lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Template talk:Template sandbox heading

message: This template was listed for deletion on Templates for Deletion.  The decision was to keep this template.  Please see Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/Not deleted/June 2005 for more information. -Frazzydee|✍ 20:50, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: TfD'd

message: Can you remove the red links under the "Sandbox Projects" header? Thanks. --- RockMFR 23:19, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: *Protected edit request fulfilled.¤~Persian Poet Gal (talk) 05:20, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Red links

message: 
On the line, "You may also use the template...", the template Template:Template sandbox should be added to the list of experimental templates. --EoL talk 18:16, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Done - Nihiltres{t.l} 22:16, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Modification Requested 

message:  Please remove  from 'word association'.--209.244.31.53 (talk) 03:58, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. --- RockMFR 19:31, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Incorrect display of sandbox project 

message: Hi. On smaller screens/windows, the message this template displays can cover much of the display. This can be irritating when a test template is transcluded. Please, therefore, make it collapsible, especially as it's something that doesn't need to be in constant view once its content has been registered. Thanks. Sardanaphalus (talk) 00:45, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the  template. Big change, it needs other opinions. Thanks, PeterSymonds (talk) 10:55, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

text: * Thanks for your response. I think, however, that trying to establish a consensus before making this change might not be the most effective way to proceed, as, by their nature, these test pages are only used momentarily. Instead, how about a WP:BRD approach? If it's met with WP:SILENCE, there's the consensus. Sardanaphalus (talk) 13:27, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit request (make template collapsible) 

message: Please change the line "For uses of sandboxes, see the article sandbox." to "For uses of sandboxes, see the article sandbox (software development)."  Sandbox is a disambiguation page, and the link is not helpful to inexperienced users.  --Russ (talk) 15:56, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Rjd0060 (talk) 16:00, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit request 

message: The final line reads: For a sandbox of your own, create a user subpage here.. The final here links to create or open a user page/sandbox. (e.g. for me). But the subpage should not be capitalised, my regular sandbox is User:DePiep/sandbox. This behaviour also happens when transcluded, e.g. on page  -DePiep (talk) 13:18, 19 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Possible error 

message: I've changed the target sandbox over to Draft:Sandbox since it has VisualEditor enabled. Topic raised at WP:VPT with no objections. T.Shafee(Evo&Evo)talk 22:46, 1 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Draft:Sandbox as target
Talk:Noobelf

message: This article is:
Extremely obscure, it has no true relevance to anything outside a single game, more over the term itself is obscure. While the behaviour referred to in the article does occur and I'm aware of it myself, 'noobelf' or 'noobelfing' is NOT common terminology used for this behaviour.
Furthermore the article is in NPOV violation, since it repeatedly states opinions and uses opionated language and made up words such as 'This perplexing view arises' and 'overpoweredness', 'underpowedered' and the whole tirade against Blizzard Employee T Caldwell.
On the whole this article is an attempt made by one group of people to make derisive comments about another group of people, all the while trying and failing to make it sound like an informative piece.
I'm putting this one up for deletion. Robrecht 23:35, 11 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  I'm totally disputing this
Talk:The King's Demons

message: So, what's the name of the above mentioned software designer: Mike Power or Powers? Cema 00:06, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Notes

message: I'm not sure how to clean this up. The comment states that the oldest known iron maiden is the Iron Maiden of Nuremberg, "which was built in 1515." Except, if you click through to the iron maiden article, it says the Nuremberg's history was a hoax, and no references to the iron maiden can be found before 1793! What do y'all think is the best way to phrase this? --DrGaellon (talk | contribs) 23:40, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Outside References

message: It says that there is not enough information in the lead section, however any other information can easily be found on the side bar and need not be repeated.  Many of the other serials of Doctor Who have just as little information, so why does this one provoke a lack of information prompt?
Lineov (talk) 02:18, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lead Section Discussion 

message: Should this really be in this category, considering that it is not an actual TV Series, but just a part of a larger series? Of course that category is pretty bad anyway, I just deleted three fantasy series from it because they don't have any business being on there.
Kirschkuchen (talk) 22:50, 21 June 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  TV Series Set in the Middle Ages
Talk:Dick Butkus

message: Did this get locked because of AotS or because of his name?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.23.198.131 (talk) 05:26, 29 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: AOTS

message: Butkus played the role of Ed Connor, an auto body shop owner in 1988 comedy/teen movie Crash Course. 2600:1014:B1E5:FB30:752A:E382:5887:D2BF (talk) 23:16, 5 October 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I’m honestly not sure A listing of his scant acting filmography and TV roles is all that noteworthy. I mean, sure, it exists, but he’s best known for his NFL career as a member of the Chicago Bears in the 1960s and 1970s. 2601:405:4000:1F50:99D2:C663:C4CD:1CF4 (talk) 23:43, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Film and Television Career
Talk:My Brilliant Career

message: The 1901 book seems to be out of copyright, and available free from Project Gutenberg.  Are images of the book online free, maybe at Google books?  Are there any free audio readings/performances?-69.87.204.176 12:50, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  out of copyright 

message: Referenced in "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tomorrow,_When_the_War_Began_%28film%29" with the dialogue:
“Good book?”
“Better than the movie.”
“Books usually are.”
TWTWB centres around young adults who have grown up in country Australia and have been brought together by the invasion of Australia.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 165.228.102.38 (talk) 01:55, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  References
Talk:Online Gaming Organizations

message: I did some surfing to find out if there are sociology studies on this, but don't have a clear idea what's out there yet. My thought is that once this article is fleshed out, it might list a number of such organizations without describing them individually. This would, hopefully, avoid controversy as the details of which one does what or when are not particularly relevant to the social phenomenon. --Habap 17:58, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I believe I have a fairly clear idea and I agree with your thoughts. Trying to list everything under exactly the same term will only lead to inaccuracies and generalisations. Best to create subsections about varies forms of groups. This is currently the problem with the Clan (computer gaming), this article is more NPOV(starts by explaining that there is broad range of these groups) and is a much better basis for writing a full description. --FlooK 19:59, 31 July 2005 (UTC)

message: If you followed the link here about merging this article with the one about gaming clans please see the discussion on Talk:Clan (computer gaming) --FlooK 06:16, 2 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge
Talk:Prodrazverstka

message: I suggest to merge Lenin's hangin order here for better background. Historical documents such as this are to be considered in context of historical realities at that time to avoid misinterpretations. (Igny (talk) 02:33, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge discussion 

message: I'll be honest, I really don't know how to edit anything on Wikipedia. But if someone does, could they include a re-direct from the term Razverstka, as that seems to be a more common English term for the Russian translation? Maybe even re-naming the article, since it seems that most modern English scholarship on the subject uses that term?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.97.120.33 (talk) 03:03, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Terminology

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.  Extraordinary Writ (talk) 01:25, 11 January 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Prodrazvyorstka →  – WP:COMMONNAME per Google Books Ngram.  —Michael Z. 00:46, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 4 January 2023
Talk:Vigil Honor

message: I removed the following: "On a average, one out of every fifty to one hundred Order of the Arrow members can expect to be elected as a Vigil Honor Scout during tenure with the OA." I felt that this was both inaccurate and apocryphal. I also removed the stub warning, as I feel the article is well filled out. I'll upload a picture of my Vigil Sash later today, hopefully ArrowmanCoder 18:12, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Removal

message: I see there is a user box for Vigil Honor wikipedians.  Can someone please explain how we can edit the box to get our Vigil Name/translation in it?  --Emb021 20:31, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Never mind.  Found it.  here is the full box: , which shows you how to put the stuff in it.  --Emb021 20:35, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: User Box
Talk:Mazda Tribute

message: The Mazda MPV had been discontinued and is not being replaced in the 2008 lineup.  The Mazda Tribute has been redesigned for 2008 and a picture of the new 2008 Mazda Tribute can be seen at http://www.kingsmazda.com.
--Dj1cincy 15:20, 25 March 2007
323/Protege - Mazda3
626/Capella/Millenia - Mazda6
Tribute - CX-5 & CX-7
MPV - Mazda5 & CX-9
Miata - MX-5 -- Bull-Doser 02:55, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: At The Mazda Dealer

message: I noticed the beginning of the article classifies the Tribute as a compact SUV, but rather it should be a crossover SUV. Interestingly, the Ford Escape page is the same way. A crossover by definition is a light truck built on a unibody platform, usually front-wheel drive. The page for crossover suv also lists the Tribute and related siblings as crossovers. Just for comparison, an old Kia Sportage or Chevy Tracker would be classified as just a 'compact' SUV, since they're both built on truck platforms and are rear wheel drive.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Iamjrm (talk • contribs) 02:56, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Crossover status 
Talk:Livingston Mims

message: I looked in half a dozen books that mentioned him but was not able to confirm this assertion adapted from Franklin Garrett's history:
"During the United States Civil War, Mims was in the Confederate States Navy, serving as a Major on the CSS Alabama."
Everything I saw was army; So, I've removed this. Jolomo 18:15, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Phoebe Tyler Wallingford

message: I have cut-and-pasted sources from main page:
* Terrace, Vincent. Encyclopedia of Television Series, Pilots and Specials: 1974-1984, VNR AG, page 11, 1985. 
* Soares, Manuela. The Soap Opera Book, Pub: Harmony Books, page 34, 1978. 
* Museum of Television and Radio (New York, N.Y.), Worlds Without End: The Art and History of the Soap Opera, Pub: Harry N. Abrams, 1997. 
* Schemering, Christopher. The Soap Opera Encyclopedia, Ballantine Books, page 12, 1988.
These above are books about a general topic, soap opera. Whether they significantly or trivially cover this character... well, that's for you to decide. Nevertheless, I may consider them indirectly related. --George Ho (talk) 17:27, 16 June 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Indirectly related sources here
Talk:Hermit's Cave

message: This article was listed for deletion on 26 May, 2005. The discussion was closed with the result of keep.  This article will not be deleted.  You can view the discussion, which is no longer live: Wikipedia:Votes_for_deletion/Hermit's Cave. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 18:36, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Closed deletion listing

message: The heritage section appears to need work/editing -- overly detailed and may be copy-pasted from elsewhere? Hanne Thato (talk) 20:45, 16 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Heritage listing section
Category talk:Christian Wikipedians

message: I posted this on many of your individual pages recently, but I was told to instead post it here:
I recently found that the Jesus article on Wikipedia is the first item that comes up when you search for "Jesus" on the world’s most widely used search engine, Google. Please edit the Jesus article to make it an accurate and excellent representation of Him. The Jesus article may be a person’s first impression of Jesus.  It would be nice if their first impression was from a Christian or the Bible, but for so many in these new days it probably comes from the Internet. Watch the Jesus page to keep it focused on Him. Thanks a lot. Scifiintel 18:39, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: In short, no.~ZytheTalk to me! 20:09, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Jesus]]

message: The userbox template should not be used on this page, or be altered so that it does not add itself to itself. ⇔ ChristTrekker 21:16, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I was able to do this by substituting the userbox template, and then removing the category line. --Kevinkor2 05:32, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  subcat of self 

message: Baptist, Lutheran, Methodist, Presbyterian --Ted-m 02:38, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  more denominations need to be added 

message: I guess we can remove the template since the Cfd was closed here as no consensus. JungleCat  Shiny!/Oohhh! 22:54, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Cfd template
Talk:Gaston Caperton

message: I worked on some of the NPOV wording and whatnot. There is more to do, however, including adding some of the criticisms of his administration and an expansion of his roll in improving the SATs. Youngamerican 15:13, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Cleanup
Talk:Indian logic

message: does anybody know a new weblink to V. V. S. Sarma: Indian Systems of Logic (Nyaya): A Survey, Proc. Bombay Logic Conference, 2005. the old one is dead. if not, i would really appreciate an electronic copy of this paper ... anybody? thanks --TobiasKlaus (talk) 17:55, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  literature 

message: (79.90.42.149 (talk) 14:39, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  logical triangle of Indian logic 

message: I have removed some unquestionable links which was been added by user jagged85 who was involved in misusing sources in Wikipedia Myuoh kaka roi (talk) 17:00, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Jagged 85
Talk:Turkana people

message: Ok folks, lots of this is poorly written, lacks cohesiveness and is not documented with citations.  I will work on this as I have time.  I am currently writing a dissertation on Turkana ngimurok, and so I've updated the religion portion.  There are some Turkana scholars, who are in fact, Turkana, who should also contribute to this effort. signed comment added by Kklines (talk • contribs)
Keep up the good work!  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kklines (talk • contribs) 17:18, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Glad to hear it - a brief bit on Camels isn't really enough for an article - more would help! :) A curate's egg 19:11, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)

message: This article still needs lots of work and citations, citations, citations!  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kklines (talk • contribs) 06:26, 11 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Citations
Talk:Gold(III) chloride

message: The research literature on gold-based catalysis is voluminous.  For this reason, it is prudent to stick to secondary or tertiary literature.  All organic chemists want the readers of their publications to conclude that the work is "useful".  I could be wrong, but there are zero applications of any of soluble gold complex in the production of any commercial organic compound.  Zero.  The biggest app for gold remains jewelry, around 80%.--Smokefoot (talk) 23:40, 14 April 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Not all gold goes to the jewelry industry, some gold-based medicine are known and are actively used, such as Auranofin. However, I agree there are very little applications of gold compounds to produce any organic compounds. Keres🌕Luna edits! 02:04, 15 April 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Great.  Yes, some antiarthritic drugs and such.  I really wish that Au was useful in org syn.  Maybe it'll happen, but I wanted to check that you knew.  Good luck with the article. Keep it up. --Smokefoot (talk) 03:41, 15 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Caution with app's

message: That statement describes a cool transformation.  For a chemist, however, the statement requires qualification.  The reaction is not very general. No one uses the process.  It is stoichiometric. So ca. 300 g of AuCl3 is required to convert 100 g of cyclohexylamine to cyclohexanone that is easier to make otherwise.  Chemists are however a critical crowd, and it may well be fun to tell the general audience that gold chloride has some potential as a reagent. --Smokefoot (talk) 23:58, 14 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: " that Gold(III) chloride can directly convert a primary amine to a ketone without any additional steps?"

message: Is this article referring to cyclohexylamine as a secondary amine? Edsanville (talk) 13:49, 20 May 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: That was a recent vandalism. Fixed. Keres🌕Luna edits! 17:30, 22 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Cyclohexylamine
Talk:The American Review

message: After doing all that work expanding the section under "19th century," I'm thinking it's a better idea to create a new article: American Review: A Whig Journal. It seems odd having one article discussing three different magazines just because they have similar names anyway. Midnightdreary 18:50, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Feel free to split that section off into an new article at American Review: A Whig Journal or whatever the best title might be, with a link and short sentence summary here.  I don't think it's inherently wrong to have multiple things of the same name in one article if we only have a stub of information on each, though it would be better if we could eventually have seperate articles on each publication and turn this into a disambiguation page. -- Infrogmation 19:03, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

text: Agreed. I've gotten started on the American Review: A Whig Journal page, and removed the info that was on here (well, I left a small summary with a link to the new main article). Midnightdreary 20:47, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  American Review: A Whig Journal 

message: The external link jumps one to an "American Review" which has nothing to do with any of the "American Reviews" discussed in the article. It should be deleted. LAWinans (talk) 19:00, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Incongruous Jump 

message: I suggest creating a disambiguation page and for each journal to have its own page.Zigzig20s (talk) 17:32, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  disambiguation? 

message: The article as it appears right now is about multiple distinct subjects which share only a name. That means it's effectively a disambiguation page, but with the article content for each included. Articles on Wikipedia that aren't disambiguations only cover a single subject, and as it's an encyclopedia and not a work of lexicography those subjects are concepts/ideas/things rather than words or terms.
That said, I'm going to break the article up into multiple articles and reformat this as a proper disambig page.
There is already a separate article for The American Review: A Whig Journal. This page will redirect to American Review, which will be the disambiguation page. We can create The American Review (literary journal) for the Collins publication. American Review (literary journal) for what was formerly New American Review. And American Review (political journal) for the Australian publication, though I'm less confident that one is notable enough for an article.
--— Rhododendrites talk \\ 05:36, 18 December 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Breaking up into multiple articles
Talk:Balthazar

message: Responsible for casting Daniel into the Lions Den, where he was for 6-days; Balthazar, was also the name for the King of Babylon. - The book of Daniel.
I disagree with this.  Belshazzar profaned the Temple pieces and is a bad guy.  Beltesshazzar is the name given to Daniel, a good guy/prophet.  I don't think a bad guy name would be used through history and corrupted to Balthazar, a good guy name would.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 107.0.27.6 (talk) 18:26, 24 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Balthazar king of Babylon? 

message: In saying "Balthazar is a traditional name..." this article implies that name was not given to him in any of the books of the new testament, but became associated in later tradition. If so it should state this outright. Also it should be more specific about this tradition, for example where do we first see this name being used for him?
The idea of him being darkly complected or African, is also, I would assume, a part of later Christian tradition, but again this should be stated more clearly ("It is widely agreed" is classic weasel wording) and specific references ought to be mentioned. For example, does he start showing up with dark skin in medieval paintings? Or was it more recent phenomena?--Ericjs (talk) 19:30, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  What Tradition? 

message: The bigger question is what should the main focus of this page be? It seems to be the name Balthazar for one of the Magi, and only secondarily mentions it as the name of the 6th century king of Babylon, followed by list of other usages of this name.
Why is the name as one of the Magi the primary focus of this page? If this page is about the name in general, why is this not simply in the list with the others? Or alternately, should there be separate pages for Balthazar the Magi, Balthazar the Babylonian king, etc with a disambiguation page? 
I'd like to note that in Mirrian-Webster unabridged, under Balthazar it mentions the Babylonian king only, which leads me to think this more than the Magi usage should be listed as the primary meaning (if there should be one).--Ericjs (talk) 02:39, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Focus of this page, the name or the Magi? 

message: Surely Jose Saramago's novel Baltasar and Blimunda should be mentioned on this page, in the literature section and/or the fictional character section. Thanks 85.64.219.179 (talk) 19:34, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Jose Saramago's Novel 

message: What is your opinion about these fabulos creatures? Rhubarboy17 (talk) 22:17, 18 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Balthazar a new species of giant salamander