lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:This Is Hell (band)

message: The result was merge into This Is Hell. -- Futurano 09:43, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: [[This Is Hell (EP)]] merge

message: despite my 500+ edits, this was my first time writing more than a few sentences. i figured a good place to practice would be on a smaller page that does not get much attention and a page that i know something about. i welcome corrections and criticism! its how i can learn about wikipedia without reading all the rules. thanks! Fezmar9 (talk) 05:28, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  new history section 
Talk:1953 Cincinnati Redlegs season

message: This page 1) implies that the name was changed from the Reds to the Redlegs for the 1953 season only, and 2) that the name was changed because of rampant anti-communist sentiment.  In response to 1): The announcers of the 1956 game to which I just listened referred to the team as the Redlegs.  In response to 2): A reference for the reason behind the name change is not provided.  I hope that someone can add reliable sourced material to this article...... Oh, wait, I see what's going on with #1: each season has its own Wiki page.  That seems kinda wacky to me. Molasseskat (talk) 01:11, 11 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Restigouche-Chaleur

message: * Village of Belldune: 189.03 km2
* Village of Pointe-Verte: 13.79 km2
* Village of Petit Rocher: 4.49 km2
* Village of Nigadoo: 7.69 km2
* Town of Beresford: 19.20 km2
Area of towns/villages in district: 234.2 km2
* Parish of Beresford: 455.93 km2
About half of this is in the district, but annoyingly, I can't be exact about it. -Wmcduff (talk) 12:46, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Got an e-mail from Elections NB saying that N-C is 406 km2.  Citation needed, of course...but sounds about right... :) - Wmcduff (talk) 20:01, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Area of the District
Talk:Albert (provincial electoral district)

message: I propose that this article be split in two, moving all parts from 1846-1974 to a new page Albert (1846-1974 provincial electoral district). The plurality-at-large riding before 1974 is significantly different than the first-past-the-post riding from 1974 onward, as a significant portion was split off into Riverview. FUNgus guy (talk) 21:17, 23 November 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  split this article? 
Talk:2006 New Brunswick electoral redistribution

message: I made some small corrections to the article and removed the list at the end, but I think this article needs some more attention.  Some information appears more than once, appears outdated (Section Preliminary report: These proposals will be taken to the public in a series of hearings in January 2006, and may be subject to change before the commission tables its final report on February 18, 2006.) or could be organized in a more efficient form (one big table?).  Also some things remain unclear (Section Preliminary report: There are five essentially new districts, three of which resulting from a merger of previous districts or large parts of previous districts.  Defending my not restyling the article myself I will note that I know next to nothing about the subject. --StevenDH (talk) 03:18, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Chaotic article
Talk:Renewal theologian

message: Please be aware that deleting persons from the list of Renewal Theologians is both subjective (who qualifies, only those you know?) and is counterproductive to the design of this article, which "is part of WikiProject Charismatic Christianity, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Pentecostalism, the Charismatic movement and its relatives and offshoots on Wikipedia." -http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Renewal_theologian It can't be comprehensive or detailed if we delete from lack of knowledge or prejudice.Nelson505
Actually, I think that we could come up with an objective criteria of who a Renewal theologian is. Those I deleted may have belonged on some list, but not on the same list with those named. It does not take a great deal of checking to determine the identity of a named individual. If you would like to discuss, please discuss on the Renewal theolgians discussion page. Theriddles 03:37, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

message: This article has no sources, which isn't good. Aside from that, it should either be called Renewal theologian (which has now been done, moved from Renewal theologians per WP:PLURAL) or List of renewal theologians. Is there any intent for this article to be anything other than a list of individuals??--Jeffro77 (talk) 22:07, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Move article 

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. (non-admin closure) Natg 19 (talk) 02:14, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Renewal theologian →  – The page is practically a list and there is no trend to change it Pestalozzi90 (talk) 21:19, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

text: Note: WikiProject Christianity has been notified of this discussion.  ASUKITE 19:48, 4 October 2023 (UTC)

text: Relisting comment: Relisted due to lack of participation (while you're here, maybe consider expanding the article :) )  ASUKITE 19:49, 4 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 25 September 2023
Talk:King African mole-rat

message: I'm not sure if this is just my computer, but how come the article's title is in italics? --Hadger 20:58, 20 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: See User talk:Ucucha#The Article you Nominated. Ucucha 21:03, 20 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh. I understand now. --Hadger 22:26, 20 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article Name
Talk:Marley Davidson

message: I came to this page from a couple of others-- should it still be tagged as a page with two few/no links to it? so far I see:
New York City blackout of 1977 ‎ (links)
Vampire hunter ‎ (links)
Exorcism ‎ (links)
The notability tag needs consideration too, I was going to create a page for this series and  a couple of others like captain Kronos until I saw it was here linked under vampire hunters alreday, -this comic book has been the subject of panels at the anarchist bookfair, and the  Howl Festival, flyers for it have been in the display windows at Forbidden Planet in New York.
( Jon Hamm's Ham Radio 14:54, 21 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is this page still really an orphan? 
Talk:New Brunswick electoral redistribution

message: :Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *Support or *Oppose, then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's naming conventions.
:I would interpret redistribution as a mass noun, which would reverse the grammatical argument presented above. Is there evidence that Canadians adopt a different grammar in this instance? --Stemonitis 07:38, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Survey
Talk:Goons

message: I believe having Goons redirect to The Goon show is a pretty narrow scope, I have found myself forgetting the name of said forums remembering only that they are called goons and searching for it here on Wikipedia, only to find myself at a Television show.
I think it's useful to have the additional information here.  Robbertom 17:06, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Nothin' wrong with building a disambig here if you can come up with a third item, but if there's only two, it's better to have a selfref in the redirect target pointing at the second one. Disambig pages with only two links are regularly deleted and redirected. MrZaiustalk 17:11, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Untitled
Talk:MM Mickey Mouse Mystery Magazine

message: In April 2023, User:BoomboxTestarossa added a :Template:POV tag to the page, which says "The neutrality of this article is disputed." There was no explanation on the talk page. I don't know what could possibly be non-neutral on the page; it basically just says that the comic exists. There's nothing to disagree with. I'm taking the POV tag off, but I'm happy to talk about it with anyone who has thoughts about it. Toughpigs (talk) 22:57, 16 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title: Neutrality?
Talk:Pollen analysis

message: Just wondering if maybe we can blend this with the palynology section a bit better.  The two overlap quite a bit.  The palynology section has some of the same "history" but seems to have more detail on the actual mechanics of the study.  Stealth cat 17:09, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Please merge, and make this a redirect, as far as I am concerned.  This article is poorly written, but has some details.  I can't see where it says anywhere that "pollen analysis" is anything but palynology.  KP Botany 19:38, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Merged and redirect to palynology Plantdrew (talk) 06:01, 6 November 2013 (UTC)
Talk:Grind

message: (stupid) question: do you pronounce it /gr i nd/ or /gra i nd/.
i know i'm not clear. i can read phonetics  but cannot write it.
The word is pronounced to rhyme with kind, mind or find.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.174.169.10 (talk) 14:11, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

message: Perhaps this article should be merged with Blade? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blade I was trying to remember the term used for the cross-section of a sword and spent quite the effort on Google trying to recall the term. Sonictk 12:59, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Move this article to "Blade"? 

message: I propose thatBlade geometry be merged into Grind. Most of its content seems to be in reference to this one, and it could add a historical perspective on the subject. Rody1990 (talk) 00:17, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge "Blade Geometry" into this one
Talk:World Beer Cup

message: This list is too long to navigate with ease. The major awards could be kept as Gold, Silver and Bronze - the others could be trimmed back to the Gold. Are there major awards - or are all awards seen as equal? SilkTork *YES! 23:23, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Trimming

message: I came here looking for info on the World Beer Cup after seeing the Miller Lite ad touting the beer's multiple wins at the Cup. I am very disappointed at the poor quality of the article. Many categories have no awards listed for 2010. Why? The very abbreviated introduction mentions the 2008 Cup's location and dates, but nothing on the 2010 Cup. The links at the bottom of the article are all dead.
Not very helpful! 75.161.180.87 (talk) 02:38, 30 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Needs a lot of work 

message: The link for the 2012 results: http://www.worldbeercup.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/WBC12-Winners-List1.pdf stobs (talk) 12:26, 14 June 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Update 2012
Talk:List of aircraft engines used by the Imperial Japanese Army Air Service

message: It appears this article substantially duplicates Japanese_aircraft_engine_identification_systems#Table of japanese aero-engine designations.  When there are two lists that purport to have the same content, one is automatically wrong. Which list is the gold standard?
The wikilink to List of Aircraft engines used by Japanese Navy Air Service refirect to this article. That is pointless. Rhadow (talk) 17:32, 23 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Duplication of content 

message: Hello Kving -- You are absolutely correct. "No references, no article," is not a policy. I suggest that an article that substantially duplicates another since 2006 without any references whatsoever is without value to an encyclopedia. This Army article is a redirect from a similarly titled Navy article and practically the same table is found in Japanese aircraft engine identification systems. This is so unbelievably frustrating for me.   I'll toss this effort into the pile of Articles from 2006 so plainly self-evident that they are exempt from WP:V.  Rhadow (talk) 21:20, 27 November 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Let's have this discussion at AfD. Would you like me to nominate it on your behalf? ~Kvng (talk) 04:26, 28 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[WP:DEPROD]]
Talk:Ultimate fact

message: Is there a reason why this article is capitalized like this? Normal Wikipedia procedure is to use lowercase throught (except the first character) unless the article title is a proper noun; for example Common law. DJ Clayworth (talk) 20:53, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: No, there is no reason and it has now been fixed. Aboutmovies (talk) 22:32, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Capitalization

message: The entire last paragraph seems out of place. I searched for People v. Murphy, and the case that is referred to isn't even the first result among cases with that name. I also cannot find any scholarly source that explains why it is a 'classic case', or even any scholarly article that refers to the case at all. 
In addition, the final paragraph seems disjoint with the article. It doesn't connect the facts of the case to the concept of ultimate fact in any way. I would recommend that the paragraph be removed, seeing as it doesn't provide any useful amplifying information related to the topic of the article, and there is no evidence that it is a 'classic case.'
Danielmjohnston (talk) 02:56, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  'Classic case' example seems like an editorial opinion
Talk:Sonoma chipmunk

message: — Assignment last updated by Davidxyao (talk) 06:28, 11 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: California Natural History

message: Hello! This is to let editors know that :File:Sonoma chipmunk_at_Samuel_P._Taylor_State_Park.jpg, a featured picture used in this article, has been selected as the English Wikipedia's picture of the day (POTD) for December 26, 2023. A preview of the POTD is displayed below and can be edited at Template:POTD/2023-12-26. 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!  — Amakuru (talk) 23:25, 16 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Featured picture scheduled for POTD
Talk:Lodgepole chipmunk

message: Nick,
Wow you did an excellent job at providing new information on this species. I thought overall the article was very well-written and extremely detailed. Perhaps you could find out how long these chipmunks live to be? That is the only thing I could find that would interest me as well. 
-Lauren  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lwleiden (talk • contribs) 02:20, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  BISC 350 Review 
Talk:Himalayan striped squirrel

message: There is some variation in the spelling of Dr McClelland's name after whom the species is named. In the type reference (Proc. Zool. Soc. Lond., 1839: 152.) Horsfield clearly uses the spelling McClelland.
Orenburg1 (talk) 07:43, 3 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Species name
Talk:Earl Gregg Swem

message: This is a hagiography, and the tone should be amended throughout to comply with :Wikipedia:Neutrality. Alex Middleton 10:43, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: POV notice

message: I'd like to get confirmation as to whether Swem was a W&M faculty member. It sounds like he was "Librarian" at a time when that title was analogous with modern library deans, so it's likely he was. If so, we can categorize him more accurately. --BDD (talk) 20:02, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Faculty status

message: I came across this page while linking to one of his earlier works, a 1918 compilation of Virginia legislators since 1776. I was surprised to see two photos removed. Given his date of death, I would think that non-copyrighted photos exist, but don't have the time to look. I know the College of William and Mary cooperates with wikipedia. Hint. Hint.Jweaver28 (talk) 18:05, 4 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Photo? 

message: I added an image of Swem which is allowed on Wikipedia under Fair Use. However, it can't be imported to Wikidata. Since the infobox is automagically importing Swem's details from Wikidata, I can't add this image there. Is there a nice solution to this besides rewriting the infobox? Thanks Jessamyn (talk) 01:45, 12 December 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Wikipedia photo can't be added to Wikidata and thus can't be added to infobox
Talk:Simucad

message: Eamonnca1, you did not address the concerns that the tags raise.
*This article isn't blatant adspam, but it's almost entirely a product listing which likely breaks WP:NOT. 
*Adding a link to another article does not indicate notability, especially when that article itself has only a single primary source and makes no assertion of notability. There is currently nothing whatsoever to indicate this passes WP:CORP. It is necessary to provide reliable secondary sources which have devoted significant coverage to this company or its products to establish notability.
*Are you associated with this company? Please be careful of WP:COI while contributing if so.
Doctorfluffy (talk) 19:38, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Tag removal
Talk:The Rime of King William

message: Or link to a Wikisource copy. 27 lines shouldn't be too much for the article, though. -LlywelynII (talk) 06:20, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: It can be found at wikiquote. .  A translation, both or Middle English?Synchronism (talk) 06:54, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

text: Actually it's not there, I thought it was.  But there is a translation of its contents here .Synchronism (talk) 07:00, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: But that one doesn't seem to use that part of the Peterborough chronicle. I know that it's reprinted in the Neophilologus article, if you can access it, I can't right now.Synchronism (talk) 07:14, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Needs original poem
Talk:Mountain pocket gopher

message: — Assignment last updated by Ehaw13 (talk) 00:47, 9 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: California Natural History

message: I plan to expand the information on the mountain pocket gopher with sections on diet, reproduction, behavior, and a little bit more about their characteristics. I also plan to change the image to one more clear. Ehaw13 (talk) 22:33, 17 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Planned Changes
Talk:Plains viscacha rat

message: Wait, I just saw a slightly worse article with a picture at Plains Viscacha.  Can someone clear this up? Cupy 52040 (talk) 08:27, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: That is a different species, belonging to a different family. Ucucha 13:30, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: A good point was recently made "people who were dead in 1895 tend not to describe new species in 1941". I have, however, restored George Newbold Lawrence as the authority because I suspect it might be correct. Perhaps a zoologist can check into this. As a botanist, my understanding of the zoological code of nomenclature is very limited, but I think zoologists do have a mechanism that allows weird listings such as the name of the person who first described the species, followed by the date when somebody else moved it to a different genus. (Further comments about the relative sanity of the botanical code omitted to save space.) Nadiatalent (talk) 13:34, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: They don't. I would find it advisable to make sure what I put in a Wikipedia article is right before putting it in that article. A cursory investigation was enough to determine that the actual Lawrence who described this species was a B. Lawrence, and in fact Barbara Lawrence (1909–1997, but not Barbara Lawrence), who worked at the Museum of Comparative Zoology. Ucucha 13:42, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: It's great now. Sorry to doubt you. I looked at your talk page and there was such a lot of general stuff that I thought you might just be guessing. Anyway, it is excellent now. Nadiatalent (talk) 13:49, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: It's true there is a quite deplorable lack of rodents on my talk page. Fortunately, my user page is a little better. Well, it's correct now. Ucucha 13:55, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Authority name for this species 

message: The part about ploidy is quite confusing and has been incorporated into other articles. Someone please look at it.88.157.194.238 (talk) 15:34, 24 June 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree... at first it states the species is tetraploid, but then foes on about how it has some characteristic that makes it not "truly" tetraploid. Is it tetraploid or not? Or was it a "true" tetraploid that is now having its redundant chromosomes drift apart genetically? Someone should figure this out... SarrCat ∑;3 20:24, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I've edited the text to hopefully make it clearer. The summary appears to be that whether or not the species is tetraploid remains controversial. I don't know where the debate currently stands, but the current text at least reflects what the sources already cited in the article actually say. Having said which, the most recent source cited is from 2006, so it is possible that things have moved on since. Anaxial (talk) 20:43, 11 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ploidy
Talk:African striped ground squirrel

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: no consensus. (non-admin closure) Extraordinary Writ (talk) 18:11, 8 September 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Euxerus erythropus →  – move species page to the most widespread common name; the disambiguation page for "striped ground squirrel" can surely be renamed something else Geekgecko (talk) 05:03, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

text: This is a contested technical request (permalink). Anthony Appleyard (talk) 09:44, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

text: Note: WikiProject Rodents has been notified of this discussion.  — Shibbolethink (♔ ♕) 11:38, 20 August 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 17 August 2021
Talk:Greater Moncton

message: Maybe this should redirect to the Moncton article..? ScarTissueBloodBlister (talk) 00:35, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Probably. There's no such legal entity as "Greater Moncton", although there is the census metropolitan area, used for the census. --Cornellier (talk) 05:20, 30 December 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Cameroon scaly-tail

message: After clarification by , I have re-inserted the images I had previously removed because of copyright concerns. All images are from PeerJ publications and thus licensed under a Creative Commons license and suitable for Wikipedia. Apologies for being completely unaware of this fact. - I have removed extended source information from the original figure legends and will insert it into the image data on Commons. (For preceding discussion, please see the talk pages of the involved editors: User_talk:Heritage_S, User_talk:Elmidae#Cameroon_scaly-tail_.28edits.29) -- Elmidae (talk · contribs) 12:44, 27 August 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Image licensing
Talk:Herpestes

message: Ok, what's your deal with me adding a subsection? Ddum5347 (talk) 16:27, 4 April 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Subsection 

message: can we just vote a lead img? Some1 {talk} 15:39, 11 March 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Showing an image of the type species in the taxobox is the most appropriate. – BhagyaMani (talk) 17:09, 11 March 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  lead img