lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Fuzz Townshend

message: Though the article name is Robert "Fuzz" Townshend, it appears that his real name is in fact Richard. Shouldn't the article name reflect this? --sparkl!sm  talk 07:31, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Robert or Richard?

message: We MarkB1975 & Angievoluti have attempted to update the page with various images that we own. We'd like to place this image:-  under the Classic Friendly part of Fuzz's page but in the past the image has been deleted. I personally took the image and there is no advertising involved. The image just shows Fuzz handing over a sign to a garage that has been Classic Friendly Approved. If classic car owners see that sign they know a garage/mechanic is trustworthy to work on their classic car. There is no mention of the garage involved or the other people in the photo with fuzz MarkB1975 (talk) 12:10, 2 April 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I have readded the image.  It is directly related to the section at hand, and if the section exists in the article, than the image is suitable for that section. Having said that, please don't flood the article with images, even if they are freely licenced. --kelapstick(bainuu)  13:03, 2 April 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Images

message: The tone of article and the headings, appear to be promoting the person rather than just describing them.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.6.196.152 (talk) 21:01, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Done a hefty copyedit to remove all that material that appears to be too overly promotional. Karst (talk) 16:13, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reads like a PR bio, not an encyclopedic one 

message: Self explanatory really.
Sections of this article are out of date & seem to contain contradictory information. Words and phrases such as "recently", "currently" and "about to" are used in sentences with linked references from 2015.
Also information about the 'Classic Aware' campaign and where he is based are included under the TV Career section heading.
Definitely needs updating/rewriting in parts.
95.150.59.238 (talk) 16:50, 31 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article is out of date & seems to contain contradictory information...
Talk:Mournblade (sword)

message: Maybe we should move the musical references section to the appropriate section in the Erlic main article?— Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.27.112.72 (talk • contribs) 02:22, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Untitled

message: Given the similarities between the two swords, and that Mournblade, Stormbringer, the Cold Sword, Kanajana and various other blades wielded by the Eternal Champion were all aspects of the same malevolent being, would it be a good idea to merge this article with Stormbringer's, or is there enough info about Mournblade itself to merit an entry of its own?— Preceding unsigned comment added by  Dungeoneer  (talk • contribs) 04:30, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I would mildly support such a merge. The Stormbringer article is certainly not too long to absorb more information. Maestlin 19:39, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mournblade / Stormbringer
Talk:Gabonese Confederation of Free Trade Unions

message: to whooom it may concern---> i put the wikify tag on cuz i couldnt fix the spacing; the problem has something to do with the infobox, but i cant figure it out. Benji64 02:26, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: the problem has been fixed--Bookandcoffee 19:28, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
Talk:Gusinje

message: Whom ever here is editing nonsense, stop. I have just seen a change mentioning how a few families are of serb origin, specifically Cekic, they are not the Cekic from Serbia. They are the Cekic from Trieshi and are Albanian. Excine (talk) 03:35, 26 April 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Serbian propaganda. 

message: Dedushaj was a secondary school teacher and Albanian nationalist activist in the 90s, not an academic or scholar.  His book does not contain any publisher's information, which is a dead giveaway that it is self-published.  I will WP:AGF that the users adding Dedushaj across multiple articles are unaware of his lack of credentials and/or Wikipedia's rules pertaining to reliable sources, but further additions will be considered disruptive. Amanuensis Balkanicus (talk) 20:13, 12 February 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Full reply: .--Maleschreiber (talk) 05:22, 13 February 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: The reality is that for most parts which use Dedushaj as a citation, there are other sources(e. g. Bartl (1976)) What is the disputed content by Dedushaj in the case of the Shabanagaj family? When I used Dedushaj in Gusinje Municipality, I did so because he has written about the family's background before Ali Pasha of Gusinje, who is the only member of the family known in international sources.--Maleschreiber (talk) 06:17, 13 February 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: You're both creating a false equivalence. Those authors were published by reputable publishing houses. One is a journalist and the other is a scholar, whereas the one you are defending here is self-published and a secondary school teacher. WP:SELFPUBLISHED by itself is sufficient to circumvent WP:RSN. Amanuensis Balkanicus (talk) 16:44, 22 February 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: It's the same issue as two years ago:  Is there something from the details about local history in Dedushaj (1992) which you dispute - two years after our first discussion? The book isn't used for politics or subjects which can't be confirmed in other sources. --Maleschreiber (talk) 19:45, 22 February 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: Dedushaj
Portal talk:United States/Selected article/2006, week 29

message: The portal has recently featured articles on literature, military, a national park (geography), a president (politics), and next week will be space race (technology/history).  To mix up the topics, I found grunge music in the list of featured articles.  I think this would be a good pick to keep variety in choice of topics. --Aude (talk contribs) 22:07, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Don't think we have a clear answer on that.  Generally, I avoid fair-use pictures on portals, in the same way they aren't allowed on the main page.  But, I think main page exceptions are made for featured articles that have no other pictures available.  I think that principle applies here. --Aude (talk contribs) 00:00, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I have found a free-license photo on Flickr that we can use, staying away from fair use issues. --Aude (talk contribs) 00:20, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Grunge music]]

message: =====Support=====
* Nominate and support. --Aude (talk contribs) 22:07, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Don't think we have a clear answer on that.  Generally, I avoid fair-use pictures on portals, in the same way they aren't allowed on the main page.  But, I think main page exceptions are made for featured articles that have no other pictures available.  I think that principle applies here. --Aude (talk contribs) 00:00, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I have found a free-license photo on Flickr that we can use, staying away from fair use issues. --Aude (talk contribs) 00:20, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Discuss

message: * Nominate and support. --Aude (talk contribs) 22:07, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Support

message: *Question - do we allow fair use photos on the Portal page?  I was under the impression that fair use images are not allowed outside of the Main article space.  Thanks, Johntex\talk 23:54, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Don't think we have a clear answer on that.  Generally, I avoid fair-use pictures on portals, in the same way they aren't allowed on the main page.  But, I think main page exceptions are made for featured articles that have no other pictures available.  I think that principle applies here. --Aude (talk contribs) 00:00, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I have found a free-license photo on Flickr that we can use, staying away from fair use issues. --Aude (talk contribs) 00:20, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Comments
Talk:Codex Borgia

message: I've restored the display of each of the codex's individual folio images. I don't think that WP:IINFO applies here, those images are not there purely for illustration or to give a representative idea on what it looks like. Rather they are there because the text comments and discusses specific interpretations on specific folios. There are quite a few decent resources that can be used to go into details on the interpretations and aspects of all the individual folios, and the article could easily be expanded from this to discuss the elements from the codex in the context of each of these imgs, at some future point. I think it's useful to have 'em here. --cjllw ʘ TALK 04:50, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removal of codex folio images 

message: OCLC number 783173291 was added to the Notes section.
*https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Codex_Borgia&diff=540182502&oldid=511211864
*http://www.worldcat.org/title/heaven-and-earth-in-ancient-mexico-astronomy-and-seasonal-cycles-in-the-codex-borgia/oclc/783173291
— Stevey7788 (talk) 08:32, 15 February 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  OCLC number 783173291 

message: "So the reader must rotate the manuscript 90 degrees in order to view the codex correctly." The statement seems to assume that the reader starts with the manuscript incorrectly oriented. Silly reader. Why not start with it correctly oriented, then there's no need to turn it 90 degrees? Maybe I would understand this better if I had it in my hands, but is some part of the explanation missing? Andrew Dalby 13:15, 25 March 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: I get it now. This is about the section on pages 29-46, which is oriented differently. I should have seen that, but to make it even clearer for the next person I'll change the word "codex" to "section" in the sentence I quoted. OK I hope? Andrew Dalby 12:50, 26 March 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rotate the manuscript
Talk:Flesh of My Flesh, Blood of My Blood

message: The title should read "Flesh of My Flesh, Blood of My Blood" as per Wikipedia naming conventions. --Zimbabweed 02:41, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Title 
Talk:John A. Dahlgren

message: Does anyone know what ships to link to this article? This picture for example dates from 1864, I think. It commemorates what was then regarded as an important event, and the pivot point of the U.S Military creating and using Signals Corps. for wider use in Army and Navy. Part of the caption for it reads This photograph shows a party of Admiral John A. Dahlgrens signal-men on board ship receiving a message from the Georgia shore. The two flagmen are standing at attention, ready to send Dahlgren's answering message, and the officer with the telescope is prepared to read the signals from the shore. Thus Shermans message from the parapet of Fort McAllister was read. Commander C. P. R. Rodgers and Admiral Dupont had been prompt to recognize the value of the Army Signal Corps system and to introduce it in the navy.
Possible candidates for the ship shown (Dahlgren's flagship) are the USS Galena (ship, 1880), the USS Wabash (ship, 1861) or even the USRC Nemaha (ship, 1862). I can't ascertain the name of Dahlgren's flagship at the time, can anyone help. There is no mention here of this incident or the names of Dahlgren's flagships. Broichmore (talk) 10:55, 10 August 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Dahlgren's Ships

message: Hello! This is to let editors know that :File:Admiral John Dahlgren - NARA - 528718 edit.jpg, a featured picture used in this article, has been selected as the English Wikipedia's picture of the day (POTD) for November 13, 2021. A preview of the POTD is displayed below and can be edited at Template:POTD/2021-11-13. For the greater benefit of readers, any potential improvements or maintenance that could benefit the quality of this article should be done before its scheduled appearance on the Main Page.  If you have any concerns, please place a message at Wikipedia talk:Picture of the day. Thank you! Cwmhiraeth (talk) 10:18, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Featured picture scheduled for POTD
Talk:Policy of Truth

message: "Unlike many of the prior instrumentals which were piano compositions, this one is a rough techno instrumental. However, the "Kaleid [Remix]" is more light-hearted, but has the same apocalyptic idea."
::What do you mean by "SAME apocalyptic idea?" Same as what? Jackbox1971 21:05, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  For OP:  What did you mean by this.... 
Talk:Handbags and Gladrags

message: does there exist a citable interpretation of the lyrics? i have always been curious. i have my own hypothesis, but, of course it can't be included.Toyokuni3 (talk) 05:09, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Just wondering, how did this song perform in the UK charts? The article mentions America, but seeing as all people involved were British, wouldn't it be more relevant to include details about its chart history here? 90.209.8.101 (talk) 11:56, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reference to sales 

message: The article cites Manfred Mann as not being interested in the song, but there was a recording on Youtube purportedly of the group performing the song on the BBC's 'Saturday Club'. Unfortunately it's been removed, does anyone have any other usable evidence? --Deke42 (talk) 09:16, 26 August 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: I used to see Steve Waller guitarist and songwriter (ex Manfred Mann), regularly back in the 70s. I recently discovered this video of Steve playing a local pub where he claims to have written the song for Mike d'Abo, see video 13mins 50 secs https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KFPT3q8Is8g&t=309s&ab_channel=Visabilityprods Aberbuddha (talk) 11:09, 23 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Manfred Mann
Talk:Dedicated to the One I Love

message: I put the items in chrono order and made the information more consistent, showing the year first, and including only relevant information. It is my belief that this is just a list of covers, and that overly detailed info (such as was included in the Wilson Phillips entry) belong in a page about that item rather than in this list. --Mfwills (talk) 12:59, 22 December 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Other Versions
Talk:Will You Love Me Tomorrow

message: It seems that (at least) in Germany this song played at wedding ceremonies /parties every now and then. "Will you still love me tomooorrow". They might as well play "D.I.V.O.R.C.E."  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.57.104.181 (talk) 21:11, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  usage as wedding song 

message: The article says the B-side was "Boys", but the illustration of the single says "Soldier Boy". Which is correct? Donald Hosek (talk) 18:44, 3 November 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: "Boys" is correct. The illustration shown is that of a re-released "Will You Love Me Tomorrow" and "Soldier Boy". The original B-side to the chart-topping "Soldier Boy" is "Love Is a Swingin' Thing". Best, --Discographer (talk) 19:10, 3 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  B side? 

message: "Bertell Dache, a black demo singer for the Brill Building songwriters, recorded an answer song entitled "Not just Tomorrow, But Always".[3] It has been erroneously claimed by some historians that Dache was a pseudonym for Epic recording artist Tony Orlando. However, an ad for United Artists Records which appeared in Billboard during 1961 featured a photo of the singer which conclusively proved this to be false."
Conclusively false according to whom? (It's an unsourced claim, by the way.) The photo in itself is hardly definitive proof of anything, as it was common practice in the 60s and 70s pop factories to release songs performed by studio performers and credited to fictitious groups, hire people after the fact to impersonate them at public appearances, etc. Relgif (talk) 13:12, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bertell Dache 

message: I'd be interested to find out who the musicians were who played on this song, aside from Paul Griffin on piano and Gary Chester on drums. I can't find any sources that support the full instrumentation. Does anyone have a good source?--71.200.105.111 (talk) 10:53, 23 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Instrumentation
Talk:Johan Garpenlöv

message: This article has been revised as part of a large-scale clean-up project of multiple article copyright infringement. (See the investigation subpage) Earlier text must not be restored, unless it can be verified to be free of infringement. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions must be deleted. Contributors may use sources as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously. Diannaa (talk) 03:16, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Possible copyright problem
Talk:Skanda

message: The Hindu god is the primary topic for the term Skanda. References - Britannica (Skanda entry), The Concise Oxford Dictionary of World Religions, Encyclopedia.com. As such redirecting this page to Kartikeya, moving this a disambig.
Redtigerxyz  Talk  16:45, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Primary topic 

message: :The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
The result of the move request was: not moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) EggRoll97 (talk)  21:00, 30 March 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Skanda →  – The Hindu god is the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC (especially "long-term significance") for the term Skanda. References - Britannica (Skanda entry), The Concise Oxford Dictionary of World Religions, Encyclopedia.com. As such redirecting this page to Kartikeya, moving this a disambig. Redtigerxyz  Talk  17:56, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 23 March 2024
Talk:Kate Barnard

message: Hey! Someone forgot to put the WikiProject_Oklahoma tag on Kate's page; OK, who was it?  Come on!  Come on!  Fess up!  Don't make me come up there!  OK, let you off the hook for now, but watch it!  ProfessorPaul 03:00, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Adding Kate to "the Project"

message: Hey, I tried to improve this article. Does it look better now?  ProfessorPaul 03:44, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Wikified!
Talk:Gentle on My Mind

message: I've removed the following from the lede.  It needs a citation.  It also seems to have too undue weight for the lede.  If it gets a citation, perhaps it should mentioned in a sentence in the lede and have a paragraph below.
:This song whose authorship is attributed to John Hartford is both harmonically and melodically nearly identical to a substantial portion of Brazilian composer Dorival Caymmi's 1954 version of his song "O Mar" (which also exists in a 1940 version that is orchestrated and more harmonically complex.) That 1940 Brazilian song has a structure of A-B-C-D-D-D-Tag-C, and the three D Sections appear to be the foundation for "Gentle On My Mind" which has the same basic harmonic structure (with some added passing chords) and the same basic melody (with some slight rhythmic variation.) This poses the question as to whether John Hartford was familiar with Dorival Caymmi's 1954 version of Caymmi's own composition "O Mar" and may have subconsciously taken its D-Section melody & harmonies and based his own composition ("Gentle On My Mind") on the earlier Brazilian song.
--John (User:Jwy/talk) 04:06, 7 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Attribution discussion 

message: Patti Page also recorded the song, and Glen Campbell himself re-recorded it as a duet with Bobbie Gentry on the album they did together.  On those two versions, there is a verse I have not heard elsewhere, obviously written for a woman to sing.  Does anyone know if John Hartford wrote that extra verse later, or if someone else wrote it but remained uncredited?  I tried at one time to ask this of Hartford, Campbell, and Al de Lory (who did the arrangement on the Campbell/Gentry version), but they have all died now, and I don't know how to reach Gentry. Rich (talk) 08:00, 21 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Different Verse
Talk:Security alarm

message: "Home Security" links here.  It needs it's own article though.  Home Security and Burglar Alarms are not similar enough to have an ambiguation link.
"Security Systems" should have it's own article too.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Greg.collver (talk • contribs) 04:41, 30 July 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Redirect 

message: The following source is not link spam:
*Bulldog Security Services : Atlanta Home Security
:Then what is it? -Will Beback 20:41, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The source material.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.34.68.186 (talk) 00:35, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sources 

message: Warrenlead (talk) 05:22, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Broadband 

message: There are a bunch of sections describing various types of alarm sensors that end with a conclusion section. This is blatant original research, and should be removed as per WP:SYN. -- Javawizard (talk) 05:09, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Could you site some specific examples? I believe I can fix them (without deletion) if I knew what the specific contended sections are.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.34.68.186 (talk) 00:37, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Original Research 

message: "Burglar (or intrusion), fire, and safety alarms are all electronic today." The opening sounds like something from uncyclopedia. This whole article should be updated.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.27.58.80 (talk) 06:16, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Done, albeit belatedly, 92.236.88.188 (talk) 10:41, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  unprofessional 

message: We don't have an article on silent alarms?  That's what I came here looking for.  I definitely don't get why Silent Alarm (an album) would be the primary topic for that subject.  I had to search to find Silent Alarm (moved), which redirected here.  I don't get why Silent Alarm (moved) redirects to Burglar alarm, as they are commonly used to alert of a robbery, rather than a burglary.  I guess I'll have to go elsewhere to learn about those things, though.  How odd.  Heather (talk) 05:54, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Silent alarms 

message: With the upswing of burglaries pepper spray accessories have come on the market, they are attached to the alarm system and literally bomb or fog specific rooms in a home or business. Would this be a useful update to this entry on Security alarm systems?
One example among several.
BurglarBomb Pepper Spray Home and Business Security Systems.
http://burglarbomb.com/
Rlwright (talk) 02:59, 16 November 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pepper Spray Home and Business Security Systems 

message: Seems to be some text at the top of the page that does not belong, something about a centipede
not sure if intentional; dunno how to remove it either
cheers 107.202.20.112 (talk) 01:59, 8 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Random text 

message: The citations for this article are not consistently formatted; I'm now in the process of sorting them out. Amitchell125 (talk) 19:46, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: References