lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:The Anarchist Cookbook (film)

message: Just by reading the plot it's obvious this film is garbage from someone who does not knows what anarchism is about... Is there no criticism against this rubbish to be worthy of mention?Herle King 23:20, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Garbage

message: The article is rife with incoherency (and possibly NPOV?), and even seems to mock itself:
"The film is seen by many who've viewed it as a thinly-veiled piece of right-wing propaganda, almost on the level of Reefer Madness, even featuring a character who's secretly a member of NAMBLA.
While, many others see the first set of 'many' claims of 'right wing propaganda' as propaganda in and of itself. The film never claimed to be an apologia of the anarchist movement. Criticizing it for this is like criticizing Spiderman for not getting the New York Subway train schedule right. It was really a coming-of-age story about the choices a disaffected young man had to make in order to grow up"
Seriously deserving of a cleanup tag, so I added one.
-Deus Homoni 01:55, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I removed the B=Rating. This movie article is clearly a movie, but it has no other sections according tot he WikiProject Films guidelines. Two sets of Guidelines need to be follow. Also the length is an issue. I moving it to stub class. --Shane (talk/contrib) 07:21, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Someone order the following[[User:Herle King|Herle King]] 23:20, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
Talk:Stay Tuned (film)

message: This was one of the worst movies of all time. Historically bad. 69.181.156.67 18:29, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Valid, but not really applicable for this page. Talk about improvements to the article only, please. Lots42 (talk) 14:39, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

text: It was a great movie if you had any sort of sense of humour at all.  It was just fun for fun's sake.  It wasn't meant to be deep or meaningful.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.6.159.211 (talk) 06:29, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Opinion 

message: I'm not sure the parodies should be tagged as trivia; the very -existence- of the parodies is what drives the film. The atagonist hopes to kill the heroes within the plots of the various television shows appearing; for example he tries to run Roy over in a car in the parody of 'Driving Miss Daisy'. Lots42 (talk) 10:28, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mistake?
Talk:LeRoy P. Hunt

message: This was recently added to General Hunt's article:
:"His son Colonel L.G. Hunt was to follow in his footsteps as a war hero in three wars with numerous medals."
I was unable to find a reference to verify that this is true.  I'm including this statement on the talk page for discussion.  If a reliable reference can be found, then it is an interesting addition to the article; otherwise, it does not meet WP:A. — ERcheck (talk) 03:40, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  For review - needing verification
Talk:Roberto Azank

message: Dear Sirs:
I would like to submit a statement in reference to the possible copyright violation for the page below:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roberto_Azank
I am the artist Roberto Azank on which the article is written. I wrote the paragraphs in question myself and have used them for many years as the standard text for my biography. I have  published this text in my exhibition catalogs at several galleries and own the copyright to the text.
Other venues such as the one in question have reprinted the text, which is OK by me, but I still own the copyright to it and allow Wikipedia to reprint the material freely.
The questioned venue that has reprinted the material is relating my affiliation to the Simmons Gallery in their artists listing. The Simmons Gallery has represented my work for years in San Francisco, until last November in which they closed their doors. They probably copied the text from one of the exhibition catalogs or their website. Everyone had  my permission to reprint it and so does Wikipedia. There is no copyright violation whatsoever.
Should there be any further questions please feel free to contact me via e-mail, or at (845)255-3525.
Thank you.
Roberto Azank
Rudigan 03:53, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Who Wants to Marry a Multi-Millionaire?

message: "Rockwell claimed to be a millionaire real estate investor, but in fact he only dabbled in real estate."
I thought that in addition the guy wasn't even a millionaire? 02:07, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Millionaire 

message: so what if the guy used a different last name. it's not like he's the first person in hollywood to use a different name.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wellcraft11 (talk • contribs) 18:38, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Last name

message: "She later posed nude for Playboy magazine in its August 2000 issue." 
Should the Playboy blurb be relevant to her morals, since none of the prior trespasses are related to posing nude? Sauvastika 04:24, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: ''Playboy'' and morality

message: Didn't one of the contestants die during filming? If so, I think that's a pretty relevant piece to add. SonicNiGHT (talk) 08:54, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Ya, one did don't know her name though... But there is a video about it:
http://www.jkcinema.com/runflash.asp?id=urbanlegends2&name=Urban%20Legends%202&width=450&height=300&quality=best
--74.127.215.157 (talk) 02:09, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Contestant death

message: Over 25 million watch the last half hour of the 2 hour show, this is reported in the book Desperate Networks by Bill by Bill Carter. (the exact page is in the 3rd chapter).--Cooly123 21:33, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ratings?
Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Archive 46

message: Do you support or oppose formatting backlinks in the style Michael has proposed?
Example (copied from above):
# Great, El Borbah The (2006). New-fangled back-links.  Newtown: Innovation. ↑ 
# Verne, Jules (2006). Citations start with authors name: just like in virtually all publications.  City of the Future: Long-named Publisher for Line-Wrapping. ↑ 
# Who, Joe (2006). Back-links are visually subordinate to the note's content.  Newtown: Innovation. ↑a ↑b
*Support - Dv82matt 05:47, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Backlinks after the note - straw poll 

message: What about using a small superscript arrow ↑? It could look something like this:
References
:1.  a b Marx, J. L. New disease baffles medical community. Science. 1982;217(4560):618-621.
:2. ↑ New York Times. January 2010 issue, page 16
:3. ↑ UNAIDS
Just an idea. Any opinions? Thoughts? --Dv82matt 11:24, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Another Option

message: :Proposed: No carats for backlinks. Just link from the number, or if there is more than one backlink, link from the letters.
I've implemented this and deployed it, you can see a demo of it at Wikipedia:Sandbox/Ævar. Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason 11:34, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Status
Talk:Gadolosaurus

message: Arstanosaurus is actually a nomen dubium (Norman and Kurzanov, 1997) and thus Gadolosaurus cannot be referred to Arstanosaurus. Most recently Sues and Averianov (2009; see supplementary material) considered Gadolosaurus to be Hadrosauroidea indet.
Norman, D.B., and Kurzanov, S.M. (1997). On Asian ornithopods (Dinosauria: Ornithischia). 2. Arstanaosaurus akkurganensis Shilin and Suslov, 1982. Proceedings of Geologists' Association 108(3):191-199.
Hans-Dieter Sues and Alexander Averianov. (2009). "A new basal hadrosauroid dinosaur from the Late Cretaceous of Uzbekistan and the early radiation of duck-billed dinosaurs." Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 276(1667): 2549-2555.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.4.61.237 (talk) 15:01, 25 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Perhaps the articles should be merged. Deletion is unwarranted. FunkMonk (talk) 18:05, 25 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Astanosaurus/Gadolosaurus
Talk:Kinnareemimus

message: Here are some more leads:
We probably need WP:SEASIA for this; FWIW here the top line seems to mean "การประชุมผลงานทางวิชาการกองธรณีวิทยา [journal's title?] ประจำปี 1998 ["Vol. 1998"?] 19-23 January 1999 [date when "on sale"?]". It might be an initial write-up by Suteethorn for his local journal.
:Digging through Wikipedia and Google, most I can make of การประชุมผลงานทางวิชาการกองธรณีวิทยา is "[Meeting] [Scientific?] [ชาการก-geology]". Thus Reports of the Annual Meeting of the Geology-something perhaps. But I have about zero skill points in Thai.
:The author of the 1999 paper is Sasithorn Kamsupha (ศศิธร ขันสุภา), and its title is ไดโนเสาร์แหล่งใหม่ที่จังหวัดชัยภูมิ. The journal name is indeed  การประชุมเชิงปฏิบัติการและสัมมนาวิชาการกองธรณีวิทยา (whatever that means).
:In any case, there is much nice stratigraphic info in English. As regards localities, the species was apparently also found in one or both of "Muang district" (Amphoe Mueang Chaiyaphum) and "Ban Khwao district" of Chaiyaphum Province.
:If we have someone Thai-speaking, the paper แรกพบฟอสซิลสัตว์มีกระดูกสันหลังยุคเทอร์เชียรี่ จากแอ่งโคราช (also by Kamsupha) in  การประชุมเสนอผลงานทางธรณีวิทยา กองธรณีวิทยา ประจำปี 2540 [1997] (December 22-23 [1997]): 111-114 might warrant a glimpse. I have not seen a fulltext on the Web (I have not looked but the source above does not have it), but the paper's title probably allows to guess whether its useful or not.
I have also found this (also pre-dates Kaneko's 2000 report). See pg131 last para "Recently, one of the Phu Wiang ..." Top line: ?"การประชุมผลงานทางวิชาการกองธรณีวิทยา ประจำปี 1995 / Date [วันที่] 21-22 December 1995". On p.130 last para, Phu Pratu Theema is given as a "Phu Wiang area" site name, but that is probably not the "Ginnareemimus" quarry in Amphoe Phu Wiang mentioned in the 2009 abstract. Rather, it seems to be one of the "Phu Wiang hills" sites.
This might be mentioned in the 2009 descr, but at a first glance I see nothing suggestive of the species.
You might also want to check out Buffetaut & Suteethorn (1999) "The dinosaur fauna of the Sao Khua Formation of Thailand and the beginning of the Cretaceous radiation of dinosaurs" Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology 150(1-2): 13-23, it is probably cited in the descr.
The  Phuwiangosaurus papers by Martin et al. (1993, 1994) may also discuss the material (when was it quarried? "recently" says 1995 paper). The 1999 paper there is probably about the 1994 Kalasin Province (Phu Pha Ngo/Wak Sak Kawan) Phuwiangosaurus material mostly. Dysmorodrepanis (talk) 14:15, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: More material
Talk:Joey Styles

message: How come the Joey Styles quote from RAW was taken down, but the Paul Heyman quotes from SmackDown! and One Night Stand are allowed to stay? - AugustWinterman 0:25 3 May 2006 (UTC)
:Why not make him a Wikiquote page? If any announcer deserves it...it's Gordon Solie. But Joey is a close second.Bdve 17:36, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Guys, I think we should consider removing this quote from the trivia section. Styles is also the man who named Kurt Angle the "The Wrestling Machine,". Last night, on RAW, I watched the Chris Benoit Career Retrospective, and they flashed back to the 2004 Royal Rumble Match. During the Match, when it came down to Chris, Kurt Angle, and Big Show. Kurt angleslams Show and Chris. And after that, I heard Jim Ross call Angle,  a wrestling machine. Should we change this or not.  TonyO13 01:51, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Wrestling Machine 

message: There is a rumour from an anonymous source in WWE that the shoot on RAW against sports entertainment was real, and Styles actually DID say this stuff unscripted.
He was sick of spending HOURS learning how to call a match WWE style, which he has been said to have called idiotic and fake, leading to him saying that the wrestlers are ignored, and its more about 'storytelling'.
He was scripted to say something else. Apparently he had a meeting with Shane, who offered him a place on the ECW announcing team, which vince agreed to, and they made it look like a storyline to prevent damage to WWEs reputation.
Who thinks this should be added to the article?
:It needs a reliable source. Gavyn Sykes 14:42, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  ''Worked'' Shoot 

message: In his personal life section it states that he has a 2 year old Daughter (although it says citation required). However, a blog on Styles' WWE Fan Nation page states that he, infact, has a 5 year old Son. I would suggest that this needs adressing in the article.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Theincomparablebigci (talk • contribs) 13:44, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Personal Life 

message: I didn't want to add any criticism that Joey Styles has had without any citations.  The criticisms about the way Styles commentates.  But again there neeeds to be citations.  Mr. C.C. (talk) 08:19, 29 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Criticism 

message: I'm sure he wants to forget it, but should there be any mention about his short stint in XPW when that promotion started to run in Philadelphia?
- No mention of his entire stint with MLW as well
90.204.45.47 (talk) 14:13, 26 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  XPW 

message: Joey Styles knocked out JBL with a single punch last week while in Iraq. OH MY GOD! Pvegeta (talk) 16:13, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  One Hitter Quitter
Talk:Hot-wire barretter

message: Im sure Ive heard of barretters being used as early forms of surge arrestor. Has anyone else? (I could have dreamt it tho'!)--Light current 02:20, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Other uses 

message: :Image:Bareters 085b55 12.jpg is not a hot wire barretter - demodulating detector. This is barretter for electric current stabilization, but not radio frequency demodulation! --ScAvenger lv 19:48, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Barretter photo

message: I might be wrong but ISTR iron wire hydrogen filled barretters being used as constant current devices to stabilise power feed.
Tabby (talk) 10:51, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Iron hydrogen barretter
Talk:Reich Star

message: This looks to be more of a stub than an article requiring cleanup. I fixed the obvious error, but I don't know anything about the game, so I can't add any detail. Suggest removeing the cleanup tag. -AndyBQ 02:21, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I have been frustrated, can't find my copy! Dominick (TALK) 02:51, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:He Poos Clouds

message: A propos of nothing, dear reader, you just might be a Torontonian if you understand why the song title "This Lamb Sells Condos" made me laugh like a hyena. Bearcat 02:22, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Comment by Bearcat
Talk:Ornithomerus

message: What is Ornithomerus? Is it fair to say that it's a nomen dubium? It barely seems to have gotten any attention recently, but when it has been synonymised with either Rhabdodon or Zalmoxes rather than being explicitly designated a nomen dubium (at least according to this article), so I'm unsure how exactly we should treat it. On the list of dinosaur genera page it's labelled as "junior synonym of Rhabdodon".
If it is best to call it dubious rather than a junior synonym I'll give it the nomina dubia category and place it in the nomina dubia section of the ornithopod navbox. But if it is a junior synonym it should probably be merged. Zigongosaurus1138 (talk) 17:16, 27 February 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  ''Nomen dubium''? Or synonym of ''Rhabdodon'' or ''Zalmoxes''?
Talk:Orodromeus

message: "The specific name honoured the late Makela." - I took a look at this page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Makela 
Now, I assume the author referred to Toivo Mäkelä, since he died in 1979, and the dinosaur was named in 1988. However, it could be any one of them who are currently dead. Can anybody help me? --77.77.252.85 (talk) 18:19, 11 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Which Makela? 

message: Various sources state the eggs formerly referred to Orodromeus are now thought to belong to a troodont. Yet this article still mentions eggs as paratypes, so are eggs also known for this genus, or is it a mistake? If a mistake, it should certainly be mentioned these were once though tot be long to this animal, anyhow. FunkMonk (talk) 09:44, 18 October 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: No, it's a mistake. The eggs, MOR 246 (there is no 249!) are also in the Stenonychosaurus article. Lythronaxargestes (talk | contribs) 15:45, 18 October 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Hmmm, seems we need an update then... FunkMonk (talk) 16:34, 18 October 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. Lythronaxargestes (talk | contribs) 17:48, 18 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Eggs?
Talk:Othnielia

message: Suggest merging with Othnielosaurus?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 175.193.247.221 (talk) 16:26, 17 March 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Have you read the article? They're not the same. FunkMonk (talk) 17:07, 17 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Garanimals

message: I created this article because I thought Garanimals were probably referenced often in popular culture, and some people would want to know more about them.  (I didn't actually realize they still existed, until the company website came up as the top result of a web search.)
I think many people probably remember Garanimals fondly from their childhood, and there are probably some "fansites" about them, which I encourage you to add to the links section if you find a good one.
Garanimals has been used in humor, perhaps playing on the odd-sounding name, or disparaging the concept, or both.  I would like to see examples of this mentioned in the article, as they would be useful in proving the pop-cultural significance of Garanimals.
I haven't found a URL for the Garan Incorporated website; this would be a useful link, as would one to a Wikipedia article about the parent company, if someone would like to start one.  B7T 02:39, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
Talk:Palaeosauriscus

message: Palaeosauriscus should be merged with Paleosaurus in order to create a taxobox for Paleosaurus and because of the note that Palaeosauriscus is now synonymous with Paleosaurus. 72.194.116.63 20:07, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: According to what I've read, only one of the species assigned to Paleosauriscus is "Paleosaurus". Since there are three species, I think it would be inappropriate to merge it into an article which only deals with Paleosaurus. Firsfron of Ronchester 05:23, 24 October 2009 (UTC)
Talk:Panoplosaurus

message: Does panoplosauros not come from the Greek stems pan + 'oplo + saur, meaning everywhere + armed + lizard?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.47.144.254 (talk) 20:37, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I get "completely armoured lizard" from here, which is usually reliable, but it's a "six of one, half-dozen of the other" kind of difference.  Both are certainly much closer than just "armored lizard", which would be Oplosaurus. J. Spencer (talk) 00:49, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The only reason is that I'm still not the best at extracting images from PDF's. Theres also figures in the 1921 description of postcranial that can also be uploaded, and a few more here and there from PLoS papers though most of those depict ROM 1215, which isnt definitively Panoplo. IJReid  18:18, 2 January 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: I have started to upload the various images, though the postcranial ones are difficult to edit cleanly because of the edges. IJReid  19:58, 2 January 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: I see, when articles are on archive.org and biodiversitylibrary, you don't actually have to use the pdfs, you can just right click directly on the online pages and save them as jpgs. This works best if you have zoomed in 100% or more of course, to get the highest resolution. FunkMonk (talk) 20:39, 2 January 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: Origination
Talk:Paralititan

message: "The autochthonous, scavenged skeleton was preserved ..." -- This is a quote from the original source http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/abstract/292/5522/1704 . 
What is "autochthonous" supposed to mean in this context? -- 201.19.93.178 17:13, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Autochthonous? 

message: The article states that P. is the first tetrapod reported from the Bahariya since 1935. Does this mean first new tetrapod genus, or is it really the first specimen of a tetrapod found there in over 70 years? Wasn't Deltadromeus, for one, found there? Dinoguy2 (talk) 12:56, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  First tetrapod since 1935? 

message: " It is also possible that Paralititan was hunted by large predatory dinosaurs such as, Bahariasaurus, Carcharodontosaurus, andSpinosaurus, though this would only be possible if the mentioned predators were able to hunt in groups of at least several individuals".
I don't think there is a scintilla of evidence to support any of this. Macdonald-ross (talk) 16:07, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Speculation
Talk:Paranthodon

message: :Thank you very much. IJReid discuss 01:29, 11 September 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  GOCE copy edit 

message: might want to take a look at this new paper, also has free images: FunkMonk (talk) 15:13, 20 March 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah I noticed and have already uploaded the images ;) IJReid  15:39, 20 March 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: It seems a bit weird to use that image of Tuojiangosaurus which is almost entirely overshadowed by a Monolophosaurus with pronated hands, ? Especially since the space could maybe be used for that image of the nasal bones of Paranthodon, the only free photo of holotype material not used in the article yet... Also, the skull diagram is very hard to see, the black lines are so thin that they look grey, perhaps make them thicker? FunkMonk (talk) 19:08, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah some changes still need to be made, infinitely better than the Maidment diagram though IMHO because of the complete wrong skull shape. IJReid  23:50, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, the drawing is very good, but the thumbnail is just a mess of grey on my otherwise pretty large screen! FunkMonk (talk) 23:52, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: I changed the line thickness. I like the cleanliness of a thin line but wikipedia thumbnail basically merges it if its under 2 pixels. IJReid  00:17, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Revision 

message: the article says about only one distinguishing trait, but is it still valid?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 240E:FF:B317:EA43:4418:ED3D:C614:EB3E (talk) 05:21, 25 September 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: It is valid, because not only does it have one completely unique trait, but it also has differences from all other stegosaurs, none of which are found anywhere close to the same location and age anyways. IJReid  15:09, 25 September 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  This year study~it it a valid taxon?