lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:KnowledgeWeb Project

message: This looks like it could easily be absorbed within the scope of the Wikipedia project. Has anyone contacted them? The Anome
User:Daniel MacKay writes: I asked James Burke this very question in the fall of 2002.  He said he didn't really care whether Wikipedia absorbed Knowledge Web, or Knowledge Web absorbed Wikipedia, as long as the project went ahead.  Having seen his demo of it, there's actually much much more to KnowledgeWeb than Wikipedia:
* KnowlegeWeb is designed to be an interactive teaching tool more than a reference tool
* have you seen James Burke's Connections series?  ONE of the functions of the KnowledgeWeb is for a student to be able to build his or her own Connections show using a sort of "bread crumbs" feature which Wikipedia doesn't have - BUT you could easily build a front end that did the crumbs.
* there are some VERY sophisticated knowledge visualization tools in Knowledge Web too - that ball with all the links on the upper-right-hand corner is one of them.
* KnowledgeWeb is designed to be graphically intensive, and the content of Wikipedia at the moment is not.
Also, James Burke himself created almost all of the several thousand pages on line, and. This is obviously untenable in the long run.
----
Just noting that whether KW survives or not, it is a separate entity in its own right and I personally do not feel it should be merged into James Burke's own page - unless of course he says it should be. 118.209.61.205 (talk) 13:24, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
Talk:Platanus

message: Where do they grow? It just says "Northern Hemisphere" and "wetlands." Is that as specific as we know? Torie 14:19, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No, we can be more specific, but the specific habitats are for the species.  This is the talk page for the genus. (btw, please start new topics at the bottom of the page, and add a header.) Imc 23:39, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

message: I believe the agreed-upon convention for genera and species is that, when there is a common name, that they would be placed under the common name rather than the scientific.  Are you justifying this move on the basis that sycamore is more an American name (aka plane tree)?
By the way, please register and sign your work.
--jaknouse
: I think it's confusing to describe three separate types of tree in one article, especially when there's a taxobox for one.  But maybe there's a better name that could be used for the Platanus article?
This article conflicts with the article Sycamore. --dunnhaupt (talk) 19:19, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: In what way? This article is about the genus Platanus, of which some American species are called "sycamore", as Sycamore says. Peter coxhead (talk) 20:15, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Names

message: The article would benefit from photos showing one or two typical species in maturity. That would make it easier for the reader to get a sense of the general size and habit ("look") of the genus.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 157.131.205.113 (talk) 23:36, 7 December 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Overview photo 

message: Potential material, use it or don't:
The Georgics - Virgel, annotated translation, 1830
The platanus is our oriental plane-tree. Pliny tells us that this tree was first brought over the Ionian sea into the island of Diomedes, for a monument for that hero: thence into Sicily, and so into Italy. Pliny likewise mentions that the ancients had so profuse a veneration for this tree, as to irrigate it with wine. — Martyn.
  (talk) 15:03, 6 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pliney 

message: What does "flowers are reduced" mean?
I cannot find any definition of "reduced flowers" on the internet.
If you are using a technical botanical term then you should be sure that its definition is either readily available or included in the article.  agb 173.233.167.50 (talk) 19:43, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reduced flowers
Talk:Ngaio Marsh

message: I've never seen an edition of "Spinsters in Jeopardy" that's titled "Bride of Death", although to be sure that does sound like a reasonable title for this novel.  Can someone provide a citation? Accounting4Taste:talk 18:01, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Found one. There were two US editions, the first (Boston, 1953) as Spinsters, the 2nd (New York, 1955). Given that US publication was often a year earlier, I might redo that list as a table when I get time. dramatic (talk) 23:04, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Many thanks for promptly providing this (see what happens when you lend your copy of Hubin? LOL) Accounting4Taste:talk 00:52, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Bride of Death

message: In 2010 the Dame Ngaio Marsh Trust created the Best Crime Novel Award, to be given annually.  In its inaugural year, the three finalists were Neil Cross Captured ; Vanda Symon Containment; and Alix Bosco (pseudonym), Cut and Run. Alix Bosco won the inaugural award.Inaugural Marsh award winner
In 2011, fellow Ngaio Marsh hometown writer, Paul Cleave beat out stiff competition from Neil Cross, Paddy Richardson and Greg McKee (aka Alix Bosco) to take the award for his novel, Blood Men.
In 2012, a delighted Neil Cross accepted the award for his book, Luther: The Calling which is a novel that predates the events in Luther the television series.  The other three finalists were, Vanda Symon, Ben Sanders and Paul Cleave.
Rivertorch (talk) 10:04, 6 October 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Award

message: Dame Ngaio Marsh did not wear trousers. She wore slacks, which are not the same at all. To call them trousers implies a masculinity which is misleading.Royalcourtier (talk) 00:47, 25 June 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that the sentence you objected to, which spoke of trousers and deep voice, implied masculinity. I don't know whether that was misleading but it certainly seemed trivial. It also (rather ridiculously, I thought) juxtaposed Marsh's denial of being gay with the said trousers and voice. On a more technical note, the sentence also was an uncomfortably close paraphrase. I have removed it and revised the paragraph. Rivertorch's Evil Twin (talk) 19:01, 25 June 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Trousers
Talk:Dynamic logic

message: I moved "Dynamic logic" to "Dynamic logic (modal logic)" and "Clocked logic" to "Dynamic logic (digital logic)". This page is now a disambiguation page. I really hope I didn't piss anyone off. Fresheneesz 21:00, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Moved

message: Deleted links to articles not mentioning any kind of dynamic logic.  (Some of these links might be appropriate for a dab page under dynamic or logic, though the ones I deleted seemed just plain incoherent and rambling.) --Vaughan Pratt 03:41, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually Perlovsky's notion does have a little coverage in independent sources: , so I've added a line for it (back), but I can't write up a brief and insightful summary just yet, and dynamic logic (neural) is of little help being loaded with wp:jargon I'm unfamiliar with. Tijfo098 (talk) 20:54, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Deleted
Talk:Proboscidea

message: Why is Amebelodon listed as gompothere in that article, while there is also an Amebelodontidae family listed here? Sorry for the double post DaMatriX 15:49, 26 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Amebelodon 

message: Just a note to say that I have removed some [or an] image[s] from the page beacuse they were speediable under either:
*Category:Images with no fair use rationale
*Category:Images with no copyright tag
*Category:Images with no source
Or similar category. Kilo-Lima|(talk) 17:48, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Removed deleted image(s)

message: Something's not right here. Look at the taxobox - Euelephantoidea is shown as the parent of the child Gomphotheriidae. Yet the actual article for Gomphotheriidae has a taxobox indicating the taxonomic parent is Order Proboscidea. Presumably, the Gomphotheriidae page has omitted all intervening suborders? Or, is there an error? There seems to be taxonomic confusion throughout the various wiki pages within Proboscidea.--Leperflesh 20:54, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There still is, three years later. cygnis insignis 12:53, 15 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Classification

message: From the article: "Most families of Proboscidea are now extinct, many since the end of the last glacial period."
Could someone please include the date for the last glacial period?  I think this was 20,000 years ago but I'm not sure.  A link would be nice too.  Thank you. Rissa, Guild of Copy Editors  (talk) 01:57, 4 November 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Last glacial period 

message: While it is possible to figure out that species now extinct are marked with "†", a note in the article or a footnote at the end would be helpful.  
Because of my Wiki editing inexperience I'd rather not do this.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by GeeBee60 (talk • contribs) 08:24, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Extinction footnote 

message: The taxonomic tree ("cladogram" above the section "Morphology" has "Loxodonta africana" ("African bush elephant" or "African savanna elephant") but "Loxodonta cyclotis" ("African forest elephant") is missing (as of the date and time I'm typing this). What's also missing are the lines that show how the two taxons (taxa) relate to each other, at which node they join up.2600:1700:6759:B000:1C64:8308:33BC:E2D6 (talk) 06:07, 18 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Missing species
Wikipedia talk:About

message: Yes. I mean, its just old at first. The video contents should be remolded, as the main page is now COMPLETELY different from what was yeas back. So, please remake them.
Thank You!
Utkarsh555 (talk) 05:08, 3 September 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Renewing videos 

message: In the Exploration section (at " Related projects include..."), I've added embedded links to each described WF project except:
* "manuals" (couldn't find—does it still exist?)
* "scientific reference sources" (does it refer to Wikisource, which is much more general?)
– AndyFielding (talk) 02:20, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Project links? 

message: Please see discussion at the idea lab at Wikipedia:Village_pump_(idea_lab)#Redesigning_the_About_page. Interstellarity (talk) 15:43, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: As the discussion is now archived, not sure where else to post this. The new version is (bluntly) a miserable shadow of its former self. While the former had visually interesting media and statistical information, the new version is just a boring plain wall of text and links. I honestly initially took the changes for vandalism given how awkwardly the page ends. Given the size and radical effect of the change, I'd recommend a RfC. SchizoidNightmares (talk) 01:40, 17 July 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Redesigning the About page 

message: This has been at the bottom of the page for awhile. I don't know why it says "bugs", and how are they shallow. I may be missing something in thinking this is a good Zen mind twister but has no other meaning (generational gap? is it a meme?). Thanks. Randy Kryn (talk) 03:19, 1 October 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Randy Kryn, this phrase is Linus's law. —⁠andrybak (talk) 14:18, 1 October 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks , first I've heard of that. It seems a little inside-baseball to act as the "big finish" of the Wikipedia:About article, and I'd guess it tends to confuse more than just me if someone doesn't know the term. Still seems a slightly confusing way of ending the introduction of the site to newcomers. Randy Kryn (talk) 15:29, 1 October 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Then again, computer people will know its meaning and recognize the term, so I'm just reacting as a non-computer savvy user. Thanks again for the education. Randy Kryn (talk) 16:18, 1 October 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: I went to add a wisdom of the crowd link to further explain the point of the Linus's law quote and ended up editing and reordering the last paragraph for concept flow and brevity, and then put in a paragraph break. Seems to work. Randy Kryn (talk) 04:41, 2 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: Given enough eyeballs, all bugs are shallow!

message: What kind of mistake I have done from my side. Please explain Rahulsoman (talk) 17:24, 12 July 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: @Rahulsoman you are not blocked, and if you do have a block message it surely shouldn't be pointing you to this talk page. — xaosflux Talk 17:38, 12 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why you blocked me
Talk:Hollywood cycles

message: Article was listed on Wikipedia:Votes for deletion Apr 14 to Apr 20 2004, consensus failed to be reached.  Discussion:
From Cleanup: Hollywood cycles - stub.  Zoe and Ihcoyc both wonder to what extent this is a valid term.
*Keep. Not an orphan Screwball comedy film, Formula fiction. The former article implies it was more commonly used in early US cinema, but it is still occasionally used in a similar sense today , to refer to Hollywood's tendancy to repeat itself. I'd remove the stub tag, as it is unlikely to be expanded unless we get some active senior citizen contributors that can expand on its origins, etc.
:Also, it has no VFD msg, and my understanding is that unsigned votes/nominations don't count. Niteowlneils 20:34, 14 Apr 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: VfD

message: This stub is in need of some sources! Avery Miller (talk) 20:54, 26 February 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sources needed
Talk:Chiswick House

message: David Jacques, Chiswick House Gardens: 300 years of creation and re-creation (English Heritage/ Liverpool University Press, 2022) 2.139.197.58 (talk) 20:32, 1 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Further reading 

message: The gardens section contains several doubtful facts, for example by mentioning Charles Bridgeman, for whom there is absolutely no contemporary evidence (just an offhand reference in the 1770s to the style being possibly Bridgeman's). The book above under 'Further Reading' contains the latest research, and should lead to a reconsideration and expansion of the gardens section commensurate with their importance to Burlington and to English garden history. 2.139.197.58 (talk) 20:50, 1 April 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, the section is unsatisfactory in many ways. The Chiswick House Gardens is a major topic, and deserves its own article, with just a summary of it here, and a 'Main' link. If you are familiar with the topic you would be well placed to write that article. Chiswick Chap (talk) 01:49, 2 April 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, that's what I told him over at Talk:Monastic garden re that. Johnbod (talk) 14:54, 2 April 2024 (UTC)
replies: text:  Ah, maybe he just likes to talk. There must be a word for that. Chiswick Chap (talk) 15:09, 2 April 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, I hope not. His points are good. Johnbod (talk) 15:14, 2 April 2024 (UTC)
replies: text:  It does need work. Chiswick Chap (talk) 15:18, 2 April 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: I could suggest a new section on the gardens, or prepare a longer article. I'm not to date a Wikipedia contributor, so could you please tell me the best way to proceed? 2.139.197.58 (talk) 21:50, 2 April 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: You could do a Word doc, & email it to one of us, or just register an account (very quick, & no personal details required), & start a draft in your "sandbox". If you register you get lots of "how to" links, & I'm sure we're both ready to help (from my return from holiday mid-month, in my case).  Johnbod (talk) 22:26, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

text: Still appear to have the full text in the main article. Murgatroyd49 (talk) 08:30, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
replies: text:  I think not. The split leaves the parent article still not well cited; both the subsidiary articles, Architecture of Chiswick House and Chiswick House Gardens have the same issue: all need substantial work to bring them up to B class, let alone GA.  Chiswick Chap (talk) 08:38, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gardens
Talk:Search for extraterrestrial intelligence

message: If there has been no reliable source (other than a biography and Stanislaw Lem's comments) updating his 1961 ballpark estimates, I suggest that the entire paragraph with its "probability estimate" should be cut as junk science. Martindo (talk) 01:00, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Disagree. It illustrates the thinking of that period of history. That it may be inaccurate is irrelevant. It's also mentioned in other encyclopedias. Johncdraper (talk) 18:06, 1 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  suggest cutting von Hoerner's bombastic calculations that were made over 60 years ago 

message: This article has been incorporated into the Science Policy Project by an offworld affiliate (Technology Transfer Specialist, Special Circumstances [Nuclear Fusion, Planetary AGIs for Peacebuilding]) as part of a planned upgrade. The page has been rated Mid-importance, C-class, and the improvements seek to update material, otherwise amend it, and copy edit it in order to achieve B-class, and then eventually (/gasp on) GA status (/gasp off). BTW, we hacked all your SETI computers years ago following a Galactic Council mandate and operate 737-camoflaged UFOs, complete with exterior airplane blinking lights. Enjoy. Johncdraper (talk) 18:24, 1 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wikipedia Science Policy Project Upgrade 

message: Planets of extraterrestrial 2601:602:D200:FCC0:ECA5:5F1D:4EE1:4BEF (talk) 09:55, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: What? Pascalulu88 (talk) 18:56, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Extraterrestrial planets
Talk:2004 United States presidential election

message: I don't know if it's worth noting that this election made Bush the first 21st century president to win re-election, as he also was the first 21st century president in general, unless you count the year in which Clinton was president, in which case this statement becomes false. Either way, I'm of the view that it should be removed. Builder018 (talk) 02:26, 8 July 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  "First 21st century president to win re-election" worth including?
Talk:Lewisham Deptford (UK Parliament constituency)

message: Hello, I wanted to ask if it was possible to add Phillip Badger of the Democratic Reform Party to the table as standing in the upcoming general election?
I would use either of these three sites: http://www.phillipbadger.co.uk/, http://whyvote4me.co.uk/elections/2015-general-election/candidate/phillip-badger or http://www.democraticreform.co.uk/#!150126/c52v as references if they are acceptable.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.156.105.29 (talk) 14:38, 18 March 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Adding a new candidate to the election list? 
Talk:Elizabeth II

message: This article https://www.cosmopolitan.com/uk/reports/a46126585/real-story-queen-ve-night-out/ contains an account by the Queen’s cousin, Margaret Rhodes, which implies that Princess Elizabeth was among a party that dance the conga at the Ritz Hotel on VE Day. "For some reason, we decided to go in the front door of the Ritz and do the conga," Rhodes recalled. "The Ritz has always been so stuffy and formal – we rather electrified the stuffy individuals inside. I don't think people realised who was among the party – I think they thought it was just a group of drunk young people. I remember old ladies looking faintly shocked. As one congaed through, eyebrows were raised." Is this a credible? Corsac Fox Kazakhstan (talk) 14:05, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Also found https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2_-Gs0CIDf0 Corsac Fox Kazakhstan (talk) 08:14, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: It's not clear what changes you want to make to the article. Celia Homeford (talk) 10:18, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  VE Day celebrations? 

message: A death certificate from a reputable source is sufficient evidence for a surname. Even the official website says that surnames have been in use since 1917. It's not clear what @DeCausa's reason for reverting is. Thanks Titus Gold (talk) 22:57, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: This was already discussed before & the consensus was to exclude any surname, in the intro. GoodDay (talk) 22:59, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

text: Titus Gold, it should be clear to you because you raised the exact same point here on 8 December 2022. A lengthy thread ensued. Have you forgotten? DeCausa (talk) 06:35, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Consensus can change. It's not uncommon to revisit a discussion from over 12 months ago. Particularly one where 'I don't like it' triumphed over 'multiple sources say this'. Celia Homeford (talk) 10:50, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Previous consensus was not the point raised or referred to. DeCausa (talk) 13:00, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: "This was already discussed before & the consensus was to exclude any surname" = previous consensus raised and referred to. Celia Homeford (talk) 13:55, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text:  apologies, I thought you were replying to me. DeCausa (talk) 18:31, 23 May 2024 (UTC)

text: Ok fair enough; thanks for the link. I didn't recall that there had been an RFC since it was a while ago. Just saw some royals' full names come up recently in the news. No problem. Titus Gold (talk) 13:19, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Surname 

message: Specifically Church of England. Any other Protestsnt would not be allowed. 2001:8003:2605:E500:5C68:C162:D520:11FA (talk) 06:03, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: There is also Church of Scotland in the UK. Keivan.fTalk 22:54, 15 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Religion
Talk:Henry Morton Stanley

message: How was he american? No mention of his gaining citizenship over there 62.7.226.234 (talk) 17:23, 18 November 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: According to Tim Jeal's book, he officially gained American citizenship in 1885, though Stanley had mistakenly imagined that he had been naturalized during his service in the Civil War. Rublov (talk) 16:16, 28 November 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: @Rublov should we add it? -- Matteow101 (talk) 00:40, 1 December 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: I reverted Special:Diff/1124393377, so it says "Welsh-American" again. rblv (talk) 12:27, 1 December 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  American? 

message: Is this article written by the propaganda departement of the British foreign ministery? You Are In Valhalla (talk) 10:19, 22 April 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Propaganda
Talk:China O'Brien

message: Another high point: One of the characters delivered a roundhouse kick that knocked three people down.  :-)  --KQ
Is the film really more famous for Tori Amos - or as a ground-breaking female martial arts film ? -- Beardo 15:48, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Thomas Sankara

message: New to this, might have missed something. Trying to corroborate reference 16 but cannot find it online. Anyone knows where to find it and if offline sources are commonly accepted here? Strandedoncat (talk) 17:18, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Amnesty International (1988). Burkina Faso: Political Imprisonment and the Use of Torture from 1983 to 1988. London: Amnesty International. Strandedoncat (talk) 17:19, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I saw some books being used as sources so I think it is accepted Neo Trixma (talk) 07:38, 17 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Corroborating source 16 

message: Is there any word similarities between the 3? 182.3.52.74 (talk) 06:16, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: If you are seriously asking this, feel free to visit this page and ask again. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 16:07, 15 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sankara, shankar, and, ankara