lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:List of DC Comics characters: J

message: The redirect Java (DC Comics has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at  until a consensus is reached.  Utopes (talk / cont) 20:56, 3 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  "[[:Java (DC Comics]]" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]]
Talk:List of DC Comics characters: G

message: Gabriel (comics) doesn't actually list a DC character, but perhaps one of the two Marvel Gabriels has appeared in DC? What character is it, otherways? Chronos (comics)#Walker Gabriel? Ever wonder (talk) 19:39, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I changed it from (comics) to (DC Comics) instead. Hopefully, the person that originally posted it will explain why he typed it in the first place. jtmatbat (talk) 18:06, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gabriel 

message: Not sure who's editing this.  Well the creator references need to be in italic.  The television show references do not, because they don't site a particular book or company and they may mean about a fictional character, town or team.
Probably wondering about the batman TV show references?  Well technically if warnerbrothers absorbed the dc comics company and its right to air dc comics characters on national broadcasts, the dc comics characters should belong to them which technically owned the characters previously.  If not, feel free to reedit the reference to a non-italicized batman tv show ref.  Technically, if they reappear on television, warner brothers would own the rights. (see hanna-barbara absorbed into warner bros. animation).  Any dc comics character on the now warner brothers television should be ref.  See also 1976's wonder woman tv series under the warner brothers television label.  Same could even be said about the watchmen series under the elseworld guise or any creator-owned characters not directly affiliated with the DC Universe. 
 Personally I would only list characters who have appeared in the comics, or similar named ones. I would just remove the television or non-comic appearances and put them in there corresponding sections or lists.  The problem with that idea is the tv characters should not be listed under certain circumstances.  Eg Harley Quinn, or Lock-Up would be listed and Superboy x not or there would be no Rothul listed.  Tv Creator owned Clones, or rip-offs could not be listed but could vice versa.  That would be unfair I think.  For instance, Rothul is Lex Luthor.  --69.255.42.105 (talk) 18:28, 2 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: wiki references
Talk:List of DC Comics characters: A

message: there are too many characters listed on this list, most that don't link anywhere or in the wrong place. This needs editing soon! --UltimatePyro 06:47, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I have sorted the list so that it's in perfect alphabetical order now. I have also corrected the links that were sending you to disambiguation pages. As for any links that lead you to blank pages, that means that they are ready for someone here to type up. jtmatbat 17:10, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  This List needs to be fixed 

message: What are the gold, green bars supposed to mean?  I assumed Silver age, modern age, and golden age.--69.255.16.162 18:17, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bar Codes 

message: This one appears to be a Marvel comic and not DC, so unless one was acquired by the other, this should be removed. WilliamKF (talk) 19:41, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The link now directs you to the DC villain. User:jtmatbat (jtmatbat) 17:05, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

text: Actually, DC has had a few Acrobats of their own, too. User:jtmatbat (jtmatbat) 18:00, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Aquarius

message: I think all characters should be listed by their first name. 110.174.166.224 (talk) 22:12, 11 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why are some characters listed by their first name and some characters are listed by their last name? 

message: An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect :Astra (comics) and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 August 4#Astra (comics) until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.  64.229.88.43 (talk) 03:03, 4 August 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Astra (comics)" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]]
Talk:Vicus Tuscus

message: This article has some elements that are incorrect. Vicus does not mean street, it means neighborhood. The Vicus Tuscus actually refers to the Etruscan Quarter of Rome, not a particular street. The book that the incorrect information comes from is almost 100 years old. Historical information must be periodically updated. Archaeologists and classicists are continually learning new information that challenges what know / understand about the ancient Mediterranean. If Wikipedia wants to stay relevant, they must also stay updated to new information.   — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2607:FE50:0:8206:311C:F520:8CA5:CD17 (talk) 14:28, 13 July 2016 (UTC)
Talk:Rata Die

message: This section was removed because no reliable source (WP:RS) could be found which indicates notability for the system. WP:N states "A topic is presumed to be notable if it has received coverage in reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject".
Searching Google for "Chronological Julian Date" results in only 25 hits. No indication that the system is widely used or respected could be found. Indeed, the single provided "reference" link for Chronological Julian Date is to a self-published note which indicates that the system is non-notable: "... it is used at least (and only?) by people who have followed my usage ...".
   
The removed section also referred to Meyer as a chronologist without providing a WP:RS. 4.246.227.3 01:31, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Chronological Julian Date
Talk:TorilMUD

message: Hey, IPs, what's up with the screenshot-on-the-left thing?  I don't get at all why you would want that; to my eye it makes the article look cramped and has the reader darting all over the place to follow the prose.  Why do you see it as an improvement? —chaos5023 (talk) 19:51, 3 November 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, speaking for myself at least, on my browser you currently have the infobox, and below that the screenshot, and these dominate the right hand side of the screen. Then, you actually have to scroll down to read the first paragraph, because the placement of the screenshot forces the text down so far.  There is a large field of whitespace under the "Game characterstics" heading. I'm not sure if it looks differently on your browser, or if you actually prefer it that way. 204.153.84.10 (talk) 22:07, 3 November 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh, wow.  Yeah, that's horrible.  It definitely doesn't do any of that to me.  What browser and screen resolution / window size are you using? —chaos5023 (talk) 22:10, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

text: I did some testing and was able to replicate the issue in IE.  Running IE8, it shows up in IE8 Compatibility Mode and IE7 mode, but not in IE8 Standards Mode.  So I guess it's one of those wacky IE things.  I'm not clear on to what extent browser issues should be humored in article design on WP; I'll see if I can turn up some consensus on that. —chaos5023 (talk) 15:15, 4 November 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry about not responding - I got busy and then forgot.  I checked the article on my computer at home, and at the local library, and the same thing there, all on IE. 204.153.84.10 (talk) 20:48, 4 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Screenshot on the left?
Talk:Charles V. Chapin

message: I intend to add more context to this man's description. Just give me a little time to do it.Bill.jesdale 01:40, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

message: In the final sentence of the article, several last names of other "forerunners in the field" are listed.
I recognized some of these names and added their first names and links (where available) to other Wikipedia pages: Edwin Chadwick, Lemuel Shattuck, William Sedgwick & Hermann Biggs, but I have no idea who "Frank" and "Simon" are, and if that's not obvious to a PhD in epidemiology with a keen interest int he history of the field, these names should be further specified or removed.
I'm actually not sure what this printing this list of names adds in describing the "accomplishments" of Dr. Chapin, and would actually suggest that the last two sentences be removed completely.
Bill.jesdale (talk) 20:53, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Who are "Frank" and "Simon"? 
Talk:Jason Smilovic

message: What's with his birth date being ambiguous? A quick google search reveled someone else as thinking his birthdate was March 7th, 1974. Does anyone know when he was actually born?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gatorball7 (talk • contribs) 05:26, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Birthdate 
Talk:Mai Kolachi

message: Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: http://www.urckarachi.org/Housing%20News%20Articles.HTM#Mai Kolachi. Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.) For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you.  TreyGeek (talk) 21:58, 19 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copyright problem removed 

message: I'm not convinced that the foundation of Karachi definitely originates with this person. Pretty sure I have seen other possible origins. - Sitush (talk) 12:08, 11 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Foundation of Karachi
Talk:Men's skirts

message: The term ‘Near East is a byproduct of colonialism and a eurocentric term. I know that it historically refers to the area encompassing Northeast Africa, Western Asia and Southeastern Europe, but the article specifically says ‘throughout the Near East and Egypt’. This suggests that the writer does not consider Egypt to be part of the Near East. In this case, the writer refers to the ‘modern’ definition of the ‘Near East’, interchangeable with the term ‘Middle East’. The suitable term for this area is West Asia. To this end, I propose that the term ‘Near East’ be replaced with West Asia or Southwest Asia. Taishō219 (talk) 23:08, 26 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Usage of ‘Near East’.
Talk:Jack Baker and Michael McConnell

message: Under the heading "Adoption, name change, and a lasting marriage", there's currently no mention of a name change.
93.124.249.179 (talk) 06:22, 11 May 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I changed the heading to "Adoption and later legal review". Looking back at earlier versions of the article, it once said that McConnell legally adopted Baker in 1971 and Baker's legal name was changed to Pat Lyn McConnell. There seems to be quite a bit that used to be in the article and is not in it anymore, and some of the changes may not be an improvement. The article no longer directly says there was a formal adoption. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 23:44, 25 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Name change? 

message: After perceiving a lack of clarity in the opening and changing the opening sentence to say "first ... in the United States", I noticed the sentence saying "Their wedding became the earliest same-sex marriage ever to be recorded in the public files of any civil government." So perhaps this is a claim of being first in the world. Such a claim seems rather extraordinary when considering that there have been many cultures in the history of the world. If this is really intended to claim the status of first in the world (or first in recorded history), that should be made more clear in the opening sentence. It should also have strong sourcing. Both cited sources are offline book sources and thus can't be easily checked, and one of them was written by one of the people in this particular marriage, so it doesn't seem especially reliable. At the end of 2021, the article just said they were the first in the United States. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 23:44, 25 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  First in the world or first in the United States? 

message: Citation number 1 in the article looks like WP:Original research. It declares that "A historic celebration with no legal certificate, even if blessed in church, is perhaps a wedding but not a marriage." That seems rather dubious and does not seem to come directly from a cited source. It quotes definitions in a law dictionary to justify that conclusion, but the quotes from the law dictionary do not directly say that, and I think most people would disagree with that assertion. Marriage has been in existence a lot longer than legal certificates of marriage have been in existence. Even today in the United States, one can be legally married in a common-law marriage without having any legal certificate. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 00:13, 26 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dubious definition of marriage hidden in a citation
Talk:Volley (association football)

message: Terrible article, needs a complete re-edit Terrencethetractor 02:05, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed.  I feel I should almost blank the entire article and leave it at "a volley occurs when the ball is struck mid-air".  That's all a volley is.  It's not a chip shot like one of the examples in the articl, but a bicycle shot could be considered a volley.  Also, it doesn't matter where the goalie is, as the term volley refers to where the ball is (in the air) when it is kicked.  You don't have to be shooting for it to be a volley, so why is that even mentioned?  I want to link to this page in another article, but I'm afraid to do so after seeing this mess.  Since you share my sentiment (and it was 2 years ago) I'm going to be bold and take a hachet to this article.167.7.17.3 (talk) 13:40, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: untitled
Talk:National Historic Chemical Landmarks

message: all info in this article is wrong. I dont know the correct but i know it is WRONG! Designdroide 02:38, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I have checked the ACS website on this matter and confirmed that the content of this article is consistent with the original content of the website. Buki ben Yogli (talk) 22:06, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I just checked the cited ACS website, which confirms that the content of this article is indeed not consistent with the truth.  George Washington Carver has been dead for some time now, for example, and there's no way he could have done anything in 2005. Zacmea (talk) 09:29, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: ABSOLUTE Fiction
Talk:ACS style

message: External link leads to an error page.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 147.236.176.90 (talk) 04:59, 21 March 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: External Link

message: Is this article wrong or are there different formats for other physical sciences? The geophysical papers I'm looking at all cite their sources in the form
:[Last name] [First initial][Middle initial if any], [Last name] [First initial][Middle initial if any], [unitalicized et al. after the 5th name if needed]. [Year]. [Article name without quotes or italics]. [Italicized journal name] [Volume #]:[Page #(s)]
not the one given in this article. -LlywelynII (talk) 16:02, 28 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I have no doubt other disciplines have different styles (either "their own", or APA, MLA, or some other  standard style). Heck, even some chemistry journals from publishers other than ACS itself don't even use ACS style. Does the article here actually say it's the only standard, or covers the specific publisher of your journal of interest? DMacks (talk) 16:20, 28 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Geophysical citation

message: I have always hated the actual formatting of the citations because it's never intuitive to me (I learned MLA in school then APA then IEEE and now I find myself needing to use ACS). I used to use Easybib (a website that automatically formats citations for you after you input the requisite information) for English essays to do MLA and I think APA as well but I don't know of anything for ACS. Everyone just points me the way of the style guide. I have LibreOffice. ACS lets you download citations in EndNote form or BibTeX form. Since I started writing in LibreOffice, the second one probably isn't all that useful to me. I don't know if EndNote works with anything related to LibreOffice.
If someone knows, please comment below. Thanks!  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.114.197.85 (talk) 05:53, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Automated way of doing this?
Talk:Keating!

message: The plot summary refers to "a single polling booth in Surrey Hills returns the final results". However, when the show played in Wollongong in 2007, the polling booth was said to have been in Wollongong. It seems likely that the location of this booth moves with the venue, but because I have only seen the show once I can't be certain. --Mckinlayr 02:29, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Polling Booth where? 

message: I've added a short bit on the song that's played while the 1993 votes are tallied, purely because the song is hilarious if nothing else. I'm a bit poor at remembering details though, so I'm hoping someone else will flesh it out some more. Dazcha (talk) 08:27, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Antony Green 

message: Add something about how this show was promoted as "The Musical We Had to Have" - a send-up of Keating's own "The Recession We Had to Have" quip?
203.56.94.16 (talk) 01:42, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Promotions 

message: Clearly, this link is out of date, and should be removed: 
Old Nick Company, website of the Old Nick Company's production of the musical.  --wcrosbie, Melbourne, Australia 17:25, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Link to Old Nick Company's next show 
Talk:Arctica

message: I think that Greenland is the only part of Arctica left. Also Ellesmere and The Queen Elizabeth islands. Talker26 (mail•contribs) 15:56, 22 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Arctica [[Greenland|Island]]!!! 

message: Means what?  
The article starts off talking about billions of years, and then abruptly switches to "Ga" and "Ma", without any definition, explanation, or links. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.95.43.253 (talk) 23:30, 16 July 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for reporting this. Ga means gigaannum (equivalent to billions of years) and Ma means megaannum (equivalent to millions of years). I have added wikilinks for Ga and Ma at their first occurrences in this article. GeoWriter (talk) 13:42, 17 July 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ga?  Ma? 

message: What ???????
I wanna laugh & I'm mad in the same time
who has the Authorization to write this ?
because with Wikipedia, every time someone knows what is talked about and tries to rewrite the article , they aren't free to proceed despite the good faith and the proper knowledge to do so
crazy !
 90.6.60.46 (talk) 08:55, 1 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Arctica was named by Rogers in 1996
Talk:Grypania

message: thumb
Why is :File:Grypania spiralis.JPG not shown in the taxobox? --Geilamir (talk) 22:49, 16 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Image 

message: The cited Han & Runnegar paper claims 2.1 billion year age, but more recent studies show that age is in error. The corrected age is 1.8 Gya. (See citations from article on Diskagma, as well as from Eukaryote). I believe this should be corrected, but I am not sufficiently familiar with the discipline to know whether there is general agreement to the corrected date, or if significant disagreement exists.Abitslow (talk) 19:19, 29 May 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. I have updated the article. -- Franciscosp2 (talk) 12:15, 15 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Outdated (Wrong)  
Talk:Nena (supercontinent)

message: Although everything in the article is related to the topic of the Nena Supercontinent, the information provided is partially inaccurate and misleading. There is currently a section on the Nuna Supercontinent that is mentioned which is loosely connected to the topic of the Nena supercontinent that may be slightly distracting from the main topic. For example, there is currently a statement in the article that states, "Nena, or Nuna, ... configurations." This information is incorrect and can be misleading to users. The Nena supercontinent and the Nuna supercontinent are different entities that should not be confused with each other. I believe it would be fine to mention the Nuna supercontinent to provide context and establish clarity of the differences between the Nuna and Nena supercontinents. PJPark02 (talk) 01:02, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Possibly Misleading Information & Lack of Information
Talk:Siberia (continent)

message: The last one used to begin "~250 million years sith: Siberia may be..." I have altered this, as I somehow doubt "sith" is geo-slang for "in the future." Please, correct me if I'm wrong. Dhicks3 (talk) 04:18, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  The bullets on this page... 

message: is there a connection between the siberian geologic history of the continent and the siberian traps? it could merit an additional paragraph or 2 73.94.176.159 (talk) 02:09, 14 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  connection to Siberian Traps?
Talk:Jalalpur Jattan

message: The article point added by user:intothefire that Ghirjak was renamed Jalapur refers to the Darapur fort of Ghirjak/Garjaak in Jhelum, and not this particular Jalalpur Jattan, which was renamed by the founders in a completely different region in a different era. It has no connection with this particular reference by Gen Cunningham. Thus have removed this mistaken reference.--Raja 15:59, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
Talk:Sissyphobia: Gay Men and Effeminate Behavior

message: I removed the PROD, as a quick check shows a review at Salon.com, here, which means it may have at least marginal notability and deserves an AfD. I will presently add the ref to the article and see what else is out there, and send to AfD if appropriate. Herostratus (talk) 20:52, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: When I proposed this for deletion, I assumed (incorrectly) that it was a popular science sexology book written by an academic, like TMWWBQ. But this one seems written by an amateur, so expecting academic reviews was perhaps too much. He has a list of reviews of all his books at http://www.timbergling.com/reviews.html, but there's not much beyond Salon for this one. I'm not sure how to characterize the book, although "anectodal sociology" is probably best given how the author describes himself on his web page. There is a little academic recognition this book, but it generally revolves around citations for the word "sissyphobia" (which should not redirect here because he did not coin it). Tijfo098 (talk) 21:04, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

text: He links this article in Edge/Gaywired.com as review of his book, but the article only says something about only at bottom "Acclaimed gay author, Tim Berling..." I guess this is his qualification for writing the book. Tijfo098 (talk) 21:54, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  re PROD
Talk:Lausanne Underground Film and Music Festival

message: This article was the subject of an AfD discussion closed on 18 May 2007. The result was keep. Xoloz 03:12, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: AfD Result Notice