lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Template talk:Edit summary personal

message: I think this should mention No personal attacks also. Does anyone object if I modify it accordingly? JoshuaZ 06:55, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Good move. Hyacinth 08:50, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed change. 

message: Could an admin add  to the template (obviously in a <noinclude> section)? Several other templates on  have them, and it'd be nice to have this sort of standardized. EVula 18:10, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Looks like someone did. Hyacinth (talk) 07:46, 4 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit to template
Talk:Albi

message: So there are two Albis?? any one knows about this place in Catalunya? I bet it'd be better to put a disambiguation page and two separate articles... 
I think the Albi in France is more famous than the one from Spain.. should be on the main page.. yes? no?
Jackjeff 18:03, 23 Jan 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, since there isn't an article on the one in Spain, we'll leave it the way it is. Darth Panda 01:11, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Two Albis? 

message: While the Albi Tourist Office might state it as fact, we might like to put in something like "claimed". There are other places that make a similar claim most notably St Mary's Church in Gdansk. (Ajkgordon 12:49, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Largest brick building in the world? 
Talk:Pierce-Arrow Motor Car Company

message: Why were the several bottom sections removed from a previous posting, appeared to happen around July 12, 2008,   —Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.44.136.113 (talk) 21:02, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Why were bottom sections of older postings removed

message: I've taken the liberty of adding in information regarding Pierce Arrow's relationship with Studebaker to the article, along with an image of a 1932 Pierce Arrow sedan.  I hope the information is welcome.  user: stude62 user talk:stude62 18:08, 23 Jan 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Information on Studebaker Added

message: There is a revival of the Pierce-Arrow brand by Luigi Colani. Avoiding "bias," it may be a good idea to create a separate page for "Piece-Arrow by Colani," since it has been a 70 year hiatus and the styling is so different. Website for revival brand: http://www.piercearrow-corp.com/start.php (WTarrasque (talk) 03:19, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed—this will be a Pierce-Arrow in name only, with no connection to the past other than conspicuous extravagance! And what a time to be introducing a 24-cylinder gas guzzler! However, development of a separate article can surely await the eventuation of some genuine substance from the words and images on the new site. Cheers Bjenks (talk) 05:11, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: New Information to be Added

message: /* 1903–1927 */ 2nd car pictured in the 1903-1927 chapter is obviously not a Town Car but a Touring Car. These had open bodies while Town Car had an enclosed passenger compartment and an open driver compartment (also called "Sedanca" or "Coupé de Ville".
The car pictured as "1922 Pierce-Arrow" 
Picture was taken at the 2006 Bay State Antique Automobile Club Vintage show. This club does list the car built in 1927 (http://www.bsaac.com/cars.html). This year looks more appropriate for the Coupe body's lines than 1922. 
--Chief tin cloud (talk) 09:17, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Erros in Picture Legends

message: "Thirty-three cars entered the 1100-mile race from New York City to Bretton Woods, New Hampshire..." No part of New Hampshire is "1100 miles" from New York City. Even driving from Erie, PA (crossing nearly the whole STATE of New York), the farthest point in NH is only about 650 miles. I know nothing about the "endurance race" cited, so I'm not going to fix it. Just pointing out what seemed a glaring misstatement. Jororo05 (talk) 17:38, 13 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  This just isn't true ("Early History")
Talk:Constructicons

message: This article has 1 picture. That is not sufficient. 
The constructicons created the gestalt technology, and six of the constructicons were chosen (or volunteered) to test the unproven technology.
I think this is disputable.  in the cartoon there are multiple mutually contradictory origins for the Constructicons.  In the comic, they were built by Shockwave and given life using the Creation Matrix while Optimus Prime was a captive of the decepticons.  --Plicease 18:29, 23 Jan 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: WALL OF TEXT

message: This is wiki en why all the french and italian names for every bot , should be removed imo (Gnevin 20:24, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Should information about toylines that were not released in North America also be removed? Heaven forbid Wikipedia might actually contain information about the world outside the boundaries of the USA.--80.141.83.119 22:20, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wiki En 

message: I just recently saw Transformers (2007), and neither Brawl nor Devestator's name was mentioned in the credits. I believe some Wiki information needs to be deleted.
:The toys are all named Brawl.  In the movie, however, he announces his own name as Devastator. --  JediLofty User ¦ Talk 08:32, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Incorrect Information 

message: Some idiot replaced several names with garbage. "Scrapper" with "Payload", "Gravedigger" with "Crushernut", "Glen" with "Glark" and so on. And instead of just undiong his nonsense, someone else simply changed back one single instance of the renaming nonsense and kept the rest like it was.--80.141.83.119 22:22, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vandalism 

message: In the Conflicting Origins section, there are arguments to explain away origin contradictions with no citations of any kind.  That clearly may as well be ruled OR, correct?  Especially if these aren't documented theories and conclusions from a reliable source.Kuahmel (talk) 07:40, 30 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is it Wikipedia appropriate?
Talk:Integrally closed

message: The Integrally Closed page requests suggestions on whether or not it should be merged with "Integrality." The "Integrality"  page has discussions to the algebraic geometry and other uses. The Integrally Closed page request for discussion points to an Integrality talk page. DeaconJohnFairfax (talk) 22:39, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  relation to "Integrality" 

message: I don't think this is right:
 "That is, every monic polynomial with coefficients in R has all of its roots in R." 
For example, the integers are integrally closed in their fraction field (the rationals) but not every monic polynomial with integer coefficients has all it's root in the integers (i.e. x^2+1).    I think it should read something like:
 "That is, every monic polynomial with coefficients in R has NO roots in S which are not in R."   --Paul Laroque (talk) 20:55, 26 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Problem with explanation
Talk:Siding (rail)

message: I bet "loop" refers to through sidings only. Kwantus 20:36, 2005 Jan 23 (UTC)
:I'd say that a siding specifically means a track with a buffer stop at the end.  A loop is not a siding. Biscuittin (talk) 14:33, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

message: There is some potential for a merge here between loop (rail), crossing loop and this article, perhaps. ++Lar: t/c 23:36, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The American usage of "siding" cuts across British usage. We need to keep some place to point the American usage at. Mangoe 22:20, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge?

message: :Category:Railway track layouts is itself a category within :Category:Railway track layouts. — Robert Greer (talk) 21:17, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[:Category:Railway track layouts]] ''vs.'' [[:Category:Railway track layouts]]  

message: I have moved this because:
* Siding is the most common term
* It chimes with the article which only talks about "sidings" 
* It is US/Rest of world neutral
* It is the official UIC, British and US engineering term
It can be qualified with "railway", "railroad" or "rail", but "rail siding" is the least common. (Of course it can also be qualified with "passing", "industrial", etc.)
It is arguable whether Siding (in the sense of building cladding) should be the primary article rather than this one, but that's for another day. --Bermicourt (talk) 16:02, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Move to Siding (rail) 

message: How overgrown can a siding be and still remain functional? Why are they retained when 'inaccessible due to trees etc'? Jackiespeel (talk) 18:30, 26 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Question

message: I'm not quite sure why nobody has started a discussion on merging this with Team track, even though the template says it's been proposed since July 2017. I Support merging Team track into this article, Siding (rail). It seems this article is much more detailed than the other article, and both would benefit from merging. –Daybeers (talk) 14:25, 12 February 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed, on the proviso that Siding remains the article's title and Team track a sub-heading. Regards. The joy of all things (talk) 20:30, 21 June 2018 (UTC)

text: Klbrain (talk) 20:41, 24 November 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merger proposal 

message: The first paragraph is nice. But the second appears to be a history of the popularity of railroads as a freight transportation method. Would suggest removing. 
Also, the claims about railway freight transportation's recent uptick in usages needs some more citations. Especially where it talks about why. For example, are traffic jams on interstates really a significant force here? Themumblingprophet (talk) 20:09, 29 April 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Second Paragraph of History
Talk:Ryo-Ohki

message: This page was voted on for deletion at Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Ryo-Ohki on 2005 Jan 17.  The consensus was to keep it.  (11 keep, 1 delete.)  dbenbenn | talk 20:43, 23 Jan 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: No, Ryoouki is definitely a female outside of Mahou Shoujo Pretty Sammy (TV). Elric of Grans 23:02, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Shouldn't we have pictures of Ryo-Ohki's humanoid forms? 71.203.209.0 16:17, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Pictures

message: Ryo-Ohki HAS spoken outside of Mahou Shoujo Pretty Sammy. In the dubbed version of Tenchi Muyo! GXP Episode 12, She is seen and heard in her humanoid form speaking when asked about her master, Ryoko. She said, "Yes! She is wonderful!"204.13.204.162 19:03, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ryo-Ohki speaks 

message: If Ryo-ohki is also Chibi the cat, where exactly did her rabbit half come from? Did Ryoko also merge a rabbit with her ship?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.74.89.197 (talk) 02:00, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Rabbit?
Talk:Margaret Oliphant

message: Who can explain the name, Margaret Oliphant Oliphant, rather than just Margaret Oliphant? Wikikiwi 20:45, 23 Jan 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Why the full name?

message: I never can understand these grading systems. I would have thought the entry for MOO had about the right amount of information for her importance in literature. Dickens she ain't. Bmcln1 (talk) 11:32, 26 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: "Start" class etc.

message: yes  that was sarcasm.  100.15.138.239 (talk) 23:21, 9 September 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  could you have copied just a little more faithfully from your source? 

message: A 6 November 1897 edition of The Times (London) newspaper gives the date of her death as 20 June 1897 
:(see )
The text reads: "WILLS.—Mrs. MARGARET OLIPHANT WILSON OLIPHANT, of The Hermitage, Wimbledon-common, who died on June 20, left personal estate of which the gross value is £4,932 and the net value £804."
It is unclear where the date of death given in the Wikipedia article (25 June 1897) comes from. Should we change the article to 20 June 1897?
— Hebrides (talk) 21:45, 11 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Date of death 
Talk:The Music (album)

message: *All song titles serve as redirects to this album, have their own pages, or have been placed at the appropriate disambiguation pages.--Hraefen Talk 22:08, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: '''<^>v!!This album is connected!!v<^>'''
Talk:Susannah Lattin

message: Why are there a long row of [Edit]s two-thirds of the way down the article? Nonplus 14:54, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: it is rather ridiculous that there is far more text in references and further reading than the actual article. Secondly, this as been done by an editor with a certified history of copyright copy paste violations. I am going to trim, there is no need to have this. LibStar (talk) 12:27, 26 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: excessive quotations
Talk:Allen Danzinger

message: This page was voted on for deletion at Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Allen Danzinger on Jan 17, 2005.  The consensus was to keep it.  (7 keep, 3 delete.)  dbenbenn | talk 21:25, 23 Jan 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:David and Jonathan

message: For context, see the section above this one.
By my count the article has 1840 words out of a 3214 word article (57%) that discuss whether or not David and Jonathan had a homosexual relationship. In particular, the "Traditional Christian interpretation" section, despite millions of words written on other aspects of David and Jonathan, paints a picture of bible scholars only discussing whether they were gay.
In my opinion, this is far too much WP:WEIGHT given to a WP:FRINGE theory. I have opened up a discussion on this at Wikipedia:Fringe theories/Noticeboard#David and Jonathan again. It is my intention to remove all material not sourced to reputable scholars. --Guy Macon (talk) 01:31, 16 February 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, I support such removals. See my comment here: Wikipedia:Fringe theories/Noticeboard#David and Jonathan again. Crossroads -talk- 20:17, 16 February 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Too much weight given to a fringe theory?
Talk:Comparison of Internet forum software

message: This is listed as Partial with the reference to this discussion
Last edit on that was 10th Feb 2016. Mozilla gave Discourse a grant to improve their email list support at the end of 2015 and this is a thread on their support forum about the features that were added. This is a user guide for those features on Mozilla's forum.
It looks like a lot more support was added for email over the course of 2016. I don't know what the definition of "full support" for email/NNTP is here, but this might benefit from another look? 
MarkJWilkin (talk) 21:45, 7 April 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Update Discourse Feature Listing for Email/NNTP interface 

message: IMO Flarum (http://flarum.org) needs to be added to this article/ Paf uk (talk) 13:32, 22 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Flarum 

message: For each software, mention if end users can
*Figure out the name of the software
*Figure out the version number
*Figure out the copyright
*Figure out where to send interface improvement suggestions
Or, if all that is hidden, only visible to administrators, or looking at the HTML source code. Not even a Powered By label.  Jidanni (talk) 06:34, 23 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Transparency to end users
Talk:Donatello

message: Several part of the article give his birth date as 1486, while others list 1386. The first date doesn’t line up with the creation of The David. Please correct. 96.19.58.147 (talk) 15:45, 26 January 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Ignoring your attempt to correct it (which I have reverted), I can't see any mention of 1486 anywhere in the article. Could you say where you saw it? Multiple sources affirm 1386 for example https://www.metmuseum.org/toah/hd/dona/hd_dona.htm . Please come back if it was not just a misreading. --𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 16:02, 26 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Birth dates don't line up
Talk:Robbin' the Hood

message: Weasel Words
----
This article contains Weasel Words namely in the first sentence "Robbin' the Hood is often thought of as the hardcore fan's favorite album." I'm going to go through to attempt to get rid of them.
ADarkerBreed 23:16, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Who is the woman singing in this song? --Thaddius 21:00, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Saw Red 

message: Do not think this article should be merged.  Clearly Robbin' the Hood is a music album, Rollie on the other hand is a real-life human, therefore clearly needs his own wiki article.  Sixthstar (talk) 15:30, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Rollie is entirely non-notable except for having been quoted on this album. If not merged, that entry should be deleted. Cheers! bd2412 T 20:50, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Robbin' the Hood is not the only album he appears on (Elva by Unwritten Law), so merging his entry with it does not seem appropriate. How notable he is brings up an entirely different debate. 24.192.144.101 (talk) 21:00, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge

message: What Eazy-E song does this track sample?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.9.60.183 (talk) 00:19, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Q-Ball

message: Whoever went through and noted all the original works from the tracks, that is awesome!  I've gained a new understanding for the kind of synthesis the band put together.  The other albums need the same treatment though.  I've started this for the self-titled Sublime with a section on "covers" but 40oz only gives writing credits on the songs that are covers.--Louiedog (talk) 19:32, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Notes on cover songs 
Talk:Wishbone

message: Anyone have an idea how the tradition of making a wish on breaking a poultry wishbone  began? In what part of the world? How ancient is the custom?— Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.237.13.246 (talk) 21:57, 23 January 2005‎
:   Dictionary.com cites 2017 Random House Dictionary in claiming (as to only "wishbone"'s etymology!) 
::"1850-55, Americanism; wish + bone; so called from the custom of pulling the furcula of a cooked fowl apart until it breaks, the person holding the longer (sometimes shorter) piece being granted a wish"
: and some vague attributions to Roman reports citing otherwise unattributed claims about ancient Etruscan use of (what sounded to me like) behavior of live (and non-vivisected) poultry for undefined sortilege -- ("Thee have I not seen in flight, yet thou thinkest me dim, in trusting them more than thee??", i 'spose) -- as if that were reason to blame the ancients for our modern nonsense about dead poultry.--Jerzy•t  03:23 [tho ready to be saved by around 01:00] 18 June 2017.
::   Oops! Ignore the immediately preceding cranky old bastard, and consult Wishbone#In folklore, which says 
::: The custom of two persons pulling on the bone with the one receiving the larger part making a wish developed in the early 17th century.
::(Yet, indeed, non-destructive furcular divination, re November weather, was practiced by the 1455).--Jerzy•t 03:23, 18 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  (Whence this wishy-washy notion?)
Talk:Spherical space form conjecture

message: At some point I'll put in a detailed list of all the finite subgroups of SO_4 up to conjugacy. For which ones the conjecture is known, and for which it is not. The exposition in Thurston's book is not very efficient. It's easier to describe these groups in terms of binary icosahedral groups, binary dihedral groups x abelian groups they commute with, etc... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.171.229.101 (talk) 22:06, 23 January 2005 (UTC)
Talk:Electrolysis (cosmetology)

message: I have moved this topic to Electrology instead of electrolysis (cosmetology) for three reasons:
* To distinguish the practice of electrology from other meanings of electrolysis.
* Not all electrical epilation is strictly electrolysis. One method uses diathermy rather than electrolytic reaction.
* Not all electrology is cosmetology: the original ophthalmologist's paper from 1875 described its use as a medical procedure to cure trichiasis. Electrology is still used for both cosmetic and medical purposes to this day.
Jokestress 22:06, 23 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Talk:Electrology

message: Although I have no opinions on the matter, I was recently contacted by a user claiming that this article is biased. In deference to that statement, I've added a neutrality dispute template to the article. I'd encourage any involved parties to discuss the accuracy and fair coverage of this article. Thanks, Alphachimp 00:47, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Refusing to allow an editor to linkspam her non-notable business website (her only contributions ever to the project) is not an NPOV issue. I've removed the tag. Jokestress 18:21, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

text: I have edited the final paragraph, which was biased and unencyclopedic.Snafflekid 19:04, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Neutrality 

message: Discussion of side effects, etc. should be added. -- Beland (talk) 18:01, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Adverse events
Talk:List of political parties in Liechtenstein

message: Removed this:
:The general rule on naming applies. That means: the parties are named in the English translation and the original native name is placed on the first line of the article unless the native form is more commonly used in English than the English form. Rationale and specifics: See: Wikipedia:Naming conventions (use English).
as it is an editorial comment, not part of the article --Henrygb 22:41, 23 Jan 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Komodo dragon

message: The largest verified specimen reached a length of 10.3 feet (3.13 meters) and weighed 366 pounds (166 kilograms).  
Source - 
https://nationalzoo.si.edu/animals/komodo-dragon#:~:text=Size,larger%20and%20bulkier%20than%20females.
The current heading with max length and weight is innacurate.  Max length is not 9.8 ft - it is 10.3.  Max weight is heavier than indicated, as well. 2001:56A:6FF4:6EAA:BC6E:CBAA:3B07:9A39 (talk) 04:33, 29 March 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: Largest specimen is mentioned in Description subsection. Lead is general. User:CanonNi (talk|contribs) 09:04, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 29 March 2024
Talk:Gesta Danorum

message: Links only made once and only those links which are most relevant. --Stbalbach 23:17, 23 Jan 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Links

message: Why did someone kill my entry (colophon text of the 1514 edition? The old error of the printing date (May instead March) has been spread in many publications, is anybody interested to keep the status quo??
:It is not a colophon of the book; it is the date of a letter in the book. It is also not an old error either, cause most page with the 15 may date you find on the net, come or is copies from this wiki page. I wrote it and it aint a long time ago. I will write the Royal Libary to hear what they think, hopefully getting some good info.
:is anybody interested to keep the status quo?? - ??? I dont understand ?? I’m intreasted in the right date only, whatever it is. Twthmoses 19:13, 9 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Date of publication 

message: "It is thought that Shakespeare never read Gesta Danorum, and instead had access to an auxiliary version of the tale describing the downfall of the Prince of Denmark, whose real name - Amleth - was used in anagram by Shakespeare for Hamlet. "
:This is unclear to me. Does this refer to Ur-Hamlet? If it does, ought it be linked, surely? -- Cimon avaro; on a pogostick. 06:01, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Enquiry about the auxiliary text