lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Wellington Regional Stadium

message: Is that a real photo? It looks suspiciously like a CGI as used during the design of the place. If it is, it should say so!  Grutness|hello?  13:58, 31 Dec 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: That doesn't really make the statement wrong, though... it is known colloquially as the cake-tin (and by quite a few Wellingtonians, too!) - it's just known by that name more outide the city. If you said "The cake-tin" to Wellingtonians, they'd still know where you meant, though. I suspect it's true with a lot of stadium nicknames - I think Carisbrook is called "the House of Pain" more by non-Dunedinites than people here in Dn. Grutness...wha? 03:54, 23 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Image of Westpac Stadium

message: According to the stadium itself the capacity is 34500 and not the 36600 being quoted:
http://www.westpacstadium.co.nz/key-facts/  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.239.114.147 (talk) 09:22, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Capacity

message: Why does 'cake tin' redirect here? How am I supposed to find the article on cake tins?--Jcvamp (talk) 18:08, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I also came here trying to find the cake tin article, but there doesn't seem to be one. The closest I can find is Cookware and bakeware . So I put the thing in. The wording is a bit strange for this case, but does the job. --49.181.184.62 (talk) 12:41, 7 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cake tin 

message: I am proposing redirecting "Westpac Stadium" to "Wellington Regional Stadium" – this is to maintain consistency with the naming of stadium articles across Wikipedia (e.g. Lang Park is the preferred name over Suncorp Stadium, Docklands Stadium over Etihad Stadium, Football Park over AAMI Stadium, etc.). If anyone objects to this proposal please let me know. MasterMind5991 (talk) 13:09, 6 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Redirecting the article to "Wellington Regional Stadium" 

message: Just my two cents, but if the section in the side panel is for field size then it should reflect the actual field size, not the dimensions of the stadium.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.30.19.58 (talk) 09:20, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Field Size
Category talk:History of Great Britain

message: I think this category should be abolished. It contains little except articles on a couple of 18th century European wars; most of the 18th century history of England and Scotland and Wales is elsewhere. Why not just merge into United Kingdom history? There was a union in 1707, and it is not conventional to give such priority into separately categorising the period up to Union with Ireland. I think this is why people are ignoring this category: it aspires to be the home of 18th century Great British history on Wikipedia, but it is not: despite the doubtless good intentions of its creator, it is a failed category. I don't think the formal name of the kingdom in the 18th century is an adequate reason to add to the unavoidable confusion caused by the impossibilty of using the only category name which would encompass everything relevant ("History of Great Britain and Ireland").
I find the categorization system for "British" history confusing and I know plenty about it. Heaven help people who are unfamiliar with the area. Philip 15:09, 31 Dec 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree.  It would best to merge it into the general "History of Britain" category. - SimonP 01:55, Jan 2, 2005 (UTC)
See Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2014_September_24#Category:History_of_Great_Britain for a merger proposal that was discussed and then withdrawn. – Fayenatic London 07:45, 24 November 2014 (UTC)
Talk:New York Mets

message: The history section has no mention of Mrs. Payson. The article should acknowledge her role in the creation of the Mets, with a link to her Wikipedia page. That page has more about the Mets' creation than this does. I'm not qualified to make the edit; can someone step up and get it done? 2600:4041:5C11:7D00:4DA:9641:A82E:83BC (talk) 16:44, 21 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Joan Whitney Payson 

message: The rivalries that the Mets had with both the Pittsburgh Pirates and St. Louis Cardinals are historical. We should put both those teams under historical rivalries. The Mets' rivalry with the Pirates was due to both having high-profile rivalries with the Philadelphia Phillies and it peaked during the late 1980s and early 1990s when Barry Bonds and Bobby Bonilla played for the Pirates and Jim Leyland was their manager.
Also executives on both the Mets and Pirates recalled the two teams playing critical intense games at Three Rivers Stadium late in the season. SnoopyAndCharlieBrown202070 (talk) 01:22, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Two teams playing each other in  just means they're in the same league, not that they are "rivals". You have not presented any sources here that would justify that claim. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:31, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Both the Mets and the Pirates were in the NL East during the 1980s and early 1990s. Both teams being in the same division and the rivalries they had with Philadelphia were the reasons. SnoopyAndCharlieBrown202070 (talk) 00:16, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rivalries 

message: Please change “ The team ended the 2023 season with a 75–81 record finishing fourth in the NL East Division.” to “ The team ended the 2023 season with a 75–87 record finishing fourth in the NL East Division.” Since 75-87 was there record 69.118.230.235 (talk) 14:09, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: The existing citation confirms this, thanks. Jamedeus (talk) 16:47, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 13 April 2024
Talk:Casamance

message: A map should be added to ths article. --Circeus 15:46, 31 Dec 2004 (UTC)

message: Right now, the article says: "The entire Casamance region experiences a tropical savanna climate, with average rainfall greater than the rest of Senegal. The region is like the rest of Senegal:..." It is a bit unfortunate to name a seemingly relevant or even large difference first and then to say it's the same. Perhaps the second part refers to seasons only or so?2001:BB8:2002:2400:5D73:165B:D12F:8019 (talk) 17:56, 17 December 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is it the same or not?
Talk:Zaire

message: Does anybody understand this?
:"A third imperative was to expand the reach of the state in the social and political realms, a process that began in 1970 and culminated in the adoption of a new constitution in 1977. By 1976, however, this effort had begun to generate its own inner contradictions, thus paving the way for the resurrection of a Bula Matari ("the rocks breaker one") system. ″"
Shall we delete it? Francis Hannaway (talk) 12:37, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Does anybody understand this? 

message: It's an excellent, indeed professionally drafted, overview of the underlying theoretical themes and motives involved, at the time, in drafting of the new constitution. The statement even draws on the well-known Bula Matari model. It needs to remain for serious academic readers to contemplate.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 61.244.13.219 (talk) 16:22, 1 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: It expertly summarizes the thematic thrust of the new constitution

message: Defining the country as Zaire implies that it should be pronounced as a single syllable, when it fact it was always two - which is why the country's name was Zaïre.
i is NOT the same thing as ï; the presence of TWO dots above the letter serve a precise phonological purpose.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Random jottings (talk • contribs) 14:10, 18 December 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Name of country - use of diæresis 

message: royal shields 85.255.232.147 (talk) 08:08, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Queen of Zaire nancy mpanzu king Arnold congo 

message: Kwassa kwassa 49.146.251.248 (talk) 12:11, 14 November 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  African music
Talk:History of early modern Italy

message: "The Italian unification (1796-1861)" section has a big hole, between the last paragraph and the one before it. At least some words must be said about how Italy became unified.Oleg Alexandrov  | talk 20:25, 22 Jan 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Problem with this article

message: Why not merge with Italian unification? 204.8.194.242 14:41, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Probably makes more sense just to add the unification article to the infobox, move the unification content of this article into the unification article, and then rename this article to Italy under foreign domination or whatever you want to call it - there is probably a better name. FlagSteward (talk) 15:36, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Oops, just noticed, unification is already on the infobox, and is in pretty good shape, probably GA-worthy.  So all the more reason just to pare out the independence stuff. FlagSteward (talk) 15:36, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Merger?
Talk:Al Hubbard (activist)

message: You remove the information that he was a Panther, as well as the more detailed explanation of his “war injuries”, when he got them playing B-ball. You then introduces the “inconclusive” nature of his records where it pertains to Vietnam, when those records are very conclusive in the fact that there is no mention of him ever being there. Hubbard dod claim to have been wounded in Vietnam, as the Meet the Press interview has him stating this very matter of fact. Would you like to see the video of it? Ten Dead Chickens 21:00, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Back to your old Tricks Rob

message: As part of the Arbcom ruling you cannot perform a content revert without discussing it in talk. Ten Dead Chickens 21:19, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: If Rob removed information that he was a Panther, fear not, cuz I put it back for you.  But in a more correct form - he was a sympathizer, and even recruited vets from their meetings, but was never a member.  Have info to the contrary?  Sources please.  The records do look inconclusive, with DoD talking heads saying so: "Despite that, Defense Department officials stressed it was still possible Hubbard could have served in Vietnam, flying in and out from Tacoma." and "...he could have been in Vietnam for brief periods during cargo loading, unloading operations or for crew rest purposes." (see your linked article).  Can I also see this video you mentioned above? 165.247.219.220 21:53, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  He started a Black Panther Chapter in VVAW, 53-54 Nicosia. Ten Dead Chickens 22:06, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  You mean he started a Black Panther chapter of VVAW in Harlem, correct.  But he wasn't officially a Panther.  He also started several Campus chapters of VVAW, but he wasn't at that time a student.  And he started the first VVAW PAC involved in congressional elections, but he wasn't a congressman.  Same Nicosia source. 165.247.219.220 22:33, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  "There was Al Hubbard, who was a Black Panther who was also pushing the organization toward violent confrontation," Nicosia added.  Ten Dead Chickens 22:38, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Interesting.  Perhaps Nicosia has learned more about the man subsequent to his published book; good enough for me, so I put it back in the article.  (Until I discover that Nicosia was misquoted, or simply incorrect.) Can I see the video you offered to Rob above? 165.247.219.220 23:00, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Recent Hubbard Rewrites
Talk:Poplar Rates Rebellion

message: This article is takes a wholly favourable view of the dispute, and contains numerous contentious statements.Philip 16:24, 31 Dec 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I've removed the POV tag now following a very slight rewrite in more encyclopedic style, but I don't really see any serious neutrality problems with it anyway. If anyone wants to point out which statements they believe are contentious, we'll have a look at them! Keithlard 14:13, 6 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Shift-share analysis

message: I'm a grad student in economics, and I'm familiar with using shift-shares.  I'm going to work on expanding this article a little, making it useful to both technicians and layman, and addressing the refimprove tag from Dec 2009.  While I'm working I'm going to post the underconstruction banner, but I hope to remove both that and the refimprove by week's end.  Estaling (talk) 14:00, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I believe that I have addressed the lack of references, so I have removed the refimprove tag.  I'm also finished with reorganizing the article, so I removed the underconstruction banner.  However, I do plan to make some continued improvements to the article in the future.Estaling (talk) 15:18, 24 October 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Page Expansion
Talk:Winnecke 4

message: Brady Haran's video , mentions (presumably on the authority of Merrifield) that the pair catalogued by Hevelius was the significantly brighter and wider pair 74 and 75 UMa, somewhat to the NE. Is there a source for this? (Merrifield also argues against classifying M40 as a "mistake", saying that reporting failure to locate a previously cited object (in this case, nebulosity around a double star) is also an important aspect of science.) -- Elphion (talk) 14:14, 24 February 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hevelius
Talk:Beehive Cluster

message: The main text says that the diameter of the Beehive is 16 ly, but the table says that its radius is 16 ly.  Which is it?  Vegasprof 19:32, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: 16 is the diameter, 8 is the radius--I fixed it.--Todd 02:36, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Comments

message: The photograph accompanying this article does not represent well the appearance of M44. I believe that the photograph depicts a small portion of the cluster - the dense region around Epsilon Cancri and 42 Cancri. A wider-scale photograph would be more appropriate.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.60.209.109 (talk) 17:13, 18 November 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Photograph

message: Can someone explain why it was called a beehive, and when? My guess it was in U.S? Thanks! 116.250.237.211 (talk) 10:18, 3 October 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm also thinking the same thing here, why is it called the "Beehive Cluster"? User:Hamterous1 (discuss anything!🐹✈️) 11:53, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why a beehive
Talk:Messier 43

message: :The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section. 
The result of the debate was Move all.  —Wknight94 (talk) 23:11, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: The Orion Nebula M42 occupies most of the image area. M43 is just the splodge in the central part. Better illustration for this article would be a cut of this high quality HST image of both these nebulae. I'll try to make it. --Egg ✉ 12:18, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Picture 

message: The photograph shown in this article is not actually a picture of M43, since M43 is the teadrop-shaped nebula located just north of M42, and not that one.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.136.233.189 (talk) 21:46, 9 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wrong picture
Talk:Messier 52

message: :The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section. 
The result of the debate was Move all.  —Wknight94 (talk) 23:15, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Messier 55

message: :The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section. 
The result of the debate was Move all.  —Wknight94 (talk) 23:16, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

message: Removed fictional name added by unregistered user 86.8.19.126 on 16:34, 24 January 2014 . I.e. Saying  "Other name added, I have documents of proof." without even citing is no support for addition. Arianewiki1 (talk) 12:21, 9 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fictional Name
Talk:Messier 62

message: Should we really keep both images? It breaks the layout, though I was wanting to get some opions on which should be kept. ~  02:20, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think it's okay to have both images. They provide different perspectives. If this article ever gets properly expanded, the layout can be improved.—RJH (talk) 16:29, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Images
Talk:Leo Triplet

message: The correct name for this triplet is "Leo Triplet", not "Leo Triplett".  The spelling of "triplet" should be the same as the word in the English dictionary.  As best as I can tell, the only places where "triplett" is used are the SEDS page on the galaxies and other webpages that have copied information from the SEDS page (including the older version of this Wikipedia page).  Please discuss the rename here if you think I am in error. GeorgeJBendo 12:15, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rename to Leo Triplet
Talk:Pussy, Savoie

message: Im looking for a map of Pussy, but cant seem to be able to find one. Can some one help?
:You can get a map of the area around it by looking it up on mappy.com.  Chameleon 11:22, 14 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Map needed 

message: The given source doesn't directly mention Pussy, and especially after seeing pussyfrance.YTMND.com/ I was a little dubious, but there are indeed three pages at the site that refer to Pussy, including this one (with "aux alentours..." translating to "in the neighborhoods...").  --Interiot 20:14, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Go on maps.google.com and type in "pussy", it will go to "Pussy, France" 24.129.237.34 (talk) 23:20, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sources 

message: There is allegedly a Madame Fouqueau de Pussy who was an author at some point. I am not joking, I am told that's a real person. Does anyone know anything about her? 69.172.117.108 (talk) 14:07, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Jeanne-Justine Fouqueau de Pussy, I think. /ƒETCHCOMMS/ 01:27, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Famous author
Talk:Pálinka

message: Dear IP,
please engage yourself better with the talk page rather than bullying others with unprofessional explanations. This article is not about the Romanian Pălincă, which is anyway mentioned in the lead as a similar product (I even moved the source there), no need twice to explain the same, anyway.(KIENGIR (talk) 17:52, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  IP edit 

message: first sentence indicates that pálinka is called stamesz or stampedli in hungarian, which is untrue. pálinka is called pálinka in hungarian, stampedli/stamesz is only used as a slang. 188.142.200.213 (talk) 03:24, 2 December 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  first sentence is untrue 

message: Just reverted a change in pronunciation someone made who either doesn’t know Hungarian or doesn’t really know English. Either way, barack is *not* “barazk” but “baratsk”. The previous version was correct. Fenevad (talk) 02:24, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pronunciation 

message: The word stampedli/stampó/kupica is not about the substance (in this case the pálinka) but rather refering to the little glass from which you drink spirits. 84.236.95.206 (talk) 10:57, 29 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Stampedli
Talk:Steak pie

message: "Other types of steak pie are available around the world", states the article.
Any more details on this? I don't recall seeing anything steak pie-like in any other country. Correspondingly I have seen visitors in Britain, having been served steak pie, reluctant to eat it. -- Abut 16:11, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Outside Britain

message: I think the term "steak pie supper" is used in Scotland only - I've certainly never heard it used in other parts of the UK. AdorableRuffian 22:49, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Steak pie supper
Talk:Mary Ann Bugg

message: I have added a neutrality tag to the article, I would like to call to question the presentation of the alternative view of the date of death, I feel that it is more widely held that Mary Ann died in 1867 but her date of death at the start of the article is 1905. And in the death section, it is stated that the fact that she died in 1867 is not true, linking to a website which seems to present original research, it would be fine if it was listed as something like "an alternate theory, is that Mary Ann did not in fact die in 1867, but" rather than the way it currently is, which seems to imply that the books on thunderbolt to date have been incorrect. I can understand that the death as reported at the time can give rise to speculation that it was not actually, Mary Ann who died, but someone else, but I feel that it is presented too much as supported fact, but when looking at a page on the citation, the website claims that there "have been made in emails, articles, and letters to editors of various newspapers that the death certificate shown below could not possibly be that of Mary Ann Bugg" and then goes about debunking each of the key arguments, if so many people have set out to dispute the website, that the creator has to make mention of them, then it should be presented in the article here as a possible theory, and not how it currently stands.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.181.80.50 (talk) 12:49, 27 April 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: In light of this and discussion at WP:CP I have restored the page. I assume you mean by this that you are prepared to licence this material as you did at Thunderbolt (New South Wales). --rbrwr± 13:41, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Original research 

message: I have removed the tag as it was added without discussion as to what NPOV was being breached.  Unless the tager is prepared to state what offends, they should not tag--A Y Arktos\talk 09:14, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Neutral Point of View 

message: I think better tagged as Original research. We went trough this with Captain Thunderbolt.
Barry's Page is obviously a good reference, and his participation must be encouraged. However I think a rewrite is needed to wikify and remove POV as happened on the thunderbolt page.Ghostieguide 00:45, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Original research 

message: I have reverted  by . This edit drastically changed some 'facts' and mucked up the use of Ibid (use of which is supposed to be avoided in any case) in the references and replaced the references with this: http://users.tpg.com.au/users/barrymor/Mary%20Ann%20Bugg.html, which seems to be a self published website.(see mentions of this site maintained by 'Barry Sinclair', above.)
* There seem to be 2 separate camps over the death of Bugg, particularly how, when and even who actually died. I am not a 'member' of either side.
* Wikipedia is not the place for this difference of 'opinion' to be played out, especially by just making major edits to the Mary Ann Bugg page. Rational discussion of the issue is required. - 220 of Borg 04:54, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Revert
Talk:Eugene Field

message: ==Untithere on talk rather than being orphaned. -- Infrogmation 21:14, 31 Dec 2004 (UTC)

message: Apparently Eugene Jr. was a famous signature forger. Watching an episode of History Detectives right now, talking about some Abraham Lincoln signatures he forged in the late 1920s and early 1930s. Eugene Jr. at least ought to be mentioned in this article, if not get an article of his own. --Ragemanchoo (talk) 04:52, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Eugene Field II?

message: I deleted the following paragraph from the Legacy section because it doesn't appear to fit (e.g., it's not a famous saying that people quote a lot). In case anyone disagrees, or can make it work better in a different section of the article, I'm putting it here:
Reviewing an actor named Creston Clarke in the title role of King Lear, Field commented that, "Mr. Clarke played the King all evening as though under constant fear that someone else was about to play the Ace." 2600:100A:B122:8B4A:0:16:1DD7:FC01 (talk) 05:01, 21 April 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removed text