lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Primitive skills

message: So, then, does this mean that we have set the precedent that Neologism is perfectly acceptable here?  James084 13:44, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: I removed the sole citation used in the article – it appears to be a self-published website for the "Society of Primitive Technology". The website is currently offline, but an archived copy exists. —Sangdeboeuf (talk) 16:20, 20 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: References

message: I've removed the unverified material (which was all of it) and redirected the page to "Survivalism" as the article most likely to be relevant to the topic. The article has had no more than one self-published source as a reference at any time since this 2009 revision. The various how-to guides published are not reliable sources due to having a commercial interest in promoting the use of the term, and primitive skills appears only in passing in most scholarly papers, either in the context of testing people with dyslexia or else machine learning in robots. In short, there appears to be no reliable sourcing to support the notability of the neologism primitive skills as it's used here. —Sangdeboeuf (talk) 06:47, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Redirect to Survivalism
Talk:Power of the Dollar

message: Shouldn't this song title be changed to  Your Life's on the Line  seeing since it was labeled as such on  Power of the Dollar ? It was only on  Get Rich or Die Tryin'  that it was labeled as aforementioned. Proof picture --DuckieMcGoose (talk) 01:32, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Life's on the Line 

message: Trust me. I copped the vinyl when it first came out and still have it. That should be mentioned somewhere.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.66.106.71 (talk) 03:43, 19 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  This was originally released officially by Columbia as an EP with about 5 tracks.  
Talk:Galley division

message: So,how exactly does galley division work ? The article doesn't explain it (and the diagrams/calculations aren't exactly clear in this regard).  MP   (talk) 09:32, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  How does it work 

message: According to the article, the method
:is still taught in the Moorish schools of North Africa and other parts of the middle east.
I guess that's why they beat the kids from the Most Serene Republic of Venice. --Trovatore 05:04, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Moorish?

message: The second part of the explanation reads: "Now multiply each digit of the divisor by the new digit of the quotient and subtract that from the left-hand segment of the dividend. Where the subtrahend and the dividend segment differ, cross out the dividend digit and write if necessary the subtrahend digit and next vertical empty space. Cross out the divisor digit used."
- This is a bit dense (or maybe I am! :-) ) - but I think if wikipedia is claiming to be a resource for the public, this explanation should be expanded: don't use technical jargon for a start ("subtrahend" is not common English). I'd love to have a go at this division method but don't think I can do so without supporting documentation to explain the explanation!
many thanks. --mgaved (talk) 10:28, 3 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: A bit dense, open up explanation
Talk:Lattice multiplication

message: The article may also want to mention why the method works. MP   (talk) 09:46, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reason it works 

message: There is no reasonable reference why lattice method is merged with Shabakh. However, there is research that shows lattice method was invented by  Al-Khwarizmi in the 9th century.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.109.98.30 (talk) 16:37, 3 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lattice method 

message: I don't know if it should fall under the same article or it should be a "see also", but the Mayans used a multiplication technique that is substantially similar to this.
The multiplicand is written across the x axis from right to left, and the multiplier is written up the y axis from bottom to top. The sum of each row/column is created in a grid, then that sum is "swept" into a single diagonal that crosses the grid. The result is normalized (base 20 sub 5) then the product is read vertically from bottom right to top left of the diagonal.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.172.76.114 (talk) 02:39, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mayan Multiplication
Talk:Annette Stroyberg

message: When reading about Annette Vadim on the Internet, various web sites give different birth and death dates. I have put some work into resolving which ones are correct, and my conclusion is that the dates given in this article (Dec 7 1936 - Dec 12 2005) are indeed correct. This conclusion is based mainly on the Times obituary linked in this article, and a Danish newspaper funeral add, sent to me by the webmaster of Danish website . /Dcastor 09:47, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Birth and death dates

message: :Annette Vadim →  – Per a request at the help desk indicating that the obituaries in major publications used this name, however a variety of other publications seem to use Annette Vadim  and a discussion appears to be called for.-- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 05:31, 26 January 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Strøyberg acted in ten films and was only credited as Annette Vadim in two of them (the first two). She was credited by her real name, Strøyberg, in her last seven films before retiring from acting at the age of 28. This last name "Vadim" comes from her very brief (less than 2 years) marriage to Roger Vadim, and the only time her name hardly ever comes up is in publications about him. This is a very obscure subject (who probably doesn't even merit a Wiki page) but if there must be one it should at least get her name right. Kaynow5 (talk) 05:57, 26 January 2014 (UTC)

text: * fr.wikipedia also uses  fr:Annette Stroyberg, not Strøyberg or Vadim. -- Jreferee (talk) 16:01, 26 January 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: i havent looked deeply into it -just that first scan that pulled up the vampire movie hits- but from what I have seen at this time and from the comments by both  and  above, i dont have any objections to the Annette Stroyberg move. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 13:42, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Requested move
Talk:Vladimir Sukhomlinov

message: This article is not completely lacking in content but I disagree with much of what there is: "In December of 1908, he became head of General Staff and, in March of 1909, Minister of War. Vladimir Sukhomlinov was responsible for the military stagnation of 1905–1912, which resulted in unpreparedness of the Russian Army at the outbreak of World War I."  
Russia was much better prepared for war in 1914 than it had been in 1904, and this is due in large part to Sukhomlinov's efforts.  From Nik Cornish The Russian Army 1914-1918: "The period 1910-1914 saw change on a scale unprecedented during peacetime....  Inevitably there was opposition to these reforms, which polarised into hostility between those who supported Sukhomlinov's modernization programme and the more traditionalist adherents of the Grand Duke Nicholas."  
From Norman Stone The Eastern Front 1914-1917: "The impression that Sukhomlinov, and not his enemies, was the real promoter of a modern cause is strongly confirmed by the story of his army reforms."  Stone acknowledges accusations against Sukhomlinov but regards them as more the product of the latter's peronsonality defects, and his unpopular opposition to investment in fortresses, than an objective view of his work.  
From Bruce W. Menning's Bayonets Before Bullets: "There was no doubt that [Sukhomlinov] remained committed to building Russia's defensive and offensive military power."  Further: "Thanks to Sukhomlinov's reforms, the peacetime strength of the Imperial Russian Army on the eve of World War I reached 1,423,000 officers and men."
I have no problem inserting these into the article, but I have no idea how to balance the original unsupported critique of the General with the references I have provided.  I'd like to avoid weasel words, e.g. "Despite the opinions of Stone, Cornish, and Menning, some still regard Sukhomlinov as responsible for an alleged military stagnation that began three years before his promotion to head of the general staff...."
 - Boris B (talk) 11:15, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Should there be a mention of the so-called "Sukhomlinov effect"? This is the notion that in a war, the side whose generals have the fancier uniforms generally loses. Jhobson1 (talk) 11:20, 15 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sukhomlinov effect
Talk:Thomas King (boxer)

message: Oxford DNB states he died at Clarence Road, Clapham, not Hampshire. Ephebi 00:47, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Retirement

message: The language about the fight with Heenan violated NPOV and mixed interpretation with factual content. I've used some more detailed accounts to rewrite portions of this section and I also deleted the POV language (about Heenan’s skills). The use of scare quotes and disparaging language about Heenan’s match with Sayers was also POV and out of keeping with consensus about that fight. Hopefully my changes will not be controversial.-Fenevad (talk) 11:07, 5 April 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  NPOV in fight with Heenan 
Talk:Superman & Batman: Generations I

message: I've redirected this article, it's an overlong detailed plot description.  Guidance on writing about fiction precludes such detailed plot synopsis.
Wikipedia:Guide to writing better articles states:
*Wikipedia is an out-of-universe source, and all articles about fiction and elements of fiction should take an out-of-universe perspective.
**This article failed to discuss the out-of-universe perspective, presenting all information from within.
Wikipedia:Guide to writing better articles also states
*(ensure) fictional passages are short, grounded with real-world language, and do not form more than a small portion of the article.
** Again, this article failed to consider this issue, being over 30k in size and detailing only a four issue limited series.
Wikipedia:Guide to writing better articles states:
*Articles about fictional topics should not be simple book reports; instead, the topic should be explained through its significance on the work. The reader should be able to feel like they understand why a character, place, or event was included in the fictional work after reading an article about one. A reader should be able to understand why this person/place/thing/event is relevant to the story.
**To my mind, this article was a book report, thus breaching the above guidance.
Wikipedia:Notability (fiction) states 
*It is generally appropriate for a plot summary to remain part of the main article, not a lengthy page of its own. Wikibooks, Wikipedia's sibling project, contains instructional and educational texts. These include annotated works of fiction (on the [[wikibooks:Wikibooks:annotated texts bookshelf) for classroom or private study use. Wikisource, similarly, holds original public domain and GFDL source texts. See wikisource:Wikisource:Wikisource and Wikibooks.
**Plot should be part of the main article, not a separate article, again a point on which this article failed. Hiding Talk 21:23, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Redirected
Talk:Superman & Batman: Generations II

message: I've redirected this article, it's an overlong detailed plot description.  Guidance on writing about fiction precludes such detailed plot synopsis.
Wikipedia:Guide to writing better articles states:
*Wikipedia is an out-of-universe source, and all articles about fiction and elements of fiction should take an out-of-universe perspective.
**This article failed to discuss the out-of-universe perspective, presenting all information from within.
Wikipedia:Guide to writing better articles also states
*(ensure) fictional passages are short, grounded with real-world language, and do not form more than a small portion of the article.
** Again, this article failed to consider this issue, being over 30k in size and detailing only a four issue limited series.
Wikipedia:Guide to writing better articles states:
*Articles about fictional topics should not be simple book reports; instead, the topic should be explained through its significance on the work. The reader should be able to feel like they understand why a character, place, or event was included in the fictional work after reading an article about one. A reader should be able to understand why this person/place/thing/event is relevant to the story.
**To my mind, this article was a book report, thus breaching the above guidance.
Wikipedia:Notability (fiction) states 
*It is generally appropriate for a plot summary to remain part of the main article, not a lengthy page of its own. Wikibooks, Wikipedia's sibling project, contains instructional and educational texts. These include annotated works of fiction (on the [[wikibooks:Wikibooks:annotated texts bookshelf) for classroom or private study use. Wikisource, similarly, holds original public domain and GFDL source texts. See wikisource:Wikisource:Wikisource and Wikibooks.
**Plot should be part of the main article, not a separate article, again a point on which this article failed. Hiding Talk 21:23, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Redirected
Talk:Calpernia Addams

message: After reading the 2008 AFD's, it seems to me the least we can do to prevent distress to the subject of this article, and stop the flow of poorly sourced BLP violations is an indef semi-protect.  Therefore it is done.  Courcelles 23:07, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Semi-protected indefinately

message: I see no reason to link to Portal:Biography under "see also". Nothing there is relevant to this (good) article. 77.127.89.140 (talk) 22:05, 17 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  link to [[Portal:Biography]] 

message: I've seen the film literally a billion times. I do not recall the name 'Calpurnia Addams' appearing on a tombstone. Rather, Wednesday's teacher and Morticia discus the picture that Wednesday submitted of her "Aunt Calpurnia," in which Calpurnia is apparently being burned at the stake atop a mound of skulls. PurpleChez (talk) 01:01, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Addams Family
Talk:Johann von Aldringer

message: Isn't this a duplicate of Johann Graf von Aldringen User:Dimadick
: They certainly seem to be the same person, as far as I can see. --Saforrest 11:07, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Nancy Pearcey

message: I've left a note for npearcey regarding WP:AUTO, and invite her to work with us here to include her viewpoint in manner acceptable to all. FeloniousMonk 22:49, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Autobiography 

message: Recent additions have included:
*Unsourced information (education section)
*WP:SPS used in violation of WP:ABOUTSELF
*Unreliable sources (Amazon blurbs)
Additionally, the article is mostly cited to sources affiliated with Pearcey (whereas WP:Notability requires "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject"). HrafnTalkStalk(P) 04:13, 29 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recent additions and sources 

message: update pubs 24.19.179.253 (talk) 06:10, 15 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  New book on masculinity
Talk:Ralph Fiennes

message: In the article is said the name of the actor is pronounced as /reɪf/
At https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ralph is said that in the modern English the name 'Ralph' is pronounced /rælf/ RALF and more rarely, /reɪf/
Many dictionary sites say it the same - /rælf/  The British and the American pronouncers say it clearly as /rælf/
For example the Oxford Dictionary - https://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/definition/english/ralph-ellison?q=ralph
and I definitely hear /rælf/ !
Many famous people with the nordic name 'Ralph' are known as /rælf/ 
So, which pronounciation is really correct - /rælf/ or /reɪf/ ?
And what does Ralph Fiennes say about his name himself?
Gambit RUS (talk) 23:11, 10 October 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  /rælf/ or /reɪf/ indeed ? 

message: What is a "Shakespeare interpreter"?
The intro paragraph states that Fiennes is one, but no where in the article does say what it is.
Or did I miss something? 2600:8800:784:8F00:C23F:D5FF:FEC4:D51D (talk) 05:37, 9 November 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Huh ? 

message: You have confused his surname with that if the British explorer Ranulph (Twistleton-Wickenham) Fiennes..... 147.160.2.140 (talk) 00:18, 30 December 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: There's no confusion here, they're cousins. It's spelled Twisleton-Wykeham-Fiennes for both men, but both regularly just shorten it to Fiennes. 2601:184:487F:EA10:ED87:A4CD:EF68:69ED (talk) 16:15, 24 January 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Surname issue 

message: This article needs a filmography table for works the actor was involved with. This narrative long form walk through of his career is different than pretty much any other actor. 199.68.231.236 (talk) 02:01, 9 November 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Filmography Table 

message: itsa rafe. His name is, rafe. 82.9.56.21 (talk) 01:03, 18 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rafe
Talk:Goh Keng Swee

message: Hi, Good Olfactory. I don't think it is right to remove Goh Keng Swee from ":Category:Alumni of Raffles College" and place him in ":Category:National University of Singapore alumni". NUS is the successor of Raffles College, but it was only formed in 1980 and Goh clearly did not study in that institution. Could you please revert the change? Thanks. — Cheers, JackLee –talk– 07:38, 13 July 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: When there is a defunct university and a successor university, category-wise we only have the categories for the successor university. That's the standard convention. An exception would only be made if there was a separate article about Raffles College, which there is not. Good Ol’factory (talk) 07:56, 13 July 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Really? I'm surprised. Is there a guideline or policy on this? — Cheers, JackLee –talk– 09:10, 13 July 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Probably not—at least not that I know of. What I said is based on my experience at WP:CFD when categories of this type come up for discussion. As I remember it, invariably the decision has been to use only the current-institution category rather than having one for the current one and the ones that were succeeded. Perhaps this one could be nominated and users could say what they think. Good Ol’factory (talk) 03:34, 14 July 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Good idea. Will you do that? — Cheers, JackLee –talk– 08:21, 14 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Alumni of Raffles College/National University of Singapore alumni 
Talk:King George V DLR station

message: It's not really fair to count the building work around the station as belonging to the station itself as if it's Transport for London's fault; it is in fact part of the extension from King George V to Woolwich Arsenal. I have amended the article accordingly.
:The work taking place is part of TfLs 10bln transport fund. Lenny 11:25, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: untitled

message: This section really has very little to do with the station itself.  The curvature of the tracks, location of tunnels to Woolwich Arsenal and the location of the bus terminal beside the Woolwich ferry has nothing to do with the location of King George V Station.  If nobody has any objections, I'm going to remove most of this section.  nzseries1 12:13, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Removed - I feel that an article on the station should be about the station.  Any objections please note them here. Nzseries1 (talk) 11:40, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Location section
Talk:Panama (cryptography)

message: Should this page possibly be moved to PANAMA, since the authors spell the cipher this way?
: Yep, have done so. — Matt Crypto 12:49, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Move

message: The article says, "RadioGatún is strictly a hash function". If I'm interpreting it correctly, this appears to be contradicted by the RadioGatún article, which says, "RadioGatún can be used either as a hash function or a stream cipher". Someone with more knowledge about these matters should change or clarify this in the article, depending on whether I'm right about this. - dcljr (talk) 07:00, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  RadioGatún
Talk:Flossie Page

message: most definitely NON NOTABLE
I CANT BELIEVE I SPENT 25SECONDS OF MY LIFE READING THAT
** Very important. One of the best known of the Americans over 110 and that alone is enough to warrant inclusion.
M
She holds the all-time age record for the state of Kansas, breaking a record that held for 14 years.  What about YOU?  
If you are so selfish that you can't see the significance of a person born in 1893 living to 2006, well, then, that's your problem. 69.180.8.87 06:32, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Assam Agricultural University

message: This says 1948 and the article says 1969. Which is true? -- Sundar \talk \contribs 11:01, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: When was it established?

message: With Reference to http://www.aau.ac.in/aau.htm, Assam Agricultural University was established in 1969.
Yes Kirandahal1993 (talk) 06:06, 29 March 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Fact was correct
Talk:Claudine Longet

message: The Trivia section says:
::"The incident of criminal negligence in the death of Sabich was the subject of a song written by Mick Jagger which was ultimately cut from the album Emotional Rescue (1980), although copies have surfaced due to piracy over the years."
Is this verified?  If so, the title of the song should be included in case anyone wants to find more information. - Ugliness Man 11:02, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Jagger 

message: I do not believe for a second that she recorded that song but I'm not asking that it be removed-- Profhum (talk) 08:31, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  You misunderstood.  Mick Jaggar wrote and recorded the song, not her. TodKarlson (talk) 23:14, 3 February 2013 (UTC)

text: since removed.Mercurywoodrose (talk) 00:56, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Bang, Bang, My Baby shot me down

message: One of her nipples is visible in the picture.  Is that allowed on Wikipedia?
74.105.147.58 (talk) 18:55, 3 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: You're wrong about the image (which was used on one of Longet's album covers), but even if there were some nippage, WP is not censored. WP:NOTCENSORED. Monkeyzpop (talk) 22:24, 3 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Part of one areola may be visible, but I'm not sure by looking at the low-resolution image.  No nipple is visible, and of that we can be certain.  Anonymous commenter 74.105.147.58, you really should inform yourself about anatomical terminology before getting yourself worked up into a lather. —QuicksilverT @ 17:58, 6 May 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Image since replaced with a public domain (publicity still) image.Mercurywoodrose (talk) 00:55, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Picture 

message: Wikipedia pages in other languages talk about 1942 being her year of birth, not 1941. I checked German, Dutch, French and Russian. All say 1942, as does IMDb. Kennin (talk) 08:43, 13 October 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  1941 or 1942 

message: Is there 2600:1700:780:9260:F414:38C6:A799:5AE6 (talk) 19:09, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Current photo of Claudine Longet
Talk:Cadence (disambiguation)

message: I propose that Cadence (music) is the most common usage of cadence and that that article should be moved here and this disambig at Cadence (disambiguation). Hyacinth 11:03, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Most common?

message: Strange no mention of cadence as applied to software development.  Cadence being the rhythm and frequence of releasing a piece of software. Example in usage  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mj1856 (talk • contribs) 19:33, 5 November 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Software Cadence
Talk:Sevlievo

message: Actually, the current article hasn't been edited from the source version (per Chuck Bowen's edit summary, 23 Feb). Is it OK to restore the slightly cleaned up version of 6 Feb? JackyR 11:10, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Of course--sorry, I didn't realize you'd done some cleanup.  Thanks. Chick Bowen 15:46, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled