lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
File talk:Replace this image.svg

message: Since this is an image placeholder, please place Category:Wikipedia image placeholders on the bottom of the image page. Thanks. GregManninLB (talk) 14:23, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Done --David Göthberg (talk) 02:01, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Category:Wikipedia image placeholders

message: This should be changed to 'Can you provide one?' or something like that on this image and all its other forms. Often images can be uploaded by people without they themselves being the owner - public domain drawings from expired copyright, suitably licensed photos on Flickr etc are often suitable. Richard001 (talk) 23:51, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: "Do you own one?" isn't appropriate

message: I keep encountering this thing in articles; not all editors are aware of the Centralized Discussion that nixed, by WP community-wide consensus, the use of this and similar images on article pages, and some are thus still deploying it. The status of this image as deprecated is very clear and needs to be made clearer (but it should not be deleted; the centralized and pre-centralized debates about it are of great precedential value, but would be rendered rather inexplicable if the image disappeared, as it is used numerous times in the course of the debate).
#Please place the following at the top of the image page: 
#Please also remove the tricky redirect, or at least comment it out; it still strongly suggests that these placeholder images are accepted and directly encourages their use.
These changes should be applied to any and all images in this series. I have so far tagged four of them for this editprotected cleanup.
— SMcCandlish [talk] [cont]  ‹(-¿-)› 09:23, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: . — Huntster (t • @ • c) 09:56, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Effectively disable 

message: What the heck is this image doing here? We should remove it immediately, it does not have any justifications.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.212.21.109 (talk) 21:21, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  This image doesn't belong
Talk:History of Athlone

message: Hi. This article has two section headings. One for "Castle". One for "Barracks". 
Under the "castle" section, there is lots of content completely unrelated to the castle (bridges, etc). Ditto for the "barracks" section (stuff about workhouse, John Locke, weir, etc).
Unless someone can explain the value of these section heads, I propose reorganising the sections on different lines. To be honest I'm not entirely sure what to propose. Chronologically ordered would seem more sensible for a history article. Or, if we are to keep an arrangement where we organise on "geographical" lines (and have sections covering the history of specific buildings/structures), then at least we should add another section to cover the "other" content ("castle", "barracks", "other"). 
Whatever the solution, I think just about anything (including removing the section heads altogether) would be better than the current arrangement. Guliolopez (talk) 16:43, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Are there any comments/insights on the above? If not I will probably restructure this article in the coming days... Guliolopez (talk) 01:36, 17 March 2014 (UTC)
replies: text:  A year later, I finally got around to addressing some of these points. Guliolopez (talk) 11:43, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sections and structure 
Talk:Right to health

message: Here is an interesting article on the topic of the right to health in the lancet:
--WS 20:32, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: This article needs a criticism section. Not everyone believes that this right exists.
--75.130.139.171 (talk) 02:58, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: WP:UNDUE, WP:FRINGE. - Gilgamesh (talk) 14:38, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Criticism?
Talk:New York State Public High School Athletic Association

message: This article may need to be deleted. Some suggestions:
# NYSPHSAA in the title needs to be capitalized, as it is an acronym.
# An article on NYSPHSAA itself is needed, including a list of the different sections and their geographical boundaries.  
# Since the Association deals with all public high school sports, not just wrestling, maybe this is too specific of an article.  Or, we need to add similar articles for all sections and all sports. Tckma 20:39, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Nysphsaa section one wrestling
Talk:Causes of the Indian Rebellion of 1857

message: Hope those who have worked on this page are okay with the alterations (see my edit summary) I made to the opening paragraph. I think it is now improved in clarity and balance (betw. immediate cause and underlying). Jon Acheson (talk) 03:06, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: I can't find what the 1853 Enfield rifle cartridges were coated with anywhere.
Could anyone shed some light on what grease was used? (Lucas(CA) 20:48, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Do you have a reference for that? Francis Davey (talk) 20:29, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Enfield Rifle Coatings

message: Which regligious practacies were outlawd by the EIC?ersge5y [[[User:Slatersteven|Slatersteven]] (talk) 18:22, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: out laawing regligt43tergergereion

message: ... 2405:204:2186:AFD7:0:0:137A:30AC (talk) 15:11, 6 August 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  The great march (from meerut to delhi)
Talk:Western Pomerania Lagoon Area National Park

message: The attached photograph might be usefully added to this article.  I'll leave that to those who curate this page though.  RobbieIanMorrison (talk) 12:14, 8 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Photograph of observation hut at Alter Bessin 
Talk:Transform, clipping, and lighting

message: Normally I'd take a few minutes to clean up the double redirects after this move, but Wikipedia is suffering extraordinarily serious problems for the last half-hour or so, and may be about to crash for the day (that hasn't happened in a couple of years, I think).  I'll be back later. Michael Hardy 21:07, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: I'll be back

message: > T&L was implemented in software until 1999
T&L was done in hardware as early as 1981, possibly earlier.  See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geometry_Engine.  This article is written with a heavy bias towards consumer technology.  Here's a link to a document from nVidia that touches on the history of 3D graphics:  http://barbagroup.bu.edu/gpuatbu/Program_files/Luebke_GPUatBU.pdf  It shows images of Jim Clark's 1982 Geometry Engine design which did hardware T&L and other SGI graphics systems which were the predecessors to nVidia's original GeForce GPU design (they were sued over this later and lost actually).  The hardware section needs a rewrite.--LookoutforChris (talk) 17:38, 10 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Consumer Bias
Talk:Jeff Easley

message: It is not fair use of copyrighted images of book covers to use them in an article about the artist, unless commentary is specifically being made on the art in question. As such, I have removed the images again. If anyone disagrees with this, feel free to bring it up at fair use review or in some other forum, but this is a incredibly obvious case. --Pak21 21:22, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use
Talk:The Naval Annual

message: There should be some reference to the cessation of publication after 1992. Was a decision made to go on-line, but the publisher collapse?203.80.61.102 (talk) 00:35, 4 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Last publication 

message: Howard from NYC (talk) 15:39, 6 July 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Q: online viewable?
Talk:Oliver Samuels

message: There is obviously a dispute about whether Samuels is a stand up comic or not.
If he is, we need citations from publications referring to specific performances.
If he is not -- and it's difficult to prove a negative -- citations could refer to refer to published statements, preferably made by Oliver himself, that he is not a stand up comic. 
Pavium 21:47, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Li (neo-Confucianism)

message: Thank you for this. I see that on the Chinese philosophy page, section "Concepts within Chinese philosophy", the reference for "Li" is to the Li (Confucian) page. Is that correct? Or should it link here? Hundovir (talk) 19:44, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, you are correct. Fixed. Caorongjin (talk) 23:19, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Link 

message: The Li is not the reference to Daoism and to say this can be very misleading. Le is through correct ritual. Like blood going through the veins. Not the path. Health and wellbeing is very important. We should understand what we say before we talk on subjects like this. Zongqi (talk) 23:16, 29 October 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tao in Taoists.
Talk:2005 Canadian Grand Prix/to do

message: This article is a Formula One race report. For editing guidelines on style and structure, please take a look at the Example race report.
Please list your sources when you have completed a task.
Article
* Add references.
* Restructure to meet Formula One race report standards.
Report
*Write a race report.  Done.
*Verify the race report using (new) references.
*Expand the report with subsections for pre-race, practice, qualifying and post-race.
*Cleanup the "Notes" section.
*Write a good lead section.
*Add photographs to the article.  Done.
Results
*Add race results.  Added. BillCook
*Verify the race results and add a reference.  Verified using F1DB.com Luka666 (talk) 05:06, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
Talk:Trochulus

message: I should like to point out that Trochulus is not a valid name. Read for the sound reasons page 147 in:
*Falkner, G., Ripken, T.E.J., Falkner, M., 2002. Mollusques Continentaux de France: Liste de Référence Annotée et Bibliographie. -- Museum National d’Histoire Naturelle, Paris, 350 pp.; ISBN2.85653.539.9.
It is obvious that Trochulus should be renamed into  Trichia  W. Hartmann 1840.--Tom Meijer (talk) 10:17, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: As I am sure you know, for our basic taxonomy here on WP, we have to follow a "reliable source" and we were following the usage on AnimalBase for all our land snail basics. However, if you ever want to add a note to this article saying that these authors considered this name to be invalid in 2002, and give a ref, that would be really great! By the way, our project has 25,000 articles and no more than 25 workers, so if you want to make sure someone reads your note, please leave it on the gastropod project talk page, that way it will be seen for sure! Thanks! Invertzoo (talk) 00:12, 20 October 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: ''Trochulus'' not a valid name
Talk:Blastocystis hominis

message: ::Greetings....to anyone who is following this Wiki entry.  I'd like to solicit input on a major revision to the article.  There have been a series of papers published in the last year which I think should be included.   They would include Unaiza Parkar's work showing zoonotic transmission; Dr. Suresh Kumar's lab work on genetics/behavior of isolates from symptomatic vs. asymptomatic carriers; Dr. Rune Stensvold's paper from Denmark; plus Dr. Omar Amin's research from the US (lists symptoms on 800+ Blastocystis patients). 
::The other change I'd like to propose is making the article look more like some of the other entries for infectious diseases, like Toxoplasmosis or Malaria.  This would involve including the little box with the diagnosis code, genus, etc. on the page.  Also, I'd like to propose switching the reference style to the auto-formatted type which is used in the other medical articles.  The reason being that as more references are added, it will take more time to maintain the reference list at the bottom.  Also, I believe that feature puts in PUBMED links automatically, which is a nice feature for medical articles.
::Comments welcome.  
Gastro_guy 21:54, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Proposed Major Edit
Talk:Timeline of prenatal development

message: I separated this page from prenatal development, not because that one was unreasonably long, but to make it like a portal to all aspects of prenatal development. A timeline like this is only one way to present it, another one is by each organ individually. Therefore, I say they are to be kept separate, and that a summary of this list is created on that page. Eventhough it isn't vey long now, it has potential to become really huge, and I think it is good to prepare for that already now. Mikael Häggström 16:37, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I made a summary of this article in prenatal development, so it now looks like the idea I had when I first moved the article to this page. I know it would have created less confusion if it was done right away. Anyhow, I find both that and this article much more potential to expand now, so personally I vote to keep them separate. Mikael Häggström 17:32, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Keep separate or merge with [[prenatal development]] 

message: The issue here is whether prenatal development is now long enough to require splitting off the timeline.  See Wikipedia:Summary_style.  I think not.  Does anyone disagree?Ferrylodge 04:55, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I partly agree, and can accept such a merge. Still, I find it a pleasant page to go to separately, but I agree that it's not really very long. Anyhow, if it be merged, it should be split into the embryonic and fetal sections, where there are summaries now. Earlier it was inconsistent with the rest of the article. Mikael Häggström 05:11, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, we'll merge as you suggest.  Then someday if the article gets too long, then we'll consider splitting at that time.Ferrylodge 07:34, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I too support a merge. This article is around 12kB, and so is the prenatal development article. Since there is some redundancy, I anticipate the merged articles to be around 20-22kB, which is still not too long. I agree with Mikael that it's neat to have a page with it all in one place, however, there are already a lot of articles on this topic, and merging some down makes sense to me to help clean things up.-Andrew c [talk] 13:38, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Splitting
Talk:Swift's silver mine

message: Likely 99% legend. The part about carrying bars and coins out of the mine is especially ludicrous.Rlevse 00:21, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, there is significant evidence against it's existence, but that doesn't disqualify it from having it's own article. I think the claim was that Swift mined the ore and coined it, then brought it out. Acdixon (talk • contribs • [http://tools.wikimedia.de/~interiot/cgi-bin/Tool1/wannabe_kate?username={{urlencode:{
}}}&site=  count]) 14:48, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Legend

message: To the contrary of what is said below there is a lot of proof that he existed. Read the following site: http://www.alexandrianews.org/?p=749 he lived in Alexandria and there are records to prove it. Swift was active in the colonial politics of the time. In regards to the number of years he lived, it depends upon the journal you read. There were many derivitives of the real one. With a little research you can track down the real one and read it. Michael Paul Henson (the author) investigated and eventualy tracked down the original and had a copy of it. I have pictures of what I believe may be one of his mines, the lesser one(Its real close to the exact longitude and latitude he gives). Regarding his packing silver and other booty into the remote wilderness, smelting it and then packing it back...well that theory is out there, he could easily have taken it to an island or even done it aboard ship and not had to fight indians and weather. The idea its all an alagory about masonry is far fetched also. I have apicture of a deed where he sold part of the interest in the mine while in England. There are always people trying to theorize (armcair detectives)when that facts are in his journal plain and simple. Get out there and look, you may find things more important than the mine. Silversluthe (talk) 22:45, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Regarding Swift
Talk:Porphyrellus porphyrosporus

message: Two images for Porphirellus Porphirosporus look like two different species. The second one looks more like the real one to me, but I am not an expert.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mbashtanov (talk • contribs) 20:06, 16 October 2022 (UTC)

message: The text in article claims that this fungi is inedible, bad taste, ...
But on the lower left corner it is marked that it is edible. The latest is I think correct.
BubikolRamios (talk) 11:05, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  confusing inf. 

message: Two images for Porphirellus Porphirosporus look like two different species. The second one looks more like the real one to me, but I am not an expert. Mbashtanov (talk) 20:09, 16 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  mismatching images
Talk:Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests

message: I removed a bad section as it completely misrepresented the story. the news article here does discuss the group however if someone else wants to use it. Benjiboi 21:45, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removed bad section 

message: The article should maybe explain what was the initial reaction of SNAP when the Vatican announced a ban on gay seminarians (see Instruction Concerning the Criteria for the Discernment of Vocations with regard to Persons with Homosexual Tendencies in view of their Admission to the Seminary and to Holy Orders). As I seem to recall, SNAP was not entirely satisfied, and some in Rome were apparently criticizing SNAP for hypocrisy, for wanting on one hand an end to clerical pedophilia, and on the other for being slightly opposed to a ban on gay seminarians. ADM (talk) 21:25, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Seems like a way to conflate being gay with pedophilia, which SNAP doesn't readily perpetuate. Instead their work seems to focus on justice issues regardless of a predator's sexuality and exposing the concealment of abuse.  -- Banjeboi 03:45, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Views on ban of homosexual seminarians

message: In a quotation within a 12/19/2004 AP article in the Beaufort Gazette, David Clohessey of SNAP at the time acknowledged that SNAP had accepted donations from plaintiff's attorneys who worked on abuse cases. I have added a reference for this statement. Ajschorschiii (talk) 03:17, 26 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Documentation of SNAP acceptance of plaintiff attorney donations 

message: The blue link on the first line of the intro sends one to Priest (Catholic Church), but the article goes on to explain that they have chapters for baptists and other denominations.  While the word needs to remain "priests" because that is part of the name of the organization, should it link to clergy instead since the scope of this organization is not just Catholicism?Farsight001 (talk) 21:04, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: No one talking, so I'm going ahead with the change I guess.Farsight001 (talk) 02:24, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Priests?  Or is clergy better? 

message: I did some work aimed to improve this article:
- eliminated places repeatedly referencing the SNAP homepage and put this homepage under Sources section
- enhanced and improved little the existing text
--Remind me never (talk) 00:36, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  July 8 2010 

message: I have tagged this article for POV issues. The "Controversies" section is too long and not specifically named enough (see WP:CSECTION). Marquardtika (talk) 17:43, 30 May 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: I cleaned this up a bit. It does still seem like WP:UNDUE to me, but is not as egergious. - Scarpy (talk) 18:07, 3 October 2019 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thanks, your edits definitely look like an improvement! Marquardtika (talk) 18:10, 3 October 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  POV issues
Talk:Lou mei

message: I am trying to limit this to the category of Cantonese cuisine because that is where it started.  It is available in many parts of the world, so I can't just put it in HK cuisine or Canadian cuisine etc. Benjwong 15:15, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The categories are not mutually exclusive and isn't HK part of the Cantonese region? So it's no problem to put it in both if it's acknowledged to be a prominent part of the cuisines of both Guangdong and HK. Badagnani 21:25, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Not technically any regional cuisine
Talk:543d Tactical Support Group

message: Which is correct?
Tabletop 03:48, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  543rd or 543d? 
Talk:6204th Photo Mapping Flight

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on 6204th Photo Mapping Flight. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070401033357/http://afhra.maxwell.af.mil/rso/rso_index.html to http://afhra.maxwell.af.mil/rso/rso_index.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
 --Lineagegeek (talk) 21:43, 6 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified
Talk:Brand orientation

message: This is a new topic (in a scientific way as well) so it will take some time to fill the article. But it do have some qualities and I will continue the work on it soon.
Brando73 22:21, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I propose a merge with Brand management. Corporate 03:44, 15 October 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Discussion
Talk:Red Lake River

message: The article for the Thief River indicates there are falls at confluence of Thief River with the Red Lake River, but nothing in this article mentions those falls- are they still extant?  In reviewing Google's satellite image of the area, I find a structure which could be a dam (or perhaps spillway) located further downstream (below/south of the County Hwy 17 bridge).  If this is a dam, perhaps it has covered the falls?  Regardless of what the structure is, its mention in the article would be a good improvement, as well as adding more information about the "falls".  For example, beyond an accurate pinpointing of their location, the height of the falls would be useful to record. Dan Aquinas (talk) 19:11, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Falls / Dams
Talk:2001 United States Grand Prix/to do

message: This article is a Formula One race report. For editing guidelines on style and structure, please take a look at the Example race report.
Please list your sources when you have completed a task.
Article
* Add references.
* Restructure to meet Formula One race report standards.
Report
*Write a race report.  Done.
*Verify the race report using (new) references.
*Expand the report with subsections for pre-race, practice, qualifying and post-race.
*Cleanup the "Notes" section.
*Write a good lead section.
*Add photographs to the article.
Results
*Add race results.  Added. BillCook
*Verify the race results and add a reference.  Verified using (source). (signature)
*Double-check the race results against other sources to eliminate errors (1).  Double-checked using (source). (signature)
*Double-check the race results against other sources to eliminate errors (2).  Double-checked using (source). (signature)
*Add qualifying results.  Added using . 91.125.132.200 (talk) 21:20, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
Talk:Newbattle Abbey

message: In 2017, two Assyrian reliefs were removed from Newbattle Abbey and sold for £8 million. See https://www.theartnewspaper.com/news/tory-peer-involved-in-controversial-sale-of-iraqi-antiquities? This suggests that the "Newbattle Abbey remained the home of the Marquesses of Lothian until being given to the nation" claim is not true, since Newbattle Abbey College appears to both own and be able to dispose of parts of Newbattle Abbey.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.26.115.87 (talk) 14:00, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: "Given to the nation" - tagged as a dubious claim