lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Truth for Life

message: I don't think there's enough material here to justify a separate article on Truth for Life. I think this page should just redirect to Alistair Begg. I think he's noteworthy enough for his own Wikipedia entry, but I don't think there's a need for a distinct page for his radio show or his church--those pages should just redirect to Alistair Begg. -- —Preceding unsigned comment added by Narsil (talk • contribs)  23:30, 4 May 2007
:The redirect is now properly tagged, and is also in :Category:Christian radio programs. Any information about the radio program should be added at Alistair Begg#Truth for Life.  Senator2029 ➔ “Talk”  08:26, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recommend restoring the redirect to [[Alistair Begg]]
Talk:Modern Defense

message: I am under the impression that the Modern Defense is refers to 1.e4 g6 and the Robatsch is the name for 1.d4 g6
Of course the two can easily transpose into each other but they are seperate openings are they not? --I 06:54, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm afraid I've never heard of the names being used in that way. 91.105.6.105 16:17, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Nor have I. youngvalter 18:37, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

message: The line 1.d4 d6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 Bg7 is also a Modern. Article currently doesn't mention it and it's impossible to reach from the diagram shown. ChessCreator (talk) 23:10, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  d4 and c4 

message: The move 3.h5 isn't possible.  Other moves look questionable.  The section needs to be cleaned up.  Bubba73 You talkin' to me? 22:33, 24 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes it's a mess. But a good inclusion otherwise. There seems to be some OR included (like, doubling rooks on the h-file [the editor wrote a-file, a typo). Fischer didn't suggest that in My 60, he said very little. (So in general, how much of the new section is retainable?) Ok, Ihardlythinkso (talk) 01:59, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  Done. I moved the section up, since it follows the main line 2...Bg7, and the remaining options don't. I left the meat and cut out the fat (and there was a lot of fat!). Ok, Ihardlythinkso (talk) 06:45, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  New section on Fischer's move 

message: Apparently you can sort of reach the position if you move the knight first to h5 then advance pawn and they do not capture the knight, it is fucking stupid though and you likely wont reach the position 180.241.175.158 (talk) 11:00, 2 March 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Found this recently, apparently chess.com considers that you can reach a norwegian opening by moving the knight first then the pawn
Talk:Ruy Lopez, Mortimer Trap

message: Chesslab.com mentions an earlier game where this variation was played by an unknown player. 
The game is as follows. If this game is verified, then it should be mentioned, since it is implied that Mortimer invented this variation. 
Griffith -NN 1876
1. e4   e5
2. Nf3  Nc6
3. Bb5  Nf6
4. d3   Ne7
5. Nxe5 c6
6. Nc4  cxb5
7. Nd6#  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.152.62.33 (talk) 15:30, 28 October 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Earlier game 

message: "6. Nc4
White's best try, covering a5 and thus preventing 6...Qa5+, and threatening smothered mate with 7.Nd6#."
White could play nxf7 for a .5 pawn advantage over playing nc4.  correct me if I'm wrong.
Tat2mycat (talk) 18:49, 11 May 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: You and your chess engine are not wrong. --IHTS (talk) 06:18, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Stockfish Say Otherwise
Talk:Operation Lüttich

message: http://mudandblood.net/ < This flash game is fairly popular and takes place during Operation Luttich. 70.78.13.170 (talk) 23:26, 28 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  In Popular Culture 

message: Anyone know the name of the dead solider under the tank in the picture? Alialiac (talk) 15:16, 5 February 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Who's the dead soldier in the picture with the wrecked tank? 

message: Good to see a byword anent Luttich being the German for Liege in Belgium (historically called Luke in English) but why was “Operation Luttich” chosen? 2A00:23C7:2B13:9001:2499:E57:D206:D58 (talk) 22:23, 6 November 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why was it called Luttich? 

message: In the "German Attacks" section someone wrote "The German commanding officer, General Von Kluge, wrote after the war "The armoured operation was completely wrecked exclusively by the allied airforces, supported by a highly trained ground force operation".[citation needed]"
I would like to know how von Kluge wrote anything after the war since he killed himself in August 1944.  Anyone? 2601:244:4601:1DE0:A5C1:45CF:2545:C1EA (talk) 05:43, 3 August 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I have fixed this.  It was apparently a bad secondary source; the actual comment (which was slightly different) was from Kluge's Chief of Staff, General Speidel, who survived the war. Pfdietz2 (talk) 21:42, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Von Kluge's writings 

message: I added in why Hitler ordered the counter attack, my source is Anthony Bevers book "D-Day". Somebody removed it... 2A01:B340:81:44C9:8B1:CC44:ED42:CB1F (talk) 07:04, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Somebody removed my edit
Talk:Napoleon Opening

message: This overview article claims it is doubtful that Napoleon ever played against the Automaton:
http://www.chesshistory.com/winter/extra/napoleon.html
Pavel Vozenilek (talk) 10:19, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  The article makes no such claim. It states "Despite frequent assertions that they are all spurious, three games allegedly played by him (i.e. against Bertrand, Mme de Rémusat and the Automaton are regularly seen", but it does not claim that Napoleon's game against the Turk is doubtful. The games are vs. Bertrand (St Helena, c.1820), vs. Mme de Rémusat (Malmaison, France, 1804) and vs the Turk automaton (Schönbrunn, Austria, 1806). The article cites evidential sources for Captain Kennedy having made up the story of a game against Bertrand, and then gives "other evidence to show he (Napoleon) was a mediocre player". Chess commentators and analysts support this view, and generally agree that the Bertrand and Rémusat games both have too much clever play to have been by Napoleon. But the Turk game is different - it REALLY IS mediocre. First published in the USA in New York Chess Monthly in the 1850s, and possibly from the French publication Le Palamède some years earlier (the article is unclear on this), it has not been proved doubtful. It was apparently one of three quick games in succession played at Schönbrunn Palace in Austria (not Berlin, as sometimes stated). The automation was apparently brought out of storage specially for the occasion, and was operated by Johann Allgaier. He would have made a note of the moves, or recalled them with ease, and perhaps demonstrated to others afterwards how badly Napoleon played. Thus it is not improbable that some version of the game(s) would enter recorded history. There's no contemporary "hard evidence" for the Napoleon-Turk game(s), but there's no proof against it either - and thus no reason to doubt that the one published is not genuine. Pete Hobbs (talk) 18:07, 18 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Automaton
Talk:Australian Fire Service Medal

message: Anyone know if there are, and what the requirements are for it to be awarded?
Examples: Term/length of service? (most fire services have a "membership duration award" so wondering if this is considered..)
Position of standing? (for example a non fire-active member.. say communications brigade.. is eligible?)
Recognition of service? (attending/participating in large scale activites/events)
The actual award site lists nothing along these lines.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.216.99.172 (talk) 13:07, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requirements to be awarded?
Talk:Maitland Plan

message: This could use a bit of context - given that the Spanish were on the British side at the time, what was the reason for wanting to cause trouble in their colonies? Kisch 23:35, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Why?
Talk:Richter–Veresov Attack

message: I have several times faced this line as black:- 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nc3 d5 3. e4 de 4.f3 ef 5. Nxf3
Does this have a name? SmokeyTheCat 16:31, 17 May 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: That's the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit. MaxBrowne (talk) 01:32, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
replies: text:  Not with 1...nf6, is it? B-D deferred? SmokeyTheCat 12:07, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  A gambit line
Talk:Saragossa Opening

message: Problem with stated Plano gambit: not only is analysis somewhat unnecessary, 1. c3 d5 2. e4?! dxe4 3. Qa4+ does play out accurately, but as the article states 3. ...Nc6 4. Qxe4+, this is inaccurate. The black pawn on e4 is doubled and thus this is not a check, not to mention Black's response 4. ...Be7 is illegal as that square is occupied by the black pawn that the article's author/editor clearly has overlooked.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.181.57.254 (talk) 15:28, 27 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: 1.c3 d5 2. e4?!

message: The name Saragossa Opening is derived from the Spanish city of Zaragoza.
True, but the article doesn't explain why this name was given to this opening after a tournament in Germany between three players with no apparent links to Zaragoza / Saragossa. Does anybody know?--Qgil (talk) 17:27, 6 September 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Good question.  I added a bit more from Hooper & Whyld that explains the origin of the name in a little more detail. Quale (talk) 03:06, 7 September 2012 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thank you very much! I'm from Barcelona (300 km far from Saragossa) and before yesterday I had no clue this opening existed with this name.--Qgil (talk) 14:52, 7 September 2012 (UTC)
replies: text:  If anyone is interested in finding out more about the name of this opening, about 15 years ago I came across an old edition of Pablo Moran's A. Alekhine: Agony of a Chess Genius, where I recall there's a little discussion about how this opening was invented. I'm afraid I can't remember much more than that, but if anyone has a copy of that book, they might be able to add to the article. Cobblet (talk) 03:15, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
replies: text:  I think I saw somewhere mentioned the name goes all the way back to Ruy Lopez, and the chess version without initial double pawn moves. Can't remember where.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.76.5.47 (talk) 16:48, 19 January 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why the name Saragossa?
Talk:Sicilian Defence, Alapin Variation

message: "The main line in current practice is 2... Nf6 3. e5 Nd5 and can also arise if White offers, and Black declines, the Smith-Morra Gambit (1.e4 c5 2.d4 cxd4 3.c3 Nf6 4.e5 Nd5). White has a number of options including 4.d4, 4.Nf3, 4.g3 and 4.Bc4."
*This may be a standard thing I'm not aware of, but this makes it sound like the position that arises after 3 ... Nd5 is also reachable via the Morra. In fact that position only arises if 4. d4, so wouldn't the bit about the transposition be more useful as, say, a parenthetical after 4. d4? --Rhododendrites (talk) 16:58, 28 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nf6 main line question
Talk:Battle of Surfaces

message: They changes sides didn't they? The youtube videos on the official page suggest so. Who did better in what part? Are there statistics (unforced errors etc.) separated by halfs? JanCK 23:56, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This? http://www.thebattleofsurfaces.com/images/statseng.jpg —MC 00:34, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

text: Yeah, the match was freaking cool. If they didn't change sides the game would have been extremely easy for the player in the clay. The disproportion of being on clay while your opponent is on grass balanced out in the moments when the player on the grass served. It was cool there were thus moments in which it was easier for a player to break the service of the other. The tiebreak was far more interesting too, although I wonder how much the positions of both players when the tiebreak begun determined the odds for them. --euyyn 06:39, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: statistics
Talk:World Chess Solving Championship

message: Feeling thrilled after shaking hands with the 2016 World Champion sitting at the desk in front of me. Ad Huikeshoven (talk) 13:12, 29 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: 2016 World Champion

message: One of the formulas is: 
New Rating = (Old Rating) + (KT) x (Player's Result - (Average Result x Old Rating / Average Tournament Old Rating))
What exactly is meant by "Average Tournament Old Rating"? Bob.v.R (talk) 10:00, 22 September 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Further remark: in www.wfcc.ch the used formulas are more complex than in the article. The formulas in the article (current version of the article) look inconsistent with the formulas on the website. Bob.v.R (talk) 07:39, 23 September 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I have updated the formula section, according to the reference. Bob.v.R (talk) 07:11, 27 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Formula
Talk:Mark Cronin

message: I have tagged the article as an autobiography based on the admission of the original editor in the edit summary. Truthfully, at first glance, the article seems to be reasonably well-written. However—and this is the bigger concern—none of the assertions are backed up by reliable sources. I'm going to see if there's an IMDB page, and then, based on what I find, will probably apply  to the article. —C.Fred (talk) 00:22, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Autobiography

message: This is a clean game for tv that is a reality game show.. I have a finish project and want to pitch it to a tv net work that would grab my game show.. I spoke to celebrity entertainer pimpin ken and he supports my game show.. Someone can call him and ask him about me.. I have the script as well as the pitch and dont know who to talk to in this field.. Can you have someone contact me on oobermom27@gmail or 971-724-9579 tru Presidenttru (talk) 21:28, 28 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tv game show called who wants to work for a pimp
Talk:Knox Pooley

message: As I just wrote on the Fred Thompson discussion page  (and this is a modified version of that note), it seems very odd that this character has a whole page, and that it exists solely to make Thompson himself look bad. This is a character from the show Wiseguy he played 20 years ago. As far as I know, it is not a well-remembered role, it is something of an outlier among his roles in general, yet here it seems this minor character now has his own page, which only the top 3 characters on Wiseguy have. It seems this character is adequately described on that page. Especially see the L.A. Times story today about this  . I will also place a note on the recently-created Knox Pooley page. It's much out of proportion to both actor and TV show -- sounds like a hit job. I am willing to entertain counter-arguments, but if I don't hear any, I'll nominate this for deletion. --BunnyColvin 00:26, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Totally out of proportion. I can't find any other articles for any other characters on the show. Why does a minor character have an article? I've merged into Wiseguy. --Elliskev 14:05, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I created this article in the first place because when somebody told my wife that Fred was running for president, her first reaction was, "Knox Pooley for President?" and I concluded (correctly, I must say; thanks for the link to the L.A. Times article) that this could become a matter of public interest. I do see your point of view, though. --Orange Mike 14:46, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Out of proportion?
Talk:Anna Krylov

message: This article will be expanded over next several days. Anna Krylov is a modern quantum chemist. Her outstanding research received a world recognition, in particular for inventing  new "spin flip" method. Recently she received several prizes such as 2007 Dirac Medal from the World Association of Theoretical and Computational Chemists and the Agnes Fay Forgan Research award from Iota Sigma Pi National Honor Society, for outstanding research achievements to a woman chemist or biochemistry.
--Rospizd 02:20, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: It's an advertisement. 2603:7000:B23E:33EE:14C5:E222:5A3B:284B (talk) 06:31, 10 August 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: This is not an encyclopedia article

message: Why does this article call her "Anna Krylov" when her surname "Крылова" translates as "Krylova"? She would never have the surname "Krylov" because in Eastern Slavic naming culture, a woman's surname always ends in "-a", like "Krylova". Nivamp (talk) 19:10, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: That seems to be the way she writes her name or at least chooses to be addressed in publications, so presumably the convention doesn't apply. XeCyranium (talk) 21:23, 15 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Krylov
Talk:Amilorine

message: Recent media reports on 2007 pet food crisis frequently mentioned this name.  However I could not find its usage in any major scientific database.  The only scientific publication that mentiones amilorine is
: E.Y. Espinoza, J.L. Pérez-Arellano, C. Carranza, F. Collía, A. Muro, "In vivo inhibition of inducible nitric oxide synthase decreases lung injury induced by Toxocara canis in experimentally infected rats", Parasite Immunology, vol. 24, 511–520 (2002).
which mentions "amilorine-sensitive channels".  The paper they cited in association, however, is
:J.W. Ding, J. Dickie, H. O'Brodovich et al., "Inhibition of amiloride-sensitive sodium-channel activity in distal lung epithelial cells by nitric oxide", American Journal of  Physiology, vol.274, L378–L387  (1998).
So I redirected it to amiloride.  --Tsiaojian lee 00:35, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Misnomer?
Talk:José María Arguedas

message: This article would seem to have been taken almost wholesale from The World Heritage Encyclopedia.  I guess it's possible that they plagiarized Wikipedia, but it seems to me unlikely. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 03:54, 18 December 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, looking a little closer... it would seem clear that in fact it is the World Heritage Encylopedia ("the aggregation of the largest online encyclopedias available") that is the villain here. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 03:58, 18 December 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Plagiarism 

message: I've read the relevant sections of the article closely, twice, and I know that he wrote about Mestizo culture, etc. But I'm still having serious doubts about the validity of the two categories that characterize him as "Mestizo". I don't want to remove those categories without more clarity on the issue, so I'd appreciate if a knowledgable editor could shed light on the matter. Please ping me when you reply. Thanks! Anomalous+0 (talk) 02:02, 30 November 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mestizo descent??
Talk:Monell v. Department of Social Services of the City of New York

message: I'm hoping to develop this article more fully. Potential sources include:
Rodney A. Smolla, Deprivation of Rights Under Color of Law: § 1983, Bivens Actions, and Related Issues
Steven Stein Cushman,  MUNICIPAL LIABILITY UNDER § 1983: TOWARD A NEW DEFINITION OF MUNICIPAL POLICYMAKER, 34 B.C. L. Rev. 693 (1993)
Myriam E. Gilles, BREAKING THE CODE OF SILENCE: REDISCOVERING “CUSTOM” IN SECTION 1983 MUNICIPAL LIABILITY, 80 B.U. L. Rev. 17 (2000)
Stuart M. Speiser, Charles F. Krause, Alfred W. Gans, Monique C. M. Leahy Contributing Editor, American Law of Torts, Strict Liability in Tort and Related Remedies; Intentional Torts
Oscar G. Chase , Arlo Monell Chase,  MONELL: THE STORY BEHIND THE LANDMARK, 31 Urb. Law. 491 (1999)
City of Canton, Ohio v. Harris, 489 U.S. 378 (1989)
Monell v. Department of Social Services of City of New York, 436 U.S. 658 (1978)
City of Oklahoma City v. Tuttle, 471 U.S. 808 (1985)
Anyone have other ideas about sources that might be useful?Monfredo (talk) 06:47, 2 May 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: I removed the inline cite after the name of the decision for three reasons: (1) I couldn't figure out how to make that template point to the Cornell LII page for the opinion; (2) I couldn't figure out how to make the template make the whole reference "xxx U.S. yyy" work as a reasonable link -- somehow the first first part (xxx) was not marked as part of a link, the second part (U.S.) inappropriately linked to a page on the U.S. Reports when "U.S." is actually part of the reference, and the third part (yyy) confusingly contained the whole of the link; and (3) I agree with Bryan Garner that such inline cites are unnecessary and irritating for ordinary readers, especially when that information is readily available for technical readers in footnotes as well as in the infobox here on Wikipedia pages. Belastro (talk) 23:19, 5 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Inline cite

message: Very impressive!! For more readings about the case and its impact, in addition to using citing references/case notes in commercial databases to find more, you may consider using this list of sources as a starting point available here: http://www1.law.umkc.edu/justicepapers/monelldocs/MonellBibliography01.htm 
Hope this helps! 
Alex2018ALR (talk) 18:59, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Alex's comment
Talk:Monroe v. Pape

message: How are two case citations the sources for this entire article? Revert all you want but it doesn't make the sourcing here any stronger. Is all of this in there too: In the years immediately following the Civil War, the southern United States suffered great social and political upheaval. Many white citizens resented the political power wielded by newly freed slaves, and took action to curb their participation in the electoral process through terror and other means. As attacks against African Americans continued into the 1870s, many of which were conducted with the approval and even the participation of local law enforcement authorities, President Ulysses S. Grant asked for congressional action to address the problem.
The Ku Klux Klan Act was passed in 1871 in response to Grant's appeal.''
IvoShandor 00:33, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Sources
Talk:Ángel Rama

message: Read: Rama is more famous for his criticism, and in particular his analysis of the Latin American Boom, its motivations, origins, and possible consequences.
The above statement is not legible, it is difficult to understand, I am restating the meaning as: Rama is better known for his criticisms, particularly, for his analysis on the Latin American Boon, its motivation, origins, and possible consequences.
this discussion is open but this is clearly an evidence of the lack of understanding on how writing composition is important for every reader. Now, we can also note that many web sites are not a reliable source of information, let alone verifiable. It is seems that this entry lacks of verifiable sources. Just two issues. Interesting sometimes we focused in somebody else's when there is a lot to fix in our houses. Let us clean up this entry first than anything. -"-Todos Llegan de Noche, todos se van de día" 16:56, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It's also just wrong.  Rama's not particularly well-known for his analysis of the Boom, rather (as the opening sentence of this article correctly states) for his criticism of modernismo and his theorization of transculturation.  (One might add also La ciudad letrada's quasi-Foucauldian analysis of the colonial city.)  As such, I've simply eliminated this sentence.  --Jbmurray 19:54, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sentence style and grammar
Talk:Carrion's disease

message: Why moving to Bartonellosis...
Google comparison:
*"Carrion's disease" - 953 hits
*Carrion's disease - 9,960 hits
*Bartonelosis - 25,500 (common misspelling)
*Bartonellosis - 74,300
PubMed comparison:
*"Carrion's disease" - 62 hits
*Carrion's disease - 2334 hits
*Bartonellosis -2358
I think Bartonellosis wins... going to move. Nephron  T|C 01:00, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  

message: http://www.cdc.gov/bartonella/
http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_abstract&pid=S1413-86702004000500001&lng=en&nrm=iso&tlng=en
https://rarediseases.org/rare-diseases/bartonellosis/
http://www.rightdiagnosis.com/medical/carrion_s_disease.htm
Lanie0029 (talk) 20:52, 14 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Potential Sources