lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Reference Re Same-Sex Marriage

message: There were a couple of reasons I moved it.  For one thing, Reference re Same-Sex Marriage is its real name.  It's also consistent with other articles we have on reference questions.  Also, even when we refer to reference questions by a short name, I've never seen people use a colon.  It would be Re Same-Sex Marriage CanadianCaesar 21:30, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: 'Re Same-Sex Marriage would be acceptable, Reference re Same-sex Marriage is not. I think it's too long and no one except the court refers to it that way. -- Spinboy 21:33, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Name

message: On April 11, 2006, NTK replaced the Canadian flag in the "Gay rights in Canada"  template with a rainbow version of the Canadian flag. 
Since this is only one of the articles affected, please give your comments at this central location: Template talk:GR-C 
Wuzzy 03:40, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Is rainbow Canada flag better?
Talk:Same-sex marriage in Saskatchewan

message: On April 11, 2006, NTK replaced the Canadian flag in the "Gay rights in Canada"  template with a rainbow version of the Canadian flag. 
Also, NTK deleted the provincial/territorial flag from each provincial/territorial article. What are your views on that? 
Since this is only one of the articles affected, please give your comments at this central location: Template talk:GR-C 
Wuzzy 03:40, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Is rainbow Canada flag better? Should provincial/territorial flags be reinserted?
Talk:Same-sex marriage in Yukon

message: On April 11, 2006, NTK replaced the Canadian flag in this template with a rainbow version of the Canadian flag. 
Also, NTK deleted the provincial/territorial flag from each provincial/territorial article. What are your views on that? 
Since this is only one of the articles affected, please give your comments at this central location: Template talk:GR-C 
Wuzzy 03:40, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Is rainbow Canada flag better? Should provincial/territorial flags be reinserted?
Talk:John Williamson (geologist)

message: There are no images. slambo 17:22, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Delisted GA 
Talk:Outwash plain

message: ----
Outwash plain merge suggestion: What is the most frequently used term in geology?Stepp-Wulf 05:31, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Both are used - and although Sandur in theory is a regional term (i.e. Iceland / Scandinavia) it is used to describe outwash plains globally. I agree there should be a merge, and redirecting 'Outwash Plain' to 'Sandur' would be acceptable. NickW 12:09, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've merged these articles. NickW 15:02, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

message: This article was passed way back in 2005 prior to the present review process, and as such, there's likely some issues with it against current GA police.  I've put this article up for review at WP:GA/R. --Masem 22:45, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I have decided to enact WP:SNOWBALL and boldly delist this article from WP:GA. It was listed before criteria were put in place and clearly fails to meet that criteria. However, if this article is brought up to standards it may be nominated at WP:GAC. Regards, Lara♥Love 03:06, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: [[WP:GA/R|GA Re-review]]

message: If no one objects I will move the article to Sandur, Iceland and redirect Sandur to the dab page.--Rafy talk 23:36, 9 January 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I I object on the grounds that a Sandur is not a place, I'd suggest moving the article to Sandur (geology).  de Bivort 00:26, 10 January 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Fine by me. If no one object I shall remove it within a week.--Rafy talk 19:10, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

text: Actually a quick check on google books shows that "Outwash plain" is a more popular term in the geological context, (484 vs. 435). I will request a rename.--Rafy talk 13:07, 23 January 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Is  484 vs 435 considered definitive?  de Bivort 16:44, 23 January 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Large number of occurrences of Sandur refer to either the Jewish, Indian or a proper name. I assume "Outwash plain" has a single meaning.--Rafy talk 16:53, 23 January 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Hah, fair enough.  de Bivort 00:09, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
replies: text:  I agree that 484 vs 435 is not a big difference but I was swayed by the single meaning argument. I have moved it to outwash plain. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 12:18, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Name 

message: I've always understood the plural of the Icelandic-originated word sandur to be sandar but presently sandar is given simply as a variant of sandur. Thoughts? Geopersona (talk) 19:28, 17 December 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: P134 of Benn and Evans' mighty 1998 tome, Glaciers & Glaciation. Geopersona (talk) 19:31, 17 December 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sandur/sandar 

message: Why to have this article, this one https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glaciofluvial_deposits and this one https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Outwash_fan ?
Maybe they could be merged ? 185.215.65.24 (talk) 12:54, 4 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Redondant ?
Talk:Serafim Karalexis

message: I don't believe The Real Bruce Lee could be done in 1973 because it features the song "Devil's Gun", released in 1977. IMDb lists it being released in 1979. I would edit it myself, but people have gotten pissy about it, so I'll let someone else do it.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.71.222.39 (talk) 11:09, 28 September 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Real Bruce Lee 1973?
Talk:Shanghaied

message: This needs a disambiguation page. To have a page with this title dealing primarily with a cartoon is absurd.
Where do you see the alternate endings? The Republican 17:31, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: I have created a new page, Shanghaied (SpongeBob episode) and moved all the SpongeBob-specific content there. Turnstep 05:29, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Page move
Category talk:Christmas-linked holidays

message: ewmoved alot of pagan and secular holidays that only have in common with christmas only their time of year, they can still be found in Winter Holidays
:I am reverting some of your removals. While some may not have any very strong connection, others are seen as being predecessors in how traditions associated with the holiday came about. older≠wiser 18:41, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, perhaps this category should be renamed. It is not a very good name as it is unclear precisely what should or should not be included in it. Perhaps including Christmas (and all of these) in the newly created :Category:Winter Holidays would be better. older≠wiser 18:51, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
Talk:Sûreté du Québec

message: I am not done the History part... ;)
-Yongblood 00:13, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: History

message: I'll take the stub off, I feel it gets into start class with the info it holds, but it quickly needs references.--SGGH 15:13, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: assessment

message: :Contrary to popular belief, the Sûreté du Québec has fewer officers than the City of Montreal Police Service. 
But this article claims a force of some 5,000 for the SQ and some 4,000 for the SPVM. - Montréalais 15:47, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: contradiction

message: Some photos of the old colour scheme for the patrol cars would be nice, the mostly-green version with yellow doors. 76.66.194.220 (talk) 08:24, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: images

message: Why do they have a unicycle? That seems odd to me, and a detailed list like that if it is on here at all should have a reference, probably.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.255.213.130 (talk) 02:29, 20 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: References
Talk:RCMP recruitment

message: Rgis article has no references. No where have I heard theat the RCMP has that many more people apply than openings available. I know officers at depot and they can't hire them fast enough   —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.163.242.253 (talk) 02:09, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: After reading this article, as well as many others on the recruitment process of the RCMP, it has become clear to me that today's process is corrupted with discrimination. I understand that the RCMP wants diversity, but preferring females, asians, blacks and aboriginals over white males is simply disgusting. I was surprised to hear that such a respected government service was as dirt-low as this.
The RCMP should be an equal opportunity employer, not a racist, sexist, biased employer.
Squadcar56 20:12, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Discrimination 

message: If this article wasn't written by someone working with or for the RCMP, I would be very, very surprised.
Glandrid (talk) 19:43, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Authorship
Talk:RCMP Academy, Depot Division

message: It may well as said be the oldest Anglican place of worship in this part of Canada but it also has RC services or at least did when I was organist. This could perhaps be mentioned. There is a photo of the King and Queen visiting when they were in Regina in the early summer of 1939. Could this not be added? Masalai (talk) 05:04, 19 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: The Chapel
Talk:Cao Ren

message: From the novel of ROTK, Cao Ren was always sent to defend against the Southern Armies of Wu and Shu. Many times, i'm sure, Cao Ren would fail, but Cao Cao would still allow him to continue his work as the strong arm against Wu and Shu during their first few assaults. If Zhao Yun was the Brave and Zhang Fei the bold at the ChangBan area then Cao Ren would be the brave and bold of the two.--Zhang Liao 04:25, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: The Defense of Wei
Talk:Security Intelligence Review Committee

message: Any reason why this link goes to a page with nothing (obvious) to do with Canada? Unless Canada still uses the British Official secrets act? Mcspiff 14:25, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It appears that Security of Information Act is the current legislation. I will change the article accordingly.  PKT (talk) 17:05, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Official Secrets Act link? 
Talk:York Regional Police

message: York Regional Police does not use the following ranks:
#Staff Inspector
#Staff Superintendent  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.254.151.27 (talk) 17:20, 5 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rank
Talk:Arthur Jeffrey Dempster

message: There are no images. slambo 17:56, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Delisted GA 
Talk:Emergency Task Force (Toronto Police Service)

message: Hey, I'm new but I think this is incorrect: "As well the ETF does handle terrorism threats, which is handled by the Joint Task Force 2." Should that not be, "does not"? --64.201.42.138 (talk) 23:45, 26 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Typo?

message: Hello, I question the objectivity of this page and the sources that this information is coming from. The article says "The Emergency Task Force currently comprises 82 officers from all units who are tactically trained. There are seven Special Weapons Teams consisting of 10 officers each.", "Each tactical team has a team leader, assaulters, snipers, bomb technicians, and a negotiator. All team members are trained as assaulters, and thus are able to perform any necessary tasks requiring force.","In more complex calls involving suicidal; homicidal-suicidal; or violent emotionally disturbed individuals, a forensic psychiatrist, who has been on the negotiation team for the past 22 years, can be called to the scene to advise the negotiatiors and/or incident commander."
This contains detailed information but it isn't sourced. Where are the numbers like 82 officers, and 22 years on the team coming from? How does the public know that this information is valid at all?
The page under question is http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emergency_Task_Force_%28TPS%29
16/01/2015 5:14 (-5:00)
* The only soureable reference I could find refers to 70 officers. 67.216.61.20 (talk) 23:24, 29 June 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Objectivity and Sources

message: That phrase "the past 22 years" is only going to make sense for the year it was written. --moeburn (talk) 15:17, 17 August 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  "The past 22 years" 
Talk:Operation Soap

message: There's a lot of good information here but it really needs to be cleaned up. Most obviously, is this article about the 1981 raids, or all Canadian bathhouse raids? -- TheMightyQuill 17:30, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's about the 1981 raids, which played a pivotal role in the development of the LGBT community in Canada; other raids are mentioned only in passing. I don't see how this is unclear. Bearcat 23:20, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cleanup 

message: The article's first sentence reads:  The 1981 Toronto bathhouse raids marked a major turning point in the history of the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgendered community in Canada.  I have questions unanswered by the article as I read it:
* Is there a primary source that labels these raids as "a major turning point"?  Otherwise, this seems POV.
* Were these raids actually a turning point across the nation, or primarily of Toronto and Toronto policing significance?  What impact, for example, did these raids have on the LGBT community in Vancouver?  Did laws or policing change elsewhere in Canada as a result of these raids? This connection is not made (or not made clear) in the current article.
Thanks! --Ds13 23:53, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Opening statement, national significance 

message: Were these raids conducted specifically because the men in the bathhouses were gay, or was it a raid against bathhouses in general? The article didn't make it clear. Thanks. --DearPrudence 00:16, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Specifically against gays? 

message: All the raids that took place between 1977 and 2005 have been moved to Canadian Bathouse raids which now links to this 1981 page.  Now this page seems acceptable.
I suggest those familiar with this topic go to that page and develop it, I have done the initial work, but it needs a better introduction and some more information on Canadian law vis-a-vis the gay community.
Seth J. Frantzman 14:33, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Non 1981 info moved
Talk:Great Comet of 1882

message: Members of the Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles are in the process of doing a re-review of current Good Article listings to ensure compliance with the standards of the Good Article Criteria. (Discussion of the changes and re-review can be found here). A significant change to the GA criteria is the mandatory use of some sort of in-line citation (In accordance to WP:CITE) to be used in order for an article to pass the verification and reference criteria. Currently this article does not include in-line citations. It is recommended that the article's editors take a look at the inclusion of in-line citations as well as how the article stacks up against the rest of the Good Article criteria. GA reviewers will give you at least a week's time from the date of this notice to work on the in-line citations before doing a full re-review and deciding if the article still merits being considered a Good Article or would need to be de-listed. If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact us on the Good Article project talk page or you may contact me personally. On behalf of the Good Articles Project, I want to thank you for all the time and effort that you have put into working on this article and improving the overall quality of the Wikipedia project. Agne 01:06, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  GA Re-Review and In-line citations 

message: This article is currently having its GA status questioned, see the discussion at Wikipedia:Good article review. T Rex | talk 19:28, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: As a result of the fixes made during the reassessment process at good article reassessment all objections to this articles status on the GA list have been withdrawn.  Good job on fixing it up, and keep working on it.  This could be a Featured Article some day!  For the archived disussion, see Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/Archive 29. --Jayron32|talk|contribs 01:34, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: GA review

message: Agreed  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 119.153.167.20 (talk) 07:12, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  comet 1882 

message: Reading the (Fayetteville, Georgia) Weekly Constitution, April 18, 1882, I found an article reprinted from the New York Sun, which suggests that this comet had been discovered in the preceding month.  That is significantly earlier than this article suggests.  On the same page, an article reprinted from the Philadelphia Times gives an interview with professor [Isaac?] Sharpless of Harvard.
http://atlnewspapers.galileo.usg.edu/atlnewspapers-j2k/view?docId=bookreader/awc/awc1882/awc1882-0105.mets.xml#page/n0/mode/1up
In Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, Vol. 43, p. 58-62, John Tebbutt gives astronomical observations from New South Wales, from June and July, 1882.
http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu//full/1882MNRAS..43...58T/0000058.000.html
LineChaser (talk) 03:58, 10 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Discovery
Talk:Wars of Castro

message: This article still meets GA criteria but as for the future of the articles, these items could be addressed :
* Could we have a seperate paragraph about the aftermath or the destruction of the city as it is not clearly outlined in the text.
* Is it possible to cut down on the lead and maybe have a background section in order to help the reader to understand what led to such events?
* More pictures about the location of the town would be appreciated. Lincher 15:40, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  GA review/progression 

message: Members of the Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles are in the process of doing a re-review of current Good Article listings to ensure compliance with the standards of the Good Article Criteria. (Discussion of the changes and re-review can be found here). A significant change to the GA criteria is the mandatory use of some sort of in-line citation (In accordance to WP:CITE) to be used in order for an article to pass the verification and reference criteria. Currently this article does not include in-line citations. It is recommended that the article's editors take a look at the inclusion of in-line citations as well as how the article stacks up against the rest of the Good Article criteria. GA reviewers will give you at least a week's time from the date of this notice to work on the in-line citations before doing a full re-review and deciding if the article still merits being considered a Good Article or would need to be de-listed. If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact us on the Good Article project talk page or you may contact me personally. On behalf of the Good Articles Project, I want to thank you for all the time and effort that you have put into working on this article and improving the overall quality of the Wikipedia project. Agne 20:39, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  GA Re-Review and In-line citations 

message: In order to uphold the quality of Wikipedia:Good articles, all articles listed as Good articles are being reviewed against the GA criteria as part of the GA project quality task force. Unfortunately, as of 
September 9, 
2007, this article fails to satisfy the criteria, as detailed below. For that reason, the article has been delisted from WP:GA. However, if improvements are made bringing the article up to standards, the article may be nominated at WP:GAC. If you feel this decision has been made in error, you may seek remediation at WP:GA/R. 
The article currently has no inline citations at all, even after the notice nearly a year ago from Agne. Since inline citations are a requirement of the GA criteria, I have delisted the article at this time. If you have any questions, let me know on my talk page and I'll get back to you as soon as I can. --Nehrams2020 23:59, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: GA Sweeps Review delisted
Talk:John Flamsteed

message: If possible, I think it would be good to mention his parents and their profession. That information goes a long way in explaining someone personality. gathima 01:50, 10 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Parents/ guardian 

message: This section really needs rewording; it's hardly NPOV with it's blaitent accusations against Newton. At least mention the reasons for the disagreement: Flamsteed was refusing to publish work that had been commissioned by the king. CFLeon 21:25, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Reworded the conflict again, and added a reference. Sobel's book covers the material in this edited paragraph only, but I still removed the "unreferenced" warning. Wasoxygen (talk) 7 April 2011  —Preceding undated comment added 13:55, 7 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Confict with Newton 

message: There's no body, so there can't be a lead, so the article can't conform with WP:LEAD. This can probably be fixed easily because you have several paragraphs here, but also, you'll need more references to fully reference this article, and you'll also need inline citations, the GA criteria was recently changed to make them mandatory. And please, don't just stamp the page again without even appearing to of reviewed this article.... Homestarmy 16:22, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Delisted GA
Talk:Court of Appeal of Alberta

message: Please see my move proposal at Talk:Court of Appeals#Rename this article?. --Mathew5000 19:35, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Regarding the article [[Court of Appeals]] 
Talk:1909-10 NHA season

message: According to the Oilers website, the Montreal Canadiens were the last place team, not Les Canadiens.
: As has been said elsewhere, the hiring criteria for webmasters and marketing wonks doesn't tend to include knowledge of hockey history.  The website is wrong.    Ravenswing  00:06, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Federal Court of Canada

message: I've split up the articles for Federal Court of Canada, Federal Court, and Federal Court of Appeal.  There is generally quite a bit of confusion about the difference between the "Federal Court" and the "Federal Court of Canada". The latter no longer exists but people seem fixed on still using that name to refer to the Federal Court, so I think separate articles are necessary to make the distinction clearer. --PullUpYourSocks 03:05, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You've got a point there; it's not exactly correct to describe the Federal Court of Canada as a "defunct" court. Each of its two divisions was expressly "continued" under a slightly different name, and as a separate court rather than a division of a court. (See section 3 of the Federal Courts Act, as enacted by section 16 of CASA.) I think I might merge this article into Federal Court (Canada) and Federal Court of Appeal as appropriate. --Mathew5000 (talk) 09:02, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Federal Court articles
Talk:Supreme Court of British Columbia

message: Just wondering about adding a list, pending researching it, on the historical membership of the court; certainly starting with Begbie and Crease - whose name I came here looking for the right form of, actually; not sure how viable or relevant this is but it seems worth having; likewise on British Columbia Court of Appeal.Skookum1 21:42, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Historical Justices of the Court

message: The "Location" field lists the names of the Counties of British Columbia, which is not the same thing as the communities those counties are named for; notably Yale and Cariboo; I'm not sure where the Supreme Court courts/offices are, other than Robson Square; maybe a closer read of the article may tell me, but the wording is a bit confusing and discusses where judges reside, not where chambers/offices of the court may be found.  Not sure, then, what to put in the Location field; but what's in it now isn't correct.Skookum1 (talk) 23:43, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: "Location" field in infobox