lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Mohawk Innovative Technology

message: March 1, 2006 - We have modified the MiTi page to comply with Wiki standards. 
Please re-review and remove the advert warning.
--------------------------------------------------------------
I agree -- we need to modify this a bit.  Thanks for the notice.
--------------------------------------------------------------
As one of the references ( http://www.scienceblog.com/community/older/archives/K/0/pub0417.html ) says, "The winners of the Tibbetts award represent the vanguard of American technological know-how." MiTi isn't a household name like GE and McDonald's because it doesn't have a multi-billion dollar advertising budget. However, it is still a notable company with notable technologies and accomplishments.
Further, this has already been run through lots of different Wikipedia and non-wikipedia editors to ensure that it *isn't* advertising. Is there anything specific that has been objected to? We can certainly add back in lots of info about MiTi's awards, accomplishments, relationships with big companies, etc but all that was *removed* in order to avoid the appearance of advertising. Should it be inserted to satisfy the notablity question?
CHeshmat (talk) 00:28, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

message: Whether this pages deserves deletion or not, it's far above the level for speedy deletion. Take it to AfD if you must.  
The company exists, and has achieved notable innovations in its field. It is also sufficiently large and note-worthy to have been covered by 3rd party sources. Both of these are already referenced in the existing article. --Andy Dingley (talk) 16:02, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Contested deletion
Talk:Anna Christie

message: I'm thinking of splitting off the movie versions of the films into their own articles. Anyone else think this is a good idea? - AKeen 21:32, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Such splits appear to be general practice now, so yes we should have separate articles for each film, although I would suggest only one article for the Garbo films since they were produced simultaneously for different audiences. There's opportunity for such a "combined" article to include an examination of the differences, etc. Otherwise yes the article should be split. 23skidoo 16:46, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

text: The article has now been expanded with more information and background about the play. The film versions also now have their own individual sections. I suggest this article becomes Anna Christie (play) and the Anna Christie page becomes a dab page... ? Orbicle 00:52, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

message: Why isn't there a list of who plays who?-- Andrzejestrować Zajaczajkowski Plecaxpiwórserafinowiczaświadzenie Poświadczyxwiadectwo-Bjornovich (talk) (contributions) 18:21, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cast 

message: According to Paul Avrich's Anarchist Voices (Princeton University Press, 1995, page 490) 'the original of Anna Christie in O'Neill's play of that name' was 'Christine Ell, an anarchist cook in Greenwich Village'. Is anything known about the biography of this lady and can anything in her life be assumed from this portrayal? The only fact mentioned by Avrich is that she was at some time the lover of Edward Mylius the English radical who libeled King George V (Note 264 on page 500).AnthonyCamp (talk) 09:16, 24 April 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  The 'original' of Anna Christie
Talk:Emmi Whitehorse

message: :::Yes, I think that works, but again, "important" is (or at least, should be) redundant. If the statement reads "Emmi Whitehorse's works have been shown in Art Museum of X and Y and Gallery of Z.", the articles on Art Museum of X and Y and Gallery of Z should explain why anyone should care about those things. I do reiterate my early statement, though. Saying a "foo is important," does not make foo important. D-Rock (Yell at D-Rock) 22:24, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Continued discussion

message: In 2015, Whitehorse's piece, “Kin Nah Zin #223″ was featured in the “Material Matters: Selections from the Joann and Gifford Phillips Gift,” show at the New Mexico Museum of Art. Jgdresser (talk) 19:36, 14 July 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recent Work 

message: Her life and career are in the same section and I think it would be more professional to separate them.
- Mightymango111 Mightymango111 (talk) 20:59, 20 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Personal Life
Talk:There's No Business Like Show Business (film)

message: Did the saying "There's No Business Like Show Business" originate in the film or somewhere else? --Baruch ben Alexander - ☠☢☣ 12:34, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not sure how old the phrase is, but the song "There's No Business Like Show Business" was written by Irving Berlin for the 1946 musical Annie Get Your Gun, so it predates this film -- Foetusized (talk) 21:13, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  The saying 

message: Not sure about the description of it as a "black polka-dot swimsuit" -- from what I can see from image searches, it appears to have been a two-piece swimsuit made of white fabric with a pattern of black polka-dots. -- The Anome (talk) 11:41, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: The title is consistent with the citation on the page; however, there's an interview with the collector wherein he seems to indicate he acquired a different item.  Here's the link to the collector item: http://www.paulfrasercollectibles.com/News/MEMORABILIA/Exclusive-interview-'Marilyn-is-probably-the-best-investment-in-the-world'/6224.page.  Metabrarian (talk) 03:47, 11 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merged from [[Talk:Marilyn Monroe's black polka-dot swimsuit]]
Talk:Quo Vadis (1951 film)

message: The article says Sophia Loren was an extra and Elizabeth Taylor had a cameo.  I just rewatched the film looking for them and saw neither.  I can understand not being able to identify an extra, but by definition a cameo appearance is one where the person can be identified.  Does anyone have information on where Elizabeth Taylor appears?  If she isn't in the film, or if her scene ended up on the cutting room floor, the article should be corrected.
Thanks.
Ellis Solros (talk) 08:46, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Has anyone actually seen Elizabeth Taylor's cameo? 

message: I saw an art exhibition recently in Paris of the works of Gérome, a 19th century French artist.  One of his paintings looks eerily like the scene in the arena and makes me wonder if it did not serve as the model for that scene.  Does anyone have any information on this?  Thanks.  212.157.116.18 (talk) 17:29, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  French painting the model for the arena scene? 

message: In one scene Leo Genn's character says to Nero,"Isn't that taking 'Art for Art's Sake' too far?" MGM's motto is "Ars Gratia Artis" or "Art For Art's Sake".94.196.105.174 (talk)  —Preceding undated comment added 22:15, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  In Joke? 

message: Henryk Sienkiewicz was a famous Polish writer.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.107.196.217 (talk) 12:39, 27 December 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Henryk Sienkiewicz
Talk:Doctor Faustus (1967 film)

message: The following sentence appears in the article: "However, the overriding consensus of the critics was that the Oxford student Andreas Teuber stole the show as Mephistopheles." I would like to know which critics made this judgment.Lestrade (talk) 01:36, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with you that the critics should be named. I think this movie is great!   That includes the lead actors, the story, the deep theme,  so much else.  I have watched several times over the years. 2600:6C58:4C7F:68F9:747A:8407:63D2:6FC7 (talk) 05:31, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title: Name some critics
Talk:The Mirror Crack'd

message: Funny, I thought they intended to film a version of the story of "Mary, Queen of Scots" (which gave rise to the "Mary, Queen of Sluts" pun when the Lola Brewster character first appears).... --JohnDBuell 20:09, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: The 2nd movie within the movie
Talk:Thunderheart

message: The character of Jimmy Looks Twice had been casted to match Bob Robideau who was also involved in the Pine Ridge Shootout (cf. Incident at Oglala) Though there are also similarities to Peltier's life, the physical resemblance to Robideau is striking:
Compare the following pictures of
* Trudell 
and 
* Robideau 
versus
* Peltier
If you watch both Thunderheart and Incident at Oglala you will see interview scenes in the latter, where the resemblance is even stronger than in those two photographs, imitating not only hair style but also accessories like ear-rings worn by Robideau and Jimmy Looks Twice. --chris 論 18:39, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Jimmy Looks Twice was not modelled on Leonard Peltier 

message: I removed the reference to the film being set in the early 1970's. A specific year is never referenced in the film, but it's clear that it's set in the 1980s. In the early scene where Ray (Val Kilmer) meets Kuch (Sam Shepard) for the first time, Ray tells him that they had met once before "in '76" and the implication is clear that it was many years ago. Additionally, the vehicles and clothing styles clearly indicate it takes place at least in the mid-1980s.AE Logan (talk) 17:57, 17 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Timeframe
Talk:Babes on Broadway

message: The lyrics are by Ralph Freed, not Yip Harburg. 2A01:CB19:8ED5:B600:9865:3ECE:6209:7FDE (talk) 11:02, 14 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Babes on Broadway (song)
Talk:In the Good Old Summertime

message: I happen to catch the first few mins of this movie, w/ the sound off. Watching that scene of mayhem w/ garland n johnson, seemed right out of a silent film...and then a few moments later, noticed Mr Keaton in the film..ahh!! And herein your notes, confirm my thoughts..'Keaton also devised the sequence in which Van Johnson inadvertently wrecks Judy Garland's hat, and coached Johnson intensively in how to perform the scene." Coached? no doubt DIRECTED. Genius  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.218.248.127 (talk) 17:45, 24 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Production 

message: And I don't remember enough of the film to do it myself. L3X1 (distænt write) 05:30, 12 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Plot needs expanded
Talk:Nick Hodgson

message: Polish capital city IS WARSZAWA!!! repeat - Warshava! /in Bulgarian - hehe/ - in English - Warsaw 
Is that true that he studied geography???
He's not a spaghetti-eating champion -he is a jaffa-eating champion ! ;)  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Svejarkova (talk • contribs) 20:18, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The capital city of Poland is Warsaw. --Joshua Issac (talk) 21:14, 28 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Polish capital city 

message: How is it possible to know that Nick Hodgson is the principle songwriter of the Kaiser Chiefs when all of their songs are credited as being written by the entire band? This needs sources for verification to prove that it is a known fact that Nick is the principle songwriter of the Kaiser Chiefs. All of the sources I've seen so far that do state the same seem to have taken the information from Wikipedia and are not strong factual bases of information. Burbridge92 (talk) 12:56, 9 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Principal songwriter? 
Talk:Gay Purr-ee

message: Why is the word "gay" used in the title? Is this a reference to the original meaning of the word (i. e. happiness)? Stonemason89 (talk) 17:25, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: "Gay Paree", as in "charming, lively Paris", is an old catch-phrase. From right around the time of "the bee's knees" and "23 skidoo." Before my time, but still. --Tenebrae (talk) 03:55, 13 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Gay as in Happy?

message: "Chuck Jones helped write the movie's story, and ultimately produced the project, moonlighting for UPA in violation of his exclusive contract with Warner Bros. Cartoons.[citation needed]."
Does anyone have a source for this,  Considering that the movie was in fact distributed by Warner Brothers, I doubt this is true.  If no one comes up with a source by the 1/1/1013 I'm going to remove it.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.252.121.1 (talk) 01:42, 24 December 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: It's true and the statements have been referenced. The fact that Warner Bros. purchased the distribution rights to the film (after it was completed or near completion) is how they found out Jones was involved. --FuriousFreddy (talk) 06:56, 30 June 2014 (UTC)

text: The above statement is only partially true.  I checked the cited source (#4 in the main article)Mike Barrier, "Hollywood Cartoons," pg. 563 and there is NO mention of Chuck Jones producing the film (Henry G. Saperstein is credited as Producer).  Only that he and his wife, Dorothy, co-wrote the script, which led to his departure from Warner Brothers.  Unless some other authoritative source can be cited, the phrase "the latter Jones ultimately produced the project," should be deleted.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tim Kangaroo (talk • contribs) 07:19, 27 December 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Chuck Jones contract violation? 
Talk:The Devil Is a Woman (1935 film)

message: The following appeared as a citation for the closing sentence of the lede:
 * Peary, Gerald Joel McCrea interview
This is not a standard citation by any means, and as is, is not uniquely traceable to a source.  It is put here for someone to complete, to replace.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.179.245.225 (talk) 04:15, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Faux citation removed here, to complete or replace
Talk:Myrtos Pyrgos

message: Is Pyrgos the same site or a different site than Pyrgos Tylissos?
:Different site. Pyrgos is a Minoan complex on the south coast of Crete, near Myrtos, whereas Tylissos is a Minoan complex, and a village, near Heraklion on the north coast (which last statement I found here:  ). Pyrgos Tylissos is a hill near Tylissos, mostly known for its cave (see:  ).
:--Hippalus 06:39, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes it is, have a look here:  Cheers, Hippalus 08:05, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Considering this article has been a short stub for a long time, and there are many other places with the name Pyrgos (see Pyrgos (disambiguation)), including a city of 30,000 people, I suggest that the disambiguation page be moved to Pyrgos and this moved to Pyrgos (archaeological site) or something like that. It just doesn't seem clear to me that this would be the most likely destination for someone searching for a Pyrgos; which a number of oncoming links that refer to something else seems to bear out. Comments? Rigadoun  (talk) 06:57, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Done.--Damac (talk) 20:35, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thanks! k. da-ma-te (talk) 21:41, 4 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Page move 

message: Hello again! I've added quite an amount of things. I also had to rearrange the 2 photos already in the article but if this was an issue just let me know. I added a "see also" heading with some external links to other Wikipedia articles. One of the links was expired so I deleted it and added 2 more links. I also added 2 more photos. One is a map of the site and the second is a photo of the country house. I also deleted the stub templated because of the edits I've made. If this was a mistake just let me know
Best
-Dalila DalilaRami  —Preceding undated comment added 06:47, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Final Edit for now
Talk:The Ghost and the Darkness

message: The artcle first informs us that the movie was shot at Kenya, and then denies it! What is the fact?
--Nitin 10:02, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Filming location

message: Article states that the film, although based loosely on Patterson's account, romanticises his story and fictionalises important elements of the plot, but fails to elaborate on these, mentioning only characterisation changes (Remington/Ryall and Maasai).
Some of elements in the film that are suspect (with respect to the actual events) are:
death of Starling
lions drag off and kill promininent (and notably strong) worker, Mahina
the lions running amuck in the hospital
antics of the native three gunmen in the railway car
arrival of Remington character with the Maasai
Character of Samuel - historical figure, or plot device?
Centrepull (talk) 00:41, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You could start a section about differences between book and movie. 76.189.127.20 (talk) 01:11, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

text: I can only do that when I know what those differences are. Furthermore, the movie is purported to be based on the true events, not quite the same thing as Patterson's book.Centrepull (talk) 01:22, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Historical differences

message: The following coordinate fixes are needed for
-2.989515,38.469229
Unusual light reflection / edit?
—76.107.6.200 (talk) 05:06, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: . The coordinates given for Man Eaters Camp appear to be correct as they stand, though I'll knock off a couple of decimal places to avoid overprecision. Deor (talk) 19:37, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Coordinate error 

message: The final line of the section on the screenplay reads:
 Although, with Goldman being twice as obscure after this film as he was preceding it, the accuracy of that character assessment is rather dubious
What does that even mean?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.244.78.210 (talk) 16:08, 18 June 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  strange line 

message: Please edit Patterson travels from England to Tsavo, promising his wife, Helena, he will complete the bridge and be back in London for the birth of their child to Patterson travels from England to Tsavo, promising his wife, Helena, that he will complete the bridge and be back in London for the birth of their child and should his commission not be concluded on time to if his commission is not concluded on time. 68.12.168.117 (talk) 02:59, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Terasail[✉️] 12:31, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 9 May 2022 

message: I meant two of my suggested changes. 68.12.168.117 (talk) 18:18, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. 💜  melecie  talk - 01:06, 10 May 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 9 May 2022 (2)
Talk:The Hollywood Revue

message: There is a request for a plot summary.  This is pointless.  The film has no plot; it is a series of unconnected performances - a revue, as the film title makes clear.--SvanBueren (talk) 14:53, 21 January 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: That's worth documenting explicitly in the article. There is information in the "Production" section that speaks to this that could be reorganized to make this more clear. – WikkanWitch (talk) 15:14, 22 January 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Plot summary?
Talk:Rain (1932 film)

message: The plot summary is suspiciously like the full synopsis at TCM.com.  Which one came first?  --71.178.50.222 (talk) 06:59, 10 January 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Since this comment was posted four years ago, the plot summary has been somewhat more paraphrased. Also, TCM does not write those synopses: They take them from the American Film Institute’s API, whose summary for this film is here. AFI’s copyright at the bottom of that webpage would seem to suggest that it is not CC-BY-SA, but is instead “all rights reserved”. TCM must have a special agreement with them. — SpikeToronto 04:35, 31 May 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Plot summary
Talk:Pitt Street Mall

message: To say that Pitt Street Mall is Australia's busiest and most cosmopolitan shopping precincts is debateable. So until someone offers some concrete figures, I have changed it to "is one of Australia's busiest and most cosmopolitan shopping precincts". --Colourblind 03:06, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Australia's most..." 

message: The so-called "official" Pitt Street Mall website is nothing of the sort. From the WHOIS for the pittstreetmall.com.au domain name:
Registrant:                      julian parks
Eligibility Type:                Registered Business
Eligibility Name:                VAL PARKS SHIRT SHOP
Eligibility ID:                  NSW BN bn97973156
It seems to be a site set up for either SEO or advertising for this "Val Parks Business Shirts & Suits", with links to its website all over this so-called official website.
As far as I know there is no official website for Pitt St Mall; if one were to be set up, it would need to be operated by the City of Sydney council (there's no state government jurisdiction over the Mall unlike places like Darling Harbour and the Australian Technology Park, which do have official websites.) Westfield (who own or operate a pretty big chunk of the Mall) was at one stage grouping some of their properties in the Mall under the name/website pittstop.com.au but even that was not advertised as an official Pitt St Mall website.
--121.44.60.181 (talk) 19:42, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for pointing this out. It looks like a commercial opt-in site, with many stores participating but not a full listing. Anyway I removed it as it does not seem to add any encyclopedic value to the article. If anybody wishes to place it back it should be discussed here first, but remember that Wikipedia is not Yellow Pages and not a directory or resource for conducting business. --Elekhh (talk) 23:25, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Official" website
Talk:The Women (play)

message: Someone decided to delete most of the film info off this page and turn it into an article concentrating on the play. I've created an article at The Women (film) for the film. - AKeen 16:42, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  1939 Film Article 

message: This article states that the original play ran for 666 performances, and while that information may be correct, it doesn't seem to be supported by the source cited (a link leading to Turner Movie Classics, that doesn't mention the number of performances at the Ethel Barrymore Theater.)
I found one link that says "The title card of the film reads: The Women 'as presented for 666 performances in its Triumphant run at the Ethel Barrymore Theater, New York."
http://www.legendaryjoancrawford.com/thewomen.html
But another says "The original play opened at the Ethel Barrymore Theatre in NYC on 12/26/36 and ran for 657 performances."
http://www.joancrawfordbest.com/filmswomen.htm
One of the external links listed in the article also gives the total number of performances as 657.
http://www.ibdb.com/production.php?id=9750
Why the discrepancy, and how many performances were there?
Gerard Burke (talk) 21:07, 23 May 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: The title card for the 1939 film does indeed say 666 performances, but both the Columbia Encyclopedia of Modern Drama and IBDB put the number at 657. I've changed the article to reflect the latter due to the weight of the sources, but perhaps a note explaining what the title card says is in order. Gobōnobō + c 02:42, 21 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Number of Performances at Ethel Barrymore Theater?