lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:City of Norwich Aviation Museum

message: I have added C401 G-OVNE back on the list, a picture (the Jaguar) on the museum website shows it in the background parked next the Herald in the museum compound. A search on Google shows a picture of it parked in the same location.MilborneOne 20:37, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Cessna 401

message: I have removed the comment 'displayed for RAF Coltishall' again as it did not make sense, if somebody wants to add it again then please explain MilborneOne 20:40, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Jaguar
Talk:Mega Man 2: The Power Fighters

message: Sounds like it was taken from a manual, should we mention that?
Could someone confirm this please? --Eli77e 17:22, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It doesn't, but it's vaugely based on said reference material.  How do I know?  Because I was the one who wrote that.  Feel free to delete it or overwrite it if you want.  I think I was trying to be "clever and funny" when I did that.  ~ Joseph Collins [U|T|C] 20:27, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Story 
Template talk:Infobox language/genetic

message: This is a parameter array, similar to . Please see that article's talk page for more details. Where that array returns colours, this array returns link text to articles represented by each category. --Gareth Hughes 19:17, 23 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I've just given this template semi-protection. It cannot be edited by new or unregistered users. This is to reduce the chance of vandalism or excessive server load due to frequent editing. --Gareth Hughes 19:37, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Comment (genetic)

message: 'Genetic' was no longer used, so I deleted it and moved 'genetic2' to its location. — kwami (talk) 04:22, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge

message: Please see the discussion at Template talk:Infobox language/language family color table#"constructed language" link color messed up and discuss it there. —Anomalocaris (talk) 16:30, 6 July 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  "constructed language" link color messed up
Talk:Samurai Shodown 64

message: Can I just note that the 'title confusion' section is pedantic bordering on terrifying  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.73.216.249 (talk) 10:03, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I went ahead and completely removed it as it wasn't noteworthy enough. Cyan samurai (talk) 22:24, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Title
Talk:Global Night Commute

message: If anyone who has pictures of the event (like those adding external links) would be willing to upload them to Wikipedia, it would be cool if you would do that because it would allow us to show them directly in the article. --Basar 23:38, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Pictures

message: by facilitating a change in the policies of the United States government..  what kind of change?  From their website it was not apparent what kind of change is being advocated.  Is it unspecified? 「ѕʀʟ·✎」 15:13, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  change in policy? 
Talk:Sheldon Brown (American football)

message: One editor keeps removing the sourced content that states where Brown lived during his tenure with the Eagles, replacing it with an unsourced statement of where he currently lives. It doesn't make sense to remove the cited material nor does it make sense to replace it with unsourced details. Eagles 24/7 (C) 03:02, 24 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Residence
Talk:Saint-Just

message: Ok guys - calm down!  This England/United Kingdom issue keeps cropping up again and again  see Talk:Carbis Bay.  Neither England nor Uk is wrong.    However, unlike other England geography articles, most writers for Cornwall entries use Uk.  This is the consensus, and this opinion should be respected.  I have tried to come up with some compromise on this, by using both England and Uk in the description (e.g St Just, Cornwall, England; a constituent of the United Kingdom.  I think that this is the fullest answer, and covers both points of view, however, I have had no feedback on this.  Unless some sort of agreement is reached, then this will continue to crop up again and again.  I'm sure we could all spend our time better by improving the depth of content in these articles, rather than reverting back and forth over this small point! :)  Mammal4 20:40, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Cornwall/England
Talk:Adagio (band)

message: I don't think that Adagio classifies as "neo-classical". If you look at the neo-classical metal article, it seems to me that shredding is an essential part of the genre (see Yngwie Malmsteen for example), but this is not what strikes me at all in Adagio. I would rather call it progressive symphonic metal. In fact, this is what you will find in the Encyclopaedia Metallum (). 
I also gave it a try on google; adagio + "neo classical metal" = 477 results and adagio + "neoclassical metal"= 4,010 results VS. adagio + "symphonic metal" = 24,800 results. Looks like I'm not the only one to think this.
This doesn't mean that no mention should be made of neoclassical influences, but maybe not in the first sentence. If no one objects, I will change this. Please tell me if there's a problem. IronChris  |  (talk) 20:53, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Neo-classical? 

message: In its current state, the article is definitely not neutral, embellishing Forté too much... what little text it has needs to be rewritten and expanded. --Sn0wflake 04:03, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Neutrality 

message: Aside from a couple of Blabbermouth.net news items (possibly from press-releases) and a short Allmusic review, there is little to suggest that this band or any of their albums are notable. Can anyone suggest how they might satisfy WP:BAND?--Michig (talk) 17:15, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Notable?
Talk:Voice foley

message: It has been suggested that this article be merged with Foley artist.  At first glance, this seems reasonable, especially since this article is somewhat short.  However, it is my impression that a Foley artist is a person dedicated to Sound effects, while the sort of foley that this article is refering to is something that a Voice actor would do as part of their Voice acting job rather than as a dedicated job.  Generally, in something like Anime Dubbing, the Voice actor would say the dialog and then grunt, groan or whatever during the action or love scenes in the way that their character would.  In one ADV DVD special features segment, one actor claimed that her part was more foley than dialog because it was primarily an action feature.  However, they did not bring in a dedicated Foley artist to do this.  Instead, this was considered part of the Voice actor's job.
If there is any page that this content should be merged with, it might be that of Voice acting.  However, the Voice acting page seems to be aimed at the various organizations and guilds rather than the art of voice acting.  So, I'm not sure that this content is appropriate there either, unless someone wants to make this the start of a section to flesh out the artistry of voice acting.  Alternately, merging this content with Sound effect might make some sense, but might lead to some confusion with commedians and other voice artists who create elaborate sound effects with their voices, which are entirely distinct from the sorts of foley that is used in Anime Dubbing, which is the sort of thing that this article is aimed at.
So, I would like to suggest that this page not be merged with anything else for the time being.  I would also like to suggest that the reversals of the links to this page from Foley, Voice acting and Foley artist be restored.  In addition, if nobody has any objection, I will add some text to the main article, in a week or so, specifying that this sort of foley is a part of Voice acting and distinct from Foley artistry. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Mcrocker (talk • contribs) .
:How about a merge to Seiyū? -- Ned Scott 04:25, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Merging to voice acting would make more sense, should a merge occur. The fact that voice acting doesn't yet cover the artistry of the job isn't an argument against inclusion; it's an argument to expand voice acting. — BrianSmithson 12:57, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Voice acting is better then seiyuu.   --Kunzite 19:27, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

text: Unless the Japanese Seiyū artists/industry use the term 'foley' in the same way, it would probably be more appropriate to merge with Voice acting --Mcrocker 22:26, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Suggested merge
Talk:Enid Yandell

message: Someone needs to get a verifiable source for the Yandell's date of birth; google turns up conflicting dates. ~ PseudoSudo 21:07, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Rubinstein in American Women Sculptors says 1870, so I changed it to that.  I'll look a few other places too.  Carptrash 01:49, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Falk's Who Was Who in American Art says 1870 too.  One more source to go. Carptrash 01:51, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Mantle Fielding’s Dictionary of American Painters, Sculptors & Engravers, agrees with 1870, so us book people like it. As we all know, and as wikipedians we need to be always aware of, one little typo on the internet can go a long, long way.   Carptrash 01:55, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Her gravestone on Find-a-Grave says 1869. Seems definitive to me. - Kzirkel (talk) 16:04, 8 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  DOB
Talk:My Lunch

message: * Scrubs is a show that I love, and I thought I'd try and improve the episode guide.
** This is my first attempt at writing a wiki page. I used another wikipedia scrubs synopsis as a guide.
** I'm thinking of writing more articles, but if anyone would like to write a comment or suggestion on this one, I can use it constructively to write the next. Gavin
I think we need a template for writing episode pages. I've noticed that none of the other episode pages have the Episode Walkthrough section, and I think it is a little more detailed than is necessary. What do other people think? Sarahjane10784 05:01, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

message: *didn't tracy claim to get pregnant in heaven?
24.115.70.56 07:05, 21 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: she was pregnant in heaven, she appeared to cox as a vision, when laverne was in a coma, and was heavily pregnant.--Jac16888 14:34, 21 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Continuity?

message: Between My Lunch and My Screw Up?
In this article, it says both that My Lunch is the highest rated episode AND that it is tied with My Screw Up for the highest rating at tv.com.
In the article for My Screw Up, it says that My Lunch is the second highest rating at tv.com, and that My Screw Up is the top rated.
Can someone please fix this? Thanks.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.245.98.40 (talk) 00:23, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article discrepancy? 

message: shouldn't "In the sixth-season episode "My Long Goodbye", Dr. Cox sees (or imagines seeing) the ghost of a pregnant Jill Tracy, who died in this episode, though it was originally supposed to be Brendan Fraser (Ben Sullivan), who couldn't because he was shooting a movie" be remove since its not a true statement  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Supermike (talk • contribs) 23:16, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It is true, isn't it? The JPStalk to me 12:31, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: For so long as there is no source proving it, it may be removed at any time by anybody. Just so you know. Caissa's DeathAngel (talk) 16:13, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: remove

message: Anybody else notice that when they lose Dave Bradford, Dr. Cox's friend, that the words from How to Save a Life, "I lost a friend...", are playing? Sincerely, WM2 18:35, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lost a Friend
Talk:Scansoriopteryx

message: recent studies by professor Alan Feduccia suggest that the Scansoripteryx is not a dinosaur at all but a primitive type of bird. He suggests that birds are not descends of dinosaurs, but descendants of a different class of creatures like the Scansoripteryx.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.61.251.129 (talk) 10:52, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, we're all familiar with Feduccia's insistence that birds are not dinosaurs.--Mr Fink (talk) 16:17, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

text: lthough interpreted as feather shafts by Czerkas & Feduccia (2014), the strandlike markings on the fourth metacarpal of that specimen may be traces of scutate scales (Appendix S3.8). ... Morphology and distribution of scales, dermal ossifications, and other non-feather integumentary structures in non-avialan theropod dinosaurs Dinomarek (talk) 21:04, 25 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Status of ''Scansoripteryx''

message: of Scansioropteryx (Fig. 2) may have been misinterpreted. From what I can tell the left ischium had shifted over the acetabulum and other pertinent post-acetabulum areas, obscuring the open acetabulum (which is plainly visible on the right side). This hypothesis assumes that both ischia were the same length as their posterior tips must meet. Dinomarek (talk) 14:01, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Problem: the Scansoriopteryx
Talk:Scleromochlus

message: See said article, where the Pterosaur ancestry theory is presented as fact. We should present all theories that are part of current scientific debate, whatever our own opinions, and not exclude one theory at the expense of another. I have put the same comment in the Discussion page for Ornithodira. Jayen466 20:06, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Ornithodira]]

message: Just out of curiosity, what features do dinosaurs have, that this animal lacks (or vice versa)?71.63.17.46 (talk) 05:36, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Dinosaurs were generally much more derived than Scleromochlus. Benton (99) concludes that Scleromochlus "shares no unique features with either Pterosauria and Dinosauromorpha", for example its ankle was much more primitive than dinosaurs'. Darth Ag.Ent (talk) 13:55, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dinosauria 

message: In this edit, the plural of Scleromochlus has been changed; this isn't really consistent with the way it's been done in other articles, and the guideline on the project page says the plural form is the same as the singular. Firsfron of Ronchester 20:38, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: As it mentions on the guidelines page, nobody uses the correct pluralizations because you need to be a Latin scholar to figure them out on a case by case basis. If the pros don't use them, we shouldn't either. But for curiosity, see an article on pluralization of Latin words here:  I'm guessing the plural of Scleromochlus would be scleromochli (not scleromochlii), but the root could be one of many exceptions. Dinoguy2 (talk) 03:56, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Plurals

message: The article said, "Scleromochlus taylori was about 186 mm (about 4.3 inches) long".  186 mm is not 4.3 inches. I replaced it with the Benton 1999 figure of 181 mm (about 7.1 inches) - while the difference of 5 mm is insignificant, the 2.8 inch difference isn't. Vultur (talk) 09:31, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Length

message: The type species is S. taylori. I feel that the article needs to mention who this is named after. I'm willing to bet Mike Taylor. 70.80.215.121 (talk) 10:45, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: That would have been incredibly prescient for a scientist in 1907! ;) (seriously though, I don't know who the name honors... would be good to have in there). MMartyniuk (talk) 12:30, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  The species is named after William Taylor who discovered the holotype, and some other fossils of Scleromochlus (see also history of Scleromochlus written by Taylor himself). Ag.Ent talk 23:41, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Species 

message: Accepting that the classification of scleromochlus is unclear, is there any research more recent than Benton that challenges his phylogenic positioning of scleromochlus. In which case should we not use his classification? 
p.s. the Benton classification is used in the taxonomicon (I have no idea how authoritive that is) CptPugwash (talk) 00:49, 23 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Classification
Talk:Segisaurus

message: Add this reference to this page:
Camp, C., 1936. A new type of small bipedal dinosaur from the Navajo sandstone of Arizona. UNIV. CALIF. PUBL., BULL. DEPT. GEOL. SCI. 24; 39-56. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 72.194.116.63 (talk) 04:10, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed addition of reference for Segisaurus
Talk:Dave Bennett (footballer, born 1959)

message: Dave Bennett (born 11th July 1959) was a top-class British soccer player of the 1980s and 90s.  He played in two FA Cup finals, initially losing with Manchester City in 1981, but later starring as Man of the Match in the 1987 final for Coventry City against Tottenham Hotspur. After Coventry conceded an early goal he immediately pulled one back.  In what is still considered to be one of the greatest finals - from an independent's point of view - of all time, Spurs again took the lead, before Dave crossed for a spectacular equalising goal (Watch goal here!).  Coventry went on to win via a Gary Mabbutt own-goal in extra time.  After a brief spell at Sheffield Wednesday, Dave moved on to Swindon Town, but broke his left leg in only his second performance.  Returning to fitness over a year later he was sent out on loan to Shrewsbury to get some match practice, unbelievably breaking the same leg again in his second match for the club.  Between media appearances, Dave now plays in various testimonials and 'Masters' tournaments, still dazzling the fans with his tricky footwork.
=== Sources ===
http://www.thefa.com/TheFACup/TheFACup/History/Postings/2003/11/46668.htm
http://www.swindon-town-fc.co.uk/Person.asp?PersonID=BENNETTD
83.104.40.164 02:29, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: http://www.thefa.com/TheFACup/TheFACup/History/Postings/2003/11/46668.htm
http://www.swindon-town-fc.co.uk/Person.asp?PersonID=BENNETTD
83.104.40.164 02:29, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sources 
Talk:Sellosaurus

message: Come to think of it, aside from the fact that S. is Plateosaurus, probably, there's a bunch of stuff that is at best very questionable, at worst flat out wrong. I know that The Dinosauria and other standard volumes say this stuff, but then, they are based on really badly outdated analyses, as is the nature of compedia. 
S. is NOT 7 m long, NOT 2.1m tall, did NOT reach anything more than 500 kg, and the relationship to Plateosaurus was never considered to be 'far', but only unclear in detail, so the article is misleading.
Also, we need a few good pics - I guess the holotype will do (upcoming own photos). And, while we are at it, Efraasia, as much as I like the idea of honouring Fraas, needs a serious re-assessment, not as a  species, but in relation to other material. I doubt it will become invalid, but some Sellosaurus stuff may end up in E., which may change the diagnosis of Plateosaurus (Sellosaurus) gracilis. HMallison (talk) 02:44, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Somewhat related to this section, this wrongly posed restoration is not used anymore, but is it salvageable apart from the posture?  I was thinking of modifying the legs so it could still be used in the Plateosaurus article maybe. Something like this?  Does appear a bit awkward for some reason. FunkMonk (talk) 14:50, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Hm, this one is not easy, because I have never seen material from Sellosaurus's front half that is not badly deformed. I would guess that the shoulder area is much to broad (as in practically all quadrupedal reconstructions). I'll go through my (100 GB of) photos tomorrow and see what my SMNS collection has to offer. Aside from that it looks good.HMallison (talk) 20:39, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks! That drawing is not mine, by the way, but made by a user who has now left Wikipedia. I noticed that many restorations of dinosaurs in general show the arm-shoulder link as an overlapping line over the arm (like here ), instead of a human like deltoid muscle, as in that drawing I just made quickly. Do we have any idea what is more correect? FunkMonk (talk) 20:56, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, my second-favorite pet peeve: the croc-armed dinosaurs :) Somehow everybody misses the fact that the scapulae and coracoids of dinosaurs do not look like those of crocs. If you want to, we can do better together: let's do a 3D reconstruction based on my digital models ;) I'll do the CAD work, you do the drawing. btw, please mail me at geologyhenry_AT_googlemail.com Other email is still dead.HMallison (talk) 21:07, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: What's your favourite pet peeve then? A new reconstruction sounds cool, I've sent a mail! FunkMonk (talk) 21:35, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  my fav is the wrong thigh in dinosaurs. People write that the caudofemoralis longus was bulging - then draw a mammalian thigh! Hello????HMallison (talk) 08:02, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: other errors
Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Big Brother

message: I'm curious to know as to why an eye is the WikiProject template's image? – Callmemirela 🍁 03:18, 30 May 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: It’s a nod to 1984 (novel)… “Big Brother is watching you…” Bgsu98 (Talk) 03:24, 30 May 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: That was so not clear to someone who doesn't watch Big Brother lol. Thank you for the answer! – Callmemirela 🍁 12:21, 2 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Image 

message: You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Content assessment#Proposal: Reclassification of Current & Future-Classes as time parameter, which is within the scope of this WikiProject.  This WikiProject received this message because it currently uses "Current" and/or "Future" class(es). There is a proposal to split these two article "classes" into a new parameter "time", in order to standardise article-rating across Wikipedia (per RfC), while also allowing simultaneous usage of quality criteria and time for interest projects. Thanks! —CX Zoom[he/him] (let's talk • {C•X}) 20:55, 1 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Discussion at [[Wikipedia:Content assessment]] 

message: New stub: Paulie Calafiore ---Another Believer (Talk) 19:35, 13 September 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Sigh, redirected, I guess being on 7 television series isn't good enough for some editors. Happy editing! ---Another Believer (Talk) 16:36, 30 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Paulie Calafiore 

message: You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Council § Determining the future of B-class checklists.  This project is being notified since it is one of the 82 WikiProjects that opted to support B-checklists (B1-B6) in your project banner. DFlhb (talk) 11:27, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Determining the future of B-checklists
Talk:Serendipaceratops

message: Surely there should be a mention of Serendip, an old name for Sri lanka, Clarke's adopted homeland? One of his books was even called "The view from Serendip." Totnesmartin 22:33, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: ??? Wow-I did not know that...By all means put it in. Cas Liber 23:05, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I was under the impression it was named because it was a particularly serendipitous find? can anyone verify that the geographical sense was intended? Dinoguy2 23:34, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Without asking the discoverers or seeing their paper, I can't verify it. May I be slightly cheeky and suggest that it's serendipitous? :) Totnesmartin 00:13, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Serendip