lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:1958 LSU Tigers football team

message: A discussion regarding logo removal/inclusion that occurred during a recent edit to this article is ongoing at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject College football#Logos on articles of past seasons.CrazyPaco (talk) 22:57, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: infobox logo removal/inclusion
Talk:Marianne and Juliane

message: This article should focus on the film, not on the director. I thus removed the excessive information about von Trotta (again). Huon (talk) 21:33, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Content removal

message: There was a lengthy paragraph explaining the title with reference to the atmosphere of the Germany in the 1970s.  As the German article on the film makes clear (and the claim is referenced with a link to an interview with the von Trotta), the title was used in reference to the 50s.  Omicron18 (talk) 19:07, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Deleted gloss on title
Talk:This England (magazine)

message: The consents section implies that the magazine is largely political.  That is not so. I have most copies from the second edition in 1968 to 2010 - inherited from my mother.  Most articles are on history, architecture, royalty, village life, poetry, music and so on.  Perhaps 1% could be seen as political, and that only indirectly.  It is not and never has been a political magazine.  Reference to the new owners having "subdued the magazine's political content" is wrong. The content of the magazine remains essentially unchanged.101.98.175.68 (talk) 20:20, 23 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Politics
Talk:Normanton, Pontefract and Castleford (UK Parliament constituency)

message: Does the article need to make mention of the fact that the currents MP for Normanton, Ed Balls, and the MP for Pontefract/Castleford, Yvette Cooper, are married to each other and that it seems likely that Ms Cooper will contest the seat in the next election, leaving Ed Balls to find another constituancy?  Jonobass 16:30, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  MPs 
Talk:Zoë Skoulding

message: gathered the information from a variety of sources, including the following independent websites (as well as the subject's own sites 
http://www.zoeskoulding.co.uk and http://www.skald.org). A google search brings up several hundred results.
also some biographical details from the jacket notes to Skoulding's books
http://www.seren-books.com/public/authors.cfm?&m1=c_14&m2=e_0&m3=e_0&m4=e_0&nextStart=1&subItemId=S
http://www.gwales.com/goto/review/en/1854113666/
http://www.gwales.com/goto/biblio/en/1874786798/
http://www.welshlitabroad.org/authors.cfm?lan=e&author_id=134&switch=dsp
http://www.art-errorist.de/fiestaval_2005/Artists/zoe.htm
http://www.welshlitabroad.org/features.cfm?lan=g&switch=dsp&feature_id=99&featuretype=2
http://www.goethe.de/ins/ca/mon/prj/eur/aut/roy/enindex.htm
http://www.headheritage.co.uk/unsung/review/823
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Wrench
http://www.amazon.co.uk/s/ref=nb_ss_w_h_/202-2314373-7635024?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=zo%EB+skoulding&Go.x=0&Go.y=0&Go=Go
10drill10 16:48, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: I've removed the lead photograph from the article at the request of Zoë Skoulding. See here. —Bruce1eetalk 14:34, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I've added an alternate photo that Zoë has sanctioned. See here. —Bruce1eetalk 06:13, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Photo 
Talk:Al-Dawayima

message: map
needs to clearly show the modern state of israel not the palestinian wet dream of a palestinian state within all the territory of the jewish state. i think that would be fair, even according to wikipedia standards --129.98.212.163 (talk) 21:54, 20 November 2013 (UTC)
Talk:Bernard Silverman

message: I've taken the liberty of updating this a bit following Bernard's Knighthood, using material from his official website. I do know Bernard but I hope you will agree that this material is intetresting and NPoV. If not, please amend accordingly. NBeale (talk) 10:00, 31 December 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: , you can't just copy content from external sources into Wikipedia. Unless the content is explicitly released under a free licence that is copyright violation. I've removed the material for this reason. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 13:32, 31 March 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Updates following Knighthood
Talk:Kilij

message: ==Untitled==
The information in the very first paragraph does not reflect the scholarly consensus at the moment; neither the Hsiung-nu nor the Avars are thought of as "Turks" by historians. A few historians in the 19th and early 20th century have suggested that the Hsiung-nu "might" be the "Huns" in Europe, and they in turn "might" be connected to "Turks" but these theories remain marginal and no direct evidence exists to support them. This article should not include the Hsiung-nu or the Avars as Turks if we care about historical accuracy.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Parryriposte (talk • contribs) 03:34, 16 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Maybe it does not reflect the scholarly consensus of eurocentric scholars ,but the opinions of eurocentrists are worthless for turkish historians. 46.114.172.131 (talk) 11:50, 1 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Comments 

message: The information in the very first paragraph does not reflect the scholarly consensus at the moment; neither the Hsiung-nu nor the Avars are thought of as "Turks" by historians. A few historians in the 19th and early 20th century have suggested that the Hsiung-nu "might" be the "Huns" in Europe, and they in turn "might" be connected to "Turks" but these theories remain marginal and no direct evidence exists to support them. This article should not include the Hsiung-nu or the Avars as Turks if we care about historical accuracy.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Parryriposte (talk • contribs) 03:34, 16 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Maybe it does not reflect the scholarly consensus of eurocentric scholars ,but the opinions of eurocentrists are worthless for turkish historians. 46.114.172.131 (talk) 11:50, 1 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: In turkish 'kılıç' means any type of sword.... Armanalp 15:50, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Comment 

message: What this article needs is a picture of thi type of sword
 
Jon Ascton (talk) 15:25, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Picture

message: I think that subject must not to be united with shamshir. Despite its Persian origin, Kilij has Turkish origins. That makes it different. Of course there is a similarity between them but who can say each European sword is unique?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.213.76.197 (talk) 15:45, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vote 

message: So far one of my edits, mentioning exactly what the kilij did on Deadliest Warrior, has been reverted twice, once by the bot. No explanation has been given for why a piece of information that is easily verifiable and provides clarity to the point made on the show has been deleted as "not constructive". Chitoryu12 (talk) 01:35, 9 June 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Edit Reversion

message: What is conspicuously absent from this article is the rationale for designing a sword with a blade that has such a pronounced curve. Assuming there is such a reason, it ought to be one of the featured elements of this article and all articles that cover swords of similar design.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.117.245.132 (talk) 17:47, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rationale
Template talk:Welcomeh

message: is my preferred welcome templates, but I use  for anon users. So I've created a version of the former, with the additional content from the IP template: . Will someone check it, please? Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 19:06, 28 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  IP version 

message: [ Mixed 'em up]. Rolled back. —Waterfox (talk) 15:55, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mixed up simple_pedia and en_pedia 

message: Hi everyone. Those of us involved at the Teahouse pilot are interested in seeing a link to the Teahouse placed in this welcome template. This will be able to help us drive new editor traffic to the Teahouse during this pilot period, and allow us to continue to assess the pilot to the best of our ability. The welcome template is a great and powerful tool for new users, and it'd be really valuable to give new editors the choice to visit the Teahouse for assistance and community experience. I do hope that you will support this. Thank you for your consideration :) Sarah (talk) 23:58, 2 April 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: See discussion on Template talk:Welcome. KillerChihuahua?!? 22:26, 12 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Linking to the Teahouse on the welcome template 

message: Hasn't anyone noticed that this template looks broken? This is what it originally looked like. The next edit, it was substituted for  which also looks broken (it looked ok here, but has been messed up since the following edit). It's lower half is lopsided to the right. I just noticed it the other day, so I suppose it's not used often. I always use  (or  for IP users). Anyway, this template could use a tune up. - wolf 18:15, 7 September 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: See here. FYI - wolf 08:34, 26 March 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Broken? 

message: "Pages needing attention" under "Things to do" currently links to Wikipedia:Pages needing attention, which is marked as outdated and recommends using :Category:Articles needing attention instead. This seems like a no-brainer but I'm new and this template is substituted by at least one bot I'm aware of so I thought I should check here first. Is there a reason not to change it? Qb42 (talk) 04:45, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: I didn't realize that the link is inherited from Template:Welcomeg, I have asked on that talk page instead. Qb42 (talk) 19:56, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Outdated link
Talk:Tirthankara

message: All books and references I've read have the Sanskrit as "Ford maker" not "Teaching God" and in fact, the Tirthankara are not Gods, but transcended humans.  The reference to them as "Gods" at all is counter to the Jain religion and a misrepresentation.  I will be editing to change this across Wikipedia as I see someone has systematically changed it in several places unless there is good evidence why this should not be.  In addition to citing legitimate references, I'll consult with my local Jain community as well before making any edits.  https://www.britannica.com/topic/Tirthankarahttps://www.britannica.com/topic/Tirthankara --Shanekenyon (talk) 00:14, 28 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sanskrit Definition of Tirthankara 

message: Tirthankar 27.63.20.222 (talk) 14:16, 22 March 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  History
Talk:Waf (build system)

message: In response to the Template:Notability, I added the following sentence:
:Waf was subject to some attention when the KDE project decided to use Waf as its primary build system, although later, that decision was revoked. 
I'm leaving the template in place, though. I'm not sure about notability: KDE is a major OSS project, and it's significant what build system they use. But admittedly they made the decision, started using it, and then had second thoughts (as explained in the linked-to text). Anyway, others can now make a more informed decision on the notability issue. 193.99.145.162 17:00, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: BKsys was started as a scons improvement for KDE. But scons is known for having issues with big projects; it does not scale well. It became clear that improving scons won't help, so waf was born. However, waf was in its infancy when KDE was about to choose an alternative to scons, and thus it wasn't a viable option. I put this information in the article, and subsequently removed the template. --80.121.29.56 23:42, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Notability

message: I actually took the trouble to look into a few of these, and half of those listed that I checked didn't appear to use Waf at all. Samba and Jack don't appear to have any references at all to waf or wscripts in their current source distributions; Geany does, however. I'm thus extremely skeptical of unsourced claims about users. 98.14.211.227 (talk) 14:53, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Notable Applications 

message: This is significant -- an open-source author going against free proliferation of his free work?  WHY?  Author actively preventing free publicity and increased visibility of his work?  WHY?   Debian including your project is a detriment and not an honor?   WHY?   Can we add answers these questions to the wiki?  Can we link or pull from a trusted source for this information?  People hunting for a new build system could find this Debian blocking event as a huge red flag.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.10.5.213 (talk) 15:35, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Blocking Debian Distribution
Talk:List of Baywatch episodes

message: I've began editing the Baywatch Episode Guide to include information pertaining to the final season of Baywatch. It's now uniform with the correct information. I'll be adding episode synopsis of each episode as I sit down and watch them. The new information on the final season contains factual broadcast dates taken from another website.Wolfe426 (talk) 14:09, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Baywatch Season 11 Episode Guide Added 

message: That may be the order the episodes aired, but episodes 10 and 11 of season 8 need switched, or at least a note placed on the main page right under the season 8 header. In episode 10 Missing, Caroline is magically back at the beach (after leaving for New York again in episode 7) and working, while in episode 11 Hijacked is when she actually comes back, right at the start of the episode. 2601:584:C500:2E30:45AD:56E3:D337:1B26 (talk) 06:46, 14 March 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Season 8 is screwed up
Talk:Winsorized mean

message: My first entry.  Hope it's helpful, I am just feeling my way around here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Plf515 (talk • contribs) 17:13, 24 November 2006
:A good start, though IMHO the title should be consistent with that of the article Winsorising. Not that I necessarily prefer 'winsorised mean', I just think it is important to be consistent. Btyner (talk) 21:38, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I would like to see information in advantages/disadvantages, compared to trimmed-mean  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.206.162.148 (talk) 05:27, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

message: I always thought that the example shows a 20% winsorized, as 2 out of 10 are replaced. Nijdam (talk) 18:15, 27 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Percentage 

message: "It involves the calculation of the mean after replacing given parts [...], typically discarding an equal amount of both [...]".  Make up your mind: are you replacing (cardinality unchanged) or discarding (cardinality decreased)? Urhixidur (talk) 22:14, 2 March 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Some individual values are discarded AND replaced by different values, so no real error, but it could be rephrased. Melcombe (talk) 22:46, 2 March 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: My point exactly. Thanks for fixing this. Urhixidur (talk) 19:49, 12 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Contradictory 

message: I never heard of the winsorised mean for a probability distribution. Nijdam (talk) 08:43, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: A simple search found this, http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=8f8nBb4__EYC&pg=PA30&dq=%22winsorized+distribution%22&hl=en&sa=X&ei=STnoT-foPITK0QWw9s2uCQ&ved=0CDsQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=%22winsorized%20distribution%22&f=false , which is definitely working with a theoretial distribution. The book is Introduction to Robust Estimation and Hypothesis Testing by Rand R. Wilcox. I guess there must be similar stuff elsewhere. Melcombe (talk) 10:17, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Probability distribution 

message: The example wasn't really helpful to me. Are we dividing by 10 because the sample count is 10, or because we're taking the 10% Winsorized mean? (which looks rather like 20% (as someone pointed out earlier))..
Ai.unit (talk) 10:00, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  The example is a bit confusing
Talk:Rajinder Goel

message: Re. the 640/636/637 mismatch mentioned in Rajinder Goel#Notes,
CI has an old interview with Rakesh Sanghi, the old Haryana scorer at http://content-ind.cricinfo.com/columns/content/story/242843.html , which says "Sanghi remembers the time when there was confusion over Rajinder Goel's record. Goel, the highest wicket-taker in Ranji Trophy history, could have ended up with 635 scalps, but for Sanghi realising that five of his victims were wrongly attributed to his namesake, G Goel. Sanghi fondly remembers a newspaper recognising his worth with a headline: 'Goel takes 635, Sanghi gifts him five.'"
I checked the CA/CI stats for this person. G.Ramgoel is the only contemporary Goel and neither CI nor CA currently credit him with any wicket. Tintin (talk) 17:58, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  640 v 636
Talk:Ronnie Vannucci Jr.

message: I'm not convinced that the image used on this page is Ronnie Vannucci.  He has longer hair and no mustache.  In fact, I think this is Brandon Flowers.Bjones 06:35, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Image

message: Why is this redirecting to The Killers page? Ihavenoname42 (talk) 01:56, 13 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Here is why. Note that members of notable bands are redirected to the band's article, not given individual articles, unless they have demonstrated individual notability for activity independent of the band, such as solo releases. Members of two notable bands are generally notable enough for their own article.
So he gets his own page when he releases notable material with another band or as a solo artist. Otherwise it just becomes a fan page. Which would be interesting, but if you have one of those for every member of every band it effectively mean there is no notability criteria and that in turn would effect his band article. --➨Candlewicke  :) Sign/Talk  16:29, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: redirecting?

message: 18" K Constantinople Crash/A Ride Hi-hats??? This thing has no sense 151.42.180.127 (talk) 19:38, 29 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Equipment
Talk:Aston Butterworth

message: Aston-Butterworth was never a Formula One constructor - it was an F2 constructor at a time when all races counting towards the World Championship (other than the Indy 500) were run to F2. (Arguably this is a problem with the category name!). (This will also apply to various other F2 constructors whose cars appeared only the World Championship in 1952-3). Pete Fenelon 15:52, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: More precisely, I'd say that it is a problem with general understanding of the term "Formula One". For a very long time (judging by terminology used in some of my older Motor Sport magazines, this dates back to even the late 1950s) The FIA World Championship and Formula One have been near-synonymous. Certainly Alberto Ascari is often cited (as on Wikipedia) as one of only two Italian Formula One World Champions, except that his two victories came in the two F2 years! If you are referring to a specific set of rules and statutes, then the distinctions between F1 and F2 during the early 1950s are obvious. However, if you regard F1 as being a rather less defined "top tier of international motorsport", then arguably the 1952 and 1953 WCs still fall into this category. The latter view was even given legal backing during FOM's recent attempts to trademark the term "Formula One", which failed as the court ruled that the term was already generic. "Formula One" records and statistics routinely include 1952 and 1953, and even in historic racing circles (who you would have assumed knew better) I have seen a car referred to as a "1952 HWM Formula One car", when it was actually F2. Wikipedia has a principal of "common names" (in other words, we are not here to sit, Canute-like, to roll back the tide of misunderstanding). The differences are noted in the right places, but to insist upon absolute terminological precision just risks confusing non-specialsts who come looking for details of the 1952 and '53 "Formula One" seasons. Remember, we are a general-interest encyclopedia, so all content must be accessible to those with little or no knowledge of the intricacies of the WDC history. Pyrope 21:55, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Terminology
Talk:First Samurai (horse)

message: :The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. 
The result of the move request was: moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) Jack Frost (talk) 06:57, 16 August 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 6 August 2021
Talk:British Formula One Racing Team

message: Are there any reliable sources for the name of this team being "British F1 Racing"? ChicaneF1 and FORIX both refer to the team as "British Formula One Racing Team", as do 1977_Formula_One_season#Drivers_and_constructors and Brian Henton's F1 results table (although the team is referred to as "British F1 Racing" in Bernard de Dryver's F1 results table and the text of Henton's article). DH85868993 (talk) 15:42, 11 May 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Well if there are no sources stating "British F1 Racing" is the name, we might as well change it to "British Formula One Racing Team", given the presence of sources for that name. It's a fairly minor change anyway. QueenCake (talk) 19:36, 14 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Team name
Talk:British Racing Partnership

message: "During this time four of the team's drivers were killed while racing their cars"
To my knowledge, Yeoman Credit Racing suffered two fatal casualties that year: Harry Schell and Chris Bristow. F3promo (talk) 16:55, 4 April 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Only two fatal casualties is supported by this webpage, so I've updated the article accordingly. DH85868993 (talk) 13:25, 5 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  1960 Formula One season
Talk:Connaught Engineering

message: When I was a schoolboy I was a member of the Connaught Car Club -- an attempt, as I recall, to raise money to keep the Connaught F1 machines going.  Does anyone know anything about this.  I have no details anymore.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.58.130.138 (talk) 10:16, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Connaught Car Club
Talk:Delahaye

message: He doesn't seem to have an article yet. 74.96.53.170 (talk) 17:55, 31 March 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: If he's sufficiently notable, you could create an article for him yourself. Or if you don't feel confident to do that, you could request that someone else create an article. DH85868993 (talk) 11:41, 1 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  What about the historian of the same name? 

message: Currently, the lead consists of three paragraphs, the majority of which is made up of pre-1914-information. I believe the lead should contain hardly any information on Delahaye pre-1914, but should concentrate on 1920-1953 instead. Mark in wiki (talk) 10:25, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: The lead has certainly been lengthened, but it has become more of an opinion piece rather than a objective introduction to a Wikipedia article. Lekkere Kwal (talk) 15:31, 19 July 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: I took a crack at it. – Reidgreg (talk) 20:26, 9 November 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lead does not adequately summarize article
Talk:Dome (constructor)

message: Really short, but considering it did not enter into F1 the amount of information collected probably makes it start class and not just a stub. Guroadrunner (talk) 10:27, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Notes on F1 section classification