lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Blending inheritance

message: This discussion has been settled. Squididdily (talk) 23:33, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: agreed. I added a reference to Mendel's seminal paper on the topic.Squididdily (talk) 23:33, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

text: Sounds good.  I took everyone's advice and left this article on its own -- and expanded it a bit more in an attempt to once and for all bring it out of "stub"-hood and into a full fledged article....Squididdily (talk) 23:33, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge with [[soft inheritance]] 

message: I just want to ask editors that if they're going to contribute to the section "History", that should be written in chronological order, and it shouldn't be tendentious to defend the indefensible, without citing reliable/original sources. 
Thanks in advance.--Goose friend (talk) 03:13, 31 October 2013 (UTC)
replies: text:  A belated reply - I have completely revised the article, and cited it. I've added a footnote about the possible confusion of blending with the thinking of the biometricians about continuous variation, cited to your paper, for which suggestion, many thanks. Chiswick Chap (talk) 12:19, 7 March 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Notice 

message: Before I edited, the article began thus: 
Blending inheritance is a 19th century concept implied by some contemporary theories of evolution
Is the part about implied by contemporary theories true? I couldn't find anything about that in the rest of the article. --Ettrig (talk) 22:04, 10 March 2018 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thanks. Removed. Chiswick Chap (talk) 22:08, 10 March 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  "implied by contemprary theories
Talk:Shin-ochanomizu Station

message: :The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. 
The result of the move request was: moved. The question of whether "Station" should be capitalized was raised here, but if this were to be changed, it would require a broader discussion since it affects many other similar articles, and is currently the subject of a guideline at  (closed by non-admin page mover) Colin M (talk) 14:57, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Shin-Ochanomizu Station →  – Correcting capitalisation of station name (in its proper name, the O should not be capitalised) JaventheAldericky (talk) 01:12, 5 March 2022 (UTC)

text: This is a contested technical request (permalink). GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 15:18, 5 March 2022 (UTC)

text: Note: WikiProject Trains has been notified of this discussion. 🐶 EpicPupper (he/him | talk) 01:45, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

text: Note: WikiProject Japan has been notified of this discussion. 🐶 EpicPupper (he/him | talk) 01:46, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 5 March 2022
Talk:Table of polyhedron dihedral angles

message: Surprisingly ALL of the Catalan solids have a single dihedral angle, even with different types of edges. The last section here can be expanded to all 13 solids, but no time for me for now! (Listed in Williams book in numeric values, but not all exact values given there.) Tom Ruen 05:56, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: In fact, all the duals of the uniform polyhedra have a single dihedral angle. This is a consequence of the fact that their duals (the uniform polyhedra) have all regular faces. (Thanks to Rckrone for explaining it to me at WP:RD/MATH.) Even the two pseudo-uniform polyhedra work. Double sharp (talk) 04:42, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Approximate values for the dihedral angles may be obtained using Stella (except for the hemipolyhedra, which are, however, infinite stellations of another convex polyhedron). Double sharp (talk) 04:43, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Only the duals of Miller's monster and Skilling's figure may pose problems. Double sharp (talk) 04:48, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
Talk:Shimo-kitazawa Station

message: Not sure because my Japanese is not that great, but I think the article is misleading about the arrangement of the station from next year (2013). I've been trying to read some of the announcements that Odakyu is posting, and I thought that the local trains will continue to use the ground-level station but the express trains will be in the tunnel, so the Odakyu station will be divided into two parts. (Also, I don't think that the part about two train lines using unified gates in one station is as rare as the article makes it sound. I can think of a number of stations where that happens. For example, Yoyogi-Uehara (the next major station towards Tokyo) does the same thing with the Odakyu and Chiyoda lines. Shanen (talk) 02:28, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Split of Odakyu Station?
Talk:Dennis Elliott

message: Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: http://www.functionart.com/AM/Artists/ElliottD/ElliottD.html. 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, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that 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) 02:31, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copyright problem removed
Talk:Cylindropuntia bigelovii

message: From the article: "They grow in desert regions at elevations from 30 to 600 m (100 to 2000 ft)." That's a enormous under-estimation on the upper end; anybody who has hiked in even the hills around Tucson (elevation ~2500 ft itself) can attest that they grow and thrive to 3500 ft and beyond (eg., the locally well-known "Teddy Bear Cholla field" on the Pontatoc Ridge trail at around 32 20.3317, -110 54.03863, elevation around 3585 feet). I'm not going to bother fixing this, because it'd just be reverted by some bot-running dumbass.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.200.75.222 (talk • contribs) 
:The elevation figures probably pertain to California. I'll fix it. Cool your jets.--Curtis Clark (talk) 12:32, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Elevation 

message: We used to set these plants on fire in the Boy Scouts, since it was a really easy way to start a campfire. Just knock one over with a shovel and add a spark from your favourite ignition source. They seemed to be covered in some kind of oil to aid combustion. LuminaireX (talk) 23:21, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Flammability 
Talk:Sony CISC

message: How can an article about a division of a company, which is not plubicilly advertised for Company reasons be referenced or Verified. I'm not speaking against the article. I mean what kind of link would suffice to demonstrate what Sony CISC stands for. Anyone?
***
How about this?
http://news.sel.sony.com/en/press_room/corporate_news/release/8485.html
I, CapeDude2005, a former employee of Sony Electronics, Inc., am the author of this page. I worked at this facility for 5 years (well, technically 4 years, 10 months and a few days) and therefore consider myself competent to comment on and discuss this topic. Capedude2005 02:43, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  References or Sources
Talk:Frederic Wakeman

message: This article should probably be moved to Frederic Wakeman, Jr. to distinguish him from his father.--Jiang 11:03, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Disambiguation 

message: http://catdir.loc.gov/catdir/samples/cam031/95044122.pdf
http://books.google.com/books?id=TbpNjDlPSq0C&printsec=frontcover&dq=inauthor:%22Frederic+E.+Wakeman%22&hl=en&sa=X&ei=P8PZUK2uOtGC0QHSgoGwDQ&ved=0CFQQ6AEwBA#v=onepage&q&f=false
http://books.google.com/books?id=vT5GrHv4VcMC&printsec=frontcover&dq=inauthor:%22Frederic+E.+Wakeman%22&hl=en&sa=X&ei=WM_ZULrbCOWA0AGZqIGQBg&ved=0CFcQ6AEwBQ#v=onepage&q&f=false
http://books.google.com/books?id=ORMNHQGDuBgC&printsec=frontcover&dq=inauthor:%22Frederic+E.+Wakeman%22&hl=en&sa=X&ei=WM_ZULrbCOWA0AGZqIGQBg&ved=0CDcQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q&f=false
http://books.google.com/books?id=GNLWtjV_MDwC&printsec=frontcover&dq=inauthor:%22Frederic+E.+Wakeman%22&hl=en&sa=X&ei=WM_ZULrbCOWA0AGZqIGQBg&ved=0CD0Q6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q&f=false
http://books.google.com/books?id=rDjoJNdZCuMC&printsec=frontcover&dq=inauthor:%22Frederic+E.+Wakeman%22&hl=en&sa=X&ei=WM_ZULrbCOWA0AGZqIGQBg&ved=0CEQQ6AEwAg#v=onepage&q&f=false
http://books.google.com/books?id=NCgXTcXH-3MC&printsec=frontcover&dq=inauthor:%22Frederic+E.+Wakeman%22&hl=en&sa=X&ei=WM_ZULrbCOWA0AGZqIGQBg&ved=0CEsQ6AEwAw#v=onepage&q&f=false
http://books.google.com/books?id=jYYYQYK6FAYC&printsec=frontcover&dq=inauthor:%22Frederic+E.+Wakeman%22&hl=en&sa=X&ei=WM_ZULrbCOWA0AGZqIGQBg&ved=0CF0Q6AEwBg#v=onepage&q&f=false
http://books.google.com/books?id=8nXLwSG2O8AC&printsec=frontcover&dq=inauthor:%22Frederic+E.+Wakeman%22&hl=en&sa=X&ei=WM_ZULrbCOWA0AGZqIGQBg&ved=0CGIQ6AEwBw#v=onepage&q&f=false
http://books.google.com/books?id=ORBmFSFcJKoC&printsec=frontcover&dq=inauthor:%22Frederic+Wakeman%22&hl=en&sa=X&ei=QNPZUIrrH4XB0AHeq4GAAw&ved=0CDgQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q&f=false
Rajmaan (talk) 16:26, 25 December 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: POsting unexplained links is a waste of your time! ch (talk) 23:07, 26 May 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Works by Wakeman 

message: The mention of titles in the section of the article discussing the arc of his interests does not obviate the need for a list with full citations. The list also includes items not mentioned in the text (a list with only items not mentioned in the text would make no sense). ch (talk) 23:17, 26 May 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Major Publications
Talk:Ethiopian Intellectual Property Office

message: I'm doing POV tag cleanup. Whenever an POV tag is placed, it is necessary to also post a message in the discussion section stating clearly why it is thought the article does not comply with POV guidelines, and suggestions for how to improve it. This permits discussion and consensus among editors. This is a drive-by tag, which is discouraged in WP, and it shall be removed. Future tags should have discussion posted as to why the tag was placed, and how the topic might be improved. Better yet, edit the topic yourself with the improvements. This statement is not a judgement of content, it is only a cleanup of frivolously and/or arbitrarily placed tags. No discussion, no tag.Jjdon (talk) 18:29, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  POV Tags
Talk:Public Transport Council

message: Wikipedia articles should use reliable published sources. Wikipedia:Reliable sources explains this. Please cite your sources or rewrite from a neutral point of view. Thank you. —Sengkang 06:12, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Since you are unable to re-edit it without reverting to your old edits, I have made copyedits with proper referencing. —Sengkang 17:51, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

text: Logic or not, wikipedia grows on sourced comments, not on personal views. I just demonstrated this by adding four comments, all of which were sourced, and that is the way to go as far as wikipolicies are concerned.--Huaiwei 07:14, 7 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Removed edits
Talk:The New Legend of Shaolin

message: This article has had its infobox tag removed by a cleanup using AWB.
Any concerns please leave me a message at my talk page. RWardy 21:00, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removal of "needs infobox" tag 

message: I added a complete-rewrite tag because, frankly, this article is appalling. Contradictory information, original research, and trivia - in the lead paragraph! The quality of language used is also poor, and there are not one but two trivia sections... ugh.
Anyway hoping that this is enough justification for adding the tag, I will make necessary changes shortly, unless someone else does first. Leushenko (talk) 12:57, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cleanup
Talk:Apartment hotel

message: The two seem to recover the same notion and service, only the name can change from country to country, for intstance in France the name is rather Appart hotel while in the US it's Extended stay hotel, we just need to mention the different names in the introduction.--Khalid hassani 17:39, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge with [[Extended stay hotel]] 

message: is the image of the hugo hotel appropriate for this article? the hugo has been abandoned for years, and does not show an apartment hotel. when it was operational, it was an SRO. i propose removal of the image. Badmachine (talk) 05:50, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  hugo hotel image 

message: This concerns POV tag cleanup.  Whenever an POV tag is placed, it is necessary to also post a message in the discussion section stating clearly why it is thought the article does not comply with POV guidelines, and suggestions for how to improve it.  This permits discussion and consensus among editors.  From WP tag policy: Drive-by tagging is strongly discouraged. The editor who adds the tag must address the issues on the talk page, pointing to specific issues that are actionable within the content policies, namely Wikipedia:Neutral point of view, Wikipedia:Verifiability, Wikipedia:No original research and Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons. Simply being of the opinion that a page is not neutral is not sufficient to justify the addition of the tag. Tags should be added as a last resort.  Better yet, edit the topic yourself with the improvements.  This statement is not a judgement of content, it is only a cleanup of frivolously and/or arbitrarily placed tags.  No discussion, no tag.Jjdon (talk) 21:12, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  POV tag 

message: There is no such term in common parlance in American English.
Removed to talk from main article. Moscowamerican (talk) 10:22, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: '''aparthotel'''/'''apartel''',
Talk:Naked Weapon

message: what's with the korean poster for a hong kong movie??? can someone find a more appropriate picture for this please? Janechii 07:24, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: can we use this one? http://ent.tom.com/images/yoyo/movie/nakedweapon/nakedweapon.jpg Janechii 07:41, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Korean poster

message: Please put the Plot Details Warning Template. --190.25.49.17 (talk) 17:24, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Plot warning
Talk:AS9100

message: AS9100 list of registered companies  146.145.185.146 20:40, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  AS9100 list of registered companies 

message: ISO9000:2005 "Quality management systems - Fundamentals and vocabulary". 
 
ISO9001:2008 "Quality management systems - Requirements".  
The article quotes ISO9000 - is this correct or should it be ISO9001:2008 (or something else?)  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 20.133.0.13 (talk) 15:31, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  ISO9000 v ISO9001 

message: "Major aerospace manufacturers and suppliers worldwide require compliance and/or registration to AS9100 as a condition of doing business with them."
The two references don't support this claim.Uziel302 (talk) 16:19, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: References not supporting claim
Talk:Rafidah Aziz

message: I deleted the copy of Michael Backman's article because it's Michael's opinion and it's unencyclopedic because it is POV. Some of the arguments might be true but the article is too POV. Anyway, it is against Wikipedia's policy to copy articles from other websites to wikipedia.Wai Hong (talk) 09:59, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Michael Backman
Talk:Passed pawn

message: At the end of the article, I put a diagram that's intended to illustrate four different examples of strong far-advanced passed pawns. The board should have bold black lines added to it to divide it into four 4x4 quadrants -- just like the diagram illustrating the Stalemate article.  This is, however, beyond my limited technical abilities. Can someone please take care of this? Krakatoa 06:37, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: One and a half years later :) Lyctc (talk) 20:23, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Can someone fix the diagram? 

message: The text says "In both the first and second diagrams, White's b and c pawns are connected passed pawns" but in the second diagram white doesn't even have a pawn on the B file. I assume this is an error (but am not an expert at chess myself ;-) )
: Good catch.  There must have been another diagram at one time that was deleted, without changing the text.  Bubba73 (talk), 05:56, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Error in description of connected passed pawns? 

message: The link to "italiano" in the Languages box links to "Pedone isolato", which is actually an isolated pawn, not a passed pawn. I suggest this is fixed, with the link pointing to the more appropriate http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pedone_passato#Pedone_passato . I'd do it myself, but being a casual user, I don't know how. :p 93.151.231.139 (talk) 07:53, 15 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks, I've made the fix.  If you are curious about what is required, this is the diff. Quale (talk) 15:20, 15 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Error in the "Languages" Box 

message: Whoever wrote this page did not pass grade school.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.52.216.57 (talk) 15:13, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Arbitrary insult

message: The knight definitely isn't awkward if it has directly blockaded a non-rook pawn. It suffers no loss of mobility whereas the pawn is stuck. We should change the article to not unconditionally say that the knight is "awkward" when dealing with passed pawns.--Jasper Deng (talk) 02:11, 23 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Awkwardness of the knight
Talk:Franchot Tone

message: What is the basis for the statement that he was blacklisted? I can find no generally available reference of blacklisting or political activism. His lack of work during the 50's could as easily have been the result of his professional setbacks and personal problems.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rsteinmetz70112 (talk • contribs) 07:12, 9 November 2012 (UTC)
replies: text:  or maybe because he was gay?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 148.87.19.194 (talk) 23:02, 11 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  blacklisting? 

message: How do you pronounce "Franchot"?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 168.70.86.115 (talk) 13:12, 2 July 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: It is pronounced "Fran-cho", see https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ExTwfxumidE Afrika Boombatta (talk) 12:10, 17 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pronunciation? 

message: The entry in Feb 27 Day of the Year states he was a singer. I find only a younger man under Francot Tone song, and it's ABOUT Tone.Stuartkau (talk) 02:27, 28 February 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Singer? 

message: There is not even one WW1 movie in the filmography at all. Only two WW1 films are mentioned in the filmography or article text, and in fact more ww2 films than ww1 films are mentioned. Why does the text say that he was in many ww1 movies? Also what is the significance of "pre-code" here? It seems a silly addition by a monomaniac. Afrika Boombatta (talk) 12:07, 17 February 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Your edit summary claims to have Restored removed content, piped links and backing citations, along with removing incorrect formatting of pronunciation. This seems to be deceptive. As noted above, the claim that Franchot Tone was in "many ww1 movies" is contradicted by the filmography in the same article. Also, your edit summary claims you have restored backing citations, but you've restored no backing citations. You've also removed all content related to pronunciation, not merely incorrect formatting. Afrika Boombatta (talk) 00:56, 18 February 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: A very careful inspection of the filmography concludes that there are two WW1 movies in the filmography, Today We Live and Three Comrades (1938 film). There are several more gangster films, comedy films, and romance films, and also more ww2 films, than there are ww1 films, so the initial query of why "many" remains unanswered. No justification for including the words "Pre-code" has been offered. Afrika Boombatta (talk) 01:18, 18 February 2023 (UTC)

text: Your edit summary did not correctly summarise your edit. This article on film censorship is not related to the career of Franchot Tone, and does not merit a link from the lead section of this article. Afrika Boombatta (talk) 02:55, 18 February 2023 (UTC)

text: Thank you for your efforts. Afrika Boombatta (talk) 02:55, 18 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Many WW1 Movies such as?
Talk:Newport News High School

message: I have been looking for notable alumni and faculty.  Any suggestions?Natwebb (talk) 03:51, 30 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Editing 
Talk:Dera Bassi

message: Are these both referring to the same location? If so, maybe the article should mention the alternative English spelling. Bus stop (talk) 18:02, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Derabassi/Dera Bassi 

message: Both of these sections refer to Chandigarh places of interest and transport. Can these sections be deleted?
Clapurhands (talk) 04:57, 21 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Places of Interest and Transport
Talk:Andrea Baldini

message: Should the foil Grand Prix medals really be listed in the infobox? These are not listed on pages for any other fencers as far as I can tell. Also, since there are several Grand Prix events per year, they really don't seem notable enough to go alongside Euro Championships, World Championships, Olympics, and etc.
TheLabryinth (talk) 20:35, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Grand Prix medals in infobox 
Talk:Bryan Johnson (comic book writer)

message: Small error at the bottom where it says:
"His name was used in "Dogma", in reference to a little boy that "urinated" in Bethany's hair (the boy was said to have died of leukemia"
 - The little boy actually "urinated" in Bethany's "hand" when they were 5 yrs old, not hair.
Allen
Bryan Johnson was not the basis for Randall in clerks. Randall is Walt Flannagan  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.5.115.17 (talk) 06:34, 1 October 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: I have found a secret stash of Gary Brown's acceptance letters to dark horse and marvel and DC and a bunch of his sketch drawings and sketch pads I will send pictures
I'm 64.224.84.136 (talk) 12:08, 11 July 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gary Brown 

message: I'm not BJ, but I have seen the man personally, and I think he's due maybe an updated picture because he looks substantially different in 2024 than he did in 2012. https://twitter.com/TellEmSteveDave/status/1155080012263038977 this would suffice as a fairly modern picture. Looks almost exactly like he did on the Cruise in January. 98.122.241.168 (talk) 01:14, 9 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  New Picture.