lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Total depravity

message: The sentence relating total depravity to a feminist theological understanding of the pervasive effects of oppression on women does not belong here.  It may be true but the sins of any group against any other group, though analogously pervasive can never present the kind of theological obstacle that personal sinfulness does in approaching God.  Without depreciating these considerations they`re in the wrong article.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 176.26.106.5 (talk • contribs) 
:Whether or not you're correct, Jones is a respected theologian and the comments cited here are made specifically in the context of a discussion of total depravity. The point is that sin assaults people from the outside. I don't know whether she thinks that sins committed against women create an obstacle between them and God, but the point she's making is certainly germane to the subject of this article. --JFH (talk) 01:19, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I think it's a reinterpretation rather than an analogy. She considers sin against ourselves and the "social relations that define us" as an important part of the sin which total depravity entails. She doesn't just think it's helpful in understanding these issues, she's speaking theologically about sin and she thinks it entails things beyond the bad things we do. We can't restrict the article to a traditional view of sin. --JFH (talk) 15:28, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Feminist Theology and Total Depravity 
Talk:Psychedelic

message: This redirects to psychedelic, which is about drugs.  I associate psychedelic with drugs, but psychedelia more with music, and with the associated trappings of hippie culture.  Perhaps there needs to be a separate psychedelia (music) page and a disambiguation page here.  Almost everything that links here seems to be a music or movie link.
: I started a new page for Psychedelia.  The text contains a link to psychedelic.  It surely needs major input from other hands.  ---Ihcoyc
::It seems that there is also a page for psychedelic music.  It would appear that the two pages should be merged for redundancy, and psychedelia should redirect to psychedelic music rather than psychedelic.  ---Ihcoyc
----
Jefferson Airplane is already at psychedelic music --- not sure why they were added here?  Anyone care to enlighten?  --IHCOYC 17:56 19 Jul 2003 (UTC)
I've added a page on psychedelic art (as well as psychedelic literature, psychedelic era and psychedelic experience), so I've moved the art related references to the art page, and put links to the relevant pages, making this a quasi disambiguation page of sorts. --Thoric 21:05, 2 Dec 2004 (UTC)

message: Psychomelodic  07:50, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is it and psychedelica are the same thing? 

message: There is a clear boundry between psycadelic and psycadelic music.217.36.120.131 22:21, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  No 

message: Shouldn't this page redirect to Psychedelic (disambiguation) rather than Psychedelic drug? (Please see WP:DAB). The word "psychedelic", while originally coined to refer to a specific classification of drug, has been also been used to describe styles of music, art, clothing, movies, as well as experiences for over 50 years. This word is still commonly used in family movies, so it would seem that the disambiguation page would be more appropriate than the drug page. --Thoric (talk) 15:57, 18 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Shouldn't this be a redirect to the disambiguation page?
Talk:Robert B. Dickey

message: No explanation or obvious reason for the protection. Just wanted to add location of death as Amherst, Nova Scotia as mentioned here: https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/robert-barry-dickey  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.203.139.89 (talk) 17:30, 21 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why is this locked?
Talk:Black Rose

message: Is this anything other than an advertisement? -- Zoe
l;skflwe;gsd]vd'vlskw'dv  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.190.128.230 (talk) 14:57, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

message: add the information you're claiming to the Black Rose Mansion article with a ref, or it will be removed again. -- Fyrael (talk) 02:42, 25 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mansion
Talk:The Webby Awards

message: The Webby Awards?  We don't have articles called The Academy Awards, or The Emmy Awards.  -- Zoe 01:56, May 15, 2003
:But we have articles with titles like The A-Team, The Byrds, The Canadian Guards, ..., The Times, ..., The Zutons. Wikipedia:Naming conventions states: If the definite or indefinite article would be capitalized in running text, then include it at the beginning of the page name. The Oscar web site does not consider the definite article to be part of the name; they use "Nth Annual Academy Awards". The Emmys are treated similarly. In contrast, the IADAS systematically uses "The Webby Awards", with capitalized "The", also in running text, as in "For over a decade, The Webby Awards has recognized the best of the Web from around the world." Note the singular "has". So I guess it is a fixed part of the name, just as it is for The Times.  --LambiamTalk 08:39, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Webby Awards or The Webby Awards?
Talk:Exxon Corp v Exxon Insurance Consultants International Ltd

message: They changed the name of the ship, but not the company, I think. Mark Richards 18:20, 21 May 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Even "Exxon Insurance Consultants" ? -- User:Docu
Don't know. Sorry. Mark Richards 18:26, 21 May 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Ship?

message: I don't think I have access to most of the reports cited, but I read The Times report.  It doesn't seem to confirm the various statements that are tagged citation needed, and indeed casts doubt on the suggestion that the court found "there is no copyright in a name, invented or otherwise,", or that the court made a finding about trademark law.  Could someone please find inline citations for the disputed sentences? --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 12:17, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Disputed facts
Talk:Squad automatic weapon

message: 1. M249 is downsized M240 General Purpose Machine gun, not heavy barrelled Assault rifle.
2. Both M249 and RPK uses same ammo as Assault rifles (RPK-74->AK-74, RPK->AK-47 resp. M249->M16)
3. Noticed FN FAL assault rifle is no related with M249, but with M240, what is a FN MAG machine gun licensed and manufactured in USA.
:The only relation between the FAL and MAG is that they are both 7.62mm NATO and both FN designs. There is no parts interchangability and little similarity in mechanism or operation.FergusM1970 (talk) 15:37, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Information

message: "Therefore, in many modern armies, military doctrine requires the ordinary soldier to avoid using his weapon's fully automatic mode "
Red Army doctrine until the 1980s was for fully automatic fire. Do they not count as modern?
I quite agree with the above. It might be more accurate to say, "The United States military does not like using automatic fire from assault rifles." As far as I know we are the only nation whose military doctrine is to use semiauto firing or the 3-round burst ONLY with the primary service weapon. -RR63
: Nope. Most armies (certainly every NATO army I've worked with) have a doctrine that restricts automatic fire to ambushes or final assaults, where it's actually useful. The US Army doesn't NEED doctrine to restrict use to single rounds or 3-rd bursts; that's all the standard service weapons are capable of. FergusM1970 (talk) 14:09, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: I just saw this

message: How is a SAW different to an LMG? Surely they're just different names for the same thing?
-- Tom Anderson 2008-01-28 1829 +0000  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.40.81.167 (talk) 18:29, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: SAW is a role LMGs are often put into. Geoff B (talk) 18:35, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

text: I've removed the "doctrine" section from this article because it didn't actually contain any doctrine. To be honest I think the whole article should go; "Squad automatic weapon" is basically a US term and what it describes is a light machine gun. I think we should bin this article and edit the LMG one to say that the term "SAW" is used by some nations. FergusM1970 (talk) 15:29, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Relation to [[light machine gun]]? 

message: I seem to recall that at the same time the M14 rifle was adopted, a heavy-barrel version with bipod was introduced as the M15, intended as the SAW.  What ever became of it? -- Craig Goodrich 68.58.2.165 (talk) 22:10, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The M15 was reclassified as "Obsolete" before it ever entered production. --D.E. Watters (talk) 00:20, 18 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Where is the M15?
Talk:Oleaceae

message: Why is this article titled Olive family and not titled Oleaceae? Is there a accepted practice for this naming?Rmhermen 14:53 May 15, 2003 (UTC)
:Oddball I think. One could make a case that "olive family" etc is the "common name" and should therefore be preferred, but in practice everybody here that works on plants prefers the "aceae" name. Stan 00:19, 9 Nov 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Standard titles 

message: I am not really strict on the issue of drifting away from the topic, especially if the aside is of great interest. But, of course, there must be some limit to digression. I deleted the statements about endangered species, loss of habitat, etc., because it was really far from the topic of the article. I do not claim to telepathically know what someone is thinking, but i do know that the outward appearance is that the article was used as an opportunity to promote a pet cause. I have seen much of this in Wikipedia, but have rarely taken action against it. I believe that the activists need to be reminded of the general principle that the truth and importance of an idea does not imply that everybody needs to hear it all the time. 72.130.140.221 (talk) 00:00, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Digression
Talk:Winter War

message: Hi, either that, or a clueless non-native EN speaker ... but in the sentence (Soviet intentions, final para, Kotkin) "... unlike the pacts of mutual assistance, /.../ Finland was demanded limited territorial concessions and even offered land in return..." the wording "... Finland was demanded ..." reads wronglishly to me. How about "... the territorial concessions demanded were limited, and Finland was even offered land in return ...", or "..., the Soviet Union demanded limited territorial concessions and even offered Finland land in return ..."? Or the sentence is fine, then forget it. T 84.208.65.62 (talk) 23:30, 18 January 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. I've reworded that sentence. Betelgeuse X (talk) 10:38, 20 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Awkward sentence?
Talk:List of copyright case law

message: The US Law section is the most developed both in terms of content and layout. I would like to break it out into a separate article. We could either have a link here that pointed to the main article or we could reframe the remaining article as a list for Commonwealth countries.RevelationDirect (talk) 01:32, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with creating a separate list for the US case law. John Vandenberg (chat) 09:46, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree. The U.S. case list is well developed and there are several landmark cases that should be added. And I'd reframe the remaining page as List of Commonwealth country copyright case law. It will make developing the Commonwealth cases easier without making the article too big to navigate. Malke 2010 (talk) 17:52, 21 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Separating Out the US List

message: There are a few US cases on copyright on religious works. I think it would be good to include them in this list, and any other similar cases in other jurisdictions. John Vandenberg (chat) 09:46, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Religious works 
Talk:Slaughtering

message: Isn't the noun just "slaughter"? Deb 21:38 May 15, 2003 (UTC)
I would agree that "slaughter" is preferred to "slaughtering." Don't we also talk about a "slaughterhouse" rather than "slaughteringhouse"? By the way, the word is etymologically related to the Dutch word "slager" and the Frisian word "slachter" both of which mean "butcher." [User:Bert]17:30 February 14, 2005 (St. Catharines, Ont.)
Is this disambig page really necessary? The first two references are basically to the same thing, the third is a dictionary entry, and the fourth one is unrelated since nobody would enter 'slaughtering' to come to that page. squell 04:46, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
Talk:Rifling

message: because the ".303" refers to the bore diameter in inches (bullet is .312), while the ".308" refers to the bullet diameter in inches (7.92 mm and 7.82 mm, respectively).
because the ".303" (7.70 mm) refers to the bore diameter in inches (bullet is .312) (7.92 mm), while the ".308" (7.82 mm) refers to the bullet diameter in inches.
Also: I’m wondering if “bullet diameter” is the same as “groove diameter” for the .308, and others. MBG02 (talk) 17:59, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Suggested edit 

message: By the magic of Wikipedia, "rifling is said to have originated in Augsburg around the year 1498" (from the not particularily high-quality source) became "Barrel rifling was invented in Augsburg, Germany in 1498".
Subsequent claims (including about spin-stabilized arrows) lack citations altogether.
This entire section needs some rework. Cheers ✦ hugarheimur 20:01, 20 June 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  History
Talk:Kim Swales

message: Most of this was drawn from the publicly accessible information at the University of Strathclyde. Feel free to rework it or to contact him or them if there are any copyright concerns. PML.
I have been attempting to edit minimum wage, living wage and basic income to reflect some of Kim Swales's work, under their subtopics about implementation or alternatives. Unfortunately there is an unresolved dispute about this at present (see Talk:Minimum wage). Accordingly I am preserving the material here where there is no dispute that it should be, in the hope that some acceptable wording can be found to go in those articles. P.M.Lawrence 203.220.53.20 (talk) 00:57, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Texas Declaration of Independence

message: Is there some hidden logic to the ordering of the signers of the Texas Declaration of Independence in this article? Why not alphabetical? Any opinions? — Bellhalla 20:41, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I could not figure out any reason to the current order, so I just threw it into the apparent signatory sequence.  Alpha would be fine as well, if anyone wants to hit it. Kuru talk 21:04, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

text: Aside from the nonsense of "Texas was tken from Mexico", why was this comment made?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jcchat66 (talk • contribs) 15:30, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Order of names

message: This section is horse shit and needs to be removed!!!Who ever put this in here has no idea what they are talking about and only put it here to cause controversy and perpetuate stereotypical myths. 
I added this information to the Article, and used Wikipedia’s own page on History of slavery in Texas as a citation Cosand (talk) 18:28, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I undid the revision that deleted this entire section, but would be happy with a less drastic solution. Could it be shortened and incorporated into a broader section about the causes of the Declaration and revolution? Moreover, there isn't any specific mention of slavery in the Declaration, though there are comments about property that might well refer to it. If so (and there actually are citations to that effect) that would be more appropriate. Bennetto (talk) 19:22, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

text: One would have to ask how many Texans owned slaves? And which states did these folks immigated from to correct put this into context vrs rewriting of history. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.227.24.151 (talk • contribs) 15:00, 4 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Mexico abolition of slavery a prime motivation

message: I've made a couple of changes to this article.
# As near as I can tell, Stephen F. Austin wasn't a signatory to the declaration.  His name doesn't show up on wikisource:Texas Declaration of Independence, and from what I can tell, he was in New Orleans at the time of the signing ("He arrived in New Orleans in January 1836 and returned again to Texas in June.").
# I've looked at several different online sources of the constitution (here, here, and Wikisource) and it keeps coming back 60.  The list on this page had 61, but as near as I can tell, Austin is the main discrepancy, hence my removal.  Is there some historical reason why different numbers are cited everywhere?  (I've seen everything from 54-59).
-- RobLa (talk) 05:39, 9 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Austin and the count
Talk:Fish

message: Some of the "Evolution" section has "slightly outdated" information, for example the first paragraph from Haikouichthys contains information from a 2003 source.  I suggest updating these parts of the "Evolution" department to more modern ones, for example, updating the Haikouichthys part to the 2018 source. Mannlegur (talk) 07:43, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text:  Ok, be brief. Chiswick Chap (talk) 07:52, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is it worth updating the "evolution" part?
Talk:Henry II, Duke of Bavaria

message: He's either The Quarrelsome or The Wrangler. Mst of Hungarian sources reference him as the former, most of the genealogy online (including the one covering pretty much everyone in or connected to the royal english families) as the latter. Anyone been there and met him personally? :-)
I am pretty confused. this geneweb refers Henri II le Querelleur who has:
# a child called Henri II le Saint (973-1024)
# have a daddy called Henri I von Sachsen and a granddaddy called Henri I l'Oiseleur von Sachsen
Seems that Henries didn't care much about who's who. We have two Henry of nearly all numbers. Anyone with serious historical background could shed some light on this? --grin 19:09, 10 Sep 2003 (UTC)
replies: text: Henri le Querelleur was Henry II, Duke of Bavaria, called either the Quarrelsome or the Wrangler.  His father was Henry I, Duke of Bavaria, not Henry I, Duke of Saxony, who was the same person as Henri l'Oiseleur, that is, Henry the Fowler, the first Saxon king of Germany.  Henry the Fowler (l'Oiseleur) was indeed Henry II's grandfather, the father of Henry I.  Henry II's son was  Henry II, Holy Roman Emperor, also Henry IV, Duke of Bavaria, and called either the Saint or the Holy. Srnec 03:15, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: It would improve the article if the cause and location of his death was included in the article. BTW, this is a very interesting article and would be greatly improved if there were some sources or references. But, yes I could and should do some research myself -- right? What a name for a Duke of Bavaria, Henry the Wrangler!--TGC55 (talk) 01:00, 27 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cause and location of death? 

message: The person's name was "Heinrich", not "Henry"...Presidentbalut (talk) 21:48, 8 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Not Henry
Talk:San'yō Shinkansen

message: I need to know. 126.164.59.213 (talk) 04:13, 8 June 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Is the San'yō Shinkansen now ATC-NS enabled?

message: the San'yo Shinkansen links because most of the time it is written as Sanyo Shinkansen. E.g. google returns 1,230 matches for the term "Sanyo Shinkansen" while "San'yo Shinkansen" returns only 228 as of 2003-05-16 UTC. cheers, --synthetik 17:28 16 May 2003 (UTC)
Yes, "Sanyo" looks commoner than "San'yo", but Hepburn-ize doesn't mean killing apostrophes. They are necessary for telling さんよう from さにょう. Of course, there is no such term in Japanese, so that apostrophe is useless for Japanese-speaking people. But I think apostrophes should be denoted at least once. --Nanshu 02:54 17 May 2003 (UTC)
:I second Nanshu. The title should be named properly. Besides, we of course provide a redirect to it. -- Taku 04:51 17 May 2003 (UTC)
:: I think the apostrophe belongs behind the kanji within the parnthesis, where the lit. romaji is usually placed. If we can agree on that I think we should quickly add a blurb to the Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Japanese) to make sure people like me don't go all over the place and make changes :). I however I'm against the use of the apostrophe in the title as I already stated the common way to write it is "Sanyo", and that is IIRC the way it is labeled on the trainstations itself. Just my 2 yen. cheers, --synthetik 11:51 17 May 2003 (UTC)
Is the conversion incorrect on 300km/h, it says 190mph but shouldn't it be 186mph?
Chingster (talk) 16:12, 11 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: I changed 
Talk:Mary Pickford

message: - this phrase has been contested a couple of times so I thought I would take it here to the talk page. From what I understand, at that time early in the film industry, actresses were not billed at all in film credits; the makers felt that there was no need for them to have a personal stake in the film apart from the men and the director. So this is not a question of Mary Pickford's birth name vs. her stage name, this is a question of her being billed at all. I don't know for sure, though, could someone else with better source access fact-check this for us? Thanks. Elizium23 (talk) 03:43, 30 April 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Her own name 

message: I'm not in a position to argue with the  made by , but would note that it has introduced internal inconsistencies; "Louise" in the lede but "Marie" is asserted in the infobox and article body. Other sources differ, while Britannica has both Marie and Louise as aka. Someone more knowledgeable to fix? David Brooks (talk) 16:26, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Inconsistent birth name
Talk:Breeder reactor

message: The Table "Actinides and fission products by half-life" includes radium. It is relevant to the topic but it is neither an actinide nor a fission product. It is an alkaline earth metal (like barium) and a decay product so the table title is inaccurate. There may be other decay products significant for inclusion.150.227.15.253 (talk) 21:28, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: The table has a footnote calling out radium as a special case.  It does seem relevant since it's in the decay chain of the actinides.  Should "actinides" be changed to "actinides and daughters/decay products"?  Should polonium be added? NPguy (talk) 19:41, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

text: I have extended the title to make that clear. I do no know how to put this in a footnote, what would be certainly better. Peter.steier (talk) 19:24, 18 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nomenclature
Talk:Climate variability and change

message: Situs gakbayar 182.3.71.33 (talk) 21:11, 9 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Situs GK bayar 

message: I'm thinking of introducing an easy to read graph from  a NOAA November 23 article with some background from same.
We have much stuff but nothing that gives such a clear long term (500 million year) illustration.
What do you think folks? Lukewarmbeer (talk) 08:39, 27 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  New Graph from NOAA 

message: — Assignment last updated by Warmedforbs (talk) 01:25, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: Applied Plant Ecology Winter 2024
Talk:Wealth

message: I'm a bit surprised there is no mention that I can see of negative wealth where a persons or households total assets are less that what they owe. More than ten percent of Americans have negative wealth and there are even worse numbers in countries like Bangladesh where farmers can be virtual serfs to landownerd because of debts. NadVolum (talk) 12:25, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Negative wealth