lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Siege of Oviedo

message: How do I add the Oviedo siege to the campaign box?
GenghisTheHun 23:58, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: how to add Oviedo to campaign box

message: We need to add Oviedo to the campaign box.  Gijón is in it and Oviedo is more important than the Siege of Gijón.
GenghisTheHun 02:46, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Campaign Box

message: I decided to use the term Popular Front for the forces besieging Oviedo.  The Republic had no authority there at the time and almost the entire attack force was milita from the Popular Front parties.  In addition many historians refer to the attackers as Popular Front. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by GenghisTheHun (talk • contribs) 02:43, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Use of term, Popular Front
Talk:Mathematical Formulas

message: I am currently attempting to create a page dedicated to mathematical formulas.  If anyone has anything to add please go ahead and do so.--Trd89 23:58, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: See WP:NOT#INDISCRIMINATE, this might be useful for Wikibooks. John Reaves (talk) 03:30, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
Talk:.25-35 Winchester

message: The most significant difference is that the European 6,5x52R has a maximum pressure of only 2450 bar (the .25-35 has a maximum of 3050 bar).  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.83.60.214 (talk) 12:28, 13 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Differences 6,5x52R and 25-35
Talk:Avner Greif

message: Avner Greif == AWESOME!!! There's no grief in Greif.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.12.102.200 (talk) 05:50, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: In regard to the little edit war that you guys have going on in this article right now: it's fine to include some criticism of an academic's work but it should be criticism which has been published in reliable sources. Additionally, since this is a BLP (biography of a living person), the criticism should be published in a substantial number of reliable sources - not just one article. The Edwards and Oglivie working paper does not qualify on either count, AFAICT. The Boldizzoni book is a little bit better ... but it's very recent and apparantly much more general. I can see it being possibly used in the article on Cliometrics or Economic History but here it is in fact undue.
Consider this an (unsolicited) third opinion.Volunteer Marek (talk) 04:28, 5 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  criticism 
Talk:Avraam Papadopoulos

message: I don't know enough about this player to rewrite the article either in part or completely, so I won't try at this stage. I've added templates indicating that the article has multiple issues which should be fairly self-evident to any observer. Cyril Washbrook (talk) 10:18, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: True. Though one thing that isn't 'self-evident' is how it has managed to be labelled "Tagged since August 2010". That being, as I write this, the month after next! Grubstreet (talk) 13:07, 12 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Added templates, August 2009 
Talk:.260 Remington

message: The cartridge pictured looks like it might be a 6.5mm Remington Magnum. If it is it can be used elsewhere! Can someone take a look and at this? I think I spy a little belt on the cartridge. DeusImperator (talk) 17:30, 30 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not sure if it's a belt or if it's just an artifact of the lighting. The image is labeled in the system as a .260, so I'm guessing that's what it is. AliveFreeHappy (talk) 17:41, 30 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cartridge Pic 

message: As newbie, I only just realised I could post this question here.
I've placed a couple of charts comparing relative performance of various 260 Rem cartridges next to this section. If the author of the text posts the muzzle velocities, Ballistic Coefficients, Sectional Densities of the cartridges they refer to in the text, I'll amend the charts to include them. Cheers, JohnMZoomNoodle77 (talk) 21:34, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: According to the current C.I.P. TDCC α/alpha is 40 degrees, see http://www.cip-bobp.org/homologation/uploads/tdcc/tab-i/tabical-en-page97.pdf. From an US perspective this would be alpha/2 = 20 degrees.--Francis Flinch (talk) 17:43, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sporting Usage 

message: The twist rate of the rifling is not a specification of the cartridge and should not be listed in the specification section.
It may be appropriate to include information on nominal twist rates elsewhere in the article.SteveOak (talk) 16:56, 2 November 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rifling Twist
Talk:.30-03 Springfield

message: Since the round is correctly .30-'03, the page should be moved.  TREKphiler any time you're ready, Uhura  01:51, 29 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Move 

message: I have requested a reference citation for the addition of the .280 Remington to the statement about the .270 WCF, since I believe the ,280 does not use the original shoulder, but moved the shoulder forward to avoid chambering .280 cartridges in .270 rifles. Thewellman (talk) 02:17, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  .280 Remington 

message: Reading the article it sounds like the 30-03 were an original development, while in fact both the cartridge and the gun it was used in, were based on Mauser or other German developments. 
AFAIK the 30-03 cartridge was designed by lengthening the 7 x 57 or 7.92 x 57 case. The design was done after the US army encountered the 7 x 57 in the Spanish American war. The aim was to produce a cartridge more powerful than the 7 x 57 or 7.92 X 57. You can compare the measurements of any of the 57mm Mauser cartridges, that are again based on the M88 pattern German cartridge or 8 x 57 I. The measurements are nearly identical, but the length.
The agreed upon payments for patent infringement never happened because the advent of the great war.
The change from the 30-03 to 30-06 again copies the development in Europe. First the French changed the 8 mm Lebel to a 198 grain spitzer boat tailed bullet and than the German changed the 7.92 x 57 to a 153 grain spitzer bullet with a muzzle velocity of 2880 ft/s.
Looking at those developments, the US changed the cartridge to the 30-06 version with a 150 grain spitzer bullet with a muzzle velocity of 2700 ft/s, about copying the performance of the 7.92 x 57 S.Jochum (talk) 04:49, 23 September 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: a reference for the above https://www.chuckhawks.com/great_cartridge_families.htm Jochum (talk) 05:35, 23 September 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  development of the 30-03 cartridge
Talk:.30-40 Krag

message: http://stevespages.com/page8d.htm Can't link directly to the images.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bizzybody (talk • contribs) 07:38, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dimensions 

message: I have one of these, not a replica; it came from my grandfather along with the Krag-Jørgensen rifle.
Themathkid (talk) 20:36, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  "A replica of the McKeever-pattern .30 US Army cartridge case." 

message: Winchester Model 1895
In the .30-40 Krag article it states that "...it was one of only three rounds chambered for the 1895 Winchester lever action, introduced in 1896."  While the Winchester Model 1895 page has nine different cartridges it is chambered for. One of them has to be wrong, and I suspect it is this one. It is more likely that Winchester chambered that gun for as many cartridges as they could in order to sell more. 
Rossnoc (talk) 22:59, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I may be wrong, but I believe what was intended was to say that the .30-40 Krag was one of only three rounds originally chambered for the 1895 Winchester.  There is no doubt that the 1895 was subsequently chambered for other rounds, so any other interpretation would be spurious.  In support, I note that the image on the 1895 Winchester page of the original advertisement from Winchester shows it as being chambered for only three rounds at the time -- one of which is the .30-40.  Jrt989 (talk) 19:28, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Conflict with Winchester Model 1895
Talk:Eureka, Montana

message: Why is it apparently no longer known as the "Christmas Tree Capital of the World"? PumpkinSky talk 02:26, 19 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: No Christmas tree capital?
Talk:Troy, Montana

message: Notes for myself on what might still improve the article, although anyone can take this over if they want (please):
* Current effects of vermiculite mines despite cleanup - might find more when writing libby
* Literally any other modern news. Maybe check local newspapers - done as far as google will take me
* Pop culture/notable residents - done as far as google will take me
* Combine economy? Maybe with demographics - added recreation :)
* Check if ranger districts are relevant to encyclopedia
* Check flickr for pics - done
* I feel like the forest and river should be mentioned in the lead somehow - done
Ok goodnight. originalmessbusta rhyme 11:22, 12 December 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  To do
Talk:Azar Majedi

message: This entire article is a copy of the biography on this woman's webpage.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.86.99.174 (talk) 23:45, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: She sounds notable however. Probably sources could be found. Steve Dufour (talk) 20:02, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copied from website 
Talk:Azita Ghanizada

message: What is that supposed to mean? Arcanicus (talk) 05:15, 14 July 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, it's been rephrased to properly make things clear: she has two sisters, though I couldn't locate anything that said she was the middle child of the three. Tabercil (talk) 03:28, 10 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: ...the middle child of two sisters...
Talk:Ağın

message: There seems to be some confusion between the town currently called Ağın and the one now called Kemaliye, but previously called Eğın. Both seem to derive their names from the same Armenian word (Akn, meaning spring) and each is close to the other. As a result, it seems that the same history and biographical references are being applied to each. I'm focusing on Kemaliye for now, but someone may want to clean up this one. I think all the Armenian sources cited probably refer to the town that's now Kemaliye. Rupert Clayton (talk) 08:30, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Takabeg (talk) 08:33, 28 February 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Agin and Egin both refer to the same town (todays Kemaliye). Different dialects have produced different pronunciations and written forms of the name for Agin/Egin. Proudbolsahye (talk) 04:59, 7 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ağın / Eğın confusion 
Talk:B. Clark Burchfiel

message: According to this page he is already dead: https://www.nasonline.org/member-directory/deceased-members/57232.html
I am not sure how reliable this is. 
Can anyone please help me verify. Bdschi (talk) 16:41, 1 April 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: The National Academy of Sciences is very reliable. The Association of MIT Retirees also confirms the date of death (https://retirees.mit.edu/in-memoriam/page_view_event/metrics/page_view_event/aggregate) so I've updated the article. Kind regards, Robby.is.on (talk) 19:34, 1 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Can anyone verify his status
Talk:.300 Remington Short Action Ultra Magnum

message: *I have requested permission from The Reload Bench to use their diagram of the .300 RUM for this page.  I will upload the image if I obtain their permission.  Kartano (talk) 03:43, 4 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pictures 

message: Please rename or move this article to .300 Remington Short Action Ultra Magnum. Currently that page exists as a redirect page to this article. However, the subject of the article is properly called .300 Remington Short Action Ultra Magnum. DeusImperator (talk) 18:15, 9 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Incorrectly named article
Talk:BJ Flores

message: Move Parsecboy (talk) 18:48, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *Support or *Oppose, then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's naming conventions.
*Support, as nominator.--Vintagekits (talk) 16:22, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

text: Any additional comments:--Vintagekits (talk) 16:21, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Requested move

message: :Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *Support or *Oppose, then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's naming conventions.
*Support, as nominator.--Vintagekits (talk) 16:22, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Survey

message: :Any additional comments:--Vintagekits (talk) 16:21, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Discussion

message: There are some sources that indicate he was 25 years old, other sources indicate he was born in 1979. Which is the correct one? Or could this be a different Benjamin Flores? Though there doesn't seem any disambiguation should it be the case. --JForget  00:39, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Birth year issues?

message: This isn't the same Flores. In fact they're about a dozen weight classes apart. So stupid...  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.89.8.205 (talk) 04:10, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: For anyone who's still not sure, the guy who sadly died is here. It would be good if people stopped editing in the wrong info. Bretonbanquet (talk) 09:10, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  He's not dead idiots!
Talk:.303 Savage

message: Why is .303 if the caliber is .30?
?.30 is internal diameter of rifle barrel and .303 is diameter of bullet?
Feldercarb (talk) 21:45, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why is it?
Talk:Babar Ahmed (director)

message: The "Professional career" section does not seem neutral to me, and it is poorly cited. Thoughts? Fnordware (talk) 18:07, 12 May 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: The "Professional career" section is indeed neutral. And does have citations:  http://www.seniorsworldchronicle.com/2011/06/usa-babar-ahmed-on-challenges-of-global.html http://wbi.worldbank.org/wbi/news/2010/08/10/video-highlights-innovative-cities-global-dialogue — Preceding unsigned comment added by Computer998877 (talk • contribs) 23:48, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh, you mean the citations you just added without any understanding of Wikipedia markup usage? Added by a user with no previous contributions? Please forgive me for being suspect of your neutrality in this matter. The world bank citation can be a reliable source, but there is still plenty of pairing down to do for the rest of the un-cited material. Thank you for drawing my attention back to this article. Fnordware (talk) 04:09, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

text: The "Professional career" section is not neutral. It is written in a way that the Wikipedia editor posting it is the reporter. For example, the article sentence "He has been covered on major TV stations such as BBC World TV, NBC 4, and CH 9 WUSA." conveys information that probably is true. However, how did the Wikipedia editor posting that sentence know this information? Is that sentence a summary of information written in a Wikipedia reliable source? No. The Wikipedia editor saw or read about BBC World TV, NBC 4, and CH 9 WUSA covering Babar Ahmed. In this case, the Wikipedia editor posted a synthesis of published material where the Wikipedia reliable source themselves did not directly advance the position that "He has been covered on major TV stations such as BBC World TV, NBC 4, and CH 9 WUSA." Since the source for the information in the Wikipedia article is the Wikipedia editor, the "Professional career" section is not neutral. Don't try to interpret one or several Wikipedia reliable sources. Instead, find reliable sources about the topic and post a representative survey of that relevant literature.  -- Uzma Gamal (talk) 12:38, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

text: You refuse to discuss, so I guess I'll have to get the article semi-protected. Fnordware (talk) 18:52, 16 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  NPOV 
Talk:Crocodile Dentist

message: I'm pretty sure that in the game you actually pull the teeth out, not press down on them. I'm changing it to reflect that; if I'm incorrect then I apologize. Cuttycuttiercuttiest (talk) 02:25, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I seem to remember that the toy I had as a child was also the teeth-pulling kind, but the teeth-pushing version is a lot more common now. Though I'm not sure if it's an official improvement or whether these are all knockoffs, I'm seeing a lot of them lately (in different sizes, plus a Lilo & Stitch version) and they're all the pushing type. 119.45.34.55 (talk) 04:38, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: This game was also used as a small prize on The Price is Right in 1993.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.240.192.75 (talk) 15:42, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  In popular culture 

message: Hi, I uploaded an image and will put together a page in a sandbox: User:Swa1111/Sandbox4
If you have any suggestions let me know
Swa1111 (talk) 15:36, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Image

message: Is it unknown during play which will be the sore tooth? One would think so, but it's not clear. How is the sore tooth determined; i.e., what causes one tooth to be the sore tooth? Does it, as one might speculate, change from game to game? 71.60.69.158 (talk) 07:05, 24 February 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  It might be useful to explain the "sore tooth"
Talk:.32 H&R Magnum

message: I put the brackets around ".32 S&W Long" to make it a hyperlink. Anharmyenone (talk) 05:05, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:.32 NAA

message: Has anyone read the reference??? (http://www.firearmstactical.com/pdf/sanow.pdf) It's a complete critique of Sanow suggesting a strong conflict of interest and outright bad information.  Furthermore, the reference doesn't address the performance of the .32NAA ammunition at all.  
In addition, the section says .32NAA outperforms .380 ACP in energy when, to the contrary, the .380 article lists three types that exceed the 199 ft-lbs.  I'm striking the entire sentence and we can reinsert a properly researched/referenced statement.MartinezMD (talk) 06:59, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Performance, Ed Sanow, and References
Talk:.338 Federal

message: :I have requested permission from Gun Blast to use an image they have of the .338 Federal.  If permission is granted, I will upload their image.  Kartano (talk) 04:17, 4 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Image permission was obtained, have uploaded the image and forwarded permission to Wiki.  Kartano (talk) 05:03, 4 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Velocity given for 180 gr bullet in 308 is at least 100fps too high!  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lance may (talk • contribs) 03:31, 1 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Velocity for .308 updated to 2600 fps as per factory loads, despite much better performance with handloads. --CaboverPete (talk) 20:20, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Photograph is not labeled, and from the neck angles, they look to be 3 different rounds.Fremry  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.124.191.41 (talk) 17:33, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Photograph now labeled, identifying each cartridge individually. --CaboverPete (talk) 20:21, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: So the table that compares ballistic performance between the 338 federal and the 358 Winchester has a bullet listed as “accuballs”. I don’t know if this was a spellcheck error or on purpose, I know of no bullet named “accuballs”. I do know of a bullet by Nosler called an accubond. Help me out here and correct this if it’s wrong. 
I don’t know how to correct a table. Anthonyjoehaynes (talk) 06:58, 10 June 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Accuballs?
Talk:Bafétimbi Gomis

message: I made some changes to the page. I don't know much about his career, so I've based it off the French league stats website. If anybody follows St. Etienne or has followed his career closely, then please edit accordingly. I don't know if the speculation parts are relevant and I'm not a very good editor, so feel free to make changes and whatever.Bathory (talk) 16:27, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: There was a recent discussion at User talk:TeaLover1996, now archived at User talk:TeaLover1996/Archive 16#"consensus is to not display club at beginning", which failed to demonstrate the existence of any consensus to omit, let alone remove, the league played in from the lead section of footballer bios. I won't go through it all again, because links to relevant previous discussions at WT:FOOTY are already in that archive.
The article has been stable with the "Premier League club" wording since the player first joined Swansea. Replacing "Premier League" with "Welsh" isn't helpful to the reader, because it implies that the player is playing in a Welsh competition, and he isn't, he's playing in an English competition which occasionally includes Welsh clubs. But removing it entirely is doubly unhelpful. Struway2 (talk) 15:41, 12 July 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removing league played in from the lead section
Talk:.35 Whelen

message: Needs better research!  Col. Townsend Whelen was away on a hunting trip when James Howe decided to neck down the .400 Whelen (which the venerable Colonel did collaborate on) to 35 caliber.  Howe named it the .35 Whelen in honor of Col. Whelen, but the Colonel wasn't there at the time.
DrHenley (talk) 12:23, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: The .35 Whelen is traditionally referred to as a child of the .30-06, but initial work on the cartridge (and the .400 Whelen) was done with .30-03 cases.  When necking .30-06 up to .35 caliber, the case length shortens to approximately 2.475" - not the standard length of 2.494".  .35 Whelen should be properly attributed as a child of the .30-03, just like .270 Winchester and .280 Remington (they were also based on the .30-03, not the .30-06).  Only the .30-03 parent cartridge provides the proper starting case length to result in a finished case length of 2.485-2.494".
The poor sources cited here are giving the .30-06 too much credit!
In addition:  Now, this article is citing ".357 bullets" as all being .358" diameter.  This is so, terribly wrong, it's not even funny.  Most jacketed ".357 bullets" (the assumption of readers) range in diameter from .3560" to .3575".  Only cast or swaged lead bullets can easily be found in diameters of .358" or larger diameter.  
If this project continues to propagate false information, I'm going to start re-writing every article I come across, and leave the citations and links to project members.  Get it together!  Do some simple research, if you don't actually know what you're talking about.  That's the whole point here - CORRECT information, not just the crap Jim Bob's Uncle's Dog's Owner's Roommate's Newphew said was the history of these cartridges. Bones~~  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.52.47.145 (talk) 19:33, 18 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Article states a rifling twist of 1/16.  My “Wildcat” 35 Whelen is 1/14 twist.  Wildcat and custom rifles for 35 Whelen were often made with the 1/12 twist. Some say the 1/16 twist is for lighter bullets where people who shoot 250 to 300 gr bullets prefer 1/12 twist.  I shoot 200 to 250 gr bullets with my 1/14 twist. 107.115.203.35 (talk) 20:32, 17 November 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rifling twist on the 35 Whelen
Talk:Bai He

message: * Can someone please dont change the player statistics again... The statistics is for senior club appearances and goals counted for the DOMESTIC league only. That means it should include league matches such as Hong Kong First Division League, but not Hong Kong Senior Shield and Hong Kong FA Cup. I have revised this some many times already... Checkiema 10:23, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled