lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Shelsley Walsh Speed Hill Climb

message: There's not really much of a consensus on this, even on the official site (look at its title bar!), but "Shelsley Walsh Speed Hill Climb" is what's used for the front page title, so I'm going with that here. Various redirects to be set up in due course, I suppose. Loganberry (Talk) 14:51, 25 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Since I wrote that, the site has been redesigned a bit, and Shelsley Walsh Speed Hill Climb is now consistently used. Nice to know I've got something right! Loganberry (Talk) 14:43, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Capitalisation/spacing 

message: This edit (since reverted) by  was a rather insidious one. There were some changes that were obviously rubbish (eg mentioning the 1830s as a golden age for Shelsley!) but there were also some that could easily have slipped by without being noticed for ages, such as the average gradient being changed from the correct 1 in 9.14 to 1 in 9.24. Loganberry (Talk) 02:17, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Keep an eye out, please 

message: According to the Manchester Guardian, July 27, 1908: "H.C. Tryon, with S.F. Edge's 60 h.p. Napier, won the cup for the fastest time." It is possible that Edge is listed, as the entrant was given more significance in those days? Also I have a cancellation for 1914 event - Nicholson says "Shelsley Walsh, planned for 22 August, was cancelled,.." Without day/month/year this type of history is of limited value. Rupertlt (talk) 12:47, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Saturday July 25, 1908

message: There is evidence to suggest that the initial length of the course in this article is incorrect. Also was it set at 1,000 yards in 1907?
The Times of India, Oct 7, 1919, Page 29: "The hill has a double bend in the middle, is 1,133 yds. long and the average gradient is 1 in. 9.25." See also: T.R. Nicholson, Sprint - Speed Hillclimbs and Speed Trials in Britain: 1899-1925, Page 67, David & Charles, 1969: "Mr M.C.H. Taylor, a club member who happened to be a tenant of Court House, offered an extremely narrow, rough, steep and twisty 1,133 yd on his land which was seen to have splendid possibilities." --Rupertlt (talk) 14:09, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Length of course
Talk:Actin-binding protein

message: *I started this age on the 25th of August and have to test links to other Wiki articles.
JOK 14:55, 25 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Oberst

message: Hi, wouldn't it make sense to use the German plural of Oberst, Oberste, rather than the English version Obersts?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.65.38.161 (talk) 22:56, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Plural of Oberst

message: Why is there an entire paragraph of this article devoted to American perceptions and stereotyping from cinema?  That paragraph should be deleted - POV issue.  --Erskine — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.63.63.94 (talk) 15:02, 25 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I dont think its POV to state an image which is portrayed in American cinema.  The paragraph even cites a reference, that being Colonel Klink. -Husnock 17:23, 7 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree, "Herr Oberst" has become a stock character in American cinema and TV, much like the Roman miles gloriosus and it is worth noting here.  --Joe 18:40, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: American perceptions

message: I restored the article form its redirect as I dont understand why this was done.  The German equivalent is almost a separate rank from Colonel as this article has enourmous potential when/if sources are added.  There was also no discussion on the redirect, it appears to have been done under the perception that oberst means Colonel, therefore it should be directed.  However, in doing so, this wiped out a lot of work and material added by others. -OberRanks (talk) 21:41, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Redirecting

message: In The Netherlands, a Lt. Colonel is adressed as "overste", which literally translates to German as "Oberst". 82.176.202.53 (talk) 11:27, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Oberst" in other countries
Talk:Northrop X-4 Bantam

message: I was in Colorado Springs, CO, USA, on business in 1987, went by the Academy, and saw the X-4 on static display.  Actually, some cadets were wheeling it around!  Odd! --MWS 15:09, 25 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  X-4 at the Air Force Academy 

message: Is the X-4 in any way related to the Me-163? She resembles a jet-propelled variant... Also, I deleted the link to "Trip" Tucker of 
ST:E. I really doubt he was a Northrop test pilot in 1948...  Trekphiler 05:24, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  X-Men

message: I've removed the following: "In recent years, Taylor has stated he once flew the X-4 beyond Mach 1 in a dive, followed by a properly instrumented F-86 to confirm the Mach number, but the extensive test program indicated that it should have been in an out of control situation, if it could be done at all." It had a fact tag, and since the article is taken pretty much verbatim from the referenced PD source, and this sentence isn't in the source, I'm moving it here until someone comes up with a ref. AKRadeckiSpeaketh 16:35, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Unsourced section
Talk:Adjourned in contemplation of dismissal

message: Does anyone know whether an ACD only exists in New York state, because I can't seem to find information about it in other states. -- MacAddct1984 15:20, August 25, 2005 (UTC)
:More to the point, is is confined to the USA? Wikipedia is an international encyclopedia, so the country needs to be specified! Loganberry (Talk) 15:32, 25 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Merge this. Bearian 21:33, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: As far as I am aware, it is a system employed by the United States legal system. Anthøny 23:14, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Other State Laws

message: Is this article really A-class?  It even has a stub template!  Seems to me like it should be downgraded until improved. PubliusFL (talk) 16:13, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It is now B. Feel free to downgrade further. I believe it was a preliminary estimation of rank. AGK 16:17, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: A-Class?
Talk:Politics of Andhra Pradesh

message: Should this be called Politics of Andhra Pradesh in line with the Politics of present-day nations and states Politics of country subdivisions‎ series?? AndrewRT(Talk) 22:16, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Name 

message: I think Congress should be moved to the "main parties" sentence as it's either Congress or TDP for the last 3 decades, and "only" Congress before TDP formed. YSRCP joined in the last decade to the main parties list. JSP, CPI / CPI (M) should be added to the "other parties" as JSP won a seat and has gained a fair share of votes, and the communist parties have a significant roles, won seats and significant share of votes. Probably need to update how the lead reads too. -- DaxServer (talk) 16:03, 22 August 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Parties in the lead
Talk:Milwaukee Ballet

message: I removed a fair amount of content from the article for a couple of reasons and just wanted to leave my reasoning here. First, there was a staff listing from multiple years ago that is now outdated. Second, the amount of detail for such a staff listing was excessive for Wikipedia, turning the article into more of a directory, which is not really the purpose. A list of personnel or former personnel who are notable enough to have their own Wikipedia articles would be fine, if someone wants to add something like that. 
Also, I would like to note that one of the previous editors is someone who, on their user page, indicates that they are affiliated with the organization, a definite conflict of interest (Wikipedia:COI). 
Lastly, I also removed a mention of the organization's sponsors, as that blurs the line of appropriateness, considering that the reference for the claim was from the Ballet itself. To me that's using Wikipedia as a way to give free publicity rather than to merely inform. Wantonlife (talk) 17:21, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Excessive Details Removed
Talk:Jessica Rabbit (disambiguation)

message: Jessica is considered by some to be the world's sexiest cartoon character since Tex Avery's "Red Hot Riding Hood".
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jessica_Rabbit"
The above sentence is potentially weasely as it does not cite sources or specify who 'some' are supposed to be.
Would someone knowledgeable be able to clarify?
does 'Some' refer to her fans? to fans of 'Who framed Roger Rabbit'? to an internet poll?
:The line should be removed, it's obviously POV. She was obviously drawn to be sexy, but until we get a panel of experts on this, the line's gone.--Agent Aquamarine 00:51, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: I'd like to know that too. Who wrote the article, anyway? They forgot about The Little Mermaid when mentioning the sexiest cartoons. Nevertheless and notwithstanding, where I come from, a lot of men kept in their gem collection stickers featuring Jessica. I mean, some of them probably don't even know her name (That's probably due to the fact that the poeple who make those stickers don't even bother to keep Jessica's original colors), but if you ask them, they would answer without hesitation "She is the sexiest cartoon ever".
Back to the article, "Some" is most likely to be an euphemism for "the author of this [Jessica Rabbit's] article". --Plavalagunanbanshee 15:35, 15 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Response 

message: Is it just me, or do most of the sections in this article seem to be written as if they're an advertisement, and aren't neutral enough for Wikipedia's standards?60.240.207.206 13:36, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article tone 

message: Ok, I can understand why that pargraph (Jessica is the Frankenstein of all these different actresses) might be considered POV, but if I remember correctly, there is in fact some truth to the statement--that the animators set out to pick the best features from old-time actresses to make one bombshell. Will sniff and see if I can find it--does this sound familiar to anyone else?
Bouncehoper 04:50, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: question about "frankenstein"

message: This is needed as a DMB page since it is a three-way disambiguation. There is no reason to lose the link to the vibrator and make it harder for readers to find the page. TerriersFan (talk) 15:02, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  DMB page
Talk:Egg McMuffin

message: I just edited the article to reflect that it DOES have Hollandaise Sauce, because i just had an egg mcmuffin and it had hollandaise sauce, and everyone i know who eats them also agrees it always has had the sauce.
:Unless this is some regional variation, the Egg McMuffin doesn't contain any sauce, only margarine.  Check out the ingredient list on the McDonald's web site.  (http://app.mcdonalds.com/bagamcmeal?process=item&itemID=46) --Jkonrath 18:28, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hollandaise 

message: Okay, originally I included a statement about the Mayor McMuffin McDonaldland character, but upon further reading I see only "Mayor McCheese."  Yet I swear I remember buying a happy meal as a boy with words to a song about the McDonaldland characters to the tune of "Old McDonald," and one verse began with the phrase "Mayor McMuffin."  I know it had to be, because the tune wouldn't fit otherwise.  But maybe somebody designing the happy meal boxes got sloppy or something. Jdavidb 16:07, 25 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mayor McMuffin? 

message: Hi I am merging with Egg Sandwich as all of these belong together in one article.  If this is a problem for anyone, please get in touch. Vizjim 16:03, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge & redirect
Talk:Vlastimirović dynasty

message: being that I don’t have the “competence” for this area, and presumably you are not either by same logic, but maybe you can explain your edit? Thanks. OyMosby (talk) 17:10, 27 December 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Also a note the map has NO cited sourcing. So how is it incompetent to remove an unsourced map claiming territory lines? I did see any. RS is needed no matter how “competent” any other editor is thought to be.OyMosby (talk) 17:21, 27 December 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: The map has no sources, because there are no sources which claim that in the 9th century the area east of Stari Ras or the entire valley of the Bosna river were part of any Serbian feudal proto-state.--Maleschreiber (talk) 17:43, 27 December 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Maps
Talk:Windows 2000 Datacenter Server

message: :Its system requirements are normal, but are compatible with vast amounts of power.
What does that mean?  :)  AlistairMcMillan 16:34, 25 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Power

message: It seems rather pointless to have Datacenter Server in a article of its own, as there's very little to say about it. I recommend just merging the info into the existing Win2k-Server article. --Mike 22:42, 9 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article unneeded
Talk:Hooghly district

message: :Add any additional comments
"Hooghly district" may be consistent, but I think it would be incorrect; "Hooghly District" is a proper noun, and as such should be capitalized. Tom Radulovich 16:12, 26 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Discussion
Talk:Cograph

message: I'm not sure it's needed to explain every technical thing in the Wikipedia in a language that anyone would understand. For instance, the explanation for this still-simple article seams quite absurd (Mariano 16:46, 25 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Too technical

message: I tried to simplify the entry. I stressed the constructive definition, which is not so difficult to handle and gave some of the possible other ones as characterizations (formally, we may not have more than one definition). I removed the characterization by twins which has mainly a technical interest, but I kept:
# the characterization by forbidden P_4
#* for historical reasons (it is one of the independent introductions of the class)
#* as it is quite simple although not obviously related to the main definition
# the characterization by the diameters of the connected subgraphs
#* as it is clearly related to the previous one
#* as it enhances the intuition of what a cograph looks like
# the characterization by clique-independent set intersection
#* as it is one the strong properties of cographs, even stronger than the property to be trivially perfect. It is the fundamental reason of the low complexity of coloring problems in this class. 
I also have added some references.
pom 14:50, 14 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cleaning 

message: As noticed by D. Eppstein, Cographs are not a parametrized family hence should not belong to Category:Graph. pom 23:56, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Category 

message: First, my substantive comment.  I augmented the first characterization by explicitly including the notation P4.  Since the article's introduction points out that the cographs are also known as the P4-free graphs, I figured it would add to the article's clarity if this P4 thing showed up somewhere below to tie things together.
Now a confession.  I did it once and accidentally saved the page without having cretaed a comment to document the change in the history.  So I immediately undid the change and re-implemented it, this time including the comment.  That explains the 3 mods in such quick succession.—PaulTanenbaum (talk) 20:28, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  ''P''<sub>4</sub> notation 

message: The concept of (disjoint) union is generally defined only for sets, which graphs are not because they are pairs of sets.
If an abuse of notation is being adopted, it should be clarified somewhere.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.46.252.136 (talk) 10:41, 12 January 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: The disjoint union of graphs is standard and well defined; see Graph operations. It is a different operation than the disjoint union of sets, because it has arguments of a different type (graphs not sets). It is not an abuse of notation. —David Eppstein (talk) 17:12, 12 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Union of graphs undefined 
Talk:World's oldest dams

message: This article survived a Vote for Deletion. The discussion can be found here. -Splash 00:49, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Vote for Deletion

message: This article talks about only one dam, the Kallanai on the Cauvery River in Southern India. The title is therefore inappropriate, and should read as "The World's oldest dam". The "s" is "dams" should be omitted. PM Poon 11:13, 7 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Plural leaves room for other dams to be added to this article.  Mr. Bene 17:00, 7 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposal to change title of article
Talk:Julián Carrillo

message: Hello everyone, I have permision from Ernesto Solís Winkler to put information on Julian Carrillo Trujillo and everyting on his page (.http://paginas.tol.itesm.mx/campus/L00280370/bioging.html), including images. (preceding unsigned comment by Quillito 16:56, 25 August 2005)
:Claim of permission followed up and confirmed. --Ngb ?!? 15:30, 1 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Firm

message: Despite the fact the sentence states :
A loose legal term for a company.
Link leads to Corporation.
Why not tell the truth: 
A loose legal term for a corporation.
Does it sound so bad in regular English (I mean: bad bad Corporate term  <<Corporation>> ?)
(from European user),
Yours,
Ultrogothe 17:11, 25 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hello 

message: I suggest merging The Firm into this article.  The content is already here.  There is no need for two separate disambiguation pages that are likely to contain many of the same links.  --Russ (talk) 20:17, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Couldn't agree more. --Guinnog 00:29, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge [[The Firm]]?
Talk:Vestibular neuronitis

message: Yesterday i have my second Vestibular Neuronitis, I think, I am 40 years old, healthy, no problems at all. The thing is that my father has the same problem. Can you inheriting this illness ? And how you can fix this problem? Any diet ?  I need to help my father and me. Thanks and God bless you all.
:The best course of is probably to contact your doctor. --Sum0 17:46, 25 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Yesterday

message: I've added several summary sections automatically generated by a research project which sources information to several sites on the web.  Please edit and improve this text.  69.141.131.254 (talk) 04:59, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Automatically Generated Summary

message: The section on 'Treatment' appears to be just a different angle on cause. Pingku (talk) 16:06, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Treatment? 

message: Here is some text of the article [emphasis mine]: "It is not possible on clinical examination to be absolutely certain that the picture of 'vestibular neuritis' is not actually caused by a brainstem or cerebellar stroke, so mistakes are possible. Nevertheless, this happens so rarely that it is not necessary to perform MRI scans..."
What is "this"? Vestibular neuritis or brainstem/cerebellar stroke?
Aakoch (talk) 15:46, 10 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  What is "this"? 

message: Can an audiogram be "boiled down" to pass/fail? If passed, does that mean the person has vestibular neuronitis? Or the opposite?
Aakoch (talk) 15:50, 10 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Audiogram section 

message: * Vertigo and Dizziness in the Emergency Department
* Cranial Nerve VIII - Hearing and Vestibular Functions 
Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 01:26, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Merged to labrynthitis. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 01:58, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Refs
Talk:Tilman Hausherr

message: I archived some older talk page stuff, added two citations to the article, and gave "Sporgery" its own subsection.  Since Sporgery does have its own article, this subsection here should be expanded with at least two sentences or so, with references from that article.  Curt Wilhelm VonSavage 14:21, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Note 
Talk:SANE

message: Some old page history that used to be at the title "SANE" can now be found at Talk:SANE/Old history. Graham87 04:51, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Now at Committee for a SANE Nuclear Policy per RfD. --BDD (talk) 22:44, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Old page history
Talk:SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory

message: There is no reason for this article to be called Stanford Linear Accelerator... It would properly be called Stanford Linear Accelerator Center, I believe.  The accelerator itself has never, to my knowledge, been called SLA.  (It has been called SLC, for Stanford Linear Collider, in fact.)  Any objections to me fixing this?  -- SCZenz 17:47, 25 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, there are a lot of links.  I will not move anything until I have time to fix them all.  -- SCZenz 18:12, 25 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Turned out to be easy... Stanford Linear Accelerator now redirects here, and there ended up not being any double redirects.  -- SCZenz 18:25, 25 August 2005 (UTC)

text: Er, SLAC was founded in 1962.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.79.228.48 (talk) 21:48, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Name

message: I'm not sure who put the picture of that beamline in this article but it is not a picture of any SLAC Linear Accelerator structure.  I might belong to SPEAR/SSRL experiments which are at the _end_ of the beamline past the beam switch yard, but that is not a picture of any structure in the 3km(2mi) above-ground Klystron Gallery nor is it a picture of any accelerating structure underground in the actual beamline underneath the klystron gallery.  Since this is an encyclopedia, it is rather embarassing that we've got this inaccuracy.  I am going to remove the picture right away and put a correct picture up. Astrobayes 12:35, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: The Picture of the Beamline is Not From SLAC!!!

message: As the tag indicates, the PEP-II and SSRL section is quite sloppy.  Instead of just cleaning it up, we should replace the section with a "Projects" section and give each procject a subheading within.  That way we can organize the section better and make room for more projects.  Specifically it would allow us to add a section on the LCLS project which was only just begun in late 2005 and will be building its new facilities next summer.--WmRowan 18:24, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Article reorganization

message: The article should mention why the linac was re-purposed. Energy range no longer needed? Non-linacs better? Other linacs with newer equipment better?72.0.146.38 (talk) 22:07, 5 March 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  FACET and LCLS 

message: An important part of SLAC is (was) not only the beam energy, but also the beam current. I have a reference for the original 20GeV SLAC having a beam current of 30μA. (For those who don't multiply fast, that is 600kW.) I am not sure about the later current. Gah4 (talk) 08:18, 16 December 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  current