lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Wikipedia talk:Enhanced Recent Changes

message: We need one place to develop MediaWiki documentation so I'm starting a project-neutral MediaWiki User's Guide in meta and think it would be a good idea to cross wiki redirect this page to meta:MediaWiki User's Guide: The enhanced Recent Changes page as soon as I'm done with the conversion (before that I will change each link to this page to a direct one to meta so that it appears correctly as an external link). --mav 01:36, 7 Sep 2003 (UTC)
thread_title:  Plan to move this page to meta soon
Talk:IP address

message: The IP Address page is protected (and my English is not good enough for editing such a page) so I just like to note that there are 3 more IP addresses subnets that are reserved:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc5737/
The blocks 192.0.2.0/24 (TEST-NET-1), 198.51.100.0/24 (TEST-NET-2), and 203.0.113.0/24 (TEST-NET-3) are provided for use in documentation and I think that this should be noted in a separate paragraph. 2A06:C701:4C05:C200:47E2:4FB4:F37A:C580 (talk) 21:35, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Additional Reserved IPv4 Subnets Per RFC5737
Talk:Saffir–Simpson scale

message: In the table at the top of the page, there is defined a "Tropical storm" as being > 18 m/s, and a "Tropical depression" as being ≤ 17 m/s. I have not found any references that define Tropical storm and Tropical depression that way, and definitely not in the articles on the Saffir-Simpson scale. Where have these come from, and can someone find references for these definitions? Richard n 13:50, 18 November 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Update: found it: pd01006004curr.pdf (noaa.gov). Richard n 12:45, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Tropical storm" and "Tropical depression" definitions 

message: Ian was the third most damaging Atlantic Hurricane on record, only behind Harvey and Katrina. It definitely deserves some spot on this list. ✶Mitch199811✶ 18:56, 11 August 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Nope Ian does not deserve a spot as it didnt make landfall as a Category 5 hurricane, as the rule of thumb has been that a system has to both peak and make landfall at the same intensity before it is listed. This is why Katrina isnt included.Jason Rees (talk) 02:00, 2 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Adding Ian 

message: The growing inadequacy of an open-ended Saffir–Simpson hurricane wind scale in a warming world, a study by Wehner and Kossin, is currently seeing a lot of media coverage for its findings that a Category 6 is increasingly justified. 166.181.82.178 (talk) 00:46, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Possible additional source for the section on proposed extensions 

message: This is my proposed color scheme for the Saffir-Simpson scale. Any opinions and suggestions?
Saffir–Simpson scale, 1-minute maximum sustained winds
Category	m/s	knots	mph	km/h
5       	   	     	   	
4       	   	     	   	
3       	   	     	   	
2       	   	     	   	
1       	   	     	   	
        	   	     	   	
        	   	     	   	
Category:Hurricane scale templates
 INFIYNJTE (talk) 16:19, 9 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed Intuitive Color scheme
Talk:Yes Sir, I Will

message: The first sentence currently reads:
: "Yes Sir, I Will, released by Crass in 1983 (see 1983 in music), was the band's penultimate 'official' album."
The album is the last, not the second-to-last. Penultimate does not mean "pinnacle" or "last and best", it means "second-to-last." I'm going to change the wording to "last".
--OldManInACoffeeCan (talk) 00:22, 4 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  That doesn't mean what you think it means 

message: It's fairly well documented that the album was recorded in March 1983. The article also says that it was released in March 1983. Is this true? Given the nature of the band it's not impossible that it was released the same month, or that it didn't have a formal release date, but it would be fantastic if this came out the same month as The Final Cut -Ashley Pomeroy (talk) 21:14, 29 September 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Release Date
Talk:Millbank

message: Which is it? MilBank or MillBank? And is the capital B really correct? Evercat 00:20 3 Jul 2003 (UTC)
:Millbank. – iridescent 18:56, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:First Crusade

message: 1025 and 1081 should be swapped, and did they still hold southern Italy by 1081? Compoteleon (talk) 22:40, 2 February 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: The Byzantines? The Catepanate of Italy fell in 1071. Dimadick (talk) 16:13, 3 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Byzantine-Seljuk map mistakes 

message: We're very irregular about capitalizing the word "Crusader" in this and other articles on the Crusades. 2600:1702:6D0:5160:1CC8:15C3:9DD1:387B (talk) 18:41, 19 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Capitalization
Talk:Hatfield House

message: There appears to be a double entry in this list, namely the mention of the Golden Age film. I have not seen the film, so I am probably not the best person to merge the two entries. Waltham, The Duke of 16:09, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Redundant entry removed. - Kollision (talk) 16:16, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Film credits 

message: I am not sure. One of the locations in Netflix's Enola Holmes looked familiar viz Tewksbury estate. As fas as I remember I once saw a similar (perhaps same) location in MasterChef as well. I wonder if Hatfield House served as the location for both ie Enola Holmes and MasterChef. Ravi arnie (talk) 07:05, 6 October 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Enola Holmes
Talk:Absinthe

message: This article states that Deep Roots absinthe is not available from provincial liquor stores, but it has since been stocked by them. See https://liquorpei.com/products/deep-roots-absinthe/  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.215.105.65 (talk) 05:06, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Absinthe in Prince Edward Island, Canada section 

message: The first website cited in the tab Health affects under the number 84 is not a credible website or author. 24.240.72.156 (talk) 23:56, 20 July 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Those numbers change.  Can you cite the source of your concern. GenQuest "scribble" 02:50, 21 July 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Citation Error 

message: Hello. Absinthe is made with Angelica root and Lemon balm. The Mugwort is used as a bitter to balance the flavor. The anise is only used in a small amount and used to improve the overall flavor, but the amount of anise is not distinguishable as anise due to the small amounts. 
However wiki wants people to donate money while getting articles like this wrong. There is a book cited on the absinthe page that tells you the recipe but the wiki article ignorantly says it's "Anise flavored" beverage. 
There is anise in root beer, but it doesn't taste like anise. Just how the anise in absinthe isn't enough to make it taste like anise.
Unless you can correct your article so that the description is in line with the books you cite, no one could financially support the wiki. 
If you tell people the truth about absinthe I will donate lots of money. 
There are other problems, though. Such as the article on dalmations says they are from dalmatia when one of the books cited on the dalmation page says they are from Egypt, bred to run with horses. 
WIki doesn't deserve to keep running when the pages say a bunch of nonsense in comparison to the book they are citing. How is that possible? To list a book as a reference on the bottom of the page, but to give false information on the page? 
Wiki would fail fact checkers. The irony is the books you cite say one thing but the page says another. 
I hope wiki is taken off the internet because of the false information and lies they spread. 65.75.232.102 (talk) 13:33, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  real Absinthe
Talk:Kamakura shogunate

message: Never mind: Blanked Emperorbma 05:50 3 Jul 2003 (UTC)
----
I oppose listing Prince Morinaga and Prince Narinaga as Kamakura shoguns. They were appointed by their father Emperor Go-Daigo after the Kamakura shogunate was overthrown. --Nanshu 00:52, 4 Nov 2003 (UTC)
replies: text: I suppose you are right or I really have no idea, just I reflected text I found in OpenHistory. -- Taku 02:14, Nov 4, 2003 (UTC)
I'm japanese, but I've never heard of "the Hidatori family" nof the "civil war" in Shikoku in those days.I believe the sentences below are historically false or not so well-known as to be written in the history of Kamakura shogunate. So I comment-outed them in the article.--Miya 11:36, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Please discuss at Talk:Kamakura period. Steipe (talk) 18:38, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge proposal with [[Kamakura period]]

message: It was somewhat erroneous, and had no citations.  Hopefully this will clear up the problems with the text. This was perhaps the most important event under the Kamakura shogunate. HammerFilmFan (talk) 04:26, 29 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  fixed/corrected/rewrote Mongol Invasion section 

message: Some old page history that used to be at the title "Kamakura shogunate" is now at Talk:Kamakura shogunate/Old history. Graham87 09:13, 29 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Old page history 

message: I have source which I want to use on this article, but I don't know that how to use it here.
My source is : "...warriors had come to exercise a domi- nant share of the total volume of local government, but even after two hundred years they remained politically immature. The most exalted warriors were still only middle-level figures in hierarchies dominated by courtiers and religious institutions in and near the capital. The bakufu's founding in the 1180s thus represented an initial breakthrough to power on the part of elite fighting men" Warrior Rule in Japan, page 1. Cambridge University Press.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shahanshah5 (talk • contribs) 09:38, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Help 

message: While digging around on other matters, I came to this page. The subsection "Mongol Invasions" seems to describe either two separate but identical events (a third of a Mongol invasion force wiped out when re-embarking in a typhoon) or one event in two different paragraphs separated by another.  I don't have the subject matter knowledge to say which it is but some clarification from someone who does know would be appreciated.  If it is indeed describing two different typhoons this should be made clear. If the same one, perhaps the first paragraph in the section should be less summary and more introductory.  98.167.238.72 (talk) 04:26, 24 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Seeming duplication, or two similar events?
Talk:Harbin

message: Hi! If you translate this website this website with Google Translation, You will find a sentence that says: "Harbin" comes from the Jurchen language "Harwen", which means "swan". Because that website is the city government website, it should be a reliable source. This is different from the "Place of Drying Fishing Nets" statement introduced by English Wikipedia. I wonder if I can add it to the article? --邻家的王子 (talk) 03:56, 16 March 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Suspected source, but not sure if it counts as original research. See also: Google Books (in Chinese). In addition,   I found that some websites said that the literal meaning of "Harbin" comes from "Alejin", which means "honor". -邻家的王子 (talk) 14:01, 29 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  About the literal meaning of Harbin?
Talk:Saint Sava

message: It is understood that there are Catholics who venerated Saint Sava. But is there an official source in the Roman Catholic Church that confirm formally? whether he is revered as a Roman or an Oriental Saint? Because I did not find, and I wanted to put this as a reference. Aquinasthomes1 (talk) 09:26, 22 August 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is Saint Sava Formally a Saint of the Roman Catholic Church? 

message: instituirea zilei sveti sava ca sarbatoare a minoritatii sarbe din romania basilica.ro
no bias — קיין אומוויסנדיק פּרעפֿערענצן — keyn umvisndik preferentsn talk contribs 08:49, 2 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sveti Sava day in Romania
Talk:John Maclean's Speech From the Dock

message: Wikipedia is not a repository for original texts. (See Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not). Please summarise, add more context, and provide a pointer to an on-line copy of this speech for reference purposes. -- The Anome 12:45 3 Jul 2003 (UTC)
Heartily seconded. Utterly unencyclopedic. - Scherzo triste 20:53 4 Jul 2003 (UTC)
This should be merged with the main article on Maclean, and the full text added to Wikisource. PatGallacher (talk) 18:38, 26 March 2011 (UTC)
Talk:Australian shelduck

message: Hello! This is a note to let the editors of this article know that :File:Tadorna tadornoides female 1 - Perth.jpg will be appearing as picture of the day on January 15, 2014. You can view and edit the POTD blurb at Template:POTD/2014-01-15. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. Thanks! — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:15, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[:File:Tadorna tadornoides female 1 - Perth.jpg]] to appear as POTD 

message: Hello! This is a note to let the editors of this article know that :File:Tadorna tadornoides male 1 - Perth.jpg will be appearing as picture of the day on August 18, 2014. You can view and edit the POTD blurb at Template:POTD/2014-08-18. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. Thanks! — Crisco 1492 (talk) 02:22, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[:File:Tadorna tadornoides male 1 - Perth.jpg]]
Talk:Occupation of Iraq timeline

message: I am moving this similarly named page as well.  MB 15:40 3 Jul 2003 (UTC)
Well, it's no longer 2003, so should this page be closed down and a new 2004 timeline started? Or, should this simply be moved to U.S.-led occupation of Iraq timeline, since the main article is called U.S.-led occupation of Iraq? I favor the second choice and will move it if there are no objections. --Minesweeper 05:24, 13 Jan 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Unless the quotes are a new statement of policy, I think they are irrelevent. Perhaps the quotes should be moved to a separate timeline. Also, this timeline should probably start on April 15, 2003, since that is when the "Iraq War Timeline" ends. If there is going to be information about what happened before April 15, they should be on topic-- they should deal with the establishment of the CPA and reconstruction in particular places of Iraq. I don't think that general US policy towards Iraq is appropriate. AdamRetchless 14:18, 30 Sep 2004 (UTC)

message: If you look at a count of coalition casualties , you'll see that there was a huge number of casualties in November 2003. What happened then? I've scanned the web and can't figure out what caused all of those casualties. This timeline doesn't really indicate the cause either. It mentioned a single large event (downing of a helicopter), but that doesn't account for the sharp rise in casualties.
Other increases in casualties occured in April and August of 2004. The cause of those increases are indicated in this timeline (Falluja and Al Sadr), but their importance is not apparent. AdamRetchless 14:13, 30 Sep 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  What happened in November 2003? 

message: The multinational forces in Iraq are @ the sovereign's request. June 28, 2004 should be the last date in this timeline. JDR 21:13, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: That's a technicality, but if if the timeline is finished there, a new article should be created with everything after it.  --66.168.50.185 05:17, 22 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  We should only separate the article if we have a generally agreed upon definition of sovereignty.  If the division is on the basis of nominal sovereignty as opposed to effective, then it should be stated thus, avoiding the ambiguous term sovereign. --Zachbe 14:47, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: End of occupation

message: President George W. Bush declares major combat operations over. Mission Acomplished
That statement seems unencyclopedic.  65.93.36.72 22:48, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vandalism for May 1 2003 timeline? 

message: Like many other articles on war timeline, I support this article should be renamed as Iraq War timeline. And the other article, 2003 Iraq war timeline, will be renamed as 2003 invasion of Iraq timeline or Timeline of the 2003 invasion of Iraq. 207.233.69.239 (talk) 19:09, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Rename
Talk:George V

message: The article stated that the King had privately told Asquith that he would not agree to mass creation of peers to pass the budget until the Liberals had won two elections. This makes no sense as Lansdowne had been explicitly clear, even in the wording of the Lords' motion, that the lack of a public mandate was their excuse for blocking the budget (and they let it pass without a whimper in April 1910). It was probably my fault when I wrote up that section a decade or so ago.
Neither Gordon Murray's study of the 1909 Budget nor Neal Blewett's 400 page tome on the 1910 elections make any mention of a mooted creation of peers to pass the Budget.
The Lords had been infuriating the Liberal Party by blocking their legislation - Gladstone's Second Home Rule Bill in 1893 and most of their legislation since 1905. However, the Liberal Cabinet weren't agreed on what to do about it - most wanted to replace the Lords' veto with a delaying power, as Campbell-Bannerman had declared an intention to do in 1907. Other leading Liberals like Edward Grey wanted to change the composition of the Lords. In the end Asquith obtained a consensus for the former, appeasing the latter group with the famous preamble to the 1911 Parliament Act promising that the reform is just a temporary measure pending the replacement of the Lords with an elected Upper House (stop sniggering at the back). But that didn't happen until later in the year. So I've just put "creation of peers to allow passage of Liberal legislation" as the Liberals hadn't yet decided exactly what to do about the Lords in January 1910. Paulturtle (talk) 23:43, 21 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Liberal Peers - but not to pass the Budget 

message: (non-automated message) Greetings! I have opened an RfC on WT:ROYALTY that may be of interest to users following this article talk page! You are encouraged to contribute to this discussion here! Hurricane Andrew (444) 20:04, 24 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  RfC of interest
Talk:Dragon Ball (manga)

message: Dragon ball Super is not written by Toriyama. Toriyama simply gives plot points or rejects them. WillsEdtior777 (talk) 15:17, 11 July 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dragon ball Super is not written by Toriyama 

message: Dragon Ball should also be labeled as a "superhero" series (even in the genre section) since Goku and his friends have superpowers and fight to protect the Earth from (mostly) aliens. MrWii000 (talk) 19:51, 29 July 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Superhero 

message: I tried to fix various references used in the sales table, but I gave up trying. Several figures have been outdated for many years. Various references are just WP:USERG sites and other questionable ones, and some of them don't even confirm the figures featured in the table. The table is very poorly structured and I think that it would be better to remove it altogether from the article. Xexerss (talk) 11:01, 12 December 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm OK with removing the table entirely. Definitely worth noting that the user who originally added it, User:Maestro2016, has been banned for being a sockpuppet of a user banned for often misinterpreting sales, film grosses and the like. Xfansd (talk) 21:49, 12 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sales table 

message: The change has to be made to the total number of volumes sold. The current number of 260 million is unchanged for a few years now. Below are some sources that state the number being 300 million:
https://comicbook.com/anime/news/dragon-ball-super-manga-sales-record/
https://twitter.com/WSJ_manga/status/1425028721887612929
https://booksofbrilliance.com/2023/01/25/the-best-selling-manga-of-all-time/
Additionally, if you sum the numbers of sold volumes from individual countries, you get pass 300 million. Luka316 (talk) 12:15, 12 December 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: The first two are referring to Torishima's statement that is already directly cited the article (WSJ News should not be cited because it is WP:USERG). Books of Brilliance is WP:SELFPUBLISHED blog. I reiterate the problem with the table and its awful structure, which in several cases inflates the numbers and ultimately do not add up to the alleged estimated worldwide figure. Xexerss (talk) 13:02, 12 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Total volumes sold
Talk:I Know What You Did Last Summer

message: Added references for facts about box-office business, awards and (at least one) parody.Shearonink (talk) 14:21, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  References 

message: I do strongly believe the novel version should be the first article to see because the book was released earlier and is what the film is based off of. Any opinions?Bookster451 (talk) 20:33, 8 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  New redirect?
Talk:Causality (physics)

message: I tried to clear the page Causality by renaming it Causality dummy, but that didn't work as I intended, simply to clear the article name 'Causality'. I don't know the technicalities of such changes. I have requested editorial help.
I think that the article Causality (physics) is important and valuable. But it is specialised; it is not about the general topic of causality; it is, as is evident, about causality considered in physics. Physics is an experimental science. For interpretation of experiments, it relies on a presupposed notion of causality. The notion of causality is so general that it is not restricted to philosophy, and is not derivative from or reliant on physics, which actually presupposes it. Physics says important things about causality, but they derive from presuppositions, and are not logically prior to those presuppositions.
I think that a name change of the article formerly called Causality needs talk page discussion and consensus.Chjoaygame (talk) 18:10, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you.Chjoaygame (talk) 21:01, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  article name change 

message: In CPT symmetry article we can read "The CPT theorem says that CPT symmetry holds for all physical phenomena". However, having a situation with a clear past->future causality direction and transforming it with CPT symmetry, shouldn't it reverse the causality direction to future->past? 
So naively it seems there is some contradiction here? I have some idea to test it experimentally. Is it considered in literature? Maybe CPT symmetry should be mentioned in the article? 
Also, hypothetical allowed by general relativity non-orientable wormhole could apply T symmetry e.g. to a rocket going through it - in theory again reversing causality direction (?) Jarek Duda (talk) 06:50, 15 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is there a contradiction between unidirectional causality and CPT symmetry? 

message: In 2008, this page earned a refimprove tag:
.
15 years later, there are a grand total of 6 references, 2 of which are not in English, and one is a link to a dictionary definition.  Seems like we could do better than that. Mr. Swordfish (talk) 22:21, 13 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  References or lack thereof 

message: The section "Causal dynamical triangulation" had editorializing and no refs. It makes an extraordinary claim at the end implying that causality results from CDT.  The single ref is to a conference invitation. I deleted the content as unsupported connection to the topic. Johnjbarton (talk) 16:18, 24 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Causal dynamical triangulation with no references