lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
File talk:Railroad workers0001.jpg

message: Isn't that a sluice that he's stirring with the pitchfork? Isn't that a pan whose contents are being shown to us at the left? Aren't these men actually panning for gold? Wetman 20:34, 11 Oct 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: It looks like they're panning to me. -- Infrogmation 22:44, 11 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Talk:Khmer Rouge/Archive 3

message: I've reinstated the note of this word.  The text merely says that this term is sometimes used, which it definitely is; I've seen it quite often.  I tend to agree it has accuracy issues, but this is reporting usage, not endorsing it, and I don't see anything wrong with mentioning it.  The Genocide article also notes the broader (but less canonical) use as "mass killings". -- VV 00:47, 9 May 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Autogenocide

message: Adam, why did you revert 62.252.192.5's edit?
Because this article is not a History of Cambodia. The date of the founding of the Cambodian monarchy and whether or not Lon Nol was backed by the CIA are not relevant to this article. The other points 62 makes are just rewordings of the existing text and add no new relavant information. Adam 04:11, 28 Jun 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: One or two sentence background on the political situation for a political event isn't unreasonable.  It adds to the article.  Of course, a reader should examine History of Cambodia, but the Khmer Rouge article doesn't make much sense without that prefunctory political introduction. Stargoat 04:16, 28 Jun 2004 (UTC)

text: Thankfully, that isn't a threat here yet.  The political background is a must, if the events of the rise of the Khmer Rouge are to be understood. Stargoat 10:39, 28 Jun 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  rv 62.252.192.5's edit
Talk:Democracy/Archive 5

message: See detail in Archive 3
What do you all think? -- Mathieugp 04:42, 2 May 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, it is a good idea, the current article is not very good. The definition section definetly needs expansion, it even lacks mentions of procedural view of democracy (the one that concentrates on democracy as a type of government, like definitions of Schumpeter, Huntington, Lipset) and political view of democracy (aka substantial, the one that asks in whose name and for what purpose the power is held) (see works of Dahl, Gurr, Sartori). --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 13:35, 19 Sep 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Proposed refactoring

message: Could somebody explain me, why the neutrality is disputed. I do not see the point and removed the tag. Gangulf 13:06, 3 Aug 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why is neutrality disputed 

message: During the summer, when I've been rather absent from the world of computers and Internet, this article has undergone some changes. In particular does the following strike me (a European former student of political science) as somewhat disturbing:
:Traditionally the purpose of democracy is to prevent tyranny (the accumulation of too much authority in the hands of one or a few). That is, democracy rests on a balance of giving enough power for what Hamilton called "vigorous and energetic government" and avoiding giving out so much power that it becomes abused. Democracy often aims in practice for the "least worst" of alternatives. By creating a system where the public can remove administrations, without changing the legal basis for government, democracy aims at reducing political uncertainty and instability, by assuring citizens that however much they may disagree with present policies, they will be given a regular chance to change those who are in power, or change policies with which they disagree. Democracy is related then to the idea of constitutional government, setting limits beyond which a current majority in government may not step.
I am however not interested in puting work into changes that get promptly reverted. My experiences of Wikipedia has in this respect been rather mixed. Therefore I would like to ask those contributors to this article, who have more of an emotional attachment to it than I have, if this is a wording that you are perfectly happy with, and if not, in what direction you would expect this paragraph to evolve.
/Tuomas 07:41, 3 Sep 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Americocentrism
Talk:Master gunnery sergeant

message: The rank of sergeant major is not an administrative position in the U.S. Marine Corps, it is a separate and distinct rank of grade E9. There is no lateral movement between the two. To reflect this, I have moved references to Sergeant Major and Sergeant Major of the Marine Corps to the sergeant major page. —Fox1 October 11, 2004
: According to the entry for David W. Sommers, he was promoted to Master Sergeant, before switching tracks over to First Sergeant|. I do not know how rare this is, but it shows that such a switch is not unheard of.—MJBurrage • TALK • 02:38, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Untitled 

message: Article reassessed and graded as start class. --dashiellx (talk) 17:33, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Tag & Assess 2008 

message: It use to be, but not sure if it still holds true. A MSgt and MGySgt could hold a 1stSgt and SgtMaj Billet but not the other way around. Would this still be true?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.80.95.230 (talk) 14:40, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  E8 and E9 Billet question
Talk:Sergeant Major(General Military)

message: I disagree that this page needs to be merged with Sergeant Major - the CSM and RSM have different responsibilities (and actual ranks) and are fine as seperate pages.Michael Dorosh 19:15, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

message: I have moved references to Sergeant Major and Sergeant Major of the Marine Corps from the Master Gunnery Sergeant page to this one. Sgt. Major is not an administrative position in the U.S. Marine Corps, it is a separate and distinct rank of grade E9. There is no lateral movement between the two.
I will add to the section later.
--Fox1 October 11, 2004
Isn't it a little bit early to list the next Sergeant Major of the Army, it says he will start January.
----
I didn't realize Sergeant Major of the Army was a unique post. It seems there must be a lot more to say about it then the current 3 sentences. Could anyone expand it? -R. fiend 00:33, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I've added a bit from a few sources on the web. If anyone who knows more than I do on the subject (not difficult) thinks anything is incorrect or needs expansion please go right ahead and change it. -R. fiend 20:57, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)

text: Where in this article does it say that RSM/CSM etc are ranks? It says quite clearly that they are appointments of Warrant Officer. Neither does it mention Sam Brownes or terms of address here. If you have something to add then add it. Don't complain that the article is wrong. -- Necrothesp 16:37, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The Coldstream Guards reference is over at the RSM article. I only found the reference to addressing an RSM as "Sergeant Major" at the Coldstream Guards site; if someone wishes to add the other regiments that address their RSMs that way, they should. By the way, it does not say "only the Coldstream Guards" but includes them as an exception. SigPig 04:07, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: USMC

message: The differences between the varios ranks, billets, and appointment that fall under the name Sergeant Major in one form or another are diverse enough that amalgamating all of them into one article does not make sense.  What is needed is a disambiguation page.--Counsel 04:38, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Disambiguation
Talk:Ella Jenkins

message: It seems that Folkways Records rereleased many records on CD starting in 1989, so most of the release dates on this list are wrong in that they refer to the rerelease date. I hope that people with the original vinyl copies will correct these release dates.
Edwinstearns 21:11, 11 Oct 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Discography 

message: Please ADD  2011:A Life of Song (2011) SFW 45067 (CD) to DISCOGRAPHY section. This album will be released 2/22/2011 according to amazon.com and smithsonian folkways
Dph6k123 (talk) 16:34, 11 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit request from Dph6k123, 11 January 2011 

message: Gayle Wald has a biography of Ella Jenkins in progress. - Jmabel | Talk 22:14, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Biography in progress
Talk:Intimate relationship

message: — Assignment last updated by A.mollusk (talk) 22:46, 16 October 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi wikipedians! I've given this page quite the overhaul in terms of both structure and sources. I'd be very grateful for feedback and I hope to continue to improve this article based on any thoughts anyone has! A.mollusk (talk) 03:34, 25 November 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for your improvements! I think you've added a lot to the article. —Ganesha811 (talk) 00:28, 3 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: Psychology 220A
Talk:Bob Kiley

message: The article states that since he came to London, Bob Kiley's wife and children have been killed in a car accident, he has remarried and has a new family. I don't remember reading anything of this in the press, so I'm wondering if it is either made up, or possibly old history and in the wrong section. Either way, it needs some kind of source, so I've flagged if 'citation needed'. -- Chris j wood 15:18, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wife/children 
Talk:True Parallels

message: I just put :Category:2005 albums just in case it's not going to be released this year. -- Mike Garcia 21:59, 11 Oct 2004 (UTC)

message: Can someone please, please, please put in something about the hidden track, Retina? It does exist on the album but isn't mentioned. It plays after a bunch of consecutive tracks with nothing but silence in them. I'd put it in myself but don't know what specific track it is on the CD. RPTechnic (talk) 04:43, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Retina - hidden track
Talk:Steven Spielberg

message: Please remove this post-nominal (), that violate MOS:POSTNOM. 91.215.137.34 (talk) 11:50, 17 July 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: The  template is allowed for use in the lead immediately following the first appearance of the full name and in the infobox. Regards,  Spintendo  14:18, 17 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 17 July 2023 

message: He was in the movie The Blues Brothers as a city clerk. He is credited for this. It is near the end of the movie. 199.230.124.97 (talk) 01:22, 27 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Actor in The Blues Brothers as a city clerk. He is credited for this. It is near the end of the movie.
Talk:Anna Wood (born 1980)

message: I've removed the stub status on this article and introduced headings.  The biggest changes I've made have been to take out the references to Nasenbluten and Daniel Johns.  They're pretty peripheral to the event in question and don't really add much.Wikischolar1983 (talk) 13:44, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Expanding Article

message: 62.77.169.238 added "Drugs?" to the end of the article; I have removed it, but, if this was you and the question was supposed to be some kind of cue to editors of the article (such as myself), could you clarify here?
--Thedangerouskitchen 22:24, 11 Oct 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Drugs?

message: indicates ingestion of the ecstasy on the night of the 21st, hospitalization on the morning of the 22nd, evidence of absent cerebral blood flow on the 23rd, and pronouncement of brain death on the 24th.  This is why I had originally written that the death related to ingestion "three days earlier", but it is indeed possible that she was in fact dead on the 22nd.  What should we specify?
:She didn't really die until the 25th. A coma doesn't mean death. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by HyperSushi21 (talk • contribs) 09:55, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Time of death 

message: The file :File:Anna-Victoria-Wood-95.png, used on this page, has been deleted from Wikimedia Commons and re-uploaded at :File:Anna-Victoria-Wood-95.png. It should be reviewed to determine if it is compliant with this project's non-free content policy, or else should be deleted and removed from this page. If no action is taken, it will be deleted after 7 days.  Commons fair use upload bot (talk) 23:05, 21 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fair use candidate from Commons: [[:File:Anna-Victoria-Wood-95.png]] 

message: Was Anna skipped a year during her school days at some point? I was born only seven weeks before her in 1980 and I was in Year 9 in 1995. Paul Benjamin Austin (talk) 07:37, 18 December 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Year 10?
Talk:Pulitzer Prize for Poetry

message: Just wanted to note that Liesel Mueller's book is called Alive Together, not Live Together.
=== Pulitzer Prize ===
The article says that Moss won the Pulitzer Prize for Poetry in 1971. However, there is no such entry in the list of winners in the corresponding Wikipedia article. According to Wiki, it was Merwin who won the prize in 1971 (which I think is correct) and Moss never actually won the prize. 141.30.71.153 (talk) 14:22, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Liesel Mueller 

message: The article says that Moss won the Pulitzer Prize for Poetry in 1971. However, there is no such entry in the list of winners in the corresponding Wikipedia article. According to Wiki, it was Merwin who won the prize in 1971 (which I think is correct) and Moss never actually won the prize. 141.30.71.153 (talk) 14:22, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pulitzer Prize 

message: 'The Pulitzer Prize in Poetry has been presented since 1922 for a distinguished volume of original verse by an American author.'
What kind of 'American author' is Paul Muldoon?
What does Wikipedia mean by 'American'?
Does it mean anyone born anywhere in the world?
If so, then the definition of the prize is correct.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.160.208.106 (talk) 19:45, 2 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  'American' author?
Talk:Mit Abu El Kom

message: Mit Abu al-Kum, al-Minufiyah, Egypt was proposed for deletion. This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was KEEP
*Untranslated after 2 weeks on Wikipedia:Pages needing translation into English. Only comment there was:
**Arabic, short--Fenice 14:29, 27 Sep 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Proposed for deletion
Talk:List of universities in Karachi

message: I would like to remove all except bluelinked items. Objections? Anna Frodesiak (talk) 18:06, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pruning this list 

message: Student study fee instructions 111.119.183.33 (talk) 03:43, 12 November 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Karachi university
Talk:Ketch

message: Public domain image scanned from original source formerly illustrating this article, now orphaned, placed here in talk in case anyone in the future might find it of some use. -- Infrogmation 23:53, 11 Oct 2004 (UTC)

message: (Boatmik (talk) 08:37, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Yawl Ketch misnomer 

message: How can the shorter mizzen (introduction) at the same time be bigger ("The mizzen is bigger to hold the bow (front) ..." Derivation)? HJJHolm (talk) 14:49, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Don't have the expertise to want to make an edit - experts please jump in - but there's no contradiction between the mizzen mast being shorter and the mizzen (sail) bigger.  Or is the mizzen sail in a ketch bigger than in other similar vessels? Pol098 (talk) 13:58, 16 August 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Though I am not the author who wrote this confusing text, I believe I have now cleared it up. KDS4444Talk 03:35, 24 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  typo? 

message: I added the sentence " One of Sir Francis Chichester's earlier Gypsy Moth ketches had five staysails (each of almost equal size), none of which were boomed. . I read about this rig decades ago, but have forgotten where! Can anyone remember which Gypsy Moth it was, and who wrote about it, please? Arrivisto (talk) 12:18, 20 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Chichesters boomlesss staysail ketch
Talk:Closed-head injury

message: For an October 2004 deletion debate over this page see Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Closed head injury
----
Whooa! This is a real medical condition, and of some consequence/notability: see Google. This is a sub-stub, but an accurate one. — Bill 00:58, 12 Oct 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  
Talk:Occupied Palestinian Territories

message: For an October 2004 deletion debate over this page se Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Occupied Palestinian Territories
----
OK Jayjg, tell me again that you are not stalking my edits to promote your Zionist POV. Alberuni 01:01, 12 Oct 2004 (UTC)

message: Why does this automatically redirect to Palestinian territories? We have so many similarly titled articles on this subject, like Occupied Palestinian Territory and Israeli-occupied territories. Arguably, the plural OPT is the most commonly used by international organizations and should have its own article. Anyway, any suggestions on how to clean up this mess? Tiamuttalk 23:50, 26 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Redirect
Talk:List of members of the Australian House of Representatives

message: I restored this page to a redirect, as its intention is to point to a list of current members, which until swearing-in, would be the 2004-07 members.  Members of the Australian House of Representatives serves as a list of members over all terms of parliament, although I can see how the page titles do not necessarily indicate this difference.  Some renaming may be in order? -- Chuq (talk) 01:20, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Page purpose
Talk:Classical genetics

message: The article is well written but the part written in methods section is general idea as how the method was developed.So I feel it should be under different section.
Radhikabhake (talk)   —Preceding undated comment added 21:13, 10 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: radhika

message: I just did a massive revert on the page. I don't know what Rscavetta was trying to say with his large rewrite, but it sounded kind of weird to me. And incoherent. And possibly wrong. He doesn't appear to be an active user, so I'm just commenting on this here. It's disconcerting to see that his edits were made over a year ago, but I guess no one felt qualified to question his addition. -Madeleine 00:22, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  massive revert 

message: This page should be merged with "Forward Genetics."  Forward Genetics = Classical Genetics.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 150.231.246.1 (talk) 23:15, 8 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: merge this page

message: These article can have a history section that will show how classical genetics was discovered. The methods and techniques should have a section so the topic can be more understandable and more complete. 
|publisher=Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press}}</ref>
Marialopez pabon (talk) 02:09, 19 February 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: edit
Talk:Maxime Faget

message: Is he commonly referred to as Max Faget? Tyciol (talk) 07:24, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Max

message: What an unfortunate name.  Smart fella though. 174.97.179.132 (talk) 12:59, 12 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Aw.
Talk:Plant tissue culture

message: Missing.--65.26.30.35 (talk) 22:37, 16 May 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  History 

message: :For me it is unacceptable to think of micropropagation and plant tissue culture as synonyms, just like algebra is not tantamount to mathematics and dynamics is not the same as physics.
:So some kind of general definition of PTC is needed, that would suit both micropropagation and e.g. fertilization in vitro, in vitro mutagenesis and selection, cell fusion, genetic transformation, biotechnological production of metabolites and proteins etc.
:Perhaps it could sound more or less to this effect:
:Plant tissue culture = growing plants or plant fragments (organs, tissues, cells, protoplasts) on artificial media under conditions of sterility. Very often p.t.c. is initiated with a small fragment of a plant (the so called explant) and results in formation of complete, though tiny, plants (plantlets) or unorganized cell masses (calluses, cell suspensions).
:DJM 29 June, 2006
::Generally I do agree. Something like this is needed. Reo ON  |  +++ 09:01, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: predicting,observing,communicating and interpreting data are important words  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.206.112.252 (talk) 23:05, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  plant tissue 

message: — Assignment last updated by Sanjana Kancharla (talk) 03:19, 12 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: Molecular Genetics
Talk:Franz Josef Strauss

message: This has been discussed before, but since then Wikipedia seems to have become more in favor of keeping native spellings of names. So if Hafþór Júlíus Björnsson can be spelled natively even though hes almost unanimously referred to as "Hafthor" (or just Thor) I think Strauß can also be referred to as such. jonas (talk) 21:52, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. This should be changed. Alektor89 (talk) 14:08, 21 September 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Name change
Talk:Geography of the United Kingdom/to do

message: 'The United Kingdom continues to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.'  How can we change this so that it's not time sensitive? Jerry 03:41, 12 Oct 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: 'As of 2004'?  'In [date] the UK committed itself to continuing ...'  I'm afraid I don't have the facts to hand. -- ALoan (Talk) 11:33, 12 Oct 2004 (UTC)

message: Help reduce some of the red links on the page: a high amount of red links is a factor that may stop this article becoming a Featured Article in the future. -- Graham  ☺ | Talk 01:09, 13 Oct 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: New task

message: *Geology seems topheavy, compared to the level of detail in the rest of the article (for example: demographics; natural resources).  Rather than pruning geology more, the others could do with exanding.
*Many sections are just lists (e.g. hills and mountains, rivers and lakes)  some of which are by no means comprehensive (inlets, headlands)
*Environment is a bit of a mess:
**Current issues only mentions greenhouse gases, landfill and recycling.  What about industry, pollution (air, water, soil), demand for house building, conservation, coastal erosion, habitat loss, intensive farming...  
**The second section is just a list of agreements from the CIA Factbook - does it add much?  Can the unlinked ones be linked to anything useful?  
*** Could the agreements themselves be stated instead of the issues - e.g. Convention on Biological Diversity has a wiki page. --Flit 19:41, 26 Nov 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Issues
Talk:United Powers League

message: Why was the UPL removed from the UED? They are technically the same thing... its still the same basic political structure, just with an improved military. It's like the British Union of Fascists changing its name to the British Union of Fascists and National Socialists, new label but same thing, in this case made to be more representative of the complete membership of all Earth states, as opposed to only most of them under the UPL. The UPL should be moved back on the basis they are the same organisation. -- S@bre 11:51, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  United Earth Directorate 

message: The UPL article should definitely be merged with the UED article, as they were not two separate organizations.  The United Powers League was simply renamed the United Earth Directorate when the dissident countries were brought into it's fold.–UPL2229 21:04, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  United Powers League