lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:American Viticulture Area

message: In any anyone is interested, I first made certain that "American Viticultural Area" is the correct term, not "American Viticulture Area". (I checked five reference books on wine. Even the Web page linked to as an authority within this article calls it "American Viticultural Area".) Then I copied the contents to a new page, "American Viticultural Area", and redirected this page there. Also, I found every page that links to this one and redirected those to "American Viticultural Area". This page is probably obsolete, but, just in case anyone looks up "American Viticulture Area" (at least one person probably believes that that is the correct name), it is probably best left as is for redirection.
:Thanks much for the correction. Didn't realize I was using the noun form. Wnissen 21:17, 31 Jan 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I figured that the author must have just remembered it wrong. Glad you took my correction in the right spirit. I'm a newbie here, and every time I make a correction I wonder if an offended author might take it the wrong way. :-) So far I've been impressed by the high quality of this project, given that anyone is permitted to edit any page. -- Alan W 03:22, 1 Feb 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:American Viticultural Area

message: French and Italian AOCs have been categorized already. I'm wondering if there is a reason why AVAs haven't been yet, other than no one having tackled it yet... --Arnaudh 19:31, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: AVA Categories

message: Removed Napa Valley because it is not an AVA.
Wrong.
Title 27: Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms
PART 9—AMERICAN VITICULTURAL AREAS
Subpart C—Approved American Viticultural Areas
§ 9.23   Napa Valley.
(a) Name. The name of the viticultural area described in this section is “Napa Valley.”
(b) Approved maps. The maps showing the boundaries of the Napa Valley viticultural area are...
http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text/text-idx?c=ecfr&sid=ce096c8397b39ba7799273bc60688d37&rgn=div8&view=text&node=27:1.0.1.1.7.3.41.3&idno=27 —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Calton (talk • contribs) 04:45, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Napa Valley

message: One of the bloggers at American Winery Guide wishes to add an external link to this article with an interactive Google Map showing the different AVAs. While I don't think the map is without value, I do think the decision on the merit of this inclusion should be made by uninvolved editors, knowledgeable about Wikipedia's policies on external links and without any vested interesting the American Winery Guide website. So I'm posting it here for outside review and if another editors deems this link a worthwhile inclusion into this article, I'll have no objections. AgneCheese/Wine 17:37, 3 November 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: It seems to me that this type of map resource adds relevant encyclopedic information that is not found the article (that's basically WP:ELYES #3), so I'll add it. However, if an ad-free resource of similar map quality becomes available, I'd prefer linking to that one instead. Tomas e (talk) 15:00, 4 November 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, the ads concerned me too which is why I was hoping for a direct link to just the map instead of a general link to their main page with all the ads. AgneCheese/Wine 18:00, 4 November 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: External link addition needing independent review

message: All, the introductory paragraph spends too much time discussing rules for Appellations of Origin rather than AVAs, the title of the article. While perhaps a separate "Appellations of Origin (United States)" or "Wine Laws in the United States" might be worthwhile, for now I am moving the Appellation of origin stuff into the body of the article and adding information specific to AVAs in the top. Otherwise, readers may easily confuse the information given for appellation of origin to be for AVAs. Mdewman6 (talk) 19:33, 9 July 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  move AVA regulations to top of article?
Talk:Joe Satriani

message: Another editor recently added vocals to Satriani's instruments, mentioning that he sings on at least ten tracks. I do think this is valid, and the edit should be restored. Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 13:09, 28 August 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: He's not well known for his vocals, though. That field is for notable instruments, and in his case it's just guitar. Mac Dreamstate (talk) 16:08, 28 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vocals
Talk:Lady Ottoline Morrell

message: It's not clear whether Morrell had a child with her husband or with Bertrand Russell. --ESP 08:24, 31 Jan 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: By George Charles Beresford available at NPG. Ty 08:14, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: PD photos

message: With the passing of Lady Ottoline Morrell's works into the public domain, a large number of photos taken by her of famous people have become freely available. You can see high-resolution versions of several hundred of them at :Commons:Category:Lady Ottoline Morrell, obtained from the National Portrait Gallery, London. She was just an amateur photographer and pretty bad at it, but for many of these people they're the only public domain photos available. I've been extracting images of such people from her photos, and some are shown below. There are also some photos including her taken by an unknown photographer, which I haven't categorized yet. Feel free to use any of her photos in the article. Dcoetzee 03:48, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Photos by Lady Ottoline Morrell 

message: The article states: "Her memorial in St Winifred's Church, Holbeck was carved by Eric Gill." But a caption says: "Monument to Lady Ottoline Morrell by Eric Gill in St Mary's parish church, Garsington"  Is there only one monument with a mistake made in one of the statements or are there two memorials? The article could use some clarity. WikiParker (talk) 12:49, 17 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Need clarity about Eric Gill
Talk:Great tit

message: Darren Naish, at Tetrapod Zoology, talks about Great Tits killing Redpolls.CFLeon (talk) 21:31, 24 December 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Predatory Behavoir 

message: In "Behaviour"
--> "Ecology"
the name pied flycatcher (sic) is marked as a link. 
 
It SHOULD, logically, link to THE species that is meant, that would be pied flycatcher. 
 
Unfortunately/ with less sense, 
what it really is linked to  (until s.o. will hopefully change it,) 
is a disambiguation page, where two options are given, the Eurasian species and an Australian bird.
 
The sentence containing the link is: "Great tits compete with pied flycatchers for nesting boxes, and can kill prospecting flycatcher males." (You find it right after footnote-number 49, its own number being 50, very much to the end of the chapter).
Yes, readers CAN figure out which species is more likely the right one and choose from the options on the disambiguation page themselves, but I'd much rather just give the correct link.
(A pity I can't do it myself.)
Hopefully a person with a "key" for the "lock" ;-) will do it :-) ...*please*... 
 
 
p.s. 
 
I put the '(sic)' in to show that the article author here used the 'p' instead of 'P', the latter seeming more conventional in Wikipedia articles?
 
However now I see that the 'European (sic) sparrowhawk' is the only English species name written with a capital 'E' in this chapter, so probably THIS one should be changed and not the small 'p' - sorry.
  
2A02:3035:C12:FED3:1:0:BB0C:F3BC (talk) 08:15, 30 April 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for spotting, I've changed that to lead to the actual article EditorInTheRye (talk) 09:37, 30 April 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Please correct link 

message: It would be good to have a section about "courting" "rituals", the way & by which (potential) partner the nesting place is chosen, if e.g. the male presents the female with material, if they make several nests and choose only one later etc. etc.
Excuse me if I have overlooked this in case it already is described somewhere - but I think it isn't?
So, expert people with writing rights on locked article, that feels much needed. 
 
2A02:3035:C12:FED3:1:0:BB0C:F3BC (talk) 08:21, 30 April 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: Mating/ courting behaviour? 

message: The bird goes all the way up Norway, at least Alta so you could update the map. 88.88.29.99 (talk) 06:04, 26 July 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Do you have a reliable source for that information? Dgndenver (talk) 10:56, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Area of habitat 

message: Please remove "There is little geographic variation in calls, but" from the "Voice" subsection. 
See the following citation which disproves the aforementioned statement: https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/4194.pdf Mrschwob (talk) 20:19, 13 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 13 September 2023
Talk:Yamato

message: Why you have delited the yamato things ! I mean whats is the meaning of the Name Yamato and how i ride this in japanses  ? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yamato_(name) is a translation from the german page to Yamato and i thing this better to talk over the name in this i mean to a name you must now the Kanji and whys meaning ! and in the German you find more https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yamato --Seescedric (talk) 11:30, 14 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Yamato (name)
Talk:Gaebler Children's Center

message: *Gaebler Children is probably too obscure. --Jiang
**No vote. There is a fairly famous (at least in mental-health circles) hospital called Gaebler Children's Center. If the article had that title and some substance to it, I would vote to keep. But it's border-line. Anjouli 05:27, 24 Jan 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: From VfD

message: I've added a bunch of new info that shows some historical and current significance; primarily reflecting the development of psychiatric treatment in Massachusetts and the redevelopment of abandoned state land. I'd like to remove the importance tag. Comments? Friejose 16:44, 18 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Recent additions
Talk:Bretton Woods Conference

message: Someone should explain why this conference in 1944 is called a United Nations conference when the United Nations was not established until 1945.  Wash it actually a League of Nations conference that got re-branded later? Enquiring minds want to know!
2601:645:C300:5120:FC7A:A42E:4E5B:DA9 (talk) 07:25, 22 July 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: The IMF and the World Bank were established as part of the world order that came into effect after World War 2. It had to be done even before the UN because the Allies needed a system under which to create an international financial system as soon as they won the war. However, broadly speaking, it was an idea worked on since ~1941 (when the UN Charter was drafted) and when the UN came in to effect in October 1945, these two bodies came under the umbrella of it, hence why the conference is called a United Nations conference. 120.21.205.149 (talk) 01:46, 29 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  No United Nations Until 1945
Talk:Bhakti movement

message: I feel that the page fails to describe, or even link for further readings, what kind of environment the movement was purportedly trying to reform; namely, the traditional Vedic religion, with its blind ritualism and class segregation, where religious study was exclusive to few.
Also I feel the opening sentence is not representative. It states:
which is later contradicted:
Furthermore, is the mention of Sikhism worth being the only one in the opening sentence of the article? I'd either remove it or add the other traditions like Vaishnavism, Shaivism etc mentioned below too.
Infinitesnow (talk) 22:11, 18 April 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Some remarks from a layman  

message: A table comprising timeline of Bhakti Saints can be added Spvijay21 (talk) 08:21, 18 September 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Arranging Bhakti saints by Chronology 

message: I fail to understand the inclusion of Christianity in this article. All the references listed come from Christian outlets and the link between gospel and bhaktism seems extremely artificial.
Bhaktism is specifically Dharmic. The articles are not even remotely convincing. Either some academic sources are furnished or this segment should be scrapped altogether Varoon2542 (talk) 13:05, 24 March 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Christianity
Talk:International Society for Krishna Consciousness

message: they describe themselves as specifically not a religion
https://content.iskcon.org/icj/7_1/71srd.html
"In common with many followers of Vedantic tradition, devotees                 of Krsna distinguish between Krsna consciousness, or pure love                 of God, and what is commonly understood as religion. In his introduction                 to Bhagavad-gita, Srila Prabhupada explains:
Sanatana-dharma does not refer to any sectarian process                 of religion. It is the eternal function of the eternal living                 entities in relationship with the eternal Supreme Lord.The English                 word religion is a little different from sanatana-dharma.                 Religion conveys the idea of faith, and faith may change. One                 may have faith in a particular process, and he may change this                 faith and adopt another, but sanatana-dharmarefers                 to that activity which cannot be changed.[8]" 2603:8080:B400:5D2B:0:0:0:13B5 (talk) 23:31, 7 October 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: This is clearly a religion. What you are quoting is an ethnocentric attempt to say “our religion is deeper than other religions”, which is what all religions do. You don’t always have to follow selfID, especially from a scientific, anthropological or sociological point of view. 82.36.70.81 (talk) 19:38, 28 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Religion? 

message: It's been brought up with you several times now, about your POV pushing with unreliable sources, can you start engaging without reverting it all wholesale? You've made some shockingly damning edits so far with only primary sources in some cases.. FutureFlowsLoveYou (talk) 09:52, 21 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Inappropriate stuffing of [[WP:LEAD]] with unreliable sources 

message: Cow protection is the business of the vaisyas and along with our preaching, this is the most important work. Sunitipatelvithalani (talk) 16:04, 19 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Swami Prabhupada krishna movement integral part is cow protection  

message: Here's one article of interest by Massimo Introvigne at Bitter Winter:
* "New York Court: Secular Judges Cannot Second-Guess Decisions of ISKCON (Hare Krishna) Authorities in Internal Matters"
Take the article what you will; thanks for reading. -- Apisite (talk) 08:36, 21 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  New York Court Decision 

message: The aricle uses the word "ecclesiastical" in reference to the movemenet. I suspect other non-appropriate terms are in use and the article needs review from someone with a backgroud in religious terminology. References might also use weak terminology themselves that imho should be addressed when imported.
Gabriele Dini Ciacci (talk) 13:31, 29 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Review of wording
Talk:Auk

message: I've seen some references put the Great Auk in the Laridae family of the Ciconiiformes. Any thoughts? - UtherSRG 15:43, 31 Jan 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: see Talk:Great Auk jimfbleak 17:35, 31 Jan 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ciconiiformes 

message: Most species breed at steep cliffs, often together with gulls, petrels and gannets, or amongst boulders. I took this out because it seems to emphasise the cliff breeders. Some do nest on cliffs, but many more nest in other areas, boulder fields, burrows, even mountain tops and trees! I have expanded a similar line two paragraphs down which says as much. Sabine's Sunbird 00:44, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  line removed 

message: Is the list missing Ptychoramphus aleuticus, Cassin's auklet? I would ad it, but I'm not aware of it's taxonomic position.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.193.87.235 (talk) 15:28, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Missing species? 

message: bbb 5.238.24.4 (talk) 14:16, 4 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  auks eating fruit😋🪶🐦🥔 

message: t7s9g 5.238.24.4 (talk) 14:16, 4 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  black auklet🐦 

message: dcf 5.238.24.4 (talk) 14:18, 4 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  auk biology not portal 

message: 79raa 5.238.24.4 (talk) 14:19, 4 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  😜 😜 😜 😜 😜 

message: I removed this line from the photo caption because it is false. 'True Auks' means Alcini which includes murres, which live in the Atlantic. Many other auk outside alcini live in the Atlantic, the previous caption will only confuse people. No one defines 'true auks' as 'birds in alcini that arent murres' because that is nonsensical.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.127.128.19 (talk) 17:46, 14 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  'razorbill is the only true auk in the atlantic'
Talk:Butterflyfish

message: ITIS also lists these three genera: Chelmonops, Coradion, and Peterscottia. FishBase doesn't list Peterscottia. - UtherSRG 16:17, 31 Jan 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Comment

message: anyone got a source for the history of the "butterfly fish" term? Cesiumfrog (talk) 00:27, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  etymology section 

message: I think someone knowledgeable should take a look at the genera section of Taxonomy, Systematics and Evolution. Coo-mer Pigeon (talk) 18:57, 3 September 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Genera 

message: Nama indonesia ikan kupu kupu 2001:448A:70C0:9AF1:34A0:CA75:1735:F8BD (talk) 10:04, 3 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nama indonesia ikan kupu kupu? 

message: Nama indonesia ikan kupu kupu 2001:448A:70C0:9AF1:34A0:CA75:1735:F8BD (talk) 10:04, 3 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nama indonesia ikan kupu kupu? 

message: Nama indonesia ikan kupu kupu 2001:448A:70C0:9AF1:34A0:CA75:1735:F8BD (talk) 10:05, 3 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Chyntyaa
Talk:HBO

message: As per suggestion, I need a separate article relating to controversies surrounding HBO, like certain HBO Originals including Big Little Lies, Euphoria, Game of Thrones, Girls, and Westworld. CastJared (talk) 07:53, 23 December 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Made it as a draft, as Draft:HBO controversies. CastJared (talk) 14:25, 5 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  HBO controversies?
Talk:Rosicrucian Monographs

message: *The contents of this article were part of the Ancient Mystical Order Rosae Crucis article. Soon I decided to turn Rosicrucian Monographs into a separate article because: 1) Today, the Rosicrucian Monographs are available from other Rosicrucian orders too, apart from AMORC. In accordance with the Wikipedia's NPOV policy, I preferred to discuss these documents outside the AMORC article. In the current article, Monographs of all Orders may fit under their sections. and 2) The AMORC article was very big (about 40KB) and I needed some way to reduce its size. Optim 17:03, 31 Jan 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Why it is a separate article

message: your comments here:
This article is out-of-date in the sections 1.4 and 1.5 and in the introduction which references the Illuminati section and the Ordo Summum Bonum. The Planes no longer exist, and the Illuminati section is never described in the Master of Life.  I don't want to rock the boat, but I would like to re-write this article with up-to-date information. Is that OK with everyone?
-- Steven A Armstrong  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stevenaarmstrongsf (talk • contribs) 16:21, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Your comments

message: Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: https://rosicrucian.org/home-study-lessons. Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.) For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, and according to fair use may copy sentences and phrases, provided they are included in quotation marks and referenced properly. The material may also be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Therefore such paraphrased portions must provide their source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you.  Moonriddengirl (talk) 16:46, 15 March 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copyright problem removed
Talk:1931 in television

message: Little Orphan Annie on television in 1931?!? Where did someone get THAT? I've seen a few other incorrectly listed alleged tv shows. Did someone just assume that popular radio shows and movie serials of the era were then being broadcast on television while it was still an experimental that almost noone saw?  Sheesh, -- Infrogmation 18:51, 31 Jan 2004 (UTC)
Talk:Initiative for Catalonia Greens

message: I think this article is large enough and may count as a non-stub. Conscious 07:42, 7 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Stub status 

message: Sorry for not having the time at the moment, some please add an ambiguation for the three letter acronym i.c.v. that doctors use to denote an injection into the brain.
Smoe 08:49, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  intracerebroventricular 

message: Sorry, I don't write english so well to correct the page. The correct name is ICV, and yes, they're green left. I think the english page is and old translation of spanish page, and have same errors. Perhaps someone who speak catalan can translate the catalan page to english and could repair the errors.
--83.41.156.148 20:00, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Green left

message: The side bars are too big in my opinion to allow comfortable article reading. Could we decide on one or the other? Estrellador* 20:58, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Side Bars 
Talk:Roman governors of Britannia

message: A couple of notes:
* My changes are taken from Anthony R. Birley, The Fasti of Roman Britain (Oxford, 1981). It's an older work, & undoubtedly work has been done on the list of Roman Governors since then (new inscriptions, new arguments, etc.), but I find it a good place to start.
* Britain was a consular province, which means its governors need to be appointed consul before they could govern it. While this rank could be obtained either as a suffect or ordinares, a number of governors were consul ordinares, and also appear in the List of Early Imperial Roman Consuls:
**Quintus Veranius, cos. ord. 49
**Publius Petronius Turpilianus, cos.ord. 61
**Quintus Petillius Cerialis, cos. ord. 83
**Lucius Neratius Marcellus, cos. ord. 129
**Marcus Appius Bradua, cos. ord. 108
**Publius Mummius Sisenna, cos. ord. 133
**Gnaeus Julius Verus, cos. ord. 180
**Marcus Statius Priscus, cos. ord. 159
**Decimus Clodius Albinus, cos. ord. 192
Some of these may already be linked on the consul list. -- llywrch 19:23, 31 Jan 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I have merged the two lists preserving the sequence used in Salway's Roman Britain. adamsan  12:22, 21 Nov 2004 (UTC)