lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Wreck Pond

message: I hope and plead for people with direct knowledge or access to information to add to this article, especially information on the size of Wreck Pond in acres or square feet, estimated number of gallons of water, depth at various points, its history, the kinds and numbers of native plant and animal species, the kinds and numbers of invading species, etc.
Gladmax 09:50, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Comments
Talk:Glasgow Cathcart (Scottish Parliament constituency)

message: If the article does not exist, why does the link appear live? Laurel Bush 09:51, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: I note removal of reference to Renfrewshire. The Govan Holyrood constituency was created in 1999 with the boundaries of the Govan Westminster constituency. In 1999, and until 2005 (when the Westminster constituency was replaced with new constituencies), the Westminster constituency did include part of Renfrewhire, and, at present, the Holyrood constituency is unchanged, retaining the boundaries it had when created. See The 5th Periodical Report of the Boundary Commission for Scotland, which details 2005 changes to boundaries of Westminster constituencies, and shows pre 2005 Glasgow Govan covering part of Renfrewshire. Laurel Bush 10:49, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Boundaries
Talk:Walker Cup

message: the results section is upside down.
You should have the year increasing as you go down the page - just like on the Ryder Cup page.
: Hm.  Just about every other golf tournament article orders its results this way; I guess because most people would likely be more interested in recent results, which would come first.  Maybe the Ryder Cup section should be reversed.  Probably just a matter of preference though... you find both orders when looking at different historical results pages around the web. Carl Lindberg 15:04, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

message: Introduction says: "Half points for matches finishing even were awarded for the first time in 1971.". We then proceed to give results which include half points before that date, contrary to the official web site results. eg 1923 was 6 to 5 but we say 6.5 to 5.5. Better to use official scores I think.Nigej (talk) 20:15, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I can see both sides of this issue. If the scores are left as is, then a note should be added stating that halved matches are included in the total scores prior to 1971 for consistency with later years. If we go with the "official scores", then a note should be added that "The following years' scores do not include halved matches: 1923: 1, 1926: 1, 1932: 3, " etc or some such verbiage. Tewapack (talk) 21:46, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually worse than I thought. In our table halves included in team scores up to 1961 but not from 1963 to 1969. Have included them consistently (I hope). Happy to revert to official score if the consensus is for that. Nigej (talk) 13:38, 6 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Halved matches 

message: We have the 3 little boxes at the bottom of 2013 Walker Cup, back to 2005. From 2003 back they are missing eg (for 2011):
2009 Walker Cup 16½  9½	2011 Walker Cup 14  12	2013 Walker Cup 17  9
We have the infobox at the top which has somewhat similar functionality. Perhaps better (and certainly more consistent) to have a Walker Cup template like this: User:Nigej/Template:Walker Cup. Nigej (talk) 10:24, 9 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Navigation boxes 

message: The opening section currently has this text: 
'There is little present competitive reason to do so: although the United States leads the series 35 to 8, with one halved match (draw), through 2013, the two teams have been far more evenly matched in recent decades. Starting with the 1989 Match in which Great Britain and Ireland ended the US' eight-match winning streak, the United States have won 7 to Great Britain and Ireland's 6.'
Suggest that this should be re worded to clarify: currently it's not obvious what the objective is. CPES (talk) 18:32, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Tangled
Talk:Cardiff University Students' Union

message: Considering that this page does not seem to sufficiently meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability, it seems right to delete this article. I seek other editors views on this.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Harshcshah (talk • contribs) 13:26, 3 November 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: There are too few independent sources cited in the article, but the topic is almost certainly notable. A Google News search gives multiple hits, and there are numerous articles on equivalent unions in :Category:Students' unions in the United Kingdom. Verbcatcher (talk) 15:44, 4 November 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  PROPOSED PAGE DELETION
Talk:Christian Hernandez

message: In this edit I reverse a change someone made to the article.  Originally the article said Hernandez played a role in Hatab's death.
Someone changed this to say he was merely ACCUSED of playing a role in Hatab's death.  I dispute this change complies with policy.  What the sources make clear is that whether Hernandez played a role in his death was not what was in dispute.  What was in dispute was whether Hernandez was culpable for the role he played.  The military decided he wasn't culpable.  Geo Swan (talk) 12:41, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: "''accused'' of playing a role?"

message: In this edit I reverse a change someone made to the article.  At the time of Hatab's death DoD spokesmen were pushing the account that Jessica Lynch had been subjected to torture and rape.  In her book Lynch accepted the view of the medical examiners, in Germany, weeks after her capture, that she had been raped -- but had no memory of it.  No one claims she was tortured -- now.  But GIs believed it then.  Hatab is not the only captive the record shows was abused becaus GIs were outraged over Lynch's torture and rape.  It is not the place of wikipedia contributors to sanitize the historical record.  Geo Swan (talk) 12:41, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: "abduction" or "rape and torture"?
Template talk:Alex Rider

message: I believe it makes the template overly huge to include links to every header for every character.  It also lacks precedent, at least in my view.  For instnace, the video game series  only links to the main list of character articles.  The same goes for all the individual  templates.  Templates are supposed to be as streamlined and compact as possible and linking every character goes against that apparent philiosophy. hbdragon88 (talk) 01:23, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Maybe that is an 'apparent philosphy', but it's not a written rule you have to follow. An example of a template like this is , which lists all the main characters and supporting characters. The only different with this series is that it has more supporting characters.  The template doesn't include every character either, in fact, within each respective book, these characters would be considered main characters. As for why all the characters link to the same page, they link to theri respective headings under the page. ~ Bella Swan 00:01, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, I guess until something is standardized, it's on a template by template basis. I can't think of how to resolve this short of asking for a WP:THIRD opinion. hbdragon88 (talk) 20:59, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Personally, I don't think the characters under protagonists and antagonists should be on there at all. All the articles are a subheading of List of Alex Rider characters. A link to that page should be sufficient, I believe. I take precedent from Template:Harrypotter, where all characters with individual articles are linked, followed by the groups of characters e.g. Dumbledore's Army, Supporting Harry Potter characters, etc. -- THE DARK LORD TROMBONATOR 11:17, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I've changed it to have a 'Minor Characters' heading with portagonists and antagonists under it. What do you think? ~ Bella Swan? 13:49, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Love it. Simple and effective. -- THE DARK LORD TROMBONATOR 09:56, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Excellent. ~ Bella Swan? 22:28, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Character links
Talk:Compartmentalization of decay in trees

message: I changed the year/publication in which Shigo published the theory 'cause it looks like the USFS first published a bulletin by Shigo on CODIT in '77 , nearly a decade before A New Tree Biology (1986), and the reference I use is from '79.
Also, I wasn't really sure how I should reference much of what's on the page, as most all of it's from one source.  If anyone's got a better idea than how I cited it, please do change it, as I think I did a pretty crappy job on that. -- Severinus 10:32, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edits and cites 

message: Can we get a mod to change the name to Compartmentalization of decay In trees? --IronMaidenRocks (talk) 04:21, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I've moved it to Compartmentalization of decay in trees --Melburnian (talk) 02:59, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Remove the caps
Talk:Emcodec

message: This article was originally created by myself, the [User:Sloth monkey|sloth monkey], (14:48, 13 July 2006) under the article named "Media Codec".  This is simply because I encountered the trojan myself (under the names zipcodec and media codec) and decided to check Wiki for any information on the fishy-looking devils.  Lo and behold, there was nothing to be found in the entire universe of Wikipedia.  But there was info on it available from Symantec (I use Symantec Antivirus Corporate Edition).   
After I wrote it, some others helped to improve the article, but more than anyone it seems AxelBoldt did some good work to improve things (01:10, 12 August 2006 to 18:20, 18 September 2006).  So thanks for that, buddy.  
Then on September 19, 2006, I created this article (Trojan.Emcodec.E) and redirected the Media Codec article.  
There now you know the history of things.  As if you cared. 
sloth_monkey 10:32, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  History 

message: If anyone else finds additional info or especially different names that this thing goes by, please contribute by listing it here and also creating a new article for the varient, redirecting it to Trojan.Emcodec.E.  Thanks.
On a completely unrelated note, I wrote most of the article on Robert Kiyosaki and so I obviously feel the man's worth listening to.  Please read the article if you feel so inclined.  
sloth_monkey 10:32, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Discussion
Talk:List of Grumman A-6 Intruder operators

message: What is this specifically ? there are lot of mentions but no article 
THANKS  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.18.113.222 (talk) 22:25, 26 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: cadre status
Template talk:Jane Austen

message: What to call "Incomplete novels" - I changed it from "Posthumous" because both Persuasion and Northanger Abbey were published posthumously. Awadewit | talk 09:07, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes I agree "incomplete" is better, good spot. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 09:50, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, but Lady Susan isn't incomplete. Stratford490 (talk) 08:46, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

text: I've changed the categories into "major works" and "minor works", since all the works have been published, though not all during her lifetime (and "published during her lifetime is too long, I think), and also Lady Susan is not incomplete - it's just considered to be (much) less significant than the "great" novels. Stratford490 (talk) 08:52, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Categories

message: I removed the Adaptations section from the template because it only included one film and one serial, and there are far more than just those two, as can be seen at :Category:Adaptations of works by Jane Austen (I counted 29). I didn't know if we would want to have a section with that many articles — it's rather a lot — so I thought I'd mention it here first before I made a decision. Please discuss. Mr. Absurd (talk) 15:28, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: *Perhaps the adaptations should have their own navbox? Awadewit (talk) 15:30, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Adaptations 

message: I added Charles Austen to the template, since he now has an article in his own right. Like Francis he's been suggested as a possible inspiration, particularly for some of her seafaring characters, but if people feel that he's at too much of a tangent to feature I don't particularly mind him being taken out again. Benea (talk) 12:34, 3 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Charles Austen 

message: I added some Jane Austen characters to the template, for they have been on Wikipedia for a long time, and I thought that they should be acknowledged.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Universityoffelicity (talk • contribs) 23:04, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Adding Some Austen Characters 

message: Updated the information into a new template. Added some links and removed others, most noticeably "Characters" since the list was getting long and didn't include all characters (since some do not have pages). The characters should go under specific novel templates. I'm currently working on that in my sandboxes. Please discuss since I don't know if this new change will be welcomed or not. ImperialJaineite (talk) 02:48, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  New Template Look 

message: The literature and novels portals need to be removed, as these are general portals and not specific to the navbox topic. 212.135.65.247 (talk) 16:59, 20 February 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Done, but without prejudice to another editor re-adding them.  However, I would hope that if they do, they will be prepared to discuss it here.  The original portal, Portal:Jane Austin, was removed last September after this discussion.  davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 22:40, 28 February 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 20 February 2020
Talk:Calpine

message: Is this entry a little short of useful information? The timeline shows a meteoric rise of Calpine's fortunes, its generating capacity (MW), its IPO and share price rise, and nowhere does it explain where all the debt came from, why it couldn't be serviced, why if the company has as many assets as stated that assets could not be liquidated to satisfy debt, why the market reached near zero confidence in the company, etc, etc. Instead the grand timeline of achievements is summed up with files for bankruptcy and delisted for low share price. How about someone with knowledge of the company filling in some meaningful information? — unsigned entry by 69.61.172.213 03:34, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, it is a little short of useful information, and that's why it's tagged as a stub.  I had gathered the basic time line for another project, and since there was no article on Calpine back then I started this one.  It's not entirely useless, since you seem to have derived the basics of the company's fortunes from the "grand" timeline.  If you want a full corporate report you can pay for one elsewhere.  Please come back when you have time to contribute. —RandallJones 21:26, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: I removed the following set of plants. stand alone lists need citations to show they exist (and if they are notable, which i dont think is a problem wiht power plants). please add back in when references are found.
* Westbrook Energy Center
* Agnews Power Plant
* Bethlehem Energy Center
* Oneta Energy Center
* Pastoria Energy Facility
* Texas City Power Plant
75.61.131.36 (talk) 16:16, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: references
Talk:List of United States Marine Corps wing support groups

message: :They provide the Marine air wings with organic and deployable combat support...
Will readers unfamiliar with the combat-support field understand what "organic" means here? I'm guessing it doesn't refer to the absence of pesticides. – AndyFielding (talk) 01:13, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Organic support"?
Talk:List of United States Navy aircraft squadrons

message: Your article states the HH-60H Helicopters were used for anti submarine warfare ASW. They were not. They were HCS units used for Combat Rescue and Spec Ops Support. 2600:1012:B11E:2601:C46B:C70F:A64B:5917 (talk) 01:18, 26 November 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Do you have a source to support this? - wolf 10:37, 26 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Anti submarine Helicopter Squadron
Talk:List of units of the United States Navy

message: I'm curious as to why this list isn't named the List of commands of the United States Navy. I don't think I've ever heard the word units in a Navy context before. Minnecologies (talk) 14:30, 3 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Naming
Talk:Marine Corps Systems Command

message: I was followed home and was told i was discharged from the military ask for papers which the person didn't  have so huh i moved because of all of that now what hack by a lower military officer huh interesting 129.222.138.66 (talk) 13:52, 15 July 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  I was followed home and was told i was i was discharged
Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/September 19, 2006

message: Does it have to be "Rush is"? That's quite horrible English in my part of the world; we prefer "Rush are".
Also, I think that "(now part of Toronto)" is quite unneccessary padding for the front page. The feature is supposed to be on a band not Canada. --kingboyk 10:50, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
Talk:Hermsprong

message: What do we think about naming the page simply "Hermsprong"? Awadewit | talk 15:41, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Page name
Talk:Ianuarius

message: I think this page be merged into January. There is no need for a separate article on the latin name of a month, when such information already exists in the month's article. Nyh 10:55, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: But see Quintilis, for example. We have several articles on aspects of the Roman calendar. The articles on individual months amplify in greater detail material covered at Roman festivals, Roman calendar, Julian calendar, and Fasti. The article isn't about the Latin name, but about the month itself. For this month, for instance, one could also use the vast amount of scholarship generated on January by Ovid's poem on the Roman calendar. It just isn't fully developed. Cynwolfe (talk) 17:30, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge

message: Now that we have a full list of Roman dates for the month, it can't really fit into the #History section of January any more. That said, this month's  is still "January" and it's exactly the same month, just focused on its Roman context. It should be moved to January (Roman) or January (Roman calendar) instead of pretending that the Latin name was talking about a different subject or that it is commonly used in English. — LlywelynII 02:03, 28 February 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Move

message: The alt form with J, the common anglicized form, and the abbreviation need to show up bolded in the article. If there's a feeling that they clutter the lead, they should be moved with the etymology to a new #Name section rather than removed entirely. — LlywelynII 23:51, 17 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title: Names
Talk:205 series

message: Wouldn't it be better if KAI Commuter's 205-5000 formation in this page is shifted to the overseas operation segment in Indonesia? Also the formation can be expaned with the one in Bahasa Indonesia version of this page
--182.30.130.220 (talk) 16:17, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  205-5000 formation 

message: I have a lot of questions regarding this article. How many infoboxes does it need? Many of the sections with them are very short, badly written, have very few (if any) sources or any combination of the three. I was considering removing a lot of them because of those reasons and they simply seem to regurgitate little more than what was already stated in the lead infobox. XtraJovial (talk) 03:51, 15 March 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Infoboxes and general layout
Talk:The Mandarins

message: I'm just wondering if the Random Capitalization of Words is significant. -- Hongooi 10:03, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Caps 
Talk:Rhynchelmis orientalis

message: I think the article could be somewhat improved if it mentioned what the heck this is, as well as its Latin name. --Dweller 10:59, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi. Thanks for the response. I think it's usually considered good practice to start in a sandbox, but no matter. I meant what kind of creature is this? Is it a worm? Something easily comprehensible to the common man, as well as its Latin name, is useful on an encylopedia article. --Dweller 09:26, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It is a freshwater worm; the genus is easily recognised by its size and its prolonged proboscis. However, as with most of the family, it's not a worm that's easily found, and few people are actually interested in even trying. Supposedly, it could be called "Japanese Snout Worm" or some such name, but there are no common names in this family [with the exception of Lumbriculus variegatus which is known as the (Californian) Blackworm] as far as I know. Still, I'll try to add some general description of the genus as a whole to the genus article; it would not be productive to have this included in every separate species entry, I think. Grijndvar 11:00, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: What is it?
Talk:Giuseppe Saragat

message: The brackets around the phonetic representation of his name suggest it is a broad transcription when it is a narrow one.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.140.57.113 (talk) 10:56, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: There is an RfC on the question of using "Religion: None" vs. "Religion: None (atheist)" in the infobox on this and other similar pages. 
The RfC is at Template talk:Infobox person#RfC: Religion infobox entries for individuals that have no religion. 
Please help us determine consensus on this issue. --Guy Macon (talk) 19:46, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Template talk:Infobox person#RfC: Religion infobox entries for individuals that have no religion|Request for Comments]] 

message: Most of his close acquaintances have always maintained that, at least in his latter years, he was a Roman Catholic, although his feelings were strictly private and any religious practice of his was confined to a restricted number of members of the clergy.He refused a catholic funeral but nonetheless ordered a private catholic benediction to  be held before being buried.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:B07:6463:99D:4062:E6:62D2:79C8 (talk) 10:19, 10 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Religion
Talk:Mr. Palomar

message: Calvino's last novel is widely recognised as a major literary contribution (by writers as diverse as  John Updike and Seamus Heaney) and have changed its rating accordingly.--Jumbolino (talk) 16:51, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Changed to high importance
Talk:Glen Edgar Edgerton

message: The title should really be "Glen Edgerton" rather than "Glen Edgar Edgerton" as that is the name used in literature and what people are likely to search on. 2601:642:4C03:2CA0:492F:BB8B:7C57:D83C (talk) 01:48, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article title
Talk:Bernard Fergusson, Baron Ballantrae

message: Why isn't there any mention in this article about his involvement in the murder of the youth Alexander rubovich by Roy Farran? He was Farran's commanding officer and gave an affidavit that Farran confessed to him about murdering Rubovich Pelegisrael (talk) 07:16, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Rubovich case
Talk:Bernard Kenny

message: There is a false picture on the Bernard Kenny site
:pic was reverted to correct image. Alansohn 03:38, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: vandalism
Talk:Glenn Richardson

message: Much of the current version of this article appears to have been copied from this website. Glenn Richardson seems notable enough to keep an article, so I'll try to rewrite it within the next couple of days. Cheers. – Liveste (talk) 08:03, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copyvio 