lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Swept Away (1974 film)

message: OK, so some critics had a problem with it. But the section fails to inform on how it was received by the public. How much did it earn, for example?
--Jerome Potts (talk) 06:19, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Box office information may not be easily available for this older film.  Tracking of box office revenue is a fairly recent phenomenon (as in the past decade or so). —Erik (talk • contrib) 17:09, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  reception
Talk:Unlawful detainer

message: The tone needs fixing, and the second sentence makes no sense (at least not to me). N Shar 00:53, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cleanup 

message: This is just another name for an eviction, and all the info nedded is on that page, so I redirected it.  --UsaSatsui 00:58, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Redirected
Talk:Nadahup languages

message: i couldnt find Guariba in the Ethnologue. is it really not there? – ishwar  (speak) 00:53, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: find in ethnologue

message: Considering that not only is "Macu" pejorative, but that the two Macus are the same name (the difference in stress is an inconsistent affectation), should we perhaps move this to Nadahup languages? kwami (talk) 00:20, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: move?
Talk:Kid Auto Races at Venice

message: This needs to have a source found before it's added to the article, but my understanding is Chaplin and the camera crew were not actually authorised to film at the race, they just showed up and started messing about. If true, would that make this one of the earliest examples of so-called "gonzo" filmmaking?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.146.52.234 (talk) 20:38, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: First 'gonzo' film?

message: Why call movie magazines of the day "silent movie periodicals"? Where there any others? 2A02:AA1:1005:1646:59E7:7F54:2B61:43B0 (talk) 19:37, 27 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Silent movie periodicals
Talk:The Tramp (film)

message: Hello,
The link to IA is broken. I could not find the film. I think we should upload it to Commons. Yann (talk) 11:21, 16 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Link broken 

message: "The Tramp as Text" in Post Script is a reference to use if anyone can access it. Erik (talk | contrib) (ping me) 16:10, 9 February 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  References to use
Talk:The Floorwalker

message: Motion Picture Story Magazine noted the following: "Eric Campbell is the 300-pound 'heavy' in 'The Floor Walker' on whose head Charlie Chaplin splinters a wooden box. It was tough on Eric, for this scene had to be retaken several times." Is that trivia worth adding to the article?
Source: https://archive.org/details/motionpicture191712chic/page/148/
- Slugbreath (talk) 22:36, 5 June 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Trivia
Talk:One A.M. (1916 film)

message: Seriously, the current plot description is sloppily written and way too long. I may attempt to rewrite it myself if nobody else volunteers. Lee M (talk) 04:48, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Shorten the plot description 

message: Jeeze... 2A02:AA1:100F:AC60:A5EF:3948:4CC:22E0 (talk) 21:02, 22 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Some discussion forum as a source?
Talk:The Pawnshop

message: It can be hard to figure the exact duration of a silent film since they were sometimes projected at different speeds, but I don't believe any of his Mutual shorts were as long as 32 minutes.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.170.135.85 (talk) 09:31, 28 January 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Correct. The film is 20 minutes long. I'll make the alteration. -- Lumet (talk) 16:54, 11 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Timing
Talk:Pay Day (1922 film)

message: Determining the duration of a silent film can be tricky due to different projection speeds, but it's very doubtful a two reeler such as this one is as long as 28 minutes.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.170.135.85 (talk) 09:34, 28 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Timing

message: What is the copyright status of the movie? -Mardus /talk 16:13, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copyright status?
Talk:Bicycle infantry

message: sigh... The 1st Tactical Studies Group (Airborne) is not a real military unit, but rather the (horribly constructed and formatted) website of, how shall I call him, "disgruntled soldier" Mike Sparks. His proposals have, as far as I, or people I have discussed this with, have never been accepted by the US Military with any sort of seriousness. If Mr. Sparks wants to provide credible evidence that he actually commands a unit by the name of 1st Tactical Studies Group (Airborne) in the US Military, much less its combat testing of bikes in combat, he should knock himself out doing so. Let the poorly-composed and profanity-lined insults by Mr. Sparks begin...
-- FlyingCanOpener (talk) 00:44, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: 1st Tactical Studies Group

message: I was under the impression that the battlefield infantry maneuvered to the battlefield on their bicycles, but once there dismounted and fought as regular infantry.  Just as, for that matter, did the dragoons.  (Dragoons weren't cavalry, they were mounted infantry, who used horses for faster transportation, but who fought on foot.)
I'm not going to make an edit based on my impressions, but if someone who actually knows the topic could take a look at that wording?
--jdege (talk) 22:16, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Maneuver on the battlefield?

message: Shouldn't the text under "Sweden" be integrated into the other topics, just like information on all other countries? Anyhow, it's chronologically in the wrong place...
:Is there a template to mark the section as requiring such attention? OrangeDog (talk • edits) 00:49, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sweden 

message: With resent problems as cycling helmets are forced to everyone by law of Finland, but finnish defence forces didn't have proper helmets when I served during 7.1.2008 - 2.10.2008  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.128.253.184 (talk) 20:18, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Finnish defence forces are using bicycles as means of transport to this date
Talk:The Kid (1921 film)

message: There's nothing about Chaplin's 1971 version...  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.34.136.123 (talk) 09:16, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Hello! This is a note to let the editors of this article know that :File:Chaplin The Kid edit.jpg will be appearing as picture of the day on November 5, 2015. You can view and edit the POTD blurb at Template:POTD/2015-11-05. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. Thanks! — Chris Woodrich (talk) 00:02, 19 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[:File:Chaplin The Kid edit.jpg]] to appear as POTD soon
Talk:A Woman of the Sea

message: Under production details, the article states that 
 Some evidence suggests a copy of the film survived at the Chaplin studio until at least the late 1930s, but no copy 
 exists in the current Chaplin film archives. Oona Chaplin burned the last remaining copy in 1991.
If Oona Chaplin burned the last remaining copy in 1991, then why does it matter if there is evidence of its surviving at the Chaplin studio until the 1930s?  
What source states definitively that Oona Chaplin burned the last remaining copy?
Walrus 3d (talk) 11:56, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Surviving copy of the film
Talk:A King in New York

message: Masterpiece?
"while just as many consider it Chaplin's masterpiece". Seriously, is there anyone anywhere who thinks this film is Chaplin's masterpiece?  I find that unfathomable. Cite?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lafong (talk • contribs) 06:21, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:The Life and Death of 9413: a Hollywood Extra

message: *:File:The Life and Death of 9413 A Hollywood Extra title card.jpg
*:File:The Life and Death of 9413 a Hollywood Extra - Mask.jpg
*:File:The Life and Death of 9413 a Hollywood Extra - Jules Raucourt.jpg
*:File:The Life and Death of 9413 a Hollywood Extra - Hollywood set.jpg
*:File:The Life and Death of 9413 a Hollywood Extra - Heaven set.jpg
*:File:The Life and Death of 9413 a Hollywood Extra - Audience.jpg
The description page of all 6 files states that the film is in the public domain. Is it possible to move the files to Commons or it isn't?
190.235.229.100 (talk) 20:48, 22 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is the film in the public domain? Is it possible to move the files to Commons? 

message: In the current article, the following passage exists:
A Hollywood Extra also touches on the mistreatment of women. Although the actors wear masks—symbolizing their ability to act—the female extra #13 does not; she is expected to simply obey the (male) filmmakers, and her only role is as an object for men to look at. Her success in this simple role, contrasted with the protagonist's inability to succeed despite hard work, reveals how differently the film industry views male and female actors.A Hollywood Extra also touches on the mistreatment of women. Although the actors wear masks—symbolizing their ability to act—the female extra #13 does not; she is expected to simply obey the (male) filmmakers, and her only role is as an object for men to look at. Her success in this simple role, contrasted with the protagonist's inability to succeed despite hard work, reveals how differently the film industry views male and female actors.
Now, having seen the film several times, I personally think that it would be more appropriate to refer to 13's experiences as type-casting, rather than 'mistreatment' (I think it is also worth considering that 13 is one of the characters who mocks 9413's death), but that's my point: while sourced, this is POV writing. Granted, I realize that this is in the segment of the article where 'themes' of the film are analyzed, so POV writing (IMO) is useful and fine for such an application (even if someone is apt to disagree), but wouldn't it be more appropriate to directly quote the referenced text (and more clearly show that it is POV writing), rather than paraphrasing and giving a reference (which, at least to me, comes off as making it seem more of a statement of fact...and if it is a factual statement of the filmmakers' intent, is there a source quoting them to this effect?)? 107.77.204.138 (talk) 22:53, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  "A Hollywood Extra also touches on the mistreatment of women"?
Talk:The Music Box

message: The Music-Box-Steps appeared in "Ice Cold Cocos" (1926) with Billy Bevan. Billy had to deliver a iceblock, but that was so "difficult", that he and his partner had to go at least four times, and the stair is very long ... Offiziner (talk) 15:29, 1 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Another Appearing of the  Music-Box-Steps
Talk:The Naked Spur

message: I thought that it referred to the barren outcropping of rock where the final shootout occurred, but I've read elsewhere that it refers to the spur that Howard throws at Ben. Can anybody shed some light on this? Clarityfiend 22:48, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Meaning of title?

message: The article currently credits this film with being the beginning of a fruitful working relationship between Mann and Stewart, despite the fact that Mann and Stewart made Winchester '73 only three years earlier. That text should probably be removed.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.38.46.52 (talk) 06:40, 16 June 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Teaming Mann and Stewart?
Talk:UCI ProTour

message: This seems a bit superfluous, since it links to the page where it should be (and is), and is distinct from the ProTour. Mk3severo 10:24, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, it doesn't really belong here and I'm going to go ahead and remove it. Ultranaut 17:12, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  List of winners of the 'Monuments' 

message: Weren't they a ProTour team for 2005? Alex finds herself awake at night (Talk · What keeps her up) 03:18, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes. Added. SeveroTC 14:39, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Domina Vacanze 

message: What about we make a table for the teams that is similar to the current one with the races? The legenda could look like this:
*: Included in ProTour
•: Teams raced, but not as part of ProTour
X: Team did not exist, or not as professional team
Just my 2 cents. --83.128.68.67 (talk) 13:54, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Done: changes in name mean it could not be done quite as you suggest, and there is only room for about two more years in this format (maybe the WorldTour has arrived just in time) Kevin McE (talk) 21:47, 1 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Table for teams 

message: "The UCI ProTour was a series of road bicycle races ..." Right. So this topic is a historic one. But UCI ProTeams are still existing. Today the existing ProTeams are discribed in a section auf a historic article. Dosn´t they deserve a seperate article (as http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/UCI_ProTeam) or shouldn´t they at least be part of the article UCI World Tour?--RikVII (talk) 10:16, 5 November 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I've said before (I guess at WT:CYC) that I think that the teams information should be split to either UCI ProTeam (currently a redirect) or to something like UCI team classifications. SeveroTC 16:26, 5 November 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: A year and half since this convo, but I've added the current ProTeams to the World Tour page. If someone wants to make a new page for the ProTeam list, that could be cool, too, but until then, having to come to the page for the now defunct ProTour to find out who the 2013 WorldTour teams are was kind of silly.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dcash36 (talk • contribs) 04:17, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: No particular objection, but the most obvious place to find 2013 UCI World Tour teams is on 2013 UCI World Tour, where they have always been.  Kevin McE (talk) 08:44, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  No ProTour any more but ProTeams
Talk:Duel in the Sun (film)

message: :"When she is overpowered by Lewt in her bedroom one night, Pearl is angry with him and ashamed of her own behavior. But she also cannot help but be flattered by his lust and attentions."
I haven't seen the film but is the implication that Lewt raped her? Or forced kisses upon her? It makes a big difference in how you interpret both of their actions in the rest of the film. 69.125.134.86 (talk) 16:57, 23 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Plot point 

message: "It earned $11,300,000 in rentals in North America during its initial release"
Should this be "revenues" instead of "rentals"?  I don't think they had rentals in 1946, and the source is dated 1960 so they can't be talking about a DVD release or even VHS.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.8.220.129 (talk) 05:04, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Rentals"? 
Talk:Swoon

message: As far as I know, the term swoon has been around for a long time, and it's not used especially of the internet, compared to in face-to-face conversation. Also, according to bitchonary.com, swoon is not slang and has been traced etymologically.
I rarely, if ever, hear anyone utter the word "swoon", but it is used on girlie girl blogs and forums ad nauseum as a replacement for "I love it".  See the world of Etsy. 164.106.16.163 (talk) 12:46, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Internet use and slang?
Talk:Charles Nesson

message: Swartz thinks he should have a page.  So do his students, but that's a bit more subjective.  Sj 01:04, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

message: I'm in the process of making a timeline (for my own interest, maybe for the 'pedia if it is felt to be wanted) of the documents in the Joel Tenenbaum case (the one against the RIAA), here, if anyone is interesting in helping. JesseW, the juggling janitor 09:31, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Timeline of Joel Tenenbaum case
Talk:Jane Eyre (1970 film)

message: Must disagree about the plot section being too short, as stated in your tag. I think the present summary is exactly right for this page. You don't need the whole story in detail. But we could use a new section on the box office performance and critical reception. Valetude (talk) 17:51, 28 January 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Plot section
Talk:James Fisk (financier)

message: huh>?
— Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.91.145.102 (talk • contribs) 01:04, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: *See [] and []  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.53.145.129 (talk) 13:48, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Fiske in Uniform

message: He  died at age 36. What of? Froggo Zijgeb (talk) 14:08, 29 July 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Being shot dead does it. Claverhouse (talk) 06:03, 14 July 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Death
Talk:Son of Frankenstein

message: I put the cast for this movie over here, i got some sources for the cast from IMDB as well: 
Cast sourced from the American Film Institute and the book Universal Horrors:
 2.50.190.75 (talk) 11:42, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: IMDB is not reliable, also the article already has a cast section. PrisonerB (talk) 13:06, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

text: Note: some text copied from IMDb has been removed from the post above. DanCherek (talk) 17:45, 24 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cast 

message: Can't anyone, anywhere get some pictures from this film into wikimedia so that we can illustrate the article with some photographs? This is embarrassing.  Racing Forward (talk) 14:03, 24 October 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: What do you find is actually lacking or you want to illustrate? Andrzejbanas (talk) 03:19, 2 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Photographs?
Talk:The Ghost of Frankenstein

message: Although well-written, the Plot Summary section crossed the WP:NPOV line and became a movie review, and we're not allowed to do that so I had to cut out a bit of it. The only way around this is to quote (with citations) other people's reviews of the film, otherwise it also becomes a case of WP:NOR. 23skidoo 17:34, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Edits

message: According to television horror show host "Svengoolie" , Dwight Frye appears in this film as one of the villagers at the beginning of the film. Making him the only actor to appear in all four of the original Universal / Frankenstein films. He is uncredited in the screen credits. 75.104.174.180 (talk) 18:22, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Dwight Frye

message: The cast for this movie with some explanations for how they got the role, the explanations from IMDB: 
Cast is sourced from the book Universal Horrors:
 2.50.190.75 (talk) 08:56, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: , for Wikipedia standards, don't use IMDb as a source per WP:RS/IMDb, so we should use it here. Andrzejbanas (talk) 09:48, 15 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cast
Talk:House of Frankenstein (film)

message: Niemann and Daniel move on to the flooded ruins of Castle Frankenstein in Visaria, where they find the bodies of Frankenstein's monster (Glenn Strange) and Lawrence Talbot, the Wolf Man (Lon Chaney Jr.), preserved in the frozen castle. Although in Frankenstein meets the Wolf Man the Castle Frankenstein lies in Visaria, in the current film the rascals arrive in a gypsy camp within sight of the flooded castle, little after having passed the sign "Frankenstein 1 km". Later they continue their trip to Visaria (a sign "Visaria 152 km" is shown, then another "Visaria 107 km"), where Dr. Nieman has his estate. I am just now watching the movie. --Manfariel (talk) 17:49, 30 November 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Error of continuity 

message: I'm fairly certain that the movie is a sequel to Frankenstein Meets The Wolf Man (from how they are found in the ice underneath the castle when it was flooded with water at the end of that movie). Why else would they be in ice under a castle when found?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.99.210.174 (talk) 18:07, 27 August 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: You may be right, however we just post facts, not guesses. Do you have a reliable source to support your claim?  - FlightTime (open channel) 18:26, 27 August 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: For what it's worth, we don't need to guess why they were in ice under the castle; almost immediately after being freed from the ice, Talbot explains the whole thing to Niemann in a capsule summary of the events of Frankenstein Meets the Wolf Man. Martin IIIa (talk) 14:47, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Reflecting further on this, I feel like it is fairly important for the article to mention that House of Frankenstein is a sequel to Frankenstein Meets the Wolf Man, so I did a little bit of research and found that AllMovie's review of HoF covers this fact. So I've added that to the article. Martin IIIa (talk) 11:53, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Surely it is a sequel to Frankenstein Meets The Wolf Man?
Talk:House of Dracula

message: The phrase "confined to a wheelchair" is demeaning, offensive, and oppressive and should not be used here. A person is never "confined to a wheelchair": he doesn't shower or sleep in his wheelchair. When he rides a plane he rides in a seat, not his wheelchair. "Confined" is inaccurate and conveys an inaccurate stereotype of inability of wheelchair users to engage in sexual, social, travel and physical pursuits.
Read more: http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Discuss:Why_is_Charles_Krauthammer_in_a_wheelchair#ixzz1Z7NXhrIG  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Denverjason (talk • contribs) 03:02, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I just removed the sentence, since it was an unnecessary detail anyway. Sp4cetiger (talk) 08:13, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Untitled
Talk:Son of Dracula (1943 film)

message: --- Chaney as Alucard ---
This whole section is weasely and uncited. It should probably just be removed. Can anyone improve it? 
BoosterBronze (talk) 19:01, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Not my responsibility to look for a source when the editor has been told three times that a source is needed.  Further, your source, while pertinent, does nothing to support the previous editor's contention that the matter is still under discussion today.  So, please, considering that you yourself did not come up with a source that supports the IP editors' contribution, keep your criticism for where it is actually appropriate. BMK (talk) 14:18, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Untitled
Talk:The Invisible Woman (1940 film)

message: Wasn't there a short-lived Invisible Woman TV show (1983?)? I believe it starred Alexa Hamilton and Bob Denver. Or did it not go beyond the pilot movie?  US 71 16:31, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I looked it up, and there was such [a show].  But where do we put this information?  Should it go in this article as a spin-off?  Should it go in its own article?  There's already an article called The Invisible Woman about the 1940's film.  Invisible Woman is about the Fantastic Four team member.  Regardless, I think that this discussion should take place on :Talk:The Invisible Woman.  (I've copied this stuff over there.) Val42 16:37, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

text: Aside from being made by Universal, the television pilot has nothing to do with the film.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:8806:1101:A900:94E0:2219:6983:3474 (talk) 23:51, 23 February 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Invisible Woman

message: i request you to move this page to The Invisible Woman, since we have now three pages for The Invisible Woman
:The Invisible Woman, a 1940 movie</br >
:The Invisible Woman, a 2013 film</br >
:Invisible Woman, the Fantastic Four character</br >
nzakir (talk) 20:41, 14 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  request to move this page
Talk:The Invisible Man Returns

message: The Frank Skinner link in the post production section leads to the British comedian. It should lead to the the American composer. 92.12.6.115 (talk) 15:15, 13 July 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Fixed. Andrzejbanas (talk) 01:38, 1 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Frank Skinner link.