no other country can be taken into consideration. I'm not sure if it's actually theoretically possible but can someone find a source for the continued use of the VVIS system more reliable and trustworthy than Volvo cars?Lotsofmagnets (talk) 23:11, 10 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  VVIS system
Talk:Guldize

message: In the article it states "The earliest reference to Guldize was in 1602 by Richard Carew in his Survey of Cornwall.[3]" The citation contains no page number, and using digitised copies of Carew's Survey of Cornwall available via archive.org and Google Books I can't find any reference to the word Guldize at all. I have found an email on RootsWeb that points out that Jenkin (himself often guilty of omitting/confusing references!) remarks that:
Richard Carew in 1602, in his "Survey of Cornwall", although the Cornish language was still widely spoken, fails to use the Cornish term, Gol Deis or Feast of Ricks even though that term or variants of it were still in use in the 20s and 30s eg Gooldize, Goolandize and Dicklydize.
Can anyone else verify?
--Electric Antiquarian (talk) 15:58, 29 September 2017 (UTC)
Talk:Population model

message: This sections seems useless unless the reader is already aware of the identity of each variable. This section needs to define each variable before using it in an equation. Unfortunately I do not know what the variables are and so cannot do this myself, instead I ask that someone with some knowledge in the field add the identity of each variable just prior to their use in each of their equations. 
Fildon (talk) 13:44, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Equations 

message: "Population modeling is an application of differential equations to the study of changes in populations."
This is not true. Models of population growth might as well consist of difference equations, or be agent based or individual based.
--OpenScience (talk) 21:29, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  What is population modeling?
Talk:Central Point Software

message: The utilities that were shipped with PC-DOS 6 and 7 were from Central Point Software, in much the same way that Microsoft included Norton Software in their MS-DOS.  Whereas the Microsoft stuff was feature-reduced of the current norton version, PC-DOS shipped with full copies of older versions. --Wendy.krieger (talk) 09:24, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  PC-DOS 

message: I've fixed the release dates for the earliest versions, and specified the platforms.  The previous text made it appear as if CopyIIPC (the IBM PC/compatible version) was released in June 1981, when the IBM PC itself wasn't even announced until 2 months later... 79.178.184.72 (talk) 13:12, 5 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Release dates 

message: "CPS licensed the Mirror, Undelete, and Unformat components of PC Tools to Microsoft for inclusion in MS-DOS versions 5.x and 6.x as external DOS utilities. CPS File Manager was ahead of its time, with features such as view ZIP archives as directories and a file/picture viewer."
XTree, which Central Point acquired in 1993, had many of these same features (file viewing, ZIP viewing, Undelete).  Was the excellent File Manager that was included in PC Tools for Windows based on XTree?  Even if it was originally developed in-house, were any of its features added to it from XTree?  If so, that would be worth noting.  (And if not, then what — if anything — did Central Point actually get out of the XTree acquisition?)
2001:5B0:24FF:3CF0:0:0:0:32 (talk) 06:29, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Features from XTree? 
Talk:Quadrat im Kreis

message: I consider this song a very important one on this album. As for the lyrics, I looked it up in the album's booklet, so they are perfectly fine.
--Strobeshot (talk) 11:56, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi. There are specific notability guidelines to cover articles on Wikipedia. Song articles are governed by the guidelines at WP:MUSIC. If the song is a single or has significant press coverage, it may be notable enough for an article, but sources are necessary to verify that. As the lyrics, the question isn't whether they are correct, but whether they are legal. Wikipedia's copyright policies forbids using them unless the copyright owners (usually the band or a managing company) have released them for such use or unless they are in public domain (like with three hundred year old sea chanties). With songs on albums, this is seldom the case. I have redirected the article to the album article rather than delete it. You may wish to focus your attentions there, since the album article is currently also in need of some development. :) --Moonriddengirl (talk) 13:58, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  All right, I understand now, thank you. I will focus there first :) --Strobeshot (talk) 18:54, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
Talk:Spiritual book club

message: I added the "notability" tag to this article last month, coincidentally within minutes of someone else adding an "unencyclopedic" tag. The latter tag was just removed on the grounds that it had not been discussed.
Lack of discussion is not really a good reason for removing such tags. In any case, maybe I can help explain some of the issues with "Spiritual Book Club".
The article is largely definitional, mostly involving what an SBC is. This is contrary to Wikipedia policy. It desperately need a good discussion of the value of such clubs, as well as any available contrary opinions. It also needs better references to demonstrate "notability". References showing the existence of one or more clubs are not particularly useful in this way, but rather references discussing these clubs in general, their history, how they are organized, and similar factual information about them are needed. In other words, if people are talking about the concept of spiritual book clubs, then such discussions help show notability. If they are merely talking about the existence of such groups, then such a reference is not nearly as useful. Tim Ross·talk 11:56, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Some sources would help and wikifying the rest and I agree the notability tag seems most appropriate. If those issues are addressed would be an excellent start. I think notability is a priority here. Benjiboi 22:31, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

text: I mostly concur although it might have been more diplomatic to gain a consensus before effective removing the article. Did you attempt to merge usable material to the target article? I still think there is more to the subject and we simply haven't found it yet but as the main article develops perhaps that will be more evident. Banjiboi 19:40, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Problems