lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Kaolin deposits of the Charentes Basin

message: Looks like a copy-vio - what does that mean?
strange citations - they don't look strange, but they do need expanding (a refs section giving fuller citations). DuncanHill 14:59, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I replaced the tag as the article author had simply removed it without comment. It probably isn't a speedy candidate as is, but I would hope the contributing editor would clarify/explain here. Left a note on his/her talk to that effect. Propose changing speedy to cleanup tag. Vsmith 15:09, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

text: I wrote the above while you were writing your response Vsmith - would agree cleanup tag. DuncanHill 15:19, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: 
--Johnsoniensis (talk) 07:37, 1 August 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Speedy delete?

message: Should we remove the "Gibbsite" section or even the entire "Transformation during and after Sedimentation" section?  RJFJR (talk) 14:51, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Remove?

message: Are these Kaolin deposits of any commercial importance now or in the past?--Dthomsen8 (talk) 20:16, 21 July 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Commercial importance?
Talk:Ferdinand Heim

message: According to the discussion at the german wikipedia the quotes are highly questionable. There seems to be no reliable sources, only this Daily Mail article and copies of it. Someone should check it. --2A02:8070:78A:7500:35A3:3BA4:14FF:666A (talk) 00:31, 5 November 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: I replaced the Daily Mail cite to one from a book by Andrew Roberts (historian). Could you link to where the discussion is happening on de.wiki? K.e.coffman (talk) 00:46, 5 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Quotes
Talk:Hell ship

message: seems that someone has removed a lot from this article.  I see the first sentence as "The term hell ship mainly refers to the ships used by the  to transport   (POWs) out of the ,  and  during . The POWs were taken to , , , or  to be used as . In , they are now known as Jigoku sen (地獄船), with the same meaning."  But, when I looked at the revision history, the "current version" seemed to be correct, and not what I see when I look at the actual article.  Something seems screwy here, so I didn't revert or edit anything because I don't really know what I'm doing, but I thought I'd mention it. 98.218.190.191 (talk) 08:17, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Looks good to me—the article is fine. Wherever there was a link, your browser was showing you nothing, and I have no idea why. I've never seen that kind of problem with a browser. Maybe the link font color was the same as the background color? Binksternet (talk) 14:23, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  redactions? 

message: Is there any consensus on the proper style for this word? I generally see it written as either "Hell Ship" or "Hellship", but this article is titled "Hell ship". Just wondering before I made the change. Gibbative (talk) 16:13, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think it matters too much. Both "Hell Ship" (and I don't think it really should be a proper noun) and "Hellship" redirect to this article. howcheng  {chat} 06:32, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Correct title - "Hell ship", "Hell Ship" or "Hellship"? 
Talk:Kalmykian Cavalry Corps

message: "Unlike most other national "volunteer" divisions, the Kalmykian Cavalry Corps incorporated genuine volunteers willing to fight together with Germans. The other national divisions relied upon recruits from POW camps.[2] More Kalmyks fought in the Kalmykian Cavalry Corps than in comparable units of the Soviet army."
This passage looks like POV to me. The 110th Cavalry Division (Soviet Union) alone had more Kalmyks serving than the Kalmykian Cavalry Corps. While the first sentence basically accuses all Soviet collaborationists of acting under duress which is most certainly not true.--Catlemur (talk) 22:17, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Questionable Claims
Talk:Langenstein-Zwieberge

message: I have put some links in but the article still needs a lot of tidying up. Biscuittin (talk) 21:49, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tidy up 

message: a worthy article. it does need to be combed-through by native english speakers though. Cramyourspam (talk) 18:48, 13 May 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  english language tweaking needed
Talk:Emmet Otter's Jug-Band Christmas (book)

message: I am removing the redirect which was formerly here to Talk:Emmet Otter's Jug Band Christmas (TV show). This should be the talk page for the original story. --Metropolitan90 01:41, 15 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Redirect

message: Re this, my basis for putting  on the page was the inclusion of Kermit in the Muppet adaptation, as he is now a Disney character. But I'm not married to the idea; if Disney does not own the distribution rights, story, or original Muppet designs, the inclusion might be misleading. ▫ JohnnyMrNinja 03:31, 21 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Disney

message: I finally got the article split. The section for the TV program was tagged for some time.Thelimiter (talk) 16:32, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article Split 
Talk:List of civil parishes in Scotland

message: I am thinking this article might be better placed at Civil parishes of Scotland
It seems to include the best description we currently have of the origin, nature and history of the Scottish civil parish
Laurel Bush (talk) 18:37, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Have a look at WP:LIST. This article is pretty much a "stand alone list with a lead section". I have a feeling that I created an article once (2 or 3 years ago) in a similar format to this which was quickly renamed as "List of..." Can't remember what it was. I also recall WP:LAUNDRY project members slapping tags on some articles I worked that were list-heavy. I suppose the best thing to do is take the text from the lead and actually write an article about civil parishes! Lozleader (talk) 19:11, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

text: I am going to have a go at tackling the parishes article: I am currently trying to get my head around quoad sacra, quoad civilia and quoad omnia: it would appear that the parish quoad civilia is the forerunner of the civil parish, so may need to push the start date back a bit Lozleader (talk) 17:18, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Move article? 

message: It is not listing the civil parishes, it is listing the villages in parishes, surely? I found the Parish of Clyne, at ] seems to be about 24 miles long by a 4 miles wide, and has a couple of vilages.scope_creep (talk) 00:16, 14 February 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Parishes

message: The intra-page links in the "Contents" box at the top of this page do not work. More specifically, they don't work on my Mac, regardless of which browser I use.  I'll mention Safari as an example, which is version 11.1 under macOS 10.13.4.  I do not have access to a Windows system to compare results.  I will not presume to know how to fix this myself, so I'm hoping somebody else can perform the necessary edits.  I don't know if this type of functionality is even possible when a table is involved.
--AkloVarit (talk) 21:46, 4 May 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Contents links problem 

message: Can the figures from the 2021 census be added? Jackiespeel (talk) 11:30, 14 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Population
Talk:Office of War Mobilization

message: can some one please make this better i would appreciate it. Drrake 03:21, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: November 25 1942: Congressman Tobin urges President Roosevelt to establish Office of War Mobilization.
New York Times, November 26 1942 page 1: Nelson Lays Case Before President
https://timesmachine.nytimes.com/timesmachine/1942/11/26/83890544.html
https://timesmachine.nytimes.com/timesmachine/1942/11/26/83890544.html?pageNumber=1 Kyle Andrew Brown (talk) 20:40, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Army Navy v Civilian Control of War Mobilization
Talk:17th Panzer Division (Wehrmacht)

message: Why is the 1943 book being labelled "propaganda"? The article gives no hint. Is any history published in Germany during the war going to be dismissed as propaganda? Many divisions published histories which would naturally not have benefited from deep study of enemy archives, etc. - this would be natural during wartime, and the Allies did this as well. Also, the Germans (and Allies also) published yearbooks, etc. I'm not sure calling them "propaganda" is all that accurate as they were intended for the soldiers themselves rather than for widespread distribution.139.48.25.60 (talk) 19:38, 19 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I think, most books and movies about the war, published during the war, would qualify as propaganda, no matter from which side. As a matter of fact, in my opinion, most war movies made after the war still qualify for it, too. In the case of the book in this article, while I havn't read it, I had a browse through it and it seems propagandistic to me. EA210269 (talk) 01:03, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

text: show me a "wartime military book" which is not "propagandistic". Of course these books or other publications were propaganda, what else. Self-evident. ("wartime propaganda book", is somewhat like a round circle,  a pleonasm). --213.172.123.242 (talk) 17:22, 17 May 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Propaganda  
Talk:Liberation Front of the Slovene Nation

message: I noticed there's no mention of the expulsion of Germans from Slovenia at the end of the war by these partisans. I believe it's an important thing to note, that these people did. This is a reference: https://web.archive.org/web/20091001022039/http://cadmus.iue.it/dspace/bitstream/1814/2599/1/HEC04-01.pdf 2601:647:4480:BB10:A444:5B9F:8952:67B6 (talk) 19:36, 20 January 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  No mention of the expulsion of the German minority in Slovenia
Talk:Joseph Dodge

message: You've done an excellent job of expanding the article! Very impressive. You've made solid improvements with all the individual sections, and your structure so far makes it plain you're no newbie to Wikipedia. It's clear you know your stuff and have put a lot into your research. 
Here's just a few things to note:
-In the introduction, you misspelled "MacArthur" as "MacArther". A quick fix. This misspelling is repeated again in the "Personality" section. 
-Also in the "Personality" section, you might want to consider that having comments in brackets within the quote makes it a bit confusing, and I think the brackets interrupt the flow of the paragraph. Instead, you may want to try removing what you put in parenthesis from the quote and somehow incorporating your own words afterwards. That way the whole section wouldn't be a quote, and you could expand a bit more on the traits listed, if possible to do so. Roseice8 (talk) 01:25, 21 November 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Peer Review

message: An impressive amount of progress has been made to this article. Showing individually which countries Dodge had worked in was a good touch.
A thought is that the personality section could be merged with personal life and career since it’s not particularly detailed thus far.
Perhaps it is unnecessary to say that he started as a “simple” messenger boy.
The part on Dodge taking up boxing feels a little choppy, perhaps it can be revised.
The part saying "even when it meant treading on toes here and there” seems somewhat colloquial and the quote following it could use a name attached to it outside of the reference.
The part saying Dodge "proposed a 90% currency reduction, coupled with capital levies on real property to even out the burden of defeat." does not really need to be in quotation marks.
Maybe “liberal oppression” could be reworded to be more neutral.
I hope my suggestions lead to some help! Vanstraiten (talk) 00:53, 22 November 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Second Peer Review
Talk:Niland brothers

message: Not that this really matters, but was Preston a 1st or 2nd lieutenant? ÇɧĭДfrĪĔпd12 16:53, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: 2nd lieutenant. --Ye Olde Luke (talk) 02:50, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Does anyone know what happened to the surviving Niland brothers? 217.110.40.18 (talk) 10:29, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled (2)

message: The article says one brother found out about the deaths of his brothers after being shipped back to England, then says he was shipped back to England because of this. Can this be clarified, please? — Preceding unsigned comment added by KageTora (talk • contribs) 01:37, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: In Band of Brothers it says he received word while in Normandy and received the transfer there. A transfer stateside would have gone through England as a matter of course. 131.96.212.196 (talk) 17:00, 10 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Where did he find out about his brothers? 

message: The article references Sampson but in such a way as it's not obvious to the reader what his role was nor why his biographical data would be important.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.150.43.74 (talk) 02:22, 7 April 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Came here to post the same as above. Hope someone knowledgeable can fix it. Brhiba (talk) 05:30, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Curious omission of Francis Sampson
Talk:3rd Panzer Army

message: The colours identifying the various units are not visible. Can this be fixed?
Asd36f (talk) 01:46, 30 June 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: May be a browser or computer issue.  They display on Firefox on my PC. W. B. Wilson (talk) 07:14, 30 June 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Colours not visible on May 1945 map
Talk:Pork tenderloin

message: I suggest the title and references within the artical be changes to describe a Pork Tenderloin sandwich.
DCwom 2/22/07
----
Isn't this just a cut of meat like beef tenderloin?  I swear I've bought these at farmers' markets before.  How does it derive from Wiener schnitzel, a veal-based food? -- goatasaur 15:19, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Isn't this a Sandwich? 
Talk:Jäger Report

message: The actual sortable table designed by  is excellent. It provides all available figures from the Report. The only problem – and I mean – serious deficiency, are the names of locations which are NOT from the Report, therefore they can neither be compared with a photocopy of the original text, nor quoted in their original form. The approach to locations (as of now) constitutes an example of ahistoricism in our coverage of the Holocaust. We do have the tools to improve on it. For example, the redirect pipes should be used instead of the 21st century toponyms in quoting place-names used by Jäger in his Report: Dünaburg instead of Daugavpils, Novo-Wilejka instead of Naujoji Vilnia, and so on, per the source which is being quoted here. Thank you, Poeticbent talk 16:48, 21 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Re: Jäger Report table
Talk:Maquis des Glières

message: This is in need of dire work. It's not wiki, it's not historical, it reads like an excerpt from a thriller. 203.122.219.178 18:03, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It was perhaps more exciting before, but now its wikified Mujinga (talk) 18:26, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Cleanup

message: this was depicted with veterans acting in a pierre schoendoerffer movie, i don't remember if it was Là-haut (above the clouds) or l'honneur d'un capitaine (a captain'honor). thanks for checking (i don't have the dvds here). Cliché Online (talk) 11:20, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: in fiction

message: Te article seems to have variety of sentence which are not appropriate for an encycloped in style and tone. That should be addressed together with the sourcing issue.--Kmhkmh (talk) 22:10, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: style, npov
Talk:Operation Majestic

message: The idea that Majestic was part of Pastel deception plan is not supported by the (all now) declassified primary material not by any peer reviewed secondary source Downfall specialists. The claim it was part of Operation Pastel I or II occurs in some unsourced material on the web, and unfortunately in several places on Wikipedia.
What 'Operation majestic' is, is simply a very late stage renaming of Downfall's 'Olympic' when in a incident known to cryptography historians, Olympic was sent nearly in he clear and the name was suspected to have been possibly compromised. 
AS Olympic name was compromised just a couple of days before Hiroshima and Nagaski, rendered Downfall moot so planners did not bother fully and permanently promulgating the name change from Olympic to Majestic since  thousands of Top Secret documents already had 'Olympic.'
Here is the reference if someone would be so kind as to put it in:
https://books.google.com/books?id=y56Dut69s5UC&pg=PA379&lpg=PA379&dq=operation+majestic+name+olympic&source=bl&ots=uFCaTV88l-&sig=G1Slce7g_61fkwJo6VflIokzVfI&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwipj6zp9dXYAhXtSN8KHdnKDFgQ6AEIVjAK#v=onepage&q=operation%20majestic%20name%20olympic&f=false
there at several other expert references out there making it clear Majestic is simple the Aug 6 change of Olympics name, which ended up never mattering.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.33.17.32 (talk) 22:02, 13 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Majestic was simply an alternate name for Olympic 

message: --The Vital One (talk) 22:13, 5 May 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm going to go ahead with it, as what's here doesn't warrant a standalone article. Clarityfiend (talk) 22:03, 18 March 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Would anyone object to a merger with Operation Downfall?
Talk:Fall Rot

message: I've just posted a note at Talk:Battle of France about the relationship of this article to a section of that article, Battle of France#June: Fall Rot, France.  -- John Broughton   (♫♫) 17:11, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  This is already part of [[Battle of France]] 

message: There seems to be an inconsistency in how German operations named Fall X re used in Wikipedia. Consider Case Blue--mrg3105 (comms) ♠♥♦♣ 22:19, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  naming inconsistency 

message: The Fall Weiss article mentions another Fall Rot, from 1935, a planned defense against a French incursion during a German-Czech conflict. Someone should sort this out.24.69.174.26 (talk) 19:02, 24 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fall Rot 1935 

message: Fleshed out course of FR by pasting in from BofF preparatory to more detail from Cooper, Frieser et al.Keith-264 (talk) 10:10, 6 September 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Additions 

message: Fall Rot is an operational plan not a conflict, the infobox needs to be restored. Keith-264 (talk) 20:54, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wrong infobox
Talk:Operation Dingson

message: One of the references provided is this one:
:Shortt, James; Angus McBride (1981). The Special Air Service. Osprey Publishing. p. 14. .
There is a serious question about the reliability of this source.  Other books by James Shortt get poor reviews on Amazon.  This book is clearly unreliable as regards SAS procedures but may or may not be accurate about history.  It is discussed here: James Shortt at the British Army Rumour Service wiki
Man with two legs (talk) 12:06, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: An interesting link! However, that aside, the Osprey books do have a generally good reputation for accuracy. Salmanazar (talk) 15:05, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Comments
Talk:Operation Lost

message: This page is still barely adequate, although I hope to have upgraded it slightly by reference to standard sources, of which MI9 by Foot and Langley is one. A better statement of facts, in respect of the French SAS involvement, drawing on original publications by French authors writing in French, is currently to be found on the French language version of Wikipedia. This blindness to sources in languages other than English is prevalent in all wikipedia articles on Allied special forces of World War 2.81.19.57.130 14:56, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
Talk:Operation Samwest

message: does anyone have more details? Cliché Online (talk) 14:34, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: seems like these SAS are jedburgh

message: 1 jedburgh team = 3 men (1 French, 1 American, 1 English). 
4 Free French SAS battalion = 500 men.
Marc 212.234.218.194. 15:50, 26 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  SAS are not like jedburgh
Talk:Operation Ladbroke

message: Was this the operation that resulted in the units involved and their descendants wearing the glider on their sleeves?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.175.189.105 (talk) 09:04, 19 September 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: No that was there assignment to the 1st Airlanding Brigade. Jim Sweeney (talk) 09:08, 19 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Glider badge
Talk:Operation Währung

message: How many were executed, where there trials beforehand?  Did these killings constitute war crimes?119.224.100.246 (talk) 06:12, 13 August 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Summary execution of spies -- i.e. enemy combatants dressed in their opponents uniform -- is SOP. BMK (talk) 22:36, 14 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Executions
Talk:Western Allies

message: How about Poles? Poland seem to be a western allied country, but there's nothing about Poland in this article. Please, someone focus on this. Thank you
MeusH 62.111.138.18 12:40, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Untitled 

message: As far as the Allies were concerned, Italy was never an Ally but a "co-belligerent" and were not therefore a "Western Ally". Stephen Kirrage talk - contribs 10:13, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Italy
Talk:Operation Gaff

message: Edits by User:86.138.188.25 make this mission a definite attempt to kill or wound Rommel. This all appears unreliable, based on a sensationalist source, so I am reverting. Cyclopaedic (talk) 15:15, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I have added a more reliable source to confirm that this mission was intended to kill or capture Rommel. That source is itself based on the primary source of the SAS Brigade Operation Instruction No. 32. Phil Bridger (talk) 18:46, 23 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  November 2009 edits
Talk:Operation Tombola

message: Daniel Lewis' book states the target was the 14th Army HQ, which differs with that identified in the article. Can any expert wikipedian please help clarify? Thanks, DPdH (talk) 05:38, 22 December 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Target 

message: A better description is in Roy_Farran#Operation_Tombola Wizzy…☎ 09:57, 4 January 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Roy Farran
Talk:V-mail

message: How long did V-mail take? the article doesn't specify and I'm sure different theaters were different, but would it fair to say the three-week length mentioned in 1941 in Egypt was at least a good rule of thumb, with some a bit more, some a bit less? It might be nice to put a one-sentence comment about how long on average it took, even if the variables were too great to give a really good figure.108.192.86.137 (talk) 01:53, 9 November 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  How long did it take? 

message: "V-mail hadn't caught on very well in the South Pacific, and you could say that again."
James A Michener - Tales of the South Pacific, page 141.
This book was the inspiration for the "South Pacific" musical of Rogers and Hammerstein 123.208.128.111 (talk) 03:10, 1 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mentions in culture
Talk:Tito–Šubašić Agreements

message: G'day Tomobe, yes I think this is within scope, as it relates to the provisional government of Yugoslavia during the war. Peacemaker67  (click to talk to me) 02:22, 27 December 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for clearing this up. Cheers --Tomobe03 (talk) 02:41, 27 December 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Milhist scope
Talk:World War II cryptography

message: to Cryptography during Second World War--mrg3105 (comms) ♠♥♦♣ 02:34, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  suggest rename 

message: The original lead was simply: "Cryptography was used extensively during World War II, with a plethora of code and cipher systems fielded by the nations involved." Extending this has involved making judgements which could be said to violate Wikipedia:Neutral point of view and is at present unsourced. Given that this article is essentially a useful list of links to other articles, might it not be better to revert to the original single-sentence lead?--TedColes (talk) 07:28, 29 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Minimal lead