lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Comic Relief

message: I'm not sure it can proved that Lammy's various ranting interventions since 2017 have directly led to the major falls in donations ever since (his name is often cited though), but it is true that he isn't of direct African descent (he is British and his parents were immigrants from the former British colony of Guyana in South America). So essentially a British West Indian of Guyanese descent ranted and raved about the portrayal of Africa (and caused donations to fall etc) - is was not a Briton of African descent doing it. Actual Britons of African descent probably have all sorts of views about Comic Relief - but it should be pointed out in the article that David Lammy isn't one of them - and indeed his rantings can be considered "second hand". He has no more in common with Africa than any of the millions of other modern descendants of slavery across the world - he certainly isn't of direct modern African descent - so that context should be made clear. I would say that wider "cultish" North London politicians from the Labour Party - Jeremy Corbyn, Dianne Abbott etc- and their often severely aggravating effect on huge swathes of the British people generally be cited (coined "The London Effect"). In fact any (criticising) views of Africans (British or otherwise) should be given in the article too, as they are at least as valid as Lammy's, if not more so.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.99.210.174 (talk) 16:09, 22 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: David Lammy is of Guyanese descent - i.e. he isn't African nor of direct African descent

message: Can anybody remember all the different noses? There was one with a trunk last time, there was a furry one, and a smelly one. What else, and for what years? Mintguy 22:43 Feb 25, 2003 (UTC)
:Let's see: Bagpuss and others have come up with the following 'best guess':
pipoo
:* 1988 - Normal
:* 1989 - Smiley face etched onto nose
:* 1991 - Arms 
:* 1993 - Tomato
:* 1995 - Colour change
:* 1997 - Furry
:* 1999 - Squeaky
:* 2001 - Tongue
:* 2003 - Hair Dos
: I have now found references on the web for 1993-2003. Verfication can be found by searching Google for "Red Nose Day 199x"/"Red Nose Day 200x" and looking through pictures! Note there are only 7(!) hits for the 1995 search and you need to look at Alan Cumming's TV biography page to find a picture. These searches are no good for 1988,1989,1991. What we have are strictly speaking guesses, but I am pretty confident about all three. There is an excellent chance that is the only place on the web where this information is collated so I am going to add it to the article Pcb21 16:47 Apr 1, 2003 (UTC)
::Heh, two years later... red nose day.com itself put together a history (maybe inspired by this page ... who knows!... and the list is finally undeniably accurate! Pcb21| Pete 23:30, 11 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Chronology of noses
Talk:Omar Bradley

message: An editor added this parenthetical to the Korea section.  It seems accurate, but we need to word this properly on the page, so moving it here to work out what we should do.  --John (User:Jwy/talk)
(this statement is inaccurate, North Korea and South Korea were not politically separate until the Korean War cease fire was negotiated.  At the time the conflict began there was just one Korea.  The conflict began when Communist forces in the north attacked forces in the south, essentially starting a civil war)
::no. the reliable sources agree they were totally separate independent nations with full-fledged national governments in June 1950 with a well-defined border. See > and accompanying UN documents.
:::Had I but glanced at the North Korea article, I would have known this.  Thanks.  That is something I did not, but should have, known.  --John (User:Jwy/talk) 15:32, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Koreas 

message: In February 1941, Bradley was promoted to (wartime) temporary rank of brigadier general...
:But America wasn't at war until December 1941. Valetude (talk) 16:36, 29 October 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wartime rank?
Talk:Jean-Jacques Rousseau

message: I notice there is a lot here on Rousseau's child rearing and similar facts... but there is no mention he had 5 children with Therese who he abandoned to be orphans. Is there no criticism of this available? Should we not certainly include this in our assessment of him? What happened to his children? 66.168.118.139 (talk) 21:33, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Rousseau claimed that he went to the foundling hospital 10 years after he abandoned their first son, but it didn't have any records of the children. I believe he lied and never  visited, he never wanted any of them in the first place. This would be an interesting exercise for French historical researchers, to look at the records and see what really happened. 2402:8100:3197:7315:1943:D911:7460:2398 (talk) 17:24, 24 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: His children?

message: Jean-Jacques Rousseau has historically been classified as a liberal.
The sources are under the article "classical liberalism"; Another source: The history of European liberalism by Guido Ruggiero.
--RVD3 (talk) 17:27, 29 December 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Liberalism 

message: The current version of the page says his pastor described him as "the Antichrist". But the book cited just says "his onw pastor turned against him, and denounced him in public sermons as Antichrist", itself citing a book which writes "M. de Montmollin, whilst professing to withdraw from all public action against Rousseau, continued to excite, by his sermons and letters, the animosity of his parishioners against this "anti-Christ", inflicted upon the pious people of Neuchatel after he had been repudiated by all Christian states". Given that historically "antichrist" has not always been understood as referring to just one person, I think Wikipedia should say he was described as "an Antichrist" or just "Antichrist".136.152.143.254 (talk) 21:52, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: "the Antichrist" vs "an antichrist"

message: From Juvenal's Satires; cf. . Probably worth adding to the main page somewhere. --RZiman (talk) 17:12, 5 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rousseau's motto: ''Vitam impendere vero''
Talk:Ruth

message: The last item on the page --
*Ruth Chilton, the legend
-- was added anonymously at 19:17, 18 July 2006, with a link to a nonexistent "Ruth Chilton" page. Googling that name shows no reasonable referent. I've removed the line. Thnidu 20:15, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Ruth Chilton, the legend"
Talk:ECMAScript

message: the infobox claims "Influenced by: CoffeeScript", which, given there's not a single mention of that anywhere on the page nor this discussion, sounds a bit weird, especially given CoffeeScript is both way younger than ECMAScript, and a language that's designed to extend/modify and compile to it?
46.92.182.139 (talk) 08:30, 12 September 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, I think it's because newer versions of ECMAScript have features (like optional chaining) that are inspired by CoffeeScript's syntax.  AltoStev Talk 13:46, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Influenced by CoffeeScript 

message: The introduction in https://tc39.es/ecma262/ has some information not included in this article. It's a primary source but there should be others...
Some quotes:
"Focused development of the sixth edition started in 2009, as the fifth edition was being prepared for publication. However, this was preceded by significant experimentation and language enhancement design efforts dating to the publication of the third edition in 1999."
"ECMAScript 2016 was the first ECMAScript edition released under Ecma TC39's new yearly release cadence and open development process"  AltoStev Talk 13:50, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Missing history
Talk:Diabetic ketoacidosis

message: Since when do people in need of medical assistance get told to call a certified diabetes educator instead of a physician, practitioner, or emergency response system?  Makes me wonder if the person who wrote that section is a CDE.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 165.214.4.22 (talk) 19:57, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Can't remember if I wrote that, but I would not object if a person with DM1 who is feeling unwell gets in touch with someone who can advise when to to got hospital. In the UK, diabetes specialist nurses are often the first port of call for patients. JFW | T@lk 00:22, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Certified Diabetes Educator 

message: doi:10.1136/bmj.d4092 is a systematic review as to why some kids get diagnosed and treated before DKA sets in. Might require citation. JFW | T@lk 21:52, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  DKA at presentation in kids 

message: The following was added:
This probably reflects the pathophysiology, but there is no source and I'm not sure if it is necessary for the flow of the text. Opinions welcome. JFW | T@lk 19:53, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pathophysiology 

message: ... can occur as we already discuss. This review discusses it in more detail: doi:10.4239/wjd.v6.i8.1009 JFW | T@lk 06:58, 30 December 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Respiratory failure 

message: BMJ doi:10.1136/bmj.h5660 - revew in adults
NICE DM1 in children and doi:10.1136/bmj.i139 BMJ summary
More to add, thus. JFW | T@lk 16:56, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: In fact, NEJM review should be added doi: 10.1056/NEJMra1207788 JFW | T@lk 12:15, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Updated the lead based on the BMJ paper. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 05:35, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: More sources

message: I have just updated the references to the June 2021 update of the JBDS guideline. The ADA seems content to stick with the 12-year old guideline that we still reference. JBDS also addresses DKA in dialysis patients - I have not added this.
On scanning recent reviews, the following stand out:
* doi:10.1016/j.ajem.2021.02.015 - review of euglycaemic DKA
* doi:10.1016/j.numecd.2020.06.006 - Italian national guidelines for all age groups
* doi:10.1038/s41572-020-0165-1 - broad review in Nat Rev Dis Primers
* doi:10.1542/pir.2018-0231 - review in paediatrics
* doi:10.1016/S2213-8587(20)30042-5 - prevention strategies
* doi:10.1136/bmj.l1114 - BMJ state of the art review
* doi:10.1080/17446651.2019.1561270 - approach to possible KPD in DKA
* doi:10.1111/dme.13519 - role of deprivation (important systematic review)
Just in case I find myself with nothing to do for a few hours! JFW | T@lk 09:21, 10 August 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Also doi:10.1038/nrendo.2016.15 JFW | T@lk 20:18, 2 October 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  2021 update 

message: doi:10.1111/dme.14788 JFW | T@lk 22:56, 16 March 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  JBDS update
Talk:Messiah in Judaism

message: Dunno where this 2240 CE came from, but the numbers within the Bible add up with the current day already way over 6,000 years. So even if I take out the years that never were, we are way past the 6,000 years since Creation described in the Bible. 89.134.17.205 (talk) 19:25, 21 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  We are already over 6,100 years after creation 

message: Don't delete sourced information. tgeorgescu (talk)  18:27, 31 March 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: I refuse to interact with this individual, so my contributions to the article will stop here if other users are fine with him deleting my edit I will not revert it. Have a nice day! Nycarchitecture212 (talk) 23:25, 31 March 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Why? Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 00:26, 1 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Deletion of sourced information 

message: @Davidbena: while I appreciate the hard work you put in to providing material for this page, the Talmud is not a secondary source per Wikipedia standards but an original source. In addition, we need to write an article intended for the general public, and these comments are really deep in the weeds. We must provide secondary sources that explain what theologians think of the Talmudic references, not provide the references themselves (except as limited examples, such as a quote). Ogress 01:32, 28 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay, I agree with you there. If I find any secondary sources that are worthy of note, I'll suggest the edit. Thanks.Davidbena (talk) 03:28, 28 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks, that would be super! Ogress 13:37, 28 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sourcing
Talk:Magdeburg rights

message: As far as I know, Magdeburg never managed to achieve the status of an Imperial Free City, even if the citizens had such ambitions. In this connection the introductory sentence is incorrect. Also see List of Free Imperial Cities--Zarbi1 (talk) 17:36, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Introduction 

message: Hi,
not too surprisingly, the german page on this is more comprehensive, going into a lot more detail of what was in the lawcode, appeal procedures, gives sources and so on.
So I'm planning to translate and add the following sections.
  2. Content and subdivisions of Magdeburg Rights
  2.1 Rules of Procedure
  2.2 Commercial Law
  2.3 Marriage and Inheritance Law
  2.4 Criminal Law
  2.5 Court Officials and jurisdiction
  4.2 appeal procedures to Magdeburg
  5 the Removal of Magdeburg's role as an Appeal Court
  6 The disappearance of Magdeburg Rights
I was therefore thinking of deleting parts of the current "contents", but will leave the section on jewish people and their relation to magdeburg rights. 
if this is treading on anybodies edits or restarting a flame-war, please warn me in the next few days
Ballymichael (talk) 22:01, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  suggestion: import section headings, content and sources from german page 

message: Lydford law has nothing whatsoever to do with municipal rights or privileges and does not belong in this article. It means meting out harsh (or unjust) 'justice'. It was not some kind of model charter for English towns. See:
http://www.legendarydartmoor.co.uk/lydford_law.htm
This is not an ideal source, but it makes the point. Norvo (talk) 23:51, 27 July 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: As there has been no comment at all on this for over two years I've taken the liberty of removing Lydford law from 'See also'. Norvo (talk) 02:55, 12 November 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lydford Law 

message: The situation in Bohemia was more complicated, and certainly the majority of Bohemian cities were NOT using Magdeburg Law. I wrote a more comprehensive comment on this at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:German_town_law#h-Litom%C4%9B%C5%99ice_Law-20240513072600.
Ceplm (talk) 07:32, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bohemia
Talk:Human papillomavirus infection

message: The "Genital cancer" row in HPV types table is confusing. Does it refer to female genitals, male genitals, or both? The impact of HPV types is quite different.
I suspect the current content applies to female genitals but doesn't seem to fit very well with penile cancer. For instance, in this study https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0302283815012154?via%3Dihub analyzing the role of HPV in penile cancer, HPV-16 was the most frequent HPV type detected in both HPV-positive cancers (68.7%) and HGSILs (79.6%), followed by HPV-6 (3.7%) but in the table HPV-6 isn't even present. Another study https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1850485/ found single-viral infection of the following types in patients with penile cancer: 45, 35, 18, 52, 68, 31, 53, 6. All of which (except type 6) are currently present in the table. However I haven't been able to find any reference linking penile cancer with the remaining types (33, 39, 51, 56, 58, 59, 26, 66, 73, 82), perhaps these types are only associated with female genitals? Maybe a good solution would be to split "Genital cancer" in two rows, one for female genitals and one for male genitals.
Robert1dB (talk) 22:57, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: "Genital cancer"

message: Apologies if I'm missing something obvious (I'm not an expert in the field or even health/biology for that matter), but based on information  I found on the net it would seem there's more to HPV and "Oropharyngeal cancer" than just type 16. Quoting from this meta-study https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3394168/: "The most common HPV type detected in oral cancers is HPV16. A notable outlier is a study from South Africa which detected only HPV18, and not HPV16, in patients with oral cancer. HPV18 was detected in a smaller percentage of oral cancers, some oral carcinomas had dual infections with HPV16/18. Rarer types detected in oral cancers were HPV8, HPV31, HPV38, and HPV66."
Robert1dB (talk) 23:07, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: "Oropharyngeal cancer"

message: "While cases of warts have been described since the time of ancient Greece, their viral cause was not known until 1907." occurs twice in the article. Mansell (talk) 06:35, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Redundant statement 

message: "HPV is necessary for cervical cancer to occur." Looking through the citation linked for this information, there is no information which supports this claim. There are other articles which say HPV negative cervical cancer can occur. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34073478/ 
Stew240 (talk) 09:38, 18 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Cervical Cancer" 

message: Why no mention of when HPV was discovered ? 70.190.65.59 (talk) 04:41, 26 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Discovered
Talk:Anatomy

message: Create 2409:4043:2513:5105:6F89:6B15:7964:9391 (talk) 06:17, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Antonyms words 

message: The redirect Vertebrate anatomy has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at  until a consensus is reached.  Steel1943 (talk) 14:35, 4 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  "[[:Vertebrate anatomy]]" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]] 

message: The redirect Anatomy and physiology has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at  until a consensus is reached.  Steel1943 (talk) 14:40, 4 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  "[[:Anatomy and physiology]]" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]] 

message: The redirect Male anatomy has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at  until a consensus is reached.  Steel1943 (talk) 16:41, 4 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  "[[:Male anatomy]]" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]]
Talk:Malleability

message: According to our dissections in class and with many professors and experts, a mechanical property is the reaction of a substance when a load is applied, which is not necessary for measuring malleability. Therefore, malleability must be a physical property or possibly neither. Anyone have anything to say on the possibility of it being neither? Thatcherk 03:15, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  CU Material Science Class? 

message: Since the properties are so closely related, this proposal seems sensible to me. At the same time, the text can be edited and rationalised. Peterlewis (talk) 17:08, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I support said merger.  The topics cover the same subject matter. Iepeulas (talk) 03:55, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Merging articles
Talk:Chromium

message: There are a number of articles based on one study that identifies chromium as having been used in ancient Persia. I don't know how much attention should be paid to that, but maybe it merits a mention? One of the articles is https://phys.org/news/2020-09-chromium-steel-ancient-persia.html Mrfoogles (talk) 02:47, 3 June 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Possibly used in Ancient Persia
Talk:Politics of South Korea

message: Does South Korea use a mixed member proportional system?  How exactly is "half" of the representation obtained proportionally?  Are party lists used?  If a party has 20% of the vote but wins none of the non-proportional seats, will they end up with 20% of the legislature, or only 20% of the half that's elected proportionally? Scott Ritchie 07:21, 24 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Talk more about the voting system, please. 

message: Is Korea in the G-77 developing nations? I think it's in the G-20 industrial nations. (LeeJun7 00:09, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Group of 77? 

message: The file :c:File:Emblem of Korean Courts.svg used in this article has been nominated for deletion on Commons 
 Reason: I think time has come to finish the long-forgotten (or ignored) question: Is  free?  I doubt its freeness, based on the fact that we do not have definite answer for Template talk:KOGL#Free?. To save your click...    We, as of 2018, do not have a final answer for this. And this means, we have to delete these images, including some VIs and FPs. 
 Deletion request: link 
Message automatically deposited by a robot - -Harideepan (talk) 06:15, 23 March 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  File nominated for deletion on commons 

message: The file :c:File:Emblem of the Government of the Republic of Korea.svg used in this article has been nominated for deletion on Commons 
 Reason: I think time has come to finish the long-forgotten (or ignored) question: Is  free?  I doubt its freeness, based on the fact that we do not have definite answer for Template talk:KOGL#Free?. To save your click...    We, as of 2018, do not have a final answer for this. And this means, we have to delete these images, including some VIs and FPs. 
 Deletion request: link 
Message automatically deposited by a robot - -Harideepan (talk) 07:50, 23 March 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  File nominated for deletion on commons
Talk:Vanadium

message: Extremely narrowly scope article about a rare form of a metal, better covered as a redirect and section Sadads (talk) 01:15, 10 August 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Klbrain (talk) 12:04, 20 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed merge of [[Native vanadium]] into [[Vanadium]]
Talk:1932 Winter Olympics

message: Where are the results for the demonstration curling? Anywhere?  TREKphiler any time you're ready, Uhura  15:08, 4 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Men without brooms 

message: Hello! This is a note to let the editors of this article know that :File:Olympic Bobsled Run Lake Placid2.jpg will be appearing as picture of the day on February 4, 2011. You can view and edit the POTD blurb at Template:POTD/2011-02-04. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page so Wikipedia doesn't look bad. :) Thanks! howcheng  {chat} 22:21, 2 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[:File:Olympic Bobsled Run Lake Placid2.jpg]] to appear as POTD soon 
Talk:Braintree

message: Actually, should I put Braintree, Essex here? It looks like the biggest by quite a way, so there shouldn't be much confusion. -- Oliver P. 17:08 Feb 26, 2003 (UTC)
:Well, Braintree, Massachusetts has a similar size, though it was likely named after the Essex town.  Ubermonkey 22:55, 16 May 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I think we should leave it as a dab page; neither town seems more notable than the other. Raime 12:31, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I strongly believe this should be kept as a dab page. We have too many arguments over which settlement has a "right" to use the name. The best option to avoid revert wars is to use disambiguation unless there is a strong reason not to do so (and "my town is a bit bigger than yours" does not count. Nor does being the original town of that name). Disambiguation should be the norm in almost every case where more than one location shares a name. Moscow is one example of name that does not need disambiguation. A provincial English town is not. Lurker (said · done) 12:54, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Comments