lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Dicta Boelcke

message: Can someone tell me why this article keeps referring to planes as 'machines' seems like an odd word to use. If there is no good reason/objections I am happy to replace it to clean the article up. :) --Curuxz (talk) 14:43, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Its a reasonable point; I know what you mean.  At the time, using 'machine' to describe an aircraft was very common and it seems to have stuck throughout the years in a lot of WW1 Aviation literature, which is a bit odd really - maybe it gives a bit of an 'olde worlde" touch.  I personally wouldn't have thought its worth going to a lot of trouble cleaning up on that basis but that's not to say there's not a lot of editing that could justifiably be done on the article. I'd say it is too wordy. Scoop100 (talk) 17:12, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I have some old storypapers from the 1890's / 1900's in which bicycles are also referred to as "machines". I suppose it was just the style of the times. Oddly i don't think i have ever seen a car referred to in the same way (though in the 1940's the bizarre word "Flivver" was popular!) 82.153.230.147 (talk) 23:36, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: "Maschine" is still contemporary German for airplanes. If that's unusual for English (I cannot tell, really, being native German myself), perhaps this is an issue of too-literal translation? -- 145.228.61.5 (talk) 12:27, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: In English it was originally short for "flying machines" - hasn't been that common (even in England) for many years, but as people have mentioned, this is an historical article. We don't use "planes" (the style manual says it's too colloquial) - "aeroplanes" is frequently objected to by U.S. users, while "airplanes" is regarded as a Yankee illiteracy by non U.S. English speakers. "Aircraft" is of course a "trans-Atlantic" word, but alas, it's ambiguous, especially in an historical context. So what will you? We are divded, alas, by a common language. --Soundofmusicals (talk) 23:29, 8 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  machines?
Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Archive (sexuality)

message: Yikes Sam, did you call the APA gay? Hyacinth 22:46, 5 May 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: No, he called them homosexual. Remember, there's a difference. ;) Snowspinner 22:48, 5 May 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: LOL... you guys got a laugh out of me on that one, I will admit :) Sam Spade 23:32, 5 May 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: APA gay?
Talk:Wakefield, New Zealand

message: I am not convinced that the story about the naming of the town is true which is why I left it ambiguous in the original version of this article.
ping 07:37, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I've rewritten that part and added a source. Schwede66 20:31, 13 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Marlboro Man

message: You have the Marlboro man. What about trying a Marlboro woman? She doesn't have to be extremely big,like the Marlboro man is. 174.251.66.36 (talk) 05:29, 19 August 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  What about a Marlboro woman? 

message: FREDERICK JAMES SMITH
IM HIS DAUGHTER.... 181.197.52.144 (talk) 18:31, 29 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Origional Marlboromam artist
Talk:Loud Guitars, Big Suspicions

message: This album title was first self-produced (I believe) and released by Pop Sense (#2505) on April 27th, 1999. 
Track list: 
1. Few and Far Between
2. No Riders
3. That's How it Feels
4. I Don't Make Promises (I Can't Break)
5. Love Me Like That
6. Hard to Make a Stand
7. I'm Coming Home
8. Never Enough
9. True Friends
10. Musta Been Love
11. Real Bad Feeling. 
Per http://web.archive.org/web/20010426002650/www.shannoncentral.com/popsense.html & http://www.musicstack.com/item/228750996 71.164.128.167 (talk) 23:07, 15 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pop Sense
Talk:APS underwater rifle

message: Night Gyr's last edit "23:10, 17 February 2006 Night Gyr (merged in fictional content and tagged original research, the statements about frogmen and such need citations)".
I cannot have done any original research on this subject, as I have never fired or handled an APS  rifle anywhere and I have never fired any firearm underwater.
Is the query about this paragraph?:- "It has appeared in fiction, such as the role playing game Twilight 2000, which included an American made copy known as the Mk 37 Mod 0 Underwater Assault Rifle or Frogman Stinger. However, no American version of the weapon is known to exist in the real world."
Anthony Appleyard 22:13, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Alleged "original research"

message: * The base cartridge would seem to be the 5.45x39mm best known for use in the AK-74 and its many derivatives (not the 7.62x39mm used in the AK-47).  More importantly, the APS is known to have been designed by Simonov, not Kalashnikov.  The unique problems associated with firing underwater and the creative solutions necessary to solve them would seem to point to this being a stand-alone design, not "derived" from any particular existing weapon and certainly not from a Kalashnikov design; that is at best an insult to V. Simonov.  Thus, it seems quite obvious that the APS is wholly unique and not a "derivative of the AK47"; that statement is certainly misleading and, I believe, incorrect.  
Nwilde (talk) 03:43, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  AK-47 Based? 

message: * Look what that japanese Black Lagoon (anime) bigtits scuba Bond Girl is clutching:
*: http://tomopop.com/ul/10328-/c097-550x.jpg  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.82.34.26 (talk) 22:22, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  From Russia with loli 

message: I'm hoping that the new name will stick, but in case it doesn't here are some observations.
Firstly, strictly this isn't a rifle at all. It's a smoothbore.
But second and most important, this sort of accuracy issue (and the sort that seems to have motivated the RM above) is not terribly relevant according to official Wikipedia article name policy. What we're primarily interested in is what people do call it, not what they should call it however well that might be argued. What they should call it is a topic for discussion and promotion elsewhere on the WWW, but not at Wikipedia. Here we just reflect what is accomplished elsewhere. Andrewa (talk) 15:29, 13 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Article title

message: * See http://venturebeat.com/2013/06/09/call-of-duty-ghosts-underwater-guns-actually-work-in-real-life . Someone saw APS's in game footage for the Call of Duty: Ghosts videogame and routinely thought that were videogame fictional weapons; then he watched game footage being filmed and so found that working APS's exist in the real world also. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 13:43, 31 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Not only fictional
Category talk:Logic

message: :Note the prior discussion on :Category talk:Formal logic
User:Isaac_Rabinovitch and myself are involved in a dispute over whether we should have a :Category:Formal logic, following my failed attempt to put it up for Categories for Deletion.  I'll put my argument here; Isaac will, I assume, follow shortly.
The problems with the category are:
# Logic is an integral whole, where topics in formal and informal logic closely mirror each other, and it helps navigation to see similar topics side by side;
# Many topics in logic do not neatly divide into formal and informal, but instead treat the two side-by-side.  If we have a subcategory formal logic, should these mixed topics go in or not?  Since it is not a clean criterion for division we are best not using it for breaking up the logic category;
# As far as possible subcategories should be orthogonal to each other.  Formal logic cuts across many subcategories (eg. :Category:Modal logic, :Category:Paradoxes,  and :Category:Philosophical logic) raising more issues of classification that will not be obvious to the user;
# Since the category does not help classification, it's main effect would be to add degrees of remoteness between related subjects.
Hence I think we would be better off without such a category. --- Charles Stewart 18:42, 20 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Should we have [[:Category:Formal logic]]? 

message: I think a bunch of articles in :Category:Logic (but not all of them) belong rather in :Category:Mathematical logic. I tried to move some of them, but ran out of breadth. Any help would be appreciated. Oleg Alexandrov 02:03, 3 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[:Category:Mathematical logic]]
Talk:The Ozzman Cometh

message: I believe the title is a reference to this play. Does anyone else know about this, because I'm not 100% sure.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.119.45.21 (talk) 03:04, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Iceman Cometh 

message: #"Fairies Wear Boots" (Osbourne, Iommi, Butler, Ward) - 29:50
#*Previously unreleased. A newer version than this can be found on Paranoid
#"Behind the Wall of Sleep" (Osbourne, Iommi, Butler, Ward) - 22:50
#*Previously Unreleased. A newer version than this can be found on Black Sabbath
Are they really that long?
The Laxative (talk) 12:37, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fairies Wear Boots/Behind the Wall of Sleep 
Talk:National Trust for Historic Preservation

message: Should mention be made of the controversy surrounding the demolition of the St. Louis Century Building?  Ajacksb 19:46, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Demolition controversy

message: I bought Valspar paint at Lowe's that is marked National Trust For Historic Preservation. The Wikipedia article makes no mention of why paint would have this marking but the NTHP site does if you know to look for it: http://www.preservationnation.org/about-us/partners/corporate-partners/valspar/. Since the paint generates income for NTHP, is it worthwhile to mention it in the Wikipedia entry?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.203.251.45 (talk) 06:44, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Personally, I don't find it signifcant enough to mention. Multiple organizations or businesses do the same thing with various products. →Wordbuilder (talk) 14:02, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Historic Paint Colors

message: Hello! I'm an editorial assistant for the National Trust, and I was looking to make a factual update to our organization's logo and website. I understand that organizations and companies are discouraged from editing their own pages, so I was wondering if anyone would be interested in making these updates for me? This is our updated website: https://savingplaces.org/ and I can send you assets for our logo if you'd like to fix it. If you have any other recommendations for the page, you are more than welcome to edit it! We were thinking of removing our 11 Most  Endangered Historic Places list, since that changes yearly and could be difficult to keep up with. Thanks for your time!
Carson Bear at National Trust (talk) 14:59, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. DS (talk) 22:30, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edits to National Trust Logo and Website 

message: Is anyone sure about the motto because I can not find any source on that and it is not mentioned on their website  — Preceding unsigned comment added by TheMajora12 (talk • contribs) 05:30, 8 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Motto
Talk:A Change of Seasons

message: I edited the track listing into a table as a temporary fix as previoustly you could not tell each track apart (as the track numbers were centred and there were no borders.)  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.193.166.29 (talk) 13:24, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: TACK LISTING

message: An edited version of what song? Beeeej (talk) 05:51, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Trivia

message: Hey there!
5. "Mike Portnoy's Instagram account". Instagram. November 16, 2022.
cites Mike Portnoy's instagram account as the only reference for the statement, "The back cover has a calendar displaying the date November 16, the date Portnoy's mother died." 
Per  WP:UGC social media posts aren't reliable sources-- even though I'm certain this is a correct statement, I'm sure there's a better source for it hanging around somewhere. I'll remove the source from the reflist. : ) 
  Atomic putty? Rien!  15:49, 24 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Howdy! It's the reliable source police ^-^
Talk:The Best of New Order

message: http://www.billboard.com/articles/news/58848/ask-billboard
in the article it is hinted, that it sold well
here is a number
428,000 in the USA  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.204.139.32 (talk) 18:04, 26 August 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  sales numbers USA
Talk:Main Street/Archive 1

message: Shouldn't Main street be entirely in capital letters?  Combuchan 10:16, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. I have never seen it written as "Main street."  Whether used generically or in reference to a particular one, it is always "Main Street."  I am moving the article.  --Coolcaesar 13:28, 20 August 2005 (UTC)
Talk:Paul Sauvé

message: I've tightened up the wording on this, and tried to reduce some of the POV. Kevintoronto 11:50, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: I have assessed this as Start Class, as it contains more detail and organization than would be expected of a Stub, and of low importance, as I do not feel that many people outside of Canada would be familiar with the subject of the article. Cheers, CP 17:33, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Assessment
Talk:N-Ethyltryptamine

message: Why do we need an article about N-ethyltryptamine? It is not very interesting pharmacology-wise. Maybe we should put it onto another page like 'various tryptamines' or 'tryptamine intermediates'. I have removed it from the Tryptamines template. Cacycle
I think this article should be deleted. There is no content beside a structural image and the compound has no interesting properties (at least no known ones). It is just a chemical like billion others. Cacycle 20:29, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Yep, it should be deleted. Reckon somebody added it because it's from TiHKAL, but it's indeed non-notable pharmacology-wise. 80.203.115.12 22:16, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Talk:Folk music in the United Kingdom

message: Sorry I don't have enough information to be able to do a section on Welsh music.
I am very unsure about the format of timelines. I hope this doesn't upset too many people.
Ogg 13:16, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: There are many things wrong with this page
*Can the Timeline of trends in music from the United Kingdom page, and some of the pages linked from it, be rescued? I feel that these particular pages have been untouched for so long, that users have forgotten about them, so in essence they have been lost and information has been put elsewhere. Maybe it is best to delete the page altogether? --Montchav 18:52, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Deletion/Merging/redirecting 

message: I was bold, and moved everything from this page onto other pages - all information is now at Template:English folk music and Template:Scottish music. The rationale was that this page itself contained nothing but links to other pages. It was redirected to Folk Music of England because that was the most-related page. I personally am glad to get rid of the page, as it annoyed me in so many ways --Montchav 10:03, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Merging
Talk:Practice Statement

message: yes i do agree but i think it should have been available to court of appeal instead of them having to rely heavily on the young criteria
if the court of appeal was able to use the pratice statment as well as the house of lords, fair enough law reform would take place a lot quicker, but the united kindgon would have no last resort court to make an overall decision, and the hierarchy of the courts would be in disarray.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.144.161.178 (talk) 18:33, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Do you agree with Lord Gardiner's practice statement 1966?
Talk:Lackey (manservant)

message: greetings all...
to whoever found the dates of origin for the term lackey...  I have been working on a project about this name for quite some time, and would greatly appreciate any bibliographic info you could give me.
Aisling
: should be Cited anyways.. --Streaky 15:28, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

message: There is a disambig page for lackey - shouldn't the 'other uses' be referenced there rather than in a section for it's meaning? --Streaky 15:29, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Other uses?? 

message: The term was widely used in Communist propaganda, especially imperialist lackey. Norvo (talk) 00:23, 11 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Use in Communist Propaganda
Talk:United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement

message: I've heard that ICE is the largest law enforcement agency in the world in terms of personnel. Anyone know if that's true or have a reference for that? - Walkiped 14:40, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: So ICE isn't even close. Thanks for checking it out. - Walkiped 21:23, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Wikipedia talk:Requests for arbitration/Shorne and Fred Bauder

message: [In response to Jwr's change of vote from Abstain to Accept]
#:What bullshit! You obviously did not even read the discussion. In any case, I completely reject this kangaroo court, which has consistently failed to answer my numerous questions about the lack of my response to my own cases brought against VeryVerily. I do not recognise the jurisdiction of this band of "arbitrators", of which POV-pusher Fred Bauder is a member. Go ahead and ban me; that's obviously what you intend to do. Shorne 03:14, 5 Nov 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Added material from Requests for Arbitration
Talk:The Gilded Palace of Sin

message: ...and are smart enough to repaint it and file off the serial numbers.
Good LORD, how much of this "Wikipedia article" is just outright theft from other sources?? The Recording and composition chunk is pasted-together bits, poorly attributed, and most likely without permission of any sort.
Weeb Dingle (talk) 06:40, 3 February 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: amateurs borrow, professionals steal
Talk:Road to Ruin (Ramones album)

message: Hi, the second paragraph of the lead section of this article especially I feel could use work. It's uncited, and just focuses on asserting that fans and critics alike consider the album an attempt to get more airplay. And it wraps it up with "this attempt by the band failed". This doesn't come across as unbiased or fair to me. The opening paragraph was much more balanced, with positive as well. Pointing out that "I Wanna Be Sedated" became one of their most well known songs. 
I also feel the article could mention more of the album's legacy. How it's a fan favorite, and the reception part of the article points out some people love it, so why doesn't the opening lead section do that too? Since it mentions aspects of the reception, but mainly the negative aspect for some reason. Plus, sales does not equal reception, why would music history on wikipedia be so focused on the money aspect? But I digress there.
Stuff like how "I wanna be sedated" went on to become a hit with a music video a decade later for Ramones Mania, is featured in movies like Spider-Man: Far From Home etc, lots of things could be in this article about it's positive legacy. The album is covered in it's entirely by The Mr. T Experience, that's also interesting and cool. The album contains fan favs like I Just Wanna Have Something To Do, and She's The One was selected by Rhino as a music video to promote their 40th Anniversary re-release. It's been pointed out that the album shows the band evolving with diverse styles and influences. My point, it's also a beloved album, seemingly unanimously in the top 4 of a beloved band by most people who talk about the band today. It's also one of their top albums on Spotify. Could just use a more balanced lead section. Hopefully others would also be happy to help this article. 
Psychogoatee (talk) 18:07, 11 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Looking for some help on the lead section of this article, more balanced.
Talk:Wawel Hill

message: What we've got now is a stub and there's a lot more to be written about the Wawel. Because there's still so little, we may already think about how to organize further contributions. I believe that one article wouldn't be enough, so I suggest creating a series of Wawel articles which would consist of:
* Wawel Hill (Wawel would redirect here) - general info about the whole hill, its history (not too detailed), some facts about the castle and he cathdral, plus some Wawel trivia (dragon, chakram);
* Wawel Castle - detailed description of the royal residence, its history, plus info about the State Art Collection on the Wawel and museum exhibitions in the castle (Royal Chambers, Private Royal Apartments, Treasury and Armory, Orientalia, Wawel Lost);
* Wawel Cathedral - detailed description and history of the church, including side chapels, the bells, the necropolis, the cathedral treasury and the cathedral museum;
* Wawel Dragon - the article already exists at Smok Wawelski, it would need some rewriting and perhaps a move to Wawel Dragon
-- Kpalion 16:00, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I suggest merging those stubs into one good article (Wawel). Creating subarticles is good when we have losts of material, which is definetly not the case here. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 19:45, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Zobacz ze na pl wiki one tez sa oddzielone. Mam nadzieje ze przyjmiemy serie Wawel jako Polish Collaboration of the Week, wtedy problem stubow sie rozwiaze--Witkacy 20:02, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: With all due respect, Pl wiki, like all non-en wikis, has much lower standards then en wiki and more often then not can serve as an example 'how not to do things'. One should create subarticles when there is excess material in parent article, which is most definetly not the case here. I doubt it very much we could make every of those articles a FA status, however, if we merge them and expand - then we can have a potentially FA-level candidate. Now, I am not saying 'delete' the series - keep them as it is, but merge into Wawel and PCoTW *THAT* article. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 18:22, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Zerknij na polski artykul o katedrze - mozna by bylo nawet kazda z kaplic opisac w odzielnym artykule. O Wawelu jest do pisania a pisania, z kazdej czesci serii wawelskiej mozna zrobic FA. Nie odrazu Krakow zbudwali, poczekaj troche a artykuly sie powieksza.--Witkacy 21:59, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)

message: See suggestion for a merger --Jotel (talk) 08:58, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  duplication
Talk:Super Black Market Clash

message: I deleted the reference to "Bankrobber" as a single off Black Market Clash.  I believe the converse is true, i.e., that the single came before BMC (which was by definition made up of hard-to-get or unreleased tracks).  Further, I believe "Bankrobber" was only a single in the UK, while BMC was a US release.  Anyone w/different info, pls share.Cloonmore (talk) 02:02, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Bankrobber

message: Shouldn't Black Market Clash be lsited before Super? 70.88.213.74 (talk) 20:43, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes. I think it is a good idea. I consider Black Market Clash a studio album more than a compilation, because it features many previously unreleased songs. But, the article title is "Super..." so it is not possible to do it at the moment. –pjoef (talk • contribs) 14:09, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

text: I agree, it should be moved. It shouldn't be a proplem to just move the page, won't everything redirect? Chadwholovedme (talk) 14:43, 26 February 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree. Currently the articles reads like two articles tacked onto each other, and that needs to be fixed as well. Morganfitzp (talk) 12:28, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: First things first