lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Oregon

message: why doesn't Education In Oregon have its own article? literally the worst education in the USA and the world.
https://www.kgw.com/article/news/investigations/oregon-has-one-of-shortest-school-years-in-us/283-560012138 2601:646:9A80:EA0:685D:2037:B94:C654 (talk) 20:00, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: If you have reliable sources backing your statement (that page is geowalled, so I can't say whether it does), feel free to add it to Oregon#Education. The Crab Who Played With The Sea (talk) 01:15, 4 August 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Education In Oregon  

message: The state’s location would be better described as “in the Pacific Northwest region *and* the Western United States.” Saying “the Pacific Northwest region *of* the Western United States implies that the former is nested geographically within the latter. It is not, as the PNW, as the term is usually understood locally, also includes part of Canada. N. Pharris (talk) 21:20, 13 January 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Yep, and also it's just awkward wording. I'm going to edit accordingly. Steven Walling • talk 19:12, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Location 

message: The article is mildly to very out of date in portions.
The list of top businesses is from 2016.
Until a revision I did today, the number of Electoral College votes was based on the 2010 US Census.  2601:1C0:CF00:41B0:9DDB:FDD7:3F44:2916 (talk) 04:57, 13 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Many portions are out of date 

message: Nothing to say about Greater Idaho? 2A02:908:C38:D3A0:0:0:0:38EC (talk) 08:18, 19 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Greater Idaho 

message: What is Oregon? At first I would expect a map. There is not 1 of any type.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.23.68.137 (talk) 18:33, 1 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Oregon Map? 

message: We (Oregon) have a State microbe. It's brewers yeast. Should that be listed here? 71.63.222.48 (talk) 18:59, 4 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Living Insignia  

message: Hey, there isn't a transportation section at all. Could somebody fix this? I'm not too great at citing or anything, as I've only ever done one edit, and that was changing a single word. Maybe this Wikipedia article (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rail_transportation_in_Oregon) can be used for the sub-section about the railways of Oregon?TheFluffyProto (talk) 18:30, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Missing section
Talk:List of American films of 1987

message: 07-Oct-2008: I have reformatted "List of American films of 1987" to have fewer wrapped lines (as displayed on 800x600 screens) and include numerous cast members (for all films in Table A).  The rows in Table A have narrow colums to fit the side navbox:
:* Genre/Note combined/widened as 10% (so old Notes column unused as 1%);
:* the Table-A name columns are Title=27%, Director=20%, Cast=30%.
The other tables have column widths: Title=24% Director=19% Cast=35% Genre=17%, and relabeled "Notes" as "Note" with width 5%. As typical, several rows had incorrect columns:
:* short rows at "Batteries not included" & "Broadcast News";
:* extra columns at "The Chipmunk Adventure" & "Dirty Dancing".
Also, I put subrow notes for long text under the "Note" column:
:* for "Dirty Dancing", put best-song title as subrow text;
:* for "The Last Emperor", put best-picture text on subrow;
:* for "Moonstruck", put best-actress text on subrow.
This is a typical film-year article, where adding the director/cast names for 15 films took almost 1 hour to expand, plus time to edit other text. The reformatting reduces line wrapping for users with 800x600 screens, but wider-screens have ample column space. -Wikid77 (talk) 17:52, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Reformatted in October 2008
Talk:Oh! Edo Rocket

message: *Mania.com DVD season 1 part 1 Mania.com DVD season 1 part 2
*ANN DVD S1 part 1 ANN DVD S1 part 2 Shelf Life S1 Part 1 Shelf Life S1 Part 2
*AICN
*Active Anime S1 Part 1
--KrebMarkt (talk) 13:10, 31 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Review(s) 

message: I think some false information may have made it's way into this article. Would someone familiar with the subject please check it out? – Allen4names 07:59, 5 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  False info?
Talk:Great Thessaloniki Fire of 1917

message: This article is entirely within the Greek official cant and amounts to nationalist propaganda. Among the unresolved questions was the motive of the Venizelos dictatorship'd refusal to allow the Jews to rebuild their neighborhoods.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.111.71.197 (talk) 05:32, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The fire was deliberate. Salonica was a Sephardim city, not a Greek one, and the occupation government could not allow that. It was ethnic cleansing.
There is no nationalist POV here! Venizelos' "refusal to allow the Jews to rebuild their neighborhoods" that was also Venizelos' refusal to allow the Christians and Turkish to rebuild their neighborhoods. Behind this "refusal" there was the will to renovate the city's town plan. The Ernest Hébrard plan, that followed the fire totally changed all city regions, Jewish, Christian and Muslim burned and unburned (except from Ano Poli-upper city region). What seems POV to me is that "Venizelos dictatorship". Greece has seen dictators, but Venizelos was not one of them.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.128.241.129 (talk) 17:47, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: POV
Talk:Azerbaijan–Israel relations

message: Reverted an inappropriate anon IP edit, which replaced the word secular with highly cultured and civilised and also added POV statement about executing people without sources. Discuss your edits here. Atabek 19:05, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Added a reference regarding to the actual percentage size of currently occupied territory. Atabek 23:43, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

text: To anonymous editor: both Azerbaijan and Israel are secular nations, and that's what the source cited emphasizes. If you would like to add pro-Western nations, that's fine too, so I added that fragment also. Thanks. Atabek (talk) 16:11, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I dont know who the anon was bur s/he is right. Israel is not a secular state, it has Judaism as its state religion. In many states one religion is dominant but few have state religions. These are for example Israel and Judaism, Vatican and Catholicism, Iran and Shiism etc...--Babakexorramdin (talk) 02:05, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

text: Not sure, why sourced material was removed  from the article without any discussion. Restoring the edit as it contains important references. Atabek (talk) 21:21, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: [Untitled]

message: Yesterday, I reverted this series of edits which, when taken together, constituted the removal of nearly an entire subsection, including sourced material. Along with reverting the edits, I notified their talk page, that removing sourced material was not constructive editing, at which point I noticed that I was not the first to do so: three months ago, Firestar464 gave them a similar notice, also for this page. Shortly after I restored the removed content, my edit was reverted without explanation by ARandomGuy12345. I am adding this section in the hopes that I can avoid potential edit warring, and I welcome ARandomGuy12345's explanation for why they reverted my edit (which I presently still believe to have been correct on my part). Andrew11374265 (talk) 01:46, 14 February 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Correction: User:Arandomguy12345. Firestar464 (talk) 03:45, 14 February 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removal of sourced material – February 2021
Talk:List of American films of 1975

message: This series of pages is listed as "List of American films of..."
But there are also British films included (by mistake or what?). Surely this can't be right.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 143.159.128.106 (talk) 11:51, 30 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  American films? 

message: The film Barry Lyndon, on its page, is listed as an American and British film from 1975. Does it belong on this list?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2606:69C0:5120:3108:55BC:E068:FEB4:DC27 (talk) 17:14, 3 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Barry Lyndon?
Wikipedia talk:Good article nominations/backlog/items

message: ... is there an easy way to find the next oldest nom on the list, at WP:GAC ?  Smee 08:15, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Other than by bot... 

message: The Hustler (film) is under review and on hold but the bot keeps adding it back. Can whoever owns the bot maybe make it stop? Otto4711 (talk) 20:36, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Hustler (film) 

message: I have manually fixed the list as it seems that the bot is not working. Jezhotwells (talk) 20:18, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bot not working? 

message: Is there a way to diversify the topics listed here?  Currently they are all on LWx articles, which is broadly the same topic and all nominated by the same editor.  That seems wrong to me somehow. – Philosopher Let us reason together. 16:51, 15 February 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: People tend to nominate articles in batches so if they don't get reviewed they tend to appear here in batches. It would probably be too much effort for very little benefit to enforce a one editor per backlog item (the next oldest is also a LW article and then we have more video game ones from the same editor). I am thinking that if we move the instructions to a dedicated subpage like is being discussed at the rfc then we could maybe increase the number in this list, which may add more diversity. AIRcorn (talk) 23:55, 15 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Diversify?
Talk:List of American films of 1960

message: 05-Oct-2008: I have reformatted the article (as in the format for 1950) to split the tables as D-H, I-M, N-S and T-Z; at table A-C, I joined Genre/Note (leaving the actual Note column empty). I put some sub-row notes to avoid tall columns under "Note"; widened the columns Title=25% Director=21% Cast=38%; narrowed Genre=10%, re-labeled "Notes" as "Note" with width only 5% (was 28%).  That formatting wraps well for both screen size of 800x600 and wider hi-res screens (1024x768); however, the tables are much shorter now for 800x600 display, than when the "Notes" column was 28% of width. -Wikid77 (talk) 14:00, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Reformatted in October 2008
Talk:Deathdream

message: Most sources I can find, including the New York Times, list it as 1972 (though IMDb says 1974).  Unless someone has something more reliable, I'm going with the NYT.
: The copyright date on the closing credits is 1972. It was apparently rated PG by the MPAA in 1974. Maybe it sat unreleased for a year or so. Muzilon (talk) 00:30, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Film Year?
Talk:Sleepless (2001 film)

message: This article is too short and needs to be expanded in more detail than what it currently has, the plot is too short and needs to be expanded and more information needs to be added to the production and reception sections.--Paleface Jack (talk) 17:45, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Expansion
Talk:Gleek (Super Friends)

message: I don't know how "original research" really applies to Gleek's understanding of spoken English and strategic planning.  He clearly does understand it.  He has been shown able to lie (as when he vigorously shook his head when another of his kind -- a variation who spoke English -- identified him correctly as "the one they call Gleek," whereupon the accuser correctly called Gleek a liar), he has been shown to obey verbal commands, and even useful in planning (as when Wonder Woman told Gleek to distract Medusa and avoid looking into her eyes, both of which he accomplished successfully).
So, why does is stating that Gleek understands spoken English and can understand simple planning strategy "original research"?  He has shown that he does!  
It's about as much "original research" as saying that I can speak English and am literate.  I'm writing this comment in English, therefore I am literate and can speak English, unless you really want to introduce the "million monkeys on a million typewriters" argument. PatrickLMT (talk) 16:16, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Not original research

message: It seems in every episode Gleek's superpower was known as "bucket power", as he was able to immediately produce a bucket out of thin air to contain the transformed Zan. Is that worth putting on the page? 12.41.204.3 (talk) 21:04, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Gleek's bucket usage is referenced nuetrally on the page... Lots42 (talk) 05:34, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Bucket power?
Talk:List of notable sopranos

message: Someone removed the Listcruft tag without explanation. I am putting it back because there are problems with this article. If you disagree say so here! -- 02:10, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Once again the tag has gone! Who has taken it off? -- Kleinzach 08:30, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Listcruft tag removed without explanation!

message: As we are not making any progress in making this page viable I suggest making it into a re-direct to :Category:Sopranos. Comments? -- Kleinzach 00:59, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Proposal to make this page into a redirect

message: "Someone"'s removed the tag again. There are many notable sopranos in the world, and the list is going to reflect that. If you want to redirect to Category:Sopranos, well, that list is three (3) pages long, makes no distinction between operatic and pop singers, and does not reflect notability. Talk about listcruft.
Quite frankly, I do not wish to repeat the endless and pointless back-and-forth that we had on the Voice Type page. This page is the way it is, so kindly don't slap tags on it.-- Operalala(talk) 04:27, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It's unacceptable to remove the tag instead of addressing the issues. If you think this page has a purpose you have to explain what it is. If it is just listcruft - a long pointless list - then it should be deleted or made into redirect. Also remember that you don't WP:OWN these soprano-related pages. -- Kleinzach 11:18, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Kleinzach, whoever you are, neither do you own these pages. Please don't assume your own opinions must be carried through. And a moderator in fact answered your objections above. The issue has been addressed, and your tag is coming off. -- Operalala(talk) 15:44, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  list 

message: I have recommended that this article be made into a redirect to the category. See the link above. (Unfortunately the Afd notice has been removed from the article page.) -- Kleinzach 17:04, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of notable sopranos]]
Talk:Las Palmas, Argentina

message: There are several districts and places in Argentina called Las Palmas; see :es:Las Palmas. I suggest this article be moved to "Las Palmas (rocket launch place)", or something similar. // habj 08:43, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
Talk:List of Quintet games

message: Please see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Square Enix#Soul Blazer series article. Kariteh 08:51, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: See

message: This series doesn't even exist. The article was only based on a few similarities noticed by some review website. Since people don't want to delete this article, I've turned it into a "List of Quintet games" article instead so that the information can remain but be presented in a more objective way. Kariteh (talk) 12:27, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Moved "Soul Blazer series" to "List of Quintet games"

message: "Soul Blazer, Illusion of Gaia and Terranigma feature two gods, Gaia and Dark Gaia, who are constantly in battle. In Soul Blazer they are referred to as The Master and Deathtoll."
In ActRaiser the main character is referred to as "The Master".  That could simply be a side effect of Nintendo censorship of the time however. Still, The Master and Tanzra could be seen as another aspect of Gaia and Dark Gaia/Deathtoll, respectively. 97.91.0.236 (talk) 06:35, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Possible connection between Soul Blazer and ActRaiser series
Talk:Single whip

message: I don't think the explanation "carrying baskets" comes from the cited sources (not sure, though).
According to , biān may be a "an ancient type of weapon, segmented and made of iron" - perhaps something like a nunchaku (perhaps originally a flail).
Is there anything we can actually source?--Nø (talk) 11:23, 16 September 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Meaning? 
Talk:100-man kumite

message: If you're going to list Marcus Akin there you might as well add every other loud mouthed braggart. No one can even say what style of karate he supposedly practices, let alone where. 100 karateka to fight against for a real hyakunin kumite is not an easy thing to organise, people would have evidence these days.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.210.106.26 (talk) 21:55, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree - there are no sources on Marcus Akin completing a 100 man kumite. --Grendelshitsuren (talk) 09:08, 5 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Ao muke gata ude hishigi

message: The two articles Ude hishigi sankaku gatame and Ao muke gata ude hishigi, describe the same technique under different names. According to The Canon of Judo book this armlock is known as the former, while the Kodokan refer to it as the latter. I think this is grounds for a merger, especially since the Ude hishigi sankaku gatame article covers the other name for the technique; also this is my rational for merging into that article rather than vice versa. — Jdcollins13 (talk) 11:27, April 30, 2012
:Merger completed. — Jdcollins13 (talk) 15:27, 20 June 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Merger Proposal
Talk:Humboldt Fog

message: mmmm  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.114.149.108 (talk) 22:59, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Furietti Centaurs

message: These are the Furietti Centaurs: dividing them into two articles, under obscure names has no defensible rationale. They were conceived as a pair, perhaps both ridden by cupids and illustrating the pleasures and frustrations of love, in youth and in maturity. How can they be considered separately? --Wetman 16:21, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, the Louvre one is only highly likely to have once had a (now-lost) pair, not certain, but I take your point and will instigate a merger, and then can you add something about Furietti?  I hadn't heard of him til now, and whenever they're referred to separately in UK museums (eg the label for the casts of them at the Courtauld) or academe, "Old Centaur" and "Young Centaur" are the commonly accepted titles, nothing obscure about it.  Neddyseagoon - talk 16:34, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Talk merged from [[Old Centaur]] and [[Young Centaur]]

message: In this sentence here it says that Napoleon "acquired" this:
"It entered the Borghese collection, but was acquired from Camillo Filippo Ludovico Borghese by Napoleon in 1807 and is now in the Louvre Museum"
Why is this word "acquired" used when it has been well established that the French simply stole and plundered Italian art. After all what is the difference between the Nazis plundering gold and the French plundering art? For more info see this article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Tolentino
With this in mind this sentence would be more accurately written as the following, 
"It entered the Borghese collection, but was plundered from Camillo Filippo Ludovico Borghese by Napoleon in 1807 and is now in the Louvre Museum" with other plundered Italian art. T.Nuvolari (talk) 21:04, 23 June 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Use Of Euphemisms
Talk:Stamppot

message: :The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section of this talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
I'm guessing this is the same as Stoemp - which would be the better one to merge to?  Is this a Flemish/Dutch difference? FlagSteward 20:26, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  people agreed also in the discussion page of the food project, together with readers of it.wiki and fr.wiki. I am going to do it in the WE.. I can merge the content and create a redirect on the Stoemp page, but I hope I make no mistake with the right warning/note to put in the discussion pages at the end of the process, that's my first merge on en.wiki. Please take a look and check it if you think it is ok. --Alexmar983 (talk) 14:04, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
replies: text:  Ok I didn't do it because there is a "problem" on fr.wiki (I answered in English there:  so for the moment I stop for 7 days.--Alexmar983 (talk) 20:33, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge?

message: How much potato and how much vegetabls are included?
Half potato and half vegetable, ot a third of each .. or?
Warrington (talk) 18:37, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ratio 

message: Given the word-of-mouth nature of this dish, it is difficult to find many references aside from personal experience of the authors. I have added a reference from a cookbook that covers essentially what stamppot is made of. For this reason I think we should remove the citation warning. Qwilleranfan (talk) 17:53, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  References 

message: What I had originally intended to mean was that it's origins were peasant-born. That is, it was a dish traditionally made by lower-class dutch families (as many potato-based dishes are). I do not have a reference for that, however, so until I find one we'll leave it out. Qwilleranfan (talk) 18:04, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Peasant Dish 

message: no. 3, as it is currently written, stands out as if it is a separate method and looks confusing. I have no intention to change it if it was meant this way, though 145.100.125.133 (talk) 17:47, 5 October 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Methods
Talk:John Cade

message: * I've moved the two Mitchell references from the external links section to References.  The second Mitchell reference is inadequate and may be deleted. Shelbypark (talk) 13:50, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mitchell references 
Talk:FTSE 250 Index

message: All Wikipedia Visitors should be able to decide whether to use any relevant external links; that decision should not be made for them by other Wikipedia Editors.  I had entered an external link (details below) but it was removed by other Editors without consultation, even though registration is not required and access is Free to the results of detailed Technical Analysis of all the constituents of FTSE Mid-250 Index.  If you consider that the external link may be of interest to other Visitors, please add it to the ‘article’ page.  
To access the removed external link, click on the ‘history’ tab of ‘article’ page then click to view Revision (236132909) 23:57 3 September 2008 by TechAnalysis.  Scroll to ‘External Links’ section and click on the removed link. 
*Technical Charts of selected constituents of FTSE Mid-250 Index – 250 UK stocks below Top 100 - Technical Charts of selected constituents of FTSE Mid-250 Index – 250 UK stocks below Top 100 – London Stock Exchange SETS Segment STMM
TechAnalysis (talk) 17:49, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links 

message: In the FTSE 100 article, the constituents table includes a column for FTSE Industry Classification Benchmark sector. 92.71.60.61 (talk) 13:35, 9 February 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Fine with me if you want to add the sector to this article but it will take some time to look up all the sectors for 250 companies. Dormskirk (talk) 13:49, 9 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Add sector? 

message: There's a question on the Talk page for the (locked) FTSE 250 Template, regarding automatically adding every company to the category‎ (makes maintenance a lot easier). Could somebody take a look? 92.71.60.61 (talk) 13:51, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Open question on Template talk