lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Practical equine psychology

message: [P0M:]  I think this article needs some work, wherever it finds a home. The problem is that when other people write stuff and don't cite their sources it is difficult to just wipe out some assertion on the suspicion that it is invalid. P0M 23:43, 18 Feb 2004 (UTC)

message: In fact, I have read that horses found it favorable to begin venturing close to establishments populated by man, and while they never requested being enslaved, they found themselves compatible with man through their curiosity and gregariousness. -- Bryan
The band stallion exists within a very clear dominance hierarchy. Below him are his harem, who among themselves, have established a rather clear pecking order. While the alpha mare is often responsible for directing the band to food and water and disciplining foals, the band stallion directs the band away from other stallions and away from danger. Additionally, the band stallion maintains a clear pecking order between himself and bachelor stallions after his mares. Furthermore, a pecking order exists between different bands, based in large part on the overall pecking order of the band stallion and the other band stallions. -- Bryan
The band stallion plays a role in ostracism, often at about the time his colts display a sexual interest in his mares. -- Bryan
:I think that is a different kind of ostracism. It's not "You'd better straighten up young man," it's "Leave now because you're cruising for a bruising." [P0M]
Monty Roberts is by no means the ultimate source for horse behavior. Stephen Budiansky, Margaret Cabel Self, J. Frank Dobie (his classic work The Mustangs), Moyra Williams, Tom Ainslee, Pat Parelli and Mark Rashid are excellent sources. -- Bryan
§ I certainly agree that Monty Roberts is not the ultimate source for horse behavior -- except for his discovery on how "negotiations" are conducted between the alpha mare and fractious colts.  I was unwilling to get started on cleaning up this article because of the authors that Bryan mentions I'm only familiar with one book by Margaret Cabell (sic) Self, and I didn't have the time to do all the research needed to set things to rights.  I at least made a list of the people whose names had popped up in my recent reading in Present-day proponents of establishing cooperative relationships between humans and horses, which I cobbled together out of other articles that had assertions that seemed to me to need a knowledgeable editorial hand.  I hope that Bryan or somebody else will straighten some of these things out. (I'm glad to see that Bryan agrees with my critiques at the top of this talk page, but that's my ego speaking I guess.)  P0M 03:53, 5 May 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: To summarize the points I interspersed in the above "dialogue":

message: I just merged what was left of this article into the Horse behavior article (what was left here was essentially a stub) and put this page as a redirect. No sense having two articles on essentially the same topic. Montanabw 00:03, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merged
Talk:Pink

message: does anyone know why pink should be regarded as a feminine colour? where does this symbolism originate from? --Cap 01:52, 13 Sep 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pink = Feminine 

message: An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect :FFC0DB and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at  until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.  –MJL ‐Talk‐☖ 07:08, 15 December 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  "FFC0DB" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]] 

message: So... Hello fellow Wikipedians! You might or might not have known about my edit which was basically changing from "color" to "shade [of red]". My edit was quickly reverted and I went to the Teahouse where they told me to go get a source, which I did! My arguments are:
1. Magenta is a secondary color according to the RGB/CYMK color scheme/wheel and Pink is a tertiary color, which the tertiary colors contain: Colors (Orange, Purple, Pink) and Shades (Chartreuse Green, Spring Green).
2. The F****NG fact that Pink is a shade is literally in the article description, quote "Pale tint [aka shade] of Red". If that doesn't prove it, I don't know what it is!
Goodbye fellow Wikipedians!
P.S.: Not related to the Pink/Magenta soon-to-be argument, but we shouldn't have a Austro-Hungarian flag. Like, ever again. 2001:8A0:DF58:401:AD25:4D6B:E599:6BF8 (talk) 14:44, 14 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pink vs. Magenta: Shades or Colors
Talk:List of show business families

message: Added some names but still not sure about:
*[1] the principal of order
*[2] how many members constitutes a dynasty? Would Liz Taylor be one? - Nunh-huh 01:30, 19 Feb 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: For that matter, shouldn't those already listed as a family not appear in the siblings section again? Lars T. 14:02, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I disagree. Imagine a journalist writer looking for a list of famous siblings, they would look there and find, for example, Joan Fontaine and Olivia de Havilland. But not now, Somebody removed them on the basis it was "duplicative" of the above family listings, which is plain silly. Wikipedia is supposed to be helpful, and not cause digging for info which could be missed. I propose that the "duplicative" entries be put back.  JohnClarknew 19:51, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: As someone who has been working in both theater and film for nearly thirty years, I can assure that 95% of those people with any success are related to SOMEBODY.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.194.22.53 (talk) 21:02, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: For which readers would it be unnecessary? Saga City (talk) 05:16, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Isn't the list, in general, unnecessary? 

message: What about Bruce and Laura Dern? Apace361 13:16, 24 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  At least one other omission
Talk:Shirley Strickland

message: Most reports had her dying on Tuesday 17 February. However, the obituary in The Australian of 18 February said she died on 16 February (with 17 February merely being the date on which her death was announced). Can anybody clarify or confirm either way? JackofOz 01:44, 19 Feb 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: The claim by the Australian seems correct, it is also mentioned in this article . Jeronimo 07:30, 19 Feb 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks.  Seems she really did die on 16 Feb, not 17 Feb as most sources would have it. JackofOz 22:15, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)
replies: text:  Actually died on 11 February, but body not discovered till 16 Feb.  --  Jack of Oz [your turn] 21:32, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Death
Talk:Interactive fiction

message: A discussion is taking place to address the redirect :Hugo (programming language). The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 April 18#Hugo (programming language) until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.  Jovanmilic97 (talk) 08:12, 18 April 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Hugo (programming language)" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]]
Talk:Loris

message: (Yes, this is a placeholder. I need to go write lots of primate articles, looks like)Vicki Rosenzweig
When you do, above is a picture of a Grey Loris, scanned from an 1882 encyclopedia for you to use - User:Malcolm Farmer
Moved the above from the article, incorporated the image into the taxobox. - UtherSRG 02:55, 19 Feb 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Picture

message: Does Loris and Lorisidae regard the same subject? --Rebel2 05:50, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: If you even looked, you'd see that Loris = Lorisinae, while Lorisidae = Lorisinae + Perodicticinae. In other words, one artcle is about a biological family, whily the other is about one side of that family. - UtherSRG (talk) 11:13, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Merging

message: I take it by reverting me you want some of these links red when articles actually exist? --kingboyk 20:36, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes; slender loris is not the same as Slender Loris on purpose. Same with slow loris and Slow Loris. Genus Loris is slender loris. Genus Nycticebus is slow loris. Individual species are capitalized. And if you notice, Slender Loris is not a species article, but a redirect to Red Slender Loris, etc. - UtherSRG (talk) 00:31, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: revert

message: Major oversight:  the article says nothing about these creatures' habitat -- where in the world do they live? 199.46.199.231 (talk) 18:59, 5 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Habitat

message: The article claimes there are 5 species, but lists 7. --Belg4mit (talk) 23:01, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for pointing this out.  It's been fixed.  We recently expanded the article Slow loris and most of its species articles, and recent literature suggests new species.  Don't be surprised to see a similar expansion for the slender lorises sometime in the near future. – VisionHolder « talk » 16:04, 21 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Varieties 

message: Hi, Is Lorinae another name for this subfamily? I've read this name in some papers. --Andresisrael (talk) 22:52, 8 August 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: According to this paper (pg. 100), the ICZN was asked in 1998 to rule on whether we should be using Loridae + Lorinae vs. Lorisidae and Lorisinae.  Unfortunately, the ICZN does not have all of its old cases in its online database, but given that the taxonomy seems to be based on the 3rd edition of MSW3 (2005), I would assume that it follows the verdict of ICZN. So to answer your question, yes, Lorinae appears to be a synonym of Lorisinae. – Maky « talk » 00:29, 9 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lorinae 

message: Why are we only showing a face from a 1904 depiction, as the article photo? Do we have to use Britannica or Google Search to get a photo of the Loris? It seems that way. Stevenmitchell (talk) 13:50, 2 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Photos of Loris?
Talk:Red slender loris

message: KIlled this section.  "In Popular Culture" sections are discouraged, and there was nothing in that section that wasn't already said in the Threats section.  128.114.60.40 (talk) 19:10, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: In Popular Culture

message: Why is this article Red Slender Loris and not red slender loris? WSU ENG 3040 W2006 20:53, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: WP:PRIM, which follows Wikipedia:WikiProject_Birds#Bird_names_and_article_titles. - UtherSRG (talk) 21:02, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh, OK. Thanks. WSU ENG 3040 W2006 21:47, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Why Red Slender Loris

message: Both the IUCN  and the EDGE  limit the distribution of Loris tardigradus to Sri Lanka (no India). --151.29.18.161 22:49, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Good point. This are recent splits. Making some changes appropriately. Shyamal 03:53, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Distribution: India? 

message: The same image is used for both the Red Slender Loris and the Gray Slender Loris  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.223.92.108 (talk) 22:10, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Image 

message: Is this one of the subspecies already mentioned?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/today/hi/today/newsid_8834000/8834223.stm  Rojomoke (talk) 10:02, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Horton Plains subspecies
Talk:Doctor Who (film)

message: Shouldn't the disambiguation point to the Dr Who and the Daleks page rather than the character? Someone might mix up the movies, but they're not going to mistake a movie for a lead character in a different movie. jamdav86 (talk) 19:31, 1 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Disambiguation
Talk:Galago

message: Should the term "genera"  in the taxobox be "species"? --Mishac 21:56, 21 Feb 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Genera

message: Just watching a very silly film with Wife and Daughter, and Wife askd how long Bush Babies live. "Not as long as that", I said as the starring bush baby swam out of the crocodile-infested water. But the question still stands. [...] Not a lot on the web in general, but | Primate Information Network gives ages between 12 and 16.5 years. I'll stick that in.
A Karley 13:25, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Lifespan

message: If "nagapie" is Afrikaans, shouldn't we give the pronunciation here, I'd guess it's something similar to IPA  (Nach-aahpih), not at all "nagga-pie", or any English equivalent... 惑乱 分からん 18:55, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Nagapie

message: I just read an article from Reuters, via Yahoo! Hunting chimps may change view of human evolution that says bush babies are prey for chimps.  I didn't read anything in this entry about this being true.  Can any one provide more info. or update? --HatchetFaceBuick 19:42, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Food Chain 

message: I noticed that the title of the pages is Galagidae, where as throughout the article its listed as Galagonidae (which is what both of my mammalogy textbooks list them as...  Are these terms interchangable?  If they are some sort of explanation should be included. Opendestiny (talk) 01:23, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: There has been some controversy as to which is the correct name to use. The ICZN and MSW3 say to use Galagidae, so we should follow suit. - UtherSRG (talk) 01:41, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Consistency of Family name 

message: Greetings, Since this topic is outside my knowledge, I did add Kalwe Galago into the "See also" line. It can/should be moved elsewhere to a better place. Asking for help here. Regards, JoeNMLC (talk) 20:57, 14 January 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Nupe. At first I thought it wasn't a valid article... We don't accept new mammal taxonomic articles until they are at least accepted by the IUCN or the ASM's MDD, and that doesn't happen until after they have been formally described. Further, the species is actually already described and is Grant's bushbaby and we've had an article for it for some time. - UtherSRG (talk) 21:18, 14 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Taxonomic classification and phylogeny - Kalwe Galago
Talk:Járnsaxa

message: I'm reading 'Myths of the Norsemen' by H.A Gueber which state Jarnsaxa was Thor's first wife married who bore him Magni and Modi. I was wondering where the 'mistress' angle comes from. We have to keep in mind that the norse were polygamists. Looking now at the Skaldskaparmal its also translated as '[XXI. "How should Sif be periphrased? By calling her Wife of Thor, Mother of Ullr, Fair-Haired Goddess, Co-Wife of Járnsaxa, Mother of Thrúdr.'http://www.sacred-texts.com/neu/pre/pre05.htm90.195.111.233 (talk) 19:21, 7 November 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Gueber's Myths of the Norsemen is a poor source on Norse mythology. You're likely to encounter all sorts of nonsense there. :bloodofox: (talk) 21:38, 7 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Gueber
Talk:Panbanisha

message: The material on Kanzi's tool-knapping should be moved to a page on Kanzi when we have one.  Note that this ability was demonstrated about 30 years ago in an orangutan, so we need to watch for inflated claims.  seglea 03:26, 19 Feb 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Why is this one page?  What do Panzee and Panbanisha have to do with each other?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Aaport (talk • contribs) 02:07, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Fixed. Now only about Panbanisha. Jack (talk) 17:28, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

text: True she is the adoptive half sister. Jack (talk) 17:28, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Comments 

message: This article is one of at least 16 articles on Wikipedia primarily about the fascinating but controversial subject of Great ape language. These articles have been created independently and contain much interesting but uncoordinated information, varying levels of NPOV, and differences in categorization, stubbing, and references. Those of us working on them should explore better coordinating our efforts so as to share the best we have created and avoid unnecessary duplication. I have somewhat arbitrarily put the list of 16 articles on Talk:Great ape language and would encourage us to informally coordinate efforts there. Martinp 18:02, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Multiple articles on great ape language 

message: Is the information that Panbanisha pulled a fire alarm at at the Great Ape Trust relevant and noteworthy enough to include in the article?  See this Yahoo! news article dated 10/23/2006.
:Probably not, but it's still hilarious! :) --Puellanivis 06:12, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recent news story: Panbanisha pulls fire alarm
Talk:Royal Marines

message: Regarding the Customs and traditions section, one of the photographs there shows a uniform that is out of date, Multi-Terrain Pattern (MTP). That can be removed and possibly replaced. Dreddmoto (talk) 14:28, 12 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Photographs 

message: Regarding the section titled Selection. The first photograph there is obsolete and is from 1996. It is not helpful in showing modern selection or training in the RM. It could be replaced with an image that is more recent. Suggestions would be welcome. --Dreddmoto (talk) 03:42, 26 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Photographs of selection and training 

message: Two views of what this article describes seem to exist.  One is that it describes solely the Royal Marine Commandos.  The other is that it describes the Royal Marines in general, starting with their history and moving forward to today and the foreseeable future.  This version includes obviously the commando portion.
I believe that the latter view is correct.  In order to avoid edit wars, could we reach a consensus about which is correct? Bluenose Gunner (talk) 14:11, 14 August 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I support the view that the article should describe the Royal Marines in general, starting with their history and moving forward to today and the foreseeable future. Dormskirk (talk) 17:10, 14 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Request for consensus 

message: you have repeatedly removed content, despite all the p&g that have been cited for you each time the content was reinstated. After the last time, you removed it again, without so much as a single word posted here. As such, I have started this thread for you, to give you an opportunity to explain your edit properly, instead of by way of very brief and vague edit summaries. - wolf 06:12, 15 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Commando Helicopter Force
Talk:Matthew Rogers

message: "a native of Rancho Cucamonga, CA, on the island of Maui"? I don't understand where he lives. Is it Hawaii or California? Puzzled, Meelar 05:24, 19 Feb 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Matthew Rogers is the host of a new show on the Discovery Channel called Really Big Things. Someone placed a delete tag on his profile because of his limited television appearances. Now since he is the host of a show which runs on a majoy cable network, deleting his profile doesn't make any sense. So I removed the tag. I sourced all info in the profile.
The2ndflood 10:38, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Removed Delete tag

message: Why was my update to this biography as well as an external link deleted?Sunfox (talk) 23:12, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  info deleted 
Talk:New World Order (video game)

message: This article should probably be at New World Order (computer game), a more standard disambig for computer games. Plus, when I saw the title for the first time, I thought it was referring to Illuminati: New World Order. --Mrwojo 05:25, 19 Feb 2004 (UTC)
Talk:Otago Peninsula

message: Thanks for the improvements, Meelar.
Anyone can see a bit more local material in the Zeal category I created: http://www.zeal.com/category/preview.jhtml?cid=10136693 
The Dunedin, New Zealand page itself has more detail.
:robinp 05:39, 19 Feb 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: There are two inline references to Anderson 1993, p. 7, but no source matching that year. I think it ought to be 1983, which is used a few sentences earlier. XLerate (talk) 09:09, 1 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reference typo 
Talk:Naïve empiricism

message: Naïve empiricism is original research, POV and completely made up by the original editors of the article.  Sorry to break the news.  Possibly the original editor(s) were confusing empiricism with naive falsification, a concept of the empirical method.  Possibly they were referring to some extremely obscure and long obsolete uses of the term from the 19th Century.  The arguments "for" and "against" it were essentially conjured up without any reasonable sourcing or other research. Most of the first paragraph was internally contradictory. Therefore, I will now remove most of its content...Kenosis 22:29, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Naïve empiricism is a commonly used term in philosophy of science.  However, the original article was totally wrong. --SecondSight 02:52, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

text: These usages just given are reasonable, IMO. To which we could add numerous and fairly widespread conflations of naive falsification and the numerous manifestations of the very fundamental, widely misunderstood concept of empiricism that have been thrown into the marketplace of ideas throughout the years.  The conflations, all told, are worse than, say scientism.  As a pejorative without widespread agreement about what it means, it's difficult to present an article under this title.  In light of the difficulties, I say "Very nice research, Delerium" ... Kenosis 08:58, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Naïve empiricism page, unfortunately, is in complete error