lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Lew Lehr

message: Before the edit that I just completed, the "External links" section consisted solely of a single reference (behind a paywall, as well) that didn't strictly apply to any of the article's text, at least as far as concerns the free sample text shown by the publisher. I could have deleted it, but I instead moved it to the References section, and then deleted the otherwise empty External links section. It may be useful to someone with the requisite subscription.
If consensus is reached, feel free to delete it. I do not have the subscription to evaluate its usefulness or lack thereof. 1980fast (talk) 04:07, 30 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links section
Talk:Burrell affair

message: This page should be merged with Paul Burrell's page - I don't see the need for separate entries. Smurfmeister 09:25, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I would agree as most of this page is unsourced conjecture and can easily be merged into the Paul Burrell page as there is a definite overlap of information. There needs to be more information however. Fixer23 (talk) 01:02, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge
Category talk:Anabaptism

message: It should be noted that the Australian Anabaptist Association of Australia and New Zealand is an association, not a denomination, and does not represent all Anabaptists groups in Australia such as the Australian Conference of Evangelicals (Australian Mennonite church), and those with a plain anabaptist background such as the Australian Christian Brotherhood and others. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.49.255.112 (talk • contribs) 09:32, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
Talk:Legal professional privilege in Australia

message: A few more ideas for this page:
*LPP extending to tax advisers and accountants
*LPP in relation to statutory disclosures: eg. Freedom of Information, coercive powers & Parliament
*THe AWB case & commissions of inquiry
*Info re previous ALRC inquiries & uniform evidence law --Mkativerata 10:25, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
Wikipedia talk:Meetup/Perth/4

message: I would like to know whether minors would be welcome at the next event, regarding Twenty Years' previous attendance. I probably would not go until I am older by a year or two if approved, though. Auroranorth 10:31, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: For me personally, I'd prefer not to have unaccompanied minors at these events, but others have expressed a more liberal view.  Its possible that Perth/4 will end up at a licensed venue, in which case it becomes more tricky.  The bottom line is, no-one has any authority to stop anyone else attending, and you can be assured that all Wikipedians in good standing will be welcomed courteously. —Moondyne 15:11, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Minors

message: The location for the meeting is the doors to the Alexander Library? Can we think of somewhere more specific with more seating? - Mark 15:07, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll contact the library and see if when can get a meeting room but they arent answering the phone at the moment. Gnangarra 15:12, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Another possibility is one of the many cafes at Northbridge, we could get a table there pretty easily by booking a couple of days ahead. Orderinchaos 16:40, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Location 

message: Given only three of us have responded affirmatively, along with Moondyne's unfortunate injury and my business with week-before-uni stuff, I think it may be a wise choice to consider deferral. What say others? Orderinchaos 20:10, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm up for it.  Is 3 a quorum? —Moondyne 10:03, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

text: I owe some shouts I'll probably be there SatuSuro 10:12, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

text: OK it's on then. Just making sure. :) Orderinchaos 10:31, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Date/time
Talk:Winston Churchill High School (San Antonio)

message: Sam Cangelosi earned 9 letters but he only played 3 sports!  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.154.13.159 (talk) 00:21, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: 9-Sport Letterman?

message: While I appreciate the program's recognition in the article, it is misleading and suggests that there was no program before Naeglin. More research is required to trace the program, e.g., if it had broken down until Naeglin took over. --Brad Eleven (talk) 05:26, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Forensics Program

message: Added Gary C. Kelly, CEO of SWA and WCHS class of 1973 Ken (talk) 05:59, 26 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Added notable alumni 
Talk:North Cornwall Railway

message: Can someone help with the issue of purchasing the Bodmin & Wadebridge "illegally"? The usual terminology is "without parliamentary authority" which is not quite as high-profile. If we are going to say "illegally" we ought to say in what way it was illegal. Was there a specific prohibition on it? Or was it just a general Companies Act rule about buying another company's shares? Was it a prohibition specific to the railway industry, or would it have applied equally if it had been grocery companies involved? Sorry to be asking questions but I can't lay my hands on a copy of Roche's book. 80.6.20.72 11:40, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Yes, this terminology makes me nervous too. The modern day expression is ultra vires. I'll incorporate some words to address that. The article seems imbalanced at present, with a block of history and then a huge amount of detail about certain stations, and the Betjeman quite under Wadebridge station. The weight restriction limitation is right, but the wikilink is to Axle Load which I don't think was the issue -- the cited reference doesn't support the claim. Afterbrunel (talk) 20:52, 24 May 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: An Act of Parliament for a railway usually gave permission for one or more of three things: to incorporate (set up) the company; to raise money (typically 75% by share issue and 25% by bank loan); and to compulsorily purchase land and property over or through which the railway was to run. The first railway amalgamation to be sanctioned by Act of Parliament was that (4 & 5 Will IV cap. xxv) which created the North Union Railway out of the Wigan Branch Railway and the Wigan and Preston Junction Railway. Some railways were built without parliamentary authority, and this usually occurred if the railway company already existed; had sufficient funds to build the line; and also owned all the land over which the line was to pass. --Redrose64 (talk) 21:54, 24 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Illegal
Talk:Pisanica (Croatian)

message: I am not Croatian, so cannot access several of the links provided, but wonder if the Croat language has separate words for raw, intricately decorated eggs meant for ritual purposes and simple cooked, colored eggs meant to be eaten?
This article does not distinguish between the two, and provides almost no information about egg decorating techniques.  It seems to be more a discussion of Easter rituals than the pisanica.Lubap 11:46, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Croatian distinctions

message: How is this Croatian Easter egg so different from all other 160+ Easter celebrating countries' Easter eggs that someon thought it needs a special article in Wikipedia? I'd say in no way whatsoever.
So I suggest to merge this with the Easter egg article, giving prominence to the photographs if needed.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.245.127.172 (talk) 13:02, 28 January 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  What exactly is the purpose of this article?
Talk:Ziggy Pig and Silly Seal

message: This article would seem to satisfy B-class requirements: It's suitably referenced, with inline citations; covers the topic without obvious omissions or inaccuracies; has a defined structure that follows WPC MOS; is well-written in that it has no major grammatical errors and it flows sensibly; it contains illustrations as supporting materials; and is written for a general audience. 
About the only thing it's missing is an infobox, which can be easily remedied and, given the above, wouldn't really seem to be the critical element between B-class and C-class. -- Tenebrae (talk) 06:02, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: B-class

message: As this B-Class article has yet to receive a review, it has been rated as C-Class. If you disagree and would like to request an assesment, please visit Wikipedia:WikiProject_Comics/Assessment#Requesting_an_assessment and list the article. Hiding T  14:58, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: C-Class rated for Comics Project
Talk:Mandatory Integrity Control

message: “A subject IL can also be assigned to the security access token when an object is initialized”. Wouldn't be  “..when an subject is initialized” correct? --Anhtrobote (talk) 16:52, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  mistake? 

message: This is a Windows feature introduced in Windows Vista, right now the article is categorized under Windows Vista and Windows 7. Are we going to categorize the article under every Windows version released after Vista? I don't see Windows Server 2008 or 2008 R2 here, and I would object it to be categorized under Windows 8 --Skyfiler (talk) 20:57, 10 December 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Be bold. Socrates2008 (Talk) 10:55, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  category 
Talk:Red River

message: How are six North American rivers more important than the Asian Red River which is over 1000 km long? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.162.30.75 (talk • contribs) 12:13, 08 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: WTF?! What do you mean, more important? Aren't you glad this page isn't just a redirect to an American river? Gee whiz. I think you're being silly. 170.215.65.87 (talk) 08:47, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Rio rojo. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so.  Anarchyte (talk | work) 12:15, 22 December 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Rio rojo" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]] 
Talk:JLA: Act of God

message: If anyone is wondering, I was trying to edit the Criticism section. I didn't mean to remove the heading so please don't get mad at me.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jwhale9382 (talk • contribs) 02:16, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Criticism section 

message: While I love Linkara's show, I think the critisism section is just a mess. It lacks NPOV, it has nearly no sentance structure and, above all, it just copies from Linkara's review than it does compiles critical reception. I believe a full rewrite is in order. 66.31.76.134 (talk) 02:58, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Grievences 

message: So it's apparent that nothing has come of these discussions, even though they date back nearly a year ago. Can someone provide a good reason why an internet personality's opinion deserves mentioning? Is he a professional? Does he have credentials? Is he widely accepted as a legitimate critic? And besides, isn't he a fictional character? So why have this here?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by BalanceFish (talk • contribs) 07:06, 7 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Once again, the criticism section
Talk:List of web service specifications

message: It shouldn`t be merged, but I think a  link from List of Web service specifications should be put in, as this a core update to SOAP, from the three main folk who 'invented' /defined the original SOAP standard. I will take a look at the article links at Microsoft, IBM and the others and define exactly where the proposed standard sits in relations to WS standards, and see if a link is needed. scope_creep (talk) 12:15, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed merge of GXA into this article
Talk:New cybernetics

message: :This talk item is copied from Talk:New Cybernetics (Gordon Pask)
I started looking for some sources on New Cybernetics, and these are the first I found - Mdd 19:56, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Some sources on New Cybernetics 

message: Hi, Nick. I renewed this article and moved the original article to New Cybernetics (Gordon Pask) as a first step to solve the conflict of interest here. Hereby:
* This article New Cybernetics gives a general introduction of the term "new cybernetics" as used in the theory and practice.
* The specific article New Cybernetics (Gordon Pask) about Gordon Pasks vision on New Cybernetics.
I created this page already on my own because, I think this could be a workable solution. Things are often difficult to foreseen. It is sometimes easier just to create the accual situation and the look what happens... Then you can evaluated and judge the actual new situation. So let me know what you think of this new situation. - Mdd 12:49, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  This article renewed and a new [[New Cybernetics (Gordon Pask)]] article 

message: Due to possible violation of copyright, see WP:Copyvio, I have removed one or more section of this article for now. 
I apologize for all inconvenience I have caused here, see also here. If you would like to assist in improving this article, please let me know. I can use all the help I can get. Thank you.
-- Marcel Douwe Dekker (talk) 19:10, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article section(s) removed
Talk:The Conspiracy of Claudius Civilis

message: Did we have one just now? Johnbod 20:52, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It does, but also reintroduces the material I had added.  Although I'm not sure about some of your language changes, some are certainly correct. All yours now, but please note eg - not his largest painting so far, but ever. Irridescent is how Slive spells it etc. Johnbod 21:07, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I would not like to meddle with the content of the article, nor to be caught up in any controversy. All I did is rephrase some of the sentences and streamline the referencing. Finally, irridescent must be a typo in Slive then: there is no such word. Small matter, admittedly. Bessel Dekker 21:26, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Edit conflict

message: The article states that Claudius Civilis has been in Stockholm since 1795. That is contradicted by one of the Nationalmuseum links which says that it came to Stockholm in 1766. The painting is also depicted hanging on the wall in the background in Elias Martin's painting "Gustav III visits the Academy of Art" from about 1782. Hegvald 21:41, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok, I have amended to "since the 18th century" pending a solid ref. Johnbod 21:48, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll see what other refs I can find. I found a very low-resolution picture of the Martin painting here: http://www.auktionsverket.se/auk106.pdf. There are better pictures available in print, but I am unsure about copyright. Hegvald 22:03, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

text: You can reference things to Nordenfalk regardless, they don't need to be his originally. Johnbod (talk) 09:57, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Arrival in Stockholm

message: I am happy to remove him - you were the one who brought him in int the first place. 
: I did not add Slive, I don't have his book here. I only wanted to mention Cornelis Jan Witsen, because there are hardly any links to him. He seems to be important, causing his bankruptcy. Happily they made up a list of Rembrandt's belongings, which is very important for research, you should not better. It is the best information you can find in the archives on a citizin, when someone goes bankrupt. Dont be so strict, there is enough reliable information in the article. Taksen 09:14, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Wait till I gathered and added more information! Taksen 09:14, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Witsen

message: Greetings--I may be missing something here, but this painting is located in the Rijksmuseum in Amsterdam. I saw it there less than a year ago. Was it only on loan? Can someone please clarify?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.65.139.51 (talk) 15:35, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Location??
Talk:Ascension of Our Lord Secondary School

message: no offence, but this article claims to have been the high school of some important people, but outside of 1 or 2 names, i dont recognize anyone else.  are these people in fact important or names that were added by individuals themselves?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.234.199.142 (talk) 00:04, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Manunggul Jar

message: If the image of the jar lid were ever to be deleted, it ought to be possible to recover something from a small image on the 1000 Peso note.
Another possibility might be to go to the museum and take a digital picture, then to upload it. If that were to occur, then a closeup view of the two figures, especially their eyes and mouths, and also the same eyes and mouth on the prow of the proa would be important evidence.
If there is any more information on the missing paddle or mast, especially a reconstruction, that would be valuable. If evidence for an outrigger were to be found, then that would be important information for  the article. If there were any details about the sail, that would also be important evidence for the history of the Philippines article. I learned of this artifact in 1981 during an exhibit of the jar, at UCLA's turn for the travelling art show, The Art and People of the Philippines. --Ancheta Wis 11:26, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  If the image were ever deleted 

message: Nihiltres, why is there a parenthetical name in the infobox? It was not there in Dec 2010. I will revert it if we don't know why. --Ancheta Wis    (talk  | contribs) 21:49, 10 May 2014
:I don't know where the "(nasser montemayor)" text came from or what it means; probably just as well that it's removed.  18:08, 12 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  question a parenthetical name
Talk:Nagoya Station

message: Can we change the opening year to 1886?  The casual reader might look at "opened: 1999" and assume it was opened in 1999, reasonably enough, without realizing it has been part of the backbone of rail in Japan for over a century.  It burned during the air raids.  If the station before 1999 really was a different station, then I think it should have its own article and a prominent link to it on this one.  I don't want to mess with an important article like this one without some discussion.  What does everyone else think?  Thanks haplo (talk) 04:30, 3 December 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Definitely. We don't normally use the opening date simply to indicate the date when it was last rebuilt, unless, as you say, it was a totally different station (like Shimbashi Station in Tokyo), which is not the case here. I can't lay my hands on a reliable source for the original 1886 opening date right now, but I don't think there is much controversy in using the date given in the Japanese Wiki article. --DAJF (talk) 08:13, 3 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  opening 

message: The station and towers feature prominently in the film Gamera the Brava.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.87.74.55 (talk) 01:52, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Popular Culture Section?
Talk:Claire Verity

message: First para. did not adequately suggest the tenor of the remainder, i.e., that Verity is controversial.  (This very word IS used later, and is even a subheading.)  So I added it.  A question, though: Is there ANYTHING for which Verity is generally respected as an innovator, authority, or responsible promoter? Jmacwiki (talk) 03:23, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Child psychologist Dr Pat Spungin's response to Claire Verity and Bringing Up Baby
What's the general view on this? Links to this site have been previously queried as a spam issue, and I think it does look a little spammy to bring in a ref that hasn't been mentioned in the media coverage and doesn't actually verify the statement about the e-petition it references. Gordonofcartoon 19:39, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It was certainly added in the wrong place as it had nothing to do with the e-petition.  But I don't know how well-respected raisingkids.co.uk or Dr Pat Spungin are - sorry I can't be more helpful. Mattmm 20:43, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Possible reference/link

message: The article Truby King doesnt quickly indicate what his methods were, and it does describe some strange ideas and the resulting controversies.  So, if Claire Verity specialises in the "Truby King" method, what is it? Does it warrant being mentioned in the first sentence?  We arnt the only people to prominently link her to Truby King:
* "[she] practises the rigid methodology of Truby King"
* "Miss Verity advocates the rigid methodology of Truby King"
There are more, but ideally we want a quote from herself saying she advocates those methods. John Vandenberg (chat) 04:37, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: "My approach is based on the ideas of Fifties childcare 'guru' Truby King, a New Zealander, whose views influenced a generation of post-war mothers." - from this article (currently Ref 6 on the page). Privatemusings (talk) 05:14, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: (I've done some further work on this on a 'mentoring' user subpage of mine) Privatemusings (talk) 07:03, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Truby King" 

message: Very little of the information in this article is supported by its few sources so I've placed a template on it as of today. XeCyranium (talk) 03:30, 1 February 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lack of sources
Talk:China Investment Corporation

message: I have attempted to wikify the article. Categorized information and trying to make more sense.
--Zhongxin 13:37, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: For addition to article: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/02/08/AR2010020803681.html AniRaptor2001 (talk) 10:35, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: SEC Report

message: isn't CIC more like singapore's Government Investment Corporation (GIC)?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_of_Singapore_Investment_Corporation
Temasek is a holding company which was created to manage public company asset the country has. it does not receive further funding from the government and is more of an instrument of privatization. it makes investment from profits generated from it's asset or buy selling them.
while GIC is to manage the national currency reserved. also their name give it away too.
Akinkhoo (talk) 10:35, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Temasek Holdings? 

message: Someone has added
Liverpool FC, August 5th, 2010, $900 Million, 97% stake[22]
with a fake reference.
This is pure speculation as there has not even been offered a bid from CIC yet.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.202.166.200 (talk) 09:42, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Holdings 

message: The island is beginning to boil over and a dedicated section of their activities might be of value.--Wikipietime (talk) 14:14, 4 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Special Section for Manhattan 
Talk:Tubbataha Reef

message: If the US Navy grounding is worth mentioning, what about the greenpeace vessel ? 12.238.5.243 (talk) 15:28, 18 January 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: The Greenpeace incident is already mentioned in the article. --Jojit (talk) 07:38, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

message: Is the national park website the best source for the following claim "tubbataha reef is the global center of marine biodiversity"? Certainly the park has a vested interest in playing up its importance. DouglasCalvert (talk) 03:18, 9 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Global center of marine biodiversity 

message: Does anyone have a source on the amount of species of marine life inhabiting the coral reef?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 135.23.48.66 (talk) 17:54, 25 March 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ecology Question