lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Joan of Évreux

message: The article currently states: "two of Jeanne's remarkable possessions survive—her prayer book and a statue of the Virgin and Child."  This statement implies that only two of her items are extant and that those were personally and indisputably owned by her.  Please note the existence of the manuscript Ordo ad consecrandum et coronandum regem et reginam Franciae (France, c.1326—1330) currently held in the Rare Book & Manuscript Library at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign (call number Pre-1650 MS 0124).  Physical Description: 23 leaves : parchment, ill. ; 263 x 161 (167 x 106) mm. bound to 269 x 182 mm.  A better description of the item and a list of citations may be found in the UIUC Library Online Library Catalog.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by MoggieBleu (talk • contribs) 18:59, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Disputable/limited ownership

message: :The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. 
The result of the move request was: Moved(closed by non-admin page mover)  Megan Barris (Lets talk📧) 05:23, 31 August 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Jeanne of Évreux →  – The page has recently been moved from "Jeanne d'Évreux" to "Jeanne of Évreux". Both "Jeanne d'Évreux" and "Joan of Évreux" are more common than the half-translated "Jeanne of Évreux" (which I also find a bit jarring). "Jeanne d'Évreux" appears to be most common but is used mainly in connection with the Hours of Jeanne d'Evreux. The name "Joan of Évreux" seems to be strongly preferred in English-language history books, including those by historians Kathryn Warner, Elizabeth Hallam-Smith, and Jonathan Sumption. Surtsicna (talk) 14:19, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 17 August 2020
Talk:Joan of Valois, Queen of Navarre

message: The sentence "She was firstly betrothed to John of Brabant, son of John III, Duke of Brabant and his wife Marie d'Évreux. The marriage did not,Charles Cawley, Medieval Lands, CAPET  however, take place, since John died around 1356" implies that she didn't marry John because he died before the marriage took place. However, she married another man (Charles II of Navarre) before John of Brabant died. The reason for breaking off the engagement must thus have been for another reason. 145.53.0.242 (talk) 12:20, 2 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Madog ap Gruffydd Maelor

message: I have re-written the former section stating that Madog's grave slab was found at Valle Crucis. Whilst he did establish the Abbey, the heraldic slab that was discovered at the Abbey in 1956 relates to Madog ap Gruffydd Vychan who died in 1306, and was this man's great grandson. This information comes from the official Valle Crucis Guidebook. Boatgypsy (talk) 19:01, 13 August 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Burial at Valle Crucis Abbey
Talk:Joan de Munchensi

message: I think I put this sentence in originally: others added the references:
:Joan de Munchensi is well known not only for her family connections but also for her patronage of the Anglo-Norman poet Walter of Bibbesworth, whose Treatise, a verse glossary of Anglo-Norman vocabulary, was written at her request for her children's education.  
I'm removing it because it's all true except for the crucial point that (as I now see) I got the wrong person. Joan de Munchensi very likely learned French from this book, but the person who commissioned it was her stepmother, her father's second wife, who really was called Dionisie de Munchensi. Dionisie de Munchensi has no Wikipedia article; nor does Walter de Bibbesworth, so there is nowhere to paste this sentence as yet.
This becomes clear if one really reads the articles mentioned in the footnote. Sorry. Andrew Dalby 19:20, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bibbesworth
Talk:Magnús Óláfsson

message: I tried to reorganize the chaotic text found here, and put it into logical order.  This helps some, but I hope someone else can smooth out the article, and make it more official looking as a biography article.  --Ph0kin 19:30, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think I have a couple of Manx history books lying around somewhere. I'll find it and do some work when I have the time. Manxruler 02:16, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Did my best 
Talk:Manfred III of Saluzzo

message: This line:
Agnes (1245 – after 4 August 1265), born posthumously, married John, son of Eustace de Vesci, no issue
is incorrect per the pages own source/reference, and other references printed and digital-
AGNESE (1245-after 4 Aug 1265, bur Pontefract, Church of the Black Friars).  Her parentage is confirmed by the charter dated 24 Aug 1251 under which Bonifazio Marchese di Montferrato "tutor Thome filii condam Manfredi marchionis Salutiarum et filiarum suarum Alaxine et Agnesine" donated property to Staffarda monastery in accordance with the last wishes of Manfredo III Marchese di Saluzzo[536].  As she and her supposed sister Margherita are not mentioned in their father´s testament dated 1244, it is assumed that they were born posthumously and that they were twins (assuming that Margherita in fact existed, about which there are doubts as discussed above).  It is assumed that her marriage was arranged by Pierre Comte de Savoie who had been her husband's guardian from 12 Feb 1254, after the death of his father[537].  m ([before 1262][538]) as his first wife, JOHN de Vescy, son of WILLIAM de Vescy & his second wife Agnes de Ferrers of Derby (18 Jul 1244-Montpellier 10 Feb 1289, bur Alnwick Abbey).  No children.
thanks Collision-Shift (talk)  —Preceding undated comment added 21:46, 23 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Agnes, please correct her line....
Talk:Manfred, King of Sicily

message: I'd like to standardize the refs and shoot for FAC. Normally I should wait a few days after posting this, but I sorta suspect no one is watching. Will go ahead... If anyone has any thoughts, I'm open... ♦ Lingzhi2 (talk) 15:00, 12 February 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  standardize references, shoot for FAC
Talk:Joan of Lancaster

message: I corrected it from 1345 to 1349, which is the year actually given in both of the sources cited on this page. I first suspected 1345 was an error simply because the plague didn't get to England until 1348-1349. Another source that gives 1349 is Magna Charta Sureties 1215, by Frederick Lewis Weis, with additions by Walter Lee Sheppard Jr, 5th Edition, 1999. I would add it to the References section, but I'm unschooled in the nuances of editing Wikipedia references, citations, and footnotes, and a quick look at the relevant how-to pages convinces me that I don't have the time to figure it out this particular morning. Pnh (talk) 13:16, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Joan of Lancaster's death date

message: Attempted to add a little more to the article with Joan's numerous royal family ties. If anyone thinks that's not appropriate, feel free to revert. Also did a bit of grammatical tidying.
I wish the citations previously inserted actually had the names of the books, not just the last names of the authors and yr published.....can someone fix those? ScarletRibbons (talk) 22:51, 29 November 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Expansion, citations
Talk:Margaret of England

message: Margaret did marry Alexander III of Scotland, but I've never heard him described as "The Glorious" in any historical reference source.  Anyone else?  Neither his formal Wikipedia entry nor his listing on the "List of Kings of Scotland" page has this information.  In fact, on the latter the space for "nicknames" remains empty (as it should probably be.)  Thanks122.26.13.160 (talk) 03:31, 4 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Alexander "The Glorious?"
Talk:Margaret of Hungary

message: I insist the grandparents are of importance. She for instance was the first empress of the Orthodox Byzantine Empire, and then a prominent figure in the obviously Roman Catholic  Latin Empire of Constantinople, a short-lived Crusader creation, not long after the 1054 Great Schism, and mentioning that she was the granddaughter of Crusading chief adventurer Raynald of Châtillon puts it into an interesting perspective. As does the fact that she was the granddaughter of a Rurikid (Viking-origin ruler of an Orthodox Slavic state). It creates the right impression of the fluidity of areas of influence between religions, denominations, ethnicities and empires, far remote from our modern thinking, which is exactly what helps understand Margaret's life and fate.
Already in principle: it's an article about a medieval royal figure, and genealogy is highly relevant for such, probably more so than for anyone else.
Let's drop the personal approach and go about it logically. I'm not into WP rules, but I think it's not only a matter of common sense that removing a bit of valid, useful info isn't a good thing to do. And yes, it's not well-viewed and accepted here on WP either. And if nothing elese, it's not about a weighty, overly detailed questionable paragraph, but about just two short genealogical statements. Let's get real. Cheers, Arminden (talk) 07:43, 22 July 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Comment: the information about grandparents is already in the "Ancestry" table below. I suggest, if there is also to be a paragraph about it, we need to explain its relevance. The argument about cross-cultural influence and fluidity, above, is really important, and somehow, if there are relevant sources, it needs to emerge in the text. Andrew Dalby 11:34, 22 July 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Genealogy 

message: How did Margaret of Hungary show the freedom of god? 119.94.165.211 (talk) 04:29, 20 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  How did Margaret of Hungary show the freedom of god?
Talk:Margaret of Huntingdon, Lady of Galloway

message: Text originally said she died in 1212 in the first paragraph but contradicted itself in the last paragraph by saying she was certainly dead by 1228 when her husband remarried. No justification given for the 1212 date, so I changed the date and the category; it appears that the birth and death dates were supplied anonymously with no source back in 2005 (I looked at the page history).--FeanorStar7 02:02, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Per Harrison 2009, p. 214, her death date is 1223. Thanks,   — Jason Sosa 08:52, 8 October 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Death date
Talk:Maria of Montferrat

message: Surely, the name Maria of Jerusalem is more suitable than Maria of Montferrat? Montferrat was her fathers name, and I suppose that is why it has been used. But she was after all a monarch of Jerusalem. This is reason enough to use Jerusalem in her name. Monarchs are referred to by the country the are a monarch in, rather than by their family name. Maria's gender is no reason to use another rule about her. The intro in this article also say that the name Maria of Jerusalem are used about her. Thereby, I assume it would be okay to rename the article. I will leave this message here for others to give their oppinion on the matter all the same before a move is made. --Aciram (talk) 21:39, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: She's normally called "Maria of Montferrat" in English, for whatever reason. You do see "Maria of Jerusalem" (or "Mary of Jerusalem"), but not as often. Adam Bishop (talk) 07:56, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

text: I would support moving the article to Maria of Jerusalem or Maria, Queen of Jerusalem (to comply with Sibylla, Queen of Jerusalem and Melisende, Queen of Jerusalem). Surtsicna (talk) 12:11, 20 May 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree, it should be moved to Maria, Queen of Jerusalem as it indicates who she was--David (talk) 14:59, 20 May 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I never understand that argument. The article indicates who she is; why must the title indicate it, especially if it's an artificial title invented for Wikipedia that is never used anywhere else? Hardly any title indicates what something or someone actually is. We don't have an article titled Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia anyone can edit, do we? Adam Bishop (talk) 19:10, 20 May 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with Adam Bishop. If Maria of Montferrat is more common name then that should be the title.--Queen Elizabeth II's Little Spy (talk) 04:07, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Name change
Talk:Kutadgu Bilig

message: Why are you reverted my edits in Yusuf Balasaghuni page?I just added translation in modern uyghur language that most closest to the language of turkic of Balasaghuni rather than modern Turkish. Also there is a many mistakes in transliteration of middle turkic text that written turkish style where there is no sounds like "Q" ("Қ")  and because of that some words are written wrong like "Kamuğ" (it suppose to be a "Qamuğ")
So i leave my uyghur translation here:
:Modern Uyghur Latin translation:
:Xuda ati birle sözüm bashladım, töreltken, östürgen, kechürgen izim	
:Tola medhi birle tümen ming sena, qadir bir Xudagha, anga yoq pena
:Qongur yer, yashıl kök, kün, ay birle tün — yaratti zaman, waqit, mexluq we kün.	
:U xalap yaratti, yaraldi pütün, u birla dédi "bol", bar oldi pütün.
:Bu barche yaralghan mohtajdur anga, igem sen bihajet, yoq hemrah sanga.
:Ay qadir we menggü bihajet Bayat, séningdin bölekke yarashmas bu at.
:Ulughluq sanga hem büyüklük sanga, seningdin bölek yoq sanga tur tenga.	
:Ey bir sen, birikmes sanga bashqa bir, burun sen jimidin, jimidin axir.
And one thing a want to mention, what is you definition of "central asian" (or "eastern turkic"), what is that?Who is this in your opinion?Did you even know that modern day uyghur language is also was called "Eastern Turki" by scholars? SatukBughraKhan (talk) 08:06, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I do not support keeping the Turkish trans. either but this (about modern uyghur language that most closest to the language of turkic of Balasaghuni) is riduclous argumentation. TrangaBellam (talk) 11:33, 5 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why are you reverted my edits in Yusuf Balasaghuni page?
Talk:Alexander Cunningham

message: I have broken up the article into sections, as a lot of new material was added. Most of what I have added is biographical, and is derived from Cunningham's The Ancient Geography of India (ref provided). I have also added a few lines about his participation in the now-controversial border de-limitation in Ladakh and Kashmir, as he led two commissions there. I have a full list of his publications..wondering if it can be put in? Any comments?Prashanthns (talk) 13:40, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Changes 

message: Would someone knowledgeable please do something to fix this article and add appropriate references please? As it stands the article is a mess. John Hill (talk) 12:01, 19 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Article needs a lot of work
Talk:John Clyn

message: Like so much of Wikipedia, this article is spoilt by including fiction in it, as if the fiction were as important and no different in worth from the fact. I think such fiction, in a factual article, should be at least assigned to a parallel article so that the non-fiction and the fiction/trivia/worthlessstuff are kept seperate. 89.240.58.231 (talk) 19:11, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I have to say that I agree with your move. There is an abundance of fictional information on Wikipedia which leads to guidelines such as this one for dealing with it.  The information you removed was, although probably appropriate in an article about that book, inappropriate and trivial in this particular article. ThemFromSpace 18:36, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article spoilt by fictional section "Other" 

message: But surely there was no university of Dublin in the 14th century? am I missing something? Moonraker2 (talk) 22:28, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: "He may have attended the university at Dublin"
Talk:John Comyn, Earl of Buchan

message: Hello Authors! There are references in the reference section, but no references linked to the specific assertions they support. Would someone familiar with the content and references create references to support the assertions in the article? This will help to remove the template that is asking for more references at the top of the article. Also, are there any portraits of Jon Comyn that could be posted to Wikimedia Commons under an open/free license, and then added to this article? Or, perhaps some other image pertaining to the content of the article that can be freely licensed? Snapdragon66 (talk) 23:49, 31 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  References
Talk:Meir of Rothenburg

message: According to other sources, Rabbi Meir died on May 4th. (corresponding to the Jewish date 19th of Iyyar, 5053. See, e.g., http://www.zadikim.org/index.asp?catID=17101&siteLang=3).-- -- --  21:51, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Date of death 

message: Do we have an accurate source that tells of Rabbi Meir of Rothenburg's death while he laid up in prison? According to Gedaliah ibn Jechia the Spaniard, in his momentous work Shalshelet Ha-Kabbalah, Jerusalem 1962, p. 134 (Hebrew), Rabbi Meir of Rothenburg died in the year 1305, one year before the general expulsion of all Jews from France. It is perhaps best to recheck all sources. I know that there were two Rabbi Meirs who lived roughly around the same time. However, the Spanish chronicler (ibid.) makes it clear that his Rabbi Meir of Rothenburg died that year in prison.Davidbena (talk) 05:20, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Verifying the Year of Death of R. Meir of Rothenburg 

message: The French wikipedia article has the date as 1242, which seems to make more sense to me. (https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proc%C3%A8s_du_Talmud)  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ezelhaar (talk • contribs) 12:12, 31 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Date of autodafe of Paris 

message: Amongst those who have actually heard of him, this person is widely known as the Maharam of Rothenburg and I propose to move this page to that name. --Dweller (talk) Become old fashioned! 15:15, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Well - whatever we do - we need both in the lede and redirect either way. Looking at this from a COMMONNAME perspective, I think Meir of Rothenburg  is more common in English. Maharam is a Hebrew acronym (מהר"ם = מורנו הרב רבי מאיר) of (loose translation) "Our teacher the rabbi rabbi Meir" - which loses its meaning in English. If we go to the major league of acronymed rabbis - Maimonides (רמב"ם), Nachmanides (רמב"ן), Moses Isserles (רמ"א), Shlomo ibn Aderet (רשב"א), and Rashi (רש"י) - only Rashi retains the transliterated Hebrew acronym in English (and there is cause for Rashi's uniqueness). In hewiki they went the acronym way (across the board) - vote - but it was a fairly close vote - 22-16 - and in Hebrew the acronyms "make sense" (are legible/understandable) and are widely used.  Icewhiz (talk) 13:29, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

text: To put this numerically - "Maharam of Rothenburg" has ~110 google-scholar hits and ""Meir of Rothenburg" has ~680 google-scholar hits. Icewhiz (talk) 13:44, 1 July 2019 (UTC)
replies: text:  As long as both are in the lede and the "other" one is a redirect, it doesn't matter much. But I think for the reasons @Icewhiz has stated, leaving it alone wins for me. StevenJ81 (talk) 13:52, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

text:  I agree with both Icewhiz and Steven. Debresser (talk) 19:43, 2 July 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed move
Talk:John de Ufford

message: Obviously these are the same individuals, merely spelling changes. Ealdgyth | Talk 18:20, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed merge 
Talk:John FitzAlan, 1st Baron Arundel

message: Isn't rather his son the Lord Marshal from 1377 to 1383? --VM (talk) 13:50, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Indeed, how did he serve to 1383 if he died in 1379?--Brian Dell (talk) 12:27, 14 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lord Marshal 

message: I'm researching Henry Fitzlangley. This page claims that he's the son of John FitzAlan and Eleanor Maltravers but with no apparent source. The edit was anonymous. 
This parentage also comes up frequently on Ancestry.com (this is my entry, but linked to many others). As on Wikipedia, though, there are no sources provided to validate it. (Ancestry's "Millenium file" confirms that Henry Fitz Langley was a real person and father of Alice Fitz Langley, but does not suggest who his parents were).
His surname suggests that he was not a FitzAlan at all. Can anyone shed a light on who Henry Fitzlangley was? 
SheamusPatt (talk)
 — Preceding unsigned comment added by SheamusPatt (talk • contribs) 16:45, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Who is Henry Fitzlangley?
Talk:Ludwig Mond

message: Some suggestions for improvement as the article is expanded:
*Lead needs expanding and should emphasise reasons for notability of subject
*Some appropriate headings present, but further organisation would be beneficial
*Information on research should be expanded
*Some references present, but some material unsourced
*External links to useful online resources should be added if available
Espresso Addict 18:32, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Review comments
Talk:I Don't Want to Wait

message: It's humorous that Ms. Cole is chastised about the poor grammar in her lyrics when this article includes the sentence: "This single, with a 56 week-long run, is still among the list of the 20 songs in the history of the Billboard Hot 100 to have had a chart run longer than 50 weeks." How can it "still" be in the list of 20 songs having charted for over 50 weeks - one would presume of such a list that it would always "still" be on it since 56 will always exceed 50. Now, that list may eventually exceed 20 songs given the stated definition, but that's not what the sentence says. Jmdeur (talk) 02:31, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

message: Was this meant to be an anti-war song.?--Hhielscher (talk) 23:12, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is this an anti-war song? 
Talk:Jo Ramírez

message: This page contains several minor errors that should be corrected:
It says that Ramirez was associated with 10 F1 Driver's Championships, but only lists 9 years.
It indicates (with a †) that Ramirez' daughter Ana Vanessa died and his wife Bea is alive, but
Ramirez talks about his wife's death in the second edition of his autobiography and his
daughter Ana Vanessa was clearly still alive at the time it was written (2010).
To my knowledge, the World Sportscar Driver's Championship did not exist at the time that
Pedro Rodriguez was driving.
It says that Ramirez "dropped out in 1960 to follow his friend Ricardo Rodríguez to Europe",
but in his autobiography, Ramirez said that he first traveled to Europe in February 1962."
Bill321 (talk) 04:31, 18 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  needs some cleanup 