lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Šatrovački

message: The offensive political term "Serbo-Croatian" should be changed with something different. --millosh (talk (sr:)) 18:47, 2 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: If you don't know how to better formulate it, than let it be as it is. The article is accurate, has no particular POV. First elaborate what's POV about saying that Serbian, Croatian, Bosnian, etc. can be categorized as Serbo-Croatian languages, and than slap on the tag. --Dejan Čabrilo 18:55, 2 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I found better, but you are forcing your POV. This is POV. --millosh (talk (sr:)) 09:55, 3 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: What is exactly POV about it? Do make a case for it. Besides, see your talk page, I tried to explain there (Stokavian is a dialect, not a language to start with and is way more POV). Would you like this article to use "Bosnian, Croatian, Serbian and Serbo-Croatian" or does that sound way too ugly even for you? --Dejan Čabrilo 18:36, 3 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Serbo-Croatian is very POV if you are reffering to Serbian, Croatian and/or Bosnian using this term. If you call your native language SC, it is not the case with 90% of people which speak Shtokavian based languages. So, this is your POV. And you know that. (Or you have some newer statistics?) --millosh (talk (sr:)) 19:18, 3 November 2005 (UTC)

text: "Sthokavian based languages" is very good term to describe similarities between languages. But you don't read what is written and/or you don't think about the construction. Or you want to say that no one of those langauges is Sthokavian based in linguistic sense? --millosh (talk (sr:)) 19:18, 3 November 2005 (UTC)

text: Every person introduced into language problems in this area knows that all standard languages are mutualy intelligible; but the term "Serbo-Croatian" (in the sense of all languages and all dialects) is offensive. --millosh (talk (sr:)) 21:43, 4 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  POV tag 

message: I've removed the section on Serbian profanity.  It doesn't seem to have anything to do with Šatrovački. --Tony Sidaway 15:24, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Serbian Profanity

message: The following statement seems problematic:
"Today, it is spread among youth in informal speech and its variants are found in all South Slavic languages."
Is there any evidence of the dialect being used by speakers of Slovenian, Macedonian, and Bulgarian? Based on the citations provided, the dialect appears to be used exclusively by speakers of "Serbo-Croatian" (a.k.a. Bosnian/Croatian/Serbian). --24.219.67.50 (talk) 01:23, 13 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Found in which languages?
Talk:Son of the Morning Star

message: The writer of the article seems to be confusing SotMS with Crazy Horse and Custer.CFLeon 05:00, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Edited article to avoid this bit of confusion. CFLeon 07:01, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Crazy Horse & Custer 

message: As the section title states, I propose to split this article into two, one for the book and one for the movie.  Otherwise it is difficult to work on.  The split will reduce confusion. Jusdafax   05:32, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Split this article into one for the book and one for the movie
Talk:Emma Sansom

message: The assistance of the great-grandson of Emma Sansom is gratefully acknowledged in the preparation of this article.  MccullarsJ 18:57, 2 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Untitled 

message: Some accounts of the skirmish indicate that the two came under fire from Union soldiers, who subsequently ceased fire when they realized that a young girl was showing them the way. 
:Doesn't make sense. She wasn't showing them the way. Valetude (talk) 17:54, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Clarify, please 

message: There is a contradiction: was she born on June 2 or August 2?--Solomonfromfinland (talk) 16:57, 27 July 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Contradiction 

message: I've started adding content about the controversy regarding the statue and calls for its removal. Most of Sansom's modern notability is derived from the statue commemorating her, and it's not WP:NPV unless we discuss the significance of this statue in the context of lost cause-ism. AdJHu • 胡安祝 15:51, 20 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Statue removal movement
Talk:Brainwashing 101

message: Old discussion, which includes a whole lot of flames and some material discussion on what to include in the article, has been moved to Talk:Brainwashing 101/archive. Please feel free to edit the archive page to remove personal attacks and things you consider slanderous, while doing your best to retain things that demonstrate consensus on aspects of the article. Sdedeo 16:27, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

message: As I understand it, Brainwashing 101 was only intended as an early version of a longer and more ambitious documentary, which has now been released as Indoctrinate-U. That would explain why On The Fence Films is no longer hosting free downloadable copies of Brainwashing-101. See for example this January 2005 item in the New York Sun.
If this is correct, we'll need to rewrite (and perhaps rename) this article. Does anyone know for sure? CWC 13:54, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Indoctrinate-U
Talk:Clarecraft

message: — JIP | Talk 19:53, 2 November 2005 (UTC)

message: "When it closed in October 2005, its factory was the last operating in England." - erm, last what exactly? the way it reads later on its as though they were the last company to make any sort of manufactured goods. Can someone elaborate? Hellfire83 13:27, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Since nobody's expanded on them, I've removed the somewhat strange comments...  Chris 16:51, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:New Jersey Legislature

message: * The article is certainly too long at present and the district descriptions are not necessary in this article. Splitting it might work, with this article including, say, a table listing the senator and assemblymembers from each district (with perhaps the county names but no lists of municipalities). If a new article is created, I'd suggest it be called New Jersey Legislative districts, 2002-2012 rather than New Jersey Legislative Districts, 2001 redistricting (note the capitalization, as well as the text change). -- Lincolnite 15:50, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Splitting

message: I checked the legislature website or constitution of all 50 states.  Only in the seven states listed do the House and Senate districts share the exact same borders.
If you disagree with this, please point us to appropriate counterexample references.
Perhaps my wording "coincide as a single constituency" was unclear, so I've rephrased it.
New Jersey is one of only seven U.S. states (with Arizona, Idaho, Maryland, North Dakota, South Dakota, and Washington) in which the upper and lower house districts coincide as a single constituency. 
--J8 (talk) 05:05, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: District boundary alignment

message: This is the worst writing I've seen on wikipedia, it reads like a 4th grader's school report:
"Would that be fair? No it would be fair, because there would be no equal power between people voting for and against others like fighting, I disagree with fighting and going against one another. Regardless of any changes, the Legislature met infrequently, had high turnover among its members, and was far from being the most influential or powerful organ of state government.
What History we have today? I wounder what it was like a long time ago."
--69.199.197.90 (talk) 19:50, 6 January 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Looks like those edits were introduced in November.  :(  Reverted them.  --ChrisRuvolo (t) 19:24, 9 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Awful Writing Style
Talk:Counting coup

message: — JIP | Talk 20:10, 2 November 2005 (UTC)

message: I have recently been using the term "counting coup" to describe the bureaucractic practice of "counting numbers" versus "giving services".
:Why are you telling us this information? Are you asserting that this usage is important enough to add to the article?  -Will Beback 00:19, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Comment

message: This article could really use a photo or illustration of a coup stick. Dlabtot (talk) 19:52, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  coup stick 

message: What's the origin of the term? IIRC, it's French (per coup, duh...).  TREKphiler any time you're ready, Uhura  09:17, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: You want "flew the COOP" http://idioms.thefreedictionary.com/fly+the+coop  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.35.181.7 (talk) 17:24, 4 September 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: •sigh• See irony.  The Unknown Comic you talkin' to me?</small>  18:23, 4 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Flew the coup 

message: Several paragraphs of this article are identical to paragraphs here:  I'm hesitant to tag this article though because these days it's hard to tell where the text originated, Wikipedia or another site. 68.146.52.234 (talk) 20:59, 26 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Possible copyvio

message: Greetings: 
Some years ago, I read 4-5 books about the Iroquois Confederacy, Joseph Brant, Molly Brant, and William Johnson. Somewhere in at least one of the books was written that the nations of the Iroquois Confederacy used the practice of counting coup to smooth over anger within a group. If someone was accidently killed somehow (not in a battle), the person responsible would transfer goods to the victim's family by way of compensation. It seems analogous to winning a wrongful death court case today and being awarded a large settlement. 
Am I remembering this fairly well? It was definitely about the Iroquois. The information I see so far, net-wise, involves plains warriors and battle behavior between plains nations, not within groups.
[Also, was scalping (which the nations of the Iroquois practiced) some type of counting coup?]
Thank you for your time, Wordreader (talk) 21:22, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Another meaning for "counting coup"?
Talk:New Jersey Senate

message: It might be good to spell out the 2-4-4 election scheme.  I believe it results in elections in xxx1, xxx3, and xxx7, correct?  Terms are then xxx2-xxx3, xxx4-xxx7, xxx8-xxx1 (inclusive), correct?  So the current senators were elected in 2003 and will be seated until 2007?  Thanks. --ChrisRuvolo (t) 19:36, 7 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: If I read Our Legislature on the New Jersey Legislature web site, which states that "Senators serve four-year terms, except for the first term of a new decade, which is only two years. This "2-4-4" cycle allows for elections from new districts as soon as possible after each reapportionment." then you are correct. I think your version states the facts a bit more accurately. Alansohn 20:12, 7 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay, thanks.  So then the naming of :Image:New Jersey Legislative Districts 2001 by 2004 2005 senator party.png is not correct.  It should be ".. by 2004 to 2007 senator party".  I'll make this change, finalize the image and upload it.  --ChrisRuvolo (t) 17:21, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  2-4-4? 

message: I notice that the method of voting in the NJ State Legislature is by pushbutton. Apparently, there's a green button at the top corner of one's desk for yes, a red one for no, and a yellow one for abstain, and (at least in the Assembly) a white one for turning on your microphone. Speaking is done from the desk. A typical vote, once debating is done, takes perhaps a second to complete. Pretty fast, no? (And a typical vote is affirmative, with most of the wheeling and dealing done behind closed doors beforehand, in whatever meeting place the dominant political party has. So green buttons are presumably used more than red ones.)  —  Rickyrab. Yada yada yada 16:40, 28 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Method of voting

message: Linda Metzger was the former clerk of the assembly. She's actually my maternal grandmother.  Larsconks (talk) 18:33, 28 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Former Clerk of the Assembly 

message: Please help with election reform.  We all know they’re fraudulent.   THE PEOPLE WILL NOT LET IT STAND!!! 2601:8A:4000:30E0:204F:E974:EFE8:1ACF (talk) 13:39, 24 November 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  2020 fraud
Talk:Student Radio Association

message: this article is shockingly bad. its a stub with two lists one of which is of no interest to anyone. it looks horrible as well/. any suggestions on how to better format the page and sections to write under/ --cloudo 20:33, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  re write 
Talk:Chinese Domain Name Consortium

message: :collaboration between the People's Republic of China, the Republic of China (Taiwan), Hong Kong and Macau
Isn't that saying, between the PRC, the PRC, and the PRC?  Sounds like another "Mainland China"-ism.  Is there a way of putting this that makes clear why this isn't a redundancy?  Alai 20:26, 2 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Most often the ministry/agency/department of the PRC has jurisdiction only over mainland China, and represents only the interest of mainland China. (There is no such thing as a government of mainland China, or ministry of mainland China.) There was a meeting last month among the health secretaries of the PRC, Hong Kong and Macao, and the meeting was called "Joint Meeting of Senior Health Officials of the Mainland, Hong Kong and Macao". — Instantnood 20:59, 2 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I guess something like that was the case.  As I say, this could surely (and should) be expressed much more clearly.  i.e., which agencies/etc are collaborating, rather than which political entities.  Alai 21:17, 2 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree it's better to talk about the agencies. (Btw, would you say the Government of the UK and the Government of the UK and the Government of the UK and the Government of the UK and the Government of the UK and the Government of the UK and the Government of the UK are members of the British-Irish Council? :-D ) — Instantnood 21:32, 2 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Eh, no, and for reasons that should be fairly obvious.  Several of its constituents are not even in the UK, much less identical with the government of the UK.  Alai 23:12, 2 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Alright.. the Government of the UK and the Government of the UK and the Government of the UK and the Government of the UK. :-) — Instantnood 14:06, 3 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Anti-science

message: This article correctly refers to 'beliefs' and 'ideas'. As a result, it should not be included within categ Science, but rather Beliefs. I'll move it accordingly. Ian Cairns 20:27, 2 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I think both categories are appropriate. The existence of category X isn't there to say "this is a good example of X" but to allow the article to be found by people interested in topic X, who might also be interested in this topic. - DavidWBrooks 21:41, 2 November 2005 (UTC)
Talk:Best of DIC

message: Do we really need an article about an obscure video collection? Plus, some of the summaries contradict what happens in the actual episodes. (For one thing, Sultan Pasbah is the one who plans on putting Princess Peach in his harem in "Mario's Magic Carpet"; Bowser just wants to dump her in quicksand.) - Nintendo Maximus — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.114.107.30 (talk) 20:29, 2 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Untitled
Talk:Old West Church (Boston, Massachusetts)

message: This article could be moved to Old West Church, any objections? - RoyBoy 800 20:31, 2 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: I believe it was just the tower that was razed, not the entire Old West I structure. The only building that was entirely destroyed was Second Church, the "real" Old North--ostensibly for firewood, although some (I among them) believe it may have been for more particular cause.
re: moving it; the site suggested seems to already be the site it's on. It's not accurate, as that projected site's description states, however, to compare OW and ON, for several reasons.Dellaroux (talk) 21:06, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Fact checking needed
Talk:Province of New Jersey

message: The Province of New Jersey was an English colony that existed within the boundaries of the current U.S. state of New Jersey prior to the American Revolution. The original boundaries of the province were slightly larger than the current state and extended into portions of the present state of New York.
This seems self-contradictory.  How could the colony exist 'within the boundaries of the current state' if its boundaries 'were slightly larger than the current state'?  Flapdragon 21:31, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Boundaries 

message: Discoverer John Cabot was not an Englishman, but an Italian flying the English flag. I have corrected this.
93.97.15.83 (talk) 01:38, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  John Cabot 

message: The infobox says the Province of New Jersey existed from 1674 to 1702. Why then is there a section on "Princeton and Rutgers", which were founded in 1746 and 1766, respectively — i.e., after the province was disestablished? It would seem they should be in a separate article about the "Royal Colony of New Jersey". Eagle4000 (talk) 22:36, 13 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: The title of the article refers to the Province of New Jersey, but the article itself also includes the Royal Colony.  Colony of New Jersey redirects here, although there was no explanation of why.  RJC TalkContribs 23:59, 14 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  why a section re Princeton & Rutgers? 

message: There should be a section about its economy. 70.236.39.145 (talk) 22:02, 17 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Resources/Economy 

message: The word "province" was never part of the official name of any of the thirteen British colonies that later formed the United States, yet nine of the thirteen articles on those colonies include "province" All nine articles should be moved and retitled. WCCasey (talk) 19:36, 10 January 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: What's the proof about "official" name???--- no RS is given.  Rjensen (talk) 02:33, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Never a province 

message: Most of the other colonies on Wikipedia give a series of alternate names the colony was known by in a prioritized order.  It would be nice if we could do the same here. WilliamKF (talk) 19:28, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Name variations
Talk:J. Michael Bishop

message: Photo of Mr. Bishop would be nice.  --WayneNight 23:36, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Pacific Scandal

message: It was BC's near-withdrawal from Confederation due to Ottawa's failure to deliver on its promises that finally goaded the completion of the project; running rail lines into the former Rupert's Land to help put down another rebellion in that region was just a happy by-product but also implicit in the strategic nature of any railway, i.e. military use and specifically preventing the US from moving troops into the region (to, perhaps, support Riel, as even Riel had invited them...).  London didn't want a separate BC colony - too expensive to maintain - and leaned on Ottawa to "get it done"; it took parachuting MacDonald into western ridings as he was unelectable in "the Canadas" because of the scandal, and some promise-breaking ot the voters of Victoria to boot, but it's very odd that other than a mention of BC in the opening paragraph of this article the politics of the railway vis a vis BC are barely mentioned at all; not surprising, I suppose, given only central/mainstream CAnadian sources were used to construt it.  But this article needs a LOT of work....here's some more material and see the dickshovel.com links already in the ext links.  BC histories of this affair abound, I'll ahve to find some specifics/specific pages but a writeup on the Carnarvon Terms is needed (those were Lord Carnarvon's promises to BC as to what Canada's obligations to BC about the railway were, and which were prominent in BC politics in the slogan "Carnarvon Terms or Separation"....Skookum1 (talk) 14:01, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Background section and BC

message: For the political funding aspects you may want to consult the scholarly work of the late Khayyam Zev Paltiel (Carleton University, Ottawa). I recall that he has mentioned the Pacific scandal frequently but unfortunately I do not have any of his writings at hand. Maybe it is a good idea to start with his contribution on "Party financing" in The Canadian Encyclopedia which is available on-line. The link is cited in the "Political finance" article right here. Happy hunting, Khnassmacher (talk) 06:25, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Political funding aspects 

message: Is it the Canadian Pacific Railway? The article does not seem to link to an article about the railway in question. —BarrelProof (talk) 18:13, 7 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  What railway is this talking about? 

message: — Assignment last updated by WRT7 (talk) 07:59, 27 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: CRISIS COMMUNICATION
Talk:Progressor

message: Some potentially useful stuff for more deep insight on social/psychological aspects of progressors. ellol 21:50, 24 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Section about ethics

message: I've created this  template, but I can't figure out whether it belongs in this particular article and where to stick it into if it does... Any ideas? --Koveras 15:19, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  NU template 

message: The article currently states:
:However, they don't hesitate to kill in order to survive (or to achieve other goals) — this contradicts the usual mindset of the Noon Universe, according to which every "bearer of reason" is a priory ethically equivalent to you. It's why most humans don't like progressors.
To me, this doesn't seem to be a fair representation of either the progressors' ethics, or the way the Noon society views them. In case I'm wrong, though, can anyone substantiate the claim? Certainly Rumata's single infraction (which wasn't done to survive or to achieve a goal, but rather in what the modern society could call the murder after Provocation (legal)) in his entire time in Arkanar would't qualify, particular as it was viewed as very unusual even by his friends (see the ending of the novel). Recall also the talk with Reba, in which the latter specifically uses the intelligence about Rumata's plethora of duels, all of which he won but none of which were fatal, as a proof of Rumata's alien (or, in any case, "special") origin. IgorSF 11:51, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, Rudolf Sikorski did repeatedly personally "dispatch" those Unknown Fathers who fell out of Papa's favour in Prisoners of Power... It wasn't a provocation in this case, since he knew that he'll have to kill or be killed before he entered the political powerplays of Saraksh. Plus, I don't believe Lev Abalkin managed to complete that mission on Hope (Operation "Dead World", described in Beetle in an Anthill) without collateral damage - at least, Schyokn hasn't seen any possibility to avoid the fight. --Koveras ☭ 19:04, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Progressors and "killing"
Talk:Lawrence Biondi

message: In response to some of the concerns below, I've add information to include the recent "no confidence" votes at SLU. ----
This artilce needs at least SOME information about the controversies Biondi has been involved in, including 
TMS63112 20:57, 2 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: There seems to be an error under section 'Tenure at Saint Louis University'.
It states:
"On September 1, 2013, Biondi stepped down as president of Saint Louis University following his public admission in the St. Louis Post-Dispatch of having retaliated against outspoken faculty by cutting their pay increases.[6][7]"
There was no such admission cited in either of the referenced articles.
Curtild (talk) 22:14, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article Error