lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Alexander Spesivtsev

message: Of 30 hits on www.google.com most refer to this Wiki entry. The rest to a book by Jaques (sic) Buval, Der Cannibalenclan ("The Cannibal Clan"). Has anyone heard any confirmation of this cult item? What's the reality quotient here? Wetman 22:42, 9 Jan 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Discussion 1

message: For the record, the two comments above refer to the article's original name of "Sascha Spesiwtsew". Although that is an equally valid transliteration from the Cyrillic alphabet, the spelling "Sasha Spesivtsev" is far more common. DS 15:24, 3 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I sent this one through AfD, where it was found to be genuine. Mallocks 15:21, 3 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Historical note

message: I remember watching Russian documentery (Criminal Russia) about this killer and they said, that cops didn't suspect him, because they thought that he still was in mental hospital, althought he's been allready released.--ZZbatam (talk) 14:21, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Avoiding suspicion
Wikipedia talk:Proverbs

message: Is "mispelled" the misspelled word? Just out of curiosity ^^ Sabbut 23:45, 9 Jan 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, it now is; whenever someone corrects a typo on Proverbs, the tradition is to introduce a new misspelling. If someone corrects a typo and simultaneously misspells a new word, all the better. Chris Roy 00:13, 10 Jan 2004 (UTC)
Talk:Justification for the state

message: The articles The purpose of government and The justification of the state are both pieces of User:Larrys Text. The justification of the state says: "Notice I am using the words "state" and "government" interchangeably here."  Therefore I suggest to merge the two into one article, since the (one and the same) author claims they are in essense about the same (unless seomeone wants to split hairs state/govt and purpose/justfn). Mikkalai 01:04, 10 Jan 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: 2004 comments

message: In strict usage, "state" and "government" aren't the same.  I've just edited this article to reflect the traditional understanding of the difference.  In a republic, "We the People" insofar as we act as voters, are the state.  Our elevcted officials and their appointees are the government.  That, at any rate, is the pertinent theory.
This article deserves a category but I'm hard pressed to divine an appropriate one--Hooperbloob 04:55, 5 Dec 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  I just split the hair 

message: I've removed an old neutrality tag from this page that appears to have no active discussion per the instructions at Template:POV:
::This template is not meant to be a permanent resident on any article. Remove this template whenever:
::#There is consensus on the talkpage or the NPOV Noticeboard that the issue has been resolved
::#It is not clear what the neutrality issue is, and no satisfactory explanation has been given
::#In the absence of any discussion, or if the discussion has become dormant.
Since there's no evidence of ongoing discussion, I'm removing the tag for now. If discussion is continuing and I've failed to see it, however, please feel free to restore the template and continue to address the issues. Thanks to everybody working on this one! -- Khazar2 (talk) 01:00, 18 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  removing POV tag with no active discussion per [[Template:POV]] 

message: the discussion of the development of democratic institutions in North America needs to be expanded by adding the Iroquois tribes who developed the concept of democratic governance independently of Greece or the age of reason. It shows bias and adherence to outdated assumptions about Native Americans. This is evident in the many searches I had to use before I found the citation. Spraygal109 (talk) 00:54, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Inclusion of Iroquois democracy
Talk:Académie Française

message: Despite all the huffing and puffing in January when I last visited this article, it is still not finished, although the formatting has certainly improved. Are these historical lists really so hard to find? Adam 01:44, 30 Mar 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Finished? 

message: Pakistan has a National Language Promotion Department for Urdu which seems to have a similar purpose to the Académie Française. Are there any other countries with a similar purpose? ----MountVic127 (talk) 04:31, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pakistan and the Urdu language. 

message: The lead should explain more about what purpose the organization serves, rather than focusing on its membership and history of operation. GeoEvan (talk) 22:44, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  What does it do?
Talk:Eton wall game

message: I think this is misleading. I'm pretty sure that the Eton games predate the codification of either soccer or rugby and cannot therefore be a mixture of the two games. Soccer is actually supposed to be a descendent of Eton football (though I think this is the Eton field game) not vice versa.
I have amended the article accordingly.GordyB 08:48, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Hybrid game

message: Whether its just me, it seems to be very complicated, and the rules difficult to understand. any chance of any one clearing this up?? Massau 18:46, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hard to Understand??

message: Is a goal worth 9 or 10 points - two different values given in two different parts of the article  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.9.124.158 (talk) 02:09, 15 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Scoring 
Talk:Ranters

message: Unsupported assertions like this do not exactly help in the bid to produce NPOV articles. I have, consequently, deleted them. R Lowry 04:48, 10 Jan 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: I'm putting in some effort to re-organize this article and find reliable sources. I'm new to this, so hopefully I'm not stepping on any toes or messing it up for anyone that was invested in this article. --Erie Bard (talk) 03:35, 9 March 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: No. I've been following your edits here and they all look pretty good so far. Thanks for putting the effort in and for improving this article! Keep up the good work and enjoy! Good luck, warshy (¥¥) 17:07, 9 March 2021 (UTC)

text: I agree with all your edits and support them. Thanks again for all your efforts in researching the issues and supporting them with reliable sources. Keep up the good work! Thanks, warshy (¥¥) 19:13, 10 March 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reorganizing and rewriting sections according to Reliable Sources 

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. (closed by non-admin page mover)  Extraordinary Writ (talk) 07:08, 4 January 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Ranter →  – Articles about religious groups usually have a plural title, e.g. Quakers, Puritans, Muslims. Rublov (talk) 04:50, 28 December 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 28 December 2021
Talk:Name days in Sweden

message: I think this page needs an explanation of what a namesday is. -Branddobbe
----
Is "namesday" really English? I would have called this a "name day" (or possibly "nameday") -- 194.73.118.77 09:07, 30 Apr 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I think the correct phrase would be "name day", but "namesday" seem to be fairly common if you search the web. Also, namesday reflects the Swedish phrase "namnsdag" which also has a rather unnecessary "s" in the middle - "namndag" whould be perfectly correct. But that is not what it is called in Swedish. // kandre 14:07, 21 Aug 2004 (UTC)

text: While its length would suggest that it is neither a stub nor a substub, the information it contains places it among the substubs: for it is nonsense.  A definition of namesday is crucial to the understanding of the article; without that, it is completely meaningless.  The article is listed on Wikipedia:Cleanup; please do not remove the notice unless you are going to clean it up.  --Eequor 15:56, 4 Aug 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I find the article neither meaningless or a stub. To a Scandinavian it if perfectly clear what the subject of the article is about - is it really nonsense to you? Some modifications have been made since Aug 4 - do you still do not understand what it it is about? The article should definitely not be removed, and neither should the corresponding article about Finnish namesdays even though neither is perfect. I have removed them from the cleanup list // kandre 13:54, 21 Aug 2004 (UTC)

message: I have merged Namesdays in Sweden with Namesdays in Finland under the new title Namesdays and made the original articles into redirects.  The new article needs further editing by people who understand the subject area better, as I was unsure about which elements were specific to a particular country, and which were more general in nature.  Please continue all discussions about these articles on Talk:Namesdays --HappyDog 19:26, 24 Feb 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Redirection 

message: I've listed a requested move to Name days in Sweden as all other countries' name day articles are in that format. Jenny Wong 14:37, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Requested move

message: what do asterisks (*) mean in the list?NJlo 18:41, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Asterisks 

message: It is the Swedish Academy that compiles the list. Here is a link to the lists, either by date in chronological order or by name in alphabetic order. I will not put it in the article now, as it would imply that I have checked all names. Steinberger (talk) 13:33, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Source
Talk:History of socialism

message: Shouldn't there be some discussion of Ferdinand Lassalle on this page?  I'm not sure where to fit him in, but he deserves at least some mention. john 06:54, 10 Jan 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. --Christofurio 18:33, May 15, 2004 (UTC)
Moved to History of socialism.  See Wikipedia:Naming conventions (capitalization). -- Rbellin|Talk 02:01, 7 Jan 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Ferdinand Lassalle

message: I think it could be interesting to have a section on socialism in smaller western european countries such as Holland.
:agree - the way the article reads, it seems the northern and western European government styles after 1985 simply aren't in the chosen scope of this article, in spite of the fact that they are the predominant "socialist" style governments of the West to this day. 47.185.39.179 (talk) 23:25, 27 March 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Socialism in smaller countries such as Holland? 

message: Basically what the subject says. After looking over the article, looking at the top boxes as well, I think that it should be trimmed overall, and that each history section be made into an article that can link back to this main article. One way of doing that for example may be "origins to pre-1789", "French revolution to 1850s and the development", "Marxism and the movement 1850s to 1910s", "Interwar era", 'WW2 and Cold War", and "1991 to present".  MarvelAge91 (talk) 23:29, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposal for article to be trimmed and split current sections each to become an article
Talk:Azuaga

message: The Spanish-language article uses the phrase "Período Occidentalizante" and says there are human archeological remains from that time. I've never heard this phrase in my life, and it doesn't exist anywhere else on the web. I have no idea how to translate it. -- Jmabel 07:23, 10 Jan 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks. - Jmabel | Talk 18:05, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: "Orientalizing Period"
Wikipedia talk:Canonicalization

message: I can't see evidence that illegal characters are stripped.  Try this li^nk.  If they are indeed stripped, we should document which characters are stripped and under what circumstances. --Diomidis Spinellis 13:20, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Illegal characters? 

message: Is there really anything of substance on this page that isn't covered by (or couldn't easily be added to) Help:Link? How about merging this page into that one?--Kotniski (talk) 12:02, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: No objections, so I've been bold and done it (revert if you're not happy).--Kotniski (talk) 10:01, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge?
Talk:Hertzsprung–Russell diagram

message: since this is on a log scale, it might be called a plot of the reciprocal absolute temperature, which as we all know makes more sense anyway 2A01:CB0C:CD:D800:CD8E:A2F0:3F79:2CCF (talk) 12:30, 25 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  A peculiar characteristic of this form of the H–R diagram is that the temperatures are plotted "from high temperature to low temperature, which aids in comparing this form of the H–R diagram with the observational form." 

message: While looking at the "Historical background" section (Hertzsprung–Russell diagram#Historical background) of the "Latest revision as of 02:00, 17 December 2023" version of this article, I noticed a word that may have some "room for improvement". 
It was the word "equivalent" in the sentence 
* The apparent magnitude of stars in the same cluster is equivalent to their absolute magnitude and so this early diagram was effectively a plot of luminosity against temperature. 
My suggestion is to change that one word -- ("equivalent") -- to [something more like] "proportional" or "analogous" ... or maybe even "indicative of".  
Any comments? Mike Schwartz (talk) 15:46, 4 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  a suggestion for a small change
Talk:University of Prince Edward Island

message: This page read a bit too much like a press release, IMO.
:I think we can take this off of Wikipedia:Pages needing attention -- it's not great, but I don't think it's in dire need of attention. Darkcore 04:29, 13 Oct 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: It's improved over when it was placed. Spinboy 06:19, 13 Oct 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Relocated from the main article:
"The information on this media page was removed by the IP 137.149.138.57, which resolves to "KPC07.stu-kelley.upei.ca" which also happens to be the main administration building at UPEI. It was re-entered on Feb. 2, 2007."
Original research is not allowed on Wikipedia. Everything on the site should be referenced to another published source, or reputable web source, or citable.  --  Zanimum 14:05, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: A blog isn't a reputable source. GreenJoe 22:17, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: OR

message: Inaccurate reference was removed. See the actual proposal for more information: http://weblogs.upei.ca/files/Cadre%20and%20ISM%202007-2008.pdf --Adamfreeland 03:17, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Cadre staff
Talk:Proleptic Gregorian calendar/Archive 1

message: If we use a numbering system that includes a zero, then we have to say that the year 2000 is part of the 21st century!
They did not "decide not to use a zero". This is misleading. They decided (naturally) to use natural numbers. the year 100 BC is the 100th (positive number) before Christ. It is not the year "-100th after Christ". it is the "-99th year after Christ", if you like, but that's of course ridiculous, because nobody would say such a thing. (like, "this happend in the -19th year before I was born", instead of "this happened when I was 20") dab (ᛏ) 16:08, 8 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Talk:Verdict

message: *Verdict.  Normally I'd say more to Wiktionary, but this sub-stub definition is misleading.  There are certainly other verdicts besides the two listed.  RickK 00:17, 5 Jan 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: from VFD

message: I'm no expert on Latin, but I changed the references in the main article regarding the Latin verb dicere and its forms. I think dicere is closer to the English verbs "to say" or "to tell" than it is to the verb "to speak."
For example, in French the descendant form of dicere is dire, meaning "to say" or "to tell." The French infinitive parler is closer to the verbs "to talk" and "to speak." Any Latin experts out there who can help us? For dicere, is "say" more correct than "speak"? Yours, Famspear 04:03, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Those pesky Latin verbs

message: An appeal. I would agree that some expansion of the article would be a good idea.69.6.162.160 02:16, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: True. I've added into the article that a defendent found guilty may appeal his case to the Court of Appeals. --Defender 911 18:08, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  What often follows a guilty verdict? 

message: I'm not sure whether this would belong in this article or in another, related one, but it seems to me that at least a brief discussion of the laws/rules surrounding majority verdicts would be useful, given that they vary considerably around the world (eg in England and Wales a judge can accept a 10-2 verdict, even in murder cases). Loganberry (Talk) 22:54, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Majority verdicts 

message: According to the present definition, a verdict is exclusively given by a jury. What about bench trials, where there is no jury? How else to call the outcome presented by the trier of fact in such cases? Is the article (and Mr. Black, assuming the citation is correct) unduly restrictive?  --Lambiam 15:54, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I do not know the answer, but I created finding (law).--172.56.32.247 (talk) 01:47, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: From Should I Waive a Jury Trial and Instead Have a Bench Trial?, I quote "A bench trial is also faster and the judge often returns a “finding” (the functional equivalent of a verdict) much quicker than in a jury trial.". I note that the page uses the word "verdict" three times.--172.56.32.247 (talk) 02:43, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Only in jury trials? 

message: In England and Wales the coroner will issue a conclusion, not a verdict. These are colloquially known as verdicts, but that's informal use. The correct term is conclusion. Here's a government-level source: https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/guidance-no-17-conclusions.pdf DanBCDanBC (talk) 21:05, 28 November 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  In England and Wales Coroners produce Conclusions, not verdicts.
Talk:The Fabulous Thunderbirds

message: Please see the discussion at talk:Thunderbird_(disambiguation). - UtherSRG 20:16, 10 Jan 2004 (UTC)
replies: text:  I agree..I hear this all the time now...in the lead not lede..lede is not a word  2602:306:BD95:45F0:5D6E:8E9D:8AD:3930 (talk) 05:39, 19 February 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: I feel that not enough credit is given to Jimmie Vaughan.  Under "Career", may I suggest that the opening sentence make it clear that Jimmie Vaughan was a founding member -- if not the founding member -- of The Fabulous Thunderbirds?  They used to perform under the title:  "Jimmie Vaughan and The Fabulous Thunderbirds".  If that does not suggest that it was essentially his band, I don't know what does.  Thank you.
(PS:  and 'Career' is an odd title for this section.  I would use the terms: 'Background' or 'History', instead.  The word 'Career' is more appropriate as the title of the opening section of an article about an individual musical artist, not a band.).
--Atikokan (talk) 18:03, 12 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Jimmie Vaughan 
Talk:Phylogeny

message: Warm greetings from sister project Wikibooks where I am writing a general biology textbook all by my lonesome. My profs donated a sizable bunch of notes that make up the structure of an entire introductory biology book. However these notes are in outline form and need to be fleshed out into full text. Then, some images .. I am confident that this will become the standard college text over time but need some help to get it there. --karlwick 20:22, 10 January 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Recruiting for Wikibooks Biology book(s)
Talk:Thunderbird

message: An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect :Thunderbird (disambiguation) and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 September 18#Thunderbird (disambiguation) until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.  TNstingray (talk) 12:45, 18 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Thunderbird (disambiguation)" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]] 

message: An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect :Thunderbirds (disambiguation) and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 September 18#Thunderbirds (disambiguation) until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.  TNstingray (talk) 12:45, 18 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Thunderbirds (disambiguation)" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]] 

message: An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect :The Thunderbirds (disambiguation) and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 September 18#The Thunderbirds (disambiguation) until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.  TNstingray (talk) 12:46, 18 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  "The Thunderbirds (disambiguation)" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]]
Talk:Baron Lyttelton

message: This article overlooks that there was an earlier peerage of Baron Lyttelton, of Munslow (county Salop), created for judge Edward Littleton (1589-1645) in 1641, which became extinct at his death without male issue. This makes those already mentioned of the second and third creations of the peerage. G.E. Cokayne's 'The Complete Peerage' gives details of the peerage title (heading is 'Littleton of Munslow' - my memory not sure of the spelling) but I do not have it to hand to reference it (the volumes concerned are in a place where entry is restricted due to the pandemic) but other users may have access to bring this in.Cloptonson (talk) 13:32, 19 February 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Earlier Baron Lyttelton