lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Louis Philippe I

message: Is there a reason for the missing hyphen in the name, compared to the french spelling (Louis-Philippe)? MeAmME (talk) 16:58, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hyphen? 

message: The article says that Louis Philippe's father had a hand in the execution of Marie Antoinette, but that is incorrect. His father was a regicide and voted for the death of Louis XVI, but he was rounded up at the same time that Marie Antoinette was put on trial, and he survived her for only a few weeks. 169.253.162.2 (talk) 22:07, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Marriage 

message: The lead section contains a reference (added here in 2022) to "the Spanish renunciation" with a link to "Phillip V of Spain". As it's currently worded, the implication seems to be that Charles X abdicated because of the July Revolution and the Peace of Utrecht. I think it's actually trying to say that Louis Philippe's accession was (at least in part) a result of the ineligibility of Phillip V's descendants due to the Peace of Utrecht.
Frankly, I don't know much about this stuff. As it stands, the addition is confusing. Should it be there? Should it be reworded? Does this article need to discuss the Peace of Utrecht? If so, how should it be handled? Jean-de-Nivelle (talk) 21:01, 8 October 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, I think that's what it's trying to say but I've removed it because it's a red herring and unnecessarily confuses. There was no prospect of the Spanish Bourbons coming to the throne - they weren't stepped over because of the Utrecht renunciation. The Orleanists came to power as part of a bourgeois revolution. The legitimism of the line of succession wasn't really relevant - anyone who cared about it would have supported Charles X and his grandson. DeCausa (talk) 10:58, 9 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  "The Spanish Renunciation" 

message: Can we try to get as many people as possible working on this article? This article has a lot of information already, but needs a lot of work. For example, look at the French and Portuguese versions of the article. I can’t do this alone, since I’m a fairly busy person. I’d like a decent amount of attention payed to this article, since I believe it is necessary for it to be cleaned up. Henry Berghoff (talk) 02:19, 4 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  This article needs serious work
Talk:United States Navy SEALs

message: I've been spending a little bit of time cleaning up and adding context to the the UDT section, but now realize its quite long and the level of detail is not consistent with the other sections. Being fairly new here, I just wanted to see if its better to carry over my UDT edits to the UDT page, and revise this section to be more high-level. Appreciate any guidance on how best to approach this section and others on this page. Schwinnspeed (talk) 22:40, 5 December 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Since we do have a UDT article, the majority of information, historical facts & anecdotes, names, dates and places, specific to the UD Teams, and prior the creation of the SEALs, should be on the UDT page. This page, the SEAL article, is a high-traffic, high-visibility page and the content should be kept as high quality as possible. - wolf 03:22, 6 December 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks, ok will work on carrying those edits over to the UDT page and cleaning the UDT section on this page up a bit. Appreciate the guidance Schwinnspeed (talk) 03:40, 6 December 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Underwater Demolition Teams 

message: There is quite a bit of recent history missing, particularly with culture of SEALs, Gallagher, danger of training, and drug use. The DoN has opened an investigation into the practices of the program. Is it worth adding a controversies section or placing it in history? Misterniceguii (talk) 16:11, 10 September 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Sure, why not? There's a controversies section on the DEVGRU page, so if you have content and sourcing for a such a section here, go for it. - wolf 22:37, 10 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Controversies and Investigations 

message: Yes, I get that they're the article titles - that we use here. But I was just saying that, in that particular list, going with the unit's full name, instead of the informal name, or commonname from here, looked more fitting. That's why I agreed with the other editor. There's no need to keep reverting the same thing. Have a mice day. - wolf 07:20, 17 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Infobox
Talk:Treaty of Verdun

message: The Treaty of Verdun is commonly and traditionally considered as having far-reaching consequences for the disunity of territories that made up the Middle Kingdom, and it being " carried out without any regard to linguistic and cultural continuities" as causing the future French-German enmity, but both can be contributed more to the disintegration of the Holy Roman Empire than to the treaty: the weakening of the Empire caused the same effect throughout its territory, not just the former Middle Francia, and the two "Verdun Kingdoms" perceived as linguistically/culturally homogenous were also in fact heterogeneous (Flanders and Occitania/Slavic parts). Even the disunity of the Italian Peninsula was more of a result of foreign rule (German king) and the South was not a part of the Middle Kingdom anyway. The effects of the treaty were short-lived as other treaties soon superseded it and their effects (most of the Middle Kingdom belonging to the Empire) lasted far longer.
I think the "Legacy" section should be rewritten to reflect this. Zhmr (talk) 12:32, 18 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Legacy
Talk:Nihonium

message: Interesting paper! Double sharp (talk) 15:30, 26 November 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Possible use of ionic liquids to probe Nh chemistry (based on studies of In and Tl) 

message: Is this been actually synthesized? This is very confusing. Please help! Porygon-Z 19:15, 8 May 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  NhOH 

message: I think the half life of nihonium is 20secs 
Source: https://pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/element/Nihonium Random exploration (talk) 13:38, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Your source states "7 s ± 3" not 20. Vsmith (talk) 14:01, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: That's weird, because on Google's preview section when searching "nh-286 decay pattern," it says a half-life of 20 seconds, but on another source, ptable.com, it says the element's half-life is 5 minutes. Please help! Aknip (talk) 18:34, 18 August 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Because 286Nh was predicted to have a 5-minute half-life before it was actually discovered. Double sharp (talk) 11:25, 25 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Let update 

message: Article was published on 15 March 2017, and mentions the ceremony being on Tuesday. So probably 14 March. Double sharp (talk) 04:21, 2 March 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Date of ceremony
Talk:Queen Victoria

message: Under "Declining health and death", I would give to discuss adding something about the death of the last Victorian. For example: "Born on 27 May 1900, British supercentenarian Ethel Lang died on 16 January 2015, marking the death of the last Brit verified to have been born in the Victorian era".
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/jan/18/ethel-lang-last-victorian-dies-victorian-values-live-on
https://www.bbc.com/news/newsbeat-30848592
This could perhaps be followed by a note along the lines of: "Japan's Nabi Tajima (4 August 1900 – 21 April 2018) was the last person of all to verifiably have been born during Victoria's lifetime.--78.157.120.208 (talk) 17:54, 12 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  The last Victorian 

message: A few of these tags in the article. Just noting here to stave off an FAR. Tim O'Doherty (talk) 12:48, 30 September 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Those parts don't appear particularly vital and could probably just be cut if necessary. Celia Homeford (talk) 12:10, 2 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  [citation needed] 

message: (non-automated message) Greetings! I have opened an RfC on WT:ROYALTY that may be of interest to users following this article talk page! You are encouraged to contribute to this discussion here! Hurricane Andrew (444) 20:03, 24 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  RfC of interest 

message: Sometime when I was still in high school, a recording of what appears to be Queen Victoria's voice was made public.  The audio condition was bad - it was on a roll not a disc - but her voice could not be made out.  I have no idea what her Majesty's voice sounded like, but I do know her mother tongue was German and she never fully mastered the English language, although, if that recording was any indication, she did speak English fluently.173.206.80.153 (talk) 09:30, 15 January 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: The relevancy being? EmilySarah99 (talk) 10:01, 15 January 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: "her mother tongue was German and she never fully mastered the English language" = utter garbage, disproven by the article text and the sources therein. DrKay (talk) 18:07, 15 January 2024 (UTC)

text: Interesting piece on the possible recording here. Johnbod (talk) 03:49, 16 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Her Majesty's Voice 

message: Please add the category :Category:Mothers of Saxon monarchs. 98.228.137.44 (talk) 00:17, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Awhellnawr123214 (talk) 01:10, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
replies: text:  Please add the category :Category:Mothers of Saxon monarchs to the list of categories at the bottom of the article, as Queen Victoria's second son Alfred became Duke of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha.98.228.137.44 (talk) 01:22, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

text: User:CanonNi (talk|contribs) 01:28, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 17 April 2024
Talk:Dagobert I

message: This tomb may be over the tomb of Dagobert, but it is NOT the tomb of Dagobert but a much later addition.  It therefore does not speak AT ALL to the history covered in the entry.  Weird choice.  And is this image copyright? - MichaelTinkler
:Hmm... the "portrait" image isn't really an improvement, since it falsely gives the impression that there's any reason at all to believe that Dagobert looked like that. It's clearly not contemporary, it's just a picture someone painted more than a thousand years later and called Dagobert I. I think we should rethink including purported images of people if we can't find actual images. -- Someone else 02:37, 14 Oct 2003 (UTC)
replies: text: Idiot the picture is modified by the artist to make more relevant the pedigree of the king... the blood link with his Holy Ancestor... Understanding? and look at the strange position of the hand, thus normally in portraits we do not see often the hands...
The conspiracy theories outlined in Holy Grail, Holy Blood should not be stated as uncontroverted facts.  Should they be included at all, they should be accompanied by a statement of whose theories they are, and how widely accepted they are.  Yes, 213.*, this means you. Shimmin 17:54, 21 May 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: I added the reference provided and made changes associated with it.
Dthem 2000 14:41, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Reference

message: Here's a coin of Dagobert I. Feel free to insert it in the article. Cheers PHG (talk) 19:05, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Coin of Dagobert I

message: Here's a solidus of Dagobert I, minted in Marseilles. Feel free to insert it in the article. Cheers PHG (talk) 21:18, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Solidus of Dagobert I

message: What is the source for the birth year of "circa 603"? https://www.britannica.com/biography/Dagobert-I says 605. The Crab Who Played With The Sea (talk) 22:29, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Year of birth
Talk:Sámi peoples

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: moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) - 🔥𝑰𝒍𝒍𝒖𝒔𝒊𝒐𝒏 𝑭𝒍𝒂𝒎𝒆 (𝒕𝒂𝒍𝒌)🔥 20:00, 29 October 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Sámi →  – When a group of peoples and the languages they speak have the same name, it is convention to use "name peoples" and "name languages". Here are a few of many examples:
#"Germanic peoples" and "Germanic languages"
#"Austronesian peoples" and "Austronesian languages"
#"Mongolic peoples" and "Mongolic languages"
Move per WP:CONSISTENT. – Treetoes023 (talk) 18:54, 22 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 22 October 2023 

message: " This tallies with archeological evidence suggesting that several different cultural groups made their way to the core area of Sámi from 8000 to 6000 BC, presumably including some of the ancestors of present-day Sámi." < But NOT carrying Y-Hg. "N", as far as we kno up to kow ... Thus, it does not "tally"HJJHolm (talk) 16:16, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Genetics 

message: I've been trying to research forced sterilizations of the Sami and have been looking for sources supporting this claim. In the section "genetic studies" it claims that forced sterilizations of Sami is an example of discrimination against them, and cites three news articles about the Swedish forced sterilization program to support it. These articles does not mention Sami people, rather it mentions racial hygiene, which I do not believe is sufficient for a claim that ethnic minorities were targeted by the program.  It might be true that the program disproportionally targeted Sami but this claim needs to be supported, especially since every direct source I have found by a government body or independent group, including investigations by the Swedish state, have found that Sami women were not disproportionally sterilized by the program. https://www.regeringen.se/contentassets/68b217b7f8e746a799536f3ad851c05e/steriliseringsfragan-i-sverige-1935---1975/ 85.224.75.191 (talk) 07:03, 12 December 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I looked through the sources supposedly backing that content up and none of them mentioned the Sámi, so it appears to be a case of WP:SYNTH and I have removed it for now. If reliable sources supporting such content in regards to the Sámi can be found, it can be restored. TylerBurden (talk) 13:44, 12 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sources does not support forced sterilization 

message: Please link to Fridtjof Nansen in the comments on Samuel Balto in the “Notable people of Sámi descent” section. As a non-Scandinavian, I had no idea who that was, so context/deep linking would have been nice.
--78.23.192.69 (talk) 14:08, 9 January 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Added a link. TylerBurden (talk) 18:43, 9 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Notable people of Sámi descent: Samuel Balto (who is “Nansen”?)
Talk:Fenian Ram

message: Please cut down the size of the picture so the text doesn't run into the right margin. -- Zoe
* Done Telecine Guy (talk) 01:07, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Photo

message: This vessel was built by a reputable company for a terrorist organization. What was its legal status at the time? Were there no laws against individuals or groups acquiring and owning weapons for illegal purposes?Royalcourtier (talk) 23:40, 29 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Legal status 
Talk:Barcode

message: This page states that the barcode was invented by Norman Joseph Woodland and Bernard Silver.  Woodland and Silver did invent a barcode system in 1952 [1]. However. the technology that is responsible for the ubiquitous use of barcodes was developed by Paul V. McEnroe. McEnroe and his team developed the technology independent of Woodland and Silver, although Woodland later worked on the technology after it's initial development [2].  Woodland has mistakenly been credited as the developer of barcodes due to a series of events and was even awarded the National Medal of Technology and Innovation (NMTI) [3].  
[1] - US patent 2612994
[2] - Breen, A. (2023, September 18). The Barcode Inventor Didn’t Get Credit - Now He’s Speaking Out. Entrepreneur. https://www.entrepreneur.com/science-technology/the-barcode-inventor-didnt-get-credit-now-hes/458787 
[3] - https://nationalmedals.org/laureate/norman-joseph-woodland/ RowingVol (talk) 00:14, 19 September 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Wikipedia follows the independent sources. Are there any independently written history books that credit McEnroe? If so, we can use it, but we really can't base content off of interviews with McEnroe or the book he wrote. MrOllie (talk) 00:41, 19 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Attributing Paul V. McEnroe for development of UPC Barcode technology 

message: I just wonder: by definition barcodes are one-dimensional codings. But how about 2D barcodes, such as the 4-state-bar postal codes? How do you differ a 2D barcode from a matrix code? Should there be a section in between, differing 1D barcodes, 2D barcodes and 2D matrix codes? How about colors, is a 2D matrix codes with color coding a 3D code? --Traut (talk) 09:58, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Additionally, I'd like to differ better between a 2D barcode and a matrix code, which does not consist of bars at all. --Traut (talk) 10:09, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  2D barcode 

message: I suggest merging barcode system here. It seems to cover the exact same topic, and is mostly unsourced but maybe some small amount can be salvaged before converting it to a redirect. I considered WP:AfD but I would like input from editors with more experience with this article as I'm not sure if content can be salvaged. Darcyisverycute (talk) 03:34, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I second the motion FergusArgyll (talk) 23:57, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

text: Agreed 195.158.80.245 (talk) 11:57, 2 February 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed, make it so 143.159.113.18 (talk) 15:19, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge proposal
Talk:Slide rule

message: The entire section "Multiplication" has not one reference, and thus I must assume that it is forbidden "original research". I will post a reference as soon as the original document arrives on my doorstep in a few days. I was taught to use a slide rule in the eighth grade. I used it until my junior year in college, a total of seven years. I was surrounded by classmates, all with slide rules. I every slide rule I ever saw was duplex, as in the image I uploaded. Therefore all of the discussion of "going of scale" is deeply in error. I challenge someone to produce an actual non-duplex slide rule made before 1970. It must be a straight engineering slide rule, not a special purpose one. It must not contain the duplex A and B rules, but only contain the C and D rules. I do not think such a slide rule exists. Nick Beeson (talk) 17:46, 10 August 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for your observation. The use of "duplex" in that section was incorrect and I have removed the term. As the article states elsewhere, duplex means the slide rule has scales on both sides. You are correct that the inclusion of the A/B scales was pretty much universal. I believe double scales go back to the earliest days. Single sided slide rules ("simplex") were common at the low end of the price range. See e.g. https://www.sphere.bc.ca/test/cheap.html  The Multiplication section is somewhat misleading. Proper use of a slide rule to multiply e.g. 2 X 7 does not require using he A/B scales, only the C/D scales would normally be used and that should be explained. Using the A/B scales for this needlessly sacrifices accuracy. And yes, a reference would be helpful.--agr (talk) 19:15, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

text: Slide rule scale has a bit to say about this. Thincat (talk) 19:32, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

text: Entirely an aside, but I did want to note that in the early days of Wikipedia, there was little attention paid to adding sources and citations. In fact, the 'citation needed' template didn't exist before 2005 - and this article was started in 2001. So I think it's less a matter of 'original research' (even though yes, it is) and more a matter of inertia, so to speak...cheers! Anastrophe (talk) 22:17, 10 August 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Duplex 

message: Walter Shawlee is described in a February 2024 obit in the NYT as being responsible for a resurgence of interest in slide rules. Maybe someone with access to the article (around 9 Feb.) can see if he is worth mentioning. 02:26, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Walter Shawlee
Talk:Social darwinism

message: Hello, 
I think the article was well written, and I appreciate its honesty.  Having absolutely no idea what social darwinism was before reading the article, I found it informative.
If social darwinism contributed to justifying racist and imperialist behaviors, I think that "telling it like it is" does remain neutral.  I hope that if this article is re-written, it includes a large portion of the information that exists already.  
mosmic09—Preceding unsigned comment added by Mosmic09 (talk • contribs) 05:20, 7 February 2007)
:Fear not Mosmic09, what's happened is that the other article has been merged into this one rather than the way suggested above. More later, .. dave souza, talk 07:59, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  a comment. 

message: "...for example criticisms levelled at evolutionary psychology (which had a conversely, Jewish origin)."
-Who the heck wrote the criticism section? How can a science have "Jewish [origins]"? Should sciences, even the origins of them, be attributed to nationalities? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.69.14.35 (talk) 23:58, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've removed the claim (and done a bit of clean up as well) and quite agree that sciences should not be attributed to national or ethnic origin. It could possibly have been a bid to contrast (a putatively Jewish) EvoPsych against (the predominantly German) racialist theories of the early 1900s, or it could have been a derisive slur--or it could have been something else entirely. I don't think there's anyway to determine which, but it's gone now. Justin Eiler 01:01, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  EvoPsyc is of "Jewish origin"??? 

message: Having discussed the point here, there seems to be no reason not to move the page back to Social Darwinism to comply with the Wikipedia:Manual of Style (capital letters)#Religions, deities, philosophies, doctrines and their adherents section which concludes that "Philosophies, theories, doctrines, and systems of thought do not begin with a capital letter, unless the name derives from a proper noun:". As Darwinism derives from the proper noun "Darwin" it should always begin with a capital letter, thus Social Darwinism is correct. Anyone differ from this assessment? .. dave souza, talk 15:52, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It makes sense to me--I've always wondered why it wasn't capitalized. Justin Eiler 15:54, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

text: Support xCentaur | ☎  17:22, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Proposed move to Social Darwinism
Talk:Indriidae

message: the conservation status needs to be added.
Attys 22:40, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Conservation status is on species pages. This is a family page. - UtherSRG (talk) 23:42, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: conservation status