lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:No true Scotsman

message: Gary Curtis ref defines no true S as a subfallacy of the redefinition fallacy. Does wikipedia have an equivalent thereof? (I was going to add this to the article but clearly not with the redlink) 07:12, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Not every " fallacy" or "fallacy of " term that some random writer comes up with gains sufficient currency and independent coverage to rise to encyclopedic notice.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  15:35, 29 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Redefinition fallacy]] 

message: I had sentence-cased the "no true Scotsman fallacy" in the lead, consistent with the title. In the last little bit, one user recapitalized it, claiming it's a proper noun, and C.Fred reverted that edit, stating that it wasn't apparent that it's a proper noun. I see no reason why it would be a proper noun. I think it's likely that in running text one might put the "no true Scotsman" part in quotes to demarcate it as a phrase qualifying the word "fallacy":
His argument was an example of the "no true Scotsman" fallacy.
But it isn't a proper name. See List of fallacies: we aren't considering the terms for various fallacies to be proper names. One writes of begging the question, not Begging the Question, etc. Largoplazo (talk) 01:30, 24 June 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed. Carlstak (talk) 03:58, 24 June 2023 (UTC)

text: I would agree as well; I have never seen the names of fallacies capitalized as proper nouns. Seraphimblade Talk to me 08:39, 24 June 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I've seen it occasionally, in the same kind of material that likes to capitalize "Murphy's Law" and "Method Acting" instead of writing Murphy's law and method acting. It's just a typical "capitalize everything that seems significant to me" bad habit, covered by MOS:SIGCAPS in general and MOS:DOCTCAPS more specifically. Just because an idea has one or more conventional names doesn't make them proper nouns, and Wikipedia doesn't capitalize something unless reliable sources near-uniformly capitalize it (like the word Scotsman).  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  15:39, 29 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proper or common noun
Talk:Bjarni Herjólfsson

message: Was he really the first one? There are some Ogham runes found in America that seem to be of Irish origin.They date back to  around 600. See http://www.islandnet.com/~edonon/horse.html . --
:There are various theories of contact between North Americans and Irish, Japanese, West-Central Africans, Polynesians, and various other peoples, at various different times, but none have much evidence supporting them, and certainly no individual people could be mentioned by name. The first North American peoples came over the land bridge from Kamchatka, and since then several other groups now considered native came separately across the Bering Straight. After them, the Norse are the first people for whom there is strong evidence of having reached North America. After those colonies died out, there was no known further contact until Christopher Columbus in 1492.  Eebster the Great (talk) 23:59, 28 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I suggest remove Viking settlement, since it was only a settlement, not a wiking settlement.
Dan Koehl 03:22, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Bjarni's return to the new world "of which no records were kept", his wife Ganessa, and his son Anssonno are all fictional, appearing only in the novel The Memory Painter by Gwendolyn Womack.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.5.253.114 (talk) 06:37, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fiction 
Talk:Amerindian

message: Copied in a comment from User:Maveric149.
Should Demographics of Canada point here, given the comment in the article?
:Thanks for noticing - I fixed it. --mav
----
Amerindian appears in most dictionaries as an alternate term for American Indian. If it offends politically sensitive ears, point that out, but don't claim that the word doesn't have that meaning! Someone else
It seems to me like the contents of this article should be merged into the Native American article.  Do the Amerindians of Guyana claim that only they have the right to call themselves "Amerindians?"  I have no doubt that they call themselves Amerindians, but from a brief glance at the linked web-page, I do not think they are claiming that the Amerindians of Guyana are the only Amerindians in the world.  In fact, I have heard some Indians and many scholars use the term Amerindian as an alternative to "Native American" or "American Indian."  Slrubenstein
I stand corrected. From WordNet:
 Amerindian
     n : any member of the peoples living in North or South America
         before the Europeans arrived [syn: Amerindian, Native
         American]
--mav
Agreement having been reached, let's just revert this to the redirect it was before '213.etc' had at it... Someone else
:Thanks for your comments (Someone else) the point is the term "indian", mixed in the word America, to refer all the native Americans is, as you well know, an historic and geographic mistake. Even if all of dictionaries in the world follows this error. This space is to write as true information as we can. Even if your friend call them selfs as they want or the indigenous of Guyana do the same. The fact is that, to call "Amerindians" all native American people is an ambiguity, the term must be used just in a specific case to refer who has Indian (from India) parents and born in America, as well as we call to the afroamericans. 
:It must avoid the term Amerindian or American Indian in order to avoid this error continue in the history. There is some other terms to use in the case, without ambiguity. For example : Indigenous People of America, Native Americans, American Indigenous. Lopez  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.97.35.64 (talk) 12:23, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
Talk:Octave

message: This sentence confuses me: "Notes in an octave 'ring' together, adding a pleasing sound to music."
What does it mean for notes to be "in an octave"?  Does that mean the notes are one octave apart? This phrase sounds like music jargon, used without explanation.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 23.240.255.24 (talk) 13:00, 2 January 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: This sounds to me as if the word "relationship" was accidentally omitted after the word "octave". Your edit seems equally suitable.—Jerome Kohl (talk) 17:16, 2 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Notes "in an octave" 

message: This article includes a section on Octave equivalency. The term "equivalency" seems to me somewhat inappropriate: I thought that "equivalency" meant something like "equal validity", say between two diplomas delivered in different regimes or different countries. I would think "equivalence" more appropriate, meaning "equal value". A quick search on Google shows that "octave equivalence" is almost ten times as frequent as "octave equivalency", and certainly more than that on Scholar Google. I am not fluent enough in English to decide, but I think that the term should be changed. It appears on several places in the article, also outside the specific section. — Hucbald.SaintAmand (talk) 21:08, 24 July 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: My dictionary says equivalency is another word for equivalence.  But no objection from me if you want to change it to the more common term. Dicklyon (talk) 21:25, 24 July 2019 (UTC)
replies: text:  I do not object either, but advise checking with a musician before relying on us engineers. Perhaps it is a musical term? Dondervogel 2 (talk) 05:17, 25 July 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: "Octave equivalence" is the term normally employed in English-language music theory writing.�—Jerome Kohl (talk) 16:44, 25 July 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Octave equivalency? 

message: It should say that ocatives start at C, and not A.   — Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.171.96.131 (talk) 13:18, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Starting note 

message: Reposting here on behalf of 188.120.128.39:
:This paragraph uses a whole new definition of octave (the very entry it is describing) in the parenthesis - instead of an interval, it is used here as a position marker for the "height" of the pitch. This may be a certain use for the term but it is different than the one explained before and is used without warning. Is an octave something other than an interval? This sentence seem to suggest it is, so it must be explained prior.
ComplexRational (talk) 22:59, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: This is a good remark. Musicologists probably unduly use the word "octave" to denote what may more properly be termed the "register." — Hucbald.SaintAmand (talk) 06:46, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Question on term definition and usage (reposting)
Talk:Nichiren Buddhism

message: Thank you, User:2605:E000:2198:DF00:5026:31F9:5A2F:72A3, for your edits. You tightened the article and improved its flow.BrandenburgG (talk) 22:35, 27 September 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tightening up article 

message: Added a link to the Nichiren Wikipedia page. Explanation of the teachings presented in much more detail there.--Daveler16 (talk) 17:02, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Teachings 

message: If every ex-Soka Gakkai member decides he/she is an "organization" and is listed here, the article would be massive and not really very informative. "Proud Black Buddhists" (among others) was removed once before for that reason, and is again. Please let's discuss things like this. --Daveler16 (talk) 17:48, 15 January 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Modern Organizations 

message: Soka Gakkai is actually an offshoot of Nichiren Shōshū, originally a lay organisation associated with Nichiren Shōshū. It's not a different sect. Nichirenshū is a completely different set of beliefs. PeepleLikeYou (talk) 12:12, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry, I think the above analysis was an error. Soka Gakkai seems to be a different sect now. PeepleLikeYou (talk) 01:54, 26 June 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Soka Gakkai and Nichiren Shōshū
Talk:American mythology

message: Johnny Appleseed was a real person - not a myth. Search Google for "John Chapman" for more info. Davodd 11:43, Jan 30, 2004 (UTC)
-----
This needs to be renamed now, and make sure links to are appropriate vis-a-vis American folklore dml 21:38, 14 Feb 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Johnny Appleseed was a real person 

message: I just linked the fearsome critters page to the American mythology page.  They should probably be merged and fearsome critters as a subsection of American mythology.
Not sure of what the specific definition of mythology is, but I think we need to be careful to keep pop, culture and literature, separate from myths.  
Ancient mythology intersects with religion, but I'm not sure that's appropriate here. You could look at the Mormon church etc as a type of mythology.
   Pchoate (talk) 02:08, 17 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pop culture vs mythology
Talk:William King (poet)

message: Yeah, it's Johnsonian with a bit of filtering.  I'm going to grab the DNB to see what more can be added.  At the same time, taking from SJ isn't a bad idea, as he was an important member of the Christ Church Wits who got forgotten.  The pre-2004 DNB, for example, chopped him down.  Geogre 22:26, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Eep
Talk:Rogue-o-matic

message: Oh yeah, this looks like an important entry.  File under obscure cultural references.
:It isn't too important, but Rog-O-Matic is an impressive accomplishment and has a legacy that lives to this day in the Angband Borg.  [sheepishly] Maybe I should include that....   Paullusmagnus 15:36, 11 Aug 2003 (UTC)
Talk:Animation

message: Many animations are computer animations made with computer-generated-imagery (CGi), while traditional animation was created and drawn using a computer system via graphics tablet because of the limitations of pencil-on-paper animation and scanned drawings. JennyD44 (talk) 18:24, 9 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Future of animation 

message: — Assignment last updated by JadaClark2002 (talk) 19:31, 11 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: Equitable Futures - Internet Cultures and Open Access
Talk:Clan Ross

message: Looks like the first external link is busted. Mojo Tooth 08:01, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay, I'll check it out. -- Derek Ross | Talk 15:41, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Broken Link

message: The article mentions a Lord of Hawkhead and a Lord of Halkhead. I assume one is a mistake. Maproom (talk) 15:43, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Hawkhead or Halkhead?

message: Could do with checking. I think it's more correctly Paul MacTyr (McTyre / MacTeer)the "takand man", of sliochd Gillandres. Weeyk (talk) 13:19, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  William Ross 2nd of Balnagowan married Catherine, daughter of Paul ... 

message: *Clan Ross of the United States — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.195.118.21 (talk) 15:02, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Weblinks 

message: I have put the septs in the main text body because I find the 'hide/show' feature in the little breakout box in the upper right to be obfuscatory. The septs should be displayed in the main text.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:8003:3597:3400:3D13:9AA0:4AFD:FAB0 (talk) 05:36, 19 August 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: That goes against the grain of what is planned with the Wikipedia Scottish clans project.QuintusPetillius (talk) 09:54, 19 August 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Septs in main body of text 

message: Shouldn't the full and correct name in Gaelic be something closer to Rosich na Gille Andras? (see e.g. https://electricscotland.com/history/nation/ross.htm) I'm assuming that "Ross" is an anglicization of the first word, Rosich, rather than Andras, but this could be wrong.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2603:8001:8E00:350E:514:3436:A67E:82ED (talk) 19:22, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: It looks like Electric Scotland is drawing from McIan's Costumes of the Clans of Scotland (1899), which gives the name "" in the section heading, but says in the text "They are, at the same time, known in the Highlands by the appellation , or the offspring of the follower of St. Andrew, one of the ancient earls having devoted himself to that Saint."  would be the same as , just with the orthography updated.  would be "The Rosses". Looking at the current source, it offers  and  as alternate names, not a single phrase, which would seem to align with what the text of McIan's is saying. I put a semicolon instead of a comma in the infobox to try to help show them as separate terms, but if there's a better way to reflect this, WP:BOLD. —Carter (Tcr25) (talk) 02:26, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Name of Clan Ross in Gaelic
Talk:Battle of Yorktown

message: Battle of Yorktown was last batttle
It was the last major battle of the American War of Independence.  However, Yorktown was also used as the base for the Federal Army of the Potomac under General George McClellan in the 1862 Peninsular Campaign. -- GABaker
:It wasn't the last battle of the war. There was heavy fighting at sea and at the Great Siege of Gibraltar, the following year. I'm changing the text to reflect this.Lord Cornwallis (talk) 04:58, 28 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Last Battle
Talk:Oedipal

message: I don't like the idea of article titles which are adjectives... this article should be turned into a redirect to Oedipus Rex - an.
:I think you mean Oedipus the King - which in any case has almost nothing to do with "Oedipal", Freud notwithstanding. A better solution would be to move this article to Oedipus complex. --Paul A 05:47 Mar 10, 2003 (UTC)
----
This paragraph: 
:Freud's theory is clearly unscientific, particularly when one considers that an individual who denies his wish to sleep with his mother would be accused by a psychoanalyst of doing so because he is repressing his wishes, thus bringing into play another of Freud's pet theories.
strikes me as very POV.  Does it have any value, other than to imply that psychoanalysis and psychoanalysists are 'unscientific'? If it does, perhaps the author (or anyone), could clarify what it is trying to say? cferrero 17:42 Mar 12, 2003 (UTC)
This is a nonsensical page with purely false data. Oedipal refers to the complex and NOT necessarily to the play by Sophocles! And for everything that's wrong about Opdipus complex/ Electra complex please refer to the article.
I'm getting rid of it here and now - it can redirect to the Oedipus complex.
--Pteron 01:11, 1 Mar 2004 (UTC)
Talk:Porter (carrier)

message: Introduction is too long.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.21.196.68 (talk) 17:00, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  [Untitled]

message: What is the purpose of this article? People still carry things everywhere in the world, not just Sumer and the third world. Porters are available at any airport or good hotel. And are we supposed toi beleive women were enslaved only to carry things in Sumer?  --rmhermenissue 
:Like any occupation, this one has a history that is worth examining more closely. At the moment it is barely a stub, so your reaction is understandable, but one issue this article should some day explore is that being a porter is not merely a matter of carrying a burden. I intend to add a section dealing with the fascinating history of Pre-Meiji porters in Japan. But all in good time... Pinkville 00:58, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  

message: :The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. 
The result of the move request was: Not moved. (non-admin closure) Natg 19 (talk) 23:41, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 3 March 2022
Talk:List of Italian painters

message: It would be useful to have dates following the names (birth - death). Jeff 18:58 Oct 28, 2002 (UTC)
I vote for deleting this page, a much more extensive list can be found in 
Category:Italian painters.
Any smaller list is arbitrary, and has no one "answer".CARAVAGGISTI 18:11, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Where is Van Gogh? Seriously?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.119.180.87 (talk) 01:52, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Van Gogh? 

message: My father was in the South African Air Force during World War 2 in Italy. He brought back several paintings by Italian artist Magratti. Please add him to list. M. Scholtz December 2013  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mscholtz (talk • contribs) 13:33, 26 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  New Artist 

message: What is the utility of the references in this list? To demonstrate they exist? --Carlomartini86(Knock-Knock) 12:00, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I imagine so. At the moment all the entries are bluelinked. But if a redlinked artist was added, we'd need proof they were an Italian artist and notable. Sionk (talk) 15:30, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  References
Talk:July 28

message: Would anyone object to a temporary protection? Looking through the recent history this past month, I see a lot of good reverts. Maybe semi-protecting for a while would keep the history clean. Justin(c)(u) 03:51, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I love semi-protection, but I don't think the level of activity on this article is any different from many others. -- Mufka (u) (t) (c) 03:57, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Well, comparative activity isn't really important, but overall activity shows a lot of... activity (I don't want to call each one vandalism, just misguided efforts). Justin(c)(u) 04:26, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  This article has had less than 50 edits in the last month.  If you look at an article like January 23 there were 50 edits in the last week.  (I'm not arguing, by the way - just trying to understand why you would think to protect this one and not others) -- Mufka (u) (t) (c) 04:34, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Well, I'm watching this one :) I guess the article wouldn't fall apart if we had to keep reverting. Justin(c)(u) 04:36, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Protection? 

message: In accordance with the guidelines, I've started weeding the Births and Deaths sections by removing entries for celebrities with 0-4 articles in other languages.  Where possible, these have been transferred to the relevant Year in Topic articles. As well as making the lists more manageable, this will help with the globalization effort. Deb (talk) 21:36, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Births and deaths

message: On 2061, Halley's comet will pass by. Until someone clarifies this, I am accepting the edit. L3X1 Complaints Desk 17:48, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Are future events allowed? 
Talk:Closure

message: As a math major, I don't think that brief description of topological closure as 'all points intuitively close to a set' is accurate or helpful at all. I'm changing it to 'for a set, the smallest closed set containing that set', which, though slightly wordier, is much more helpful and accurate.129.81.75.116 (talk) 03:36, 5 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Blurb about topological Closure

message: ............................................................................................................................... 
.........................................................................................................................................................................لا نقل عن شخص سيء حيوان لأن في ذلك إساءة للحيوان 
......................................................................................................................................................................................................................I'M NOT SO SURE.
لماذا تسعى المرأة وراء الجمال ؟؟..............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
THAT'S WHAT YOU HAVE TO UNDERSTAND.
WHAT SHE'S DOING ALL THIS TIME ?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Miknasi (talk • contribs) 17:58, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  يوميات سعودي