lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Insomnia

message: There is a huge section about the effects and consequences in the article about sleep deprivation but there is no such section and also not nearly as much information in the insomnia article. While insomnia and sleep deprivation are not the same, they do share many of the consequences on the body and cognitive functioning. Would it make sense to add a section about the effects and consequences of insomnia? RichardOwens67 (talk) 09:17, 1 August 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: I think it would. CallMeBirb (talk) 12:20, 1 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  What about the effects and consequences of insomnia? 

message: An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect :Hyposomnia and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 August 24#Hyposomnia until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.  CycloneYoris talk! 09:54, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Hyposomnia" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]] 

message: This research, commented here, had been conducted on around 42,000 people. Although they aren't millions yet, it doesn't seem to be a mete "Lab research", as it is said in the reversion edit. 151.57.150.216 (talk) 21:54, 9 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Difference between chronological age and sleep age 

message: — Assignment last updated by Mimitee123 (talk) 22:20, 9 December 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: SSC199 TY2
Talk:Battle of Boroughbridge

message: Someone changed this to the battle of Crecy. I've no idea why. I reverted.   Rich Farmbrough 18:37, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Revert

message: Has anyone else noticed the similarity between the Battle of Boroughbridge#Battle: "was killed as he crossed the bridge by a pikeman hiding underneath, who thrust his spear up through the Earl's anus" and the Battle of Stamford Bridge#Battle: "when an English soldier floated under the bridge in a half-barrel and thrust his spear through the planks in the bridge, mortally wounding the axeman".  The incidents may be 250 years apart, but only 30 miles distance.  Is there a chance that a good story was being reused?  Maybe just idle speculation - anyone else go any thoughts? (This question is duplicated at the other talk page) Martin of Sheffield (talk) 09:45, 16 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Spears and bridges
Talk:Softwin

message: There are quite few news reports  in connection with this company. I'll see if I can find some that profile the company. VG ☎ 21:54, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  News reports 

message: Article states:
"offices in Tettnang (Germany), Barcelona (Spain), Fort Lauderdale (USA), London (Great Britain) and Copenhagen (Denmark)"
but the homepage of SOFTWIN GROUP states:
"HQ in Bucharest, offices in Germany, Great Britain, Spain and the USA".
http://www.softwin.ro/?pagina=despre
I am not able to find the company in Danish address books. Can anyone confirm a Danish office for Softwin?
Supermagle (talk) 08:42, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Office locations
Talk:Veronica Guerin

message: Forgive my frankness, but it's a poor thing that her life and career can be summed up in little more than half a dozen sentences (with no mention of family, upbringing or interests outside journalism), yet we're given a bizarre detail like the model and colour of the car she was murdered in.
Please, I beg, somebody who knows her story well do a better job than this. This is the sort of entry people make jokes about. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.42.71.249 (talk) 01:24, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Amen. There's so much more to this individual than her shooting. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.146.50.17 (talk) 18:12, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bizarre detail 

message: I noticed in the text it states that she attended trinity college.The link leads to answers.com,which is hardly qualified proof, and is highly unreliable.
Also, a book titled" Veronica Guerin, the life and death of a reporter" written by Emily O Reilly (which is reliable) contridicts this unproven statement — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.97.54.72 (talk) 23:12, 31 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removed unproven link and related text 
Talk:Johnny Oates

message: Don't seem to be showing up for some reason.Sylvain1972 (talk) 15:35, 1 August 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: fixed it.Sylvain1972 (talk) 15:38, 1 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Succession boxes

message: His career exciting stupid at the end of his managerial career, but says nothing of his years as a coach. 174.240.68.25 (talk) 23:22, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Coach
Talk:Tueller Drill

message: I disagree with the 'citation needed' here.  The article appeals to common sense in "One would think", "Should be", and "has a dilemma".  What sort of citations could cover this?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.198.151.119 (talk) 07:49, 13 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Disagree

message: Would it be worth mentioning that season 5 of Justified make several indirect references to this as the "21-foot rule"?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.65.211.107 (talk) 03:14, 21 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  In popular culture: season 5 of "Justified"? 

message: A scientific examination of the 21-foot rule
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/15614263.2020.1772785  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1700:CDA0:1060:398D:8970:4140:43B4 (talk) 12:19, 20 November 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  A scientific examination of the 21-foot rule 

message: Assuming all other things being equal and correct, the Mythbusters reference should either be removed entirely or more pragmatically expanded to include the fact that the drill requires two center-of-mast shots. One shot at absolute point blank range (the attacker being close enough to grab the gun themselves) is a diffrent test, and therefore a diffrent result.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.10.163.44 (talk) 01:43, 23 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  ''Mythbuster'' 

message: Topic is very deserving of inclusion, I can say as someone who got shafted by the cops. This article, however, is POV cop trash and in need of a complete rewrite. 76.70.97.144 (talk) 04:00, 17 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Blah
Talk:Cervix

message: I propose that Cockscomb cervix be merged into Cervix#Anatomical abnormalities. CV9933 (talk) 13:40, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
replies: text:  No objections after two weeks - Merge completed. CV9933 (talk) 14:33, 8 September 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  New Merger proposal  

message: hi, i am reading the fertility section and i am having trouble with its tone. In particular, its use of the term "quality".  And the judgement of this said quality seems to derive from sites external to the woman. Moreover, most of the section is not cited.  The citation that is given, i.e., 12 the question is directed to the person whose fertility is the topic, that is, the woman, which i discerned only from its title which uses 'your'. But in Wikipedia, this article, the judge is not the woman, but instead an other. As Wikipedia is supposed to be written from a neutral perspective (an impossibility!) this section is obviously not congruent to that Wikipedia policy. Instead, this article places the assessment of the "quality" of that which pertains to woman, to elsewhere, that is, an other than herself. *a cis woman growing a philosopher's beard MichelleGDyason 06:30, 29 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Fertility Section
Talk:Will Elder

message: Please cite the following: "Through imitation, I found an avenue of expression... if you're going to make an imitation of something, a fascimile, it's gotta be convincing. When you convince people, then you can turn the tables and shock them as a result. Accuracy was part of it. If I could fool people to think that this was the real item, and then suddenly make them realize at the last moment that it wasn't, that in itself is surprisingly funny." Where is the quotation published?Lestrade (talk) 01:57, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Quotation
Talk:Bryostatin

message: Ollie: interesting subject - welcome to Wikipedia!  A few minor comments: 1) it's not the convention to sign articles here, as anyone can edit so there's no single author; 2) Cite your sources; 3) no need to describe bryozoans, as they have a page already. [19:27, 6 June 2005‎ Raygirvan]
:Thanks very much for tidying it up, it is a lot better now.  I've never used Wikipedia before, so I'll learn the conventional way of writing things here, before I do anything more.  I was working on bryostatin synthesis last summer and previously I have been surprised at the lack of information about it.  I wasn't expecting anyone to bother looking at it so soon as it is rather an obscure area! [20:42, 6 June 2005‎ 80.229.219.14 ]
::Glad to help. I've put a link from the Bryozoa page.
::I strongly recommend you sign up for a named account, as I ran into this page by accident via a search on the IP address for a nuisance user, and you don't want to get associated with that. Good work, anyway - as I said, welcome. If you want any advice on Wikipedia practice, just leave a note at the end of my user page. RayGirvan 23:47, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Revision (June 2005)
Talk:Solid-state nuclear magnetic resonance

message: The part under "Methods and techniques" is obviously copied from somewhere, but the references for [Waugh et al.] and [Hartmann] are missing. --129.13.72.198 (talk) 09:57, 22 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  References missing 

message: Hi. FYI I'd like to suggest the addition of a "drug delivery" subsection in the "applications" section. I can base this on a review I authored. As an alternative or supplementary source, I can put this one as a source but it's a little bit dated. That's why this review wasn't so bad as an main option. I have noo hurry, I just noticed that it's missing. Alexmar983 (talk) 13:46, 24 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Durg delivery
Talk:Sweet Auburn

message: I suspect this article to be a copyright violation. The author has posted other articles that were cut-and-pasted. I have left an explanation of Wikipedia's copyright policy on the user's talk page. Sayeth 20:35, Jun 6, 2005 (UTC)
:Replaced former content with non-copyright text from the National Park Service. Sayeth 18:42, Jun 13, 2005 (UTC)
::Material from the NPS or any other public domain source still needs to be attributed.  Currently, the article sports a disclaimer "This article incorporates text from the National Park Service website, a work of the U.S. government, and therefore under public domain.", without identifying which webpage it draws from, and without identifying which text is drawn from there.  New material has been added by others, too, so now what we have is a mish-mash, of unclearly attributed stuff, with possibility of original research creeping in.   It would be better, in my view, to put any copied text into "quotes" or ::
::and give direct, regular attribution to the source.  Sayeth, can you identify which text came from what website? doncram (talk) 19:35, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Suspected copyright

message: The Atlanta Journal-Constitution published an article on Atlanta developer, preservationist joust over Auburn Avenue building.  Rjluna2 (talk) 17:54, 11 August 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Atlanta developer, preservationist joust over Auburn Avenue building
Talk:Homogeneity (disambiguation)

message: I have tagged this article as confusing for a number of reasons:www.myspace.com/my_lipgloss_is_poppin
*"coefficient of homogeneity" mentioned but no precise definition is in evidence.
*"..depart from this ideal lattice form.." - not clear what is meant by 'ideal lattice form'
*Fig. 1 - what on earth does this represent? what are the scales on the axes? etc.
I have many other concerns. Madmath789 13:15, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Confusing tag

message: There are lots of pages that link here, referring to various notions of homogeneity that are not explicitly identified on this page. Many of them refer to people - cultural, demographic, ethnic homogeneity - and come from such diverse disciplines as sociology, anthropology, politics and marketing. We probably need a series of articles to cover these various notions - but how many? The same is undoubtedly true of heterogeneity as well.--RichardVeryard 23:28, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Disambiguation 

message: There seems to be some confusion in this article between the words "homogeneous" and "homogenous".
Homogeneous is the more commom term and it means “of the same kind or structure, of like composition”.  Homogenous is used in biology to mean two organisms that are similar because of a common ancestry (as opposed to homoplasious which means similar becasue of a common environment)
teri ma ka bhosda  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.211.134.76 (talk) 14:38, August 25, 2007 (UTC) 
Indeed, would it not be more appropriate to either split of homogenous which deals with a more specific case, or perhaps have it as a subsection at the end of the page? In any case all articles on this subject probably need checking, the article about homogeneity in Physics incorrectly uses homogenous throughout most of the article when homogeneous is actually correct. This page clarifies the difference http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1114842/ TomGibsonUK (talk) 13:02, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Homogeneous vs. Homogenous
Talk:Danceteria

message: Reinstated previous version of the page (again) prior to redirect.  Redirect causes looping problems with Nightclub article and other links will need to be created or changed.  Google test is not the only validity test for Wikipedia -- suggest taking the matter to VfD if it's all that important.  Anyhow, I just did my own Google search for Danceteria NYC and got about 190 hits, which is proper for a narrow focus article according to Wikipedia:google test (that is, "a couple hundred").    Earpol 20:58, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Old comment

message: "In 1986 a time capsule placed in an inert 200-pound bomb was buried in the patio to the west of the building. It remains underground, unknown to the present occupants."
OOPS.  guess the secret's out NOW! 67.150.85.226 (talk) 22:16, 2 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Loose Lips Sink Ships 

message: The coordinates set in the article for the club were previously to the 30th street location. After checking with Beyond My Ken the 21st Street location appears to have been where the club garnered most of its notoriety, making the 21st St. location seem like the best one for the coordinates to reflect. I've changed them to reflect 30 West 21st Street.  — SpintendoTalk 22:38, 25 June 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: See this for sources in support of this change. Beyond My Ken (talk) 00:43, 26 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Coordinates for Danceteria's location
Talk:The Bartered Bride

message: A New York Times article, "'Bartered Bride' a Fine Start to Marriage of Met and Juilliard" (which I archived with WebCite) reviews a version staged by the Metropolitan Opera and Juilliard School.  I noticed it on the NYT front page (not too far below news of the Second Going of Lance Armstrong and such) and quickly remembered That One Well-Received Wikipedia Article I Noticed on FAC That One Time.
Perhaps not significant in the grand scheme of the opera's history, but enjoy it I guess.  --an odd name 14:40, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Met–Juilliard version 

message: We’re saying Gustav Mahler led the German premiere, in Hamburg in 1894.  Yet there’s evidence it was performed in Berlin in 1893 – see  and .
This and this say Mahler conducted it in Hamburg in 1894 but make no claim to it being the German premiere.  It's not claimed that even the 1893 Berlin performance was the German premiere. 
We need to dig further.    --  Jack of Oz [Talk] 08:02, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: German premiere was prior to Mahler Hamburg 1894

message: The article in stating that the overture was written first misses the fact that all the themes of the overture appear in the Act 2 finale.
This begs the question as to whether the Finale Act 2 was composed before the overture.Bkesselman (talk) 11:13, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: This level of detail is unsuitable for a lead (see WP:LEAD) but could, if properly cited go in the main body of the text. Tim riley talk 13:29, 6 April 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Overture 

message: Anthony Powell in The Military Philosophers (Chapter 2) has a Czech colonel comment: 
:'The heroine is not really a bride, but a fiancée,’ explained Hlava. ‘The English title being not literal for German Die Verkaufte Braut.’
One assumes that The Fungible Fiancée was rejected for bathos. Thomas Peardew (talk) 08:04, 20 June 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Many titles are misleading, but common. The German "Braut" isn't only on her wedding day, but means "wife-to be" in a broader sense. This opera was performed in English under the current title, not some perhaps more literal translation which could come up in a footnote. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:37, 20 June 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks Gerda Arendt: I assume you are familiar with German. I wonder if the Czech title carries the same ambiguity? I note that the article already mentions that in France it is - perhaps a bit more correctly - la Fiancée Vendue.Thomas Peardew (talk) 10:36, 20 June 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: There is precedent for flexible translation: I understand that À la recherche du Tom Peardew is known in English as Remembrance of Things Past. – Tim riley talk 15:39, 20 June 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Translation of Title
Talk:Gauze (band)

message: I went ahead and changed "thrashcore" to just punk. And metioned the fact that they formed in 1981. keaganobrien 12:13, 23 May 2007
Mindspillage (spill yours?) 04:28, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Is Tam not in Gauze anymore or this guitarist the same guy?
Tam was never in Gauze he was in Stalin then later G-Zet and "Bradbury"/"BloodBerry" then he disappeared and hasn't been heard from in 20+ years.
71.161.225.254 (talk) 01:09, 25 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tam? 

message: Honestly, who has written this page? If I knew much about the band I would change it myself, but I only came on here to find out a little about them before I listened to them. It reads like a high schooler's diary - I don't understand a word of it. Can someone please help to clear this up?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by FlipsidePro09 (talk • contribs) 20:36, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Who wrote this page? 
Talk:List of Queen's University Belfast people

message: Why not put these with the university's article? --Kushboy Jun 06 5:21
: Because it detracts from the main article, having lists of things. Djegan 21:27, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Query

message: This split is a bad idea as its not the usual proceedure and also their is a stark error Andrew Porter, Attorney General for Ireland (as distinct from Attorney General of Ireland) would have to be one of the eldest people alive as he held the office in the 1880s and its in the contemporary section! Djegan 23:57, 24 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Historical/Contemporary

message: Any names on this list which are "redlinks", meaning there's no article there, should either have a source added which verifies the notability, or the link should be removed.  Then if a source becomes available later (or an article is created), the name can be re-added.  See also Wikipedia:Verifiability. --Elonka 16:31, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: To clarify, if there is no source or reliably sourced article available on a person then their entry should be removed Aloneinthewild (talk) 12:47, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Redlinks
Talk:Smooth jazz

message: The content of this article does not follow the standard of similar articles; such as Jazz and R&B, where the musical genre itself is explained, historically quantified, and where musical excerpts and examples are provided. The article does not even help one understand the fork, or split, that separates this music from Contemporary or Elevator Music. Instead, it ponders long upon the specific radio stations where the genre was aired. It appears that a more thoughtful edit by a qualified Musicologist is greatly needed. -- Curley Wolf (talk) 17:57, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Overemphasis on specific radio stations  

message: The radio format has been split to Smooth jazz radio as that is a different subject. SilkTork ✔Tea time 21:22, 30 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Split

message: The instruments parameter in the infobox should list the more important instruments popularly associated with the genre, not an exhaustive list. Ideally, these instruments will be supported with reliable sources mentioning them. I included sax, guitar and synths because these are mentioned most often in the sources. To help figure out what else might be put into the instruments parameter, let's list sources below. I'll start. Binksternet (talk) 23:59, 15 April 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Terms like "lite-funk" and "elastic guitars" are not really a sign of competent or informed musical analysis. What the fuck is an "elastic guitar."?!?!PaulCHebert (talk) 00:56, 16 April 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, I'm not saying that AllMusic's genre guide is well-written and definitive, I'm just including it because we have been using it as a reference for years, and it lists smooth jazz instruments. Binksternet (talk) 16:32, 16 April 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Instruments listed in the infobox
Talk:Robert Siegel

message: Siegel's [bio page] on NPR is the only source of info that I have been able to find. Can we use the photo on that page? I think the photo from Bob Edwards is from his NPR bio page.
Is he the same Robert Siegel that was a former editor-in-chief of The Onion? Esquizombi 04:40, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No. That's Robert D. Siegel. MahangaTalk 00:06, 26 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Comments
Talk:Galactic Empire (1980 video game)

message: I included the list of planets because I suspect some of the names were taken from other sources, and might provide an interesting cross-ref source.  Nandesuka 21:30, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Two years later, and the list doesn't seem to have sparked much interest in such. One might take a stab to establish cross-connections, but efforts to do so would likely be original research or pure guesswork. Is it really a necessary inclusion? D. Brodale 11:04, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: List of Planets

message: Re last sentence: "The player has 999 years to take the galaxy." 
In the version of the game (v2.04) that I'm still playing on a Apple Macintosh Perfoma 580, the player has 1200 years to take the galaxy. :)  My Other Head (talk) 16:39, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Duration of the game 

message: I am sure that there was also a Commodore 64 version of the game (because I spend hours with some mates in a friend's cellar playing that game).  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.77.249.125 (talk) 09:58, 2 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  C64 version