lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:First Leeds

message: I've removed the long tables giving details of every service and ticket that First Leeds offers. It gets out of date too quickly, is difficult to maintain and the information is on their website anyway. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:NOTTRAVEL seems to be appropriate here. I kept details of the overground services because that seems to be a reasonable summary of their major routes without being too details. mh. (talk) 13:00, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removal of timetable and ticket info 

message: Can I make a suggestion !  There are associated projects on the Wikia.com network that are more suited to that type of information as they have a different set of rules with a wider brief. Buses are at the UK Transport Wiki here and they are looking for people interested in buses and route information etc as well as other forms of transport (Trains, Trams, & Roads). BulldozerD11 (talk) 02:28, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Timetable Info 

message: Is the First logo allowed on this article?  Unless First Group put it there themselves or someone has First Group's permission then it's not. Sheliaval (talk) 13:12, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I just added a non-free media use rational to :Image:FirstGroup.svg, so it looks like it now meets Wikipedia's non-free content policy, though I would prefer if someone converted it to PNG format. Permission from First Group would be a nice bonus. --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 13:56, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Best removed, it does not add much to the articleSovalValtos (talk) 17:19, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Use of logo

message: I think this article should be merged with [First West Yorkshire] due to the fact that First Leeds is technically within that company.
Slender (talk) 00:37, 17 November 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge?
Talk:Ultraparallel theorem

message: The proofs in this article would be enhanced if diagrams were available.
If you can help, please consider this project.Rgdboer (talk) 20:14, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I try an image of demostration. Rocchini (talk) 13:57, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thank you very much. The image contains key features of the proof. The use of color for correspondences is impressive. Confidence in this theorem is now more sure.Rgdboer (talk) 20:23, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Diagrams

message: This proof depends on the notion of "pole" of a line with respect to a conic. Though this concept is very elementary in Projective Geometry, our articles do not yet establish it. The related concept of Harmonic Cojugates is not in place either. So far WP understands the two real functions in an analytic function as harmonic conjugates. When the tools are in place then the concept of "perpendicular lines" in the Klein model will be available. The proof given is quite satisfactory given such foundation. Due to the delay in foundation, I have put the Klein model proof into second position.
The reference (Borsuk) uses a proof based on metric properties of the curvature -1 plane.Rgdboer (talk) 23:11, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Klein model proof

message: This article does not actually have a definition of "ultraparallel" nor is there a wikilink to a separate definition page. So it's a little difficult to see what the theorem is actually saying. Michael Kinyon (talk) 14:59, 26 October 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Fixed on 5 January 2023. Michael Kinyon (talk) 03:47, 2 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Definition?
Portal talk:The Simpsons/Did you know

message: *For formatting on the main portal page, and for uniformity with other standards on Wikipedia, it would be best to conform with the rules set out at WP:DYK for T:DYK.  
*Specifically:
#Hooks should be no longer than 200 characters
#Hooks should be phrased in the form of a question
#The information should be sourced in the original article, which should be bolded in the hook itself.
#Barring citations included in the articles themselves, a citation could be included on the hook's individual page.  
Cirt (talk) 20:14, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  New entries
Talk:Faversham explosives industry

message: The websites agree that the 1916 explosion was at 14:20 (presumably the afternoon not not the morning) of Sunday 2 April, but have either 109 or 115 casualties Hugo999 (talk) 02:42, 4 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Casualties 

message: I am reviewing this page at the moment. Chwoott (talk) 20:38, 9 December 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Updating this page
Talk:383d Bombardment Group

message: 543d Bombardment Squadron should be merged into this article and made a redirect to 383d Bombardment Group#Components.  Unlike the other three squadrons assigned to the 383d group from 1942-1944, the 543d has no independent notability.  (Compare 40th Air Refueling Squadron, 541st Bombardment Squadron, 42d Air Refueling Squadron). Its article is presently basically a stub with enough formatting, etc. to rate it as a start.  Expanding the article would essentially duplicate this article, with different numbers.
--Lineagegeek (talk) 23:57, 3 March 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Endorsed - sounds like a good idea.Buckshot06 (talk) 04:53, 4 March 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Merger
Talk:Segen

message: Grimm has a giant article on the lemma.
Basically, it is the German term for blessing, but it took a life of its own to such an extent in the early modern period that it can now be considered a special topic of German folklore studies. The term in this sense covers the field of meanings spanned by English "blessing, benediction; charm, spell, incantation". --dab (𒁳) 14:25, 30 April 2013 (UTC)
Talk:List of tallest buildings in Phoenix

message: I've never even heard of this, but I'm guessing Phoenix won't be the home of a 120 story building any time soon. I've deleted it from the article. MY COCK.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.138.168.60 (talk) 00:14, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Phoenix United Towers 

message: No mention of FAA influence on building height restrictions here, which may make Phoenix the most vertically challenged city for its size in the U.S.A.  San Diego has the same problem in that its airport is even closer to downtown and it is discussed on their page. List_of_tallest_buildings_in_San_Diego
    Rijkstra (talk) 01:52, 7 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  FAA restrictions 

message: This should be a featured article candidate - Seems to have good skyscrapers - even if tallest building - 148 m (483 ft). Most cities with tallest building that height are featured! 68.99.241.179 (talk) 21:27, 30 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  I think this should be featured. 

message: This should be nominated for FL-class status - most FL-class articles of skyscrapers look like Tallest buildings in Phoenix article. This article is long enough to be considered FL-class, so any contributors nominate this for FL-class? (I've seen since this article was created, it showed only the top 5 or 10, it now shows top 26.) Someone must have significantly edited this article.
68.228.255.234 (talk) 16:30, 3 August 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: When I complete this process, I will nominate it for FL status. There are some things here that need to be corrected first, and I also have at least three other Tallest Buildings Lists to consider nominating for FL status (St. Louis, Fort Worth, and El Paso). Zonafan39 (talk) 17:47, 27 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Be nominated for FL-class. 
Talk:List of people from Demopolis, Alabama

message: I merged the section "Famous Demopolis people" in the article Demopolis, Alabama and created this article.  This type of list in the article about Demopolis itself can quickly overwhelm the other content and is much easier to maintain as a list article of its own, and helps the Demopolis article conform to Wikipedia's MOS.  Altairisfartalk 20:56, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Merged list into this article

message: Completely unsourced list, with a lot of people who had no Wikipedia articles.  I've removed all of the people with no articles, but there should be a source for every person listed here.  Corvus cornixtalk 01:17, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Unsourced

message: Hudson Strode’s Wikipedia article gives the years he taught as beginning in 1916. Citations would help to solidify the accuracy of the 1924 date given here. Ryguy913 (talk) 18:32, 28 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Years of teaching
Talk:List of prehistoric jawless fish genera

message: I believe the titles of this and similar articles are not as accurate as they should be and should be changed. See Talk:List_of_prehistoric_cartilaginous_fish#Article_should_be_moved for the original proposal. -- Yzx (talk) 01:02, 3 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article should be moved 
Talk:Timeline of Colombia–Nicaragua relations

message: This article states that in 1928 "Colombia and Nicaragua signed the Esguerra-Bárcenas treaty in Managua, Nicaragua and set the 82nd parallel north as division for islands and territorial waters". This is obviously not true as the 82nd parallel is way up in the Arctic. Can anyone provide the correct information? Bazonka (talk) 20:33, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Error
Talk:Roman Catholic Diocese of Beauvais

message: I made quite a few large edits, to try to bring the article to have more information about various bishops (especially those without english articles), eliminate erroneous positions of time, and general attempts to make it look a little better! I do not know if the way I wrote the lists are correct for wikipedia, for example I simply put "previously" and "later" for positions the bishops had between their occupation of the bishopric. Some other bishop lists use "transferred from/to" or simply "to/from". I suppose in 100 years we can standardize our wording! For now this is good enough for me, if anyone has problems just go ahead and change it. I started only because I wanted to add "St." to those bishops who are sainted and got carried away!
99% OF INFORMATION ADDED IS FROM FRENCH WIKIPEDIA!75.73.150.255 (talk) 16:22, 10 December 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Large Edits 

message: 'Sainting' is a POV problem.  (Some) Catholics may consider certain bishops 'Saints', though those before 1100 certainly did not go through a formal process, and are only 'popular saints'.  But the rest of the world (a) uses the word 'saints' differently (e.g. The Church of Jesus Christ of the Latter Day Saints); (b) does not necessarily believe in saints or miracles.  Since it is a matter of sectarian belief, it is POV, and best kept to a minimum.  --Vicedomino (talk) 05:48, 3 September 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sainting the bishops 

message: I removed the French Republic flag icon from the Infobox, in accordance with several sections of WP:ICON; specifically (quoting),
* "Generally, flag icons should not be used in infoboxes, even when there is a "country", "nationality" or equivalent field: they are unnecessarily distracting and give undue prominence to one field among many...."
* "Flags make simple, blunt statements about nationality, while words can express the facts with more complexity." [Beauvais was for many centuries part of the Frankish Kingdom, of the Holy Roman Empire, of the Kingdom of England, of the Empire of Napoleon I. The flag of the Kings of France was quite different]....
* "Do not rewrite history. Flags should not be used to misrepresent the nationality of a historical figure [including some bishops], event, object, etc. Political boundaries change, often over the span of a biographical article subject's lifetime. Where ambiguity or confusion could result, it is better not to use a flag at all, and where one is genuinely needed, use the historically accurate flag."
--Vicedomino (talk) 09:08, 8 February 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removal of flag of French Republic
Talk:Four Christmases

message: this article sounds very ad-like203.196.42.179 (talk) 10:31, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree - it has to be the most ad-like and one of the strangest plot articles I have read in all my browsing on Wikipedia. That is why I had to change it. 86.183.128.203 (talk) 23:24, 14 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Ad-like

message: When clicking on Scott Moore, it links to a baseball player, not to the writer of "Four Christmases" and "The Ghosts of Girlfriends Past." Rednoggin (talk) 19:31, 19 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Incorrect link 

message: Should there be a re-direct for the title "Four Holidays" to this article? 165.228.178.143 (talk) 01:44, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Was there some connection between that and this movie?--Stetsonharry (talk) 14:13, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Re-direct

message: “No person or entity  associated  with this film received payment or anything of value, or entered into any agreement, in connection with the depiction of tobacco products.”  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.4.86.232 (talk) 00:01, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  closing credits certificate in this movie 
Talk:R*

message: I'm not quite sure how to produce a page that discusses r* and the surrounding theory of resource competition properly.  Perhaps it requires a broader topic heading.
A page devoted to R* is a good idea! --OpenScience (talk) 11:50, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

message: I changed r* into R*, because that is what Tilman uses (and it is also in line with notation commonly used).
See Tilman's Resource Competition and Community Structure, page 44
--OpenScience (talk) 11:50, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Changed notation 

message: R* is a symbol for a concept from theoretical ecology. It is the resource level at which the number of births in a population per unit time equal the number of deaths.
R* gave its name to the R* rule or R* principle, which states that the species with lowest R* will out compete and exclude all other species. It also gave its name to R* theory, which is a body of theory that deals with resource competition more generally, including competition for multiple resources.
OpenScience (talk) 17:09, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Draft version for a stub on ''R*'' 

message: From Tilman D. 1994. Competition and biodiversity in spatially structured habitats. Ecology 75:2-16: "The level to which an equilibrial monoculture of a species reduces the concentration of its limiting resource is called its "R*" (Tilman 1982)," where Tilman 1982 refers to the book mentioned above.
OpenScience (talk) 11:20, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Notes 

message: Rockstar seems to use the symbol R_{*} rather than R^{*}.  I suggest removing it from this disambiguation page unless information to the contrary is found.  Tkuvho (talk) 07:39, 1 June 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  rockstar
Talk:List of placoderm genera

message: Can anyone verify the existence of the following genera:
* Boliosteus
Abyssal (talk) 19:09, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Misspelling of "Bolivosteus"--Mr Fink (talk) 20:36, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Placoderms I can find no reference for
Talk:Allium aflatunense

message: I have reverted the recent changes which quoted the RHS website as an authority for saying that Allium aflatuense and A. hollandicum are synonymous. Though by no means perfect, the RHS Plant Finder is the UK's most authoritative source of up-to-date botanical nomenclature, and reflects a wide consensus of botanical opinion at the time of each annual edition. The RHS website uses the same data. When they say "Allium aflatuense misapplied" is a synonym for Allium hollandicum it does not mean they are one and the same. It means it is often sold in mistake for Allium hollandicum (which no longer needs a × as it is now accepted as a species in its own right): that's why they say "misapplied". 'Purple Sensation' is a cultivar of Allium hollandicum and does not belong on this page. SiGarb | (Talk) 00:11, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  ''Allium aflatuense'' syn. ''A. hollandicum'' / ''A.'' × ''hollandicum''?
Talk:Gloster Gnatsnapper

message: I've just expanded this article somewhat, but when I came to check the dimensions I came across a problem: the wingspan as given in Mason is not that given, which is cited as being from Putnam's book on Gloster aircraft. Same publisher, two sizes. And I've always thought of Putnam publications as being pretty solid), .... Mason is three feet bigger. what to do? I've left it as it is....Mason's figure of 36ft 6in seems overlarge to me on consideration. (It's not a typo, since the metric equivalents also differ)TheLongTone (talk) 00:10, 30 May 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Well James does say that very little is known about the Gnatsnapper...this from Flight in 1929 suggests a wingspan of 33 ft 6 in, which matches James.Nigel Ish (talk) 08:52, 30 May 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: That seems pretty conclusive to me. Apart from the numbers themselves, scaling off the drawing the proportion of length to span confirms the lower figure.TheLongTone (talk) 08:34, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  dimensions
Talk:The pursuit of happiness

message: I am not sure who started this, but I went ahead an finished converting this to a Disambiguation page.  I was searching for the band and expected to get the phrase from the Declaration of Independence, not the Will Smith movie.  
Truthfully the band should become  The Pursuit of Happiness (Band), but that is for another day.  Web Warlock (talk) 20:33, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Disambiguation Page Built
Talk:Siddeley Puma

message: What is the relationship of this engine to the BHP-Galloway Adriatic? Drutt (talk) 20:51, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
Talk:Attack on German Flatts (1757)

message: I've changed Belletre to Belestre so as to link to his page. There was no talk page, so I've created one. If you are the original author of the page feel free to contact me. --Steels28 (talk) 21:21, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Looks good. I am adding a link from Belestre to this article. BradMajors (talk) 21:28, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: François-Marie Picoté de Belestre
Talk:Iliamna Lake Monster

message: This article lacks any references to third party, independent reliable sources to establish notability.  I will do a search myself and will shortly list for deletion if no such sources are apparent. Locke9k (talk) 23:08, 31 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Notability

message: There is a problem in the history and sightings section. It begins with mentioning tales from the Tlingit, who live in Southeast Alaska and the Aleut, who live in the Aleutian Islands. The area around Iliamna is inhabited by Athabascans, a seperate and distinct people from either of those. So, maybe they have their own stories of giant fish but they aren’t stories about this giant fish. Beeblebrox (talk) 18:18, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: There’s soooo many issues with this that I have elected to redirect it. We probably shouldn’t have an article not his subject at all if it has to resort to this sort of puffery and dependence on extremely questionable sources to look like something. Beeblebrox (talk) 01:26, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  history disputed
Talk:Lioré et Olivier LeO H-242

message: I understand that, according to the convention of the era, the H242 and H246 were considered variants of a single type - the H24. I therefore suggest the creation of a new article with that title, and composed of the current articles on the H242 and H246. These current articles would then become redirects to the new one. Jan olieslagers (talk) 16:35, 13 August 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  H24
Talk:Mikulin AM-34

message: The article has US units listed first in the text, but SI units are first in the specs.  Any particular reason for this inconsistency?  I expected metric units to be first for a Soviet engine. -Fnlayson (talk) 17:20, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Primary units ?  

message: this paragraph "The M-34 was used in an unusual system, first tried by Imperial Germany in 1918 with a Zeppelin-Staaken R.VI, that used an external supercharger to supply pressurized air to the aircraft's M-34FRN engines." made me think a lot until i managed to understand. It needs rewritting.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 186.203.57.2 (talk) 16:46, 11 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nonsense text 

message: The M-34 is thought to have been originally designed in Italy (Fiat) for the Russians, its design closely follows Italian in-line Aero engine practice. Can a source of year 1944 support a claim that something is thought? The article goes to describe the history of development of the engine, referencing to a much more recent source. Given this, what authority have the source of 1944 at all? Эйхер (talk) 15:35, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Italian origin?
Talk:List of brachiopod genera

message: This source appears to be about fossils and mentions the fossil that requires a citiation on this wiki article. However as mentioned the source is in Russian and I can't deciefer it. But I thought I'd leave it here if it helps
http://mmtk.ginras.ru/pdf/Manuals&Classica/1987.Iskopaemye.izvestkovye.vodorosli.pdf  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hanikb (talk • contribs) 03:11, 31 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Found possible citiation however source appears to be in Russian(?) 

message: This isn't the only link that links to something completely irrelevant. Many of the links are faulty. The whole page needs reviewing!
--95.146.180.32 (talk) 21:05, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: RE: [[Christianella]]

message: ....Christianella given as one of the brachiopods links to a plant! Can somebody look into this? Prashanthns (talk) 18:33, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I've disambigged the link. Abyssal (talk) 03:17, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Christianella]] 

message: Disphenia redirects to Cyathea, which is also a plant. 
I am not qualified to review the list of genera, but I do know that a type of palm tree is not also a type of shelled marine animal.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Utgardsloki (talk • contribs) 16:14, 2 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: It's been fixed.  SchreiberBike | ⌨  05:32, 29 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Disphenia 

message: The link to this genus leads to a page about moths.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.240.28.26 (talk) 13:40, 2 April 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Fixed.  SchreiberBike | ⌨  05:32, 29 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Isogramma
Talk:Laird Super Solution

message: Why was this moved from the more common usage, not to mention naming convention Laird Super Solution. Is there an over-riding reason for it, if not please move it back as it wil cancel out a lot of double re-directsPetebutt (talk) 17:17, 13 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Super Solution

message: I'm not convinced the engine was an R-985 as this engine was only just entering production as the aircraft was being built is there any concrete evidence for it as opposed to an R-1340.Petebutt (talk) 17:22, 13 November 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I have measured a scale drawing and the cowling comes out at over 52in diameter which would be far too large to closely cowl an R-985, but perfect for an R-1340!!!Petebutt (talk) 17:35, 13 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Engines
Talk:Continental O-170

message: "0.03 in (1 mm) to 0.11 in (3 mm)"
0.03 times three is 0.09. 
0.11" would be 4mm, even rounding. 
2600:1000:B15D:DFB3:0:E:6626:7701 (talk) 08:47, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  This doesn't add up