lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Alexander Hamilton Willard

message: Since willard, like most of the men in the party, has no historical importance outside the expedition, wouldn't it make better sense to encapsulate notes like these in the list already at Lewis and Clark expedition, rather than scattering them like this? --Wetman 20:57, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I personally believe that these people have led interesting lives other than the Lewis and Clark expeditition. It might be better to expand the article than to delete it. --Umalee 21:37, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Wikipedia talk:Arbitration/Policy/Proposed amendment ratification vote

message: Don't use just the word Committee in the text, you're referring to two different committees. --Dante Alighieri | Talk 21:42, Nov 17, 2004 (UTC)
:I agree. Could Arbitration and Mediation please be specified? I mean, I can tell which is meant, but it should be clear. Mackensen (talk) 01:07, 19 Nov 2004 (UTC)

message: The vote restrictions seem rather unfair. I'm sure there are plenty of people who have less than 500 edits who're not sock puppets. Dori | Talk 13:21, Nov 19, 2004 (UTC)
I concur. These restrictions seem pretty elitist to me- 100 edits would be a better mark.
--Librarian Brent 04:58, 27 Nov 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  vote restrictions 

message: Does this page still need to be listed on RFC? Maurreen 05:42, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm removing this from RFC. Maurreen 07:07, 26 Feb 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: RFC
Talk:PDQ

message: I need  a little help here- I came here about PDQ because I work in a supermarket and in the back room a lot of the shipping cartons have " PDQ " in white on a stop-sign shaped symbol. But none of these descriptions really seem to make sense for this. No one working in the back room could tell me either. 74.69.245.119 01:32, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: No matches

message: The attribution of "PDQ" to an 1875 play by Benjamin Woolfe was uncited and failed to appear anywhere in a Google search except the same Wikipedia page where it had been inserted. Thus it was deleted.  Please provide an appropriate citation of it as the original source of the meaning of the aconym before restoring the assertion to the main article.  Thank you.Wikiuser100 (talk) 14:15, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Attribution to Woolfe play 

message: The purpose of disambiguation pages are to help readers find an article about a subject where several subjects have the same or similar names. They are not for dictionary definitions. (see WP:DABNOT). Anything added to a disambiguation page should link to an article, and should not include citations as was done here.- MrX 14:36, 23 January 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed, but the user is insistent upon adding the text. Powers T 18:38, 21 February 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  pretty damned (or darn) quick(ly)
Talk:Intensive quantity

message: I hope I'm not stepping on anyone's toes, but I removed a decent amount of the more "math-y" sections of this page.  I feel the theorem/proof/corollary sections were tangential to the primary focus of the article, and they seemed hard to follow for a reader not already familiar with the concepts.  I have attempted to include the important results of the previous sections within a new section entitled "properties", but they are now presented without mathematical justification. --AHM 21:46, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Untitled discussion 

message: I noticed that the equation for an intensive function on this page exactly matches the equation for an extensive function on the extensive quanity page, thus one is probably wrong.SnakeCasey 17:50, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  equation for intensive function
Template talk:LaRouche movement

message: Curious about David P. Goldman, I took a look at his article and noticed the "LaRouche movement" box at the bottom. He's a former member of that group, but left (or was just kicked out), and it seemed unfair to imply, as this template seemed to do, that he's some kind of a current member. That also seems to be a BLP problem. So I looked at the articles for others listed in that "People" section and found a total of four that seem to be no longer part of the LaRouche movement and put them all in the separate section. Listing them in a simple "People" section would be a bit like putting Whittaker Chambers, James Burnham and The God that Failed writers in a "Communist movement" template and placing that at the bottom of each article. It's just misleading. -- JohnWBarber (talk) 04:17, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: You also have Roy Frankhouser and Jeremiah Duggan who were never members of the group, but got on the template by virtue of being "linked" to it in the press. Actually, Gunnarson fits that description also.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Know your cuts of meat (talk • contribs) 00:25, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Split off section for those separated from the movement 

message: I noticed that J. Gordon Edwards (entomologist and mountaineer) is included on this template. I am not an expert on him or the LaRouche movement, but as best I can tell, his only connection to the movement seems to be publishing a single article in 21st Century Science and Technology. Is this enough to warrant inclusion on this template? Yilloslime TC 00:50, 4 March 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, it's only been like 24 hrs, but with no comments so far, I'm going to assume that no one cares, and I'm removing Edwards. Yilloslime TC 01:33, 5 March 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Comment: I don't think Edwards was central to the LaRouche movement, and don't necessarily think he should be on this template (shoe-horning people into vague/subjective "related persons" is always problematic IMHO, see discussion regarding "Alt-right") but for the record his connection is deeper than a single article: he published a couple notable pieces  "The Lies of Rachel Carson", and "Mosquitoes, DDT, and Human Health" in 21st Century Science and Technology and appears to have been an occasional op-ed contributor and book reviewer for the magazine (e.g.  ), which also published an obituary of Edwards. So, it's probably fair to say he was loosely in the same circles of environmental skepticism/libertarian-conservative scientists, and is often cited by conservative writers, but arguably not a central figure in the movement.  --Animalparty! (talk) 06:03, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  J Gordon Edwards
Talk:Axis: Bold as Love

message: Does anyone have a reference for Mitchell being the musician playing the glockenspiel on "Little Wing"? (See "Personnel" subsection). I've always read it was Jimi, and that's what I found reference-wise so far too. ---Sluzzelin talk 22:33, 23 March 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Changed – refs say Hendrix played the glockenspiel (see "Little Wing"). —Ojorojo (talk) 17:49, 26 March 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Excellent. Thanks! ---Sluzzelin talk 20:08, 27 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Glockenspiel on "Little Wing"
Talk:M-expression

message: This page doesn't say what an M-expression is.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.164.106.200 (talk) 18:42, 14 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  What is an M-expression 
Talk:Tekirdağ

message: Çorlu and Tekirdağ are separate cities in European Turkey. Why does Çorlu redirect here?--FourthAve 23:16, 29 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Çorlu is now a separate article. Olessi 04:53, 7 November 2005 (UTC)

text: Added a fact tag to request a reference that Turkish name Tekfurdag (the second part "dag" means "mountain/hill" and first one is "tek" - "only/sole", both in all Turkic languages, as far as Central Asia) derived from Armenian "tagovar"? In addition, given the location of the city in Eastern Thrace (what was Byzantine empire prior to Ottomans) and the fact that the name Tekfurdag stayed from the times of Orhan Ghazi, this is very unlikely. Atabek (talk) 17:04, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Comments

message: :Çorlu is now a separate article. Olessi 04:53, 7 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: This was directly copied from here. I couldn't find any copyright information on the website, but I'm assuming for now that it's copyrighted. If someone can show to me that it isn't, then the info can be added back. —Khoikhoi 06:00, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Added a fact tag to request a reference that Turkish name Tekfurdag (the second part "dag" means "mountain/hill" and first one is "tek" - "only/sole", both in all Turkic languages, as far as Central Asia) derived from Armenian "tagovar"? In addition, given the location of the city in Eastern Thrace (what was Byzantine empire prior to Ottomans) and the fact that the name Tekfurdag stayed from the times of Orhan Ghazi, this is very unlikely. Atabek (talk) 17:04, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Detailed History" section 

message: As in so many instances with the Turkey pages, this would be so much stronger if there was one page for Tekirdağ town and another separate one for Tekirdağ province with a disambiguation link. I can't do this myself but having the two different concepts jumbled in together will be very confusing for non-Turkish readers.  Ealinggirl1954 (talk) 19:37, 30 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tekirdağ Town/ Tekirdağ province
Talk:Christine Brooke-Rose

message: WAAF - so one is supposed to disambiguate this (Women's Auxiliary Air Force) from the radio station meaning. Just removing it, as a minor edit, is not constructive. 
Charles Matthews 22:25, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)
replies: text:  Um... maybe because one WAAF is an historically significant military unit and the other's some alterna-pop music station in the US that nobody cares about? Just a guess. 124.149.123.196 (talk) 11:17, 23 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:RMS Queen Elizabeth

message: See SSMARITiME.com  See the SS Atlantic.  My fiancee was on that first cruise on Universe Campus formally the Badger and Atantic. 2603:8002:500:3141:3012:CF0E:931E:B0D0 (talk) 04:21, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Date of fire.  The fire was on January 9, 1971 NOT 1972.  The ship that replaced her was bought after the fire and had the first semester at sea cruise in September 1971.   

message: According to the text, "Queen Elizabeth left Singapore on 11 February, and on 23 February 1942 Queen Elizabeth secretly arrived in Esquimalt, British Columbia". She is also said to have arrived in Singapore after leaving New York on 13 November 1940. Now either she spent over a year at Singapore being refitted and left Singapore in the nick of time when part of the colony was already in the hands of the advancing Japanese, or she spent over a year in transit from Singapore to Esquimault. More likely, the year is wrong and she actually left Singapore and arrived in B.C. in February 1941, before the Pacific War broke out (in December 1941). Death Bredon (talk) 15:55, 6 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Question of dates
Template talk:Math-stub

message: What was wrong with the revision of October 7 2004? If no one answers here, I'm reverting (unless someone beats me to it). —msh210 22:50, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: metastub

message: AllyUnion changed mathematics-related article to mathematical-related article. I don't think he/she is correct: I think a noun has to precede -related. Compare odor-related article to odorous-related article, or vision-related article to visual-related article: doesn't the noun sound better? It certainly does to my ears. (But I'm a native American English speaker; perhaps it's different in Ukogbani or elsewhere.)
Note that Googling mathematics-related yields "about 26500" results; mathematical-related, "about 652".
So unless someone presents a good argument for mathematical, I'd like to revert the change. —msh210 18:06, 8 Dec 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: And?  As your cited definitions show, 'mathematics' has a very specific meaning whereas 'mathematical' has multiple meanings.  All your Google result shows is that a word with more meanings (that are also less specific) gets more hits; it still begs the question of whether 'mathematical article' is appropriate.  If you use quotes and search Google with "mathematical article" versus "mathematics article", what do you find? That search seems to indicate that the latter is more widespread in usage.  I think the former is more grammatically consistent, but that's how it goes sometimes. --C S 13:35, Dec 9, 2004 (UTC)
Because mathematical is ambiguous (see its other meanings you list above), I think mathematics-related is considerably better. (It's also better than math-related, which is strictly an Americanism.) I'm reverting. —msh210 05:10, 9 Dec 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  mathematics/mathematical 

message: How about this:
:e^{i\pi}
That's e, i, and π all making appearances (placating their respective fan-clubs), and all coming to -1, symbolizing the need for something to be added... -- Karada 12:30, 28 Jan 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: -- Karada 14:01, 28 Jan 2005 (UTC)

text: This suggestion seems fine to me.  Plain π would work too.  e and i are bad, because they don't look mathematical to regular people.  dbenbenn | talk 07:40, 29 Jan 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Regular people (who don't know what e and i are) shouldn't be helping with math stubs. linas 15:41, 29 Jan 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  An elegant expression
Talk:Anatolian Shepherd

message: I put the sketch of the dog in the breed box because there's no person in the picture, BUT (1) it's not a very large picture, and increasing its size makes it jagged and ugly, and (2) if you look at its copyright status, it says it's PD but it doesn't state the source (and it's a user who contributed only this image), so I'm guessing that its copyright status is really up in the air.  Should I put the dog+person photo as the main photo?  Elf | Talk 23:44, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Which image to use in breed box?

message: I have added a book Turkish kangal (Karabash) shepherd dog by Turkish Associate Professor Dr Orhan Yilmaz, the book was found on researchgate and looks like it may be self published. The author is very well published in the field of Turkish domestic animal breeds including dogs  so I assess it is acceptable for use under WP:RSSELF as . Cavalryman (talk) 05:00, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  A note on sources
Talk:Storming of the Bastille

message: It did???!!! What about the estates general and the tennis court oath? This is such a simplistic statement as to be absurd.
Reply by Trrishan Saha(a different person than the one who wrote the above thing): Yes, they were also important events, but the Storming of the Bastille was an open revolt by the people.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by TrrishanSahaWiki (talk • contribs) 14:59, 23 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  its fall effectively marked the beginning of the French Revolution 

message: Normal 41.114.144.121 (talk) 07:18, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  History
Talk:Twenty-third Amendment to the United States Constitution

message: Just curious, but if we want to give representation to DC, couldn't we give them a single Senator?  I know the Constitution doesn't allow unequal representation in the Senate, but that specifically refers to States only.  Just give them one Senator and one Rep, and things will be fair. Xyzzyva 21:31, May 31, 2005 (UTC)
:I think that would open a can of worms. Vermont and Wyoming have fewer people than the District, which would raise questions. Why would DC still be a second-class state? Would it be appropriate to reduce the representation of Vermont and Wyoming? Unfortunately, the politics of DC statehood make it virtually impossible. --BDD (talk) 16:06, 28 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Does anyone know the reasoning behind the amendment's convoluted wording on the number of Electors the district can have -- as many as it would get if it were a state, but not more than the smallest state?  Doesn't this by definition mean essentially that it will have as many electors as the smallest state in all cases, no matter what its population? --Jfruh (talk) 23:53, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The only way DC could end up with more than 3 votes is if the smallest state was given more than one seat in the house, but if that were to happen, and the state were to have significantly more people than DC, DC might still have only 3 votes, thus even less than the smallest state.  But that scenario is so unlikely that basically, under current law, DC will always have 3 electoral votes.  Xyzzyva 10:52, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Limit on number of electors

message: There's no history given for the amendment. Who proposed it, when, why? Why is the wording like it is? Etc. Hairy Dude (talk) 06:52, 16 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: History

message: I do remember a move during the 60s-70s to transfer the populations of Anacostia and Georgetown to Maryland. Legally it was compared to remanding Arlington to Virginia. (Arlington is the south west corner of the federal district measuring ten miles by tem miles square, now an independent city in Virginia. see any map; the grid of numbered and alphabetically sequenced one syllable, then two syllable-named streets is the same as DC's ... ) 
More complicated proposals would have included more residential areas, not only the two previously incorporated towns apart from Washington. The Maryland representatives on the House committee, mostly from Baltimore, Republican and Democrat together, killed every bill in committee. (Missouri is bi-polar by St. Louis - Kansas City. Would Baltimore state delegates ever petition Congress and so set up a competitive power center that DC metro would inevitably become?) 
Has anyone seen a write up on the Congressional history of the bill/amendment starting back that far? TheVirginiaHistorian (talk) 22:38, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  The answer may lie in Arlington.
Talk:Broncho Billy Anderson

message: According to IMDB, and some weak google hit evidence (compare "Anderson, Bronco Billy" vs "Anderson, Broncho Billy"), he used "Broncho" rather than "Bronco" -- some webpages suggest that that's a more archaic spelling of "Bronco." Can someone clear this up? Zyqqh 00:20, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Spelling

message: It is different than the one at Find-A-Grave. Lincher 19:01, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Date of birth 

message: The first section, "Birth," says that the actor's birth name was Max Aronson. Immediately afterwards he is referred to several times as "Anderson," before it is explained in the next section that he adopted the professional name of Gilbert M. Anderson. Naturally, this is very confusing!
Then in the "Film" section, it says that "in his seventies" he made a cameo appearance in "The Bounty Killer" of 1965. Since he was born in 1880, he would be in his eighties (about 85), not in his seventies.
As to the spelling controversy over Broncho/Bronco, as a boy in the 1940s (already a film buff, with my own projector and library of 8mm films!) I always saw it spelled "Broncho" and even then wondered why it was "wrong," but my dad said that it was spelled that way in "the old days." Later, people apparently began dropping the 'h' when the word was used generically. This may not be "proof," but it accords with a common type of evolution in language.
Billcito (talk) 10:40, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Discrepancies 

message: Photoplay did not print color in its interior pages, so the picture has been colorized by someone (without this being indicated). It's no longer a documentary image. 2A02:AA1:1627:3532:15D8:D98A:4C4D:9876 (talk) 16:06, 4 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Group picture colorized
Talk:Da Vinci's Notebook

message: Although most of Da Vinci's Notebook's songs are sung without accompaniment, several use it lightly (e.g. Ally McBeal) and a few use it heavily (e.g. The Dreidel Song).  While I agree that they are primarily an a cappella group, the a cappella page states that "in the modern parlance, the term applies to vocal performers who disdain instrumental accompaniment in all cases."  Maybe there should be a modifier in front of the phrase "a cappella," or a brief explanation.  --LostLeviathan 01:19, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)

message: The Paul and Storm page has a note that someone has suggested it be merged into this article.  I see no discussion of it here, so perhaps the idea has been dropped?  I'm removing the merge suggestion from that page.  --zandperl 03:57, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Paul and Storm]] 

message: Hi there! To any and all interested: I've proposed a WikiProject dedicated to a cappella. This would be a group of editors interested in improving the quality of articles related to a cappella. If you're passionate about a cappella—ranging from the Pentatonix to groups like Da Vinci's Notebook, or perhaps pop culture representations like Pitch Perfect and The Sing-Off—please check out the proposal and share your thoughts!
Here's a link to the proposal for WikiProject A Cappella.
If you could see yourself contributing to an article related to a cappella (like this one), please consider joining!
:—Shrinkydinks (talk) 20:30, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Request for Comment: New WikiProject for A Cappella-related articles 

message: Not sure if we should add this but Paul Sabourin now works as a tour manager for the McElroy brothers for their Podcast MBMBAM. He's appeared in a few episodes, specifically the Face 2 Face live show episodes, on the podcast. In one of the more recent episodes/liveshows they mentioned "he's the guy who sung Enormous Penis". Cloverjello (talk) 09:31, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  My Brother, My Brother, And Me
Talk:Târgu Mureș

message: The following paragraphs are extremely POV: 
"After 1918 the city of Târgu Mureş, like the rest of Transylvania, was taken out of the control of the Austro-Hungarian empire and become part of Romania. As a consequence it started to have a significant economic success that lasted until World War II. The old provincial appearance changed greatly in this period. The spectacular city hall was built thanks to the economic success of the 1920s.
From 1940, under the Second Vienna Award, the city of Mureş was temporarily occupied by then-fascist Hungary. The anti-Semitic and anti-Romanian policy promoted by fascist Hungary seriously undermined the economic and demographic potential of the city. It re-entered the Romanian administration after 1944 when the Romanian army succeeded in liberating it."
During the period in question, the huge majority of the inhabitants were Hungarians, so it's unlikely they objected to Hungarian rule and that they felt liberated by Romanian forces. --Tamas 15:43, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: POV2

message: The entry originally stated Romanian forces liberated TM in 1944. While Romanians living there must have indeed felt liberated, Hungarians (who were at the time a dominant majority in the city) probably did not, to put it mildly. So liberated seems highly POV in this context, therefore I changed it to more neutral reoccupied.--Tamas 22:05, 14 Jan 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: 1944