lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:List of Major League Baseball progressive career home runs leaders

message: Wouldn't it be great if there were a single location for a stat that could get updated, so that editors don't have to change a dozen different pages where the stat is mentioned? markm 18:02, 16 Sep 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Stat locations

message: Note: I am still working on getting the 19th century numbers right. Feel free to check my numbers. I know there are mistakes and I am sure inaccuracies exist. -Kingturtle
So why don't you help me by double-checking my math. I did this entire chart by hand. No computers. Kingturtle 05:12, 30 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Older numbers are shakey, sez the Turt 

message: I removed the stars that were put for players "tied to steroid use".  It's not entirely relevant, and it certainly has WP:V problems.  I guess when MLB starts making these sorts of distinctions in the statistics, so should we.  -- Deville (Talk) 01:37, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It appears the Bonds asterick was still there, so I got rid of that. Honestly, if there is a point to that other than to blantently dishonor Bonds, then please do not list it. The record does not appear with an Asterick, so it doesn't need to appear with one here. ReZips 04:12, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

text: The asterisk keeps appearing. I just removed them yet again. --TruckOttr 23:40, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Steroid 

message: I was thinking about going through the list and italicizing all players during the years that they were active, as Bonds is italicized now.  Does anyone have any thoughts on this?--Deville (Talk) 21:20, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think it would add too much clutter to the list. --TruckOttr 07:05, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Italics 

message: i think there should be a title change. Something like "List of lifetime home run leaders in MLB"
Baseball is not a sport only in North America. There's professional baseball in many parts of the world. If the data includes only MLB, then it should be specified on the title
Z3u2 17:51, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  title change 

message: There will NOT be an asterisk on any player in this article unless MLB decrees a player's numbers invalid. Kingturtle 02:32, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  * 
Talk:Ten (album)

message: OK, we said this is the name of three albums, and we only listed two.  What's the third one? -- Zoe
:LL Cool J is the one that wasn't listed yet. -- Michael
I notice the links to the last two are to 10, not Ten.  Is this correct? -- Zoe
:All I wanted to do is answer Zoe's question, but I wound up vastly expanding the list.  It's all correct now, according to allmusic, which is almost always right.  I'm not sure this should be a disambiguation page though.  The Pearl Jam album is by far more well-known than any of the others.  The only other artist to even come close is LL Cool J, and his album was named 10 because it was his tenth, long after everyone stopped caring. Tuf-Kat
:What order are these albums in? -- Zoe
::Let me venture a guess: none whatsoever?  Also, hm, that's more than four, and where's the Pearl Jam album on this list?  Koyaanis Qatsi
:::I always forget the obvious stuff... (and they're in the order that a search on allmusic puts them in, which looks like it might have been alphabetical at one point, but isn't anymore)Tuf-Kat
Shouldn't "010" be listed under "Eight"? :-) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lee Daniel Crocker (talk • contribs) 
:Win. -- C. A. Russell (talk) 23:14, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  If you're talking octal (not binary!): Yes, win. -- 91.40.51.246 (talk) 17:00, 31 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:White-winged chough

message: Is that just a stray apostrophe at the beginning of the article, or something else? -- Zoe
Anonymous edit about deception came from me - I didn't reason the system had logged me out -- seglea 23:38, 5 Mar 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: From the article (note unencyclopaedic style: the conversational digression, the issuing of instructions to the reader, and giving value judgements about different usages of language):
:White-winged Choughs are easily recognised but often mistaken for "crows"—a double mistake, as the birds most frequently called "crows" in Australia are actually ravens (see Australian Raven and Little Raven).
The situation is like pigeons and doves (or butterflies and moths). There is no scientific distinction between crows and ravens; they do not form separate clades. Often "Crow" refers to the entire genus, corvus. "Raven" traditionally referred to one particular species (of crow), corvus corax, the common (northern) raven. (That said, "crow" also frequently refers specifically to, depending on location, any one of several common corvus species. "Raven" also tends to appear in the common names of other species believed to be closely related to the common raven, however this is not the case for the Australian Raven which instead is most closely related to local corvus species such as the Australian Crow). FWIW see also . The Australian Raven is a crow, whereas one could argue that it technically isn't a raven. Cesiumfrog (talk) 01:48, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  triple mistake
Talk:Preliminary hearing

message: The article currently says preliminary hearings are used in some US jurisdictions.  I am confused.  I just looked at Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution, which seems to say that those suspected of a serious crime can only be indicted by a grand jury.
So, in the US jurisdiction that make use of preliminary hearings, is that instead of a grand jury, in addition to a grand jury, or are they considered close enough to a grand jury to fulfill the 5th amendments requirement for a grand jury?  Geo Swan (talk) 03:58, 26 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  question 

message: The purpose of a preliminary hearing is to determine if there is probable cause to indict, as I understand it. The preliminary hearing does not take the place of a grand jury. It is a precursor to a grand jury. Some cases apparently are too complicated to just present to a grand jury and ask for indictment. 
In a preliminary hearing the suspects are entitled to attorneys. It seems that admissibility of testimony is an issue. Yet hearsay is “usually” permitted. QUESTION: Why is hearsay permitted? Does it count n determining probable cause? If so why isn’t it permitted in a jury trial? Why are rules of admissibility followed but hearsay is permitted?
In a grand jury case the defendant is not entitled to counsel within the grand jury chamber. The DA determines who appears before the grand jury.  Grand jurors may question witnesses, and objections to questions by the grand jury are not permitted. In a grand jury case there is no judge.
Lobdillj (talk) 02:56, 11 November 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  question/comment
Wikipedia talk:Subpages in the user and talk namespaces

message: At Talk:List of songwriters/temp a link has automatically appeared to Talk:List of songwriters.  Is this a relic of the subpage system? Tokerboy
:Partial support for subpages has been restored for user pages and talk pages in recognition of the facts that A) sub-pages have continued to be in de-facto use in these domains and there's no clear suggestion for replacing them, and B) the complaints against sub-pages were primarily in regards to their distortion of article title conventions, which doesn't really apply to the above usages. --Brion 03:51 Feb 12, 2003 (UTC)
Is it possible to have subsubpages? For example, User:Username/Images/Full-sized? -Branddobbe 08:57, Mar 15, 2004 (UTC)
:Yes, I just tried: User:Patrick/test page 2/subsubtest.--Patrick 00:01, 16 Mar 2004 (UTC)
Talk:Cooke triplet

message: Is there any specialist in optics that can explain us what is the difference between the Cooke triplet and early achromatic triplets ?
Ericd 12:37 Apr 21, 2003 (UTC)
:Is there any specialist in optics than can explain me why dont we use two convex lens and one converging lens in a cooke triplet. +-- combination? salmanatir@yahoo.com  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.165.236.3 (talk) 06:42, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Difference in early triplets 

message: Removed the unreferenced section "Early designs" because it seems to be original research consisting of seeing an old Britannica article and implying it is the same lens. Fountains of Bryn Mawr (talk) 23:17, 12 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Early designs?
Talk:Francis Upritchard

message: Isn't Francis a man's name, and Frances a woman's?
Is F. Upritchard male or female? Or is there an intended ambiguity?
Sebastjan
:Upritchard is female and her name is spelt "Francis". That's just what her parents called her as far as I'm aware. --Camembert
:When she was at art school, friends, family and classmates called her Jemma. I'm pretty sure she changed her name. She probably realised Francis was the men's spelling. She may be a mediocre artist but she's not stupid. 121.98.80.117 (talk) 11:53, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Freedom fries

message: Is there a parent article for this or maybe a 'list of' article for similar renamings?
Recently, a similar situation has emerged with poutine (see the second paragraph at ) where even a copyright holder for invention of the dish is distancing itself from the name for political reasons. – Reidgreg (talk) 20:11, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Search for "Category:Political neologisms". Nakonana (talk) 14:55, 25 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Similar articles
Talk:William Manuel Johnson

message: I undid User:Agrahamt's move of this article from "William Manuel Johnson" to "Bill Johnson (early Jazz bassist)". Reasons: 
1)Unilateral move without discussion on talk page first. The article has been at this title on Wikipedia for over 10 years without previous complaint; if there is a better title, there should at least be notification and discussion.  2)Avoid creating neologisms if real names disambiguate. "William Manuel Johnson" was his real name, and not overly obscure for people familiar with him. It successfully disambiguates him from other people called "Bill Johnson".  "Bill Johnson (early Jazz bassist)" is not an established name for him. In addition to being a Wikipedia exclusive neologism, the capitalization of "Jazz" seems random and inappropriate.  I hope this explains my revert.  -- Infrogmation (talk) 04:33, 6 September 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Article title
Talk:Pica

message: * Can't find ref Re: Noise band, assume it is advertising, and am deleting. -- Samir ∙ TC   07:09, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Notable?? No article either.  ¡Dustimagic! (T/C) 07:19, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Noise band?

message: : just noticed that almost none of the pages linked on this page point back to the disambiguation page, despite the large number of items listed here. Perhaps something that should be fixed? or is it not necessary?  Nrjank (talk) 19:49, 1 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: disambiguation linkbacks?
Talk:Music of Norway

message: Being one of the best known international rock bands, Motorpsycho should be listed amongst the Norway Rock Group list. Sincerly, a Fan2A02:908:4B25:83A0:1788:A4C3:7E70:AD5C (talk) 18:54, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Motorpsycho 

message: In the section for Norwegian black metal, the link for Gehenna is wrong. It doesn’t lead to the page for the band. Fromthedarkpast (talk) 07:08, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  gehenna link
Talk:Nina Simone

message: The opening section goes into some detail about her early life, but only the last three sentences cover her illustrious and groundbreaking career as a musician - and there is no mention (other than three words in the opening sentence) of her political activism.  Surely these paragraphs need to be rewritten to give a better balance?  Ghmyrtle (talk) 16:02, 24 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Opening section 

message: Would you add information about Nina Simone's personal life? Thank you. 2600:1700:FE00:8800:7CCD:6C66:13FC:7E9E (talk) 02:44, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: She was married and divorced twice, and both husbands (Don Ross and Andrew Stroud) are referenced in the Biography section (see the 1954-1959 and 1959-1964 sub-sections). A. Randomdude0000 (talk) 02:58, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  NINA SIMONE HAD A HUSBAND  

message: The following book is mentioned in both the 'Books' and 'Sources' sections: Richard Williams, Nina Simone: Don't Let Me Be Misunderstood (Canongate, 2002) and an ISBN is provided. Has anyone who has contributed to this article ever seen a copy of this book? It is not cited in any of the endnotes. In over twenty years of researching Nina Simone's work, I have never seen a copy of this book, though I have seen it mentioned in articles like this one. I have been led to assume that the book was perhaps scheduled, then pulled from publication. I'd be very interested to hear if anyone can provide evidence of the book's publication.
If any future contributors to the article would find it useful, I have provided a list of Nina Simone sources at https://latevoice.com/resources/nina-simone-studies/. Dr.richardelliott (talk) 13:27, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: I have made extensive searches, and come to the conclusion that you are virtually certainly right. The book's title appears on numerous listings, sometimes with an ISBN, but none of these listings gives any concrete information about the book, and everything that I have seen is entirely consistent with the idea that the book was planned but never published. Also, in the very unlikely event that the book does exist, it is so obscure and insignificant that it doesn't warrant a mention in the Wikipedia article. I have therefore removed the mention of it from the article. JBW (talk) 14:15, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Books and Sources 

message: Referring to bipolar cycles as tantrums and discussing a grown woman as if she were a child is ableist. I tried to change the ableist language in the Nijmegen section and the entire section about Nijmegen was changed back. Either the person who changed it back needs to fix it or let me do it. 2600:1004:A121:120B:4897:6BB0:2FA0:2F8B (talk) 17:32, 28 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ableism in descriptions of bipolar diagnosis
Talk:Chancellor

message: I was looking at this article, and I noticed that the section on a diocesan or eparchial chancellor uses language that assumes the officeholder is male. I know of a diocesan chancellor who is a religious sister, and it is possible for women to become chancellors of most dioceses/eparchies. Would changing this to be not sex-specific be acceptable? ZippySpring2 (talk) 19:36, 15 July 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Don't bring that trash into here. This is an encyclopedia. 79.106.203.47 (talk) 09:13, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sex-specific language in the section on a diocesan/eparchial chancellor
Talk:Tcpdump

message: Is there any way to put the title in lower case for unix commands ?
Ericd 00:43 Apr 22, 2003 (UTC)
No. This issue has been discussed several times before, e.g. regarding iMac. Complain to a programmer. -- Tim Starling 00:58 Apr 22, 2003 (UTC)
I think that was a decision based largely on practicality--otherwise, dog and Dog would lead to different articles, which would clutter the database considerably with redirects.  Koyaanis Qatsi
:It's a simple problem to fix, for a competent programmer. You just have a "make this title lower case" flag that can be set, associated with the article, similar to the page protection flag. The UI could just be a checkbox on the edit page.  -- Tim Starling 01:27 Apr 22, 2003 (UTC)
::I'll take your word on it.  Koyaanis Qatsi, not a software programmer
:::I think article requiring lowercase will be a minority (as of today I don't see any other case than unix commands or iMac). While my programming skills are limited a tag in the tittle is the way to go IMO. Of course we will have to move article by hand thereafter. Ericd 10:42, 18 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: I didn't put this directly on the page as I wasn't sure about the relevance, or the proper formatting/style.  Feel free to fix it up, or just copy it onto the page (adding a note in the edit summary that it came from here, of course.) 75.214.135.127 (really, User:JesseW/not logged in) 04:04, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Notes about the 2002 tcpdump Trojan
Talk:Francesco II Gonzaga, Marquis of Mantua

message: Shouldn't his title be Marquis in the article title as well, not "Marquess?" SidP 08:16, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  title as Marquess? 
Talk:Stateful firewall

message: This sentence: Only packets matching a known active connection are allowed to pass the firewall.  I get the feeling this means something specific and technical.  Assuming that the router somehow knows it's "known active connections" (somehow), how does a packet "match" a particular connection, and what does any of this have to do with the idea of a "firewall", and ultimately computer security?Tym Whittier (talk) 07:06, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  What is a "known active connection"? 

message: after reading over everything multiple times, i feel this article should just be deleted as it is a rehash to firewall (computing). there is more details here, but non of them have sources. i would say that the stuff talking about TCP 3 way handshake or the explanation of how it tracks state should be kept, if there is a source explaining it, but that info should be added to the connection tracking section in the main firewall article. a source should be easy to find.
tldr: i would like to delete this article, but merge anything i can find a decent source for on the 3 way handshake or how conn tracking works. if anyone has any objects please chime in. StayFree76 talk 01:21, 5 September 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: thanks for that. i ended up in a rabbit hole of wiki docs to figure out the best thing to do and it was brutal and arguably not the best. StayFree76 talk 00:39, 10 September 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: , feel free to reach out directly to me at my user talk page for help if you need it in the future. ~Kvng (talk) 02:40, 10 September 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dedicated article not needed/ merge usable to Main?
Talk:List of people known as the Great

message: I'm not sure what the official threshold is for making this list, but in the aftermath of her death, certain members of the media and in British government have been referring to Queen Elizabeth II as "Elizabeth the Great". There's a part of me that kind of hopes putting it on this list will help it catch on, as it's hard to even imagine a person who died yesterday having the same sort of impact as an Alexander the Great or somesuch.
References:
* https://thewest.com.au/news/queen-elizabeth-ii/remembering-the-queen-was-she-truly-elizabeth-the-great-c-5394169
* https://www.thechronicle.com.au/news/toowoomba/in-pictures-queen-elizabeth-ii-visited-darling-downs-in-1954/news-story/6f06e4d6e7a09ee1ef23233b2b1d9bdd (paywall)
* https://www.moneymarketing.co.uk/news/tributes-paid-to-the-queen/
* https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/royals/queen-elizabeth-ii-tributes-pour-27940946  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1700:1904:3AE0:F8A7:AAAB:820F:A6D (talk) 20:31, 9 September 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Not surprisingly, it hasn't caught on. Heck, even Elizabeth I didn't make it, and she was a lot greater. Clarityfiend (talk) 11:05, 19 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Queen Elizabeth II 

message: I want to add some great peoples more. 1.39.25.1 (talk) 01:23, 28 August 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 01:29, 28 August 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 28 August 2021 

message: Can I ask why he is not mentioned? Even the article about him mentions him as Akbar the Great Sutyarashi (talk) 16:34, 8 December 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: He's there now. Clarityfiend (talk) 07:29, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Mughal emperor Akbar]] 

message: The term "dates" used in the table shows the dates of birth and death of each person. Shouldn't we use the dates of reigning or at least add a column for it? Aminabzz (talk) 18:06, 14 December 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: The dates they reigned don't necessarily line up with when they were referred to as "the Great" and not everyone listed was a ruler. Their life also covers when they reigned so it's more inclusive. Adding extra dates seems like unnecessary information. MClay1 (talk) 04:36, 19 March 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: "Dates"

message: Are the ranges of years given for each entry on this list in the "Dates" column supposed to represent the years during which they lived or the years during which they reigned? StellarHalo (talk) 07:37, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dates
Talk:Lepidopterist

message: Does Robert Baden-Powell qualify as a famous lepidopterist? --Paul A 04:59 Apr 22, 2003 (UTC)
:In my opinion, no; he may have been a lepidopterist, and famous, but he wasn't famous for being a lepidopterist, which is what I think this list is about. - Hephaestos
::Neither is Nabokov...
:::Nabokov is a distinguished lepidopterist in addition to being an author. One can still purchase books of his technical writings regarding lepidoptera. He's not just a famous person who happened to collect butterflies. Regardless, I don't see the harm in including Baden-Powell. -- Schaefer 07:19, 28 Nov 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  lepidopterists

message: It might be useful to add the character from Silence of the Lambs here  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.31.129.63 (talk) 20:35, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  A note 

message: I propose this article be merged in Lepidoptera. For most articles covering a specific discipline of science there is no separate page for the scientists (i.e., Paleontologist redirects to paleontology). This is how coleopterist (one who studies beetles) is handled and I don't see a reason to have a seperate page for lepidopterists. Scientific29 (talk) 18:48, 20 November 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Your proposal is sound from the WP:MOS point of view. However, famous Lepidopterists do deserve an article of their own, one which would also permit the "Lepidopterists in fiction". Since Lepidoptera is under development at the moment, I will consider the merger while developing. If more material is available, I would like to develop this article instead. Request status quo for the time being. AshLin (talk) 13:52, 21 November 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Vide no reply, assuming agreement to my proposal to develop the article. Removing the merge tag. AshLin (talk) 03:49, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I am neutral on the merge, but it seems reasonable to cover people with the existing 'Category:Lepidopterists', and as Scientific29 says, other similar articles have the professions integrated into the discipline articles. What content do you plan on adding that would not work equally well as a subsection of 'Lepidoptera'?Dialectric (talk) 16:52, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge? 

message: I propose that Lepidopterist be merged into Lepidopterology. There is a lot of overlap with the content, and I think that the content of this article could be better served as a subsection, something like Lepidontist, which can include a section on fictional Lepidontist. Mnidjm (talk) 12:54, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge Proposal