lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Blockbuster bomb

message: The bit on a Blockbuster found near Koblenz, Germany, is accompanied by a photo purporting to show "a linear shaped charge placed on the casing". The object in question looks nothing like a linear shaped charge; it might be a hydraulic press used to remove the impact fuse (cf. the German figure caption) partly covered by cloth, webbing etc.--Death Bredon (talk) 09:03, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Linear shaped charge? 

message: After many lines from the beginning, the section Operational use at once introduces this term. But it is not explained before, where it came from. --129.187.244.19 (talk) 07:09, 13 July 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: It looks like a nickname, but I'm not sure it is sourced. I removed several instances and left a couple. The original editor inserted the term about 12 years ago and left WP 8 years ago. MartinezMD (talk) 10:44, 13 July 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  ''Cookie'' 

message: "The first type of aircraft to carry bombs operationally was the Wellington" - this is nonsense of course; many aircraft carried bombs operationally, even in WW1.  It is clearly ment to mean "these bombs" - but which ones?  There are a number of "blockbusters" mentioned, or it could even be referring to incendiaries. Baska436 (talk) 09:30, 13 March 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: A simple search would've found a citation. Added. MartinezMD (talk) 15:51, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

text: Thank you Martinez.  A simple search for you might not be so simple for everyone else.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Baska436 (talk • contribs) 04:53, 14 March 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Fair enough. You're welcome. MartinezMD (talk) 12:52, 14 March 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Operational use 

message: The article says the first use was by 15 Squadron on 2 December 1943. However I found in the Operations Record Book of 106 Squadron (Kew document AIR 27/833/12) that as early as 11/12 June 1943 four out of the squadron's fifteen a/c carried "8000lb HC".
Now sadly this is "original research", hence not usable in Wikipedia. I therefore call on everyone to find a reliable source which would allow to rectify the mistake. Kauko (talk) 10:16, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  First use of 8,000 lb HC
Wikipedia talk:Requests for adminship/Mike Selinker

message: User:Mike Selinker
Category talk:	30
Category:	6601
Image:	4
Mainspace	19357
Portal:	1
Talk:	225
Template talk:	2
Template:	653
User talk:	374
User:	782
Wikipedia talk:	143
Wikipedia:	2447
avg edits per article	1.46
earliest	22:43, 8 August 2005
number of unique articles	20935
total	30619
Mike Selinker's editcount summary stats as of 10:58, 12th November 2006, using Interiot's wannabe Kate's tool. (aeropagitica) 10:59, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
Talk:Mayo A. Shattuck III

message: Cooperative Research the 911 research source states: 9/11 Mayo Shattuck III resigns, effective immediately, as head of the Alex Brown unit of Deutsche Bank. No reason is given. Some speculate later that this could have to do with the role of Deutsche Bank in the pre-9/11 purchases of put options on the stock of companies most affected by 9/11. Deutsche Bank is also one of the four banks most used by the bin Laden family. [New York Times, 9/15/2001; Wall Street Journal, 9/27/2001]
http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/context.jsp?item=a091401shattuck#a091401shattuck  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.2.212.198 (talk) 01:39, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Allegation of foreknowledge of 911 

message: As part of the Wikipedia Student Program, I am planning to use the following sources to add to this article:
Johns Hopkins Institution-Affiliated Articles
https://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/Press_releases/2004/07_17_04.html
https://pages.jh.edu/~gazette/2007/12mar07/12burn.html
Articles by Baltimore Sun
https://www.baltimoresun.com/business/bs-bz-shattuck-leaves-exelon-20130315-story.html
https://www.baltimoresun.com/business/bs-bz-big-givers-20121014-story.html
https://www.baltimoresun.com/news/investigations/bal-baltimore-area-ceo-pay-story.html
https://www.baltimoresun.com/opinion/bs-ed-taxes-letter-20111222-story.html
https://www.baltimoresun.com/opinion/readers-respond/bs-ed-mayo-most-hated-letter-20110629-story.html
What is your opinion on these sources and their content? MKichar1 (talk) 07:10, 4 March 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Additions to Bibliography  

message: As a part of the Wikipedia Student Program, I am planning to make the following changes to this article:
* Changed format to create paragraphs and make reading of the article easier. Addition of subheadings to Career section.
* Addition of a sentence about Philanthropy to the lead.
* Addition to the information on philanthropic efforts at the Johns Hopkins University.
* Additional facts and figures for Shattck's work at Constellation Energy Group.
* Included specific information on his degree from Standford Graduate School of Buisness.
What is your opinion on these content changes? MKichar1 (talk) 16:51, 8 April 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed Article Edits
Talk:Type 96 and Type 97 150 mm infantry mortar

message: Seeing as the photograph was taken on Peleliu, I'm guessing that this monster wasn't just used on Iwo Jima and in China.--172.190.68.60 (talk) 08:00, 11 July 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Taki's Website mentions what's written in here, maybe he#s the source (also given as link). The Peleliu battle page in Wikipedia mentions 150 mm mortars. 87.78.212.25 (talk) 05:57, 26 September 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Combat use 

message: Identical (maximum) muzzle velocity is almost impossible with different barrel lengths. it would require a conscious effort to match the MV through a tailored propellant charge (would make no sense) or a huge coincidence with different propellant charges. The MV and the rangea re almsot certainly not identical between long and short barrel versions. 87.78.212.25 (talk) 05:56, 26 September 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  specs
Talk:Queensland Premier's Literary Awards

message: I've googled and searched http://www.qld.gov.au/, but it doesn't look like it was awarded this year.--Shirt58 11:17, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Just updated one link to the Wayback Machine archive. Doctorhawkes (talk) 20:42, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Encouragement and Development Prize
Talk:Type 97 torpedo

message: I believe the Type 93 torpedo ("Long Lance") was used by surface ships only. The standard submarine torpedo was the Type 95 torpedo. At least that is what their respective articles claim. The Type 91 torpedo was used by aircraft. The introduction says that the Type 97 was "based on the Type 97 used by other Japanese submarines", but should say "Type 95". I believe both the Type 95 and 97 used the same "oxygen wet-heater" engine as the Type 93, which brings some to claim they are "based on" the Type 93, but both were significantly smaller than the 24-inch diameter Type 93..45Colt 20:40, 31 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Type 97, 95, 93
Talk:Type 95 torpedo

message: I think an actual speed would be helpful, instead of the "fastest torpedo of WWII" bit. How fast is "the fastest"? It says that its range was "three times the range of the Mark 14 torpedo at the same speed", but then it says that it was the "fastest torpedo". What does that mean? That it was capable of a higher speed, but they could reduce the speed to increase range? It can't mean that it had the same top speed if it was "the fastest". Also, is its range three times the Mark 14 at the Mark 14's TOP speed? Or does it go three times further while they are both traveling at a mere 20kts? 
I also question that is is "based on" the Type 93 torpedo. Maybe it is scaled down from the same design, but in my mind "based on" means a modification of the Type 93. Being both shorter and narrower suggests that it's an entirely separate design. I guess that's just a matter of preference in wording however. If it is closely "based on" the Type 93, ikt is odd that there is so little info on it, since there is so much about the Type 93 out there.
And last, neither of the links at the bottom is any good. The first doesn't seem to work at all, the second directs you to what appears to be the main page for some university in Hawaii; I see nothing regarding anything military on that page, certainly nothing about Japanese submarine torpedoes of WWII..45Colt 18:16, 31 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Details
Talk:Type 88 75 mm AA gun

message: This article statement is misguided in the sense of representing AA as being either effective or not "considered capable of handling any targets". If it's a matter of altitude, that should be made clear. 98.210.208.107 (talk) 02:51, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: It's also a matter of time frame. When adopted, the Type 88 was a good weapon, but by the end of the war it was found to be almost completely lacking.--172.190.50.79 (talk) 22:50, 29 January 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: "Lacking" what? Boneyard90 (talk) 23:22, 29 January 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: How about lacking the ability to deal with the performance of 1940s aircraft. LACKING THAT!--172.190.184.240 (talk) 09:11, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Loose statement about utility
Talk:Type 91 torpedo

message: Need help for edit. Since this is a stub, you can shrink, delete or roll back. Best regards. --Shun Zero (talk) 03:43, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Need help

message: Do we really need to convert every unit into one or two equivalent units? It makes this rather dense article almost unreadable, since the unit conversions take up nearly as much space at the actual text. Leave it in knots and metres, the type of person who's going to plow through 60 kilobytes of Wiki prose on obscure WWII weapons is motivated enough to do his own conversions. --Wtshymanski (talk) 17:41, 8 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Ugly typography

message: There's lots of stuff that probably needs to go. I think those equations need to go too. Isn't this page about a particular torpedo not the general mechanics of torpedo bombing. Usiruk86 (talk) 23:53, 12 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Irrelevant Material 

message: It is written in the Type 91 article that the torpedo's main engine was "an eight-cylinder, single-row radial."  As far as I know, that is not possible.  The dynamics of radial engines require that they have odd numbers of cylinders per row.  My only source is 50 years of flying as a pilot behind radial (and other) engines.173.62.31.201 (talk) 17:34, 8 February 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Eight-cylinder radial?  Not possible.
Talk:Japanese gunboat Teibō No. 2

message: There are two ships named Teibō, Dai-ichi Teibō (第一丁卯) and Dai-ni Teibō (第二丁卯). This thing needs to write. --Nightshadow28 15:22, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  1st and 2nd
Talk:Freedom and People's Rights Movement

message: in the article it says The West Coast of America, which had a large Japanese population, was a haven for Japanese political dissidents in the early 1900s, free from persecution from the government of their homeland. Many of them were refugees from the "Freedom and People's Rights Movement.". San Francisco, and Oakland in particular was teeming with such people where is the source to this. I don't see it in the source. (Greg723 (talk) 19:59, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: proof of the movement in America
Talk:120 mm Gun M1

message: Article reassessed and graded as stub   --dashiellx (talk) 18:19, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Tag & Assess 2008 
Talk:French curl

message: I have been trying to get some solid references on this, because there seems to be a lot of confusion on this topic. The exercise being described here is also referred to as a French press. (At the moment, French press only links to an article about coffee.) There seems to be great confusion about which one is correct -- possibly there are regional variations -- which is added to by the slangy names as well. Some instructors have tried to clear up the confusion by renaming it the "[dumbbell/barbell] triceps extension".
There is also a view, however, that only "French press" is correct for this exercise, and "French curl" actually refers to a biceps curl executed with the palms facing down. This view has the advantage of being logical: the "French curl" described in this article is clearly not  a "curl" at all, but a press; whereas the reverse grip curl is at least a curl. Not only that, but in this view, a "French press" is in fact a sort of variant of the bench press, while a "French curl" is a variant of a biceps curl.
Thus "French" becomes a consistently used modifier, meaning "a bit different to the normal one". Which is also consistent with a lot of other usages, of "French", as in French cricket, French knitting, etc.) -- 144.138.137.253 11:35, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's a nonsense to call these 'curls', as has been pointed out by the original poster - I actually suspect someone has made a mistake somewhere along the line, whether it's with regional variation or slang, or just outdated terminology. As said above, if anything this should be merged into Lying triceps extensions (not the other way around). Lying triceps extensions is definitely the generic and more widely used term for this exercise as it's currently described. Incidentally it's interesting to check some of the older versions of this article, and watch the description change over time. --jjron 14:39, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree; the exercise described in this article is an extension, not a curl.  This should be merged into lying triceps extensions and turned into a redirect.  I've already changed the redirect at skull crusher to point to the other article. — EagleOne\Talk 19:22, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with the move to merge both articles under Lying Triceps Extension.  The movements are essentially the same, with the grip being supinated in the barbell exercise called Lying Triceps Extension and being ostensibly neutral in the dumbbell exercise called French Curl. // 70.200.25.196 20:37, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
Talk:Altarnun

message: Redirects from Fivelanes and Trewint would be quite useful here.----Felix Folio Secundus (talk) 02:21, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: These now esist.--Felix Folio Secundus (talk) 06:18, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: http://www.genuki.org.uk/big/eng/Cornwall/Altarnun/ has 15014 acres (either figure might be correct). The claim of largest parish is also made for St Germans: presumably this would be for the parish before Hessenford was taken out.--Felix Folio Secundus (talk) 06:12, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Area of parish
Talk:Submarines of the Imperial Japanese Navy

message: The picture shows I-400 a Sen-Toku type submarine.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.137.120.127 (talk) 22:01, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wrong picture for the AM type 

message: I see mention of freighter subs, but no details. Did I miss something? I've seen them described as YU-1s (based on the Ha-101), design begun in 1943, built by Hasado Iron Works, Hitachi Shipbuilding, & Kudamatsu; 273 tons surfaced/370 tons submerged, 40.8x4.1x2.7m, crew 13, payload 40 tons freight. Just don't ask for a source...  Trekphiler 11:19, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Carrying the weight?

message: What was I-64? No mention of this boat on the page. Drutt (talk) 09:37, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: I-64

message: Don't want to trigger an edit war over this, since it's just not that crucial a point, but the Type 95 and Type 93 were siblings, both being oxygen-fueled weapons coming out of the same development program. Type 95 was for submarines and Type 93 was for destroyers, and, yes, it was the Type 93 that Samuel Eliot Morison dubbed the Long Lance. My point is that I think the best statement is that the Type 95 is closely related to type 93 -- not that the Type 95 was the Long Lance (it wasn't) or that it was confused with the Long Lance (doesn't seem to really capture the relationship correctly.) Thought I'd bring it up here before modifying the article, though. Yaush (talk) 15:26, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Type 95 vs Type 93 

message: If anyone has access to that info, please add it to the article.HammerFilmFan (talk) 22:01, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  cost of the individual sub programs?
Talk:Taira Shinken

message: 1) Was Taira actually Japanese, or was he Ryukyuan?
2) To describe him as a sensei is extremely vague. Sensei can refer to a lot of things; it would be helpful to change the intro section to describe him as a karate teacher or a martial arts master or the like. Whatever's appropriate. LordAmeth 11:44, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Assessment

message: why is there a neutrality box on this, but no explination here on what the issue is? THe assessment stuff looks more like a factual issue...RCHM 21:20, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: neutrality?

message: Done. I confirmed his kanji name by this page. --Nightshadow28 14:52, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Japanese script
Talk:Ankō Asato

message: To whoever is adding entries to the article in the form of "My Sensei..." and "I would, nevertheless, like to introduce a couple of anecdotes about Master Asato's karate". This is a neutral point of view encyclopedia article, not a specific individuals point of view. There is no "I" "Me", "My". Furthermore, if Asato is described in the text he will not be described as "Sensei" but simply by his proper name. "Sensei" is not aproperiate the same way "His Holiness" is not aproperiate for the Pope-article. You must also mention proper sources to the claims in this text. You cannot, for instance, interview your own teacher and then post the information here unless it is in a written, accessible form, either online or in book-format. Fred26 10:39, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I left the text in there (but commented out) in the hope that it would help provide structure for a revision, but perhaps it is indeed better to start again from scratch. Janggeom 12:29, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  This is not a personal essay 
Talk:Warhammer 40,000: Dawn of War – Winter Assault

message: I think the merge should go ahead? Lowris 15:43, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge

message: How many campaign missions are there? i think the amount should be put into the article. Luminaflare 17:09, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Missions

message: I'm creating an article at List of units in the Warhammer 40,000: Dawn of War series. If anyone feels like they have some time, feel free to come by and help out in creating it. I'm aiming to make it as comprehensive as the List of units in the Age of Mythology series, which I'm using as a guideline. Anyway, I look forward to seeing anyone there! Cheers. Master of Puppets Care to share? 00:46, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: List of units in the Warhammer 40,000: Dawn of War series
Talk:Daitō Islands

message: The entire "History of the European Sightings of the Daitō Islands" section was copied from the last three pages of this journal article.  I don't know of any way to do a partial revert, so I'm just going to delete this section.  Please let me know if there is an official way of doing a partial revert. Lisatwo 22:18, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The original author of this paper added the material to this article, so this deletion has been reverted. Lisatwo (talk) 17:52, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Still not good enough. The article needs to be cited, and the language needs to be put in an encyclopedic manner. Without citations, it reads like Original Research. See Wikipedia:No original research. Without citation and article formatting, the section can still be deleted. Boneyard90 (talk) 22:29, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  copyright violation 
Wikipedia talk:Requests for adminship/Terrillwhite

message: Edit count for Terrillwhite:
Category talk:	1
Category:	14
Image:	77
Mainspace	770
Talk:	264
Template:	17
User talk:	85
User:	59
Wikipedia:	42
avg edits per article	2.22
earliest	09:24, 13 May 2006
number of unique articles	598
total	1329
Produced with Interiot's wannebe Kate's tool. MER-C 11:52, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
Talk:USS Witter

message: Sadly, putting "This article incorporates text from the public domain Dictionary of American Naval Fighting Ships" at the foot of the article does not meet the standard of "It is suitably referenced, and all major points have appropriate inline citations", which is Wikipedia's minimum requirement. Can I encourage any editor to use this source, and others if appropriate, and insert appropriate inline citations. As a broad rule, one reference at the end of each paragraph, which fully covers any facts in that paragraph, is an acceptable minimum. Gog the Mild (talk) 01:35, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Referencing

message: My grandfather was one of the men who was killed on the ship, and one day we noticed that a number of those who were with him were listed as part of the article. So we went in and added his name, so that it would live on forever for future generations to see. Especially my children and grandchildren. I was upset to see that the names were taken out. I would like an explanation. Thank you. Handjbend (talk) 12:11, 12 January 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: See WP:SHIPSNOTCREWS Lyndaship (talk) 12:41, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

text: Also WP:NOTAMEMORIAL. Llammakey (talk) 02:29, 20 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  I would like to know why the names of those killed on the ship were removed from the article?
Talk:Esplanade Park

message: I was surprised to find this nominated for DYK. There is only one citation available which states that the park was built in 1943. Other sources say it was completed in 1953 (See  and ). In 1943 Singapore was in the midst of WW2 and I really don't understand how this park could have been built at that time. --Lemongirl942 (talk) 18:01, 25 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Historical inaccuracy? 
Talk:DM

message: Diis Manibus, a common inscription on Roman gravestones ---George100 12:09, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: How is 'DM' being short for 'Doctor of Medicine' a dubious postnomial? It's been 15 yers since that superscript was added, btw. 72.174.131.123 (talk) 07:06, 21 January 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not the one that added it, but a doctor of medicine is abbreviated MD usually not DM BhamBoi (talk) 07:12, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  ummm..
Talk:Büchner funnel

message: I think this is complete enough for this subject. Why is it still marked a stub?  CindyB 12:21, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Removed stub tags. Hope this helps. --Rifleman 82 22:25, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think it could use a bit more detail.  Bfesser 03:01, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Like how they are made. It's straightforward for the glass and plastic ones - the latter are usually two-piece, also for better cleaning. But how do they make the ceramic ones? I emailed some makers, but they refused to divulge.--Cancun771 (talk) 21:51, 21 February 2010 (UTC)
Talk:Maserati Karif

message: The image is of a Maserati Biturbo (222SE) not a Karif.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:569:73D4:8C00:5102:1F7:25B4:7F7D (talk) 22:58, 21 February 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Um, no, that's definitely a Karif. The 222SE would have a considerably longer wheelbase and a differently shaped rear side window.  Mr.choppers | ✎  02:42, 22 February 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Here, found a rear view of the same car in 2009. The number is no longer listed with the DVLA or anywhere, does anyone know more about this particular car?  Mr.choppers | ✎  02:58, 22 February 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: IP edit