lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Mount Berlin

message: The following coordinate fixes are need for
Mount Berlin in Antarctica.
It is listed as being in Marie Byrd Land and shows up in Wilkes Land on Geohack.
-76.05, 135.866667 should be -76.05, -135.866667
Mount Andrus is also incorrect.
-75.8, 132.3 should be -75.8, -132.3
—207.6.53.93 (talk) 01:34, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: — TRANSPORTERMAN (TALK) 21:58, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Coordinate error 

message: The article is inconsistent on what type of volcano Berlin represents. For instance, there is a claim in the intro describing it as two coalesced shield volcanoes while the Geomorphology and geography section describes it as a stratovolcano. From looking at the article's images I would say Berlin is a shield volcano. Volcanoguy 13:44, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: <yawn> Again with contradictory sources. I am more inclined to trust the "coalesced shield volcanoes" source as the other ones treat the topic more peripherically. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 14:16, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Volcano type
Talk:Gaussberg

message: The article claims that Gaussberg is the only Antarctic volcano situated on the Antarctic Shield. However, since the Antarctic Shield is an old and stable part of continental lithosphere that has existed for at least 1 billion years, there is a high probability that there are old Precambrian volcanoes buried under the East Antarctic ice sheet. Precambrian volcanoes have been found in shields elsewhere on Earth. Volcanoguy 23:01, 21 March 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: I think there are such volcanics, although I don't think that even under an ice sheet would Precambrian volcanoes remain intact - only volcanic rock formations. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 11:15, 22 March 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Not necessarily. Calderas and diatremes can remain intact for billions of years (e.g. Sturgeon Lake Caldera in Canada and the Argyle diatreme in Western Australia). Volcanoguy 17:28, 22 March 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: I really do not get the impression that these two are "intact" in the normal sense of the word. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 17:29, 22 March 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: By "intact" I meant not diminished. Yes Precambrian volcanoes have been heavily eroded but that doesn't mean none exist anymore. This is especially true for calderas because the collapse structure can still be present and for diatremes because the pipe extends below the surface. Volcanoguy 22:26, 22 March 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Honestly, I don't get the impression that anyone uses a definition of "intact" as broad as to encompass such volcanoes that have almost entirely lost their topographical signature. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 17:20, 23 March 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dubious
Talk:Stetson Kennedy

message: This article has a lot of redundancies and is pretty rambling, so I'm working on paring it down. I'm up to the section about infiltrating the KKK, which is a hot mess, and the part of the article he's most known for. There's way too much emphasis on the Freakonomics criticism, which has been solidly shot down in a number of articles in serious academic journals. My goal is to make the section more concise and include more academic sources:
* SHARON MONTEITH: "'I second that emotion': a case for using imaginative sources in writing civil rights history", Patterns of Prejudice, 2015 Vol. 49, No. 5, 440–465, 
* John DiNardo. (October 26, 2006) "Freakonomics: Scholarship in the Service of Storytelling", American Law and Economics Review,  
* John DiNardo. (December 2007) "Interesting Questions in Freakonomics Journal of Economic Literature Vol. XLV, pp. 973–1000
* NANCY GROCE AND STEPHEN WINICK (Ap 2008) "The New Deal at 75: When Art, Culture and Government Intersected." Libr Cong Inf Bull 67 no4
*https://www.facingsouth.org/2011/08/voices-stetson-kennedy-and-the-pursuit-of-truth.html
*https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/cifamerica/2011/sep/02/protest-florida
Just an FYI. I'm open to suggestions. —PermStrump(talk) 16:09, 26 August 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: This is correct. The article is contorted into a discussion of the mistakes made by the guys who wrote Freakonomics. That has very little to do with Kennedy and less of a place on Wikipedia. Trumpetrep (talk) 02:19, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Work in progress 

message: All of the junked material from the Criticism section is here if anyone wants to salvage it. It was so lengthy that it completely threw off the balance of the article.Trumpetrep (talk) 07:02, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title: Criticism
Talk:Gerbil

message: This page is mostly about the Mongolian gerbil (Meriones unguiculatus), but the link for Tribe Gerbillinae redirects here.  There's already a better page for Meriones unguiculatus, so I will move most of the contents of this page there to avoid a mess of redirects, I'll create a new page for the tribe and move the material that is appropriate to that there. This page could then be deleted. seglea (talk) 12:38, 22 December 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Major cleanup needed
Talk:Mount Sidley

message: The article states: "Mount Sidley is the highest dormant volcano in Antarctica." This implies there may be higher nondormant (active) volcanoes in Antarctica. It also implies the possibility of higher nonvolcanic mountains, peaks, or other geographic formations in Antarctica. Since Mt. Vinson surpasses Mt. Sidley in elevation, at least one of these implications does appear to be true. It is not clear if the other is true. The qualifiers used after "highest" are what are at issue. Whereas, a simple "the highest point in Antarctica" would be unambiguous and clear, adding the qualifiers "dormant," and "volcano," obfuscates the ranking somewhat. I am no expert, but, after reading the Mt. Erebus article's lede paragraph, it seems implied that Mt. Sidley is indeed the highest volcano in Antarctica, dormant or otherwise, and thus should have the word "dormant" edited out of its lede (or, at least that sentence). I did not feel confident enough in this conclusion to edit the article myself, so if someone with more knowledge on the matter could edit it for clarity, it would be greatly appreciated. Thank you. 66.91.36.8 (talk) 02:39, 16 May 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Highest?
Talk:Paraguayan War

message: The Paraguayan army strength is wrong. The 300,000 mentioned in the article should be the total Paraguayan death toll. 
The mentioned source supports my claim and probably got misread.
https://web.archive.org/web/20180412081700/http://remilitari.com/guias/victimario5.htm JakobR32 (talk) 17:17, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Charliehdb (talk) 11:39, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 4 April 2024 - Paraguayan army strength 

message: And there's evidence the prior move was brigaded by other languages. Paraguayan War is the COMMON in Brazil, not in English which goes with the Argentinian and Uraguayan name. 
War's having different names in regions is pretty common. At the time it happened Britain and Belgium called WW1 'The Great War', France 'The World War', and US 'The European War'. Use the commons for English. TheBrodsterBoy (talk) 20:12, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Clearly it is not.  There is nothing like a consensus.  This was gone into thoroughly.  Still, since it wouldn't do any harm to have the principles set down, which I shall do in a day or two.Ttocserp 20:38, 28 April 2024 (UTC)

text: Based on the move log, this has been contested multiple times. If you wish to gain a consensus, please see WP:RSPM and start a Requested move discussion. – robertsky (talk) 20:48, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Everyone in the talk section agrees that War of the Triple Alliance is the common english name
Talk:Companding

message: Removed the following irrelevant (and uncited) text from the article:
"Many of the music equipment manufacturers (Roland, Yamaha, Korg) used companding for data compression in their digital synthesizers. This dates back to the late 1980s when memory chips would often come as one of the most costly parts in the instrument. Manufacturers usually express the amount of memory as it is in the compressed form. i.e. 24MB waveform ROM in Korg Trinity is actually 48MB of data. Still the fact remains that the unit has a 24MB physical ROM. In the example of Roland SR-JV expansion boards, they usually advertised them as 8MB boards which contain '16MB-equivalent content'. Careless copying of the info and omitting the part that stated "equivalent" can often lead to confusion."
Reducing the number of bits to fit within a smaller storage device is (obviously) data reduction (also popularly referred to as "compression"), not to be confused with dynamic range reduction, which is what the "comp" in "companding" refers to.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.115.32.222 (talk) 21:12, 28 May 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: That is actually companding. Companding is a method of data compression because compression reduces the number of bits needed to store a signal digitally. Compress the dynamic range of the input signal for transfer, then expand it for output. Compansion is better than quantization because it retains greater S/N for low-level signals. Removing the paragraph for being uncited is reasonable, but that is a form of compansion and the distinction you are thinking of is actually irrelevant here. Compansion compresses data by compressing dynamic range. Radiodef (talk) 18:18, 8 November 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Companding and digital compression (data reduction) are not the same thing!
Talk:Mount Bartle Frere

message: During a recent visit to the walking track of Mt Bartle Frere I came across a well maintained shrine for Brett Darren Thomas. The only information about him that I could find is from this news article: http://www.abc.net.au/news/2011-11-16/police-probe-bushwalker-death/3674122.
Here is a photo of the shrine: 
Would it be appropriate to include information about this in this article?
Mrpalermo (talk) 21:33, 29 June 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Should the death of Brett Darren Thomas be included in this article?
Talk:Mount Bogong

message: Hello, anyone going to engage me in passionate debate about this article? --Joesydney 09:32, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Um why? Its hardly a controversial article... -Shogun 12:19, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Ah, yes. I remember you.--Joesydney 10:32, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: The hill called Mt Bogong is NOT THE Bogong Mtn where the 1830s moth feasts were recorded.  THE Mount Bogong is near Gundagai.  Th e location likely was deliberatly moved when the intended Vic/NSW border was moved from the Murrumbidgee to the Murray as the Brits wouldnt have known where was what in that era.  -Johneen Jones-  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 144.139.221.178 (talk) 23:08, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Moths
Talk:Mount Canobolas

message: Mount Bartle Frere and Mount Bellenden Ker are also further west than Mount Canobolas and taller.  Who knows how many others?
The claim of Mount Canobolas being tallest between XXX and Africa is a wanky statement (and factually incorrect).  If someone else doesn't take it out I will.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.236.41.53 (talk) 09:21, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wrong claim 

message: The article claims Mt Canobolas was first climbed by "a bloke from Orange, QLD. Joshua Phillips..." This sounds like a fake insert to me. There is no citation. Google turns up no such person. The use of the word "bloke" suggests non-professionalism, and Orange is the town adjacent the mountain, in New South Wales, not Queensland. Google does find a young man who was a student in Orange in recent years, and who now lives in Queensland, but nothing connected to thus claim. I am deleting this portion. Ptilinopus (talk) 07:51, 19 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Joshua Phillips? Who's he? 

message: The text and the info box cite the same source, but give different figures for the elevation. Given the same source, you would think they would agree! Ptilinopus (talk) 23:11, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Elevation
Talk:Mount Ossa (Tasmania)

message: Please note that some editors might have one look at some of the terminology used here and do a copyedit a la flamethrower.(ok so I am exaggerating - maybe a few words changed, but)  Probably a visit to WP:Style will save any later agony... SatuSuro 13:25, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: style

message: I've reverted the change to the height - Many places on the web seem to indicate that the height is 1617 m, however the official topographic map gives the height at 1614 m. I think that this is the most authoritive source available. --Ozhiker 10:25, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Height 

message: There is a need for some verification of that claim - otherwise it needs to be reverted SatuSuro 13:19, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Beefart Says: Tasmania is full of Greek names. Please don't revert. Some Wikignome will find the citations. Captainbeefart 16:21, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Some examples of the Greek names around Mount Ossa are: The Acropolis, The Labyrinth, Mount Olympus, Mount Pelion East & West, Pelion Gap, Pelion Plains, Cynthia bay, Narcissus hut, The Minotaur. There are also many names in the Walls of Jerusalem national park which are somewhat related ancient Greece (e.g. Herod's Gate). I'll look for some appropriate citations when I get a chance. --Ozhiker 22:42, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

text: There is absolutely no need for a citation about many Tasmanian places being named after Greek mythology, as it is patently obvious. It's like asking for a citation for stating that "trees have leaves". The "citation needed" link needs to be removed at once.--Vardamir 30 (talk)I  —Preceding undated comment added 08:48, 25 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Greek legends?
Talk:Spicers Peak

message: The location of Spicer's Peak is incorrect.
It should be: -28.099428, 152.408094
—122.104.142.170 (talk) 09:45, 29 July 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: . Thanks for pointing out the error. Deor (talk) 15:05, 29 July 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Coordinate error
Talk:Mount Woodroffe

message: About prominence: see the Wikipedia article. As I don't have a map of the area (and as it is the highest mountain in South Australia I'd need a big map), I don't know what it is. Could someone check? John Wormell (talk) 07:34, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Template
Talk:Parinacota (volcano)

message: and . Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 21:01, 2 March 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Search terms 

message: This source comes from a broken paper, but may be useful. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 12:22, 1 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unclear source
Talk:Emi Koussi

message: The following coordinate fixes are needed for
—2405:204:72CD:E58A:CC5D:AF5F:8B11:A468 (talk) 15:56, 5 September 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry, but I am not seeing any issue. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 16:29, 5 September 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Coordinate error 

message: There seems to be a discrepancy among sites as to the correct elevation. Some sites give 3415 m while others 3445 m. GVP gives 3415 while geographic.org based on US government intelligence data gives 3445. Wikidata has 3445 but it uses the German Wiki as the source but that Wiki is using 3415. Peakbagger has 3445 and points to SRTM as its source (perhaps why the US gov't data uses 3445). GVP and SRTM are both reliable sources. Haven't been able to find a Chad gov't website as yet. Not sure yet what to do about the elevation.
The coordinates were not referenced until I made a change today. I've set it to use the coordinates I found at latitude.to as well as update Wikidata to use those coords. RedWolf (talk) 03:06, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Google Scholar prefers 3415 to 3445. It's a common issue on volcanoes that I've noticed, there often are discrepancies in elevation estimates. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 07:18, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Elevation and coordinates
Talk:Station identification

message: I don't agree with the contention that digital on-screen graphic IDs were introduced by VH-1 in 1993. I know for a fact that I saw crude, low-resolution, full opacity bugs used on the reruns of Tribeca on Fox around summer 1993 (the show was never rerun on broadcast TV after that) and was upset at this new, distracting, intrusive practice. 72.230.80.155 (talk) 17:33, 25 December 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Antony Hamilton

message: Quite a prominent actor, but the article needs a lot of work. Philip 17:49, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Article quality

message: I can find no printed source to support the allegations made in this article that Hamilton was rejected for the role of Bond because he was gay. Without a reputable source, such a statement violates WP:BLP policy - not on Hamilton, who is dead, but on the producers of the Bond films, and therefore I have removed it. And there was no "firestorm of controversy" regarding Tula in For Your Eyes Only, either, only some mild tabloid snickering regarding someone who was on screen for less than a second. I can't find any source to support that Hamilton was even considered for the role of Bond in 1987 since Pierce Brosnan had been heir presumptive since Moore quit and Dalton was chosen after Brosnan pulled out. However this is less likely to be considered a BLP issue so I left it in pending someone providing a source. 23skidoo 06:14, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: James Bond

message: It has been suggested that the subject of this article is eligible for inclusion in the list of HIV-positive people. If you know of any reliable source that helps to clarify this person's HIV status then please mention it on the list's talk page. Trezatium 19:17, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  HIV status 

message: This whole article seems to be one giant personal web page for the actor. Not encyclopedic at all… 98.206.241.221 (talk) 19:19, 4 January 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: This is an oldish comment but I agree with your opinion. As such, I have rewritten the article. I have no idea what was up with the odd, out of context quotes and copy/pasted content that was added before but I have removed it and tried to include all the tidbits that the quotes pertained to. For whatever reason, an IP user added it all back which I have since reverted. These "quotes" - which aren't actually quotes, just copied content from People and various other sources - should not be added back. We don't fill up article space with long, out of context quotes and copied bits from magazines. Pinkadelica♣ 10:16, 2 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article 
Talk:Jinggang Mountains

message: "Jinggangshan Mountains" is a pleonasm, because "shan" means mountain/s.  Should be changed to "Jinggang Mountains" or, better, "Jinggangshan (Jinggang Mountains)"128.255.240.158 (talk) 18:43, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: I was here recently and took photos. I've put them all on Flickr with CC-BY-SA licenses, here; if any are useful feel free to upload them to Commons and use them here. (I have limited internet access for the summer and it's slow, so I'm not going to try doing it myself.) rʨanaɢ (talk) 15:33, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Photos 

message: I'm confused. In Zhou Enlai: a political life, they say Zhou went to Shanghai when Mao was in Jinggang. Can someone please sort that one out for me? When was he where?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.178.195.19 (talk) 02:29, 1 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  when was Zhou Enlai here? 
Talk:Mount Lao

message: OhNoitsJamie, why don't you ever give a logical answer to a direct question? Your normal response is to delete the question in the discussion section and site some ambiguous rule of which Wiki has clearly made exceptions to. Why don't you let the rest of the community respond? Your actions have really set back the progress of Wiki's Qingdao articles!  Most of the local community here in Qingdao will probably stop contributing because of your actions! You act as if you are speaking on behalf of the entire Wiki community. Are you?
Questions: Why can't the Laoshan article have an External Link section? Why do you consider a comprehensive gallery photographed and put together by Qingdao locals SPAM? Your actions are implying that you consider the contributions of Qingdao locals SPAM! WHY? Why is the following link considered SPAM?  Can we please discuss this issue?
Wiki’s guidlines State:
"Be respectful to others and their points of view. This means primarily: Do not simply revert changes in a dispute. When someone makes an edit you consider biased or inaccurate, improve the edit, rather than reverting it. Provide a good edit summary when making significant changes that other users might object to. The Three Revert Rule forbids the use of reverts in repetitive succession.
Writing according to the "perfect article guidelines" and following the NPOV policy can help you write "defensively", and limit your own bias in your writing. For some guidelines, see Wikipedia:Wikiquette." —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gaoshan (talk • contribs) 
: I'm reverting spam per external link guidelines. This has nothing to do with WP:NPOV. From your contribution history, it's clear that your primary objective is to put links to your site here. OhNoitsJamie Talk 15:54, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You don't need to copy the same discussion to multiple talk pages. Please limit to your talk page  or my talk page. OhNoitsJamie Talk 16:23, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Simple Question :: Simple Answer 
Talk:Mount Hua

message: Could anyone tell me when the Mount. Hua Monastery was founded?Hamstermage 23:54, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Monastery Date 

message: It's in the official name of the PRC: 中华人民共和国, where 中华 is indeed used in place of 中国.
According to A New Learner's Chinese-English Dictionary (China International Publishing Group, 2008 - ISBN978-7-80200-357-6), pp. 330-331:
:华 [huá]
:I (1) radiant; magnificent; splendid (2) prosperous; flourishing ... II (1) corona (2) best part; cream; essence ... (4) Chinese (language) (5) China ...
:华北 North China... ... 华人 Chinese 华文 Chinese ... 华语 Chinese (language)
Same source, p. 1076:
:中华 (1) the Chinese nation (2) China
So I think the "citation needed" can safely be removed.
Given the other meanings of 华 (e.g. "magnificent", "cream [best part]"), it might also be appropriate to translate 中华 as something like "Great[er] China" in some cases, as opposed to 中国 "land of China", but this is beyond the scope of this article; besides, it's only my intuition speaking and I can't cite a reference for this usage.
Jonstephens (talk) 03:20, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: The pronunciation of 华 in 华山 is huà, not huá in Zhonghua (中华). See the dictionary meanings of the character 华 and the word 华山. So the name of Mount Hua may not be relevant to the name of China. --Pengyanan (talk) 03:49, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Meaning of "华"/"華" (huá) 

message: There is a big cave on north face of West peak. It can be seen from the picture . The hole is just on the left bottom of the photo and just above the cloud. From its shape, it seems to be natural. More detail can be seem from . Could any one provide more information about it?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Constellationevolution (talk • contribs) 02:18, 3 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  The big cave on north face of West peak