lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Netherton

message: moved the link relating to a Netherton community in/near Dudley to the
Dudley page. PaulHammond 04:41, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC)

message: I came to this page expecting to find a link to Netherton syndrome, but I was surprised not to find one, and even more surprised to find that the page actually did exist, even though there's no link to it here.  I'm not sure how best to add this link.  
24.57.239.43 (talk) 02:13, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Netherton syndrome
Category talk:Filipino cuisine

message: argh! I only saw the link to "Category:Philippine cuisine" after I created this category. I'll leave it up to others to decide which category should be authoritative and delete/reorganize appropriately... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Greenmoss (talk • contribs) 05:11, 9 January 2005
:IMHO, we should use Philippine cuisine. Although Filipino cuisine is more popular online (Google returns 197,000 hits for the phrase with quotes) vs. "Philippine cuisine" (just 16,500 hits), we know that there are minority sectors in our country who do not consider themselves Filipino. Therefore if we use "Filipino cuisine" vs. "Philippine cuisine", we are automatically putting ourselves up for debate on whether, for example, Tausug cuisine should be put under "Filipino cuisine" (they don't consider themselves Filipino).
:Also, and the weighter reason is, the main article for this category is Cuisine of the Philippines, not "Cuisine of the Filipinos".
:--Bentong Isles 06:00, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: At the moment, :Category:Phillippine cuisine does not exist. --GentlemanGhost (talk) 01:42, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Philippine vs. Filipino cuisine
Talk:Peterborough/Archive 1

message: While exploring towns near my home, I came across this nice template for towns of the East of England.  I just added it to the bottom of Peterborough, which is how I came to be here.
I can see that some people have put quite a bit of work into designing info boxes and templates, but the text here is much smaller than that at Peterborough.  Hopefully, the text here can go there with few problems, and the info boxes might just drop onto that page - but it's a bigger job than I'm up to doing right now.
:I'd previously considered suggesting a merge with Peterborough, but on reviewing the various talk and page histories, I came to the conclusion that the separation was quite deliberate. However, it is confusing that the City of Peterborough is the area and Peterborough is the town, so both articles could do more to clarify their relation to each other. -- Solipsist 10:50, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: It is becoming clear these articles should merge as there is conflict between them. Both are starting with text like "Peterborough is a city....". This should not be so. Either Peterborough is a place in the City of Peterborough (2 articles) or Peterborough is a city... (1 article). MRSC 14:04, 24 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge with article at [[Peterborough]]
Talk:Private company

message: The problem I see is that the term "private company" is sometimes used to refer to any company in the private sector (as opposed to a government agency, a government-owned corporation, a trade union, etc.).  See, for example, the usage in Exploitation#Organizational exploitation, the first entry on "What links here" for this article.  I think that "privately held company" would be a better article title.  Either way, of course, whichever title isn't used should be a redirect to the other.  Is there any objection to my moving the article? JamesMLane 06:10, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I do object to moving the article.  A publicly-held company (i.e. shares publicly traded) is still considered a "private company" (as in not owned by the state).  In addition, the two articles cover completely different topics.  If you're going to merge things, I'd do some name shuffling, and retain both articles.  This should be "privately-held company", and the other should take this article's title, or a new name should be devised entirely. SchuminWeb (Talk) 10:41, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Then again, looking a second time, let's merge them into an entirely new article and make BOTH articles redirects.  SchuminWeb (Talk) 10:44, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Private or privately held?

message: I'm not well read on US or UK corporations law, but in Australia this sort of company is technically refered to as a proprietry company. If a company is not a proprietry company then it is a public company. A company owned by the government would then be refered to as a government owned company or state owned company. Then a private company is a non-government owned company. So to summarise:
*Proprietry company - small, privately held company.
*Public company - large, privately held company.
*Government owned company - self explanatory.
*Private company - all private sector companies.
If something could be done to reorganise it into those 4 categories, then I think this problem would be solved. Bambul 12:58, 31 Jan 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Proprietry company
Talk:Urban spelunker

message: Does this term merit a separate article? I think it would be better as a sentence or two in the urban exploration article. Unless there's something significantly different between an urban spelunker and a garden-variety urban explorer (other than the name), I'm inclined to VfD this and add it as a note in urban exploration. Thoughts? jdb ❋ 06:11, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, no responses. I'm VfDing this. jdb ❋ 07:23, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  Never mind -- it just occured to me that a better solution would be just to redir it to UE. Done. jdb ❋ 07:29, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Talk:Shareholders' equity

message: Shareholder equity was moved here. It's not the shareholder equity. The shareholders are not equity, they're flesh and blood. It's the shareholder's equity.--Jerryseinfeld 06:14, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Moved

message: If the calculation is : retained earnings from the prior year + net income of the year at hand (revenues - expenses) - dividends paid during the year at hand , What about the use of the earnings by the compnay to fund a future investment or expansion ?? Isn't that a withdrawl from the earnings and therefore it reduces the shareholder's equity like: retained earnings from the prior year + net income of the year at hand (revenues - expenses) - dividends paid during the year at hand - Withdrawls by the company ?? Is that right ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 06:34, 9 October 2006 (talk) 84.36.143.167 
Answer.  You are confusing cash flows with revenues/expenses.  Paying money (asset='cash' decreases) to build a long-term plant (asset='fixed asset' increases) just changes two items on the Balance Sheet.  There is no effect on the Equity.  The 'equation' that was given is wrong.  I have corrected it.Retail Investor 02:36, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Use of earnings

message: This article reads like it was imperfectly translated out of another language.  Can someone who actually understands how this term is used in English-speaking countries' accounting rules please fix it?  121a0012 21:36, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Better translation
Talk:Hans Zassenhaus

message: from VfD:
Apparent vanity. Uncle G 06:28, 2005 Jan 9 (UTC)
* "Article" is nothing more than a link to a memorial page for an Ohio State math prof who died in 1991.  Delete unless some indication of notability shows up.  Edeans 19:17, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: I changed the article title from "Hans Julius Zassenhaus" to "Hans Zassenhaus".  Reason:  He was never known by his middle name.  In the mathematical literature he is "Hans Zassenhaus" or less frequently "Hans J. Zassenhaus".  See Mathematical Reviews, i.e., MathSciNet.  Besides, I know several people that knew him, and they always refer to him as "Hans Zassenhaus"; I verified today with one of those people that he never used "Julius".  I am also changing the links that mention him as "Hans Julius Zassenhaus" to eliminate "Julius", for this reason. Zaslav (talk) 04:33, 13 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article title: no Julius
Talk:Panaphonics

message: from VfD: 
Simpson's sub-trivia DCEdwards1966 06:34, Jan 9, 2005 (UTC)
*Merge Merge this article. Just like Homer's annoyed grunt, more phrases from the Simpsons are finding its way into colloquial speech, and this article is well-written and factual enough to deserve a place at Wikipedia, in the section of Simpsons made-up words. Fourlittlediamonds
*Merge with Simpsons article.
*Delete DJ Clayworth 06:55, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Talk:Jules and Mimi

message: from VfD: 
An imaginary soap opera from Sex and the City. DCEdwards1966 06:38, Jan 9, 2005 (UTC).
* Delete. I'm not against "show within shows" being given articles (see Radioactive Man which I voted to keep), but there's too little here to justify an article, and what's here is incomplete. It certainly shouldn't be linked to a list of real soap operas (I'll go remove that right now). 23skidoo 16:08, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: This article has now been merged per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jules and Mimi (2nd nomination). CanadianCaesar Et tu, Brute? 06:33, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
Talk:Garut Regency

message: I'm sorry. What does "Dalem Cipeujeuh", mean. I've tried googling it but gave up after a little search. Someone should explain what is mean by "his call of Dalem Cipeujeuh." — Preceding unsigned comment added by Whippersnapper1 (talk • contribs) 22:13, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Dalem Cipeujeuh
Talk:Augsburg University

message: Does anyone know the various names of the school in it history. I mean did it start out as Augsburg Seminary ? when did they change it to Augsburg College and anything between the twoSmith03 20:39, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: History

message: What do readers gain from reading a list of university presidents with no context or explanation? "University has had presidents" is not helpful or interesting information. ElKevbo (talk) 03:10, 2 September 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with your point that, what do we intend?  To remove all such lists from all the bloated University pages?  However, I'd suggest that this section be demoted toward the bottom of the article. Like others place it. Jax MN (talk) 04:08, 2 September 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: I think It would also help to convert the table to a bullet list. Tables are more intrusive and draw more attention to themselves. Indyguy (talk) 14:05, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

text: Yes, it would be good to remove similar lists of names that have no context or explanatory power from other articles. No, if there is a consensus to keep this information in the article then it should not be relegated to a disparate section at the end of the article; this (disconnected and unexplained) is clearly part of the institution of the history so it belongs in that section. ElKevbo (talk) 03:52, 6 September 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  List of university presidents
Talk:Dress-up

message: from VfD:
I doubt there's anything encyclopedic to be said about the game of "dress-up".
*Delete Dbenbenn 07:33, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC)

message: An article about virtual dress-up: https://killscreen.com/articles/awfulness-and-importance-dress-game/
Maybe it actually needs an article in itself, as it is a video game genre. This article would be about the physical game of dressing up, with references and link to both “Paper doll” and ”Dress-up video game”. 
Nclm (talk) 09:01, 12 March 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Virtual 
Talk:Jatiya Sangsad Bhaban

message: Hi People,
First thanks to Ragib for starting this article. I created a basic structure to this article and used outer resources and my own knowledge to create a good start point to make this an article worth being featured! :)
Please feel free to let me know of any edits you think are necessary. Kindly avoid deleting entire sections totally. Instead, put ideas in the discussion before taking major actions.
Urnonav 08:51, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Muhammed edh-Dhib

message: I put this page on attention as the additional information is rather inflammatory and is unsubstantiated as far as I can tell. -- mordemur 09:59, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I have removed  and deleted the content of 219.95.229.167's edit. Though there are conspiracy theories that suggest the fabrication of the Dead Sea Scrolls, I don't believe any of them regard Muhammed edh-Dhib as the actual fabricator. The claim of being a Muslim supremacist also appears to be baseless. --mordemur 05:39, 23 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Talk:Leverage (finance)

message: how I make more profit by letting money 105.225.105.107 (talk) 20:35, 26 November 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  financial 

message: Other articles link here to a deleted section called "Leverage ratio", but it doesn't exist. It should: the 2008 crisis section refers to Lehman Brothers' leverage ratio. Sometimes there is an obvious section to which a WP:anchor  can be attached but I don't see one. Would someone who knows the subject resolve, please? 𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 16:28, 24 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Leverage ratio
Talk:Rudolf Augstein

message: I heard that as a young man he wrote for some Nazi paper. Is it true ?
--Molobo 17:09, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Can somebody confirm this : 
Talk:Valhalla (comics)

message: Old norse? Modern scandinavian is quite different from old norse...
:Yeah, I'm a bit sceptical about that myself. But I guess that it might be enough for someone to read the Icelandic translation, and since i don't know enough about that I didn't remove it from the article when I rewrote it. Amphis 21:30, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It still is far-fetched. Also, the info is redundant anyway. I delete it and see if someone objects. 惑乱 分からん 12:42, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Old Norse?

message: I've made a few links to the relevant Nordic Myths. I think that the difference between the myths and the comic book adaptations are worth elaborating on Aastrup 10:33, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Links and elaboration

message: I just reverted the page to an older version, changed serveral headlines back to what they were before. History is a better headline than Historical fiction, Norse myth is hardly historical and the paragraph is about the history of the comics. Valhalla as an animated film has nothing to do with TV debut. There was made a stamp with Valhalla motif. And the cards are playing cards, not trading cards  Eldestone 09:04, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Reverted to older version

message: Possibly the article should be moved to "Valhalla (comics)", in analogy with several other articles. I don't think there are many links that needs correcting, anyway... 惑乱 分からん * \)/ (\ (< \) (2 /) /)/ * 17:05, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Might be better if an admin did the move, to preserve the history, though. 惑乱 Wakuran (talk) 03:08, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I've done the moves, in line with WP:NCC. (Emperor (talk) 22:47, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Move article

message: I think "giants" is a very bad translation of "Jætte". Why not go with Yaetir or "forces of chaos" instead.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.215.69.198 (talk) 19:47, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, we could have Jötunn, with a link. Your other proposals don't seem that appropriate to me. 惑乱 Wakuran (talk) 11:55, 4 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Giants?

message: Apparently, there are uncertainties whether the last book will be translated into Swedish. The series has motly sold reasonably and has a dedicated cult following, so there are however some different editors bidding for the publishing rights, at the meantime. I don't know about the Norwegian translation. 惑乱 Wakuran (talk) 23:25, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Apparently, the rights have now been bought by another (yet secret) publisher, thankfully. 惑乱 Wakuran (talk) 19:15, 7 November 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The least album has now been published in Swedish by "Ekholm och Tegebjer". 惑乱 Wakuran (talk) 09:18, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Scandinavian translations

message: Should we include a bit about the new Danish live action feature film adaptation coming out in 2019? Here's the announcement in English https://www.dfi.dk/english/news/fenar-ahmad-making-adventure-film-valhalla --Luka1184 (talk) 14:52, 1 December 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Live action adaptation
Talk:Portland Harbour

message: NO sign of 
 
so insert this pic.  Hope it's the right portland.... Rich Farmbrough 12:54, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Untitled

message: I am surprised that no mention is made in the "history" section of the construction of the artificial harbour at Cherbourg, just across the Channel at approxiomately the same time. Construction of the Cherbourg harbour must surely have been a spur to the construction of Portland Harbour.
Incidentally, I believe that the harbour at Ras Laffan, in Qatar, is now the largest artificial harbour in the world, so that Portland Harbour is only the third largest.
Franciscus montmartinensis (talk) 22:13, 4 October 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: You need reliable and sourced references before changing the article. Adding content with WP:POV edits and comments, such as "I believe" is not acceptable. Thank you, David J Johnson (talk) 17:36, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  No mention of Cherbourg? 

message: I thought I would post here as other editors may be more knowledgeable than me. The Port of Jebel Ali is noted on Wikipedia as being the world's "largest man-made harbour", which would suggest Portland is the fourth rather than third as noted on this page? Ajsmith141 (talk) 19:08, 7 January 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: I've replaced the content in the lede with a more general statement and moved the specific content to the main body. Absolutelypuremilk (talk) 16:28, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Third largest manmade harbour
Talk:Tidal wave

message: There is a way to distinguish a tsunami from a tidal bore - the tsunami is usually a lot higher, it travels a lot faster than any tidal bore and a tidal bore can be predicted years in advance. A tsunami can only be pedicted a few hours before it arrives. With respect to the claim that the tsunam of 26th December 2004 wa sonly inches high I witnessed it a close hand and can assure you that it was not inches high - it was an estimated 10 metres high moving at a velocity of approximately 283 m per second, and each cubic metre of ocean impacted with a force of approximately 3.43 x 108 Newtons m2 which is equivalent to 343 million tonnes per metre square.  The Geologist (talk) 18:53, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Tsunami and tidal bores

message: :"tsunami" ... means harbor wave in Japanese.
Where's the source? For sure, (tsunami) literally means harbor wave in Kanji. However in actual Japanese it does not mean harbor wave. No ambiguity. --219.167.78.17 21:13, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  harbor wave 

message: : a wave in the magnitude of the tide (and larger tidal waves). http://books.google.com.vn/books?id=VXgrAAAAYAAJ&dq=%22tidal%20wave%22&pg=PA293#v=onepage&q=%22tidal%20wave%22&f=false Although of differing origin to a normal tidal wave it was/is still associated as a name for the event waves after earthquakes.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.73.98.217 (talk) 13:06, 12 April 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  tidal(size) wave
Talk:Radioactive Man (The Simpsons character)

message: wtf is this bongo comics shit? if there's a knock-off of the simpsons with its own universe, it should be in its own article.
Bongo Comics, for this anonymous user, is a licensed user of the Simpsons Intellectual property.  It was founded by Matt Groening and a couple of other folks, and one of their products is a comic series about well, Radioactive Man.  Probably a bit too late, but just in case somebody else wonders what's going on.  FrozenPurpleCube 22:46, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  bongo comics? 

message: Should someone put that up and Atom is also Atom Ant's catchphrase?  Treynate2 22:56, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It says in the link that Atom's catchphrase and battle cry was: 'Up and At 'em, Atom Ant!' so no --Rubber cat 07:04, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Up and Atom 

message: That "#711" link is faulty.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.233.226.126 (talk) 01:06, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Faulty Link 

message: On one of the DVD commentaries (maybe for the Radioactive Man movie episode), Matt Groening sites that Radioactive Man was created for a comic book hero for Bart to idolize and that he designed to look like Homer, who is in fact is a 'radioactive man.'  So if someone wants to write that up in a nicer fashion and site it, by all means.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.226.112.194 (talk) 23:26, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Creation Story
Talk:List of disasters in Great Britain and Ireland by death toll

message: Apparently my browser search wasn't working, lol. Sorry. Previous comments suggesting missing mining disasters removed as they are indeed listed. 51.6.23.116 (talk) 15:31, 3 March 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mining disasters 

message: Why are Ireland and the UK lumped together again? In case you don't know, the answer is that the British imperialist mindset is incapable of recognizing or accepting that the Irish want no connection with Britain. 188.65.190.78 (talk) 15:50, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Nobody is stopping you from writing a separate article.--Llewee (talk) 10:42, 23 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Inclusion of Ireland in article.
Category talk:Stage terminology

message: Note: Stage terminology has been used rather than the probably preferable term of Theatre terminology due to the alternate spellings of the latter word. --Vamp:Willow 15:23, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC)

message: Why is "butterfly" listed here?  It is a cinema term, and has no reference to theatre. Hans404 (talk) 07:07, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Butterfly (Lighting)
Talk:Trip hop

message: I don't think it's correct for "chillhop" to redirect here, it's a fairly distinct genre of music with really very little in common with trip, at least to my layman's ears.
The fact chillhop isn't mentioned once in the article supports this. I'd argue that a new article be made.
78.149.215.16 (talk) 23:28, 13 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Chillhop redirtect 

message: I think it may grow ever trickier to incorporate new genre names, like "chillhop", into wikipedia, since you need major music media to define them, and we barely have major music media anymore.
If the link from "chillhop" still exists, it should either be omitted, or the genre defined using the correct sources and citations, and it's relationship to trip-hop defined clearly in the article. 
I strongly suspect "chillhop" is a completely popular term, i.e. something defined by users and makers, in playlists and such, and therefore pretty impossible to define using wikipedia terms. 
--Sveinbjornpalsson (talk) 15:30, 30 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  chillhop?