lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Moscow Metallurgical Plant

message: Source: Qarterly report:
ЕЖЕКВАРТАЛЬНЫЙ ОТЧЕТ
Открытое акционерное общество 
"Московский металлургический завод "Серп и молот"
Код эмитента: 00946-А
за IV квартал 2003 года
Mikkalai 21:58, 31 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Composers

message: Hi there, this article about an American film composer and songwriter is waiting review since a couple of months back. It has been marked with GA status. Please advice if there is anything that needs improvement, or if I should just be patient and wait.
Draft:Camara Kambon AnamSoul (talk) 16:24, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Draft:Camara Kambon|Camara Kambon]] draft - open for feedback 

message: :Dmitri Shostakovich has an RfC for possible consensus. A discussion is taking place. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. —CurryTime7-24 (talk) 19:00, 26 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[:Dmitri Shostakovich]] has an [[WP:RFC|RfC]]

message: I notice a great many composers now have infoboxes. I think this is a good thing as long as the composer infobox is used:
. 
This avoids the situation in Schostakovich where the box became too big. Have the composer's group now accepted the need for a simple infobox with consensus on the talk page? I have proposed infoboxes for Kenneth Leighton and Sofia Gubaidulina and may propose more as I find them missing. Please comment on the talk pages. I'll let you know as I propose them and will keep you updated. — Iadmc♫talk   09:02, 1 June 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: One important composer where an infobox is being proposed is Haydn... Perhaps that debate should be resolved first? — Iadmc♫talk   09:08, 1 June 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: I have also suggested we have a debate at Mahler — Iadmc♫talk   20:39, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

text: I've added infoboxes to Kenneth Leighton and Sofia Gubaidulina per WP:BRD — Iadmc♫talk   00:21, 4 June 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Infoboxes
Talk:Chinese adjectives

message: cairoi 20:27, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  I need the pinyin 

message: The comparative section is rather confusing. 她(tā) 漂(piào) 亮(liang) has little to do with comparative sentences in Chinese, which employ the word 比. 
The article's English can be improved.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.22.194.186 (talk) 17:59, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  English delivery can be improved
Talk:Oak Ridges Moraine

message: I've been looking over the featured article criteria to see what we need to do to get this article to featured status. So far, this article fails in:
* comprehensiveness (criterion 2) - I'll write about this later
* standards for style (criterion 4) - doesn't fail this, but we need to ensure we meet the standards
* images (criterion 5) - this article needs a few more to capture the essence of the text
I think we do OK on the other criteria. Mindmatrix 14:18, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Featured article push

message: Some of these may have useful information that can be used to expand the article:
* International Association for Great Lakes Research: Case Study: The Oak Ridges Moraine
* Hunter Geographic Hydrogeology Study
* The Oak Ridges Moraine
* City of Toronto info on Oak Ridges Moraine
* City of richmond Hill info on Oak Ridges Moraine
* City of Pickering: Studies by Outside Agencies
** Note: affiliation of those agencies to various groups is not reported
* Ontario Ministry of Housing: Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan
* Oak Ridges Trail Association
* Ontario nature: The Oak Ridges Moraine
* Government of Ontario - Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing: North Pickering Land Exchange
===Municipal and Provincial Planning===
* Town of Newmarket proposed Official Plan and Zoning Bylaw amendments regarding the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan
* Program to bring the East Gwillimbury Official Plan, Mount Albert Community Plan and Zoning By-law # 97- 50 Into conformity with the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan
* Township of King Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan Conformity Exercise
* Ontario Professional Planners Institute: Position Paper on the Oak Ridges Moraine (PDF)
===Environmental Organizations, Activists etc===
* Oak Ridges Moraine Foundation
* Save the Oak Ridges Moraine (STORM) coalition
* Environmental Defence - Protecting the Oak Ridges Moraine
* Green Ontario:  Saving the Oak Ridges Moraine
* Sierra Club of Canada: Response to the Ministry of Municipal Affairs Regarding the Oak Ridges Moraine Advisory Panel
* Protecting Happy Valley Forest on the Oak Ridges Moraine (PDF)
* Nature Conservancy Canada: The Oak Ridges Moraine
===Developers and pro-development groups===
* UDI Ontario: Oak Ridges Moraine Settlement in the Best Interests of the Province and Taxpayers
Mindmatrix 16:15, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Internet Links

message: * UDI Ontario: Oak Ridges Moraine Settlement in the Best Interests of the Province and Taxpayers
Mindmatrix 16:15, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Developers and pro-development groups
Talk:Metamorphosis trick

message: This is really bad. The first part, before the spoiler should give at least some information about the trick background. What happened from the view of the audience? When and where was the trick performed? What was so special about the trick? Some examples from Houdini's history.
Only then needs there to be an explanation. Furthermore, as it is against the established practice of magicians to reveal the tricks, may be Wikipedia should not reveal the secret for ethical reasons, instead pointing to another site. Paranoid 22:35, 31 Dec 2004 (UTC)

message: There appear to be two seperate articles on Metamorphosis
* this article (Metamorphosis trick)
and
* Metamorphosis (illusion)
These need to be merged into one. I will do this in a couple of days unless anyone comments otherwise (Possibly also implementing as an experiment the idea of splitting off the method to a seperate article)
Circusandmagicfan 18:30, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Problem - duplicate articles
Talk:Chad Hugo

message: I am removing the discography section. If you want to highlight Chad's solo work, do so via The Neptunes discography page, u can note that they are chad releases using the reference thing. The current one is WRONG anyway, chad did not produce every track on New Sacred Cow for example. i am not going to spend much time verifying every other track, they aren't cited so they go. not to mention they are a mess, and violate WP:NOR, and getting reliable sources (or even information) to back each one up would take forever. then some wiseguy who thinks he knows better would change it anyway. ~ Bungalowbill 15:12, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Discography. 
Talk:Bernhard Rogge

message: I am reading a book in which Doenitz states that Rogge was Jewish. Does anyone know how he came up with this absurd claim?— Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.44.4.251 (talk) 23:33, 31 December 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: His Grandfather on his Mothers side was Jewish thus making her Jewish at birth. As she married out of her family's faith, she was not classed as Jewish - something which protected Bernhard throughout his Naval career. As a direct decendant I know this to be true. (86.146.114.245 (talk) 18:22, 19 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: REPLY

message: There is only one author Bryan Mark Rigg with his book Hitler's Jewish Soldiers.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.158.234.203 (talk) 18:35, 30 March 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Jewish 

message: Under Nazi race lawa a person with one or more Jewish grandparents was a "racial Jew" even if the Jewish grandparent had converted to Christianity and the other three grandparents had been born Christian, the person's parents were both born Christian, that the person was not married to a Jewish person, and the person was not a member of the Jewish religious/social community. 2603:800C:3A40:6400:290C:94BE:B44A:F30 (talk) 03:15, 14 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Racial Jews"
Talk:Christian de Quincey

message: I am the copyright holder of all content on www.deepspirit.com. However, for some reason, Wikipedia is not permitting access to my website via this site. If anyone can clarify what the difficulty is I'd appreciate it.
:The problem is that someone flagged up the apparent copyright violation without listing it at Wikipedia:Copyright problems, so nobody else knew about it in order to follow it up. I take it that you are Christian De Quincy; I recommend you have a look at Wikipedia:Autobiography for our policy on writing about yourself on Wikipedia. Provisionally accepting your claim to hold the copyright, I will restore the text copied from www.deepspirit.com; however, given that it is autobiography I will take the precaution of putting a  tag on it. No offence meant!  --rbrwr± 17:23, 5 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Copyvio?
Talk:Bulleen, Victoria

message: Since when is Bulleen not within the City of Manningham? What council is it really in, as I am confused? Somebody in the WWW 23:46, 31 Dec 2004 (UTC)

message: Just thought I'd let anyone know who's interested that I've purchased some history books from the Doncaster-Templestowe Historical Society and will try to add the information into this and other Manningham articles. If you want, you can ask me for some info rom it. Thanks, Chicken-7  talk 05:04, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I am sorry that the history is still not finished. I've been busy and have also lost the books. I'm sure I'll find em but for the time being, just stick with me. :P Cheers, Chicken-7  talk 08:57, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I haven't forgotten this. PS - I found the books  :)  Chicken-7  talk 07:09, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  History
Talk:Hardball with Chris Matthews

message: is a nutcase, but do we really need three long paragraphs about one edition of the show? Anything that detailed should probably go in Bachman's own article. Alex finds herself awake at night (Talk · What keeps her up) 03:44, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Michele Bachman 

message: At the opening of the 2 March 2020 episode, the host went on the air claiming that this was his last episode. Schissel | Sound the Note! 00:03, 3 March 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: , Yup, just came here to share the same. See also. ---Another Believer (Talk) 00:03, 3 March 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Last episode? 

message: Should we keep the currently unsourced Guest hosts and Regular guests sections? ---Another Believer (Talk) 05:10, 3 March 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: I am going to remove for now. ---Another Believer (Talk) 13:52, 3 March 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Guest hosts and Regular guests sections? 

message: This was an improper name change.  We do not change the name of a show because of the change of hosts to formerly.  The show, for its duration have been known as Hardball with Chris Matthews.  That title might have changed with Matthews' retirement but it has not changed to "formerly."  The Tonight Show with Johnny Carson didn't change to the Tonight Show (formerly) with Johnny Carson.  When a new host is declared, use the show title the network chooses to use for the show.  Write an article about the Hardball franchise if such occurs.  But wikipedia does not use its voice to force a change in title on an owned entity.  That is not our prerogative. Trackinfo (talk) 03:31, 4 March 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: I completely agree with you. I have changed the title back to simply Hardball. This can provide a placeholder until a new host is selected (and the title officially changes). KidAd (talk) 06:28, 4 March 2020 (UTC)

text: and , I concur with this assessment completely. Until a permanent replacement for the show has been named and the show is retitled, the existing page title should remain. At the same time, I'm also not certain that the disambiguation qualifier (news show) follows the Wikipedia Manual of Style for television programs. So, given this discussion, I've listed this at RM/TR to revert the undiscussed, now controversial, bold move. Doug M.  T·C 03:00, 5 March 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Name change
Talk:Enric Valor i Vives

message: Please, I'm trying to do a more briefly version than the Spanish or Catalan wikipedia version, because I would like to purpose this article as a candidate for :meta:Translation of the week. If this article is too long, it wouldn't be translated into other languages. Thanks. --Martorell 00:02, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Category talk:Syllabus-free dance

message: You are welcome to rename the category, but the words "impro" & "freestyle" will not do, since  these words already have specific associations. Mikkalai 00:23, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: How about Interpretive dance? MPS 23:23, 15 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Cat rename?
Talk:Minuet step

message: I would like to offer an alternative description for this page.  I am new to Wikipedia and I am unsure of the protocol.  This is my alternative text, which I find clearer - 
The Steps of the Minuet
The 18th century English minuet is danced to music with six beats in the bar.  The dancer takes four steps per bar, always starting each bar with the right foot, touching the floor on beats 1, 3, 4, and 5.  Thus R * L R L * giving the distinctive minuet rhythm.
The step starts, in effect, on the last beat of the previous bar with a plié (sink) and levé (lift) of the right foot, which is placed with emphasis on the first beat of the new bar.  In the second beat the left foot slows as it passes the right, to land on the third beat.  Beats 3, 4 and 5 follow with quick steps and the dancer pauses, poised, on the sixth beat ready for the opening plié and levé of the next bar.  
The dancer may move forwards, backwards or to either side, maintaining the rhythm in a continuous flow.  When moving to the side, the left foot usually passes behind the right on beat 3 and in front of the right on beat 5.  
Apart from the plié, the dancer’s weight is on the ball of the foot throughout with the heels high off the ground.  The body is balanced with the centre of gravity just under the dancer’s diaphragm.  Hand and arm movements are relaxed and open, moving elegantly with the body.  
Typical patterns of a minuet for two dancers include a Z shaped path, (left, forward-right, and left or vice versa) facing each other all the time they dance and passing each other at the middle of the second leg, or circling each other facing inwards.
Link 1: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4yurw5Cf4HY
Link 2: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O-a2D0Rwr8w
By 1790-1800 the step may have become more like a waltz step.  Step with the right foot on beat 1 pause for 2 and 3 and do the final three steps on 4,5 and 6, thus R * * L R L.
I would appreciate people's views.  If you all agree, I will replace the whole page with the new text.
--Mgnotley (talk) 11:53, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: It is unfortunate that edits of Mgnotley were reverted! They were a decided improvement. The first link was extremely helpful. 68.173.171.34 (talk) 06:25, 21 April 2011 (UTC)

text: The plie is NOT always only on the right foot in Link 1. It would be good to state that the asterisks mark the beginning of a bar of music (or a pair of bars of music if written in 3/4).68.173.171.34 (talk) 06:35, 21 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Alternative description

message: What is the significance of the unusual capitalization in this entry, e.g. "Ways"?  Are these terms with special ballroom dance-meanings, or just typos?  --Connel MacKenzie 17:28, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: FWIW at this late point in time, almost all of the material proves to be uncredited direct quotation from an 18th-century source, with a number of minor alterations, mostly of no help whatever in understanding the prose. I have restored the original text, and provided inline citations.—Jerome Kohl (talk) 05:05, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Capitalization?
Talk:Safa Giray of Kazan

message: If you use "Giray" instae "Gäräy", should be "Muhammed"instead of "Moxammad". --Untifler 00:46, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: As there was no consensus here for the move to Safagäräy, I have moved the page back to "Safa Giray"; but with a disambiguation modifier "of Kazan". Eugène van der Pijll 19:20, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Old talk
Talk:D-brane

message: What is the reason for the link to "as of 2005"? JWSchmidt 01:12, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)

message: I made a stab at cleaning up the intro, but this page needs a lot of work.PhysPhD (talk) 06:07, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Needs work

message: :<tag: this article has been written in a professional way and it lacks explanatory language for people from other fields. Please help rewrite it into a more educational form>
A reader left the above comment on the main page
PhysPhD (talk) 18:32, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Comment 

message: What doe this thing mean: 'class of extended objects upon which open strings can end with Dirichlet boundary conditions'. Is none of the well-defined concepts of geometry (manifold, sheaf, whatever) applicable?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Karol8 (talk • contribs) 00:14, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  give a definition!
Wikipedia talk:Proposal to expand WP:CSD/Proposal I (Amount of content I)

message: Could it also include articles that are just interwiki links?  This may need some discussion because soft redirects do exist and are ok, however some users like to create articles that are just an inter-language link and this, in my opinion, should also be listed as a candidate for speedy deletion. -- Graham  ☺ | Talk 01:38, 30 Dec 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: So have I but it'd be nice if it were actually in policy somewhere :-p -- Graham  ☺ | Talk 01:57, 30 Dec 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Slight amendment to Proposal I

message: Could "taxobox" be listed to the items which can cause an otherwise empty page to be deleted?  172.169.21.14 22:03, 31 Dec 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Proposal I

message: instead of how this information is expressed.  Say I'm a spammer interested in promoting ACME Inc.  I create an article about ACME with contents "acme homepage: http://acme-inc.us/ Category:ACME" (assuming the ACME category didn't exist before).  Arguably, this doesn't provide any more information than just the link to the ACME homepage, yet it cannot be deleted under the proposed policy.  IMO it should be possible to speedily delete such articles.  The current proposal is useful (in fact, I'll probably vote for it), but I'm afraid it's too narrow since the proposed policy can easily be circumvented. --MarkSweep 00:52, 2 Jan 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: The criterion should be based on information
Wikipedia talk:Proposal to expand WP:CSD/Proposal II (Amount of content II)

message: Proposal II has an example which provides information not self-evident from the title. It's very common for ambassadors to live somewhere other than at their embassy, so saying that it is the home of the ambassador as well as the embassy is additional information. Jamesday 19:30, 19 Dec 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Contradictory example

message: For many of us, we're more likely to edit a redlink than we are a blue link; therefore, if the contents of Peerage of the United Kingdom were "The Peerage of the United Kingdom is the peerage system used in the United Kingdom", I'd assume there was a half-decent article there (because the link was blue). However, if the link were red, I'd be surprised that an article didn't exist and I would go create it. ugen64 00:41, 3 Jan 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Reasoning

message: From the time of this comment, it seems that this proposal won't pass (117 agree, 72 disagree, for a total of 62% support), but some people that disagree seemed to support my suggested rewording: 
From Extremely short articles which add no information beyond what is obvious from the title.
To Extremely short articles consisting of nothing but a rephrase of the title.
Maybe a future proposal could feature this rewording. --Deathphoenix 15:38, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rewording the proposal
Wikipedia talk:Proposal to expand WP:CSD/Proposal III (Vanity articles)

message: Two Google hits? My almost-unique name (there is one other person sharing it) gets 1950 google hits and there's no way I'd be worthy material for an article. dramatic 23:08, 3 Dec 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Google

message: Proposition III seems to be the most controversial of these criteria, and it perhaps needs more explication.  The goal of Prop III is to be able to delete those pages that everybody knows won't survive VfD, but which are currently impossible to speedy delete.  Some examples from VfD are Shatter, Shumaker, ZTC, and Arthur Wyatt.  No Wikipedian thinks articles like this should be kept, yet each article has to be listed on VfD, voted on, deleted, and its debate archived.  Overall this process likely wastes at least twenty minutes of our editors' time, when a speedy deletion could resolve the issue in seconds. - SimonP 07:08, Dec 9, 2004 (UTC)
* I agree.  You're welcome to try your hand at explication.  I might end up removing that proposal because even I am beginning to think it is too contentious.  BLANKFAZE | (что??) 17:02, 9 Dec 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Prop III

message: We needn't consider proposal XI if it will make no difference to the success of III.  The statement "Because proposal XI is a weaker alternative of proposal III, if both pass, Proposal III should be implemented" is no different from saying "If proposal III passes, proposal III should be implemented".  ‣ᓛᖁ[ ᑐ] 23:49, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposal XI
Wikipedia talk:Proposal to expand WP:CSD/Proposal IV (Dicdefs)

message: Proposal IV makes claims about Wiktionary's submission requirements that don't appear to be accurate — see Wiktionary:Criteria for inclusion, Wiktionary:Neologisms, and Wiktionary:List of protologisms, for a start.  It would be better to phrase the proposal as simply "Any article consisting only of a dictionary definition (dicdef), which already exists at Wiktionary."  Otherwise, there will be problems with admins deleting definitions because they have mistaken ideas about which words qualify for Wiktionary.  There are cases where judgment on recently coined terms is in order, but speedy deletion is not the proper venue for that. Factitious 12:26, Dec 10, 2004 (UTC)
: I'd like to see something that describes what a "dicdef" is.  Strictly speaking,a dictionary definition includes parts of speech, pronounciation, etymology, etc.  What we usually call a "dicdef" tends to be a one- or two-sentence description, slightly less than a stub.  Where does a definition cross into becoming an encyclopedia entry? -- Netoholic @ 19:22, 2004 Dec 21 (UTC)
: Can we restrict this only to articles which already have a Wiktionary definition? Reason: Either the definition needs to move to Wiktionary, which means that although you'd want to delete the Wikipedia page eventually, it would hardly be a candidate for "speedy deletion". If the dicdef isn't acceptable to Wiktionary, then more thought needs to go into where to store the information, and the process shouldn't be rushed. Grobertson 18:44, 27 Dec 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with the comment above that dicdef should not be rushed through. If it can put into Wiktionary, sufficient time should allowed for appropriate formatting/editing. The appropriate tag then is  instead of speedy. Enochlau 03:11, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Proposal IV
Wikipedia talk:Proposal to expand WP:CSD/Proposal V (Copyright violations)

message: I would also like to see some rule allowing the deletion of blatant copyright violations.  The percentage of articles that are rescued after being posted on Wikipedia:Copyright problems is minuscule and the danger of losing good content by making them easier to delete is small. - SimonP 17:46, Dec 5, 2004 (UTC)
* No harm in putting it up to a vote. BLANKFAZE | (что??) 18:14, 5 Dec 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Blatant copyvios