lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Telephone numbers in Japan

message: The info box says that Japan has a closed dial plan, but later in the article it makes reference to dialing local numbers without the area code — in other words, an open dial plan. Which is correct? Lincmad (talk) 23:19, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Open or closed dial plan? 

message: The removal of the leading zero (0) makes the list harder to understand.
From within Japan the number is ALWAYS 0120, the number is NOT accessible from outside the country.
If removing prefixes, why was 00 left untouched?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 113.36.159.162 (talk) 00:49, 22 October 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Leading 0 Removed 

message: I have fixed some.  Putting the ONE or TWO zeros back in the numbers.
Honestly, whoever decided to remove the leading 0 or 00 has screwed things up badly.  It used to be a useful resource, now I have to go back my MIC reference to correct the 090-xxxx-xxxx and 090-xxx-xxxx numbers.  They were removed at some point.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 113.36.159.162 (talk) 07:56, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Leading 0 Removed - Part II 

message: Surely many readers of this article are trying to find out the answer to this question. In no place in the page is it clear or explained how to do call into the country with a +81 followed by a landline or cell phone. Brinerustle (talk) 08:04, 26 August 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  when calling from outside of japan into japan does it have leading zero?

message: I came to the page curious what a Japanese phone number looked like, and the page disappointed. Found this, in case it helps someone: https://www.reddit.com/r/japanlife/comments/2qzr3v/curious_about_the_format_of_japanese_phone_numbers/ 
An example from the page is 0426-(32)-8510, or +81-426-32-8510 as an international number. 2600:8800:7000:33:1036:15E3:98C9:A8E1 (talk) 18:07, 26 October 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  How is a phone number formatted?
Talk:Index of military science and technology articles

message: I've created this list and intend to finish it. I would be greatful for some help--Phoenix-wiki (talk · contribs) 19:22, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Just a note, if you are going to do the list in the format I see under 'A', then I'd suggest not putting a contents box in every section, and leave it as just one at the top until the list becomes very long. You could have a contents box in each section if you change it over to standard list (aka one per line) format, as that would lengthen the article out enough to need it.Cromdog 20:26, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

text: I was originally copying the format of List of biology topics but I suppose that's a good idea--Phoenix-wiki (talk · contribs) 21:12, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Creation - expansion needed
Talk:Iron nanoparticle

message: The introduction doesn't match the title —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.61.137.243 (talk) 
The article doesn't cover the applications, production or very much else about nanoscale iron particles. These are widely used in medical and laboratory applications. The article needs to be expanded or simply replaced. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.198.99.61 (talk) 
:Yeah, it reads as a self-contained essay on one specific application of the the topic and specifically (and almost only) as a review of the work of one person in that realm rather than an encyclopedia entry on the topic itself. Undue weight/minutiae focus and primarily primary-sourced for the content that is actually on the main topic. I'm almost tempted to brutally stub it down so we can get going on a better article on this important material. DMacks (talk) 00:23, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I removed the off-topic info/fluff & consolidated the remaining useful info.  Feel free to further modify it as you see fit. --ThaddeusB (talk) 03:31, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
Talk:Red Roses

message: I don't think that the article should contain Category:Communities of Carmarthenshire - surely Red Roses is not a community in its own right - the community is Eglwyscummin? That said, there doesn't seem to be a proper place in the infobox template where the community should be entered. --Redrose64 (talk) 11:07, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Both sorted --Redrose64 (talk) 21:22, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Community
Talk:Index of history articles

message: I've created this list and intend to finish it. I would be greatful for some help--Phoenix-wiki (talk · contribs) 19:23, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: *I will try to help. On an unrelated note, would it be possible to make this list more appealing to the eye? Perhaps in columns with entries and sub-entries (like an index)? That way, it wouldn't look like just a block of text, and we could also compact it (for example, by listing all the "ages" under the entry "Age of"). Just a few thoughts. --Malachirality 00:00, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

text: *It's more toics: ie. French revolution, WWII and History of China etc, not individual people or battles--Phoenix-wiki (talk · contribs) 20:32, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Creation - expansion needed

message: I haven't been here in awhile, but could we establish some guidelines and some sort of scope/parameters for this list? I think it's already pretty clear that this is not a military history list (so no battles, people, etc.). So, what should and shouldn't be included? Maybe through this discussion we could 
#Establish the contents and direction of this list
#Make it easier to find and added appropriate, related entries
#Clean up and flesh out this list, which right now reads more like a directory of countries of the world than a list of history topics (incidentally, should we include every single "History of X Country"?)
--Malachirality (talk) 23:37, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: After trying in vain to clean up the once enormous and disorganized mess that was the "List of astronomy topics", the consensus was to start over with a List of basic astronomy topics. At the very least that page has some organization now and is more useful. Hence, as a suggestion, you might do something comparable with this page before the list gets out of hand.—RJH (talk) 20:46, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Scope 

message: There's a discussion on what the reference requirements for lists like this one.  The Transhumanist (talk) 01:29, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Wikipedia talk:Verifiability#Should there be an exception for indexes?]] 

message: Ek 2603:8000:9B02:C0FB:4432:6AAB:DAB5:9368 (talk) 03:59, 9 February 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ek 

message: History 105.4.7.76 (talk) 18:53, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  History
Talk:CBRT-DT

message: Doesn't anybody have anything better to do than tagging images that have an obvious connection to the article?
Mjlarochelle 19:21, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Reply

message: article changed to Disambiguation, th original one moved to CBRT (TV)--MJKubba|talk|contributions 22:26, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The problem is you didn't move it.  You copied/pasted, leaving behind the history here, thereby violating the terms of the GFDL.  Also, countless links point here, instead of the correct location.  Next time, please use the "move" function (at the top of the page).  --Rob (talk) 23:59, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Changed
Talk:KDIC (FM)

message: The KDIC record on the FCC station database states that "KDIC's first license was granted 9-12-1968." This seems to conflict with "KDIC went on the air on May 20, 1968". Given that Grinnell has a fall and spring semester, with the academic year ending in May, it seems more likely that they went on the air in the fall of 1968. 
Since I work for Grinnell College and Wikipedia strongly requests we don't update our "own" pages, I think it would be good for anyone who agrees with the change to update the entry. Thanks.
Sarah at Grinnell (talk) 20:48, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Disparities in timelines 

message: I work for Grinnell College, and am new to using the request edit template. Please review and update if you approve. Also, if you see anything I'm doing wrong or am missing, please let me know. I want to make this easy for the reviewers.
* Specific text to be added or removed: 
In spring of 2020, the station ended live student broadcasts due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Later that year, KDIC's antenna was damaged in the derecho that passed through Iowa in 2020. It was removed Aug. 31. As a result of these two incidents, the station implemented an online platform to allow live shows to stream to remote users. 
* Reason for the change: I think this makes for interesting historical data about the station, especially a few years down the road. FWIW, the station's live stream is not active during the summer when the radio station is off air. 
* References supporting change: See citation in text to be added
Sarah at Grinnell (talk) 13:49, 22 June 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: do you have secondary sources that have written about the incidents?  One source provided is a blog and the other is from the school.  What is needed are independent reliable sources.  One of things to consider is if secondary sources have not written about something then, generally, it should not be covered in the article.  If you can find secondary sources, please submit another request. S0091 (talk) 22:17, 10 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  KDIC Antenna Damaged in Derecho
Talk:Scars Upon My Heart

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians. I expanded this stub to include scholarly references that demonstrate the impact of the book Scars Upon My Heart since its publication in 1981, as well as address some of the continued debate around the contents. Treesiati (talk) 15:25, 1 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Expanded article 

message: Thank you for expanding this article. The substance of it is interesting and well-written, and it is generally based on solid sources, so most of my comments are organizational in nature. I would also ideally have liked to have spot-checked some sources, but I'm struggling to find anything that's accessible, and for a brief review I don't intend to go to the library. And the content is good; my comments below may seem critical, only because I'm offering suggestions for improvement. With those caveats:
The lead is very detailed, especially for an article this length. I would generally recommend avoiding block quotes in the lead, and trimming it down somewhat; it's supposed to be a summary, not to reproduce content in the body wholesale. Along the same lines, there shouldn't be information in the lead that isn't in the body; so if it's important information, I suggest including it in the body. The Tylee paragraph is what sticks out: I would try to summarize it in a sentence, and combine it with the previous paragraph. The full quote can be retained in the reception section. 
This is not strictly mandatory per WP:CITEVAR, but I would strongly recommend formatting citations using a template; Template:Cite book or Template:Cite encyclopedia should be sufficient for most of your needs. This will then allow you to link your footnotes to your sources, which makes it a lot easier on the reader to find full bibliographical information. 
The pedagogy section seems to me to wander into original research; see WP:OR. I recognize the utility of documenting the uses of this anthology, but if secondary sources haven't done so, we should generally not be doing so either. GA reviewers vary in their strictness, but as a reviewer I would object to that content. It would be fairly typical scholarly practice to include this, but we're not scholars, we're summarizing what scholars write. I suggest omitting the section altogether. 
Other miscellaneous notes; I think a bibliography of the editor is WP:UNDUE here, and should likely be pruned. The Last bit of "publication" strikes me as material better suited for "reception". If possible, more summary of the contents would be nice; there is a sentence in the lead that could perhaps be expanded upon, about styles. Finally, I would suggest, though it isn't required, putting the contents before the reception section. Thanks again for working on this, and please ping me if you require clarification. Vanamonde (Talk) 17:06, 1 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  WIG 20-minute review
Talk:Bart Spring in 't Veld

message: External Link no. 2 leads to nigerian spam site 2001:9E8:4545:D300:89F3:2C9F:9AE2:76A (talk) 20:04, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  External link leads to spam website
Talk:Prince Frederick William of Hesse-Kassel

message: No problem, it seems to be coming along nicely now, good luck with the article.Paste 19:57, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Deletion 

message: Overall think people who revert the edits are interested in Wikialty (something is true because I can get other Users to agree to it) then the actual informative content of the articles relating the Kassel branch of the former ruling house of Hesse, but if all interested, overall issue under way at Talk:William VIII, Landgrave of Hesse-Cassel Cladeal832 (talk) 01:51, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The discussion that you've linked to above indicates that there is no consensus to move the pages. DrKiernan (talk) 08:02, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Move Request 

message: I need to positively confirm if he served on HMS Cleopatra (1835) with a reliable source. The newspaper article from 1849 refers to him as son of the King of Denmark, but the King of Denmark at that time had no sons.NealeFamily (talk) 09:15, 20 November 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Royal Navy
Talk:Flashing Swords! 3: Warriors and Wizards

message: For many years, I have been searching for a hardcover copy of Warriors and Wizards...is this the only one of the series not to have a HC Book Club edition? The other volumes exist...including #4 and #5. I've never seen W&W for sale on any platform or any used bookstore. Were they all sucked off the planet by some wizard's magic spell?.......... 76.77.132.2 (talk) 19:42, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Flashing Swords! #3
Talk:HMCS Esquimalt

message: I have removed the new infobox tag because the infobox of this article conforms to the WikiProject Ships infobox template. Tundrawinds (talk) 21:51, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Infobox Tag 
Talk:New Zealand women's national field hockey team

message: One or more portions of this article duplicated other source(s). The material was copied from: http://www.wct2010.com/page.asp?section=87§ionTitle=About+the+teams. Infringing 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.  SFB/talk 12:59, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copyright problem removed
Talk:Pivara Tuzla

message: As the two articles are identical, I think a merger would be non-controversial. Biscuittin 19:56, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Comment
Talk:Swiss Indoors

message: There is a long, ongoing discussion at WP:Tennis about the tournament tables found in tennis articles on English-language Wikipedia (e.g., this type of table). The discussion is about whether the "official sponsored name" of a tournament - such as Pacific Life Open - or another tournament name without the sponsor - such as Indian Wells Masters - must be used in those articles. Please join the discussion here. Thanks.  Tennis expert (talk) 08:46, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Request for wider input on discussion at WikiProject Tennis
Talk:Law Preview

message: Law Preview seems to be both a company and the name used for its law school prep course product. The article is about the product. I can't find a category for this product in Wikipedia. It's a form of education, but it doesn't offer a degree or credits toward a degree.  It's not a professional certification program.  It seems to be a form of tutoring or continuing education. Please help classify. --Busy Stubber 20:03, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: This article is a promotional piece for a for-profit corporation.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.231.108.204 (talk) 18:12, 15 September 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Too promotional
Talk:List of tallest buildings in Taiwan

message: Would this article be a good place to mention how some tall buildings in Taiwan have a floor plan that includes an atrium extending from a low floor all the way to the top of the building?  Readin (talk) 17:54, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Empty inside 
Talk:Christian Party of Austria

message: WHY IS IT WHITE NATIONALIST??? Thats nonsense....its a christian utra-conservative party....  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.178.186.152 (talk) 01:16, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Coma (disambiguation)

message: I found Comatose functioning as a Rdr to Coma, and thus properly requiring a double HatNote, since many sensible users will assume we would not intend them to go to Coma (disambiguation) for senses of "comatose" other than "in a coma". For what purpose? Few editors will be so presumptuous as to expect us to have an article about being comatose at Comatose, since we would never use that adjective for an article on the subject of, what comatosity, comatoseness, or is that just called "coma"? No one should be using it to save themself from building a pipe-trick markup, since comatose works just fine. On the other hand, since we almost never have articles that might be about an adjectivial aspect of a topic without using a noun title, users who know about Comatose but not "Comatose" (or vice versa) would have a fairly reasonable expectation of it being the main topic of Comatose; they should check if there aren't too many distractions from, uh, writing prose, and even if they intend to, they may forget. In contrast, anyone searching "comatose" or clicking such a link had to soft-Rdr themselves to the Dab, and thence to the sought article, and every reader of Coma experienced the clutter of the extra HatNote -- all for the sake of making up for the lapses of editors, and worse yet, those editors who have not edited in compliance with guidelines. I think there is no sense delaying fixing the mess, by making Comatose a Dab. --Jerzy•t 05:27, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Comatose 

message: The entry
: * Coma, a MapleStory Crusader skill
not only has no links, but a WP search for 
: MapleStory coma
produces only the accompanying Dab page, and 2 false hits in other namespaces. Write something -- something  substantial -- and it can be considered for a Dab entry.--Jerzy•t 06:18, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  MapleStory
Talk:Ardfert (Parliament of Ireland constituency)

message: Yes to merging. Seems logical. Hadrianheugh 20:17, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge
Talk:Camasunary

message: "Camasunary" is not a bay but the name of a few buildings inland. As can be seen from the Gazetteer for Scotland "Camasunary" is the name of the locality while "Camasunary Bay" is the name of the bay. Although its not a village (at least now) it does have 10 ruined houses so it should probably be in :Category:Populated places in the Isle of Skye. With the bay I expect it should probably be a redirect here or maybe be a separate article but in any case as far as I'm aware all bays have "Bay" in the name so "Camasunary" alone isn't the name of a bay. Crouch, Swale (talk)  17:55, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: "Camas" means "bay", so to call it "Camasunary Bay" would be incorrect, although you do see that used, mostly on maps or gazetteers made by people without local knowledge or understanding of the Gaelic. There's also a patch of privately-owned land by the shore, surrounded by Strathaird estate land, which includes a fishing lodge and the old and new walkers' bothies, but no dwellings or permanent population. --188.28.129.24 (talk) 07:31, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Then it might be more appropriate to say its a locality and bay though there is Uig Bay and "Uig" means "bay" see List of tautological place names so I don't think "Camasunary Bay" is incorrect when the sources do use it. Crouch, Swale (talk)  09:54, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: I wouldn't use the term "locality" - that has a very specific meaning in Scotland in terms of census data measurement, and I'm pretty sure that doesn't apply here. --188.28.129.24 (talk) 20:55, 17 January 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Then maybe "place" like many other largely deserted "settlements" in Scotland. Yes there might not have been specific consensus for "locality" but you didn't need to revert my entire edit which introduced new content you could have just removed "locality". Crouch, Swale (talk)  21:03, 17 January 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: "Place" is a vague term, whereas "bay" is more specific. --188.30.218.114 (talk) 16:13, 24 January 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Then maybe "deserted settlement" would be better? Though we don't know if its completely depopulated. There is a place of some sort on the mainland just like the fact that there is Uig, a village and Uig Bay the same appears to be the case here though "Bay" is apparently dropped for the bay and uses the Gaelic name. And again why have you removed my entire edit? Was the rest of it problematic? With Boreraig since its also deserted can't it be in both :Category:Former populated places in Scotland and :Category:Populated places in the Isle of Skye. Crouch, Swale (talk)  17:10, 24 January 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bay v locality