lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Battle of Wytyczno

message: Why is the result field empty in the infobox? --Irpen 23:31, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: To make you feel better adding it yourself? Nyah, only joking. In fact I was weavering between "Soviet victory" and "Polish defeat", with the latter being IMO a tad more correct. Halibutt 13:41, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Result
Talk:Battle of Kápolna

message: Failed due to insufficient citations. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk to me 21:56, 4 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: B-class review
Talk:Battle of Mackinac Island (1814)

message: It may be worth splitting this article into two sections: the initial capture in 1812, and the American attempt at recapture in 1814. Other than being on the same island, there is little in common between the two actions. HLGallon 21:25, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Split article ? 

message: By renaming the battle "Battle of Mackinac Island," which by the way is its official name, the article refocuses attention on the actual campaign of July-August 1814 and battle of August 4.  The 1812 facts (which track those in Wikipedia's parallel "Fort Mackinac" article) are useful as a "frame" for the main story.  If anyone wants to edit them down, they are welcome to do so, but I think they are useful where they are.  Bigturtle 01:40, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Hope this is a good response
Talk:Battle of Gumbinnen

message: I have posted my own article on the Battle of Gumbinnen on the temporary page. This article is not a copy of the one at FirstWorldWar.com, which is cited as an external reference.
Didacus 21:47, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: The article states "The Battle of Gumbinnen, initiated by forces of the German Empire on August 20, 1914, was the first major German offensive on the Eastern Front during the First World War.". This does not meet the truth and is also not in agreement with e.g. also(Eastern Front (World War I)).
The battle was not initiated by Germans but by Russians that attacked the German Army in Eastern Prussia on August 19 (days before they already entered into Eastern Prussia but without much battle). It was not an offensive but a defensive of the Germans that had to retreat. Only after reforming the General Stuff they went offensive at the battle of Tannenberg 2 weeks later. 213.55.176.66 (talk) 10:17, 19 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  chronological order somehow messed up
Talk:Battle of Nemea

message: I would like to raise the question as to why the article only mentions Diodorus statistics as to Allied casualties; certainly, Xenophon's claim in the Agesilaos, 8 'Lakedaemonians' to 10,000 allies, is spurious, but the emphasis on such outlandish numbers should certainly indicate that the defeat was not a 'standard' hoplite battle in terms of numbers. Equally, I feel that it should be noted that this is one of the few, if maybe the only, battle in which Lakedaemonian troops 'attack' a retreating enemy, which may preclude the reliance on 'standard' proportional casualties. If anybody knows of any reason, other than the sheer disproportion between the two figures, as to why Diodorus figures are 'exact,' please comment. If not alternate suggestions as to the quantity of losses, obviously with reasoning, would be appreciated.
—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 137.73.88.101 (talk) 21:43, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Casualty statistics of the Nemea
Talk:Battle of Tuyutí

message: The caption of the photograph of the troops in trenches is mistaken.  That was not the Battle of Tuyutí.  It is by the Uruguayan photographer Javier López and was taken after the Battle of Boquerón del Sauce.  The photograph has sometimes been attributed, with more imagination than accuracy, to the later battle of Tuyutí, which I believe López did not even cover.  It should be moved to the appropriate Article in Wikipedia. Ttocserp 19:32, 26 January 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: The photograph was taken at Tuyutí, but not during the First Battle of Tuyutí nor during the Second Battle of Tuyutí. Thus, I don't think he photo should be here: it's misleading. --Lecen (talk) 13:23, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Wrong caption
Talk:Battle of Marrakesh

message: بعد أربعين يوما من الإضراب البطولي عن الطعام الذي يخوضه المعتقلون السياسيون بسجن بولمهارز السيء الذكر، وبعد أزيد من ثلاثة أشهر عن المعركة التي فجرتها الجماهير الطلابية بموقع مراكش، أصبحت دراسة هده المعركة وتحديد اتجاهاتها أمرا استعجاليا وضروريا حتى نستخلص الدروس الكثيرة التي لقنتنا إياها الجماهير الطلابية بمعية كوكبة من الشباب الشيوعي الذي استرخص كل شيء في سبيل حرية و كرامة هدا الشعب. فما هي النتائج التي حققتها هذه المعركة و كيف يمكن تثبيتها وترسيخها للذهاب قدما أكثر فأكثر ؟ ماهر إبراهيم محمد عاقل مقرني (talk) 02:39, 25 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  الاحداث
Talk:Battle of Redwood Ferry

message: I added the unbalanced tag on this article as it fails completely to even mention Dakota or anything about their motivations in this battle. Completely a white POV.  oncamera  (talk page) 11:23, 11 February 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Is there any information out there from the Mdewakanton/Wahpekute point of view on this battle? I have yet to encounter any. Ironmarshal1805 (talk) 16:59, 22 January 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, I've read more balanced books on the Dakota-US war. However, there are many that are unbalanced like this article.  oncamera  (talk page) 17:43, 22 January 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: What books have a good Dakota account of the battle? I'd love to help make some edits if possible. Ironmarshal1805 (talk) 01:30, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: "Little Crow and the Dakota War" by Mark Diedrich is a book that analyzes historical documents from the time period along with a bibliography for his sources that can also be referenced.  oncamera  (talk page) 09:45, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unbalanced
Talk:Battle of Riachuelo

message: The battle ocurred on the La Plata River in Argentine waters, nothing to do with the place shown in the map.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.198.204.68 (talk) 13:19, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: That was another battle, in a different Riachuelo. DPdH (talk) 21:07, 6 June 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Where the battle took place 

message: The Rangel is a mistake in the Brazilian sources. there was no such ship at the battle.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Vawarner2000 (talk • contribs) 00:01, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree, I have a list of the ships in the battle, will fix it now and reference it (since this lacks reference). Veritiel (talk) 11:46, 5 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rangel 

message: In the article of battle of Riachuelo is said that the Brazilan Forces had 247 deaths, but i found a list that says that the Brazil had:
mortos (portuguese for deads) feridos (portuguese for wounded) 
Amazonas -> 13 Mortos e 13 Feridos 
Belmonte -> 9 Mortos e 23 Feridos 
Iguatemi -> 1 Morto e 6 Feridos 
Jequitinhonha -> 8 Mortos e 33 Feridos 
Parnaíba -> 33 Mortos e 29 Feridos 
Beberibe -> 5 Mortos e 19 Feridos 
Araguari -> 2 Mortos e 5 Feridos 
Ipiranga -> 1 Morto e 6 Feridos 
Mearim -> 2 Mortos e 8 Feridos
Total 74 deaths
142 Wounded
i think this should be changed right?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cypher3 (talk • contribs) 23:53, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Casualites

message: Is there a source listing the Paraguayan ships lost? Thanks, DPdH (talk) 21:15, 6 June 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lost ships
Talk:Gospellers

message: I'm not sure what this means exactly, it's not a common phrase and makes the article seem a bit unclear. No one I've spoken to can shed any light on it and a previous editer seems to have had some difficulty. If someone could shed some light on it that would help immensely. M A Mason 00:42, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Maybe it refers to the group's Oricon chart ranking?  The name Oricon comes from the words "original confidence," so that could be what the editor was trying to say. Kamezuki 04:18, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah yes it is the Oricon chart, article now reflects this. Thanks a lot :) M A Mason 18:17, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Original Ranking?

message: Note: this text was in the article for a little less than a month; I removed it because it's not encyclopedic or wikified. If someone wants to clean it up and carefully put it back in the article, great. BTW, I did not add the user's signature, it was there already. Yes, in the article. Jediknil (talk) 08:21, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Blackface Controversy
Template talk:LGPL

message: I think this template needs a bit of cleanup, so it looks more like the rest of the copyright tags, eg Template:GPL? --Romeo Bravo 00:44, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed.  Other templates have not looked like this for many months now.  Had it not been protected, it would look better by now...  --WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 16:39, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: How about now? --Admrboltz (T | C) 23:13, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Looks MUCH better. --WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 23:34, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Looks 

message: Please add an interwiki link to the Vietnamese version of this template:
vi:Tiêu bản:LGPL
Thanks.  – Minh Nguyễn (talk, contribs) 00:27, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Done --Admrb♉ltz (T | C) 01:05, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks again. – Minh Nguyễn (talk, contribs) 01:30, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Interwiki link to vi: 

message: Perhaps the article should link to the licence itself like the gpl template?
Also, perhaps it should say "work" in stead of "library" because most likely it will be an image on which this template is used, and therefore no library. This also like the gpl template. Cristan 13:41, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Done.  Ral315 » 07:00, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  suggestions 

message: Please add a link to nl:Sjabloon:LGPL as well. Cristan 13:46, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Done.  Ral315 » 07:00, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

text: Plz, add ru-wiki ru:Шаблон:LGPL Alex Spade 12:10, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. -- JLaTondre 13:39, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Interwiki 

message: This is a problem similar to the one with the GPL tag. The following lines could cause a spacing issue if another license tag is placed directly below this one:
Category:LGPL images
<noinclude>

Please remove the line break between the first and second lines, like this:
Category:LGPL images<noinclude>

I tested this with the sandbox templates  and  and it appears to correct the spacing issue. —Remember the dot (talk) 23:23, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: done. CMummert · talk 02:04, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks! —Remember the dot (talk) 03:48, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

text: Happy‑melon 14:19, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Problematic line break 

message: Hi, could an administrator add an interwiki for this template from the French wikipedia: fr:Modèle:LGPL. Thanks. Ciao. Bouchecl (talk) 06:46, 17 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Yet another interwiki
Talk:Mountain Creek Lake Bridge

message: The text is a direct ripoff of this page and needs to be rewritten. Cacophony 00:47, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Comment
Talk:William McCrum

message: The FIFA webpage I've referenced mentions the obituary of McCrum. If anyone has access to this it would be useful to read, particularly as FIFA and the Guardian seem to have rather different POV. JMiall 00:50, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: See Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Ireland-related_articles#Derry/Londonderry - "Use Derry for the city and County Londonderry for the county in articles." Alekksandr (talk) 21:25, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title: County Londonderry
Talk:Jerusalem (computer virus)

message: Shannip (talk) 16:04, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

message: I just wanted to give a heads-up that I'll be making some wide-range edits to this article within the next few weeks. I'm dedicating a course project solely to researching and writing on this topic. Will be adding sources, information, and grammatical corrections. Shannip (talk) 17:25, 4 March 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Article Editing for Class Project

message: I do not believe that the Jerusalem virus used the DOS "Terminate and stay resident" system call, but that it instead relied on trapping interrupts to stay memory resident. I have therefore removed the phrase "as a terminate and stay resident program". In general, viruses using the DOS TSR call were rare. 193.216.223.188 00:52, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Terminate and stay resident

message: "since the advent of Windows, interrupts are no longer used"
I don't think this is true. 69.87.200.97 01:09, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm pretty sure interrupts are still used; however the specific DOS function cited isn't, which is what makes this virus & its variants obselete. I changed a couple of words to reflect this. Rockdozen 19:24, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Interrupts? 

message: Most of this article is in present tense, with some confusing exceptions (i.e., "the Jerusalem virus becomes memory resident and would then infect every executable file run"). I copy-edited to make it consistently present tense, but since this is an obsolete virus should the whole thing be in past tense? Rockdozen 19:55, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Tenses?

message: How is that sentence there? It is false and is based on some loosely reliable source. Since politics are sensitive matters, I will leave it to others to deal with it Snfdfk (talk) 14:10, 17 February 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: I added "apparently" to the beginning of the sentence so that it is more doubtful, hope it could solve the problem. -iaspostb□x 05:51, 16 March 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you, but I'm not sure that is enough. It smells like modern day anti-history (play on ant-vax) shenanigans, since there wasn't a country in the region, but a turkish rule followed by a british mandate, as is well known. The fact is it's a day marked as "Naqba" by arabs of the region, refering to the war and displacement rather than the new claim of statehood. Snfdfk (talk) 09:39, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  the last day Palestine existed as a country
Talk:Amani Abeid Karume

message: Added Wikipedia cross references and corrected spelling - of Raha Leo for example. Zanzibar64 (talk) 04:28, 14 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Ayumi

message: I was so annoyed by this page redirecting to a bunch of characters I had never heard of from a cartoon series I barely know anything about that I decided to pull a Keiko.
Chsf 01:07, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Does anyone really search for the lone first name "Ayumi" looking for anyone besides Ayumi Hamasaki? Casey J. Morris (talk) 05:30, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

text: I've been here for 3 things and not once was it for her. 86.40.160.142 (talk) 23:04, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ayumi 

message: Does anyone agree with me that the picture of Ayumi Hamasaki doesn't really belong here? It has little to do with the name Ayumi, instead illustrating a person who carries that name. Will delete if no one responds in two weeks or so. IceUnshattered [ t ] 01:24, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Meh. I'll leave it for now, but still would appreciate feedback. ♫ IceUnshattered [ t ]  22:59, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

text: I agree. 86.40.160.142 (talk) 23:04, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

text: I agree, too.  Someone deleted the entire infobox, and upon restoring it today, I took the opportunity to delete the Hamasaki photo, since no one has spoken up in its favor. TJRC (talk) 19:06, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hamasaki img? 

message: "AYUMI(MU)" is not Chinese's name.
Are Britain all origins in American's name because it uses English language? 221.189.74.125 (talk) 22:45, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Origin Chinese.
Talk:Square One (song)

message: This article survived an Articles for Deletion debate. The discussion can be found here. Owen× ☎ 01:16, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Articles for Deletion debate
Talk:Richmond station (California)

message: This article was previously under Richmond Station, somebody moved it, apparently without consultation, I say that because I am the first one editing the discussion page, to Richmond (BART station). This article was previously moved to Richmond Station from Richmond(BART), as this is a multimodal station serving both Amtrak and BART it seems fair to say that Richmond Station is a better term, if there is no more discussion on the issue I will move it to Richmond Station on December 20. -- User:JVittes Dec. 17, 2005 17:17 (PST)
*It looks like Richmond Station was turned into a disambiguation page. However, I still think this article should still be renamed because "BART station" still is not a good specific term. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 01:29, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: I don't think any of the bus routes listed will ever have an article for it, I propose removing the wikilinks to them as they may be detracting from the page. --JVittes 05:59, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I disagree they should be included.Cholga is a SUPERSTAR¡Talk2Cholga!Sexy Contribs 07:36, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Transit Connections 

message: A proposal to merge Metro Walk to here is on the talk page for Metro Walk. See Talk:Metro Walk#Merge to Richmond Station  Purplebackpack89≈≈≈≈ 20:18, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge [[Metro Walk]] to here? 

message: I changed the platform formatting to reflect the same formatting as all other BART stations, which show where the platform is located. 71.198.231.208 (talk) 23:24, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: I removed the station layout for two reasons. First, it's simply redundant to three lines of prose (plus the s-rail templates in the infobox), yet takes up an entire screen. That's poor article design, and is an issue with the majority of these diagrams. Second, it's rather misleading. The UP tracks are not northbound/southbound/passing track; trains may be in either direction on either main. Notably, any train stopping at Berkeley will usually be on the eastern track (main 2) to avoid the 10mph crossover at CP Stege. The non-platform track is a low-speed siding and is not generally used by any passenger train. The passageway also goes the whole way under the tracks, perpendicular to the platforms, which is not what the diagram shows. If you want to improve the diagram I might not oppose re-adding it, but in its current form it is a net negative to the article. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 04:35, 26 January 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Noted. Maybe it could possibly be redone and split in the future, like you did on Oakland Coliseum station#Station layout ... but I now agree: only if there was more cited prose. Thanks. Zzyzx11 (talk) 03:35, 27 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Station layout 

message: What are you trying to do with the lede? It is already a summary of the cited information presented in the prose. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 00:45, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lede
Talk:List of African-American abolitionists

message: This article survived an Articles for Deletion debate. The discussion can be found here. Owen× ☎ 01:18, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Articles for Deletion debate
Talk:Abdussattar Shaikh

message: The link to Steven Butler goes to the wrong person. It should be disambiguated, or unlinked or something. Jra 19:06, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Shaikh and why police oversight committees are a joke.  Ms. Sandoval is still there, even though Shaikh is gone now.  Scott Fulkerson's been replaced by Patrick Hunter.  No need to prove an informant on the board now, just proven liars and incompetents is enough.  
One big joke, and it takes a national tragedy to prove it.  Reporter Joe Cantlupe ran at least one informative article on Shaikh years ago, but I guess many citizens didn't know what they were reading about.  So your tax dollars are still paying these person's  salaries, salaries that do nothing but cause you and your country grief.
Benedict Shaikh, anyone?--75.55.39.120 (talk) 07:09, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Citizen's Review Board on Police Practices
Talk:Lotfi Raissi

message: I have removed the template but it has been re-inserted. With the edit summary: "rvt, clear victim of terrorism"  
He is the victim of the FBI and the Department of Justice who falsely arrested him. Are the FBI and the Department of Justice terrorist organizations? Iqinn (talk) 11:16, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: His accusers made him a victim of the "War on Terror", therefore the template applies. Sherurcij (speaker for the dead)  16:12, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Template Terrorism 
Talk:Hassan Almrei

message: 144Sherurcij (speaker for the dead)  01:27, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: I have made the following changes per the Wikipedia:Manual of Style:
* removed "b." and replaced it by "born" per Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style_(dates_and_numbers)#Dates_of_birth_and_death
* removed date linking per WP:MOSNUM and MOS:SYL, and changed formatting to WP:MOSNUM
* spelled out CSIS on first use per WP:MOS 
* removed links to plain English words per WP:OVERLINK: fruit stand, driver's licence, high school, cell phone, van, city hall, prison guard (I restored the link to civil marriage, which may be an unfamiliar concpet not explained by its name
*Remove repeated links to Imam per WP:OVERLINK - it is already lined in the article.
*changed the spelling of "license" (as a noun) to the Canadian "licence"
Ground Zero | t 02:26, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Formatting per [[WP:MOS]]
Talk:Yale (federal electoral district)

message: Don't know why it's doing this but the category, stub and such are coming above the last table in the Election Results section.  I tried cutting it out and putting it back in, and cutting out the Cats, Ext Links and Stub; but still the '49 election comes after all the rest.  Are there Wikicoders out there somewhere?Skookum1 01:41, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Formatting problem with '49 election
Talk:Anett Pötzsch

message: WikiProject Biography Assessment
The article may be improved by following the WikiProject Biography 11 easy steps to producing at least a B article. -- Yamara 17:52, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Wikipedia:WikiProject_Biography/Assessment#Class_parameter|Biography assessment rating]] comment 

message: Shouldn't her name be Anett Pötzsch-Rauschenbach? Pelladon 01:53, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Discussion
Talk:Battle of Shaykan

message: I propose this page be moved to Battle of El Obeid, which for the moment is only a redirect. In this article it is repeatedly refered to as "El Obied" but this is apparently a mistake as can be seen in the El Obeid and William Hicks articles. Raoulduke47 18:41, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 

message: Newbolt's poem about breaking the square surely refers to Abu Klea, which was a British battle, and not El Obeid, at which only a handful of British officers were present.  Is there any source for the claimed reference to El Obeid? MayerG (talk) 19:35, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Newbolt poem 

message: Is fuzzy-wuzzies regarded as a racist term ? If so should that be made clear. It sounds like it might be, its not used on the main Hadendoa page. Interesting to now know to who the term, used in Dads Army, refered. 82.11.163.59 (talk) 13:34, 9 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  fuzzy-wuzzies
Talk:Blink-182 Greatest Hits DVD

message: I linked the cover image for this compilation. The categories on this article are for an audio recording, but the page is about a DVD by Blink-182, not one of thier albums. I'll change them in a few days if no one objects. 
Kresock (talk) 03:36, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Categories for this article