lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Tübingen school

message: Why does Tübingen school redirect to higher criticism when there is no longer any reference to Tubingen in the article. Shouldn't it be an article in its own right?
:For now, it redirects to FC Baur, where there is coverage of the tubingen school. If someone wants to make TS an article, go for it. Jonathan Tweet 04:47, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
Talk:Zanclean

message: What's up with the coordinates? Last time I checked, time didn't have coordinates. Can this be explained? Gug01 (talk) 22:23, 11 March 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: It's the location of the basal Zanclean GSSP in Sicily. Mikenorton (talk) 14:03, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Coordinates 

message: The link leads to a paleozoic trilobite, instead of the plankton described in the article.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 104.189.24.191 (talk) 23:47, 23 March 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Ceratolithus
Talk:Burdigalian

message: ;j  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.62.242.2 (talk) 21:33, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  p3wldjwfwfd 
Talk:Rupelian

message: I have added more information to this article. Merging with Oligocene seems to me unnecessary and also rather difficult. Woodwalker (talk) 08:28, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
Talk:Kermit, West Virginia

message: Can this Kermit, WV page be updated to the newest census results (2010)? All the info is from the 2000 census and the population info has changed in those 10 years. I don't know how to do it or I'd try to help out and do it myself.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hillsy099 (talk • contribs) 18:11, 16 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Update 

message: It's at the center of the Opiod Epidemic someone talk about it Dermato1 14:01, 18 July 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Opiod Epidemic
Talk:Maastrichtian

message: This page is about the Maastrichtian, and while it's good to have a short summary of what defines the animal groups that lived at the time, I think the amount of info under the bird heading is excessive to the point of detracting from the article's main subject matter. Abyssal leviathin 20:09, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, cancel that, I think. the new additions look pretty good. But... I think I've seen some inaccuracies. The Ichthyornis article says that the genus went extinct prior to the Maastrichtian. What's up with that? Abyssal leviathin 20:21, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Too Much Bird Info?

message: My searches for Maastrichtian dated dinosaur remains are coming up empty. Does a data base exist for dinosaur dating across the Cretaceous?
Morbas (talk) 16:05, 20 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Try Flora and fauna of the Maastrichtian stage. Mikenorton (talk) 16:35, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

text: Recent NOVA documentary "Arctic Dinosaur" lists the beasts found on the AK Northern Slope dated to 70Ma ago. The Dinosaur bone structure indicates a warm blooded taxa, residing in Arctic and Antarctic polar regions: counters the Meteorite global cooling causal. The Dinosaurs thrived above the arctic circle (4x closer to the poles than the present AK fossil locations). The documentary video lists multiple Dinosaur Species uncovered above the Artic Circle and proposes the 65Ma ago meteorite event could not have terminated these Dinosaurs.Morbas (talk) 04:27, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

text: It's probably due to lack of exploration of Maastrichtian rocks, rare terrestrial Maastrichtian rocks, or both. J. Spencer (talk) 01:36, 18 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Maastrichtian Dinosaur Record 

message: Isn't it 66.5 mya, not 66.0?142.176.114.76 (talk) 18:15, 23 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  End date 

message: Per Talk:Chicxulub_impactor#Size_of_the_Impactor, sources seem to vary for the size of the impactor.  Unless the sources are better, the range should be 10-15 km.  The three articles Chicxulub_impactor, Cretaceous–Paleogene extinction event, and Maastrichtian should be kept in line with each other.  CuriousEric 14:33, 15 March 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Size of the Impactor
Talk:Campanian

message: I would replace "Description" with a more precise systematics placement. Because contributors will hardly be able to resist the temptation to put "just another bit of info" into "Description", defeating the purpose (conciseness) of having a table. Dysmorodrepanis (talk) 09:30, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Tables

message: Should Brachylophosaurus be included in this list?  According to its article, it lived 75 million years ago. Rlendog (talk) 01:19, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Iberomesornis seems out of place too. 97.104.210.67 (talk) 16:14, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Good catch, I've removed it. Dinoguy2 (talk) 16:53, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Brachylophosaurus
Talk:Aptian

message: What exactly is the usefulness of listing all fauna from everywhere present in an entire stage? Wouldn't it be more practical to break down by geographic region and list geologic formations, which then go on to list collections of fauna? Dinoguy2 (talk) 06:50, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It makes up for us not using categories for any rank of geologic time below the epoch level. Abyssal (talk) 06:54, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  List Utility 
Talk:Hauterivian

message: Of all listed theropods in the article only Gallornis is confidently placed here. The rest of them are described as of Barremian age in their articles, their respective formations' articles and in fossilworks. I ask for permission to move them accordingly.  --Draco ignoramus sophomoricus (talk) 18:17, 24 November 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Theropods
Talk:Valanginian

message: Can someone please stop the automatic bots from adding eu:Berriasiar. I've already added it to the Berriasian article, and it does not need to be wiki-linked here. Mark t young (talk) 12:15, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Bots
Talk:Tithonian

message: Should we include sections on the extinctions within the depicted period - especially when there's no article nor even a section on it anywhere on Wiki?  
I'm talking about the Jurassic-Cretaceous extinction this time, particularly.
Try searching yourselves, will you: Jurassic-Cretaceous extinction (or whatever)?
95.72.61.255 (talk), Josh  —Preceding undated comment added 06:45, 24 August 2015 (UTC)
replies: text:  Huh? 77.51.32.104 (talk), Josh  —Preceding undated comment added 09:01, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Extinctions? 
Talk:Kimmeridgian

message: I am going to add a section on the Kimmeridgian environment because the Kimmeridgian article does not have a environment section yet.--Fang 23 (talk) 01:48, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you! <333333 Abyssal leviathin (talk) 02:29, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Environment 

message: Yes, please merge, as far as I can tell the single "m" spelling is just a mistake. Please use care, as the single-m page looks like most of it comes from the old Britannica 11th ed. and may not be correct with modern usage. I am not knowledgeable enough to figure it out but certainly there are other editors here who can. Cheers Geologyguy (talk) 20:02, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merging Kimeridgian 
Talk:Callovian

message: Not sure the images are required.  Is it better (neater) to have the reader link to the organism article and learn about it there? Heds (talk) 04:55, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Images 
Talk:Bathonian

message: The link to Parkinsonia (Gonolkites) convergens currently goes to a flowering plant.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 61.69.255.182 (talk) 21:21, 11 March 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for reporting this. I have changed the link. GeoWriter (talk) 21:51, 11 March 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Incorrect link to Parkinsonia
Talk:Loreauville, Louisiana

message: Loreauville Owner (talk) 23:14, 20 March 2016 (UTC)

message: Please follow Wikipedia's guidelines when including or editing content.  Commercial content (advertising or similar) will be edited or removed.38.104.31.146 (talk) 16:16, 6 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: General Comments

message: Edits to the notable people section should follow Wikipedia's guidelines.  Discussion here for proposed edits to this section before making changes. " It is a generally accepted standard that editors should attempt to follow, though it is best treated with common sense, and occasional exceptions may apply. Any substantive edit to this page should reflect consensus. When in doubt, discuss first on the talk page." Wikipedia:Notability (Loreauville Owner (talk) 23:14, 20 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Notable People

message: , I removed some material that you added in 2018-04. Your edit summary said: "if you only removed it because you thought it was unreferenced, it is in fact referenced".  In fact, it is not referenced. As you discovered, the reference you added two years ago has no definition. As far as I can tell, for almost three years, your edits have caused the page to render with an visible "undefined reference" error.
There are other similarly-named reference definitions that do appear in the article, and maybe there was once a definition for this reference. As far as I can tell, there's not. After three years, it seemed best to just remove the long-unsourced text. Maybe you feel differently? -- Mikeblas (talk) 00:13, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removing unreferenced material
Talk:Toarcian

message: Can someone put a pronunciation note in here? There's nothing more embarassing than mispronouncing the name of a period etc.
80.175.243.147 (talk) 09:56, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pronunciation 

message: I note that two different age ranges are given for this unit - one in the lead and another in the infobox. Which, if either, ought we to go for? cheers Geopersona (talk) 07:57, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dates 
Talk:Sinemurian

message: Shouldn't Lanasaurus be removed from this list since it has turned out to be the same species as Lycorhinus? Niels de Groot (talk) 08:51, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
Talk:Hettangian

message: GSSP at Kuhjoch in Austria has been ratified in 2010. See: Global Boundary Stratotype Section and Point (GSSP) of the International Commission of Stratigraphy. --Franco3450 (talk) 13:19, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  GSSP 
Talk:Black NASA

message: A vote to keep the article:
Chris Kosnik was associated with some major players in the stoner rock scene: Monster Magnet, Solace (band), The Atomic Bitchwax, and also Godspeed (band).
Also their records received positive acclaim:
* Black Nasa - All Music Guide  link
* Deuce - All Music Guide  link
While the band has not sold many records, I feel it is important to the genre of stoner rock, and other articles do reference the band (note: their is a need for some redirect pages for different spelling: Black Nasa, Black NASA, etc.)  The creation of a Chris Koznik article may also help the case of keeping the article. 
Kennonv 04:52, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Editor's Concerns
Talk:Carnian

message: I have this page in my watchlist. It looks like it requires "immediate attention". Ok, only, I am missing wath this actually means... are there any changes that are strongly needed and I don't know about? May I help? (How?) --Kaapitone 18:12, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It's 5 years later, and we still don't know! I have removed the flag. RockMagnetist (talk) 20:55, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
replies: text:  If there's no objection I'll merge the 'Crocodylomorphs' "list" of one with the rest of the pseudosuchians and I will split the Avemetatarsalian list, that's getting a bit too extensive (I added a couple of dinosaur taxa in the list and will most likely add some more), into dinosaurs and non-dinosaurian, since there's a relatively confident distinction between them in this stage. Please contact me if you disagree. --Draco ignoramus sophomoricus (talk) 21:39, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Attention? 
Talk:Olenekian

message: I removed "Ichthyosaurs" from the "Fauna" section below the main article because paleontologists agree that ichthyosaurs didn't appear until around 230 million years ago, 15 million years after the Olenekian. This is corroborated by Wiki's entry on ichthyosaurs: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ichthyosaur
“Ichthyosaurs thrived during much of the Mesozoic era; based on fossil evidence, they first appeared approximately 230 million years ago (Mya) [during the Laninian] and disappearing ….”
I also changed "disappearing" to "disappeard" in the ichthyosaur article for parallel verb structure purposes.
216.77.227.163 20:04, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

message: In the list of Olenekian notable formations added to this article on 7 February 2023 by Fanboyphilosopher, 8 of 13 are not even definitely Olenekian (but they are instead described as "Tentatively assigned to the Olenekian"). I think this severely weakens the case for their inclusion in this list. I suggest that the formations marked "tentative" should be removed from this list. GeoWriter (talk) 19:58, 7 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Notable formations
Talk:Sakmarian

message: The date for the beginning of thee Sakmarian in the info box is not the same as in the text.  Similarly the text of the article (written 12 years ago!) says a GSSP has not been selected, but the infobox gives coordinates for it.  Someone dropped the ball, but I am not a geologist so I won't guess which is correct.
  Solo Owl    Eall Ân Ûle (talk) 01:25, 21 August 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for reporting this. I have updated the article to now mention the GSSP ratified in 2018. I have also updated the start date of the Sakmarian (but this is actually only a temporary fix until an administrator can apply a better fix to an edit-protected template). GeoWriter (talk) 15:07, 21 August 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Needs updating Suggestion
Talk:Viséan

message: The paleogeography image used is of the late triassic/early jurassic, according to the image itself. If you look at the images for the preceding and succeeding ages the shape of the landmasses is similar to eachother but wildly different to this one.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Smoltran (talk • contribs) 03:00, 13 January 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  The image is of the wrong time
Talk:Tournaisian

message: The "Name and regional alternatives" section of this article states: "The Tournaisian was named after the Belgian city of Tournai. It was introduced in scientific literature by Belgian geologist André Hubert Dumont in 1832."  Dumont's report -- Mémoire sur la constitution géologique de la province de Liège -- is available in Google Books, pages 1-336.  Nowhere in this report does Dumont even mention the city of Tournai.  Instead, Dumont divided the Lower Carboniferous sediments into two sequences or stages, which later authors named the "Tournaisian limestones" and the "Viséan limestones".  See:  Luc Hance, Edouard Poty, and François-Xavier Devuyst (2006) "Tournaisian," Geologica Belgica, 9 : 47-53.  Available at:  University of Liege.
The term "assise de Tournai" (Tournai stratum) first appeared in:  Dupont, Édouard‡ (1861) "Note sur les gîtes de fossiles du calcaire des bandes carbonifères de Florennes et de Dinant" (Note on the fossil deposits of the Carboniferous limestone bands of Florennes and Dinant), Bulletin de l’Académie royale de Belgique, 2nd series, 12.
‡Édouard-François Dupont (1841-1911), Belgian geologist
Cwkmail (talk) 03:15, 6 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Error:  Origin of name "Tournaisian" 
Talk:Pérrine Moncrieff

message: Two articles existed for this person in parallel. These have been merged but without a history merge due to Wikipedia:Parallel histories. For the history of the other article, please see Pérrine Moncrieff/version 2. Schwede66 08:32, 3 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article history 

message: Moncrieff wrote many articles published in the Emu, Austral Ornithology. For online access to this journal and her articles see here. Ambrosia10 (talk) 22:15, 29 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Journal articles
Talk:Jhenaidah Sadar Upazila

message: Jhenaidah Sadar Upazila Many people came from Noakhali District from 1950 to 1970. They left East site Jhenaidah West site Jhenaidah. Near Jhenaidah around 3.5 ml east is Uttar Kasto sagra. There was British broker hindu family. Now they are out of village. Another family is Muslim Miah bari. They steel have but power is jeero persent.
I have moved this here from the Jhenaidah District article as it seems to belong here more.  –Mattisse (Talk) 18:36, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  from the Jhenaidah District article
Talk:Kaliganj Upazila, Jhenaidah

message: After the list of schools there is a seemingly random list of people—not just educators but also what appears to be random business men.  I'm going to delete everything in the section after "We are the sons of Kaligonj" (which is pretty ambiguous in and of itself).  If someone wants to re-add these names and clean it up, feel free to do so.Editfromwithout (talk) 21:55, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: List of people under "education" section
Talk:Comparison of kobudō styles

message: which kobudo style does Iha practice in his dojo in Lansing on tuesdays and thursdays? Tkjazzer 00:55, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Iha's style 

message: what does "required" mean? and is it explained well enough in the article.  The article says weapons training is standard.  I assume that is what required means... but does it? Tkjazzer 20:23, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Required" field
Talk:Outline of neuroscience

message: the section on "cellular neuroanatomy" contains a whole lot of stuff that isnt cellular at all!!! its like molecular/ neuropharm.... i would change it, but i dont know if someone else is doing this for a reason that i missed?? Countryroad 17:23, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Cellular neuroanatomy

message: List of Wikiproject Medicine Neurology articles is also an awesome list.  Perhaps this one and that one could be merged?!  SriMesh | talk 21:01, 26 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Added category tree here.
Nervous system	
Organ systems
SriMesh | talk 21:04, 26 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Medicine/Neurology task force/List of articles|List of Wikiproject Medicine Neurology articles]] 

message: Under glial cells some options are missing, such as ependymal cells and satellite cells.
Brodmann area somewhere, could be under brain for example.
Under Sensory system I would suggest itch and proprioception
I see there is no page for reward learning under learning and memory subsection.  I assume this is instrumental conditioning, I guess they have different names.
Add sexual arousal under the arousal section?
Behavioral Neuroscience is broad, yet there is only one topic, neuroethology.  Drinking, Eating, Sexual Behavior, Social Behavior, and many other types of behaviors exist.  Let's make this bigger.
I am a senior undergraduate majoring in neuroscience.  I would make the changes myself, but don't really know how.
Grouphug (talk) 10:51, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with all of your suggestions. Please feel free to "be bold" and add as many of them as you want, and please don't hesitate to let me know if you need any help doing it. Thanks. --Tryptofish (talk) 22:19, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  A few suggestions... 

message: "Outline" is short for "hierarchical outline". There are two types of outlines: sentence outlines (like those you made in school to plan a paper), and topic outlines (like the topical synopses that professors hand out at the beginning of a college course). Outlines on Wikipedia are primarily topic outlines that serve 2 main purposes: they provide taxonomical classification of subjects showing what topics belong to a subject and how they are related to each other (via their placement in the tree structure), and as subject-based tables of contents linked to topics in the encyclopedia. The hierarchy is maintained through the use of heading levels and indented bullets. See Wikipedia:Outlines for a more in-depth explanation.  The Transhumanist 00:08, 9 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Quick explanation of Wikipedia outlines
Talk:Shin guard

message: Do we really need to put sources for this article? Its very basic and almost every one who knows the game of hockey and soccer know a lot more about shin guards that tne information written here.
i for once cant get a comprehensive explanation why rear shinpads are rearely worn by midfield soccer players who suffer achilis injuries quite often???  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.62.98.145 (talk) 11:22, 12 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: simple, references are needed, and that's final.
24.15.175.163 (talk) 01:43, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Hello 92.0.182.166 (talk) 09:47, 29 January 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Helllo
Talk:Electric grand piano

message: What genre of music is this music most likely used? 73.151.171.171 (talk) 05:10, 24 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Genre 
Talk:Electronic carillon

message: I found https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XrPrKq3Qt0Y a Maas Cathedral chime and https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Tcm3nRbcVA a Maas-Rowe Vibrachime. Maas-Rowe is known for making carillons, but AFAIK these Maas-Rowe keyboard-operated chimes were were used as a modification to a church organ. As I mentioned at another talk page, I'm not sure if these external links are appropriate or if this instrument is somehow relevant to the article. If it somehow is relevant to the article, and I can find a better source and/or a more appropriate external link maybe I'll add this information.--73.128.145.64 (talk) 23:18, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Maas-Rowe chimes
Talk:EMS Synthi 100

message: According to a BBC documentary on the Radiophonic Workshop the Synthi 100 or 'Delaware' was designed specifically for their use.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.7.147.13 (talk) 16:13, 28 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Intended for 

message: From the different sources, it would appear that 1970 was the correct date for the BBC who specified various modifications for their model. We can only reflect what the sources say and I will adjust accordingly.CV9933 (talk) 11:24, 3 June 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: I notice that the expression in the lede has been changed from "designed in 1971" to "documented in detail in 1971", which could be a critical difference. In any case, you are absolutely right about reflecting the sources, and I look forward to further results of the ongoing investigation.—Jerome Kohl (talk) 23:25, 3 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  BBC dates 1970/1971 

message: I'm sure he's very proud & excited to own a synthi 100, but it quite clearly isn't the only known working example- that's a ridiculous assertion.
why's it still in the article?
198.147.19.1 (talk) 20:33, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  jack dangers' claim
Talk:Flutter-tonguing

message: Is this technique really called "fluttertonguing"? I have heard it called "flutter tonguing" and "flutter-tonguing." The only way I have seen it written as one word is in German (Flatterzunge or something like that). I have never seen it spelled as one word in English. --  () 04:35, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: New Grove 2nd Edn; Oxford Companion to Music; Oxford Dictionary of Music, and Walter Piston's 'Orchestration' all have "flutter-tonguing". On that basis, I suggest a name-change... Pfistermeister (talk) 17:57, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks, Pfistermeister. By the way, I know this is not a huge deal, but I don't think "Tonguing" in "Flutter-Tonguing" should be uppercase. --  () 21:42, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed. I made a request for an administrator to make this move since a redirect page already exists at that location. --dbolton (talk) 00:11, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Name 

message: I've never heard of fluttertonguing on a bassoon (or any double reed) and I doubt it's possible in any useful way.  One sees it for clarinet, however. 134.173.80.143 (talk) 18:44, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Instruments