lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Indohyus

message: Why was the family page moved to the page for a single genus within that family?  This has been turned into such a mess that I'm not sure what the standard practice is for fixing it.  Basically, the history of Raoellidae should probably be preserved there, then the article as it currently stands (pertaining only to Indohyus) should be moved here.  I guess one of the two has to have a cut and paste job at this point.  Which should it be?  --Aranae (talk) 12:55, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Like I said, I really have no idea how to retain the proper history in a situation like thta.  I have therefore cpied a historical version of this page over at Raoellidae.  --Aranae (talk) 22:11, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Family versus genus

message: I am writing a bio. I know him. Give me til Dec 31 2018 --Akrasia25 (talk) 13:17, 3 December 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: , please remember to start new threads at the bottom of the talk page, and it is unnecessary to spam all talk pages with the same message.--Mr Fink (talk) 13:31, 3 December 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Hans Thewissen Bio

message: Wondering if we can remove this section or rephrase it or add it to all the other archeo cetaceans.
"O'Leary & Gatesy 2008 postulates an extinct group of carnivorous mammals called "mesonychids" as more closely related to cetaceans. " 
Things have moved on and we have so much evidence that archeo cetaceans came from Artiodactyls but this is not a POV. Just think we should add this paragraph to many other articles if we keep it here. Thoughts?Akrasia25 (talk) 20:52, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Carnivore origins?
Talk:Timothy Allen

message: A recent edit: "Removing external link: *.timothyallen.blogs.bbcearth.com -- per m:User:COIBot/XWiki/timothyallen.blogs.bbcearth.com"
The cited link is a "BOT generated Meta report"; by contrast, this is a thinking human writing.
I, who have not contributed to the article and have not been accused of having any COI, declare that this "blog" is exceptionally interesting, a fact that might override the tut-tuttings of that bot. It is true, however, that the blog is linked from Allen's site. -- Hoary (talk) 13:24, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Blog
Talk:The Bully and the Beast

message: Okay so you’re kicking around Wikipedia and you come across this article and think, “Hey this article doesn’t even have a plot summary.  I think I’ll recommend that this short story be merged with the short story collection it came from.”  Well that is not a good idea for a two very good reasons.  First of all, Orson Scott Card published most of his short stories in two or three different anthologies so that an attempt at combining his stories with their collections would result in multiple listings.  The second reason is that Card’s biggest collection Maps in a Mirror contains 46 short stories and more than half of them have fairly long articles about them which include plot summaries, connections to other stories, critical reception, publication history, book covers etc.  The problem is that if all these stories were merged into Maps in a Mirror it would result in an article that is about three miles long.
So… If you want to help, try doing something constructive with your time like writing a summary for this story.  Pmcalduff (talk) 06:56, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: There is no evidence that this story is notable, so I suggest that this page should be changed to a redirect to Cardography Guy who reads a lot (talk) 22:36, 26 March 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: There's been no response to the suggestion to delete or redirect in the last ten months, so unless there's some objection, I will change this to a redirect to the Cardography article in a day or two. Guy who reads a lot (talk) 04:55, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  delete or redirect
Talk:Will Allen (urban farmer)

message: I always see the man referred to as Will Allen, never Willie Allen.  I think this has probably prevented people from finding this page before.  I propose it be changed.
In a somewhat separate issue, is Will Allen still known best for being a  basketball player? This was surely the case a few decades ago, but it seems now he is more famous as an urban farmer/the leader of Growing Power. Will Allen (urban farmer) is available.--Hraefen Talk 19:52, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I've moved the page. I agree, he's probably better known as a farmer. His pro basketball career was rather short. Zagalejo^^^ 23:37, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: name of page and person

message: I'm thinking this page should also go into the WikiProjects for Agriculture and Horticulture and Gardening. Especially given the above discussion that Allen's more important to urban farming than he is to the history of basketball. Possibly the WP for Wisconsin, too. Thoughts? Bs4173 (talk) 21:13, 5 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: WikiProjects
Talk:The Cares of a Family Man

message: When trying to source some claims, I noticed that there are a few places online that have copied this article verbatim, and i was also unable to independently find sources for some of the interpretations. 
If someone wishes to take the lead I would be happy assisting with finding sources and rewriting parts of the article if necessary Thepenguin9 (talk) 19:16, 17 July 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  General notice for editors looking to improve/overhaul the article
Talk:The Changed Man and the King of Words

message: This article lacks citations to  reliable sources to show that the story is notable.  Either such sources should be added, or the article should be deleted or merged.  Guy who reads a lot (talk) 01:56, 22 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Notable? 

message: I am tagging this for deletion, since no reasons have been advanced to suggest that this short story is notable (although the author is notable). Guy who reads a lot (talk) 22:38, 3 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Deletion proposed
Talk:The Girls' Guide to Hunting and Fishing

message: Since this book is actually a collection of short stories, as the article says, isn't it kind of strange that the title of the article ends with (novel)?  Shouldn't it be (short story collection) or (book)?  
Or, since this is the original work with that title, why do we need the qualifier at all? --Jfruh (talk) 16:54, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  (novel)?
Talk:The Little Black Bag

message: Two quibbles. From what I remember of the story, I don't think Angie kills Fall with a scalpel - I think he falls and hits his head during their struggle for the bag. After all, the scalpels operate in such a way that they can't cause harm to living tissue. The second quibble is that the technician switches off the bag simply because he and his colleagues assume that, the bag being lost, it probably isn't much use to anyone. However, there was a television dramatisation of the story which used the "murder alert" plotline, so perhaps the article can be changed to reflect this. Halmyre (talk) 11:16, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: You could be right. I may have gotten this confused with the dramatization. I'll check it out. Clarityfiend (talk) 20:23, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

text: Nope. He's stabbed in the back with a scalpel, and the technician deactivates the bag because it has been used in a homicide. Clarityfiend (talk) 18:37, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah, OK. Although I thought the scalpels couldn't cause harm to anyone? After all, at the end of the story Angie is drawing a scalpel across her neck(?) to demonstrate how safe the process is. Halmyre (talk) 16:09, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I realize this is a very old discussion, and it's been even longer since I've read the story, but as I recall, there was one essentially normal scalpel in the bag, for use in exceptional cases when the non-harmful ones wouldn't suffice. That's what she uses to commit the murder. Mahousu (talk) 00:52, 12 January 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Plot 
Talk:Kendall Walton

message: I would just like to comment that I am quite angry that the page was deleted with only the vague phrase "it was a copyright violation". There seems to have been very little discussion about it, no explanation of how it violated whose copyright, and I am dissatisfied. Still, what are the ordinary folk of Wikipedia supposed to do against the "gods"? Chris Martin (talk) 13:24, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: In the article it says that "The genesis of the make-believe theory can be found in Walton's 1978 paper 'Fearing Fictions'". That cannot be true as I am currently reading a paper from 1973 called "Pictures and Make-Believe" (published in the Philosophicl Review, Vol 82, No. 3)  where he already has a worked out concept of make-believe as the basis of representationa art.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.70.82.221 (talk) 19:16, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Origins of Make-Believe Theory 

message: ...is dead. Working link is http://sitemaker.umich.edu/klwalton/files/cv_29april2013.pdf
thanks. Prophetoffrivolity (talk) 04:55, 23 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Link to curriculum vitae
Talk:The Monkeys Thought 'Twas All in Fun

message: Okay so you’re kicking around Wikipedia and you come across this article and think, “Hey this article doesn’t even have a plot summary.  I think I’ll recommend that this short story be merged with the short story collection it came from.”  Well that is not a good idea for a two very good reasons.  First of all, Orson Scott Card published most of his short stories in two or three different anthologies so that an attempt at combining his stories with their collections would result in multiple listings.  The second reason is that Card’s biggest collection Maps in a Mirror contains 46 short stories and more than half of them have fairly long articles about them which include plot summaries, connections to other stories, critical reception, publication history, book covers etc.  The problem is that if all these stories were merged into Maps in a Mirror it would result in an article that is about three miles long.
So… If you want to help, try doing something constructive with your time like writing a summary for this story.  Pmcalduff (talk) 06:45, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Is there any evidence that this story is notable?  Seems to be a non-notable story by a notable author. Guy who reads a lot (talk) 02:44, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Notable?
Talk:Double hashing

message: The second function has to be subtracted.
:The presentation in Knuth does subtract the offset produced by the second hash function, but the important thing is that the offset is a function of the key, and that it be in the interval {1,T-1}. The offset can be added or subtracted. Sbalfour (talk) 16:01, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: New section

message: Just as there is linear and quadratic probing to resolve collisions, there is linear and quadratic double hashing, and as might be suspected analogous to the probing cases, quadratic double hashing is superior to linear double hashing.  The entire content of this article is about linear double hashing. I propose we either add quadratic double hashing here, or split off an article for it. Sbalfour (talk) 16:29, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm unable to find a citation for "Quadratic double hashing" (searching for that phrase turns up only comparisons of quadratic hashing and double hashing), but I added  which I think covers the field. 196.247.24.12 (talk) 22:16, 5 March 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Linear and Quadratic double hashing
Talk:The Originist

message: Is this story notable?  This is the only story in the anthology Foundation's Friends that has its own article, but I don't see any evidence that it's any more notable than any of the others.  I propose changing this article to a redirect to Foundation's Friends Guy who reads a lot (talk) 19:11, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Keep – I have no opinion on this story's notability; nevertheless I support keeping the article. – Conrad T. Pino (talk) 05:37, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: If you have no reason to think that the story's notability, what reason do you suggest for keeping it?  Guy who reads a lot (talk) 02:19, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

text: Astonishingly short and slight article, especially given it's not even marked as a stub.  Perhaps because it has no reasonable possibility to grow beyond stub length?  Given that, and its only two sources, both primary ones that are straight-up publisher blurbs, I'm very much of a mind to merge and redirect.  109.255.211.6 (talk) 14:05, 26 September 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Change to Redirect?
Talk:Kevin Smith (running back)

message: Kevin smith is not a free agent and is still a lion. If there is proof otherwise please post a link.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.41.68.35 (talk) 09:18, 13 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Not a free agent 
Talk:Aaron Allston

message: The league of spies, Published by The Srengseng Publishing Group.  --89.152.177.195 (talk) 05:12, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Add it! 67.175.176.178 (talk) 05:35, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Missing Work... 

message: I don't know if anyone has access to HighBeam, but according to this search, there may be some good sources out there for Allston. BOZ (talk) 14:55, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  HighBeam
Talk:The Porcelain Salamander

message: Okay so you’re kicking around Wikipedia and you come across this article and think, “Hey this article doesn’t even have a plot summary.  I think I’ll recommend that this short story be merged with the short story collection it came from.”  Well that is not a good idea for a two very good reasons.  First of all, Orson Scott Card published most of his short stories in two or three different anthologies so that an attempt at combining his stories with their collections would result in multiple listings.  The second reason is that Card’s biggest collection Maps in a Mirror contains 46 short stories and more than half of them have fairly long articles about them which include plot summaries, connections to other stories, critical reception, publication history, book covers etc.  The problem is that if all these stories were merged into Maps in a Mirror it would result in an article that is about three miles long.
So… If you want to help, try doing something constructive with your time like writing a summary for this story.  Pmcalduff (talk) 06:45, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: The article gives no evidence of notability of the story, although the author is notable, and has no citations or external references.  I suggest that this article be a redirect to Unaccompanied Sonata and Other Stories.
Guy who reads a lot (talk) 01:57, 26 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed deletion (or, better yet, redirect)
Talk:The Princess and the Bear

message: Okay so you’re kicking around Wikipedia and you come across this article and think, “Hey this article doesn’t even have a plot summary.  I think I’ll recommend that this short story be merged with the short story collection it came from.”  Well that is not a good idea for a two very good reasons.  First of all, Orson Scott Card published most of his short stories in two or three different anthologies so that an attempt at combining his stories with their collections would result in multiple listings.  The second reason is that Card’s biggest collection Maps in a Mirror contains 46 short stories and more than half of them have fairly long articles about them which include plot summaries, connections to other stories, critical reception, publication history, book covers etc.  The problem is that if all these stories were merged into Maps in a Mirror it would result in an article that is about three miles long.
So… If you want to help, try doing something constructive with your time like writing a summary for this story.  Pmcalduff (talk) 06:56, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: This article does not give any evidence that the story is notable, in fact, it has very little content at all.  I suggest that the article be changed to a redirect pointing to Cardography. Guy who reads a lot (talk) 22:29, 26 March 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Since no one has suggested a reason that this article is notable, I am changing the article to a redirect to the collection it appears in. Guy who reads a lot (talk) 02:30, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Delete or Redirect
Talk:The Shadow Kingdom

message: :However, in "Delcardes Cat" Kull encounters what seems to be, though not explicitly, a community of serpent men living under a lake (like the nagas of Indian mythology, arguably the source of inspiration for the serpent men) close to his capital. There, he discovers their version of the conflict between serpent men and "true" men, learning that the same thing may look quite different from the other side of the square. Probably Kull did abandon his vow to destroy the serpent men after that. Quite clearly, the land that is Stygia in the days of Conan was the last stronghold of the serpent men, long after Kull. It was the conquerors coming from the east, perhaps ultimately ancient Mu, who destroyed the Serpent Men.
I've removed the above paragraph from the plot section of the article because it is not from this specific publication and including it here is just plain confusing. "Delcardes' Cat" is part of the Kull (short story collection) so if anything this information should go there. 2601:342:100:9000:4934:6F35:B466:CFA3 (talk) 19:03, 26 September 2021 (UTC)
Talk:Archduke Carl Ludwig of Austria (1918–2007)

message: What is the correct form ? In the ressources - German and English links and books -  you can see both possibilities.
In which form had Karl Ludwig (Carl Ludwig) written his name ? This must be the correct version. 
--AndreaMimi (talk) 18:32, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Karl Ludwig or Carl Ludwig
Talk:Lambert I, Count of Louvain

message: There is a move discussion in progress which affects this page. Please participate at Talk:Counts of Leuven - Requested move and not in this talk page section. Thank you.  —RM bot 05:21, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Move discussion in progress

message: There is a move discussion in progress which affects this page. Please participate at Talk:Counts of Louvain - Requested move and not in this talk page section. Thank you.  —RM bot 22:01, 14 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Move discussion in progress

message: thanks for your edits. Just to make sure we miss nothing:
*I don't feel strongly about the "I" but I have a nagging doubt that this particular one is commonly used outside of internet genealogies. Do scholars often call him "I"? I normally read about him in Dutch and French and I don't think they normally do that. A reason for caution is that there were/are old speculations about earlier counts named Lambert, meaning the genealogists are not consistent on this. Another thing to consider is that there were not many Lamberts in this family.
*Concerning the wording "ancestor of all the future counts of Leuven and dukes of Brabant until 1355" does this not imply that Lambert himself was such a Duke?
*Any opinions about his mother? I have looked at this in the past and I think I came to the conclusion that the popular proposals about her identity were all modern speculations from antiquarians and genealogists. If I get a chance I will look again, but that is the background to my caution.--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 15:49, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: A cursory Google Books search shows that, at the very least, "Lambert I" is not a Wikipedia invention. (It takes some effort to find history books among the genealogy publications, though.) But I cannot tell whether it is common. Surtsicna (talk) 14:42, 26 June 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Sounds like a correct summary. So good enough to keep going with it until someone has a better idea.--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 14:47, 26 June 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Various 

message: it is not a big concern but I am wondering if this article is still a stub as you've indicated? (It has recently been expanded quite a lot.) I am interested to know if I misunderstand the normal criteria.--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 15:12, 13 August 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Now reassessed.--Johnsoniensis (talk) 15:17, 13 August 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Stub
Talk:Unaccompanied Sonata

message: Okay so you’re kicking around Wikipedia and you come across this article and think, “Hey this article doesn’t even have a plot summary.  I think I’ll recommend that this short story be merged with the short story collection it came from.”  Well that is not a good idea for a two very good reasons.  First of all, Orson Scott Card published most of his short stories in two or three different anthologies so that an attempt at combining his stories with their collections would result in multiple listings.  The second reason is that Card’s biggest collection Maps in a Mirror contains 46 short stories and more than half of them have fairly long articles about them which include plot summaries, connections to other stories, critical reception, publication history, book covers etc.  The problem is that if all these stories were merged into Maps in a Mirror it would result in an article that is about three miles long.
So… If you want to help, try doing something constructive with your time like writing a summary for this story.  Pmcalduff (talk) 06:45, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Summary needed
Talk:Marquee Moon (song)

message: Except for the chorus, almost this entire song uses the chords D and Bm. I find it hard to believe that due to a tricky chorus (of a rather short duration) that Hell left the band because he simply couldn't play the song. I imagine more likely is the tension created when a populist sort of guy like Hell plays with a technical player like Verlaine, they both end up going their separate ways. To make a long story short, there needs to be some cited evidence that this is why Hell left.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.81.108.72 (talk) 14:14, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. I've added a "citation needed" tag. The Richard Hell article states he either quit or was fired after a dispute over creative control. Grievous Angel (talk) 08:38, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Complex Key Changes? 

message: The chorus riff and both solos are pure mixolydian. It's misleading to imply that only Verlaine's solo uses the mixolydian scale.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.48.117.37 (talk) 07:07, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: You are right, I introduced the "mixolydian" because "jazz-like" sounded a bit vague (I still don't like it). The entire song is purely mixolydian. I am planning to publish a classification of the modes of this album, in my blog page.--Daniel (talk) 10:20, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mixolydian 

message: Undo this edit; the source cited does not describe the song as either "rock" or "art-punk". Dan56 (talk) 02:59, 6 January 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Please discuss this here on the talk page and come to a consensus of what should be used first.  Edit warring over this value led to the current protection. — xaosflux Talk 21:30, 6 January 2017 (UTC)
replies: text:  *fails to give the inquiry a proper look* Dan56 (talk) 04:32, 7 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Protected edit request on 6 January 2017
Talk:Ronen Altman Kaydar

message: is this a joke of some kind? who is this guy? seriously, I'm writing my PhD in hebrew literature and I've never heard of any of his stuff. Then I googled it, and his "poems" are mid-school level. Really, really weird.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.101.48.50 (talk) 06:05, 1 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Worthing Farm

message: Is this story notable in its own right ? Or would it be better to incorporate in the article on the collection in which it appears, or the one on the series it forms part of ? -- Beardo (talk) 04:28, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Definitely should be merged. Done. Damien Linnane (talk) 17:54, 18 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Notability