lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Pang De

message: Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: http://kongming.net/novel/sgyy/pangde.php. Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.)
For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, and, if allowed under fair use, may copy sentences and phrases, provided they are included in quotation marks and referenced properly. The material may also be rewritten, providing it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Therefore, such paraphrased portions must provide their source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you.  _dk (talk) 20:54, 9 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copyright problem removed
Talk:Tensor product of algebras

message: You have mentioned that for Z-Algebras (or commutative rings) the canonical mapping A -> A @_R B and B -> A @_R B are injections, why is this so? 
Sincerely
Jose
:Well, that may not be true, I think. I have made it 'homomorphisms'. Charles Matthews 15:16, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Canonical Mappings 

message: Why is the tensor product necessarily unital? unless it can be done only for unital R-algebras~but that's not mentioned. I checked out the references and it's not even as detailed as this article Noix07 (talk) 09:40, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unital R-algebras? 

message: (I'm writing this so I don't forget). If A, B are subrings of some ring C and if they are all algebras over say R, then isn't tensor product of elements of A and B is the same as that of C? I'm not sure about the generality but in the special case (some sort of freeness) probably yes. (I found the answer myself: linearly disjoint.) In any case, this matter should be discussed in the article. -- Taku (talk) 22:01, 8 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tensor product and usual product
Talk:Pupienus

message: Germanic not German!!!!  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.158.125.199 (talk) 13:28, 5 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Untitled 

message: WisDom-UK (talk) 23:42, 31 May 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Its just what you think it is. —Soap— 21:42, 27 July 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pronunciation needed
Talk:Justine Musk

message: Published authors are notable on Wikipedia. The request for a third party source is stupid, do you think it's not true that she is not actually an author? If you think it should be deleted then start a RfD. We can waste a lot of peoples time and effort and at the end I'll swoop in an add some banal useless third party reference just to satisfy the guidelines. -- 71.191.36.194 15:53, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Notability 

message: How exactly does the term starter wife fit when the woman gave birth to five children during her marriage?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.115.53.131 (talk) 12:23, 8 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  starter wife? 

message: I have googled this person and have found no additional relevant articles that make her meet the notability guidelines for Wikipedia.
She is an published author, and so are probably another 1,000,000 plus people on this planet.
She married a billionaire, this does not make her notable.
I can't see why she has a wikiepedia entry as in my humble opinion she is not notable.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 61.69.24.118 (talk) 12:01, 15 March 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  2nd suggestion for deletion 

message: The cited sources do not establish notability of the article's subject as an author according to the criteria in WP:BASIC and WP:ANYBIO. – Editør (talk) 10:26, 8 February 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Justine Musk is an author (Career section) and the wife of Elon Musk (Personal life section). The notability of her authorship is not established by cited sources. The notability of her marriage comes only from her husband and should therefore be discussed in Elon Musk#Family as it already is. – Editør (talk) 11:01, 21 February 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Notability 2
Talk:Philopater Mercurius

message: In addition to the fact, as noted at the beginning of the article, that it lacks references, there is an external link to a web page of a Coptic Orthodox church in Australia, which also contains a biography of this saint. I have read both bios and found discrepancies, not including the spelling differences that can be attributed to transliteration. For example, they differ on where he was born and what city the Berbers attacked.
Hccrle 13:45, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Accuracy in question 

message: There is an article on the same saint that is better written at Saint_Mercurius. This article should be deleted as it does not have any information that doesn't exist in the other. It should simply re-direct to the other article. (Mike Morgan 14:13, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, I've done a merge and redirect. Well spotted. Actually I added about 1 KB from this article to that one. The two articles have both existed for two years; if only they had been more fully categorised, someone might have spotted the duplication sooner!  - Fayenatic (talk) 21:27, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article should be deleted
Talk:Sun Hao

message: Does anyone know where information on Sun Hao's wife Lady Wang (the Right Lady) can be found? The two Ladies Zhang (Zhang Bu's daughters, the Left Lady and her younger sister) and Empress Teng were mentioned in Volume 50 of Records of the Three Kingdoms, but I can't find anything about Lady Wang. Sun Hao's biography in Volume 48 also did not mention Lady Wang. I searched online and discovered that Baidu Baike, Soso Baike, Hudong Baike and other similar Chinese websites also mentioned the existence of this Lady Wang, but failed to provide references. So, where did the information on Lady Wang as Sun Hao's Right Lady come from? The Book of Jin, or in another volume of the Records?   LDS  contact me 06:01, 28 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Lady Wang
Talk:Sun Chen

message: I've been looking into this person a bit, and it seems there are two common transliterations of his name: "Sun Lin" and "Sun Chen." Unihan indicates that the character 綝 has three valid readings, including "lín" and "chēn". Some sources claim that "lín" is incorrect in the case of this person's name. In Japanese he is "Son Chin", which indicates to me that "chēn" could indeed be correct. Does anyone have a definitive answer on this? -Amake (talk) 01:49, 8 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: In the case of a personal name, the reading should definitely be "chēn". Right now Sun Chen directs to Sun Lin. It should be the other way around, with the content changed to reflect the correct reading. Snuge purveyor (talk) 17:53, 11 January 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: There're a few name transliteration problems in wiki, but for 孫綝, I'm not absolutely sure which one is the correct one, and it seems to ME both could be used ("lín" is affiliated with jewels; and Chinese people do use words with that affiliation as names) But I do believe "chēn" as a more suitable transliteration than "lín".--EkmanLi (talk) 21:40, 12 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Correct transliteration of name
Talk:Sharon Waxman

message: The first reference is to mooseroots.com, a now defunct website. Do you know another source?  If not, can you mark the link as broken? 
MidwestGeek (talk) 04:19, 31 December 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: How is the coi asserted to be here evidencing itself? I am not clear that that tag at the top belongs. --2603:7000:2143:8500:1D36:6FB6:FDDA:9EB2 (talk) 20:18, 31 January 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  COI
Talk:Victoria (Gallic Empire)

message: RFC aborted for lack of WP:RFCBEFORE — HTGS (talk) 23:50, 21 May 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Please discuss your content issues here before starting an RfC. Note, Yswj700, you should know better than to edit war. Acolex2, please be aware of WP:3RR and for best practice, see WP:BRD. No person is above these, regardless of how much each of you are certain you are right. — HTGS (talk) 23:50, 21 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  She was a sovereign 

message: At some points in this article, particularly in the "Existence" section, Victoria is called "Victorina". I have yet to find any outside sources mentioning her as "Victorina" outside of Beyrand. Is this a spelling error or is this a different version of her name? If it is a different version, someone please specify it was a name she was also known as in the top section. Bostonicus (talk) 19:38, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Victoria or Victorina?
Talk:Vologases V

message: indicates that Vologases pulled off some kind of [unspecified] tricks to do what his predecessors could not. TrangaBellam (talk) 09:51, 24 January 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: TrangaBellam (talk) 18:08, 24 January 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: The source (and other sources for that matter) don't go into detail regarding this, probably because the reason is unknown; Parthian history is very obscure. Removed "managed". --HistoryofIran (talk) 19:12, 24 January 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: I appreciate it. TrangaBellam (talk) 06:26, 25 January 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Clarification tag
Talk:Ministry of Health and Family Welfare

message: ebin viswanath 13:29, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: here and here. Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.) For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, and according to fair use may copy sentences and phrases, provided they are included in quotation marks and referenced properly. The material may also be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Therefore such paraphrased portions must provide their source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you.  Diannaa (talk) 13:31, 14 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copyright problem removed 

message: Covid 19 2405:205:100C:1597:0:0:A1B:C8A0 (talk) 16:12, 6 January 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Malaram 
Talk:Jack Lauterwasser

message: Article reads:  Born 1904.  Joined club 1924 (age ~20).  Won 1st race - his club's - when 13 (~7 years before joining club).  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 144.183.224.2 (talk) 23:11, 21 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dates of events & descriptions vs. Math 
Talk:Alatheus and Saphrax

message: I think the article confuses Alatheus with Odotheus. Jacob Haller 19:25, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think it does too. As far as I can tell the error goes back to Gibbon, vol. 2 ch. XXVI.  Jmullaly (talk) 11:42, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Untitled 

message: Alatheus and Saphrax are predominantly mentioned as a pair (duo) in historiography. They are separated only when studying their names. They were both regents to their King's son, and together led their tribe in battles. Gbook hits: "Alatheus und Saphrax" (69), "Alatheus und Safrax" (45), "Alatheus and Saphrax" (40), "Alatheus and Safrax" (20), "Alatheus und Safrac" (15), "Saphrax and Alatheus" (14), etc.--Zoupan 07:55, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merger proposal
Talk:Camden station (Seaboard Air Line Railway Depot)

message: Well I think this article's name should be changed to Camden (Amtrak station) for the same reason Palatka's was changed. Nobody is going to recognize this name. Seaboard may have owned and used this station originally, but Seaboard doesn't exist anymore and it's successor CSX doesn't own or use the station. They only own the line. This is Amtrak's station. I will rename this article myself in about a week if there aren't any objections. Murjax (talk) 01:04, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Since it was renamed a long time ago, I'll change the assessment to Redirect. ----DanTD (talk) 12:51, 20 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Article Rename
Talk:Arnobius

message: The articles about "Arnobius" and "Arnobius the Elder" are clearly about the same person; one should be deleted, or they should be combined (and I'm not the person to do it). One gives the title of his magnum opus as "Adversus Gentes" and one as "Adversus Genies." Nevertheless, they're the same person.
Michael N. Koplow 17:53, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Merge Don't mind which way.-- billinghurst (talk) 22:45, 11 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Arnobius 

message: Since Arnobius seems a good Latin from North Africa, why is a Greek version of his name given?
ABS (talk) 23:11, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Greek transliteration of name
Talk:Auxentius

message: The article states that Auxentius died in 374, but then discusses his actions in the 380s and 390s. Are we dealing with two Auxentii? Of course the actions in the 380s and 390s are those of Auxentius of Durostorum (and of Milan), aka. the "Junior Auxentius," but who would the other one be? Jacob Haller 21:07, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Contradiction!!!

message: Valentinian I died in 374. The article has him "ascend to the throne" after 386. Jacob Haller 21:07, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Which Valentinian?

message: * Replace this page with a disambiguation page leading to:
:1. Auxentius of Mopsuestia, d. 360
:2. Auxentius of Milan, d. 374
:3. Auxentius of Durostorum and Milan, d. ca. 400
:4. Auxentius of Bithynia, d. 473
* Separate the material referring to Auxentius of Milan from that referring to Auxentius of Durostorum and Milan.
* Move the material referring to Auxentius of Milan to the relevant page (currently redirected here).
* Delete the current redirect page from Auxentius of Durostorum, and move the current page for "Junior Auxentius" to Auxentius of Durostorum.
* Merge the material referring to Auxentius of Durostorum to the relevant page. Jacob Haller 21:25, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Proposed Fix

message: There are quite a few variants of the name in other languages like Polish, Georgian and many others however I am unsure if this needs to be added since this is a disambiguation page Qsuiiitka (talk) 01:09, 16 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Should a section with the name in other languages & its variants be added to the article?
Talk:Ridge View High School

message: I've removed an old neutrality tag from this page that appears to have no active discussion per the instructions at Template:POV:
::This template is not meant to be a permanent resident on any article. Remove this template whenever:
::#There is consensus on the talkpage or the NPOV Noticeboard that the issue has been resolved
::#It is not clear what the neutrality issue is, and no satisfactory explanation has been given
::#In the absence of any discussion, or if the discussion has become dormant.
Since there's no evidence of ongoing discussion, I'm removing the tag for now. If discussion is continuing and I've failed to see it, however, please feel free to restore the template and continue to address the issues. Thanks to everybody working on this one! -- Khazar2 (talk) 02:02, 22 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  removing POV tag with no active discussion per [[Template:POV]]
Talk:Blackstone River

message: The original native American name for the river was the "Kittacuck", which meant "the great tidal river". The "Kittacuck", or Blackstone, was plentiful with Salmon and Lamprey in pre-colonial and colonial times.
Can anyone verify the "Kittacuck" name claim? I cannot find a single web reference that isn't circular to this or the Uxbridge, Massachusetts Wikipedia article (also uncited). Nothing in my local history book either. Rhavasy (talk) 04:50, 24 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Name 

message: Poorly written. Clearly the author is passionate about the Blackstone River but witty word play and short one liners do not belong in an encyclopedia entry 2600:740A:3:5315:70C0:F0C:FB3F:935A (talk) 21:25, 11 September 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: I attempted to clean this section up -- it still needs a lot of citations but I hope the wording is more Wikipedia appropriate. DuckWrangler97 (talk) 13:30, 13 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pollution and remediation tab
Talk:Emperor Yuan of Jin

message: This article, especially the section "Early reign and the loss of Northern China" needs a rewrite. It has too many run-on sentences, general grammatical and tense errors, and parenthetical thoughts. Sol Pacificus (talk) 23:30, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rewrite
Talk:Ermanaric

message: Please remove the following.  It has nothing to do with Ermanaric and no basis from any source:
"During the last 70-years of his life (H)ermanaric relied increasingly upon his superior-intelligence in military and government actions. (H)ermanaric's reliance on his intellect was in stark-contrast to most rulers of the era who relied more upon their youth and strength. An inordinate amount of (H)ermanaric's victories and contributions have been buried over the millennia"
Superior intelligence??  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.89.158.80 (talk) 06:12, 18 November 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. I also removed the speculative map. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 11:15, 18 November 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  This section is meaningless 

message: Do we know what his name meant?  (It looks as though it would be <something>-king). Iapetus (talk) 14:55, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Meaning of the name? 

message: Is there a source for the reconstructed Gothic name?--Ermenrich (talk) 16:03, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Here is a source in Swedish.--Berig (talk) 17:40, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Source on Gothic reconstruction of name
Talk:Eusebius of Emesa

message: Additional works
An additional reference to works by Eusebius of Emesa is found in the Works of John Jewel (Cambridge Univ. Press, 1850; Google e-Book). The list of authors and works cited includes on page xxxvi "Homil. in Evangel. Paris. 1554, et 1575". This work is indicated as in the library of Cambridge University.  Njesson (talk) 00:41, 21 March 2012 (UTC)
Talk:Firmus (4th-century usurper)

message: In the page on Count Theodosius it says the Count won, here it says Theodosius waged a "bloody and hopeless campaign." One is certainly wrong. JoshNarins (talk) 20:30, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Would there be any objection to moving this article to Firmus (4th-century usurper)? Since 4th and century are working together as a compound adjective before the noun usurper, it should be hyphenated. Firmus (4th century usurper) would remain as a redirect to the new title. If there's a consensus, or at least no objection, I'll make the move in about a week. Thank you. SchreiberBike (talk) 05:25, 19 May 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  ''(4th century usurper)'' to ''(4th-century usurper)''
Talk:George of Laodicea

message: George of Laodicea was a presbyter in Alexandria who was ordained by bishop Alexander ((Philost. H. E. viii. 17; Eus. Vit. Const. iii. 62).  He was later excommunicated and deposed, also by Alexander (Athan. ib. p. 886; Apol. ii. p. 728; de Fug. p. 718; Theod. H. E. ii. 9).  He retired and attempted to regain admittance to the church in Antioch, where he was rejected by the homoousion Eustathius, bishop of Antioch.  The "Arians" having gained ascendency in the east, after having deposed Eustathius, welcomed back George, and ordained him bishop of Laodicea (Athan. de Synod. p. 886; Or. i. p. 290; Soz. H. E. vi. 25).
He was not the bishop of Alexandria, nor was he Cappadocian, and so on for the rest of this article, which is a description of the life of George of Cappadocia, the co called "Arian" bishop of Alexandria, who was bishop until he was killed by a mob in 361.  
I guess the article should be retitled "George of Cappadocia", and maybe a new article started for George of Laodicea.  I am not sure, however, whether the article is simply mislabeled "George of Laodicea" or whether the article is a conflation of the biographies of the two men.  I think the latter, which is a more difficult fix.  The fact that this article is straight from EB1911 is somewhat shocking.  For George of Laodicea see http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Dictionary_of_Christian_Biography_and_Literature_to_the_End_of_the_Sixth_Century/Georgius_%283%29,_bp._of_Laodicea, for George of Cappadocia, the bishop of Alexandria, see http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Dictionary_of_Christian_Biography_and_Literature_to_the_End_of_the_Sixth_Century/Georgius_%284%29,_Arian_bp._of_Alexandria Ocyril (talk) 20:14, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  All Wrong
Talk:Gratianus Funarius

message: This page is a bloody mess, it needs serious attention. Terrasidius (talk) 10:21, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mess 
Talk:Hosius of Corduba

message: I see nothing in the text indicating that the subject is venerated as a saint by any Christian church. Until that evidence is put forward, I believe it appropriate to remove the category above. John Carter 15:16, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Removal of [[:Category:Egyptian saints]]

message: On the main page Hosius with Saint Athanasius went to this Council, The Council of Sardica, which had been summoned by The Pontiff, Saint Julius 1, and did what was requested of it, 343.
This is referred to as a "fruitless council".
All the evidence is to the contrary.
I request this comment be removed. It is made in the wrong place, as well. Also criticises the Council and Hosius for not having recognision for Arius. 
This is not History but opinion and has no place on the main page.
I request, therefore, that this whole page be rewritten, from top to bottom.
MacOfJesus (talk) 18:51, 20 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Request for Comment

message: This page has been revived, I see, and well done.
MacOfJesus (talk) 22:40, 16 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Revival 

message: The clause "that he presided is a very doubtful assertion" in reference to the council of Nicaea is unreferenced. Lewis Ayres, in his book Nicaea and its Legacy says that Ossius probably chaired the meeting, though he himself provides no evidence for this. Given that Ayres is a preeminent scholar in this area, I suggest "very doubtful" be removed from the article, or that Ossius chaired the meeting be considered equally likely as unlikely. Bren0110 (talk) 19:04, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Presiding at the council of  Nicaea 

message: In the Page we read:
..."Hosius presided in 343 at the fruitless synod of Sardica, which showed itself so hostile to Arianism; there and afterwards he spoke and wrote in favour of Athanasius."
This sort of writing and accounting of History is surely unacceptable and unworthy of a proper History Page of Wikipedia........ I therefore, wish to challenge it...... MacOfJesus (talk) 16:06, 29 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Historical accounting