lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:1986 Queensland state election

message: I had earlier added the follwing edit wich is cited, factual and encyclopedic by nature, it was removed and replaced by a previous uncited version that is only an opinion, not factual in nature I believe. 
If an editor believs what I have posted is not encyclopedic and factual and should not be here then show proper cause here.
The Nationals won a total of 54.1% of the vote after distribution of preferences.Vivaldi27 (talk) 17:00, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, the edit is not faithful to the source. It says that the Coalition, not the Nationals, won said percentage of the two-party preferred vote, and the Liberals won 10 seats (most of them metropolitan ones) outright. The interesting part is that the two-party preferred vote is less than the combined primary vote of 56.1%. Orderinchaos 17:09, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

text: Very simple answer - As the Nationals did not run in every seat, none can be calculated. Trying to "come up" with things which have to be dreamed into existence is original research at its worst - and how would one calculate it? One would have to make assumptions about Labor, Liberal and minor party preferences in seats which the Nationals did not run in. That is why a Coalition one is given, as either the Nationals or the Liberals or both ran in most seats. I have given sufficient proof by citing it to a peer-reviewed academic source, where it is discussed in no less than two pages. One statement from that source reads: "While introduced ostensibly to provide for better representation, the real purpose of enlarging the size of the House was to protect the National Party's electoral base in the rural areas which, demographically, are stable or declining." It then goes into the specific details and mechanics of population growth within the different "zones" and how the seats were allocated. A book which came out a few years later looking at the 1989 election which was co-edited by Colin A. Hughes, a former Commonwealth electoral commissioner and long-serving UQ academic, also mentions it, as do the reports, collectively titled EARC I, of the Electoral and Administrative Reform Commission (which was itself set up by the Nationals) which came out in 1991 and recommended major changes to the boundaries to reflect one vote one value style principles. Orderinchaos 17:35, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I say Vivaldi is wrong. I also wanted to laugh at "forced distribution of preferences". It's full distribution. Nobody holds a gun to a voter's head. They can vote informal or not at all if they so wish. Timeshift (talk) 00:45, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Final Vote After Distribution of Preferences

message: Should anything be mentioned about the obvious disparity in votes and seats gained? Labor got more votes but fewer seats. The famous Bjelke gerrymander known as Bjelkemander. Was there any commentary at the time that could be cited? LamontCranston (talk) 04:26, 19 May 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bjelkemander?
Talk:1995 Queensland state election

message: Does anyone know how with a Labor and Liberal candidate, the Greens managed to get 24.2% of the primary vote in Mount Coot-tha in 1995? Timeshift (talk) 02:55, 22 June 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Given that the candidate was Drew Hutton and that he was both the Greens' primary spokesman (effectively their leader) and very prominent at the time, I'd say that explains it. Frickeg (talk) 04:57, 22 June 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: IMHO still an unusually high vote for even a Greens leader considering it was 1995, but fair enough. Timeshift (talk) 05:00, 22 June 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: It's absolutely an impressive result, but this was actually one of the watershed elections for the Greens; for the first time outside Tasmania and WA, AFAIK, they completely demolished the Democrats whenever they ran against each other and reached double figures in quite a few seats. I suspect the protest vote was pretty high; one of those "I don't like the government, but the opposition's a useless rabble" elections, from what I can gather. Plus, they were pretty much the only option in Queensland in 1995, even for right-wingers since the Confederate Action Party had become a joke. Frickeg (talk) 05:35, 22 June 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: This is way before my time, but I know they had a couple of major issues they were campaigning around, and considering that a) they were overtly dealing with the Liberals, and b) this was well before the conservatives started railing on the Greens outside of Tasmania, I suspect Hutton probably picked up votes from all over the place in a way they couldn't do now. The Drover's Wife (talk) 14:58, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: That is a good point. As the only non-Labor/Coalition option the Greens got 12% in Capricornia in 1990, a seat where they can't even break 5% now. Frickeg (talk) 20:42, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mount Coot-tha - Greens got a quarter of the vote?
Talk:1998 Queensland state election

message: Pauline Hanson...? We shouldn't even have ONP there anyway... we should only have the two ever-feasible realistic choices for government - one or the other. Anything less and we start going in to murky thresholds of what does and doesn't constitute infobox worthy... rant over. Timeshift (talk) 01:00, 4 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: They won 11 seats and got the second highest party vote, I think that puts it *well* out of contention personally. Orderinchaos 04:14, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

text: Ah excellent. That makes sense actually, as she then became the lead Senate candidate for Qld. Orderinchaos 11:35, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Infobox incorrect 
Talk:2004 Equatorial Guinea coup attempt

message: Parts of this article such as the discussion about UK prior knowledge sound biased.--69.132.212.35 01:34, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: i disagree, also all sourced information.Chendy (talk) 13:59, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Source or no source, it may be unwise to base such a disproportionate amount of the article on the viewpoints of the Guardian. QatBurglar (talk) 03:22, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Boilerplate POV discussion 

message: This plot sounds like the plot of the Fredrick Forsythe story, Dogs of war. Also, I read somewhere that one of the guys had that book on his person when they were arrested.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.250.62.216 (talk) 08:06, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dogs of war 

message: I am currently reading the book "The Wonga Coup" by Adam Roberts which tells the long and sordid tale. Once I finish reading, I will update this page with the things I have learned. Until then, adieu. QatBurglar (talk) 03:18, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Wonga Coup
Talk:Collection (abstract data type)

message: This page should be added to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Data_structures
I would do it but I don't know how... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.59.98.193 (talk) 01:37, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:ROCS Tso Ying

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. Uncontested RM (closed by non-admin page mover) ❯❯❯ Raydann(Talk) 21:12, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 15 April 2024
Talk:Albuminuria

message: ... reduces albuminuria. Now for a hard clinical endpoint... doi:10.2215/​CJN.09110914 JFW | T@lk 13:47, 8 September 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Salt restriction 

message: "For a number of reasons, clinical terminology is changing to focus on albuminuria more than proteinuria." 2001:171B:2274:57E1:4412:62A7:A6C0:DC75 (talk) 11:26, 25 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  What does this sentence mean?
Talk:Cherepovets

message: "The University graduates a lot of specialists for the city enterprises: engineers, economists, managers, interpreters, spin doctors and many others."
Funny. I understand the article was written by Russian speakers who didn't realize what is "spin doctor".
Overall, the article is written in bad English with a lot of Russian language influence and should be corrected by someone who speaks English at least fluently.
I just went ahead and removed that, plus some other overly optimistic statements about the cinemas. This needs some attention.. and references..! WijzeWillem (talk) 11:02, 31 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Old talk
Talk:Blood urea nitrogen

message: Nearly all of the information in the Methodology section needs to be removed.  Wikipedia is not a how-to manual.  WhatamIdoing (talk) 04:51, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Seems to have been done. - Rod57 (talk) 12:26, 18 November 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: [[WP:NOT]]

message: It says lab procedures differ.  How ? and are any affected by non-urea nitrogen eg protein ? - Rod57 (talk) 12:26, 18 November 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Procedures

message: Blood Urea Nitrogen test 2409:4072:2E16:4AFE:0:0:C9CA:BF02 (talk) 18:06, 15 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Physiology
Talk:I Want a Hippopotamus for Christmas

message: My 10" PHILIPS label cat. no. P.B. 211 lists the A-side as:
"I Want a Hippopotamus for Christmas" (Hippo the Hero) (Rox)
What is the "Hippo the Hero" part?  Is that a continuation of the song title? As in "I Want a Hippopotamus for Christmas (Hippo the Hero)" should be an alternate title? Antmusic (talk) 18:48, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Have no idea but she does mention a 'Hippo hero standing there' when she comes down the stairs in the morning. DarkMithras —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.100.246.254 (talk • contribs) 17:32, 26 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Song title

message: I don't recall ever hearing the song before until a few years ago.  Is there any way to know how much airplay it got from year to year, and if somebody in particular was responsible for bringing it back? Шизомби (talk) 04:46, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I remember singing the song in elementary school and heard it somewhere every Christmas since, in shopping malls, commercials etc. It's quite well-known. I'm not sure if there was some artist in particular responsible for bringing it back, but you could try asking at the Reference desk, I've always managed to get an answer to any question there. -- œ™ 19:27, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

text: Growing up in the 1970s, I reliably heard it every Christmas in stores etc. However I was startled yesterday to hear it in a Subway sandwich store! I was never a big fan of the song. I think the music is well written, and the concept is funny, but her voice has always grated. Greg Lovern (talk) 07:42, 19 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Revival? 

message: Regarding the line at the end of the History section about her saying in 2010 that she never recieved any royalties from the song, I listened to the whole 9:16 minute video that was referenced there and did not hear her mention anything at all about royalties. 
In a 1916 New York Times article, she said that with the recent renewed interest in the song, she was recieving royalty checks "in amounts ranging from a few hundred dollars to $1,000", and a Sony Music account in her name had almost $100,000 that had been accumulating since 2008.
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/30/business/retirement/i-want-a-hippopotamus-for-christmas.html Greg Lovern (talk) 07:38, 19 December 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks, the fact that the wrong interview was referenced turns out to have been my fault. I've added a brief summary about the royalty situation from the newer interview. Graham87 (talk) 15:57, 19 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Royalties
Talk:Cystatin C

message: Moved this section from the article. --Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 17:56, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Further reading
File talk:Ah Louis Store.jpg

message: Image was found here: http://www.flickr.com/photo_zoom.gne?id=2708250&size=o and is attributed with a Creative Commons Attributions-Share Alike 2.0 license.  Image was uploaded to Flickr by peterme.
Permission for the image was explicitly granted by peterme. —XSG 18:50, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Can we use this?
Talk:Hypermagnesemia

message: This article has been revised as part of a large-scale clean-up project of multiple article copyright infringement. (See the investigation subpage) Earlier text must not be restored, unless it can be verified to be free of infringement. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions must be deleted. Contributors may use sources 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. Moneytrees🌴Talk🌲Help out at CCI!  01:11, 25 May 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Possible copyright problem
Talk:Membranoproliferative glomerulonephritis

message: Google finds title at "Membranoproliferative glomerulonephritis - a new look at an old entity" - but it says personal use only so not sure if can use it on article page as ref or external link. - Good diagrams and refs, but no supplements or appendices. - Rod57 (talk) 14:52, 13 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Full text of Sethi2012 ref 

message: See http://pmid.us/17396142. Mark ong (talk) 22:13, 6 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Type II not like type I
Talk:A Love (2007 film)

message: This summary is not encyclopdaedic in tone.  For! example!, exclamation marks and a setnece frag.  I didn't understand enough of the movie to do a good job of  re-writing this.  While it may  be a personal or cultural difference, I was startled to see the article characterized the woman as lovely (but maybe that is one of the reasons I didn't understand the movie very well). Kdammers 02:20, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tone 
Talk:Uroscopy

message: The Uroscopy/Uromancy proposed merger was added in February 2010.  Would someone who supports the merge provide a rationale?  I tentatively oppose the merge because these seem like two distinct topics to me. Chuck (talk) 14:41, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: And one is directed to determining the health of the patient (no matter how wrong we know the conclusions therefrom to be today) and one is not, which is what I see as the fundamental difference.  If there are citations (either modern or from that era) which blur the line by using "uroscopy" for determination of things beyond the patient's health, or, conversely, "uromancy" for determination of the patient's health, I might reconsider, but until then the distinction seems to be a clear one to me. Chuck (talk) 17:48, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree: one is about predicting the future at large, the other is about assessing a person's state of health.  Sergeant Cribb (talk) 06:19, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge?
Talk:Vesicouretic reflux

message: Same topic as vesicoureteral reflux shall merge --Iztwoz (talk) 18:11, 28 November 2015 (UTC)

message: ... in children doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(14)60383-4 JFW | T@lk 21:16, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lancet review
Talk:Language (journal)

message: I reverted the deleted text about Chomsky's review of Skinner's "Verbal Behavior" and Lees' review of Chomsky's "Syntactic Structures".  Whether one likes these reviews or not, they are the only two articles from Language likely to ne known to non-linguists, and they are surely two of the articles that shaped the field in the last half of the twentieth century and into the 21st.  (The Skinner review, for example, appears on the list of "top 100 works in cognitive science" at http://www.cogsci.umn.edu/OLD/calendar/past_events/millennium/final.html.  The book "Syntactic Structures" is first.)   Again, whether you think this is a good thing or not.
--Linguistslinguist 02:32, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Chomsky's review of Skinner

message: The Chomsky review of Skinner was certainly for many years one of the Language pieces most likely to be known to non-linguist social-sciences academics, but whether it is the "most famous" ever is possibly dubious.  If the Chomsky review is allowed to overshadow 75 years of scholarly activities mainly internal to the field of linguistics, then there would seem to be a rather striking disproportionality... AnonMoos (talk) 07:05, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: again

message: This journal does not appear to be open access. The link in the article to "open access of language since 2001" leads to Project Muse which only provides closed access to the journal. The journal's website (here) states: 
"At no additional cost, LSA members may now access Language, beginnning with Volume 77 (2001), on the web through Project MUSE. To take advantage of this benefit, please follow the instructions below...Click on the article you would like to read. If you are not currently connected from a library that is a member of Project Muse, you will need to log in. LSA members should use LSA1 as their login and jun56 as their password." 
This is NOT open access. This is access to those at subscribing institutions along with free online access for LSA members, and those who somehow happen to find out about the LSA user name and password. Open Access, in ANY accepted definition of the phrase, requires free online accessibility to EVERYONE. As such I think it warrants removing this claim.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Leddydavej (talk • contribs) 17:04, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: It appears that this policy has changed, with all content being available free online after a one year embargo. See here. Brusquedandelion (talk) 08:49, 13 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title: Not Open Access
Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Musicians/colortest

message: This is still in use on the archive of the project talk page it was created for.  As the author, I could nominate this for speedy deletion (or move it to a subpage of the archive page), but that would require either making the archive hard to read or modifying the archive, and I'm a tiny bit reluctant to do either one.    It seems pretty harmless where it is, and I see no strong reasons for deletion.  Xtifr tälk 02:32, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
Talk:Satamkar

message: Why is this article here? Not clear that the family is notable in itself. Article is poorly sourced.Parkwells (talk) 21:02, 16 May 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Recommend deletion, questionable notability

message: you wrote. "Not clear that the family is notable in itself"
What is the criterium of a "family notable in itself" ?
Is it to be an American Family ? Or a notable family for the Americans ?
The Bene Israel were a very small community and remain a small one.
The Satamker family is typical of this community, by its history. But it is also unique because one of its member was the first Bene Israel to create an important company.
We do not need Wikipedia if it is only intended to contain the names you may already find in the Encyclopedia Britannica.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.124.24.12 (talk) 03:56, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: This was related to Wikipedia guidelines that say articles must be supported by citations from verifiable, "Reliable Sources": published secondary accounts in major newspapers, books published by established commercial and academic publishers. You can also read its guidelines on "Notability" at WP:Notability, which usually relate to being covered in Reliable Sources. Parkwells (talk) 12:17, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Satamker
Talk:Floating Bridge, Dubai

message: I deleted a reference.  The reason is because the website changes every month.  The information provided about the Floating Bridge is no longer available.  This is what the reference was for people that want to see it:  [ Dubai News This Month Economist.com ].  --Leitmanp 02:46, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Deletion of a Reference on 14 October 2007

message: At many points within the article, it is referenced that the Floating Bridge is temporary and that the Al-Ittihad Bridge would be its replacement. However, I cannot confirm via Wikipedia that Al-Ittihad has been built as the article for that is also out of date. I don't have the time to research this fully, but may tomorrow.
I am asking of the following:
# Has the Floating Bridge yet been replaced? If so, article must be updated to past tense.
# What is the status of the Al-Ittihad Bridge? This could affect both this article and that for the Al-Ittihad Bridge as these articles have not been majorly updated since 2014/15. I am willing to undertake this part, and if anyone is willing to help please message me.
Thank you in advance,
Siguida Siguida (talk) 04:07, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Replacement of Floating Bridge and Al-Ittihad Bridge.
Talk:Boeing 747 G-BDXJ

message: ok so you know wikimedia right? They put the name as Category:PP-SMA (aircraft) so that's the reason i want the name of the article to be changed to G-BDXJ (aircraft) or to the name  of the plane like for example "City of Amsterdam" i want to ask your opinion on this. Iyusi766 (talk) 03:45, 24 February 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requesting a move
Talk:Kamikaze (1937 aircraft)

message: Hi,
I Just wrote the French version of this article. I started with English version but I finally changed  everything. Since it's not a translation anymore I didn't credit the authors from this article but I'd still like to thank you for getting me interested in Kamikaze plane. 
Regards
--LJouvenaux (talk) 22:31, 1 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  THanks you 

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 to Kamikaze (1937 aircraft).   -- Calidum 16:00, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Kamikaze (aircraft) →  – The article is currently called Kamikaze (aircraft).  Since "aircraft" can be a plural as well as a singular term, this provides little disambiguation from the Kamikaze attacks.  I suggest retitling it to Kamikaze (airplane), which is clearly a singular. 174.89.49.204 (talk) 22:29, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
replies: text:  I would support the move back to Kamikaze (1937 aircraft). Perhaps we can find consensus this way. Oska (talk) 06:01, 21 August 2020 (UTC)

text:  Kamikaze (1937 aircraft) makes sense to me as well. Retswerb (talk) 04:59, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 16 August 2020
Talk:Plus Ultra (aircraft)

message: I've noticed that the related article in the Spanish Wikipedia has much more information. I'll add to my "to-do" list to translate some of that info into English and add to this article to expand it a bit. Regards, DPdH (talk) 10:49, 21 November 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Still in my list... DPdH (talk) 03:11, 29 July 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article expansion 