lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Socialist Alternative Politics

message: the article gives the impression that SAP-Rebel was one organisation. Wasnt it so, that Rebel was the youth organisation of SAP? Bertilvidet 17:50, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The party was very small organisation. The SAP's organisation has changed through the years. In the earliers it tried to be party with a youth organisation. Then both organisations merged to one party. Now it focuses on its magazine "Grenzeloos" (Borderless). The party's organisation is too unclear for me to understand what's happening. C mon 19:33, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: SAP-Rebel
Talk:Astronomical object

message: Transiting planet is a propitious orbital alignment, rather than a type of planet. I'm not clear it belongs on the table. Likewise, optical binaries, visual binaries, astrometric binaries, spectroscopic binaries and eclipsing binaries are dependent on the location observer, rather than being a physical type of binary star. Similar provisos apply to asterisms and constellations. Do we need a separate table for these categorizations?—RJH (talk) 19:56, 23 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Isn't a astronomical 'object' just something (persistent or periodic) we can 'see' (inc radio) in the night sky ? Most of those binaries you list look like a single point object so they seem to qualify. - Rod57 (talk) 13:53, 10 February 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Not an "object" 

message: I'm not sure that this is a proper criterium, or even what this means. What if we set an explosion that breaks a comet into two pieces? What if we build a moon? Cheers, Greenodd (talk) 01:00, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Those haven't happened. If they do, we can revisit the concern. Praemonitus (talk) 01:15, 1 April 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Naturally occurring? 

message: Aren't all astronomical 'objects' initially defined by where we see them in the sky - ie by declination and right ascension ? - Rod57 (talk) 13:50, 10 February 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  No mention of astronomical coordinates 
Talk:HSBC (disambiguation)

message: The problem with having Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Corporation on this page is that it is just the group's Hong Kong operation, if it is to be included then all of the other local subsidiaries will need to be, that is around 25 - which plainly isnt sensible. HSBC has a full explanation of where to find local bank infomation anyway. Ian3055 18:06, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: And the below would be the result:

HSBC can mean:
*HSBC Group
*HSBC Bank AS
*HSBC Bank Argentina SA
*HSBC Bank Australia Limited
*HSBC Bank Brasil S.A.- Banco Multiplo
*HSBC Bank Canada
*HSBC Bank Egypt SAE
*HSBC Bank Malaysia Berhad
*HSBC Bank Malta plc
*HSBC Bank Middle East Limited
*HSBC Bank Polska SA
*HSBC Bank USA N.A.
*HSBC Bank plc
*HSBC Building, Shanghai
*HSBC Finance Corporation
*HSBC Hong Kong headquarters building
*HSBC Mexico, SA
*HSBC SA
*HSBC Tower, London
*HSBC Tower, Shanghai
*HSBC Trinkaus & Burkhardt KGaA
*Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Corporation
*Hampton School Boat Club

Which isnt very pleasing - it also becomes somewhere else which will need to be kept updated. What about if we add something along the lines of "including details of local operations" after HSBC Group? Ian3055 20:50, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: HSBC Bank links
Wikipedia talk:Requests for arbitration/Locke Cole/Workshop

message: Sam Korn, rather than further cluttering up the arbitration page I thought I'd discuss this with you here. I really can't see the basis for your position on 'edit warring' in 'proposed finding of fact 2'.
You seem to be suggesting that if a user encounters a persistent vandal they should not get into an 'edit war' (which you say is "always" wrong) of reverting the vandalism, but rather search about for someone that the vandal "respects" enough to voluntarily stop vandalizing... even if 6+ admins have previously failed to get the person to stop. Note, that this isn't just some wild hypothetical... WP:VAND includes intentional violation of copyright policy as a form of vandalism... making the above an accurate description of this case. There are exceptions to the 3RR rule precisely because edit warring is not "always" wrong. When someone is clearly violating policy you should revert them... indeed WP:CV and WP:VAND say so explicitly. If that isn't the case then the exceptions to 3RR should be removed and we can all observe how effective convincing persistent policy violators to voluntarily comply will be.
The idea that people shouldn't remove a policy violation if they suspect the person will repeat it also strikes me as bizarre. It starts by assuming bad faith and ends by rewarding persistent policy violation... we only correct violations if we think the user will not repeat them. The really dedicated violators we leave alone until we can find someone they respect.
BTW, my cynical side might suggest that Netoholic's eventual capitualation on this issue could have had more to do with discussion on AN/I about blocking him over it than it did with his having more 'respect' for Wgfinley than the numerous people who had previously asked him to stop. In any case, 'hunt around for someone the person respects enough to follow the rules' does not strike me as a sound policy. Netoholic should have respected all of the people who talked to him about this... and the copyright policies themselves for that matter. Not respecting other users shouldn't be an excuse for getting away with violating Wikipedia policy. --CBDunkerson 18:24, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
Talk:That Don't Impress Me Much

message: Couldn't there be more on the lyrics of the song in this article? ACEOREVIVED (talk) 22:20, 8 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: More on lyrics needed
Talk:Table of Ranks

message: Table of Ranks is a poor title for this page.  First of all each title should stand alone so it should be something like Table of ranks in Imperial Russia.  I don't know enough about this subject to know if this is a good title or not and I don't want to do a page move only to have to have it moved again.  Second, Wiki capitalization rules on page titles is that only the first word and proper nouns are capitalized.
*Tabel o Rangakh (The Table of Ranks) is the name of the table as given by Peter I, so the capitalization is correct, as per Wiki capitalization rules. I think a more specific title would help, though - something like "Table of Ranks (Imperial Russia)" should work. [06-07-2006]
** "Table of Ranks (Imperial Russia)" format of title is pointless. There is no other thing called Table of Ranks. Original article title restored. `'mikkanarxi 18:22, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Page needs better name 

message: It seems that the _personal_ nobility was _not_ given from the lowest (14th) rank, as the page currently says. Even Russian Wikipedia says:
"По манифесту 11 (23) июня 1845 года[9] право на потомственное дворянство приобреталось с производством в штаб-офицерский чин (8-й класс) или в чин 5-го класса гражданской службы при условии, что эти чины присвоены не при выходе в отставку. Личное дворянство чиновник получал только с 9-го класса, служащие в более низких чинах имели право на статус личных почетных граждан. В военной службе личное дворянство давали так называемые обер-офицерские чины (не выше 9-го класса)."
Basically, since 1845 you'd need 8th grade at military and 5th grade of civil service (not assigned at retirement) to get heredial nobility; personal nobility was assign from 9th rank, below that gives you a honoured citizen status.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:908:C38:B080:E4CB:2286:4684:D5B8 (talk) 19:31, 2 July 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Personal nobility
Talk:Spineshank

message: I tried to fix this page up as much as possible. I wanted to create separate sections for the departure of Jonny Santos, as well as another section for Santos' post-Spineshank projects. I also think that Brandon Espinoza should not be mentioned as an "official member" - simply because nothing with him was ever released, even in the form of a sample MP3. Therefore, it's easier just to say Spineshank broke up in 2004 after Santos left - which is more or less correct anyhow. Oh yeah, and I referenced as much as I could.  Dmiles21 05:57, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fixed up page

message: I don't really believe that they were ever Nu Metal.  People slap that tag on any band that catches any kind of notoriety.  Hell, people probably tried to when Lamb of God got a grammy award nomination.   The later 2 were more along the lines of industrial and even imo could be metalcore with the use of synths and other sounds, much like Fear Factory (who they're influenced by...), but the first was more like Alternative metal.  Shatterzer0 07:48, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Genre 

message: its mentioned that the band announced they broke up
can anyone confirm this? i have not seen this anywhere else.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.45.238.52 (talk) 21:43, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  break up? 

message: So I guess the Jon Santos from this band is not the same Jon Santos from Seven_Wiser ?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.234.80.72 (talk) 14:36, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: No, this Jonny Santos has always gone by 'Jonny'.  --Kingoomieiii ♣ Talk 19:04, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Jon Santos 

message: Looks like someone had fun with the dates in the History section, changing dates to randomly be in the 18th and 19th century. Damage seemed to have been done at Revision as of 21:04, 29 September 2012 by anonymous user: 90.212.90.180. I can't undo since there have been intermediate changes. A lot of dates have changed, so it will be a manual clean up task. Chaozu42 (talk) 21:10, 29 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  History section vandalism 

message: Its been a while since I've been viewing Anger Denial Acceptance album page, yet still there's missing link which leads back to SpineShank main page. Can anybody fix this?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Monomic (talk • contribs) 12:19, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fourth Album Link
Talk:Markko Märtin

message: This article might be getting large enough to be split into chapters soon. SteelyDave 18:35, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Chapters? 

message: There is a picture of him on the Estonian Wikipedia, but I'm unsure of it's protected or not.  Someon e who can read Estonian might be able to add it.  SteelyDave 18:51, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Picture 

message: I replaced 'shunt' with 'crash' to describe the rallying accident which killed Michael Park.   Firstly and pedantically, a shunt is a rear end crash.  Secondly 'shunt' is used in racing to describe the myriad accidents which are part of the game and which result in damage to the vehicle and possibly minor injuries.  Its use is somewhat sardonic.  It is out of place in a description of a fatal accident.Cross Reference (talk) 13:40, 23 March 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Shunt?
Talk:Linklog

message: Isn't this really a "link roll"?  That is what http://del.icio.us/help refers to them as.  I'll clarify and make a redirect from "link roll" to this soon if there's no discussion, though I think "r_Linklog - jdsiouewkrñ.f,msdjkcg<<zl.nrfetSólo enlaces                               oll" should eventually be the primary title.  - Fcendejas 18:36, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The term linklog appears to broader.  Link roll is probably just a more modern slag for linklog.  Please review the references I just added to the article which trace the term back to PBX systems back as far as 1993.  Further research could likely produce older references to the term. David Condrey  log talk  07:25, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  roll/log 

message: can you defend your edits here?  I think you're taking a few un-related places where the words "Link" and "Log" appear next to each other, and claiming they're related.  The article (for most of its history) described a linklog as a blog with links, which appears to have minimal (but some) usage.  The definition you give feels completely fake. power~enwiki (π, ν) 16:59, 26 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Linked list" 

message: This article does a poor job of attempting to document two very different meanings for "linklog" which have nothing to do with each other and make the page confusing:
* Linkblog - as defined in the article as a user feature / application
* Link log - the thing in the image, presumably "feature of computing systems" / telco systems (PBX)
I propose: 
* split the article into two different stubs, as there is enough material for each, and each if separately notable. E.g.
** linkblog - the user feature/application - this is a much more common / specific term for this practice
** link log - The jjk thesis (and the image which came from there apparently) uses "link log" and the Avaya citation says "link-log". Zero use of a single word "linklog".
** Turn linklog into a disambiguation page for both of those ^^^
Tantek (talk) 18:48, 6 February 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Split page and disambiguate two different subjects: linkblog user feature, link log CS construct
Talk:North American Congress on Latin America

message: Right now WP:N is not established in this page and from the alexa ranking on the website some might think that this is not notable. However, the NACLA's reports are widely read amongst academics studying the Latin American region (particularly those with the left-wing point of view). I just created it to have it here and will add to this later to properly establish notability.--Jersey Devil 18:44, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Please do! I think it's a topic worth noting. Kennard2 02:17, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: The article is largely based on the self-description of the organization. More neutral external sources would be helpful. Omikroergosum (talk) 15:32, 21 June 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lacks neutral sources
Wikipedia talk:Wikipedia Signpost/2006-03-20/News and notes

message: Perhaps Wikipedia:Requests for CheckUser or Special:Listusers/checkuser would be a more useful link than Special:Checkuser?  Just a thought.  — Catherine\talk 18:46, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for the suggestion; I'm not quite sure why I added that link. I've changed it to :m:CheckUser Policy. Flcelloguy (A note?) 22:37, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
Talk:EinStein würfelt nicht!

message: I am working on a translation/recration of the german article de:EinStein würfelt nicht at EinStein würfelt nicht/WIP.  When it has reached a standard of quality, we can move it to the main article.  --tonsofpcs (Talk) 18:49, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: not clear:
- how many of his stones needs a player to move to the opponents colored area to win the game. 
- how does one "remove" the opponent's stones.
as the current text goes it is clearly nonsense:
-stones are removed from the board on reaching the opponents area.
-a stone reaching an opponents area equals win. (that would imply end of game therefore??)
-a player having all his stones removed from the board loses the game?? 
89.134.199.32 (talk) 16:53, 15 September 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  rules -  clarification needed 

message: Compared to the German version, the English one seems to be quite unclear. Here are some issues together with suggestions based on the German article:
1. The game is played on a 5x5 grid, but each player has six stones numbered one through six, not six cubes. The English wording is especially confusing considering the 3D rendering.
2. It is unclear how stones get removed. The German article says that you can remove stones by moving onto them. You may remove the opponent's stones as well as your own stones.
3. It is unclear what happens when the player rolls, say, the number 3, but only has the stones 1, 5 and 6 left. I think the German wording clarifies that you have to move with the stone that has the number closest to the rolled number (and if there are two closest ones, higher and lower, the player may choose).
4. The winning conditions seem to be not quite clear: You win by either getting a single stone all the way to the opposing corner square OR by removing all stones of your opponent.
I hope this helps. 134.2.173.10 (talk) 19:26, 22 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Translation & Clarification
Talk:Sri Lankan contingent vote

message: This article was recently moved from Sri Lankan Supplementary Vote to Sri Lankan supplementary vote. The system is almost always written with capitals and in any case there shouldn't have been a move without a discussion here first. I've just moved it to Sri Lanka Supplementary Vote, as it's the closest I can get to the original title and is better than Sri Lankan supplementary vote.
Iota 18:54, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
Talk:StarText

message: I know that the StarText staff had a heads-up on the emerging technology of the Internet, because I told them about it at a couple of StarTexan meetings in 1989 and 1990. I encouraged them to incorporate Usenet and Internet content into their offerings, and essentially become an ISP for the StarTexan community. The response? They'd had a look at this Internet thing, and thought that their content model was superior and there wasn't any reason to spend their time on that Internet stuff. They had some notion that newspapers across the country would follow their lead, and the online experience of the future was just going to be a lot more of what they had already been providing. As noted in the article, this was not a winning strategy. (Wesley R. Elsberry, 11:01 AM PDT 20 March 2006)
I'm surprised it's not mentioned in the article that StarText provided a free internet email address to subscribers. This was one of the first times that access to internet email was available to the average person. Art Carnage (talk) 21:23, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
Wikipedia talk:Requests for arbitration/-Ril- 2/Proposed decision

message: So far all that has been presented is flimsy evidence, so I don't really see why that justifies claiming I am CheeseDreams - it just seems to be an attempt by SimonP and company to have me banned by pretending that I am some previously banned user. Mel Etitis tried this half a year ago claiming I was Lir.
I use r.v. because I am a (professional) linguist - rv would be pronounced "ruv" while r.v. is pronounced "ar vee", and hence using rv or rv. is something that I find quite inappropriate. Likewise P.s. because it is short for the latin term "Post scribo" ("after writing"), not Post Scribo - only first letters of sentences are capitalised, not the rest, and it is an abbreviation, not an acronym, and not a word in itself, hence the need for stops between the letters.
I find it frankly quite startling that anyone should countenance such flimsy claims as hard evidence - almost as if someone justified a connection between Saddam Hussein and Al-Quaeda simply because both had used the word Muhhamed with p.b.u.h. at the end.
 
I gave explanations of SimonP's "evidence" last time he raised the claims, and the arbitration committee rejected the claims then. I don't see what has changed between then and now, except that I have raised arbitration against SimonP on the KJV issue - the claims remain the same. --Victim of signature fascism | There is no cabal 19:07, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Arbcom rejected the case, not the claims. You're certainly not the only person using r.v., JoanneB does it too. But it's quite rare, and a waste of time, really; edit summaries are rarely pronounced. You're quite obviously not Lir. What's your name mean, anyway? --Phroziac ♥♥♥♥ 16:11, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

message: I am confused by the diff cited in the FoF that Ril==Cheesedreams: . This edit appears not to be by either Cheesedreams or Ril. Do I misunderstand? -Splashtalk 21:01, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Odd diff in key FoF
Talk:The Batman vs. Dracula

message: If you asked me, this movie is EXTREMELY violent and gorey (you can watch it on YouTube here http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=batman+vs.+dracula&search=Search). I believe this movie's intense nature should be mentioned on this page, as it was likely the most violent animated batman movie ever. —The predfgsdfgdfgdfgdfgceding unsigned comment was added by 216.222.232.9 (talk) 19:06, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Uh... gory?  Well, okay, there was the blood bank scene, but I'm not sure that really qualifies as "gore"...Caswin 22:47, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Something here wasn't mentioned... 

message: I removed the mention of debate that this movie takes place in a separate continuity because it's more violent in the show.  This is simply inane.  The content has absolutely nothing to do with the continuity.  It's clearly in the same universe as the TV show and any debate on this would be simply asinine. 75.153.231.20 04:53, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Continuity
Category talk:Wikipedians in Kitchener, Ontario

message: I'm looking into making a Kitchener-specific userbox; all similar ones seem to use flags or coats-of-arms, a tricky proposition in this case, as within user spaces fairuse licensing is not allowed and I understand the city's symbolsare all copyrighted.
Any input on this would be helpful... Radagast 19:17, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Nevermind, I just used a photo of City Hall. Behold:  Radagast 23:50, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
Talk:Village School (Great Neck, New York)

message: In the north like Great Neck, New York and not to be confused with Charlottesville's Village School, but this is called the Village of Great Neck School. 24.211.179.19 (talk) 13:54, 9 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Village of Great Neck 