lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Studioseven Recordings

message: In accordance with WP:MOS-TM, the all-caps should be eliminated in favor of normal capitalization rules for English, meaning the page should be moved to Studioseven Recordings. - Neier 00:07, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Rename proposal

message: # Support as nominator. Neier 00:07, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Support
Talk:Older Dryas

message: In the article on the Younger Dryas, it is dated 12,800 to 11,500 years ago, with the Older Dryas 1000 years earlier, which would put it about 14,000 years ago. In the Older Dryas article it is dated as 12,000 years ago, which is clearly far too late. It appears there may be confusion in the source cited between BC and BP. Dudley Miles (talk) 14:25, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. I will try to revise to eliminate use of these terms. Dudley Miles (talk) 11:49, 15 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dating of Older Dryas 

message: There is no Wikipedia article on the Greenland Stadial/Interstadial system, yet a search shows that the term is used in several articles.  Is there a close enough correlation for Greenland Stadial 2 to be a redirect here? Otherwise, can a start be made towards a relevant article?--Wetman (talk) 17:45, 12 July 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: This source shows the Older Dryas between Greenland Stadials 1 and 2. Dudley Miles (talk) 10:22, 13 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is this "Greenland Stadial 2"? 
Talk:Beyneu

message: A discussion is taking place to address the redirect :Largest village in Kazakhstan. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 July 19#Largest village in Kazakhstan until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.  signed, Rosguill talk 16:46, 19 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Largest village in Kazakhstan" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]]
Talk:Shmuel Butman

message: Why should the campaign contributions not go in the article.  Verifiable, public information. Whats wrong with it?  (talk · contribs · [ logs] · block user · [ block log]) 00:09, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Nothing wrong, just what is the purpose, I don't think that any other wikipedia article lists campaign contributions by anyone unless it is controversial which in this case it wasn't. --PinchasC | £€åV€ m€ å m€§§åg€ 00:11, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Its interesting that he donated money to Giuliani.  It is in the public domain, and I have seen other article referencing such things.  Especially since it isn't controvertial.  If you don't strongly object I will put it back in.  (talk · contribs · [ logs] · block user · [ block log]) 00:26, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't strongly object. --PinchasC | £€åV€ m€ å m€§§åg€ 00:30, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Not relevant
Talk:Urtica ferox

message: Citation needed for the distribution section, particularly as some of it is incorrect. Anywhere "to the" east of Otago would be in the Pacific, and if the intended claim is that ongaonga is not common "in the" east of Otago then I am sceptical - I live here and it seems pretty common to me. The "dryness" justification might imply central Otago? Whatever, citation is needed so we can see where the error is (it could well be my definition of "common", but I'd like a ref to tell me so). 139.80.40.239 (talk) 21:21, 23 January 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: - Beeveria (talk) 09:11, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Distribution
Talk:Open pollination

message: As can be seen from Novangelis' history he is stalking whatever user is associated with Starfire777 and / or his friends. I suggest reverting whatever edits are made this pesron makes as it is clearly trolling, a childish kind, in which Novangelis appears to try to one up Starfire or "dirty" whatever edits Starfire makes. It's absurd and needs to stop if Wikipedia wants to have credibility.Examineroftruth (talk) 10:23, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Vandalism by Novangelis

message: A blog was recently added to the Further Reading section, which I have removed. It was 
That's somewhat problematic since self-published sources are not acceptable as wikipedia citations (of course, this wasn't an actual citation). A more serious problem, though, is that is not correct. It states "Today, the term 'heirloom' has become synonymous with 'open-pollinated,' or 'non-hybrid.'" which just isn't true. There is a modern industry of plant breeding that has nothing to do with heirloom cultivars, and produces open-pollinated cultivars. See for example this web page. Sminthopsis84 (talk) 15:55, 1 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Blog added to Further Reading section 

message: For years, my definition of "open pollinated" has been that the plant in question breeds true--if you save the seeds of an "open pollinated" or "true breeding" inbreeder, or save the seeds of an open pollinated outbreeder while protecting it from being fertilized by other cultivars, those seeds will produce plants that are similar/identical to their parents. So open pollinated, or "OP" as often coded in seed catalogues, was a term that was used in contrast to hybrids. 
The opening paragraphs of the page suggest a very different definition, one that better matches the dictionary definition of the words "open" and "pollination" but one that, IMO, doesn't match the meaning that's most often intended by gardeners and farmers. 
I feel that this ambiguity should be dealt with and explained in the article, but I'm not sure how.ChickenFreak (talk) 06:28, 9 May 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Please note that the article title is not "Open pollinated" but "Open pollination". There is actually no ambiguity. If the plant breeds true under open pollination, then it is referred to as "open pollinated". It is not called an "open pollination plant". The article now states ""Open pollination" generally refers to seeds that will "breed true."" which is not true. Another problem is that the page has no lead section, as required by WP:LEAD. Sminthopsis84 (talk) 15:30, 24 September 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ambiguity
Talk:Quaker (disambiguation)

message: Do people really refer to the restaurant as "Quaker," all by itself, and minus the rest of the name?
I spent many fun dining experiences at several of its locations, but never referred to it just as "Quaker."  It was always "Quaker Steak & Lube," or maybe occasionally the "wing joint."  I don't agree with this in the disambiguation category.  Recommend removal.  BFDhD 00:10, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I wondered that when I cleaned up the page a while ago - so I've gone and deleted it.  (John User:Jwy talk) 01:38, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I put it there because it had a BIG presence on a google search.  Thanks for your local knowledge. === Vernon White (talk) 09:56, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Quaker Steak & Lube-- Relevant?

message: Is this article intended to list several things which are commonly called "Quaker," or is it a list of things that include the word "Quaker?"  If it is the former, I propose that "Quaker Oats," "Quaker State" (nickname), and "Quaker State" (motor oil) be removed from the list.--BFDhD 15:36, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Article focus?
Talk:Otis Caldwell

message: This page and Otis Caldwell (football coach) discuss the same person and should be merged. --Masonpatriot (talk) 06:08, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merger Proposal
Talk:Dick Lynch

message: I have a question.  Does anybody know whether Richard Lynch was related to John Lynch, who currently plays Safety for the New England Patriots?  Just wondering.  Raphael (talk) 15:50, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Question

message: Hmmm...Richard Lynch had a 47-game winning streak and was married for 47 years. John Lynch's number is 47.  That answers it.  They're related.  Raphael (talk) 19:31, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Answer
Talk:Paleobiology

message: Parts of this article are factually incorrect and lack citations, specifically, the section which breaks down some of the major fields found in paleobiology, like that of paleobiochemistry. The author incorrectly labels a paleobiochemist as applying the principles and techniques of organic chemistry to detect pre-historic life. I would like to refer to the first section of the book Advances in Enzymology and Related Areas of Molecular Biology, Volume 75 Protein Evolution. The first section of the book is on the molecular paleosciences, it is Molecular Paleoscience: Systems Biology From the Past, and it is written by researchers out of the Foundation for Applied Molecular Evolution in Gainesville, Florida. Not only does it break down some of the specific aspects of Paleobiology, it explicitly describes what a paleobiochemist actually does, which is a ressurrectionist approach from a hypothesized ancestral protein as formulated from descendant genetic sequences. It also has citations from the start of modern day paleobiology to present from research articles in the fields of the molecular paleosciences. If I cared enough about the subject I would read these articles myself and update the wiki, but I don't, so whoever wants to do it, the more you know.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.194.248.106 (talk) 01:36, 13 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Source of citations for expanding/fixing this article
Talk:Fashion show

message: I actually wanted to make a change to this article to add a little more history to how it started. I think it is extremely important to also recognize Paul Poiret and especially Lucille Lady Duff-Gordon for being one of the first, and one of the most popular designers who also had a part in starting fashion shows. Lady Duff-Gordon was especially active in using this as a powerful marketing tool. Maybe I'd even mention why they started doing this.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tforclass (talk • contribs) 18:30, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit Request 

message: But I don't know where else to ask: What is the purpose of fashion shows? It seems that nearly all, or at least the ones that get coverage, contain items that no one would ever wear in the real world. None of the designs I've ever seen actually get produced; the shows seem like concept car displays, with the exception that concept cars showcase new technologies that usually get included into production models.
98.237.253.233 (talk) 20:32, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Off topic 

message: I have been adding photographs to give the article better visual representation of fashion shows. SpiritedMichelle (talk) 02:27, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Added photographs 

message: I think Runway (fashion) is unnecessary and should be merged into fashion show. (Heroeswithmetaphors) talk 18:20, 15 July 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree they are basically the same thing. SpiritedMichelle (talk) 02:22, 22 September 2019 (UTC)
replies: text:  Klbrain (talk) 19:37, 8 May 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merger proposal 

message: Fashion show it's origin and evolution 103.66.209.123 (talk) 05:18, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: There is a history sub-section, but it could be expanded. SpiritedMichelle (talk) 22:41, 11 July 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fashion
Talk:Elmo Patrick Sonnier

message: Elmo Patrick Sonnier, although a rapist, was a curagious young individual. Wrongly acussed of the murders of two teenagers. Elmo patrick, although im strongly against all crimes, will always be in my memory especially every april 5th.
66.174.92.168 00:17, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Rememberances

message: According to Find A Grave, Elmo Patrick Sonnier's birth year is 1949.  Here's the link about Elmo Patrick Sonnier.  There must be a mistake in this article.  Could someone fix it? --Angeldeb82 02:58, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh yes, and Elmo's age is 34, not 33, so he can't be born on February 21, 1951, but he must be born in 1949, but after April 5 (the day he was executed).  Here's another link.  This article may need a major fix-up! --Angeldeb82 03:44, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Birth year is 1949 

message: The article states that Sonnier, on Death Row, "attracted the attention of Sister Helen Prejean." Actually, this is not quite accurate. Sr Prejean states in her book Dead Man Walking that, as part of her Order's mission ideals and objectives, she was asked to write to convicts on death row. Having (reluctantly) assented, she was then given Sonnier's details by the organiser of the project. I think the line "attracted the attention of" is misleading: it makes it seem as though Sr Prejean conacted Sonnier entirely of her own volition, as if he was part of an already-ongoing campaign by Sr Prejean. If there is no factually-based objection, I'll change the line and cite it. Plutonium27 (talk) 17:44, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree, had to change it again.Parkwells (talk) 16:29, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Attracted the attention of..."
Talk:Paul Émile de Puydt

message: Other reference to date when he did:
http://www.encyclopedia4u.com/p/paul-emile-de-puydt.html
Paul Emile de Puydt (Born in Mons, March 6 1810 - Died in Mons, May 28 1888)
Piet De Pauw (talk) 13:36, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Jay Keasling

message: I noticed a possible error under the Artemisinin section. See the following excerpt: 
Keasling’s microbial production process has a number of advantages over extraction from plants. First, microbial synthesis will reduce the cost of artemisinin, the most expensive component of artemisinin-based combination therapies—by as much as ten fold—and therefore make artemisinin-derived anti-malarial drugs more affordable to people in the Developing World. Second, weather conditions or political climates that might otherwise affect the yield or cost of the plant-derived version of the drug will not affect the microbial source for the drug. Third, microbial production of artemisinin in large tanks will allow for more careful distribution of artemisinin to legitimate drug manufacturers that formulate artemisinin combination therapies, rather than monotherapies. This will, in turn, hasten the development of resistance to this drug. Fourth, severe shortages of plant-derived artemisinin are projected for 2011 and beyond, which will increase the cost of artemisinin combination therapies. Finally, microbially-derived artemisinic acid will enable production of new derivatives of artemisinin that Plasmodium may not be resistant to, thereby extending the time over which artemisinin may be used.
Shouldn't the use of combination therapies  slow  the development of resistance to a drug? Someone needs to check the source for this (if any) 
Junkmunch (talk) 19:26, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: The article says that he is "Founding Director of the Synthetic Biology Department at UC Berkeley".
I don't actually think there /is/ a Synthetic Biology department at UC Berkeley. There is a Synthetic Biology concentration in the BioEngineering department, there is SynBERC, and there is the Synthetic Biology Initiative... is it one of these? --71.198.143.141 (talk) 06:53, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Synthetic Biology Department? 

message: c class per ores https://ores.wmflabs.org/v2/scores/enwiki/wp10/789660476 Brock-brac (talk) 19:57, 8 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  assessment 
Talk:Photomorphogenesis

message: I am going to expand on the UV section, This section currently has one sentence so I will be adding additional information on UV-B radiation--Olivia.Will (talk) 04:35, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Entire article copied unedited from . I attempted to split into sections but the article needs serious attention and re-writing from an expert Jebus989 (talk) 10:19, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copy Paste 

message: wat is this  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 61.245.165.6 (talk) 04:17, 28 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  head line
Talk:Phyllosphere

message: Does anyone know which material was copied from Carhalho and Castillo? There is a statment in this article that "material was copied from this source", refering to Carvalho and Castillo (2018), however there are no corresponding inline citations to indicate which text was copied. A number of other references in this article also have such a note, but they have corresponding inline references so it's more clear what material they relate to.
 You seem to have added the relevant content, unless I'm mistaken. It was a long while back, so it's probably a long shot, but do you remember? – Scyrme (talk) 18:50, 12 January 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: * This "citation" appears to be flotsam added accidentally to the article. I've removed it. — Epipelagic (talk) 22:16, 13 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Material was copied from this source"
Talk:Manshuk Mametova

message: The sources listed that provide "evidence" for Mametova's last stand are dodgy. They provide no primary sources of witness testimonials (for either side), dated records of body counts and equipment captured, etc. 
They also use biased language in order to paint Mametova as a "hero". For example, she "defeated fascists to the last spark of life" (source [2], https://web.archive.org/web/20190327193623/https://e-history.kz/en/project/view/4?type=publications&material_id=962) and "the brave Komsomol member was mortally wounded, but until her last breath she continued to destroy Nazis..." (source [4]). This hurts the supposed credibility of her actions.
Perhaps consider removing the section or adding a disclaimer that the evidence for Mametova's "last stand" is weak, and the whole thing is likely Soviet propaganda.
HarrieDeStanton (talk) 22:41, 7 November 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: There are no reliable sources that claim Mametova's last stand was Soviet propaganda. Casualty reports of her division as well as other official documents such as her Hero of the Soviet Union nomination are consistent with the text in the section. Unless you have something strong of reliable sourcing that casts legitimate doubt, this is nothing more than speculation and original research, which cannot be on Wikipedia.--PlanespotterA320 (talk) 22:55, 7 November 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: P.S. The fact that Женщины - Герои Советского Союза и России by Andrey Simonov and Svetlana Chudinova (the gold standard of encyclopedias on this subject), which does not hesistate to debunk actual instances of Soviet propaganda and myths (like the sketchy claims that Yeketerina Zelenko did an aerial ramming and the false notion that Yekaterina Budanova was a flying ace), reports Mametova's feat exactly how it is described in this article. That is sufficient evidence that Mametova's feat is legit.--PlanespotterA320 (talk) 23:01, 7 November 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Biased sources for "Last Stand" (section removal?)
Talk:ABS Jets

message: Hello! I tried to improve the article and removed the template of low notability and lack of sources. I added a number of links that show the activity of the company. And, I suppose, it is important to keep the article because it's a member of several international organizations, and has several awards and certificates.
--Condiwiki (talk) 10:52, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Templates
Talk:International School Nido de Aguilas

message: I don't think that the topic is notable enough to be a Wikipedia article. FreeFromChains (talk) 14:55, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  This article should be deleted 

message: — Assignment last updated by Emanuelafabbri (talk) 15:11, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: University Writing 1020 Communicating Feminism TR 10 am
Talk:Plant collecting

message: This article needed information on what makes a viable plant specimen. Also filled out examples of how and why one might preserve a plant without pressing. Also updated how plant identification apps have changed plant collecting as a hobby. Bernz01   — Preceding undated comment added 21:27, 15 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: New Changes

message: — Assignment last updated by Bernz01 (talk) 15:26, 18 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: Bio 380 Communicating Biology
Talk:Plant taxonomy

message: Evaluating Content:
What else could be improved?
I feel as though there is plenty to add to this article specifically why we classify and use taxonomy to organize plants into categories, groups, etc. I also think that we could go more in depth about how over time we have began to classify plans differently and why. This is a good article so far- it could just use some more details!! AMCO1994 (talk) 16:33, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

message: Under the heading "Plantae, the Plant Kingdom", although not explicitly stated, the table appears to be restricted to only the divisions of extant Embryophyta (land plants).
As Bryophyta and Hepatophyta (Marchantiophyta) are included in the table, then why is Anthocerotophyta (hornworts) omitted?  It has been proposed that both liverworts and hornworts should be included in the division Bryophyta, as classes Marchantiopsida and Anthocerotopsida.  If this proposed change is accepted then Hepatophyta should be removed from the table.
Pteridophyta is polyphyletic, so should be replaced by the monophyletic Lycopodiophyta (clubmosses, spikemosses & quillworts) and Polypodiophyta (ferns & horsetails).  As Polypodiophyta includes horsetails, as does Pteridophyta, Equisetophyta should be removed from the table. 
As Ginkgophyta and Coniferophyta (Pinophyta) are included, then why are Cycadophyta (cycads) and Gnetophyta (gnetum, ephedra & welwitschia) omitted?
For Coniferophyta, the column headed "Notes" states: "Includes Pinales, Taxales, Cupressaceae and hundreds of other species".  The Pinales article states: "The order Pinales ... comprises all the extant conifers".  Perhaps the examples should be restricted to the rank of family; e.g. Pinaceae.
The name "Angiosperms" appears in a column headed “Latin”, so strictly the name should be Angiospermae, or preferably Magnoliophyta, which is used elsewhere in the article.  Also, in the column headed "Notes", the claim that Angiosperms are "divided into two main classes the monocotyledons and dicotyledons" is no longer accepted, as dicotyledons are paraphyletic.
Under the heading "Identification, classification and description of plants", the list that follows the text "For example, the family to which the lilies belong is classified as follows:" includes a line containing the common names of miscellaneous genera, and a line containing the common names of miscellaneous species.  None of these genera or species is even in the same order as "the family to which lilies belong". 
Maidenhair (talk) 10:09, 14 September 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: ''Plantae'' table and Liliaceae example

message: Engagement with a wider variety of sources would improve this article. For example, Simpson's Plant Systematics is in its third edition and would be an excellent source to consult. I plan to use this in the near future to help improve this article. I welcome other suggestions. SyLvRuUz (talk) 01:27, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Simpson's ''Plant Systematics''