lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Ricky Jay

message: Maximus, thanks for contributing to this article! Wow, I only created it yesterday. I saw him in On the Stem, and let me tell you, the man is astonishing.  I had to go back two days later, and I got to assist him on stage. Paul Klenk 02:34, 19 Oct 2003 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: I heard on an interview that his departure from deadwood / hbo were less then amicable perhaps an mention is appropriate or further details. Gabbos (talk) 00:25, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Departure from Deadwood

message: Added the infobox, but I didn't take down the notice, hopefully someone will check my work first :)  Legotech (talk) 21:53, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Infobox

message: I noticed that many items in the books section have links to amazon. Is this appropriate? at0 19:46, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Probably more of a function of laziness than any serious spam attempt.  I will re-do the list in proper form as soon as I finish this post. DoctorJoeE review transgressions/talk to me! 02:17, 21 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: External links for books
Talk:Canadian Baptist Ministries

message: I think the 1995 merger to create CBM was simply the merger of Canadian Baptist Federation and Canadian Baptist International Ministries.  CBIM history is a little more complicated.  It started out as Canadian Baptist Foreign Mission Board, later renamed to Canadian Baptist Overseas Missions Board (CBOMB) and finally (& only briefly) to Canadian Bapitst International Ministries before being merged with CBF into CBM.  At no point was as "Home Mission" part of either CBF nor CBIM's work as BCOQ held out on mergers forcing union in foreign missions work only.
Some references to support my recollections:
*http://www.longfields.ca/baptists.htm
*http://www.glinx.com/~grifwood/CBX2001.pdf
If no one has additional information, I will change the main article to reflect the above. Samw 03:04, 19 Oct 2003 (UTC)
replies: text: Made the changes.  See:  http://www.canadianencyclopedia.ca/index.cfm?PgNm=TCE&TCE_Version=A&SectionId=634307&mState=1  Samw 03:48, 1 Nov 2003 (UTC)
Talk:Diptera

message: I'm not sure it should be put in the article, so... --PuzzletChung 06:43, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Infraorder tree 

message: love bug was an orphaned page.  I tracked it down to here.  Should it be linked to from this page, or from Bibionidae?  --BAxelrod 02:40, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[love bug]] 

message: These two articles should be merged. Diptera is largely technical so the best heading is flies.Notafly 13:09, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: But the common usage of "fly" does not include mosquitoes, gnats and midges.  Nurg 04:26, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree to merging. The common usage can be explained in the merged article. sentausa 13:45, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I do not agree (see above and below) - and propose a de-merge after discussion on policy. Why are 2 pages so difficult?  Roy Bateman (talk) 13:21, 4 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Diptera versus flies

message: The taxobox uses suborders Archidiptera and Eudiptera. The article uses Nematocera. Whose classifications are these? How are they related? Which is preferred?
This article should describe both systems, but we should pick one for use in taxoboxes for consistency. Gdr 22:22, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Inconsistent classification 

message: The taxon box indicates so; but if so, then why there are two separate articles (both stubs) for each? Shouldn´t them be merged, if these are realy synonyms? PS.: The comment above mentions "archidiptera", which is not mentioned in the article anymore...according with its own article, does not seems to be a synonym with eudiptera or nematocera, however... --Extremophile 05:10, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Eudiptera = Nematocera? 

message: Whose idea was it to make this page redirect to the flies?!?  What about gnats and mosquitoes?!?  What about the people who want to analyze this order as a whole?!?  --Luigifan (talk) 14:26, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with Luigifan - this 'dumbing down' of WP is quite an issue - I think it needs to be discussed at the naming policy page. Roy Bateman (talk) 13:28, 31 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why is this a redirect?
Talk:Cao Rui

message: Will they be different?(曹叡&魏明帝) Two Chinese links will be confused. --FallingInLoveWithPitoc 04:18, 19 Oct 2003 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: I personally think this article is well written and accurate, the only thing is that it lacks inline citations, which wiki will ask for in the future. Here's the link you may find helpful to look for the cn: Biography of Emperor Ming with notes.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by EkmanLi (talk • contribs) 07:03, 4 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Can anyone help with cn?
Talk:Eugene Istomin

message: Actually, according to what I've read, it's not certain what the two debut concerts with the Philhadelpia and the NYPO contained. It's possible that they were both Brahms 2nd pno conc., but I've also read that he performed Chopin.
It's pretty clear that most sites which mention this are using the same source, and most do not make things explicitly clear. One can't just count the number of citing sites as evidence.
However, the Chopin reference could be to his later debut with the National Symphony in Washington - which could also be added to the text. I've left this for the moment, but it's possible that the entry as it stands is not factually correct because of this uncertainty. David Martland 06:47, 19 Oct 2003 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Chinese space program

message: The CMSA announced in May 2023 a mission to land astronauts on the lunar surface by 2030. Should this development be mentioned in the article? 
“Recently, the moon landing phase of China’s crewed lunar exploration program has started. The main goal is to send Chinese astronauts to land on the moon for the first time by 2030,” Lin Xiqiang, deputy director of the China Manned Space Agency (CMSA), told media at a press conference at the Jiuquan Satellite Launch Center May 29.
Quotation from https://spacenews.com/china-sets-sights-on-crewed-lunar-landing-before-2030/
see also
https://spacenews.com/china-sets-out-preliminary-crewed-lunar-landing-plan/ Calderknight (talk) 06:37, 28 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Chinese Manned Lunar Landing
Talk:Pulse-code modulation

message: PCM is usually assumed to be integers, but also includes floating point samples.  Is the definition basically "samples encoded as binary"?  So it could use some other encoding scheme like Unum (number format) and still be PCM? https://www.kvraudio.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=520701 — Omegatron (talk) 16:59, 6 June 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Floating point PCM 

message: Could someone who understands this please provide a more detailed explanation?
Perhaps a diagram - the sine wave diagram is very nice but I am having trouble relating this to LPCM...  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.81.124.137 (talk) 02:45, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  LPCM
Talk:Schmidt corrector plate

message: "Schmidt corrector plates do not compensation for the lack of magnification? which non-parabolic reflectors experience. "
This seems to be nonsense to me. Since I don't know anything about telescopes and hit "random", I don't know which way to fix it :)
Either they do compensation or they do not do compensation or do not compensate. Anyone? 
blades 14:34, Oct 19, 2003 (UTC)
----
This seems like nonsense because it is (my apologies to Pizza Puzzle, please don't take it personally). 
Originally:
:This "plate" is actually a lens which refracts the light after it has been reflected by the mirrors. Schmidt corrector plates do not compensate for the lack of magnification which non-parabolic reflectors experience.
Light passes throught the Schmidt corrector before it reaches the primary mirror and magnification is strictly a function of focal length. Fixing now. Rsduhamel 03:09, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)

message: What does it mean to "figure" a lens or a mirror? Please rewrite for laypeople. Also, a diagram of the corrector plate with some light ray paths, compared to an uncorrected spherical mirror, would be really helpful if available. - Frankie 20:21, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I have replaced the jargon term "figured". There is a little information on these processes at Fabrication and testing (optical components) but it isn't much. 69.72.2.72 01:01, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The jargon term "unfigured" remains, however. 83.104.249.240 (talk) 04:26, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Figure it out?
Talk:Single-document interface

message: Mentioning taskbar at every turn is horribly Windows^tm centric.
:However, many other desktop environments have taskbar-like elements (Gnome, KDE).  Furthermore, it's an example that most computer users can relate to.--LucidGA 21:25, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: MS Windows centric

message: I propose that Single document interface be merged into Multiple document interface. As it stands, this article is only 7 sentences long, and only over half of them are about MDI, not SDI. I couldn't find any additional sources with which to expand this article. The MDI article already has its own section about the relationship between MDI and SDI and each subsection alone is still much bigger than this entire article. Fench (talk) 23:24, 29 September 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree with the idea of merging, but given that the target it already stronger (and that this page is completely unreferenced), redirected. Klbrain (talk) 21:45, 19 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merger proposal
Talk:Underground Railroad

message: An IP user made an edit that deleted the content within the Political background section in a very improper manner:
* removal of cited content
* removal of an entire section without discussing it here
* and typing in two words under the section heading made it look like vandalism
* there was no identification of what was problematic, which would be much better - with citation needed tags, or  that challenge the veracity of the information.
But, I looked at the comment in their edit summary "this information was all false. As a proffesional in this field I feel that this MISINFORMATION should NOT be posted publicly on a website where kids and adults alike trust to give accurate info."
And have a couple of comments:
* There was a discussion about different bribes that judges would receive... which was not discussed at all in the cited source. I revised the sentence to discuss what was on that page: personal liberty laws. I am guessing someone changed the wording and kept the original citation - because personal liberty laws are very appropriate in that paragraph.
* The entire first paragraph is not cited, and I am not sure about the statistics - that's the only thing that jumps out at me. I will look for sources.
In an attempt to make the article the best that it can be, does anyone see anything that I may be missing?–CaroleHenson (talk) 20:52, 2 March 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: I am  now with this version. I am not finding anything else to be questionable, but if I missed something, please say so.–CaroleHenson (talk) 23:19, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

text: Yes, It leaves out other points along your NY Route, namely Ithaca, NY. 2603:7081:7E3E:8D3B:6C44:E50B:623E:A1EC (talk) 06:30, 15 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recent improper removal of content - Political background
Talk:List of diseases (B)

message: I'm going to go ahead and remove the link to Bieber Fever.Dhicks3 (talk) 23:02, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Someone's Clever

message: Something about ", aslo known as Bourneville–Pringle disease" arouses my suspicions. If I have erred and this is a genuine affliction then feel free to revert, ideally fixing the typo before reinserting the name. ϢereSpielChequers 09:10, 7 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Chocolate and crisps
Talk:S&P 500

message: Displaying relevant graphs is really useful to users inexperienced in the topic. But all displayed graphs appear to be outdated. Newer and more relevant graphs should be found. Anon258 (talk) 18:09, 17 February 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Update Graphs 

message: The opening words of the article are:
     The Standard and Poor's 500, or simply the S&P 500, . . .
The official source cited for the name "Standard and Poor's 500" has no mention of that name!  Therefore I propose deleting that name.
DylanW999 (talk) 05:06, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Good catch. I have replaced it with a reference to Encyclopedia Britannica, which verifies both names. Cilidus (talk) 08:58, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposal to change the opening words 

message: Currently as of 4/2/23 :
"The Standard and Poor's 500, or simply the S&P 500, is a stock market index tracking the stock performance of 500 largest companies listed on stock exchanges in the United States."
The highlighted phrase is missing an article.  It either needs to be "of  the 500 largest companies" i.e. absolute top 500 or "of 500 of the largest companies" i.e. a selection from the group of the largest companies.  As it is, the sentence is ambiguous and should be corrected by an editor that knows which case applies.  Thank you.  • Bobsd •  (talk) 16:14, 2 April 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Researched me, and according to the selection criteria listed later in the article, I am going to change the phrase to "500 of the largest". It was an edit a few days ago by 178.127.120.227 changing "large" to "largest" without adding an article for clarification.   • Bobsd •  (talk) 16:39, 2 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wording in the opening 

message: The S&P 500 index reported daily comes with a volume stat as well as the price. Is the S&P 500 volume just the volume of all the shares traded for every component of the index, or is it weighted somehow? 2600:8800:1180:25:7CB4:C4B7:5E65:353A (talk) 21:16, 22 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  How is Volume calculated?
Talk:The Federalist Papers

message: There is a large table in the middle of this article: in the external links section there are two links to a similar table but also with links to each paper. I would suggest that this table takes up a lot of space, maybe should be made it's own article with each line formign a link to a stub. What do you think?--68.121.144.176 03:04, 10 Jun 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cecropia  (talk • contribs) 02:53, 21 June 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Table of Contents

message: It states 37 as the first of the essays covering this topic, but the end No. is missing. the next item lists 85, the final essay, it seems likely that the missing number is 84. looking for confirmation. RarinRictus (talk) 00:35, 11 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Missing end number for "The conformity of the proposed constitution to the true principles of republican government" 

message: As we know, papers in opposition to the Constitution were written and published by many people.  Did anyone other than Publius write in support of the Constitution? J S Ayer (talk) 16:46, 3 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Other authors in support 

message: Hi Tonymetz. You probably know more about this than I do, so I'll pick your brain. I hope you don't mind. You obviously believe this book is important as a source for this article, at least as Further reading:
* 
The book is listed in the Bibliography at the Federalist Party article, where it is obviously on-topic. What justifies it being listed here? The Federalist Party isn't mentioned a single time in this article. Shouldn't such content be developed first?
BTW, my most valuable source of knowledge about The Federalist Papers was gained while doing a lot of work at Wikisource. It's a pretty amazing work. -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 15:28, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: The book covers The Federalist Party and Alexander Hamilton, The Federalist Paper's primary author.  The Party was a major if not primary means of influence for the ideas that Hamilton championed in this book .  For those and other reasons it seems to be relevant for "Further Reading" where it's found. Tonymetz 💬  18:17, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thanks for that explanation. -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 20:53, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fischer book about the [[Federalist Party]]
Talk:Valerius Maximus

message: Does 'VALERI MAXIMI FACTORVM ET DICTORVM MEMORABILIVM LIBRI NOVEM' translate to 'Nine Books of Memorable Deeds and Sayings'?  Any latin experts about?
MrJones 19:14, 19 Oct 2003 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: This section relies mostly on one source. A lot of it also reflects literary tastes in 1911 instead of a more neutral analytical approach. 195.169.52.30 (talk) 13:21, 3 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Style
Talk:Timeline of the French Revolution

message: According to the following reference, the Law of Maximum Général was passed on the 29th, not the 17th.
"At last, having tried or debated every other expedient, the Convention yielded to popular pressure and, on 29 September, passed the law of the Maximum Général, which pegged the price of not only bread but of a large range of essential goods and services at levels prevailing in the departments in June 1790 plus one-third, while raising wages by one-half."
Rude, George F E (2012).  Revolutionary Europe, 1783-1815, p. 107.  Blackwell Publishing. .
I've consulted other sources and they've given this date as well.  For anyone who prefers the September 17th date - what sources use this date? Mr. Know-It-All 21:35, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I only changed it back because the Law of Suspects as linked has the 17th date, and not knowing the subject matter assumed it was subtle vandalism by the anon. --Syrthiss 00:08, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Good point.  Looking through some books on French history, they say that the Law of Suspects was passed on the 17th, and the Law of Maximum Général was passed on the 29th.  I have split the laws into two lines, each with the correct date. Mr. Know-It-All 03:24, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Law of Maximum Général 

message: Is 1799, really the end of the French revolution? I'd put 1804 as the end of the revolution, when Napoleon crowns himself emperor, and he ends any form of democracy. Cause in 1799 you stil have the Plebiscites, even after Napoleon became first consul. Even historican Palmer ends the french revolution in 1804, not in 1799 ! (A History of the Modern World, 4th Edition, RR Palmer & Joel Colton) 
87.210.52.227 (talk) 20:19, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ending of the French revolution 

message: We're getting a lot of vandalism on this page. Can we restrict editing privileges somehow? Oranges91 (talk) 10:23, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vandalism 

message: ... that on 21 October 2008, 76.104.217.245 deleted about 40% of the article, including the entire pre-Revolution stage and everything from 1792 onward? I'll try to restore the deleted content. Cyril Washbrook (talk) 11:26, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hasn't anyone noticed... 

message: Whenever I search for "French Revolution Timeline", Wikipedia comes up with no search results. When I search for "Timeline of the French Revolution", I come to this page. Could someone set up a redirect so that this inconvenience is eliminated? I'm new to editing Wikipedia, so I don't know how to do it myself. Thanks for your help. 71.225.162.32 (talk) 16:53, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: French Revolution timeline is a reasonable redirect. With the capital T is not, clearly it's not a proper noun. - Jmabel | Talk 21:02, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Could someone set up a redirect? 

message: I think the entry is misplaced or is it vandalism?.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.116.101.152 (talk) 18:41, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Misplaced event on February 1, 1792
Talk:Gundobad

message: I wonder why, as it is evidently shown that Gregory of Tours, who wrote a century later, is not a realiable source, is used all the time in this article. Apperently Gregory of Tours, who was writing in the Frankian empire, was not a objective source (perhaps trying to justify the Frankian war on the Burgonds?) and the article should be cleaned up.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Codiv (talk • contribs) 10:12, 13 May 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why is so much based on Gregory of Tours, when it is clearly not a realiable source
Talk:Anthemius

message: "Anthemius was proclaimed Emperor at the third or twelfth mile from Rome" ... what does that even mean? Are we talking distance? Is there some sort of significance to those numbers? What's the deal? howcheng  {chat} 05:39, 10 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Third or twelfth mile 

message: Some of the phrasing in the article - for instance, "the gens Procopia, which gave several high officers" - looks a little... old-fashioned. Has there been some close paraphrasing of a source such as the PLRE? (I don't have a copy to hand). bobrayner (talk) 18:47, 12 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Close paraphrasing 

message: Who is Bilimer? Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 23:43, 12 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bilimer? 

message: “Born in Constantinople around 420, he went to Alexandria to study in the school of the Neoplatonic philosopher Proclus; among his fellow students there were Marcellinus (magister militum and governor of Illyricum), Flavius Illustrius Pusaeus (Praetorian prefect of the East and Consul in 467), Messius Phoebus Severus (Consul in 470 and praefectus urbi), and Pamprepius (Pagan poet).”
According to the article on Proclus, that philosopher left Alexandria for Athens in 431, when Anthemius would have been about eleven. And Proclus was still a student at the time; he didn’t become head of the Neoplatonic school at Athens until the death of Syrianus around 437. If that’s accurate, it seems probable that Anthemius either studied in Athens instead of Alexandria; or that he studied under someone other than Proclus.
Of his purported classmates, Marcellinus’ makes no mention of education; Pusaeus’ and Severus’ contain variations of the above-quoted paragraph; and the article on Pamprepius reports that he studied under Proclus at Athens beginning in 473 (at which time Anthemius was already dead). benadhem (talk) 23:35, 19 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Studying under Proclus?