lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Bob Baumhower

message: Keep in mind that sacks were not officially recorded by the NFL until 1982; thus this is what we follow when listing sack stats in the infobox. Perhaps a footnote is in order. And tackles were not officially recorded until well after Baumhower's career ended. Lizard (talk) 14:38, 5 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Stats
Talk:Gordon Shedden

message: don't know whether it is of help but there is some insight about him driving in the WRTC in a YouTube video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eW-F57atC5E --MichaelK-osm (talk) 22:37, 7 May 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Interview with Gordon Shedden on YouTube
Talk:Francis E. Warren

message: Per this Washington Post article, Frances E. Warren was the last veteran of the Civil War to serve in the U.S. Senate. That deserves mention somewhere. http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/lautenberg-was-the-last-world-war-ii-veteran-in-senate/2013/06/03/df979880-cc82-11e2-9f1a-1a7cdee20287_story.html  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.124.189.104 (talk) 05:04, 4 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Saklatava Battalion

message: Does anyone mind if this is moved to "British Battalion" (which is how it's referred to in the major literature)? These days Shapurji Saklatvala is unknown and it's a difficult name to spell. 
Roger 09:30, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: British Battalion is currently a disambiguation page. New article would have to be British Battalion (something or another). Suggestions? --Davidbober 02:27, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thanks for that ... I see The disambig page only leads to here and to a short article on the "British Battalion (Malaya 1941). So let's be bold on this one ... Perhaps we could do without the disambig page altogether? Here's how it could work: (1) British Battalion disambig is renamed say "British Battalions Disambiguation Page" (or something quite different, and marked for deletion - to liberate up the name; (2) Saklavata becomes "British Battalion" with a one-line reference to British Battalion (Malaya 1941) just above the intro; (3) and vice versa in the British Battalion (Malaya 1941) page. If there are no objections, I'll do this later today Roger 06:27, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Having given this further thought, easiest seems to (1) turn this page into a REDIRECT to British Battalion and then (2) cut and paste the article from here into British Battalion, keeping a flag at the top of British Battalion referring to the British Battalion (1941). Roger 08:29, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Name change to "British Battalion"
Talk:Amphiptere

message: Is there anyone out there that can protect this page? It seems to be attacked in all directions from fans of the "Dragonology" book and merchandise, which against my usual affectations I am already beginning to dislike from the incredible swaths of negative attention it's attracted here. The Dragonology book is fiction, albeit creative fictional reinventions of existing myth-themes.
While we're on works of fiction, perhaps a more astute Wikipedian could add information pertaining to representations of Amphiteres in contemporary fiction...
As for the Jaculus, merging into this article could be debated, as the Jaculus is pretty much just a snake (that exists, too), whereas the Amphitere was reputadly a dragon of dragony-proportions. --75.176.185.207 04:18, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recent Vandalism 

message: The image in question is this one: 
I've removed it because I don't believe it was ever intended to be an amphitere. In Edward Topsell's books the picture is clearly labelled as a cockatrice. I've seen a modern book call it a amphitere ('Dragons - A Natural History' by Karl Shuker), but no citations are given for this claim... other than Topsell, who as stated, calls it a cockatrice.
I think we need to be careful not to just use any picture of a winged serpent/dragon and call it an amphitere. It's better to have no picture than to have a picture of the wrong thing. Polenth 01:49, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Amphitere Image 

message: The "Appearance" section begins by describing the amphiptere as "generally" resembling a lindworm, and concludes by stating that the amphiptere is "rarely" depicted with legs.  The lede for the lindworm article describes the lindworm as a bipedal dragon.  An amphiptere cannot by any sort of logic be "generally" bipedal but "rarely" have legs. 12.233.147.42 (talk) 01:04, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Not quite. It says that they are generally described as having a body resembling that of a lindworm (only, we assume, without legs attached). Pinkbeast (talk) 11:32, 12 July 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: As Sol Pacificus has spotted, the entire Appearance section is uncited. A quick Google Books-ing suggests everyone else cites their material on amphipteres to Rose Carol's book (which Google won't show me the text of). There is a copy in the library, and I'll try and go and look at it soon; I have some other Wikipedia book searches to do so the trip will be worthwhile. Pinkbeast (talk) 22:16, 4 November 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Appearance" section contradicts itself 

message: THE OPHIS PTEROTOS (Winged Serpent) more specifically as mentioned in Theoi Project, I was wondering if this Amphiptere is the one and the same? Suggesting it goes further back than its appearance in Heraldry. If this is perhaps incorrect then disregard this comment. 74.124.162.10 (talk) 06:44, 4 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Related to the Winged Serpents?
Talk:Rhymney Railway

message: This article should of course concern itself with the RR as it was; the note about it now being the Rhymney Line simply being an afternote. Peter Shearan 12:15, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Comment

message: Unfortunately, I think the Start class assessment is still appropriate for this article mainly because the article is almost completely made up of a few lists.  Some other elements that could be added or improved include:
* There are two references that I can see listed in the article; these need to be more explicitly noted in a References section at the bottom of the article to follow the Wikipedia manual of style.  The guidelines at Wikipedia:Citation templates show how to use many of the templates that have been developed for this purpose.
* There are no images, which includes maps.
* A few of the sections are one or two sentences long; these should either be combined with other sections as appropriate or expanded if enough information is available.
In general, it's best to follow the guidelines for Good and Featured articles.  For examples of other articles that have been assessed at higher ratings, take a look at :Category:B-Class rail transport articles. Slambo (Speak) 13:27, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Assessment, August 2006
Talk:Steve Matchett

message: How is this not listed as a stub?  There's no information on where he was born, where he lives, or where he was educated.Mustang6172 20:01, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Go ahead and list it as a stub - noone will object PeterGrecian 18:06, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

text: Dunno, think it's not a stub now, so I've removed it. PeterGrecian 13:18, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Stub
Talk:South Devon Railway (1846-1876)

message: The page has been reverted to its original and agreed name.  That move was not discussed but was explained as moving it to "standard naming", yet Wiki naming conventions suggest that using the legal status (i.e. "Company") is the correct way to disambiguate this from South Devon Railway Trust.  Even now, many months later there are only  adozen links to South Devon Railway (1846-1876) while there are around 100 to South Devon Railway Company. Geof Sheppard (talk) 14:00, 6 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Page name
Talk:Hal Sutherland

message: The article cited about the death of Hal Sutherland only cites an unofficial fan Facebook page, which provides no source for its information on Hal's death.  No official records have been found, including obituaries, death records for the county in which he resides, or announcements on his website or anyplace else we can find. This fan page information is not necessarily reliable, as they do not cite their source.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.135.211.53 (talk) 19:56, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Death citation

message: The Article The Slaver Weapon claims that Hal Sutherland was colorblind. This issue certainly should be investigated further. --BjKa (talk) 08:28, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Colorblind 
Talk:Squadron of Justice

message: Phil Jimenez can't possibly have created the art for this JLA issue.  He would have been way too young at the time!  24.52.199.254
:You're right. I think the cover was by "Ernie Chua" (as Ernie Chan was known at the time), but I'd have to check. Daibhid C 23:23, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
Talk:Hilkiah

message: Unless there is an explicit statement tightly identifying Hilkiah the High Priest with Hilkiah the father of Jeremiah, I would like to ask that we loosen the language which indicates "He was the High Priest over the Temple of priests that were in Anathoth in the land of Benjamin".  I suspect this claim regarding Anathoth might be based entirely upon said identification of the "two Hilkiahs".  I am supposing that the source of Anathoth as the herein-cited home of Hilkiah the High Priest is in fact Jeremiah 1:1:  "The words of Jeremiah, son of Hilkiah, of the priests that were in Anathoth in the land of Benjamin."  If I surmise correctly, the High Priest is being associated here with Anathoth precisely because it is assumed that he is Jeremiah's father.  Can someone please clarify for me whether or not the Scriptures actually tie this all together?
As I understand it, we remain uncertain "to this day" :~) that Hilkiah, the High Priest who discovered the scroll of the Torah in the Temple and sent it to King Josiah via the latter's scribe, Shaphan, is in fact the same man who is the father of Jeremiah.  See e.g. Richard Elliott Friedman, Who Wrote the Bible?, 2nd edition (paper, HarperCollins New York, 1997), p. 126:  "Not to overstate the case, we do not know if Jeremiah's father was the same priest Hilkiah who found the book."
Thanks in advance to anyone who can document this.  DThrax 02:26, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hilkiah of Anathoth, father of Jeremiah? Or some other Hilkiah, not necessarily from Anathoth?
Talk:Q-series

message: I don't know a lot about q-series, but it seems a bit confusing that we say they are the q-analog of a factorial, but that we say that q-analog are the q-series version of something.
:I agree. The intro is too compressed - should mention some general idea first, such as that q-analogues are certain useful extrapolations from objects known in combinatorics. Charles Matthews 14:13, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

message: This article is badly named.  What this article is describing is a "q-Pochhammer symbol", or as the article says, a "q-shifted factorial"; a q-series is in fact a sum (a.k.a., series) in which the coefficients can be expressed using q-Pochhammer symbols.  This article and MathWorld are the only places I've ever seen them called "q-series"; is there a primary source for this terminology?  My guess is that at some point somebody was confused by the existence of a q-series expansion for the q-Pochhammer symbol.  A decent online reference for such things is http://fa.its.tudelft.nl/~koekoek/askey/contents.html; a better (but offline) reference is Gasper and Rahman's book "Basic hypergeometric series", which discusses the main type of q-series, the basic hypergeometric series.  (The Wikipedia article on basic hypergeometric series specifically mentions the alternate name of hypergeometric q-series, which is nonsense per the current article on q-series!)
The upshot is that this page should be renamed either Q-Pochhammer symbol or Q-shifted factorial (the latter is currently a redirect to here), and be rewritten accordingly (a search-and-replace, essentially), and Q-series should probably redirect to basic hypergeometric series until such point as more general content is written.  I'd be bold, but I've no idea how to move an article without breaking history. 209.125.235.244 15:54, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Uhh, I strongly disagree with the above assesment. I wrote the orignal draft of both this article and the articles on the basic hypergeometric series, and the other hypergeometric series articles. A review of the literature, from the classic cases of Ramanujan and hypergeometric series, up to modern applications in statistical mechanics and chaos, viz. the Yang-Baxter equations, in quantum Lie algebras and  quantum Lie groups, uses a consistent notion of a q-series as that which was originally used in this article, and as given in Mathworld. See, for example Jurgen Fuchs, "Affine Lie Algebras and Quantum Groups" Cambridge, or Chari, Pressley, "A guide to Quantum Groups", Cambridge. However, since the structure of this article was wrecked, and I rather don't have the time to fix anything, I will just make it a redirect for now. linas 16:52, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  That's not a q-series!
Talk:Hyrcanus II

message: under restoration
Political authority rested with the Romans whose interests were represented by Antipater, who primarily promoted the interests of his own house.
The link (Antipater) leads to Antipater son of Herod the Great.  I think it's supposed to be Herod's father Antipater the Idumean.
98.17.83.27 (talk) 17:19, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Josephus writes that ARETAS AND HYRCANUS MADE AN EXPEDITION AGAINST ARISTOBULUS AND BESIEGED JERUSALEM, but Wikipedia says the opposite, that Aristobulus defeated Hyrcanus, who was hiding in Jerusalem.
Josephus literally wrote:
"AFTER these promises had been given to Aretas, he made an expedition against Aristobulus with an army of fifty thousand horse and foot, and beat him in the battle. And when after that victory many went over to Hyrcanus as deserters, Aristobulus was left desolate, and fled to Jerusalem".
https://www.sacred-texts.com/jud/josephus/ant-14.htm  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rakovsky (talk • contribs) 01:00, 10 March 2021 (UTC)
replies: text:  I'm pretty sure , An article's established era style should not be changed witout reasons specific to its content; seek consensus on the talk page first per WP:ERA. Someone changed it here to BC/CE without consensus. Jerm (talk) 19:26, 9 November 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Something looks very wrong with Josephus' or Wikipedia's story about Aretas, Hyrcanus, and Aristobulus.
Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (toponyms)

message: related Wikipedia:Naming conventions
#Wikipedia:Naming conventions (geographic names) (is a proposal for Eastern and Central Europe only)
#Wikipedia:Naming conventions (places) (compare Toponymy, toponym = place name) - would this really include rivers? 
#Wikipedia:Naming conventions (city names)
#Wikipedia:Naming conventions (country subdivisions)
#Wikipedia:WikiProject_Rivers#Naming
#Wikipedia:WikiProject_Lakes#Naming
#Wikipedia:WikiProject_Mountains#Naming_conventions
to be conform, it should be "cities" not "city names". IMO cities should then also be used for villages and towns. Rivers, Lakes, Mountains should probably get an umbrella convention. Question to english natives: would "place name" include river names? Tobias Conradi (Talk) 13:09, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The naming conventions could merge, and the wikiprojects link to the merged page. Bear in mind the merged page will be even longer, with more special cases, even after removing duplicates. Yes, I think it can include rivers. However, I think this merge has been proposed and turned down before. --Scott Davis Talk 15:02, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

text: Looking at the current content, "places" is the top one. It's beginning to look like only two of us care. --Scott Davis Talk 13:21, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: At least not those that are online and watch this article. Yes, currently places seems to be top, but what would be the best? I will invite some others. Tobias Conradi (Talk) 13:34, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: naming conventions (toponyms)

message: *toponyms OR places OR geographic names
**physical geography / geographic features / landforms
***Rivers (a lot of dab needed)
***Islands
***Archipelagos
***Lakes
***Mountains
***Peninsulas
**human geography
***settlements
****cities
****towns
****villages
***country subdivisions
****municipalities (sometimes used like cities)
***constructions?
****streets
****bridges
Tobias Conradi (Talk) 13:45, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Don't forget neighborhoods/districts of cities and, for the U.S., Census designated places, which are like villages. Also, don't forget that many places (rivers, lakes, mountains, steets, etc) stretch across more than one toponymic place.  -Will Beback 20:57, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

text: This user has a history of inserting his own views (ie, original research) into articles without discussion (like this), and unfortunately is prone to personal attacks when he is asked about this (just have a look at his talk page for examples). Please let me know if you encounter anything else.  ProhibitOnions  (T) 11:02, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: brainstorming for a hierarchy
Talk:South Yorkshire Joint Railway

message: 'As one of only two railways in England with 5 partners the South Yorkshire Joint Railway was the most "joint" of joint railways.' - the East London Railway beat them by having six partners: Great Eastern; London, Brighton & South Coast; London, Chatham & Dover; Metropolitan; Metropolitan District; South Eastern. Some people record that as five, believing that the London, Chatham & Dover Railway and the South Eastern Railway amalgamated in 1899; however, this was not the case - it was a "working agreement". Whilst many functions of the LC&DR and SER were merged in 1899 (such as the locomotive, carriage and wagon departments), the two companies continued to exist right down to Grouping, and all lines continued to be owned by one or the other of these two; even newly-built lines were assigned to one or the other.
*
--Redrose64 (talk) 14:11, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  The most joint railway - I don't think so 

message: The article Maltby railway station has been proposed for deletion  because of the following concern:
:A search for reference found the only published (gBook) references in the novel "The Fifth Form at Saint Dominic's" By Talbot Baines Reed, fails WP:N and WP:V
While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing  will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist.  The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Jeepday (talk) 11:43, 24 December 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Someone had better clarify this. The Maltby station reference is valid. Several serious references support this; I have checked Quick, latest version, page 270, for example. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Afterbrunel (talk • contribs) 16:33, 25 September 2019 (UTC)
replies: text:  The notification is from nearly nine years ago. If you check the page history from that time, you will see that a valid WP:DEPROD occurred  at which time  added two references. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 18:14, 25 September 2019 (UTC)

text:  No doubt, but I was concerned that someone less knowledgable than some, would read the alert and not be aware that it had been settled. Afterbrunel (talk) 18:43, 25 September 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Wikipedia:Proposed deletion|Proposed deletion]] of [[Maltby railway station]]
Talk:Triple Eight Racing

message: This article uses both "Triple 8" and "Triple Eight". Should it be one or the other all the way through? And if so, which one? My suggestion would be "Triple Eight", since that's how it's styled on the team's official website (http://www.tripleeight.co.uk/). DH85868993 (talk) 06:19, 20 May 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: While the two teams are no longer officially connected, the Australian Triple 8 uses both, depending on what form of branding is in use. My preference is also for Eight. --Falcadore (talk) 11:56, 20 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Triple 8 or Triple Eight?
Talk:Star Trek: The Manga

message: Is the Wil Wheaton link really necessary? I mean, are we going to have a link for every person who announces that they're writing for it? I like Wil as much as the next guy (I got his book and got him to sign it, and he remembered me, Yay!) but I don't think he's some special superhero that should be acknowledged on every Wikipedia page that has the remotest connection to him. What's next, a link on the Train article saying "Wil Wheaton's character was chased by one in the film Stand By Me"? --StarkRG 04:11, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wheaton link? 

message: Moved these links from article to here, so their information can be used to better develop the article.  They can then be used as references.
* Announcement on IGN
* Wil Wheaton, former Star Trek actor, announces that he is a writer for Star Trek:The Manga
* Review at IGN --hamu♥hamu (TALK) 08:19, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links
Talk:Final Fantasy Fables: Chocobo Tales

message: I typed some stuff about the setting, though i'll need someone else to help clean it up a bit. Cocopopz2005 00:43, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Setting

message: The lead states nothing except when the game was released and who it was made by. It says nothing about the actual game. Ashnard Talk Contribs 12:28, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've expanded it a bit. Kariteh 14:20, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Lead

message: A short article, but plenty of other games of similar length have made GA and FA before. Really, I have no serious issues or suggestions for improvement. Good job. David Fuchs (talk) 22:29, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  GA Pass
Talk:Bob Blizzard

message: Has been updated to reflect Bob's role as PPC for Waveney.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.205.66.78 (talk) 20:19, 7 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Bob Boone

message: I think he was the last person to try and revive the four-man rotation, as a manager of the Reds, in 2003. I can't find a source for this, other than http://danagonistes.blogspot.com/2004/08/four-man-rotation-redux.html, which contains a dead-link reference to ESPN. 72.93.87.3 (talk) 19:06, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled