lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Antisthenes

message: It has become the fashion of modern scholars to promulgate doubt about certain statements in certain sources for apparently arbitrary reasons but it is not the role of an encyclopedia to simply parrot them as if they were measured facts. The casual doubt cast here about Antisthenes meeting Diogenes of Sinope is a textbook example as it does not account for any specific issues with the sources (here Diogenes Laërtius) per se. It is known that Diogenes Laërtius relied on some secondary sources of lesser value but it is not clear whether this section is one of them. Surely all historical texts are subject to at least some level of doubt? And surely there are gradients of doubt and defensible justifications for them but these are not present here and have not been made clearer by recent scholars such as Navia even. Either way, I'm pretty sure you'll find confirmation in Dio Chrysostom's account of the meeting between Diogenes of Sinope and Antisthenes so I'm unsure why we need these unreferenced problematisations. Please contact me if you want to work on this or go ahead and remove the questionable content if that is your bag Silverwood (talk) 15:32, 25 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Why don't you simply credit the tales and, if recent scholars express doubt, drop the doubt into a footnote?--Wetman (talk) 17:00, 25 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed. Silverwood (talk) 09:28, 29 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I've put in a line or two (with references this time) about the doubts some scholars have about Diogenes being a pupil of Antisthenes. This is a matter of open debate in textbooks about the ancient Cynics, and it seems to me reasonable to mention this debate in an Encyclopedia article on Antisthenes. Others (and I know that Navia is one) tend to favour the ancient reports, so feel free to add that side of the debate as well if you want. I'm fairly neutral on the issue, but I think it's worth mentioning. Singinglemon (talk) 17:50, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

text: Okay, I've added in the case for the defence as well. It should hopefully  be satisfactory. Singinglemon (talk) 21:00, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for the work, Singinglemon. Your standards of balance and extensive knowledge of the subject are a real asset. I noticed you have been quiet for a few months and it is good to have you back around. Silverwood (talk) 14:24, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Diogenes of Sinope

message: In order to help make this article more encyclopedic, can we add what his name meant in Ancient Greek? Also, was this name given to him at birth or did he acquire it later in his life? 76.190.213.189 (talk) 76.190.213.189 (talk) 21:01, 20 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  To add to article
Talk:Antistrophe

message: There is a sentence in the main article that reads in relevant part:
"exemplifying the triple m in which the ancient sacred hymns of Greece were coined"
I have no idea what this phrase means.  At the very least, it needs to be linked to a definition or article that covers its usage.  It would be preferable to describe the meaning within this article, though, or remove it if it is too cumbersome to describe properly.  
Right now, this unexplained phrase impairs a reader's understanding of the article.
:It was an error introduced when digitizing the 1911 Encyclopedia Britannica. The original wording was "triple form". Now fixed. Gdr 21:27, 16 July 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Clarify: What does "triple m" mean?
Talk:Iran–Venezuela relations

message: This article seems to refer only to the relationship between Chavez and Ahmadinejad, as opposed to Iran-Venezuela relations, and so should be renamed to reflect this.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.211.249.183 (talk) 15:48, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rename Article 

message: http://www.spacewar.com/reports/Russia_gives_Iran_top_new_radar_999.html
Is this solid enough to add yet?  Hcobb (talk) 19:07, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Russian radar cross sale 

message: In the last two months, a lot of new developments have occurred around Iranian relations with Latin America. As a result of public hearings before the U.S. Congress,there is now much more in the public domain. As a result, this article needs updating to reflect the new information available. Alohamoha (talk) 08:03, 27 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Needs Updating 
Talk:Jerzy Radziwiłł (1556–1600)

message: What name did he use? Lithuanian Wikipedia lists only "Jurgis Radvila", which is unprobable. His ancestors were using Ruski language, why should he use the Lithuanian?Xx236 10:04, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Surely you are mistaken, you must have meant that his ancestors "mówili po Polsku". Interestingly the Radziwills in their current biographies and interviews acknowledge their Lithuanian ancestries. Dr. Dan 15:19, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  What was his name ? 

message: I found a page at http://www.fiu.edu/~mirandas/bios1583.htm#Radziwill
woodfold (talk) 01:01, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Of course this information is useful, but when a source uses "Wilno" for Vilnius, and uses "Lipsk", for Leipzig, and even the controversial "Kraków" for Cracow, on English Wikipedia, one needs to take a closer look at it than usual. Dr. Dan (talk) 02:09, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is this information helpful ? 

message: It is far from clear (1) which is a title in a book;  (2) which is a description of what is in a book;  (3) whether a name cited (sometimes only a last name) is an author or an editor.  Needs some work. Vicedomino (talk) 07:27, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  WORKS section
Talk:Abu'l-Hasan Asaf Khan

message: Please check and see if you have the name right. I believe his  correct name is Abul Hasan and not Abdul Hasan!--74.96.6.128 (talk) 06:02, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: iblogger.org is on the blacklist so images from it should not be used.  See also the whitelist discussion|
Graeme374 (talk) 00:27, 2 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  images from greatestbattles.iblogger.org 

message: -ARE there any??? Basket Feudalist  16:25, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sources. 
Talk:Abiezer Coppe

message: I'm here to praise. This article is an admirably concise and accurate summary of the career of Abiezer Coppe. 69.203.146.16 (talk) 13:35, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Abraham Pietersen van Deusen

message: This guy is my great great great great great great great great Grandfather!
--Ferbess (talk) 21:48, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: If he got married on the Grote Houtstraat in 1629, then he may have been a Mennonite. Jane (talk) 12:13, 27 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  
Talk:Abu al-Ghazi Bahadur

message: How is there a photograph of someone from the 1600s?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2610:E0:A040:C550:862:5327:EB75:77F1 (talk) 19:35, 12 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wrong photo 
Talk:Antoinette Bourignon

message: WikiSander (talk) 16:47, 12 July 2012 (UTC)
Talk:Antonine Itinerary

message: Tried to help the formatting and such; cited sources; added some information; added banners to the talk page. Notuncurious (talk) 02:18, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Revamped 

message: If you must add era tags, please keep the neutral "BCE" and "CE". I would prefer it in this form. Lupus Bellator (talk) 18:01, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Please review WP:ERA, though by now I think several editors have already alerted you to this guideline. Cynwolfe (talk) 19:08, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Era style 

message: A[n] IP added ": The British section cannot have been created from Augustinian documents, since Augustus died before the Roman Invasion, in AD14. The Claudian Invasion and the subsequent road-building, took place from AD43!" - I've moved here as it seems OR.\ Doug Weller talk 13:35, 1 August 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Of course, they aren't wrong either. — LlywelynII 01:43, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  British section 

message: Aside from the silliness of ascribing any of the current document to Augustus or his time, no, "the oldest extant copy" doesn't date from the 3rd century either. Scholars conjecture an ur-text came from that era. The oldest extant copies are Carolingian or later. — LlywelynII 01:43, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title: Dating nonsense
Talk:Adriaen Block

message: I'm trying to determine the etymology of "Rhode Island" for the Aquidneck Island article.  I've seen two claims made, one of which (the one I'm less inclined to believe) is also claimed on this article's page:
1. Verrazzano noted in correspondence that there was an island in Narragansett Bay similar to the Greek island of Rhodes. The pilgrims, having known of this story, decided that Aquidneck was the island and named it as such.
Evidence: http://sos.ri.gov/library/history/name/ cites actual correspondence and documents, though I haven't tried to actually verify these citations. There is a logical leap between Verrazzano's reference to Rhodes and Aquidneck's eventual renaming by pilgrims. In the absence of better evidence, it sounds like a logical conclusion that Verrazzano was the originator of the idea.
2. Adriaen Block, the Dutch explorer, named something (a particular island? the whole RI state area?) "Roodt Eylandt" because of the red clay lining the shores.
Evidence: Many websites make this claim (including the Rhode Island state webpage!), but do not supply any backup evidence. Is there any documentation/correspondence to support this claim?
--Rsl12 (talk) 17:54, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Roode Eyelandt etymology 
Talk:Adriaen Brouwer

message: Hello, folks.  Two sections of the article appear to contradict each other.  The discussion of The Smokers given in the "Portraits and Tronies" section expresses uncertainty as to the identities of the people in the painting.  And yet, the discussion in the "Life" section (in the paragraph that starts "Early biographers ...") seems to brook no such uncertainty.  I have no idea which of the two is correct.  Perhaps someone with better knowledge of Brouwer's work can reconcile these two sections.  NewYorkActuary (talk) 20:48, 2 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Conflicting information
Talk:Adriaen van de Venne

message: I keep running into the full name spelled as "Adriaen Pietersz. van de Venne" with a dot in it, as if "Pietersz." is an abbreviation for something longer.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  21:41, 18 November 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Pietersz."
Talk:Adriaen van Utrecht

message: Hello! This is a note to let the editors of this article know that :File:Banquet Still Life, Adriaen van Utrecht, 1644 - Rijksmuseum.jpg will be appearing as picture of the day on December 1, 2016. You can view and edit the POTD blurb at Template:POTD/2016-12-01. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 12:13, 14 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[:File:Banquet Still Life, Adriaen van Utrecht, 1644 - Rijksmuseum.jpg]] to appear as POTD soon
Talk:Agostino Agazzari

message: I've reviewed this article as part of the Composers project review of its B-class articles.  It's a decent B, considering it hasn't changed much in a few years.  My full review is on the comments page; questions and comments should be left here or on my talk page. Magic♪piano 17:14, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Composer project review

message: I'll refrain from inserting the music theory stub, but there is enough material out there that a reasonable amount could be added to amplify Agazzari's connection to music theory.  If not stub, then it's certainly no better than start class.  See Damschroder, Music Theory from Zarlino to Schenker."-- kosboot (talk) 03:15, 4 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Stub or not 
Talk:Albert Frederick, Duke of Prussia

message: The death date on one of Albert Frederick sons looks wrong.  It is listed as:
  Frederick Henry of Hohenzollern (4 October 1579 – 14 October 1672) 
But Albert Frederick died in 1618, and we are told he had no living sons when he died, so presumably Frederick Henry died sometime before 1618, not in 1672. DlronW (talk) 01:07, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  death date looks wrong
Talk:A3055 road

message: I propose that Military Road (Isle of Wight) is merged into this article. This would avoid having two articles describing one piece of tarmac. Regan123 14:53, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Whilst I can see the logic, the Military Road is a definitely different road to most of the rest of the A3055.  It in not at any point in a built up area, is built to a much higher standard, and I believe most Islanders would refer to it by that name.  However, as the original writer of both of these articles, that may not be an objective viewpoint.  Would welcome further thoughts...
--Peeky44 15:33, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think these articles should be merged, albeit into separate sections.  I think that each of the two articles is short enough to warrant a unified article - how much more could be added to either of them?  -Leevclarke 23:47, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That is a good point.  If they are both to grow then a merge is not appropriate.  Is there much more to be added? Regan123 16:27, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge

message: Parts of this article refer to events which were due to take place when this was written in 2009/10. These sections require altering or updating by someone with access to relevant material. cheers Geopersona (talk) 19:10, 1 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Update required
Talk:Waterloo Moraine

message: Removed this sentence, " This substance also makes water hard, and is costly and difficult to deal with."  The hardness in the groundwater is largely a function of calcium, magnesium, and carbonate (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hard_water).  While salt (sodium chloride) may be a problem both for taste and salinity (in terms of meeting PWQO for sodium) it does not affect the hardness of the groundwater.
216.59.241.90 14:53, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

message: The two links under 'Images and maps' return 404 errors.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.236.53.153 (talk) 04:05, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Broken Links

message: I reverted a change in citations because the new citation didn't specifically address the claim to which it was attached. Here's the citation that was removed:
* Delineation of three-dimensional well capture zones for complex multi-aquifer systems. Frind EO, Muhammad DS, Molson JW. Department of Earth Sciences, University of Waterloo, Ontario (NCBI Abstract)
I think it's useful to use as a reference, but not for that claim. Mindmatrix 23:33, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Removed citation
Talk:Alessandro Vittoria

message: Hello! This is a note to let the editors of this article know that :File:Alessandro Vittoria - Paolo Veronese.jpg will be appearing as picture of the day on . You can view and edit the POTD blurb at Template:POTD/2018-10-22. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. Thanks  — Amakuru (talk) 23:42, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Image from this article to appear as POTD soon
Talk:Fat admirer

message: Concerns regarding whether this article should exist are addressed here.  This article was created by User:Sketchvg despite those concerns, and without concrete, attributable sources.  Please keep the discussion at the above-given link, rather than here.  Joie de Vivre 14:55, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Totallydisputed  and Unreferenced-section templates

message: Sketchvg expressed a strong belief that Fat admiration is a superclass, containing Fat fetishism.  We were in the midst of a discussion of this opinion when Sketchvg created the Fat admirer article.  I have merged the content of Fat fetishism to the article describing what Sketchvg asserts to be its superclass, Fat admirer.  Joie de Vivre 15:06, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge of content at Fat fetishism
Talk:Ecclesia (Sparta)

message: What does that mean? Doesn't make any sense to me. Fresheneesz (talk) 22:38, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  "as it is proved by the use of the month Apellaios" 

message: "There is a single reference to a "small assembly" at Sparta, but nothing is known as to its nature or competence. The term apella does not occur in extant Spartan inscriptions, though two decrees of Gythium belonging to the Roman period refer to the μεγάλαι ἀπέλλαι"
What is this talking about? It seems very out of place. Is this suggesting that the Sparta might not actually have had the Apella? Fresheneesz (talk) 22:42, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, they never used the word. I corrected the article. T8612 (talk) 12:41, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Contradictory information? 

message: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skias_%28Sparta%29#/media/Datei:Map_of_Archaeological_site_of_Sparta.jpg
Showing the locations of the Skias and the Agora might help people to picture it.
--KimYunmi (talk) 16:12, 26 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title: Map from German Wiki might be useful?
Talk:Aphthonius of Antioch

message: I think this is the same person as Aphthonius of Antioch, the sophist; if so, the article on Aphthonius has more references and should probably be retained and this article deleted. FeanorStar7
 Klbrain (talk) 08:03, 9 April 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: See also the subsequent discussion at Talk:Aelius Festus Aphthonius#Merge Klbrain (talk) 16:33, 27 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge
Talk:Allahverdi Khan

message: The article may be improved by following the WikiProject Biography 11 easy steps to producing at least a B article. -- KGV  (Talk) 10:49, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Wikipedia:WikiProject_Biography/Assessment#Class_parameter|Biography assessment rating]] comment 

message: Allah verdi is also a well-known toast in Caucasus and in Russia (Allaverdy, Аллаверды), from Turk. Allah verdi - Yakşi yol "- God has given - "Nice journey (?)" (according to other sources: Yakşi yoldi). The phrase gave rise to both the khan's name and the toast, or are they connected in any way? --R Camus 08:37, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  what about the homonymic toast? 
Talk:Amakasu Kagemochi

message: These sentences are not supported by a reliable source.  They were removed from the article.
:Kagemochi followed in fighting in support at the Fourth Battle of Kawanakajima during the year of 1561, guarding the ford of Amenomiya.Kagemochi followed in many battles against the Oda and remained with the Uesugi even when they were moved to Aizu after Sekigahara in 1600.
:* banner: black band on white
Any or all of this can be restored when verifying support can be cited. --Ansei (talk) 19:50, 10 May 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  No cite support
Talk:Ambrose Rookwood

message: Placed here so it doesn't get lost in the edit history:
Another Jesuit, Father John Gerard, made the following observations:
Parrot of Doom 21:15, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  unsourced 

message: When was Rookwood knighted? I do not have access to any of the books regarding him, or the gunpowder plot, but I was just wondering if he really was addressed as "Sir". Take for instance this site in which Everard Digby is the only one who is acknowledged as a "Sir". --195.75.73.1 (talk) 13:24, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: To be honest, I don't know where the honorific came from.  It doesn't appear to be in Fraser's book and his ODNB entry doesn't contain it.  I do recall random instances of editors prefixing many of those names involved in the Gunpowder Plot with "Sir", perhaps this is one that escaped an immediate reversion.  In any case, I'll remove it. Parrot of Doom 16:33, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay, thank you for the quick answer and for the great articles about the gunpowder plot and the plotters. I myself am working on their Swedish equivalents and your articles were very interesting to read! --195.75.73.1 (talk) 19:41, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks :) Parrot of Doom 21:23, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sir? 

message: What kind of high-standard processes would let through an unconverted "miles" to be in a featured article and on the main page? Tony (talk) 00:18, 1 February 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  This shows how crappy both FAC and TFA are 

message: Are FAC and TFA good or bad?--Dthomsen8 (talk) 02:01, 1 February 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: FAC is pretty corrupt and has fallen into substandard malaise. TFA doesn't seem to realise the extent to which it needs to scrutinise each main-page article it plans to display. Tony (talk) 12:03, 1 February 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Shown by editors like me who frequently improve the WikiProject lines, and sometimes the article itself, just after it is published.--Dthomsen8 (talk) 14:43, 1 February 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:   FAC and TFA 

message: The article explains that in 1601 "he joined the Earl of Essex's abortive rebellion against the government, for which he was captured and held at Newgate Prison."  The next sentence in the text (admittedly, in the next section) begins "In August 1605 Rookwood joined . . ."
So clearly he was out of prison by then.  How did he get released, considering that he had been involved in treason?  That alone was usually enough for execution; however not only was he released, but he was evidently not sufficiently grateful for the sparing of his life to stop getting into treasonous activity.  What else happened in the intervening four years?  As those are the years leading up to the Gunpowder Plot, one imagines they constitute an important period in his life, but nary a word. --Piledhigheranddeeper (talk) 15:59, 1 February 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gap?
Talk:Bent's rule

message: This is just a notification that I am planning on adding a large amount of information to and reorganizing this article over the next several weeks. Because I plan on making major edits, I wanted to give fellow users a "heads-up" before I make such changes. B Levin13 (talk) 19:46, 27 October 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Substantial Changes Planned 

message: To B Levin13: Following your recent edits, I think that the article is in general much clearer as well as more complete. One flaw, however, is the molecular diagrams for tetrahedral molecules. For example, in the first diagram for CH3F, the carbon seems to have only one C-F and two(!) C-H bonds. The line which should be the third C-H bond is too short and perpendicular to the line joining the C to the last H. It should be a dotted line joining the C to the last H. And most of the other tetrahedral molecules in the article have the same problem. 
 Can you redraw these diagrams? Or a simpler way might be to use diagrams from the articles on each of these molecules. For CH3F, the article on fluoromethane has an infobox with the more correct diagram which I have shown here. The diagram size of course can be varied. Dirac66 (talk) 03:33, 9 December 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I've drawn so many of these molecules that I see what I want to see, not what I've actually illustrated! I agree with your assessment and will recreate those images, although it might take me a week or more to get to it. My hesitation with using previously made images is that the the orientations will vary greatly. My hope was that by using the same formatting for all of the images in a particular table it would be easier to follow. Regardless, I will deal with the images over the next week or so. I appreciate the feedback! B Levin13 (talk) 08:54, 10 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Much better, except for molecular diagrams 

message: — Assignment last updated by CHEM 300 UBC CJA (talk) 18:01, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: CHEM 300