lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Vikram era

message: Stubby, but a very basic Start.
Want to help write or improve articles about Time? Join WikiProject Time or visit the Time Portal for a list of articles that need improving.
—Yamara ✉ 17:42, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Wikipedia:WikiProject_Time/Assessment|WikiProject Time assessment rating]] comment 

message: It seems they are the same concept. Is there some reason not to merge these two articles? --Knverma 21:53, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Check this disambiguation page for details on why.  I assume it is a standard transliteration artifact.  Scott Swanson 14:22, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  They are linguistically the same words, the b anv v sounds are in some dialects/languages interchangable with each another (being allophones), so it’s not purely a transliteration artifact. In some dialects/languages one of these two sounds have become prevalent and is used in nearly every word. I see no problem for them both two be merged or continue as two articles, though if they are merged I’d suggest that both the Hindi and Nepali terms be used in the body text of the article. (Whether the letter v or w is used, that is a transliteration artifact.) Kess (talk) 10:15, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge [[Bikram Samwat]] and [[Vikram era]]
Talk:Biogeochemistry

message: I propose expansion of this article along the lines of the topics outlined by Bianchi (2020).  Potential improvements include:
* More details in the Early Development section.  A century-based outline may be useful here.
* Small related-discipline sections for, e.g. soil science, chemical oceanography.
* A lengthy discussion of the intersection of climate change and biogeochemistry. — Preceding unsigned comment added by OHClNaMg (talk • contribs) 23:16, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed further expansion 

message: — Assignment last updated by Squidsauce9 (talk) 01:01, 4 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: Current Topics in Earth and Environmental Sciences
Talk:Arab Democratic Party (Israel)

message: Hi, are Ma'an and the Arab Democratic Party really the same party?I just found news that define Ma'an as a new party; the only link between the two parties that I found is the kinship bond between Abdulwahab Darawshe and Mohammed Darawshe.The Israel Democracy Institute doesn't mention Ma'an here.--Lorenzo0027 (talk) 09:18, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes. If you look at their candidate list on the CEC website, at the bottom of the list it says "The list of candidates was submitted on behalf of the Mada Party – Arab Democratic Party." That said, it looks like the party is retaining its name, but contested the election under this title. I will move the article back to the original name. Number 57 13:22, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you. So they seem to be the same legal entity. But politically I see them as two clearly separated parties. Is the legal perspective dominant?e.g. The Hadash list is submitted by Maki, but Hadash and Maki are separated pages. --Lorenzo0027 (talk) 18:18, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Hadash is an alliance that includes Maki. I am not aware that Ma'an is anything more than Mada running under a different title. Number 57 18:43, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
replies: text:  Mada and Ma'an are the same because even Abdulwahab Darawshe are Mohammed Darawshe related. It's the same situation as with New Right ("Tzalash"), RZP ("NU-Tkuma"), Otzma ("Hayil") and Noam ("Lazuz"): a renamed party which still uses the old name as legal name Braganza (talk) 08:59, 30 March 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ma'an / Arab Democratic Party
Talk:Constantine III

message: ----
Comment on redirect:
Constantine III (western emperor) was not a  usurper, for he was formally recognised as co-emperor by Honorius. That is the only objective standard we got. Neither was he Constantine II of Britain. The Roman emperors Constantine I and II both ruled in Britain, and no Roman emperor ever styled themselves as "emperors of Britain", that is just an anachronism.Sponsianus 22:04, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

message: He was never a 'governor of Britain'; Orosius 7.40 clearly states he was a common soldier simply elected emperor because he bore a lucky name. This is clear in the main article as well I believe. --Jmullaly (talk) 04:48, 20 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Not a governor of Britain
Talk:Eureka (locomotive)

message: First, this article needs citation support. It also has elements of puffery in it with respect to Mr. Markoff and the comments on his ownership of the locomotive. Notwithstanding Mr. Markoff's concerns, the Federal Railroad Administration has regulations on the operations of historic steam boiler locomotives such as operational hour limits and periodic inspections. The paragraph should be rewritten along those lines. My own interest is in eastern railroads and therefore, I encourage any editors with expertise in this particular subject to address this item.
:Cheers ... Risk Engineer (talk) 13:19, 22 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Verification needed and rewrite required to meet Wikipedia article standards...  
Talk:Grapevine Canyon Petroglyphs

message: Are there any legitimate sources for the petroglyphs being from 1100-1900? When I tried to find better sources for this article I found several contradictory claims for the possible age of these petroglyphs, and almost none of them seemed credible or provided any further information. They were mostly just described as prehistoric without further elaboration. The best I could find was the "1499-1000 AD" date listed in the national register for historic places, and I'm not sure if that's an error that's meant to say 1000-1499 AD. Teddybearbutch (talk) 03:05, 26 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Needs better sources on dates
Talk:Spirit Mountain (Nevada)

message: I removed a reference to the following link because the server did not respond after several trys. 
:
--DRoll (talk) 01:28, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually there is a guideline for dealing with dead links.  Vegaswikian (talk) 06:03, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removed a ref
Talk:List of Florida International University people

message: Please be sure that all additions to the List of Florida International University people article are verifiable.  Any new items added to the article should have inline citations for each claim made.  As a courtesy to editors who may have added claims previously, before Wikipedia citation policy is what it is today, many of the existing unsourced claims have been tagged  to allow some time for sources to be added.
For a List of article like this, the minimum ought to be that a citation is required to show that the person is a Florida International University person:  graduate, or faculty, or whatever.  If the person has an existing Wikipedia article, the Wikilink will be sufficient to establish notability, but the assertion that they are FIU must be cited here in this article (per WP:CIRCULAR).  If the claim is for a person who does not have an article, that is fine, but then the FIU connection and the person's notability should be demonstrated by the reliable source claim.  Cheers.  N2e (talk) 17:57, 23 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Citations and sources are needed 
Talk:Leonidas Kestekides

message: Why was the text Leonidas Kestekides and the article name Leonidas Daskalidès? Gene Nygaard (talk) 11:35, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Article name

message: This article was moved from Leonidas Kestekides for some reason, even though no source was cited for the change. Following a letter to the Wikimedia Foundation from its company (ticket:2012102610002934), it has been restored to its proper place. The error introduced by our relocating the article seems to have spread to other internet sources, although there are plenty of reliable sources that know better. It may be necessary to watch against this error being reintroduced. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 12:45, 26 October 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Article moved
Talk:Compression (geology)

message: Do we really need an article on compression that is specific to geology? I don't see how it differs from the usage in physics or engineering, apart from the fact that we use a different sign convention of course. Mikenorton (talk) 17:29, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Further to that, I think that Strength of materials has everything you would need to understand the concept. Mikenorton (talk) 19:56, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I think that it could be useful if it explained different compressive structures, and the relationships between stress and strain and rheology. But as it is, it seems to be way too vague and scattered to be useful, and as far as I know, practially all rocks (except water-rich clay-ey rocks) tend to stay pretty much isovolumetric under compression. Awickert (talk) 00:43, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

text: I just removed the specific merger proposal because I think the scopes of the articles are different. But I would be in support of making this a redirect per Mike, above. Awickert (talk) 08:06, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

text: This page doesn't really contain any information not already implied by the article on Tectonic uplift, though I would personally find Thrust tectonics a more useful redirect. As a stub, it just makes finding information on compressional geology more convoluted.Elriana (talk) 01:49, 21 June 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I quite like the redirect to strength of materials that User:Mikenorton suggests above, though obviously that article lacks any geological examples so I'm trying to think of ways this article might contain something different in order to make it worth being a viable standalone article. the only thing I can  think of that doesn't appear obviously somewhere else is compression as a constraining feature for magma chambers with that limit preventing eruptions (and other intrusions) until pressure changes (reduced compression for some reason or fresh magma injections). Lithification, decompression melting, folding, faulting, horst/graben all seem to be covered elsewhere - as do extensional tectonics, and thrust tectonics. EdwardLane (talk) 10:08, 21 November 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually the current compression (physics) article might be a better bet. As to what keeps magma confined, that's more the overburden pressure. Mikenorton (talk) 12:28, 21 November 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: yes good shout EdwardLane (talk) 21:37, 28 December 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Need for article
Talk:Look at Her

message: *i think it should stay the way it is. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.132.228.54 (talk • contribs) 19 May 2007 (UTC)
*It needs work and references, but it was a charting single, so it's notable enough for its own article. Closenplay 16:50, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge?
Talk:Geobiology

message: The text in this article is a near exact match to http://www.whatiscience.com/biology/Geobiology.html. However, there are also some pretty significant similarities between other pages on that site and the corresponding articles on Wikipedia (Compare Wikipedia's article on Biology and their article on the same subject). Any input would certainly be appreciated. Cheers, Afluent Rider 10:55, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  I can't decide who's plagiarizing who 

message: This article could use some serious attention to work on readability, layman-friendly examples, etc. Barely been touched since 2007, and never truly expanded despite a three year-outstanding stub template, baring the addition and deletion of a fair chunk inaccurately labeled linkspam. Anyone familiar with the topic and willing to put some work into it? MrZaiustalk 13:18, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Abandoned article

message: Very nicely done, Alicejmichel. Kudos! Quiddity (talk) 16:13, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fantastic overhaul

message: Geobiology has significant overlap with soil science, pedology, and soil microbiology. This should be addressed to help prevent the "silo" effect resulting in ignoring over a century's worth of discoveries and methodologies from soil science.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by ColbyDigsSoil (talk • contribs) 04:51, 19 June 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  The disciplinary overlap with the field of soil science needs to be addressed.
Wikipedia talk:Requests for checkuser/Case/Davkal

message: I have never IP edited at anytime on Wiki. The user Baaderthanmeinhoff is a friend who lives in the same house as me and has no real interest in Wiki other than my moaning about it. He did create an account at the time of my week long block but never used it. He made the change to the EVP article recently to see how long it would take someone to change it back. He should be home in a few hours if you would like him to explain his own reasons further but I don't think he is very interested in Wiki.Davkal 15:17, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
Talk:FIDE Album

message: It would be nice to list
Edition	Year published	Number of problems	Number of studies	Number of authors published "total" ("women")	Most works published by a single author ("number" and "name")
1st    	              	                  	                 	                                             	
2nd    	              	                  	                 	                                             	
Whose idea was it? Who made / is responsible for first FIDE album?
Was there something that could be considered predecessor?
Is/Was there an exclusive publisher? 213.149.51.165 (talk) 22:51, 31 January 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Additional useful info
Talk:Turkish tambur

message: This article needs a better organization to be enlarged. Please help. Most sources found on the instrument are in Turkish. Anyone who wishes to translate them is welcome. Ekindedeoglu 22:46, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Comments

message: The most prominent being the Afghan tanbur(tambur) and the Uyghur tanbur (tambur), these are classical instruments used in both raaga and muqam recitals.Please expand this artikle. It only explains the tanbur from Turkey, a small and insignificant country near the mediteranian sea...  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.176.47.32 (talk) 10:48, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  There are many long neck lutes with the name tanbur as well as tambur 

message: I'd love to see a photo of a Tanbur, in particular, one that shows the extremely large number of frets on the neck.
MusicScience 22:51, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed. There was such a photo, :Image:Mizraplitanbur.jpg, but it was deleted due to lack of licensing information. -- Gyrofrog  (talk) 23:10, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  A photo would be great 

message: Most of the articles listed in Tambura (such as Tanpura (instrument), Tanbur, Tambur) are the same instrument in different dialects, and it's a great wp:Content forking.--Taranet (talk) 10:06, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Content forking 

message: For disambiguation I suggest move the page to  Turkish tambur (or to Tanbur (Turkish) as it used to be, and still is, in Template:Turkish musical instruments). Although I think Turkish tambur  is better because there are a lot of country-related tanburs.--Taranet (talk) 14:17, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree, for the same reasons.--Phso2 (talk) 14:22, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Moving the page 

message: As per WP:PUFFERY, should not be filled with "the most outstanding virtuoso", "the famous", "an eminent figure", "the most renowned and probably the most prolific", "excelled in virtuosity", "prominent figures", "one last important". Jmg38 (talk) 00:09, 27 January 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Puffery throughout article
Wikipedia talk:Requested pictures/Architecture

message: Many of the radio towers were mass-deleted awhile back.  Is it time to remove these from the picture request list?  davidwr 09f9(talk) 22:56, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Trim red-linked items?

message: If the latitude and longitude are known, adding  with the "name=Object Name" parameter will show the location in a map tool (at the top of the page).  That makes it easier to find things which are near your own location.  (SEWilco 06:30, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Map of requests 

message: First I am new to Wikipedia, I was wondering is there or has anyone got pictures of what used to be the Crusader Insurance building on Cockshot hill Reigate surrey. I was brought up on the housing estate next to it[Meadvale side]which I beleive was part of the old house when the Big House was built, it just would be nice to see it as was, before woodhatch estate was built I think it was all Farmland, I have seen old pictures of the Angel pub when there was a Toll gate at the bottom of Cockshot hill,horse and cart days!!  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Earlbingham (talk • contribs) 10:32, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Crusader building.
Talk:List of Carry On films cast members

message: Any good reason why the order of actors in Regular cast is different from the order in the table?  Particularly towards the end?  --  Jack of Oz [your turn] 04:14, 13 April 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I think I may be responsible for this, and I have no idea!  The list seems fairly straightforward, based on the number of times the actor appeared in the series.  Hattie Jacques / Bernard Bresslaw is easily explained as they have each appeared in the same number of films, so could easily be reversed, but I have no idea regarding the last four in the table.  Neither correspond to the source used to establish regular actors either!  --Rob Sinden (talk) 08:10, 13 April 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  Let it remain a mystery.  I've made them consistent now.  Better check I've transposed the details corectly.  --  Jack of Oz [your turn] 10:16, 13 April 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  Good work!  Looks good to me!  --Rob Sinden (talk) 10:23, 13 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Inconsistent order
Talk:Marmolejo

message: Here, here, here and here. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 15:46, 23 March 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=de&as_sdt=0%2C5&q=volcano+OR+volcan+OR+volcanes+OR+volc%C3%A1n+OR+volc%C3%A1nes+OR+volcanic+OR+volcanism+OR+andes+AND+%22marmolejo%22+-author%3A%22marmolejo%22&btnG= is another. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 14:50, 17 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sources on volcano
Talk:List of Penrose Medal winners

message: He really deserves one. Here are a couple of memorials, most easily retrieved by Google (pdf format, can't link directly)
*DONNEL FOSTER HEWETT June 24, 1881-February 5, 1971 BY James Gilluly
*DONNEL FOSTER HEWETT by Dick Jahns of Stanford
If two of the giants of 20th C geology saw fit to memorialize Hewett, then we should too. On the ever-lengthening to-do list. --Pete Tillman (talk) 00:32, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Donnel Foster Hewett page
Talk:Underground soft-rock mining

message: Neither the title nor the text of this article clearly distinguishes the subject from that of Underground mining (hard rock).  We should either change the title here to Underground mining (soft rock), or merge the two articles.Plazak 23:02, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The title of this article in November 2007 was "Sub-surface mining". In December 2007 the article was moved to the current title. StarryGrandma (talk) 21:40, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

message: This merge was proposed without any explanation either here or in the edit summaries. These two articles should not be merged. As the lead paragraphs of each explain, materials mined and mining methods differ. Both articles are subtopics (child articles) of Mining and are summarized together at Mining#Underground mining. StarryGrandma (talk) 21:53, 2 March 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: There has been no discussion of the merge in over a month. I am removing the merge templates from both Underground mining (soft rock) and Underground mining (hard rock). StarryGrandma (talk) 18:21, 9 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge discussion
Talk:Joseph Aquilina

message: This Article was catagorised "Category:Alcohol-related deaths in Malta" by an anonymous user (cf. diff of 14th September 2008). Seen Aquilina's background, this does seem to me slightly suspicious. Further, there is no mention of such circumstences in the Article nor can I find any evidence supporting that elsewhere. Can somebody confirm? --Joelemaltais (talk) 23:41, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I can't find any evidence of this, and am removing the category accordingly. Freikorp (talk) 03:51, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Vandalism?
Talk:Messinian evaporite

message: Redirect this fragment to Messinian salinity crisis, yes? Any objections?--Wetman (talk) 17:25, 30 May 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Not as it stands, but it has the potential to be a standalone article. Much has been written about the variations within the Messinian sequence. Mikenorton (talk) 17:51, 30 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Redirect this fragment to [[Messinian salinity crisis]]
Talk:Iron catastrophe

message: Why call it a catastrophe? What's catastrophic about this occurrence? 204.52.215.107 06:46, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Catastrophe 

message: again? --99.163.48.162 (talk) 19:03, 26 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: That's exactly right.  Catastrophe implies rapid change, but doesn't really determine whether that change is good or bad.  Indeed, in terms of Geology, there is no good or bad.  Earthquakes are geologic catastrophes even if no damage occurs to humans or even any living thing.  To be fair, if life evolved on the early, non-differentiated Earth, the Iron Catastrophe would have been an extremely traumatic event to live through (or die in, as the case would more likely have been). aremisasling (talk) 21:08, 6 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: How long did this "catastrophe" take? Overnight? 500 million years? How catastrophic would an event be if it took 500 million years? Sounds like they used "catastrophe" to imply that it killed everything, you know, in the sense that when it occurred life was already on Earth? This article does not explain anything in rational terms.Wavyinfinity (talk) 00:00, 6 November 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why it's called a catastrophe 

message: The article says the Iron Catastrophe occurred 500 Million Years after the formation of the Earth.  I was rather confused by this at first, and went looking for more info, because everyone seems to agree that the Moon was formed after the Iron Catastrophe, yet the Moon creation date is always listed much earlier, around 30-50 Million Years into the Earth's history.    This was the first source I could find that reconciled the two satisfactorily.  I guess I am hesitant to edit until someone who should know more about this than me comes along.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.84.147.142 (talk) 15:13, 26 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, this timing doesn't sound like a widely supported view. --JWB (talk) 21:59, 13 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Date 

message: Surely people are wondering why the iron (being lighter than gold, copper, silver, etc.) would comprise the center when gold, silver, copper, etc. are heavier and have a lower melting point? It seems like the iron catastrophe was invented by 1800's scientists.Wavyinfinity (talk) 23:53, 5 November 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lower melting points and heavier material? 

message: In the present version of the article: "this event was necessary for life to emerge and evolve on Earth: without it, Earth's atmosphere would have been, as on Mars, stripped away long before the present epoch." What does this mean? --Alexey Muranov (talk) 10:57, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I think i've found the answer: http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2001/ast31jan_1/ --Alexey Muranov (talk) 11:10, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  What does it have to do with the atmosphere?