lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Australian Railway Historical Society

message: In effect, due to its status in railway history and preservation groups in Australia, and its importance in the documentation of rail heritage - I would argue for alevel up on the importance scale. User:SatuSuro 07:56, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It obviously needs a lot of work on it, and thanks for believing me. As with all the others it will take time  :)  User:SatuSuro 10:31, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: earlier comments

message: There is clearly room for some life in this stub of an article for mention of a number of the founding members like john buckland and singleton - to give it more life it reads like an address book rather than article SatuSuro 00:21, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: contents

message: Are the divisions really Divisions of a single national society, or are they legally separate, with the phrase "Suchandsuch Division" added to their names to make them sound as if they are sub-divisions?    Tabletop (talk) 22:49, 26 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Divisions 

message: I merged content from PRODded Austrailian Railway History.  I believe that the merge will serve the overall content/context of the information better, as Austrailian Railway History seemed a little like a fork.  I don't think there is enough there to warrent a seperate article. Roodog2k (talk) 13:18, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Support in the circumstances SatuSuro 13:28, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge from Australian Railway History 
Category talk:Baseball managers

message: This was the old criteria.  I think it's way too strict, so I changed it. 
This category includes managers in major league baseball who meet any of the following criteria:
* They are the current manager of a major league team;
* They have managed a team to a league championship or postseason berth;
* They have at least 500 career victories as a manager.
--M@rēino 14:08, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, I don't think we want hundreds of major league managers listed here when the team-by-team categories suffice. If you want to discuss reducing the requisite number of victories under the third qualifier, that's a different matter. And subcats for non-MLB areas are easily defined. MisfitToys 23:19, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Criteria

message: There is no rule that category membership means "subset".  So let's put managers in BOTH categories, rather than having all these reverts.  Agreed? 
(Incidentally, MLB itself is confused.  If you go to the Tigers roster and click on "Coaches", it will display the "Manager & Coaches".) --M@rēino 22:04, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't really have a problem with both cats being included under coaches by sport. My main concern was that the category for managers was dropped from coaches by sport; I think most users would be looking for managers rather than their assistants. As for the MLB site, I'd simply note that the manager heads the coaching staff, even if he isn't himself called a coach; and they likely aren't going to have separate pages for the manager and coaches. MisfitToys 02:27, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  "coach" 

message: If only Major League managers should be added to this category, I believe the category name should be changed to :Category:Major League baseball managers. – Ilse@ 10:25, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Category name
Talk:Twisted Colossus

message: The image used has not been vandalised, but somehow became wacky and the date got screwed. Coastergeekperson04 02:14, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: "The Ride Is Based On The 2002 American Shark Film Megalodon" How can a 1978 coaster be based on a 2002 movie? Is this factual information? Mythbusters844 (talk) 04:40, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wrong information? 

message: Just like Texas Giant was moved to New Texas Giant in 2010, Colossus (Six Flags Magic Mountain) will be moved to Twisted Colossus. We got a lot of editing to do here. Giggett (talk) 17:32, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: As much as I would go ahead and work on this article, I have other articles higher up on my to-do list. For starters, I suggest you create a "ride experience" section with a detailed description of what the ride layout was before and what the layout will be like after. Also, merge the sub-sections in the "History" section so there are no sub-sections (its possible to do so). Again, sorry for not being able to work on the article. I'm just trying to do as much as I can with less than a week before school starts (for me).--Dom497 (talk) 01:36, 29 August 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article Move 

message: Hello!
I am trying to update the coaster's placings in the golden ticket awards, but it won't seem to update, anyone know a solution to this? Marth The Hero King (talk) 16:15, 11 September 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Marth The Hero King, it's fixed. The template for the GTA table had to be updated. This should now work for other articles as well. --GoneIn60 (talk) 03:30, 12 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Help
Talk:Ikot Ekpene

message: I think it is both historically and culturally significant that IK was the first local government area in Nigeria under the British.  Please comment if this is not a fact or relevant to the history of the area.   Thanks --Rcollman 13:57, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: I just edited the Ikot Ekpene page, a place where I have fond memories.   It is not clear to me when the glory days of Ikot Ekpene actually spanned (1950 - 1967?). There are many famous sons and daughters that are not mentioned. But these are trivial points.  I decided to clean it up the statements of blame and remove the watch which was placed on this page. However true the blames may or maynot be, they do not honor the people of Ikot Ekpene in my opinion.
Ikot Ekpene is both a town and a region. Under the British administrative scheme (which lasted through Biafra), there was an Annang Province, made up of Abak (to the south) and Ikot Ekpene Divisions.  Each Division was broken up into what were called County Councils, which were groups of towns.   I believe there were 4 county councils in Ikot Ekpene Division, one was called Ikot Ekpene. Ikot Ekpene town contained a Provincial, Divisional and I believe county council administrative units. This had a big impact upon the town when compared to say Abak.  In 2006, Ikot Ekpene region is defined differently than any of the above Ikot Ekpene administrative/political units.       
A great deal of Ikot Ekpene Division is surrounded by Ibo speakers. Aba to the West and Umuhia to the North.   In particular, the Arochukwu in the 1800's  must have influenced the culture of today's Ikot Ekpene peoples as much as the British. Some accounts indicate that Ikot Ekpene's Annang ancestors helped form that vast trading empire/organization.   
----
TO SOURCES OF NIGERIAN HISTORY AT THE NATIONAL ARCHIVES OF NIGERIA, ENUGU BRANCH is very interesting. "Calabar was created a province in 1914 and was made up of the following Districts and Divisions, namely, Abak, Arochuku, Eket, Ikot Ekpene, Itu, Opobo and Uyo. In 1959 Calabar Province was split into Calabar, Uyo and Anang Provinces." It also notes that in 1914 Arochuku became a sub-district under the Ikot Ekpene Division, and in 1959 it formed part of Bende Division in Umuahia Province. In 1908 was part of the Ikot Ekpene was carved out and constituted into the sub-district of Itu. In 1914 Itu became a District under the Ikot Ekepene Division. in 1927 it became a separate Division and was renamed Enyong Division. --Rcollman 00:54, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Old comments

message: I put in the coordinates at the bottom of the page source however the coordinates I got from http://www.fallingrain.com/world/NI/a/I/k/o/t/32/E/ and the google maps search for ikot ekpene, nigeria both agree however they do not agree with what is in the source code for the infobox.  The lat/lon data from the infobox is not in the actual rendered page though so I'm not sure what to do. -AndrewBuck 21:24, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Added geographical coordinates
Talk:The Jester (roller coaster)

message: Vekoma, not Arrow Dynamics? This rollercoaster ran Arrow's trains when it was in San Antonio. Jay77tx 19:52, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Viper (Six Flags AstroWorld)

message: This basically gtfdgdfdga disambiguation page, all but two of these rides have their own articles and it wouldn't be hard to add the others. I'd like to propose that this page be redirected to the main Viper disambiguation page where we can add a separate section listing the rides. Just seems to me that there is very little in common between most of these rides apart from their name. What does everyone think? Seaserpent85 12:35, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think that the two other articles should be created, and this article should be made a disambiguation page to all of the Viper roller coasters. Branson03 16:41, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is this article necessary?
Talk:OZM

message: I notice on the page Wikipedia:NOT#Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information that point 8) states that intructions
or "how-to's" should not be included on Wiki pages:
:Instruction manuals - while Wikipedia has descriptions of people, places, and things, Wikipedia articles should not include instruction - advice ( legal, medical, or otherwise), suggestions, or contain "how-to"s. This includes tutorials, walk-throughs, instruction manuals, video game guides, and recipes.
We should remove these large sections from this mine's page as well as others that contain almost exactly the same text (mostly the soviet/east-european ones have this like POMZ and).  
Deon Steyn 14:26, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. -- Securiger 03:16, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Instructions manual
Talk:Viper (Six Flags Darien Lake)

message: Until ~1998/1999, the track on the Viper had been all black, including the supports. It was then painted green, and has remained unpainted since that time. Please stop changing the article to say the track used to be a darker green, or whatever. 12.75.106.121 15:04, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Track Color
Talk:1984 Dallas Grand Prix

message: :Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *Support or *Oppose, then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's naming conventions.
*Support Per statement above. DH85868993 (talk) 08:13, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Survey

message: arrows on the circuit map show the circuit to run Clockwise, when in fact it ran anti-clockwise.  There is video footage elsewhere on the web to prove this.
81.153.204.137 (talk) 16:04, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I have asked the editor who created the map to fix it. Thanks for pointing out the error. DH85868993 (talk) 22:50, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Fixed. DH85868993 (talk) 17:02, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

text: The map has now been corrected. DH85868993 (talk) 06:18, 20 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Dallas Grand Prix 1984- Track Map

message: If Mansell was classified sixth (thereby salvaging one championship point), it means that he collapsed after reaching the finish line, not before. (johnny-nemo@hotmail.co.uk.)  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.112.245.161 (talk) 11:40, 31 August 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: No, he collapsed before the finish line. He was classified sixth because he had completed 64 laps sooner than Fabi and Winkelhock. DH85868993 (talk) 12:42, 31 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Mansell
Talk:Moen Incorporated

message: Wikipedia is not a "how-to" - hence, I have removed extensive info on plumbing and replacing Moen faucets. --OpenToppedBus - Talk to the driver 14:43, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removed "how-to" info 
Talk:The Albino's Dancer

message: There were some doubts expressed as to whether the short story hidden on my webpage is a missing chapter of this novella: I confirm that it is, and hope that this will be sufficient rather than a direct link being required - it would be nice if we could keep the hidden nature of the story intact, at least whilst the novella is the current Time Hunter release.
Sheriff Bernard 13:33, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Given we're over a year on now, would a direct link to the hidden story now be more appropriate? Bondegezou (talk) 10:51, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

text: Feel free - I'm in the process of updating my site, so it may move over the next couple of months, but otherwise there shouldn't be any problems. Thanks for suspending normal Wiki-rules to allow visitors to my site a more fun experience. Sheriff Bernard (talk) 18:22, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:A- and B-class destroyer

message: I believe that the B-class destroyer article be merged into this one as the B-class ships were essentially repeats of the A class. This will match how our other existing class articles are organized for the British interwar intermediate destroyers (G and H-class destroyer, E and F-class destroyer, etc.) and follow how some sources, like Conway's All the World's Fighting Ships 1922–46, organize their coverage.Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 21:02, 11 September 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Support merge. If the classes were similar in everything but name, then they should be one page.Llammakey (talk) 22:25, 11 September 2015 (UTC)

text: Support merge - there is very little difference between the classes as built - basically boiling down to the B-class being fitted with Sonar and better depth charge armament and A-class having minesweeping equipment, with the A-class having a larger flotilla leader. The two classes were effectively variants of the same design, and the differences between them disappeared by World War II anyway.Nigel Ish (talk) 14:34, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Merger proposal
Talk:Agano-class cruiser

message: i think this line isn't correct: "The hull was flush-decked, and a bulbous bow was used for the first time on a Japanese warship."
Yamato had the bulbous bow and she was build a couple of years before the Agano-class cruisers.
Loosmark (talk) 10:49, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  bulbous bow 

message: The line about it's main guns being "unique" because they were capable of firing at 55deg is either incorrect, or it should say "unique among LIGHT cruisers", because the 20 cm/50 3rd Year Type naval gun as fitted to many heavy cruisers such as the Tone-class cruiser and Takao-class cruiser was capable of firing at 55deg, and in fact was originally fitted to the early Takao's with the ability to fire to 70deg, to act as an anti-aircraft weapon. This was later reduced to 55deg, but as you can see from the list on the page for the gun, there were numerous cruisers able to fire their main guns up to 55deg. Perhaps the Agano-class were the only LIGHT cruisers able to do so, but clearly not the only cruisers.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by .45Colt (talk • contribs) 20:45, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  55 degree elevation 

message: So were the secondary guns "80mm" or "76.2mm"? It says both, and that's a pretty big difference. 4mm is significant when talking about artillery of that size, and I can't imagine why they would call it "80mm" if it was actually 76.2mm..45Colt 20:50, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  76.2mm or 80mm? 

message: The body of the article and the infobox disagree on the diameter of the secondary armament.
As far as I have been able to tell from the sources listed, the IJN oficially designated them as 8cm weapons, but the actual caliber was the 7.62cm in the infobox. The wikipedia article on the weapon also lists them as 8cm weapons (8 cm/60 Type 98 naval gun). Most individual articles for the ships, such as Japanese cruiser Agano list them as 8cm weapons.
For now, I'm going to change the infobox to 8cm, since that seems to be the consensus among the pages for the class and the weapon.
Any input would be much appreciated, as I am quite new to the site.
Thanks! SpanCan (talk) 02:46, 3 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Secondary armament caliber
Talk:Steve Sloan

message: Need a reference to show that he was OC at Vanderbilt for Watson Brown's last team when Doug Matthews was DC.  Anyone have this?  (It's not really encyclopedic, but his going from AD at Alabama to an assistant at V'bilt is in fact the largest one-day demotion in the history of collegiate sports.) 75.246.157.28 (talk) 22:52, 31 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vanderbilt OC
Talk:GridCC

message: There's no real content on this page. As of now, it looks like spam to me.--HellFire 14:50, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: thanx for adding the info --HellFire 15:41, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  spam? 

message: Of the external links, only the last one is working, but this site is no longer maintained.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 140.181.91.36 (talk) 13:18, 30 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  links
Talk:Luis Carlos Galán

message: I have classified this article as a start due to its level of organisation and detail. The sourcing needs to be standardised. Capitalistroadster 06:19, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Start classification
Talk:Lavalas

message: Where is the discussion regarding the neutrality? 14:52, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, someone needs to discuss and address it. I hearby nominate it for POV check. I am not enough of a Lavalas expert to tackle it myself.  However, I would bet my right arm that this piece was posted by someone I know who worked in the Aristide government's Press Office before the last coup. CyberAnth 10:25, 7 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, I very specifically recall reading this piece in 2001. During my thesis research in 2001, Aristide's Press Secretary forwarded it to me when I requested information from her office. CyberAnth 05:33, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Why is this article flagged as "neutrality disputed'?
Talk:Wizardborn

message: I left all the recent edits intact, except for the page count.  I actually own the hardcover edition of this book, and it rings in at 428 pages, not 466, as Amazon.com says (I find they are often wrong on their page numbers...) - Runch 15:05, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for the correction! Cheers Grey Shadow 15:32, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Page Count
Talk:Scott Shaw/Archive 1

message: User:Alex West reverts my attempts to trim the article, with the edit summary: "The Re-Writer of this article continues to remove essential facts about this individual and provide an incorrect link to Thich Thien-An. Thus, this article is being reverted." I certainly do not agree that any "essential facts" are being removed. In fact, the essential facts are what I aim to keep, and I am removing what seems to be more along the lines of "patent fluff". Furthermore, the link to Thich Thien-An was not so much wrong as that article was in the wrong place; but I fixed that problem (see Talk:Nhat Hanh). - Nat Krause 07:07, 19 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Edit conflict
Talk:Akatsuki-class destroyer (1931)

message: The article describes the enclosed twin five-inch gun mountings as 'gun turrets', but then back-pedals on this, calling them next 'gunhouses' and then technically 'gun mountings' rather than 'true turrets'. This is, of course, problematic. Not least for the lay reader, who is left their own devices in how to understand what these large, fully-enclosed rotating gun positions were.
To clarify; they were turrets. They were fully enclosed, they provided protection and they facilitated the directing, elevation and thus aiming of the guns contained within. This meets the criteria for a gun turret. That they were unarmoured is not relevant to this definition. An armoured turret which has its armour plating removed and is left with just metal skin plating in place of the armour is still a turret as long as it functions mechanically and environmentally in the same manner that it did when equipped with armour.
Different points of view appearing in the main article in this manner serve not to enlighten, or to reinforce fact, but to confuse. Sadly, it is just a reflection of a completely benign and thoroughly natural human tendency; the tendency toward different perspectives between individuals. But we should strive for two key essentials within Wikipedia articles:
1) Consistency of language (even when it seems that the lexicon is being repeated frequently; science does just this, by the way, in the quest for accuracy).
2) Accuracy of ideas being communicated.
In this case, even if it means using the word 'turret' more times than some might feel comfortable with, we must remember that a good article can still be good whilst communicating to the reader as though they were a five-year-old. Let them leave with the idea firmly established and then reinforced that a turret is a turret, even if there was some technical discussion along the way. 2A00:23C7:3119:AD01:8191:C1B:C557:2866 (talk) 00:17, 4 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Turrets
Talk:King's Highway

message: ----
What evidence is there that "King's Highway" was used Canada-wide? Someone else just told me that Chemin du Roi is specifically Route 138, and Google seems to agree. --SPUI (T - C) 15:21, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for tidying me up, my dab skills suck, must RTFM sometime. --Alf melmac 15:56, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not totally sure that I'm doing it all correctly - I just do what I see on others and what makes sense. --SPUI (T - C) 16:07, 19 July 2006 (UTC)