lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Ranked voting

message: Should this be merged with the article on Score Voting (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Score_voting)? There's actually a few articles related to alternative voting methods focused on related concepts, and most of them are borderline-stub articles. 137.118.200.159 (talk) 18:32, 18 January 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Almost certainly not.  It might make sense to merge the "Score voting" article with the "Cardinal voting" article (since Score and Cardinal voting use the same ballot type), and it might make sense to merge the "Ranked voting" and "Preferential voting" articles (since Ranked and Preferential voting use the same ballot type). -- RobLa (talk) 22:50, 19 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  related pages 

message: This is a big change, and so I want to discuss it before I make it: Myclob (talk) 17:58, 21 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Comparison and Evaluation of Ranked Voting Systems 

message: Steven Brams and Peter Fishburn highlight the utility of simulated elections as a means to study the properties of ranked voting methods.Brams, Steven; Fishburn, Peter (2007). The Mathematics of Voting. Princeton University Press. p. 14. These simulations can estimate the 'efficacy' of each voting method, which is defined by how frequently it elects the candidate closest to the center of the voter distribution. In terms of these simulations, Andrew Reynolds indicates that "Condorcet methods and Coombs' method tend to deliver optimal outcomes, followed by the Borda count. Instant-runoff voting comes further behind, with first-past-the-post voting trailing."Reynolds, Andrew (2011). Electoral Systems: The Key to Power. Routledge. p. 12. Myclob (talk) 17:58, 21 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Empirical Approach: Simulated Elections

message: May I please receive the green light to fix the first point there, considering that it refers to ranked voting as such an other method, despite the whole article being about ranked voting in the first place, while it's description is also incoherent and seems to mix things up with elements of yet another voting method?
For now I am thinking that the point there was meant to be about score voting instead. Wulfstrex (talk) 08:20, 11 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Regarding the section of “Other methods“ 

message: Might it be worth a mention in this article that Slovenia used ranked choice voting for some offices for a certain period, with references, of course? It would be best if a reference could be found with a plausible discussion of why it was changed? Thanks, DavidMCEddy (talk) 23:30, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, you're right. To my knowledge, the ranked system was used to elect the two minority MPs from 2000 to 2018, until it was replaced by the amendment known as ZVDZ-D, in the 2022 general election First Past the Post was already used. The reason for change was simplification, the amendments were proposed by the two minority MPs. I'll update with reference to RTVSLO (national broadcaster - in slovene) Keraleais (talk) 14:22, 13 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Slovenia?
Talk:John Sullivan (writer)

message: This page claims, although with a  tag, that John Sullivan is an Arsenal fan. Citizen Smith claims that he is a Fulham fan. I suppose it is technically possible to support both teams but it isn't usual, so I guess one of them is a mistake. Are there any proper citations? Sam Blacketer (talk) 22:31, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Which football team?
Talk:Henry Calderwood

message: This article is title David Calderwood, but it talks about Henry Calderwood. This makes no sense. Is one or the other a nickname? If so, which is it? Is one a first and another a middle name? If so, what's the correct order? Or is this just a bizarre typo? -- Jeff Q 10:43, 8 May 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is it David or Henry? 

message: The article is about Henry Calderwood, LLD, the moral philosopher. David Calderwood (1575-1650)was a Scottish divine and historian. If there ever was an article in Wikipedia on him, it looks as if it has somehow been merged with this (though the text of that article has obviously been lost in the process). A search in Wikipedia for either 'Henry Calderwood' or 'David Calderwood' both bring the reader to this page!
Any attempt to Move this page fails. It looks as if this will have to be corrected by an administrator.Eilthireach 02:05, 18 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: It's '''Henry''' Calderwood!
Talk:Evolutionary developmental biology

message: I wanted to refresh my memory on Turing's contribution to this field. My understanding is that he and I believe D'Arcy Thompson wrote at least one paper where they essentially mapped out some of the core ideas: that constraints from math, physics, etc. shaped the type of phenotypes that could result from changes to genotype. I may be saying that wrong, Biology isn't my field, but I know I've seen several mentions that Turing wrote about the basic ideas of evo-devo many years before it was rediscovered and became an active field of biology. MadScientistX11 (talk) 16:01, 14 May 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Turing wrote a paper on how in theory patterns (in fur or feathers) could appear. Much later, evo-devo found that he'd broadly guessed correctly. Thompson (already in the article) didn't believe in evolution, which could be seen as a small problem in making him a father of evo-devo; he wanted to show that body shapes arose spontaneously, rather than through biochemical mechanisms under natural selection. I suppose if we're going to go back to the beginning, whatever that is, we'd start with Aristotle, who speculated that bodies come into being through a selection of parts; this most likely meant embryonic development (ontogeny) not phylogeny, i.e. after conception the appropriate parts are selected (from some non-physical space?) and assembled. I'm not sure any of this is exactly evo-devo, more the history of biology, but perhaps a brief paragraph of 'Precursors' or 'Historical background' would not go amiss. Chiswick Chap (talk) 18:15, 14 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  No Mention of Turing?
Talk:Earl of Bridgewater

message: I don't know whether this should be here. The place is currently called "Bridgwater" (not that that's any guarantee that the title is spelt the same way), but there is no consensus on the internet as to how the title is spelt. I'll go and have a look in Burke's when I next have a change to see if it's mentioned there. Proteus (Talk) 10:56, 8 May 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I've seen it spelled both ways, and I've put in a few redirects just in case. Mackensen 13:19, 8 May 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Cokayne spells "Bridgwater" on etymological grounds (< from "Burg-Walter"), but both his direct quotations (one the will of the seventh Earl) spell "Bridgewater". So does the Oxford DNB, and , apparently, so do the treatises. (I haven't looked at a copy, but a major university library transcribes thus).  Septentrionalis 22:26, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Malaysian Scouts Association

message: We still need to talk about the Wood Badge. --Johnleemk 11:32, 8 May 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: This needs the Malay transliteration. Chris 06:18, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Arabic script tagging

message: If anyone can use these somewhere in the article, please do so, the article they were in was recently deleted, Chris (クリス • フィッチ) (talk) 17:19, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: images from deleted article
Talk:Six Hills

message: Just wanted to say, I never meant to remove the coordinates! I think it was some sort of edit conflict that I wasn't warned about and didn't notice! :) anemone│projectors 12:21, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: No worries! I somehow got them wrong anyway, I do check edits etc but I think a combination of browser caching (cacheing?) and my own incompetence managed to get it wrong; User:Droll fixed them. So we got there together and it is better! (BTW the coords are centred with three hills each side, I assume that is the best to do.) SimonTrew (talk) 22:47, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Oops 
Talk:Tisza

message: :From Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)
Could someone please move Theiss River to Tisza? Theiss is the not so current name for the river Tisza, which flows in Romania, Ukraine, Hungary and Serbia. Theiss is the old German name, but for instance in Encyclopedia Britannica the Hungarian name Tisza is used. The reason a simple move doesn't work is that there is already some history on Tisza. Right now it's a redirect to Theiss River, but it used to be a stub saying "this is the Hungarian name of Theiss". --12:40, 29 Sep 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: There's been discussion on the talk page, and no-one seems to object, so I've gone and moved Theiss River to Tisza, and changed the (quite numerous) redirects. zoney ♣ talk 22:27, 29 Sep 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Move Theiss River to Tisza 

message: I think  "control of the Tisza" ("a Tisza szabályozása") should be written as "regulation of the Tisza"
:: So do I. 'Control' is just a bade equivalent for 'szabályozás'. I'll change it to 'regulation'.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.24.43.52 (talk) 10:57, 20 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  control? 

message: The length given in the geobox before my revision, 1358 km, is neither the “old” value of 1419 km nor the “new” value of 966 km. None of these three numbers appear with any specific reference, and one must assume they were taken from one of the two (but we don't know which) Romanian sources listed. I see that there was an attempt, back in 2006, to set the geobox value to 966 km; the edit was promptly reverted on the grounds of failure to cite reliable sources—a complaint that is both odd (since the 966 km figure was given in the article itself) as well as kind of hypocritical (since the reverter did not supply a specific reference either).
Surely, the length of the river in the geobox should be the curent length, which the article itself gives as 966 km; Britannica gives 966 km, too.  The book Rivers of Europe gives the length as 965 km. Now we can argue whether it's 966 or 965, but it is definitely 960-970 km, and not 1350-1450 km. Therefore I'm changing the data on the length (as well as on the drainage area and the discharge rate) to reflect the most recent reputable source I found, namely the aforementioned book Rivers of Europe. Incidentally, that book thereby becomes the very first reference in this article. True, there are two “sources” listed, but they are not easily accessible; and are in Romanian; and at least one of them is quite dated, from 1971; and one does not know which information in the article comes from which of the two. Thus the Refimprove tag. Reuqr (talk) 05:58, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Length (and other hydrological characteristics) of the Tisza, and the Refimprove tag 

message: If someone knows (and can cite a source) on just how much of it is navigable, I think that would be an excellent addition of the article. It was one of the main things I was curious about when I looked it up.
Tyrannophobe (talk) 18:55, 27 June 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Navigability
Talk:The Beacon Street Collection

message: I'll be working on this article for the next few weeks and will get it up to GA status. -- Escape Artist Swyer Talk to me The mess I've made 22:46, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Nominated. It'll take about two weeks most likely to be reviewed, looking at the backlog at WP:GAN, so hopefully WP:ALBUM will have assessed it by then and I can make improvements. -- Escape Artist Swyer Talk Contributions 22:32, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Work 
Talk:Pablo Honey

message: If anyone's interested: we are extremely close to having a Radiohead studio albums good topic. Pablo Honey is the only one that isn't GA/FA, but with an expansion of the "Music" section, I think it could easily reach GA. Skyshifter talk 21:59, 25 January 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, I am in the process of trying to bring it to GA for this reason, feel free to help out. Progress has stalled for a while (because I'm lazy), but it's definitely achievable soon. As you said, all I really see that it needs is an expanded music section. Obviously,  did most of the awesome work on this article, I'm just trying to add the finishing touches for GA (since they said they weren't interested in nomination). — PerfectSoundWhatever (t; c) 00:36, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

text: I'm trying to help out with expanding the music section, but in the meanwhile here is a source entirely dedicated to "You": https://www.vice.com/en/article/mb555q/radiohead-you-pablo-honey-25th-anniversary-music-theory-essay. I just can't phrase it very well for some reason, but i think it would be very useful --WeInTheUSA (talk) 08:21, 16 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Very close to GA (and a good topic)
Talk:Renegades (Rage Against the Machine album)

message: Can anyone verify if this is in any way related to the Renegades album cover? Maybe it could be mentioned in the article. 
It's interesting to note that the original monument spells "LOVE", instead of "RAGE", in the same typeset the album uses, and has a tilted letter, the O, instead of the G
Thanks! --Sébastien Leblanc ( Talk | E-mail ) 02:42, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  About the album cover 

message: Shouldn't Renegades be listed as a compilation album instead? If it is just a collection of cover versions and not original songs, shouldn't it be listed as a compilation album instead? 24.127.236.115 (talk) 23:04, 17 December 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  As a compilation album
Talk:Merlin Stone

message: Shouldn't we be connecting Merlin Stone to Robert Graves, since his work inspired some of her explorations in "When God Was A Woman"?  It seems to me that a good cross-reference would be to Robert Graves "Greek Mythology" which has some good discussion about how his thoughts have been received by classical scholars.  I would think we would want to have some information here about the nature of this debate, since, presumably, "When God Was A Woman" was an important element in the larger debate on this issue.  Added references and information about this linkage.  I am not sure how to edit the summary, which I forgot to fill out.
Peterbbishop (talk) 17:08, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Robert Graves 

message: I removed the wording concerning the views of un-cited 'critics' and also the description of Merlin Stone as a 'Neopagan'.  Nothing in her book equates to a call for a return to paganism and she actually makes statements to that effect in it.  She is much more concerned with the suppression of womens property rights and freedoms than she is with strictly spiritual issues.  Given that the description of her in that manner is just an opinion I felt it appropriate to remove it, unless anyone can cite her own statements that make her an adherent of any such creed. Tashkop 00:51, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  neutral bias 

message: I removed Marketing Books which are by another Merlin Stone who is a (male) Professor of Marketing.Professor Merlin Stone, Bristol Business School, University of West of England  —Preceding unsigned comment added by GavinCorder (talk • contribs) 18:30, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  books 
Talk:Digital sum

message: While I think the topic definitely deserves an article, I wonder whether "digital sum" is really the standard name for this operation? Casual googling seems to suggest that the digital sum of a number is more commonly taken to be the repeated digit sum, i.e. the decimal digital sum of 782 is computed by 7+8+2=17, 1+7=8 to be 8. AxelBoldt 16:42, 8 May 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, you're right. I'll try to correct this article. -- Alex Nisnevich (talk) 21:21, 26 July 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Professional mathematicians call it "digital root." Anton Mravcek 22:48, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
Talk:Distance (Hikaru Utada album)

message: Why does it say that Hamasaki is her rival? 
Utada said, "Some people compare us as rivals, but we do really different things."
She was implying that this isn't true.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.239.99.53 (talk) 17:47, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rival
Talk:Snow bunting

message: I am not a birder so don't know whether they image above that I just uploaded is a better representation of the bird than the pics we already have (assuming that it is indeed a Snow Bunting!). Comments welcome. Pete/Pcb21 (talk) 17:05, 8 May 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: — Assignment last updated by Lenaerickson (talk) 02:16, 16 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: Environmental physiology
Talk:Vajrayana/Archive

message: Shouldn't this page be unified with Tibetan Buddhism and Lamaism? -- Error 00:17 May 10, 2003 (UTC)
:I'm no expert on this school as it doesn't particularly interest me at present, however I've just started working on some related projects (Himalayan studies) so should be able to shed some light in the near future!  Just noticed from your link here that Lamaism was very disjointed, so I kind of hacked it back together.  As for Vajrayana / Tibetan Buddhism, I think the former is a subset of the latter but I don't know if it warrants a seperate wiki.  -- prat
:No! It should not be unified with Tibetan Buddhism. Vajrayana Buddhism is Indian in origin even though this is not brought out in the article. Tibetan Buddhism just happens to be the best known variation on the Vajrayana, but Shingon Buddhism in Japan is equally Vajrayana (and they would say a purer form of it). mahābāla 12:35, 9 Mar 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: BTW Lamaism is a very archaic and now abandoned way of referring to Tibetan Buddhism. It is an example of western 'orientalism' at it's worst, because inherent in the term is the assumption that Tibetan Buddhism is not a form of Buddhism at all. This was informed by a western (mostly academic) bias which saw Theravada as the standard of orthodoxy.mahābāla 12:35, 9 Mar 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Mahabala is right on both points here. Moreover, there is plenty of Tibetan Buddhism which is not Vajrayana. (20040302 08:49, 6 Apr 2004 (UTC)

message: I've just moved a lot of detail on Tibetan Buddhism from the Vajrayana page to the Tibetan Buddhism page.  If no one objects I will do the same thing with the Shingon section in a few days -- right now it contains more and better info on Shingon than the Shingon Buddhism page itself which seems odd.  The Vajrayana page will then be fairly brief -- where it fits in Buddhism, what is unique about it and then a short description of Tibetan and Shingon Buddhism with links to them -- that's about it.  But others may have a different view -- any comments? technopilgrim 18:52, 8 Mar 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, most of the Tibetan Vajrayana originates from the Nalanda traditions and the Udyana traditions of Vajrayana, neither of which were located in Tibet. (20040302 08:56, 6 Apr 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Suggestion(s) on what should go on what pages
Talk:David Berkowitz

message: David Berkowitz identifies the Satanic cult he was involved with and he claims were involved with the murders as the Process Church of the Final Judgment in both of the videos linked below. Why is that not part of the article, especially the "Satanic cult claims" section? 
"Son of Sam Speaks: The Untold Story" -- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sPF3fuICqhM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LMF-06Fj8yg
Phantom in ca (talk) 02:18, 30 August 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: I've added a link to one of these videos, which seems to be a prison interview with Berkowitz. Meticulo (talk) 10:16, 8 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why no mention of the Process Church of the Final Judgment?  

message: "Son of Samael" perhaps? 2403:6200:8852:FDD8:8469:7642:FBDC:497A (talk) 00:51, 20 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Sam" 

message: If you look on New York Incarcerated Lookup, it says he appeared before the parole board on May 14, and he was denied 2A02:C7C:F064:9700:EC16:8D27:4258:4E8 (talk) 17:36, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Parole 2024 

message: "the staff reported that he seemed remarkably troubled by his new environment"
Should be UNtroubled, to judge from the source. Also the staff didn't say if DB was troubled or not, they just reported some facts. 2A02:AA1:1149:1C0:3C:C8DA:9597:25BA (talk) 10:19, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  remarkably troubled
Talk:List of Canadian electoral districts

message: :The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. 
The result of the move request was: moved. Has been open for 14 days without opposition. Took a look into the mentioned RM and rationale seems reasonable to me (closed by non-admin page mover) Megan B.... It’s all coming to me till the end of time 17:20, 28 December 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: List of Canadian federal electoral districts →  – Per the closure of this RM, the first sentence of the articles makes it clear these are about federal ridings. Moreover, it seems highly unlikely that anyone would be looking for provincial ridings when searching for just Canadian ones. Love of Corey (talk) 05:22, 14 December 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 14 December 2021 

message: Louis-Saint-Laurent (electoral district) should be the correct link instead of the fake one that is currently in that article. ZirconiasVal23 (talk) 21:13, 14 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Incorrect link for Louis-Saint-Laurent electoral district in Québec 

message: The redirect Demographics of federal electoral districts of Canada has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at  until a consensus is reached.  Utopes (talk / cont) 04:34, 9 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  "[[:Demographics of federal electoral districts of Canada]]" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]] 

message: The 2024 - 2033(approx) New Electoral Map has been finalized in the decennial redistribution process.  I am not an experienced Wikipedia editor, but I am interested in helping make it work if I can get a bit of guidance.
In short:  This page needs to be in the list of Historical Electoral Districts for the previous decade, and the contents of this particular page need to list the new 343 electoral districts, most of which have new boundaries, some of which have new names, and all of which have new population figures! Methylphenidate000 (talk) 21:34, 24 December 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: The map change became official on April 22nd, 2024 show now it is really the time to make this a historical list  Unova Yellow (talk) 21:10, 16 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Time has Now Come to change the title of this page
Talk:List of flags with blue

message: stop deleting links to other FLAG lists
True or false: besides completing the list to include all nations with flags of this kind, there is a way this article can be expanded. 66.245.114.155 19:17, 8 May 2004 (UTC)

message: True or false: When completed, this will be the second largest of the 6 flag-color lists, with List of flags with red being the largest. (The List of flags with three colors doesn't count.) 66.32.144.73 02:28, 15 May 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Second largest??