lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Nielsen

message: It seems none, or at least hardly any, of the pages which link to the Nielsen disambiguation page should really link here. I'm afraid I don't know enough about U.S. television stations and ratings etc. to do the job, so I hope someone else is going to do it:
*Star Trek: The Animated Series
*Albany, New York
*Michael J. Fox 
*Presque Isle, Maine
*The Edge of Night
*Talk:The Fairly OddParents
*List of most-watched television episodes
*1964 UEFA European Football Championship
*Capital News 9
*Webster (TV series)
*WKTV
*2001: A Space Travesty
*TV-Anytime
*Once a Thief (TV series)
*KDKA-TV
*Pittsburgh Media Market
*MediaWeek
*MyYearbook
*Syndication exclusivity
*KFXF
*NewsMax Media
*National Empowerment Television
*Jennifer Tomazic
*List of private-use airports in Oregon
<KF> 21:50, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
Talk:Hi, How Are You

message: I have been trying to  get this article fixed for weeks!  Everytime I correct it, I am acused of vandleism and my changes are reversed!  the track listings are all messed up.  There are 15 songs on Hi, How Are You?  not 9!  the opening paragraph is so messed up its nonsenses ical.  I thought that the idea behind Wikipedia was that we could edit pages on our own and ourt changes would be excepted if they were correct.  My changes are correct!  I would like something done about this immediatly thank you!  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.42.67.230 (talk) 19:02, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  This article is all messed up!
Talk:War of Northern Aggression

message: To 128.135.194.67 and 68.84.4.238: If you feel like arguing over the article's wording, please debate it out here on the talk page before editing the article itself. Do not update the article until you two have sorted out your differences and can agree on a clear, NPOV, and informative version. Thanks.   -Mysterius 21:56, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Argument over usage of term
Talk:Hash mark (sports)

message: It is unnecessary to have a separate article just for the hash marks.  Descriptions for hash marks can just be included for American football fields.  Same goes for hockey.  Wiki is not a dictionary. KyuuA4 04:25, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Unnecessary

message: Wouldn't they be perpendicular to the side lines, if the 5-yard lines go from side line to side line?  It says "parallel" in the description.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Camerajohn (talk • contribs) 21:51, 4 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Perpendicular to the side lines? 
Talk:Multitronic

message: It is not an infinite number, but a very large number of possible ratios...
Does anyone know more about Dynamic Regulating Programme (DRP)?  -- MLPerez007 (talk) 22:22, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: ???

message: An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect :Multitronic® and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 April 15#Multitronic® until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.  BD2412 T 04:59, 15 April 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Multitronic®" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]]
Talk:Marcano

message: I submit to you that the information is correct and my family has documented proof that it is correct.
Harold Marcano  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.8.95.87 (talk) 22:01, 15 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: This is NOT an accurate description of the origin of the surname Marcano!  This article should either be corrected or erased.
It is not a description of the origin of the surname Marcano. It is an article on four brothers that were important in the history of Cuba.Callelinea 03:37, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Traffolyte

message: Traffolyte is no longer a trademark, so I removed the trademark stub link. - Andrew8 22:05, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Traffolyte as a trademark 

message: Traffolyte: 739 Google hits. Traffolite: 1070 Google hits. Neither seems to make it easy to find anything about its history - and www.uspto.gov doesn't show either name in its trademark database. Any history references? --Alvestrand (talk) 20:07, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Traffolyte, Traffolite or both? 

message: Anybody out there who knows any infomation about the side effects and health hazards related to using traffolyte please let me know. Any piece of infomation would be greatly appreciated as I work with it every day and have just recently found out that it poses a health problem but i can't find out what that problem is. If you have info about this plz post it here.
Cheers,
Dale  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.107.71.90 (talk) 07:59, 28 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I suggest you ask the supplier for a Material safety data sheet. Biscuittin (talk) 16:41, 30 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Traffolyte poses a health problem.
Talk:1996 Montenegrin parliamentary election

message: CrnaGora, why don't you put a source? --PaxEquilibrium 22:08, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: My sources are http://www.cdtmn.org/ and http://www.cemi.cg.yu/ if you are so interested. --CrnaGora 22:13, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No, no; I meant to place the sources at the bottom of the article, so that no one could dispute the census results. --PaxEquilibrium 22:44, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:West End Bar

message: The article describes Kerouac as a "Columbia graduate."  Wikipedia's Kerouac article says that he dropped out of Columbia, which was always my understanding from my undergraduate days at Columbia (1965-9).  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.76.238.2 (talk) 08:57, 29 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Kerouac 

message: Clearly the bar closed in 2006 not 2014, as the article itself states... 2600:1017:A410:C89:2028:CDA8:5EDC:F539 (talk) 18:11, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Closure Date wrong
Category talk:Notation

message: Seems that Dolfrog and I have a difference of opinion about whether Dyslexia should be added as a category to the Notation category. Anyone else have an opinion? Libcub (talk) 16:50, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Dyslexia and notation

message: Those who are dyslexic have a problem using their cultures visual notation of Speech.
So if there was an article concerning the Visual notion of Speech, or in our shared culture the written word, then dyslexia could just include a new article regarding the visual notation of Speech, which also includes writing systems and orthograhy etc. But the written word is still a form of notation, which is waht the Notation category is about. 
And dyslexics have a preblem with many forms of notation including some of the forms of notation included in the existing article in this category.
17:16, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, no.  I see your point that writing is itself a form of notation, but that's not how it's generally defined. The term "notation" refers to forms of specialist symbolic representation that are not ordinary writing. Gordonofcartoon (talk) 19:35, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Trying to find a solution
Talk:Robert K. Kraft Field at Lawrence A. Wien Stadium

message: Right now the article has three paragraphs on the COVID thing, including an extensive quote from someone identified as "Joe Ienuso, group senior vice president for facilities and real estate at NewYork-Presbyterian". It reads more like a news article than an encyclopedia entry. I get that the epidemic is a big deal, but in the context of a wikipedia article I'm not clear that it merits more than a brief mention, I'd think. But I expect it warrants some discussion. - Kzirkel (talk) 17:39, 16 April 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Section: Tranformation to a COVID Field Hospital
Talk:GWR 9400 Class

message: @  While I can appreciate and agree with the placement of images in the appropriate section it doesn't really help if the images don't get placed in the section because they get rendered under the infobox leaving a big white gap in the middle of the article.  On the PC chrome browser I am using on a standard desktop the two images from the Operations section are ending up in the Preservation section which for all but the right of the screen has a 4 inch gap between "Two have been preserved" and the top of the table of two preserved locomotives .  Now I can look at the current arrangement on my smartphone and the rendering is wonderful.  But on my desktop using what I understand in good faith to be default settings the effect on the article seems very bad to me.  It is somewhat alleviated by the compromise use of a gallery, which while probably against MOS:ACCIM does not seem to allow for infoboxes on the right which can be the root cause of this issue.  We can get some mediation discussion or you can attempt to bait me to be get 'd especially as I've upset  plus about twenty other people recently recently.Djm-leighpark (talk) 07:48, 17 April 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Does  make a difference? --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 08:51, 18 April 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes ... In my view I think it does ... well spotted and most certainly a better method to fix the underlying issue than my attempt.  I'm sort of embarrassed I didn't spot in retrospect ... but one learns through pointed out oversights and mistakes.  The images can move out of section under the infobox on the right on a wider desktop display but the effect not intrusive with the loss of connection to source section not particularly critical in this example. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Djm-leighpark (talk • contribs) 09:12, 18 April 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: If the three images hadn't been there, that tag would also have caused a gap on a wide screen because the top edge of the table would have been pushed down by the bottom edge of the infobox - the infobox would have been the same height but the paragraphs of text would not have been as tall. You can find out about the clear property here. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 09:30, 18 April 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article rendering issues
Talk:Broad Left

message: I do not recollect the Broad Left involving any element of the Liberal Party.  The Broad Left was followed by the Left Alliance which did include Liberal Party members - it was formed at a conference just after the May 1979 general election and I believe Dave Aaronovitch was elected as Left Alliance not Broad Left.
I think that the unknown author of the above comment is correct - the Left Alliance followed the Broad Left. It did not include NOLS (national organisation of labour students) members, but was basically a group of Liberals, CPGB and independents. It collapsed sometime towards the end of the 80s 38presdales 21:11, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Supporters 

message: I didn't think Trevor Phillips was a Labour Party member when elected to the NUS Executive, he was a noted member of the non aligned students group in the Broad Left, if I remember correctly. Also wasn't Jack Straw a Labour supporter of the Broad Left, he was Charles Clarke's predecessor as NUS President?
--DaveLevy (talk) 06:34, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  People
Talk:Tharapita

message: This information from Estonia, which is of too great depth for that article, could be of use here. Quibik (talk) 23:46, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Information from "Estonia" article 

message: There is far too much use of Latin in this article, without any translation. For those of us who don't speak Latin all that text is useless. --Hibernian (talk) 05:36, 21 March 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: True, but without the Latin it would be even more useless. :p — Jeraphine Gryphon (talk) 13:22, 21 March 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, but it would be immensely improved if we translated it into the language which this Encyclopaedia is supposed to be in (unfortunately I can't translate Latin, so we need someone who can, or else put it through some translation software). --Hibernian (talk) 15:30, 22 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Use of Latin
Talk:Warden's Five Rings

message: I added some conext to Warden, and am surprised he does not have his own entry yet.  I may try and fix this soon...Bennington1954 11:17, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Bio on Warden

message: Isn't targeting a civilian population a war crime?  Seems like this would at least rate a mention... 214.10.6.24 (talk) 14:10, 4 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Population Ring
Talk:Here Lies Arthur

message: (quote) "Here Lies Arthur won the Carnegie Medal [2] in 2008 and the Nestlé Children's Book Prize Bronze Award in 2007,[3]"
Does the latter mean that Here Lies Arthur ranked third in the voting by children age 9 to 11?
Whatever it means, it's unique if i skim correctly. I don't see another Carnegie Medal winner, nor any Guardian Award winner, among the Nestle Smarties medalists, 9 to 11 years (the oldest age category for those prizes). --P64 (talk) 17:09, 5 May 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, it does mean that. Not unique, though: The Other Side of Truth by Beverley Naidoo won the Silver Medal in 2000 as well as the Carnegie Medal. Robina Fox (talk) 21:58, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Age group 

message: Beside the Carnegie Medal citation (book and author blurbs) that is now referenced in the article [ref name=medal2008], contemporary press releases are available online.
* [ref name=prdir2008] "Releases for 2008 Awards". Press Desk. CILIP. Retrieved 2012-07-30.[/ref] 
Two releases 26 June 2008 feature Reeve and Here Lies Arthur. Two earlier releases 18 April 2008 may be useful, "Shortlist ... announced" and "... Judges comments on the shortlist".
The CILIP "Shadowing Site" seems at a glance to serve a youth program for the current/latest year, without any archive, but old material may be available.
--P64 (talk) 00:28, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sources
Talk:Energy (chemistry)

message: I totally disagree with the proposal. The content on this page is not found elsewhere. I have contributed much to the content of this page. If it is deleted just to satisfy the User Sadi Carnot, it would be very unfair. I suppose the admins of this page will not allow such unfair usagrHallenrm 03:42, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Deletion
Talk:Tektology

message: The reference to "This is (historically) the first identification of philosophical "complexes" in the natural sciences to denote a combination of elements of `activity - resistance'." was deleted as unsupported by evidence and contradicted by evidence. Contradictions include: 
* Čarnogurská, M. (2007). Chinese philosophy through a prism of its classical ontological conception in the future global context. In The proceedings of the twenty-first world congress of philosophy (Vol. 7, pp. 157-160).
* and the work of Aristotle, cf Aristotle's on the Soul: And on Memory and Recollection. (2004). Aristotle's on the soul: And on memory and recollection. Green Lion Press. (Original work published 2001), see Introduction by Joe Sachs.
There may be a more precise way in which this is a first, but if so this needs clarification.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Maven111 (talk • contribs) 14:44, 6 January 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Deletions

message: As the book Tektology uses a spelling with a K, should not this page be spelt the same way? Leutha (talk) 08:19, 8 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Spelling
Talk:Environmental stewardship (England)

message: I think something should be added on the Entry Level Pilot Scheme, a trial scheme established prior to the launch of ESS to test the scheme design and popularity. Will put some words together.  --Malcolmxl5 22:54, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Entry Level Pilot Scheme

message: This article does not actually give a general definition of environmental stewardship.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.117.244.25 (talk) 14:09, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: More info needed!
Talk:Paignton RFC

message: Someone named Gary Shillabear is/was the Paignton Rugby Football Club veterans' captain, is this the same person as Gary Shillabeer? Best Regards. DynamoDegsy (talk) 09:31, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Gary Shillabeer]] at [[Paignton Rugby Football Club]]?
Talk:Technocratic views of the Price system

message: I have added a link to the Technocracy Study Course, and cleaned up some formating here and syntax. Also added a link to a video about money and its creation. This video is not put out by the Technocracy movement , but it still does a very good job of explaining some money basics (skip sievert 01:54, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Technocracy Study Course 

message: This editor continues to filter all concepts in articles toward Technocracy movement and not Technocracy Incorporated
The reason ? Perhaps because he is a member/user of Network of European Technocrats http://en.technocracynet.eu/index.php?option=com_comprofiler&task=userProfile&user=85&Itemid=65
Network of European Technocrats - Ross Murphy
This editor also removes links that would provide a more well rounded presentation of Technate design Technocracy information. 
The page Technocracy movement contains directions to get to the Network of European Technocrats page. This editor has removed the link that goes to the originating group that developed the concepts of Technocracy and coined the term price system in this context of the article.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest
Wikipedia:Conflict of interest -
That site is a for profit site and the Director of that site is Andrew Wallace wikipedia editor Isenhand. A team was formed by NET members and others to control Technocracy and Network of European Technocrats information on wikipedia. http://en.technocracynet.eu/index.php?option=com_fireboard&Itemid=63&func=view&catid=7&id=853#1399
Network of European Technocrats - Re:"War" on Wikipedia over Technocracy I - N.E.T. Forum skip sievert (talk) 16:25, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hibernian (Ross Murphy) 

message: http://www.technocracy.org/Archives/History%20&%20Purpose-r.htm
History and Purpose of Technocracy
This is a very important link for the information it provides and it is from the official site. The editor removing it and also removing links to Technocracy Incorporated should carefully consider that the article is being deprived without those links as to objective material and overview. skip sievert (talk) 01:46, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  History and Purpose of Technocracy by Howard Scott. 

message: Seems rather pointless...Technocracy Study Course.  also to delete Technocracy Incorporated in favor of a movement is not really a good reference. Why make a directive to one article like that when the other edit has both. The original group should not be described connected with a movement skip sievert (talk) 15:12, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I mistakenly put back that link, but I stand by the rest of the edit. --Hibernian (talk) 02:04, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Restoring a red link to an article that does not exist

message: But the article could use more. I added energy accounting, urbanates, etc. skip sievert (talk) 02:15, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Added four references and citations
Talk:Active management

message: I noticed that the link to Prof. Sharpe's "Arithmetic of Active Management" paper was linked to a .pdf copy of the paper on another website than Prof. Sharpe's. Since this paper is still under copyright, it makes sense to link directly to the author's site, since he has posted the full text on his own site.
--216.160.113.36 (talk) 18:13, 4 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[User:ZeeSpud|ZeeSpud]] 23:02, 1 May 2007 (UTC) 
Talk:Tetragrammaton

message: @Iskandar323: The article in its present version claims that modern scholars reject the traditional explanation of the etymology of YHWH as "a later theological gloss", even though the source used does not support this assertion (Parker is simply giving his personal opinion, not that of the majority of scholars) and we have a source that explicitly says that the consensus among scholars is exactly the opposite of what this article claims. What is the reason not to correct this gross error in the article? Potatín5 (talk) 11:13, 20 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  On the Etymology 

message: Achar Sva deleted the sentence  and the attached citation with the summary . In fact, the second sentence refers to a lack of consensus and in no way contradicts the deleted sentence.
The roots  () and  () are both to be; in modern Hebrew the first is seen in past tense, future tense and infinitive while the second is seen only in present tense. The linquistic connection between  () and  () is clear -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz Username:Chatul (talk) 12:13, 23 May 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. Not only that, but the sentence removed had a legitimate reference for the wording, hence shouldn't've been removed. I shall revert and point to this discussion. Stephen Walch (talk) 12:49, 23 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Relation of roots היה (HYH) and הוה (HVH) , consistency of sentences 

message: A recent series of edits removed, reinstated and removed again the final  (He) from several places in the text. I believe that is important to retain all consonants in a tranliteration, but in any case I'm asking whether there are wikipedia guidelines for this. The question applies to other final consonants besides . -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz Username:Chatul (talk) 19:12, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I doubt there's any Wiki guidelines on this, however doesn't matter if a letter is silent, it's transliterated (anyone want to go around removing English transliterations of French words which contain silent letters such as X in deux or s in words like nous and vous?). Believe this is a daft chain of edits and the person doing it needs banning from editing this page. Does it need to be locked down again? Stephen Walch (talk) 21:35, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll quote from the Transliteration page on wiki: "Transliteration is not primarily concerned with representing the sounds of the original but rather with representing the characters, ideally accurately and unambiguously." I'll go with that. Stephen Walch (talk) 21:40, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Transliteration of silent final consonant
Talk:Epicurious

message: The website matter is fine, but I think the term you are looking for (in the second definition) is "bi-curious."  Using "epicurious" is, I think, a malapropism.  One usage by what appears to be a screenname does not define a word.  I'm not sure what the citation is for that word but it is certainly not common usage.  I am deleting the matter, but will gladly see it reinstated if someone can explain this to me.Polkapolkapoker 23:06, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

message: I haven't yet learned how to modify Wikipedia (on my list), but the awards section ends in 2015. I got the impression from this that the website (Epicurious) had gone into disfavor after the updated design. However, a glance at the Webbys indicate that it won or was mentioned again several times in the years since  https://winners.webbyawards.com/winners/websites-and-mobile-sites/general-websites-and-mobile-sites/food-drink?years=3 . 
Ordinarily I wouldn't care, but because I got the wrong impression, I thought it was important. Thanks. BobPango (talk) 18:34, 22 April 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Updated Awards Section Needed
Talk:Milewski's typology

message: I have removed both tags from the article.
1. The basic source is listed now, so the information that the article does not cite its sources is not true any longer.
2. This talk page is the right place to say what exactly needs cleaning, if you really feel so. Just adding the information that the article as if needs cleaning does not follow Wikipedia standards. Besides, if you really feel so, just try to clean it yourself!
Grzegorj 20:21, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: [Untitled]