lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:NetIQ

message: This page was listed on Wikipedia:Votes for deletion in May, 2004. The result of that discussion was to keep the article. For an archive of the discussion, see Talk:NetIQ/Delete.
----
Although purchased by Attachmate, NetIQ and Attachmate have not merged to become one entity in North America and the company operates as a separate entity and lists itself as An Attachmate Business. Outside of North America NetIQ has become a brand within the Attachmate portfolio. Shephardd (talk) 17:34, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

message: This article seems to be nothing but an advertisement for NetIQ.  Unless others object within the next couple of days, I plan to redirect it to Attachmate.  Please speak up soon.  Thanks.  --Art Smart Chart/Heart 14:58, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay, without objection, I'm redirecting this article to Attachmate.  Thanks.  --Art Smart Chart/Heart 22:13, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

text: I'm sorry, I object. NetIQ, although owned by Attachmate, is an autonomous company. Let's edit to be all fact, removing the 'advertising'. Outright deletion seems harsh. If no objection will reinstate and edit out what looks like spin Shephardd (talk) 15:46, 18 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I also object. Have a look at the company's website: it still operates completely autonomously. Attachmate, Novell and NetIQ are owned by a private holding company, The Attachmate Group. I've now created the latter article to clear up the ambiguity. Scopecreep (talk) 16:03, 13 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  This article clearly needs to be deleted 

message: The text in this section is corporate-speak from marketing to the user, not in very neutral encyclopedic tone. Most of the references in this section seem to be based on promotional sources, closely associated with the subject. There might be a question of notability as well. A rewrite is needed. 80.221.159.67 (talk) 19:38, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
replies: text:  The list of products listed in the article, and their descriptions, are more in line with other Wiki articles. Pi314m (talk) 04:02, 28 May 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Neutral point of view in "products and services" section 
Template talk:Politics of Germany

message: Hello, I as a resident of Germany think that the template should be slightly corrected. Angela merkel may not lay back on the chancellor's seat, since she still needs to be affirmed by parliament. Officially, Gerhard Schröder is still chancellor, even though Mrs. Merkel is highly probably the next Head of Government.
:I agreeElectionworld 21:39, 25 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Angela Merkel 

message: Hello, in the template there is on obvious mistake and one disputed:
# Obvious: The Federal Convention (Germany) is not part of the Legislature because it votes on no law.
# Disputed:
#* The Federal Constitutional Court 2014 (highest court of Germany) states, that the President of Germany is not part of the executive:
#*: German: "Der Bundespräsident lässt sich nach der Ausgestaltung seines Amtes nicht einer der drei klassischen Gewalten zuordnen".
#*: Translation: "The Federal President cannot classified to one of the classical three powers according to the Organisation of his office".
#* But there is a dissent opinion by Manfred G. Schmidt 2005:
#*: German: "An der Spitze der Exekutive in Deutschland stehen der Bundeskanzler als Regierungschef und der Bundespräsident als Staatsoberhaupt".
#*: Translation: "At the top of the executive in Germany are the Federal Chancellor as head of government and the Federal President as head of state".
Habitator terrae (talk) 23:20, 10 April 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Now it is corrected by me. Habitator terrae (talk) 17:30, 11 April 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Federal Convention (Germany)|Federal Convention]] and [[President of Germany]]
Talk:International Prize Court

message: What are "Prize cases"?  Legal cases having to do with prizes like the Nobel Prize?  That surely can't be what this was about, but the article doesn't really say otherwise.  Jimbo Wales 09:46, 20 May 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Subsequent edits have expanded the article, also an introductory sentence has been included to clarify the general scope of the entity. Ellsworth 00:43, 13 Feb 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: What are prize cases?
Talk:Northern Counties East Football League

message: This should really be at Northern Counties East Football League —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 194.80.193.160 (talk • contribs) 10:19, 20 May 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: I have added the official logo of this league into the article. This improves the quality of this article further. --Siva1979Talk to me 10:17, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Added image 

message: The map seems to show a Premier league team in Bridlington, but they aren’t in the list. 2601:4C4:C300:13E0:C84F:B8CC:6EF9:D12B (talk) 21:58, 23 April 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is the map wrong?
Talk:Carriacou and Petite Martinique

message: There are huge overlapping between these rwo articles: Carriacou and Carriacou and Petite Martinique. Vanjagenije (talk) 01:57, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Carried over from merge discussion at Carriacou Skinsmoke (talk) 03:42, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, merge completed. Cheers, thanks for cleaning up some loose ends. --NickPenguin(contribs) 04:55, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge proposal 

message: "With its 586 acres (2.37 km2) and population of 900, it is smaller than Carriacou. Petite Martinique is much smaller, comprising about 9.8% of the total area and 30% of the entire population which is estimated at 10,000."
This would put PM's population at 3,000, not 900.  Also, earlier in the article, it says Carriacou's population (in 1991 - is there no more recent estimate?) is around 4,500.
The area given for Carriacou Island (alone) is 34 km2.  Petite Martinique's area is given as 2.37km2.  2.37 is approximately 6.5% of the total area, not 9.8% as stated in the article.
In short, somebody has seriously messed up with these figures. 92.15.204.69 (talk) 04:22, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed. I found a good reference at Grenada's government homepage. Interestingly enough they referred to this page, which also has an updated population figure. I nevertheless went with the first source's older data since the validity of the governmental site is much more evident than that of the latter site. -- Lejman (talk) 15:40, 21 December 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Population & area figures

message: What happened to the Steele reference?   The link doesn't go anywhere.
  21:39, 3 March 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Steele
Talk:Instamatic

message: It would help to edit your postings before making them public.  For example:
The first model released in the US was basic the Instamatic 100 model.
:And it would help if you would edit a simple error like that rather than complaining and leaving it. Fixed now. Boffy b 10:34, 2004 Dec 19 (UTC)
The following statement was deleted from the article, since no patents for the Instamatic (or any other invention) appear under this name:
"The inventor of the Instamatic Camera was Douglass Coate Harvey Sr. He died Friday, Sept. 26th at 1:20am."
Several patents for the Instamatic appear under the name Dean McCormack Peterson, who is correctly identified earlier in the article as the lead designer of the camera. Tony092357 (talk) 15:16, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Comments of 2004–2008
Talk:Public health

message: I have just reworked the first third of the article after I had a video call with Tom Crook where he explained some of the overarching concepts of public health (with an emphasis on the activities in Britain in the 18th and 19th century); I have cited his book in a few places now. I realised that the lead was pretty good but that much of the content of the lead was actually not really contained in the main body. This meant that the lead was not an actual summary of the article. I have tried to improved on that now. I have set up new sections (which still need to be filled more) as follows: Definitions and purposes, 1.1 Definition, 1.2 Related terms, 1.3 Purposes, 1.4 Characteristics and components, 2 Methods, 3 Priority areas, 3.1 Original focal areas, 3.2 Changing and differing focal areas. Please note I am not an expert in public health. My background is in sanitation. So forgive me if I got anything wrong, and please help me to correct anything that is wrong. EMsmile (talk) 08:43, 7 June 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: I have also added a paragraph to the lead which is meant to summarise the history section (not easy to do). Perhaps I put too much there now about England?  please help me get the one summarising paragraph about the two history sections quite right? The lead is meant to be 4 paragraphs long and summarise the entire article. That's why I felt some summarised content about the history section ought to be in the lead as well. Thanks. EMsmile (talk) 08:43, 7 June 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reworked the first third of the article and the lead

message: :: For inspiration purposes, I add here the images that were previously in the lead (the last one was never in the lead but was discussed in 2016; strange that they were all "historical"). These images are all included in the main body of the article now. EMsmile (talk) 09:36, 6 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Historical images for inspiration purposes

message: — Assignment last updated by Hxa056 (talk) 16:44, 27 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: Race in America, sec 1
Talk:Occupational therapist

message: I have added healthcare occupation to the category link of occupational therapist article and removed health sciences as it is an occupation article. I have added health science category to occupational therapy article. --Vincej 15:41, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  category 

message: Is there a way of making the columns down at the bottom closer together? --aishel 22:58, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: State OT Associations

message: Until now the talk page for occupational therapy redirected here to the talk page of occupational therapist.  I just separated the two.  --aishel 01:38, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Redirection link
Talk:Plastic surgery

message: The father of surgery are  susukta  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2409:4050:DC6:E36B:0:0:41CA:CC01 (talk) 04:40, 16 July 2022 (UTC)

message: It seems that that section of the Australian-focused page is a generic overview, it does not seem to discuss anything specific to Australia and would benefit from being merged here. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 04:13, 18 April 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge from [[Cosmetic_surgery_in_Australia#Types_of_cosmetic_surgery_available]] 

message: The description of the Walter Theo has two different stories. In one instance, it says the image shows him before surgery and the other is after surgery. Another instance states that one image is immediately after surgery, and the other is after more healing time from the surgery.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.76.210.44 (talk) 19:17, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Walter Theo Image 

message: I want to report in my classmates and teacher 124.217.120.238 (talk) 04:24, 20 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Topic research about plastic surgery 

message: I recently published a Wikipedia article on Snapchat dysmorphia and noticed this concept was mentioned within this article under the "Psychological Disorders" section, so I have linked the new article! I would appreciate any feedback on the Snapchat dysmorphia article. Please reach out if you have any questions/concerns. Thank you! - Jinnyjin123 (talk) 04:57, 17 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Request for feedback - March 17 2024
Talk:Urology

message: I have amended the subspecialties slightly, adding references and info to Endourology with a link to the international sub-specialty's website. 
I have changed the Urologic Oncology Management description, the management mode of cancers correlates with doctor's training, unfortunately, and not the other way round (which would be more logical but is untrue). 
--Ariolan (talk) 22:08, 13 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sections 

message: I have removed a link at the bottom of the page to paedophilia with the words (pediatric urology) in parentheses, because the page on paedophilia made no reference to urology.  If there is in fact more of a connection here beyond a few chuckles, it must be made more explicit.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.135.226.217 (talk) 05:58, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Paedophilia 

message: "Branches of urology" goes on and on about prostates and penes and then at the end there's a paragraph on "gynecologic urology", as if women were a special case of men. While this may reflect the sad state of urology in practice, urology as a medical field is about all urogenital variants alike.--87.162.20.28 (talk) 19:57, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Male-centric 

message: Do you think medical articles on WP should include information on to what extent the current practice is "Evidence-Based"? There is no critique in here on the effectiveness of the diagnostic and treatment methods of modern urology and whether or not urology is practiced strictly according to sound science.Herbxue (talk) 17:14, 30 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lack of Criticism Section 
Talk:Pulmonology

message: I have removed this text from the article: "This salary is not easily earned though. Pulmonologists, as well as all other types of physicians, are among the most training required of all jobs, however, they are probably some of the most rewarding of all jobs. Becoming a pulmonologist or other physician requires a huge commitment of time and money."
Although I agree with this (being a pulmonologist myself), this information is biased and does not belong in the article. Axl ¤ [Talk] 09:31, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I didn't even read the entire text that I had merged.  I agree that the removed information does not belong.  --Scott Alter 12:54, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Point of view" comments removed 

message: I think we should change the title of the article to 'Pneumonology', and redirect 'Pneumology' and 'Pulmonology' (both of which are incorrect titles). Refer to this journal article: http://www.chestjournal.org/content/121/5/1385.full
Basically, Pulmonology is incorrect because it mixes two languages: 'Pulmo' (Latin for 'lung') and 'logos' (Greek for 'speech' or logic'). 
'Pneumo' refers to air, whereas 'Pneumon' refers to lung. See the article for an in-depth discussion.
Garaiavu (talk) 05:45, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: "Pneumonology" is a word, but I do not believe it is necessary to change the title. Pneumology redirects here. It is not necessary to change the title, as all other terms for pulmonology can be redirected here.  Tyrol5  [Talk] 13:46, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

text: "Pulmo" and "logy" may be from different languages, but "pulmonology" is a derived term. I have never heard of "pneumonology." Tyrol5  [Talk] 21:31, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article Title Change 

message: I believe that this article is in need of cleanup. It has not been a very comprehensive or good quality article ever since its creation. More sources need to be referenced. A proper reflist needs to be added (I have very little experience with this), and last but certainly not least, the article needs to be set up so that it does not look like a list of concepts. Please feel free to help improve this article. One may wish to look at higher quality medical specialty articles such as Endocrinology for how to format the article. Please also see Wikipedia:Manual of Style (medicine-related articles). Thanks. Tyrol5  [Talk] 00:31, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article Cleanup 

message: I have a great interest in the management of cough. I would very happy to share my 35 years of experience in the management of cough with anybody who has the same interest.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 175.137.64.26 (talk) 22:21, 2 April 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Acute and Chronic cough: the need for effective treatment.
Talk:General surgery

message: This is the first Wikipedia article that I have looked at (and I have been browsing Wikipedia for over 4 years now) that specifies a concept amongst the [[English speaking world[[ as being applicable to both the non USA Anglosphere and the USA.  Well done to whoever contrbuted to this article !
Most articles (non universal English language) are written in the English language as if everyone in the English language used the articles term actually uses the term  (which is frequantly not the case) or the article concerned is written specifically fron a USA perspective.
This article is great ! 
--Ordew 15:46, 15 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think the last bit about training program was pretty US centric.  I decided to axe it-- not 'cause it was US centric, but because I don't think it has a place in Wikipedia.  Wikipedia is not a residency guide. Nephron  T|C 04:50, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Incredubke 

message: M.S/F.R.C.S
Some comments:
* How can that DUDE in COMABAT-DRESS can be in OT-HALL during OPERATION? No restriction? No OT-DRESS?
Good, atleast mask is there.
I think during "war time surgery" too, there should be "Surgical Etiquette"
Which country is that? 
Please, with all my respect, remove that picture. That will give negative information about/towards surgery.
(It certainly will give a lot of questions.) 
'''
Infact, according to my knowledge medical science related students/professionals do practice very complicated methods/procedures before, during and after surgical procedures.
* F.R.C.S is well defined here, what about M.S? 
And if possible please, explanation expected relating F.R.C.S and M.S.
Thanking you
(AnThRaX Ru 14:44, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  FRCS /M.S and picture 

message: I changed the phrasing "Causes less of chest complications" to "Causes a lower instance of chest complications..." under the Colorectal sub-headng.--Legomancer (talk) 17:03, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Minor Edit 11/10/2008 

message: "Pediatric surgery is a subspecialty of general surgery...."
:In many countries pediatric surgery is a subspecialty of general surgery but in some countries Pediatric surgery has its own speciality program apart from general surgery. It should be noted in the article.
"Pediatric surgery is 5–7 years of residency and a 2-3 fellowship"
:The sentence is not clear. It may be " Pediatric surgery is 5–7 years of general surgery residency and a 2-3 pediatric surgery fellowship". But it is not true for all countries again. Because in some countries pediatric surgery is a residency program after the medical school not fellowship after the general surgery. --Antmqr mesaj at 13:08, 13 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  About Pediatric Surgery Title 

message: I had assumed that this dates back to Nelson's time when the Royal Navy who I very strongly believe pioneered surgery, employed a 1st lieutenant in that role and he would be referred to as 'Mr'  JRPG (talk) 20:12, 12 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  "On award of the MRCS examination, surgeons may hold the title 'Mister' or 'Miss/Ms./Mrs' rather than doctor."
Talk:Limonium

message: I took the liberty of moving to the far more common name. It looks like some use "sealavender" for genus and "sea lavender" for species, but that's just asking for massive confusion - better to treat them as synonyms. (This is where we decide that WP's common name is breaking down and go with with Linnean names... :-) ) Stan 13:38, 20 May 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Fine by me, and thanks as ever for the courtesy of commenting.  It's one of those words I know orally rather than in writing anyway.  My original instinct was to write it as two words, but then I found ITIS made it one word - there seems to be a tendency to do similar things for quite a lot of plants when they become genus rather than species names, e.g. fiddleneck rather than fiddle neck, deathcamas rather than death camas.  I guess the thinking is that it helps when you then stick a further adjective in front - it makes it clear that the California Sealavender is a sealavender from California rather than a lavender from the California Sea; and from a Wikipedia point of view, writing it as a single word does reduces the scope for argument on the capitalisation front, if only by one letter!  But basically I'll get on with writing the text and let those who know more about it worry about spaces and caps.  seglea 17:37, 20 May 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm taking the liberty of moving it on to Sea-lavender (the orthography given in my books!), for the same reason Seglea makes, to show it is not a Lavender - MPF 09:57, 13 August 2005 (UTC)
Talk:Nosology

message: Is it:  -λογoς (-logos) or -λογία (-logia) ?
Could you check it again, please?
Logia (Ancient Greek: λόγια, singular: λόγιον, logion), meaning „remarks“, „speeches“
93.212.80.178 (talk) 18:12, 12 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  -λογoς (-logos)  or  -λογία (-logia) ? 

message: I added Nosography to redirect to here, as it is referenced in few articles.  I did this based on the apparently identical definitions.  The same question is raised at wiktionary for these terms.  However, this isn't my area of expertise, so I would appreciate someone with more confidence to confirm both here and at wiktionary on these terms.  You also might want to standardize all references to use "nosology" instead of "nosography" if they are strictly identical.  I am not confident enough to say that is what should be done. Sondra.kinsey (talk) 00:07, 29 June 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nosography
Talk:Hepatology

message: I proposed an organisation for hepatology diseases based on ICD-10. Comments? --Steven Fruitsmaak 19:50, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  classification 
Talk:Andrology

message: I believe it would be appropriate to mention that Acetyl L-Carnitine increases sperm motility in the Andrology article. Drrake (talk) 00:25, 29 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Acetyl L-Carnitine

message: Men's health and andrology seem to be the same thing.  At the moment both articles are short, covering different aspects of the field.  (One the medical, one publicity for the field).  Combining the perspectives might help grow this into a more full-fledged article. Zodon (talk) 10:11, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll go further and say that andrology is a subset of men's health, just like gynaecology is a subset of women's health.  Combining the articles so that andrology would redirect to men's health would be the only reasonable possibility, but I think there is enough material in andrology that it can stand alone -- it would probably have to be forked out of men's health anyway.  Accounting4Taste:talk 17:58, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  merge proposal 

message: Thanks for listing the most important andrological disorders. We need to know the 
frequency of occurrence of those disorders to get a better pictures. Could someone
please add the numbers.
THANKS. -- Michael Janich (talk) 10:06, 2 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Order of occurrence
Talk:Kilobyte

message: A lot of them from decades ago show examples of:  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Gaming_the_system   Not sure if anything of value was lost.  Some of them show historical documentation of attempting to re-revise history, ironically, enough.  That might be interesting.  47.221.237.206 (talk) 21:59, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Conveniently, 99% of sections on this talk page are hidden behind archives. 

message: This revisionist derp trying to pretend a kilobyte is 1000 bytes is offensive ignorant nonsense. It should be deleted. 46.7.188.106 (talk) 01:00, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. I had added information how popular software such as Firefox and Chrome use 1024 B = 1 KB 1024 KB = 1 MB and someone deleted it. This is when we need level headed moderators since I added facts and someone just deletes it without giving his reason. Vmelkon (talk) 03:53, 14 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nonsense