lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Scary Kids Scaring Kids

message: Shouldn't we mention somewhere that they covered R.E.M.'s Losing my religion for the Punk Goes '90s album?    Bernalj90 01:42, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Punk Goes '90s 

message: Cleaned up the article. Took out the unnessisary statment about their Myspace. And the fangirlish ones. Dwnsjane2 19:18, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I believe it has to be either their own headline tour or other major tour. I wouldn't consider Immortal Records an important independent label and it certainly is not a major label or owned by one, it's pretty small and according to wikipedia it has ceased trading and only had 10 bands when it did. Popularity does not equal notability. If they had many fans it follows that they would have charted with a single or had numerous articles written about them. They have neither. --Neon white (talk) 05:24, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  I'm pretty sure that Scary Kids Scaring Kids have supported Fightstar on a European tour (they did at least support them in the UK), so they are certainly notable enough. James25402 (talk) 13:37, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Cleaned Up

message: Are there any sources for the notability of this band? --Neon white (talk) 22:16, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  I believe it has to be either their own headline tour or other major tour. I wouldn't consider Immortal Records an important independent label and it certainly is not a major label or owned by one, it's pretty small and according to wikipedia it has ceased trading and only had 10 bands when it did. Popularity does not equal notability. If they had many fans it follows that they would have charted with a single or had numerous articles written about them. They have neither. --Neon white (talk) 05:24, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  I'm pretty sure that Scary Kids Scaring Kids have supported Fightstar on a European tour (they did at least support them in the UK), so they are certainly notable enough. James25402 (talk) 13:37, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Notability 

message: "whilst"?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.146.64.166 (talk) 06:54, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Britishism 

message: It's a well known fact that this band is post-hardcore, and their latest album has some indie influences, but i really don't think that they should be classified as emo.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.88.153.44 (talk) 02:34, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Musical Genre 

message: scary kid sounds more cosely to Metal than shitknot: compare "My Darkest Hour" With Wait And "Wait and Bleed"  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.53.56.158 (talk) 06:34, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Scary Kids
Talk:Snooker world rankings 2005/2006

message: Somebody has removed Quinten Hann from this list, which isn't really accurate. Based on the 2 seasons these results incorporate he was 22nd - when he was banned for match-fixing he was retrospectively removed from the list in a rather Stalinist rewrite of histroy, which should not be reflected here --MartinUK 16:20, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: To me, it's not 'resolved' - he should be included in the list. --MartinUK 11:49, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Removal of Hann
Talk:Billy's Live Bait

message: *All song titles serve as redirects to this album or have been placed at the appropriate disambiguation pages.--Hraefen Talk 17:53, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: <^>v|This album is connected|v<^>
Talk:Fisherface

message: The article seems to be synopsis of a relatively small part of the cited source, although "synoposis" may be too generous - entire sentences have been used as is.
The source may be found here, and is certainly copyrighted.
The larger subject is digital (computerized) facial encoding and recognition. John Broughton 20:30, 13 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think it's worth an article of its own - I doubt very much that the subject is mentioned (other than in a list) in anything but very specialized journals, and that isn't wikipedia's target audience.  John Broughton 16:54, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Now that the article has been taken down for copyvio, do we just nominate it for deletion completely? --Stretch 00:05, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Would you mind doing that? It's a good idea.  John Broughton 00:19, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. --Stretch 06:31, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: I do think that Fischerfaces ought to have its own article as it not specialized enough. The method of Eigenfaces, for example, has its own article. Meowist (talk) 13:00, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reversal of Deletion and Redirection decision.
Talk:Dan and Frank Carney

message: Dan and Frank made Pizza Hut. DUH!!!!!!!
"he was a powerfull franchisse I  bless you pizza hut"  removed Jmlk17 09:29, 31 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Just a suggestion, but since these two men have accomplished much on their own, shouldn't they have separate articles?  The overly friendly tone (Dan did this...Frank is involved) is used in the current article to keep confusion at a minimum, but it is unencyclopedic. A solution would be to give them each an article and link to the other article. Cuprum17 (talk) 22:53, 12 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Separate articles for Dan and Frank Carney

message: In a business class I took the teacher went into lengths to explain why Pizza Hut did so well, that because all equipment was leased from the folks who were supplying the product, in an effort to ensure their markets, that the cost of setting up a new operation approached zero, and thus could expand rapidly to wherever sales made sense.
The quote he gave was "I don't want to own the equipment, real estate, or expenses, I just want to own the profits." I have not verified this though it makes sense relative to everything else. If there Is more information on either the nature of their innovations, or this quote it should be in this wiki.Dragonwlkr (talk) 17:53, 6 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Can someone Verify and publish a quote? 

message: “The facts . . . were so messed up,” he said. “All they had to do was use the telephone. I would have given them the facts.” “It was just horribly done.” --- Dan Carney
Quote from Wichita Eagle newpaper article
https://www.kansas.com/news/business/biz-columns-blogs/carrie-rengers/article249156665.html#storylink=topdigest_latest
https://web.archive.org/web/20210211070140/https://www.kansas.com/news/business/biz-columns-blogs/carrie-rengers/article249156665.html#storylink=topdigest_latest
• Sbmeirow • Talk • 07:14, 11 February 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  History Channel “Food That Built America”
Talk:University of Minnesota system

message: *The content of this page in reference to the University's Twin Cities campus should be reduced to parallel that of the other coordinate campuses.  Any original information in that section should be moved to University of Minnesota. --Leep4life 20:42, 13 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Becharovka

message: As a novice, I don't really remember how to go about this correctly.  Yet, I want to point about that the products name is BechErovka and not BechArovka.  I would like to suggest that someone more savvy than I rename the article.
Thanks.
Ferdiadh 20:44, 13 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: That is no problem.  There was already an article at Becherovka, so I merged them. NickelShoe 02:05, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
Talk:Inola, Oklahoma

message: I suggest that BLACK FOX be merged here, or possibliy into Rogers County, Oklahoma, as this concerns the history of this region. JoaoRicardo talk  20:50, 13 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Template talk:Non-free television screenshot

message: As has been discussed here, the "Non-free use rationale television screenshot" has been deprecated and is being deleted. It should be removed from this template to discourage people from reusing it. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 12:54, 22 July 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Is there a replacement template that should be used instead, or should the whole line be removed? Jackmcbarn (talk) 15:49, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
replies: text:   was mentioned in the discussion, and appears to be a standard template for making rationales. Other more specific non-free content tags suggest that template as well, e.g . Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 15:56, 26 July 2015 (UTC)

text: Done Jackmcbarn (talk) 15:58, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Edit request on 22th July 2015

message: This template can be switched to use  if a small change to the bulleted list is acceptable; I've drafted a new version of the template at Template:Non-free television screenshot/sandbox. Yes, I know I can edit this template myself, but I'd like at least one other person agreeing. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 12:23, 29 January 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Done — JJMC89 (T·C) 03:42, 30 January 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Template-protected edit request on 29 January 2020
Talk:Presidents of the National Academy of Sciences

message: I agree. It is obviously a subset of it.
'''
----'''
I also agree and for the same obvious reason as stated above.--Maury
Oh!, how the two cohorts listed below must have been jubilant over "President Lincoln's _decision_ (but not his _idea_). They felt themselves to be better than the non-university scientists of their time in all areas of science regardless that there were 
non-university high achievers -- higher than them without the university education. They felt they should lead the nation in scientific works and a university education was a "must" -- especially since they were educated in a university as were others they surrounded themselves with. But Professor Joseph Henry argued with others (inc. S.F.B. Morse) too much. Joseph Henry also did the unthinkable for the Lazzaroni of his day and broke away from Darwin's ideas.
* (1) Alexander Dallas Bache (1863-1867) 
* (2) Joseph Henry (1868-1878) 
--MAURY 03:41, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
Wikipedia talk:Requests for arbitration/Pigsonthewing

message: See Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Pigsonthewing/Probation
--Tony Sidaway|Talk 20:58, 13 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Central page to coordinate probation

message: Initiated by  MBisanz talk at 01:57, 25 April 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: This area is used for notes by the clerks (including clerk recusals).
=== Arbitrator views and discussion ===
*As far as I am concerned, the indefinite probation has never been lifted; the fact that it's not on a list does not negate it. It can go through WP:AE.  Risker (talk) 22:26, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Request for clarification: [[Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Pigsonthewing]] 

message: In 2005, Pigsonthewing (POTW) was placed on probation and banned for a year by Arbcom for edit warring, harassment, gaming 3RR, and stirring up trouble link. In 2007, part of his restrictions were lifted. Later in 2007, POTW was banned for another year for showing contempt of the Wiki process. Since then he has been blocked five times. Presently, he is not listed on Wikipedia:Editing restrictions. When the original WP:Probation page was transformed in late 2007, his name was not carried over to the WP:Editing restrictions page. I am inquiring if the probation from his first arbcom case survived his second banning and can be thus actioned on upon at requests filed on WP:AE? Thank you. MBisanz talk 01:57, 25 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Statement by MBisanz 

message: Isn't this "asking the other parent" (see WP:Administrators' notice board/IncidentArchive748#Pigsonthewing proposed topic ban)? The locus of this is a content dispute across several articles about whether there should be an , or an , or an , or perhaps no infobox at all. The factions involved are displaying a battleground mentality and one group are looking to silence one of their "opponents" rather than deal with his objections to their limited consensus.
If you choose to involve yourselves, you will be faced with ruling on the belief that a consensus developed at a wikiproject can then be rolled out across every article within its scope, without taking the time to answer criticisms that the change in any particular article may be detrimental. I'm prepared to offer diffs to support each of my assertions here, although reading the ANI thread would avoid unnecessary duplication. --RexxS (talk) 22:35, 25 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Statement by uninvolved RexxS 

message: *As far as I am concerned, the indefinite probation has never been lifted; the fact that it's not on a list does not negate it. It can go through WP:AE.  Risker (talk) 22:26, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Arbitrator views and discussion
Talk:Peter Brearey

message: Removed this from article:
:For further information on Peter Brearey, who did NOT publish this page, please contact his son on: mike@breareys.fsnet.co.uk 
Mattley (Chattley) 20:59, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

message: There is an RfC on the question of using "Religion: None" vs. "Religion: None (atheist)" in the infobox on this and other similar pages. 
The RfC is at Template talk:Infobox person#RfC: Religion infobox entries for individuals that have no religion. 
Please help us determine consensus on this issue. --Guy Macon (talk) 17:58, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:   [[Template talk:Infobox person#RfC: Religion infobox entries for individuals that have no religion|Request for Comments]]
Talk:Province of South Carolina

message: The following off-site maps show the various claims of the original Thirteen Colonies: , , , and . If this information could be included in a map of this province's claims, it would be great. (This request was originally made by jengod, and I moved it here.) – Quadell (talk) (bounties) 16:06, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Map of territorial claims

message: There is a very detailed page on the "Colonial period of South Carolina."  This page seems redundant in comparison.  I suggest that someone who knows how to do so eliminate this page and arrange for readers who search for "Provillll
nce of South Carolina" to be redirected to "Colonial period of South Carolina."  Drfryer 03:40, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Redirect?

message: The word "province" was never part of the official name of any of the thirteen British colonies that later formed the United States, yet nine of the titles of the thirteen articles on those colonies include "province". All nine articles should be moved and retitled. WCCasey (talk) 19:43, 10 January 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Do you have a reliable source on this?
See the complete debate at Talk: Thirteen Colonies. WCCasey (talk) 01:18, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Never a province 

message: The article says, ¨The partition of the province into North and South Carolina became complete in 1712.[2]¨ and source 2 says to go to page 616, but I didn't find any mention of the colony splitting into north and south in 1712. Riverblade (talk) 17:28, 7 September 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  I can't find where source 2 supports the claim
Talk:Northwest Territories

message: An issue has come up:  should the infobox to this article contain the field "government_type", filled in with "Parliamentary system with consensus government".  Since this issue affects all ten provinces and the three territories, a Request for Comment has been started on the Canadian Wikipedians Notice Board.  If you are interested in this issue, please come to the Notice Board and contribute to the discussion. Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 01:18, 3 July 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dispute about Infobox content 

message: I noticed that a lot of the climate section in this article is unsourced. I'm not confident enough in my ability to comprehend meterological information but hopefully this source could be of some use to someone whose better at this than me! Cheers, Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 03:31, 4 June 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Possible sourcing for climate info
Talk:NYC (disambiguation)

message: This is a dab page about NYC, not AAR.  The AAR link doesn't help someone choose among articles that might otherwise be confused, so it shouldn't be here per MoS:DP. Tedernst | talk 21:00, 13 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Association of American Railroads link 

message: Just went to Colorado in the best way Brooklyn the Chicago restaurant be careful about them 2600:1008:B159:D598:0:50:F54:E701 (talk) 20:40, 1 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  The tour project
Talk:List of governors of South Carolina

message: This isn't explained and I think is obscure to the average reader. As part of this article was moved to another article, the fact that it doesn't start at 1 isn't obvious. I hadn't realised until researching this that we used the colonial period to number governors, and others don't know this either, see  where Moultrie's governorships have been renumbered. I sympathise with the IP. I'm not sure I'm the best person to explain it. Dougweller (talk) 05:58, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I consider all of the unfeatured governor lists as horrifically deficient. It's virtually useless until someone (well, okay, me... ok fine a few other people work on these) brings it up to the current standards. --Golbez (talk) 12:58, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Numbering system & lead 

message: The table and pages for each governor says David Beasley is a Republican and Jim Hodges is a Democrat.  The "Timeline of Recent Party Control" has Beasley in blue and Hodges is red.
EvanJ35 (talk) 16:07, 14 May 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Party Colors Since 1970
Talk:Sumter, South Carolina

message: I wonder about the relevence of all this talk about settlers on the Watteree River. Sumter isn't on the Wateree. How are colonists there relevent? 155.213.224.59 (talk) 14:52, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wateree River  

message: The crime statistics are eight years old.  Is it sill such a dangerous place?  Is it even more dangerous?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 170.149.100.10 (talk) 20:52, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Crime stats are standard, especially for locations that hit the top 10 per capita list(s).  I removed the old data and updated to 2018, the last available stats.  Hope that helps. GenQuest "scribble" 08:51, 8 February 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Also, removed the entire "Crime" sub-section and replaced it with a graphic summary box. GenQuest "scribble" 18:51, 11 February 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Crime 

message: There were several references to Third Army but I changed them all to United States Army Central. Third Army doesn't exist any more. 155.213.224.59 (talk) 16:12, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Third Army --> ARCENT 

message: It appears the crime stats have been updated since the comment above. the most recent stats are here. https://www.statista.com/statistics/433603/us-metropolitan-areas-with-the-highest-violent-crime-rate/  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 170.149.100.113 (talk) 04:28, 19 December 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Crime 2

message: The following coordinate fixes are needed for
—2600:1700:F2D0:5640:8856:B567:EEF1:635A (talk) 15:46, 11 June 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: You haven't said what you think is wrong with the coordinates in the article. I've tweaked them a bit to match the GNIS entry, but if you still think that there is an error, you'll need to supply a clear explanation of what it is. Deor (talk) 16:59, 11 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Coordinate error
Talk:Jim Ladd

message: I am interested to know quite how Radio K.A.O.S is Waters' fourth solo album, particularly as he has only released three to date; it is in fact his second.
"Music from The Body" came out in 1970.  (This is a collaboration with Ron Geesin.) 
"Pro and Cons of Hitchhiking" was released in 1984.  
Now, many feel that "When The Wind Blows" to be Reg's third release (England-1986).  Side 2 of the album is devoted entirely to Roger.  Thus this is why many feel Radio K.A.O.S. is Roger's 4th solo album.  (Joe Hoskinson)
Freeform ? - no I think its far more like Progressive rock radio unchanged from the 1970's  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.33.44.66 (talk) 17:47, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Radio K.A.O.S. 

message: Much of this article is lifted straight from advert copy, right down to the exclamation points. I have already removed those, as well as some of the slogans and other paeans and exhortations. This article needs rewriting top to bottom. Laodah 03:26, 31 July 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Major overhaul needed
Talk:Kells, County Meath

message: Neither the List of High Kings of Ireland or King of Tara gives any such person for the date given.--88.97.11.54 (talk) 12:58, 19 March 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Diarmuid MacCarroll 

message: Debate on the return of the Book. 2001:BB6:588B:F458:F5D4:D210:87E3:6FA7 (talk) 03:27, 27 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Book of Kells
Talk:Melany Neilson

message: I am still compiling biographical information on Ms. Neilson, and would appreciate any assistance available.  Thank you.
Somebody called "FGSlabach" (Neilson's husband?) keeps deleting the plagiarism controversy from this article, and has been doing so for years. Self-promotion (editing one's own article or that of a spouse) is a conflict of interest and is specifically prohibited by Wikipedia rules - see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest. So is "blanking" (removing large amounts of relevant information from an article). Any further edits by "FGSlabach" which blank this article, or blatantly self-promote Nielsen's work, will be reverted, and reported to Wikipedia for potential action against FGSlabach's editing privileges. 209.49.55.170 (talk) 18:07, 2 November 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Higher Power

message: "In current twelve-step program usage, a higher power can be anything at all that the member believes is adequate"
:I don't have citations at the ready, but this is not quite my understanding, and I would appreciate discussion. My reading in 12-step literature is much wider that AA, and I know that at least indirectly some conference approved literature says you can't be your own higher power (paraphrasing: 'Our program works for people that do believe in God, and those who don't; it doesn't work for people who believe they are God'; this passage may be in Life With Hope, the "Big Book" of Marijuana Anonymous). I also don't think the literature supports the notion that your higher power could be another person, or a mind-altering substance. Maybe the problem is sentence in our article is making an absolute statement ("anything at all") that the literature does cannot support. I will keeping an eye out for more specific passages in the literature that could be used to rephrase this, but I would appeciate other's inputs. Ike9898 (talk) 23:38, 15 October 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  a higher power can be anything at all?
Talk:Acknowledgment (creative arts and sciences)

message: If anyone wants to expand this article, please refer to the two papers I've listed as references.  The authors there distinguish between many different types of acknowledgment in scientific literature. —Psychonaut 21:21, 13 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Expansion

message: Sometimes, an acknowledgement does not fit into either of the six categories used by Cronin et al., unless in a humourous fashion. An example is 
-- Daniel Mietchen (talk)  10:01, 27 November 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: The example above and a few others are quoted in http://www.slate.com/blogs/future_tense/2013/12/27/academics_hide_snarky_clever_comments_in_the_acknowledgments_sections_of.html . -- Daniel Mietchen (talk)  01:05, 26 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Humorous statements
Talk:The Literary Encyclopedia

message: See also Wikipedia:WikiProject Missing encyclopedic articles/Literary Encyclopedia. <KF> 21:32, 13 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: [Untitled]

message: I tried to reduce the bias of much of the language, but I know very little about this encyclopedia (which is why I came here to read about it). Does anyone have any additional information that they can offer? Shpowell (talk) 02:08, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sounds like an advertisement