lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Banstead

message: I can find no reference to a "Lord Muggeridge" who was [[List of Lord Mayors of London
|Lord Mayor of London]]. There was an alderman - Sir Henry Muggeridge - who lost the 1861 Lord Mayoral election: Is this the gentleman in question? --Mucky Duck 13:19, 10 November 2005 (UTC)

message: I added the 1841 map from Lambert's 1912 history. To read the place names, one needs to click on the map and look at it in the original resolution. Firefox refused to show it at this resolution for me, but IE worked fine. Did you find this too? Is it too awkward to show it like this? The map includes lots of fascinating detail, so it would be a shame if we can't find some way to show it. An alternative would be to show just a portion, which is what I have done for the Wikipedia article on Nork. Jmchutchinson (talk) 19:36, 7 March 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  1841 map 

message: How can you be a town-stroke-village? --217.156.139.14 (talk) 13:41, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  How can you be a town-stroke-village? 

message: An edit on Aug 13 2017 removed Arthur Tedder, Danny Murphy and Venetia Burney from the list of notable residents. I have put Tedder back as he seems by far the most notable of any on the list. Does anyone want to reconsider the other two? I don't believe it is usual to require entries on a "Notable Residents" list to be still living or still resident in the town. The Notable Residents list for Nork contains some other candidates to consider.  Jmchutchinson (talk) 22:21, 5 February 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Tedder should obviously be included. There are a number of Danny Murphy's and I see no source for Venetia living in Banstead.Charles (talk) 22:46, 5 February 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: According to , the Danny Walker is this one, but other articles also claim him for Chipstead and Kingswood, so there may be some confusion. The Wikipedia article on Venetia Burney includes a reference (#5) to her residency in Banstead. I have no strong preference whether to include either person or not. Jmchutchinson (talk) 20:25, 6 February 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: I am not at all sure the News Shopper is a reliable source.Charles (talk) 20:40, 6 February 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Notable Residents
Talk:Nicolas Bentley

message: I'm surprised that Old Possum is listed as his most famous work: I would have thought How to be an alien was better known to be illustrated by him. I propose to add this to the entry unless there are objections. Ringbark 13:23, 10 November 2005 (UTC)

message: Is the use of the book covers fair use, since it is not for use to illustrate an article about the book? Chemical Engineer (talk) 13:08, 6 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Query use of book covers 

message: Most of the information is available in the ODNB, but the article is not plagiarized. Someone seems to have had an alternative source.  It would be good if it could be referenced.Chemical Engineer (talk) 15:50, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Source
Talk:Pentrich

message: With some regret I think I'm going to rv the Ripley/Pentrich Church link, since it's too off-topic to history/geography emphasis of the main articleLinuxlad 13:41, 10 November 2005 (UTC)

message: I'm in contact with the Pentrich Historical Society over GB's belief that he may be related (*) to Jeremiah Brandreth. They believe he may be mistaken in this, since Brandreth's male line descendants emigrated to the USA (and are not known to have returned). Linuxlad 07:55, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Gyles Brandreth]]

message: Started a page for him in his own right. I suggest that we need a page for the uprising and another for this place. If we try to use the same page for everything then Jeremiah B does not get into "People from Nottinghamshire" and he's notable enough to be there. Victuallers 20:23, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Jeremiah Brandreth
Talk:Ray Gillen

message: i've got mp3's of the ray gillen version of the eternal idol. so far, i've been unable to burn them onto cd-r. Gringo300 13:51, 10 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: update! i've successfully made a cd-r of the ray gillen version of the eternal idol! Gringo300 18:06, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Kalis

message: This need a rewrite badly, I may do it later if I have the time and inclination. -Objectivist-C 03:21, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Content 
Talk:Music at sporting events

message: This article previously survived a VfD at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Music at sporting events. BD2412 T 14:05, 10 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Wow, how did it survive? It needs either major revisions with loads of - unfortunately, original - research; OR it needs to be greatly shortened and completely generalized because it is too ambitious. That's just my opinion as a sports historian. Another option would just be to add a section on "stadium music" on the wiki entries for each sport. This topic alone could be a book, let alone a Wikipedia entry. Kelelain (talk) 02:46, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
replies: text:  "This topic alone could be a book" seems to be an argument for having more of an article rather than less of one. Many topics worthy of encyclopedic coverage are of that quality, which is why this is basically an overview article. bd2412 T 16:59, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: VfD note

message: From the basketball music section:
"For example, the announcers often play a "charge" bugle call to accompany the home team"
Should "charge" link to Charge (fanfare) (which is short on links to it)?  Or is there a different song?  Just curious.--71.17.49.67 03:43, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've made the adjustment. Robert K S 16:00, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Charge fanfare" 

message: Whilst I think Entrance music is a suitable topic of mention on Wikipedia, I don't see how it's fundamentally different from this topic. Currently it's a list of songs that people walk out too, rather than the actual concept of the entrance music itself, which is not really discussed by many sources other than listicles that I found. There is some cross-pollination for Music in professional wrestling where we obviously have a lot of walk-on music. In short, I think the articles aren't broadly different, despite there being room for one good article out of these spaces. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 07:49, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Klbrain (talk) 17:13, 5 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge discussion
Talk:Association of Independent Professionals and the Self-Employed

message: I know nothing about this company, but I just thought I'd note that they wrote their own entry. Check out this article for more information. As long as the article is balanced, this should be no issue. But someone with familiarity in the field might want to take a look. —Amcaja 14:15, 10 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree, but I don't think we should delete it either—it just needs to be pared down and cleaned up. --Delirium 22:28, 10 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  Google says this group is notable enough. Apparently they got some press attention, so there should be no problem regarding the Original Research policy. bogdan | Talk 23:20, 10 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Article on ''Information World Review''
Talk:Taylor

message: I recommend the deletion of the section Taylor as a given name because it is a very common name and I believe it is unfair to advertise just certain Taylors, and it is impossible to list all of them. --GoOdCoNtEnT 17:17, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Taylor as first name

message: I think Taylor's theorem should be cited too, just as Taylor's series. I just couldn't come up with a sufficiently accurate synthesis of the theorem, otherwise i'd have done it already. Anyone willing to do that? Asymmetric 18:40, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Taylor's theorem

message: [Vandalism by  reverted. --Jerzy•t 02:03, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think this article should be semi-protected. Anybody else agree? Reliableforever (talk) 17:36, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vandalism
Talk:Bank of America Plaza (Atlanta)

message: I have a few night pictures of this building and am interested in adding them to the page, any help? --12.215.217.211 (talk) 09:48, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Night Picture

message: Does anyone know if this tower has an observation area or public space (restaurant, bar) near the top? — Eoghanacht talk 14:20, 10 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I found out that there is no public observation area. — Eoghanacht talk 20:07, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Observation level?

message: I also see a lot of pedestrian traffic outside of the BOA building.  If the article is going to state that there is less traffic than should be expected, I think that statement should be cited by a news articles, etc.
JKeene 01:46, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. W/O a cite, any infomation that is under question can and should be removed until a cite is added. --mav 13:59, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  There is a pedestrian entrance.  Will upload a terrible picture for citation.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.98.97.53 (talk) 03:52, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Pedestrian Traffic outside the BOA Building

message: The location map for this article is completely useless, and should be deleted/replaced with an actual map. Gil gosseyn (talk) 04:10, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Location Map 

message: Here is The Atlanta Journal-Constitution's article on Atlanta’s tallest tower is getting a makeover. Take a look inside (Subscription required). Rjluna2 (talk) 17:21, 17 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Atlanta’s tallest tower is getting a makeover. Take a look inside
Talk:S660A

message: This entry was written by members of the Professional Contractors Group, a potentially biased party. See this article for details. I know nothing about this topic, but someone with knowledge of the field should take a look for any POV in the article. —BrianSmithson 14:20, 10 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Article on ''Information World Review''

message: Today (15 December 2005) Arctic System won in the Court of Appeal against a claim that s660 applied.
A copy of the judgement can be found here http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2005/1553.html
Lord Justice Carnwath said in the judgement;
'The lack of a clearly ascertainable legislative purpose underlines the need for caution in extending the concept of settlement beyond the scope of existing jurisprudence. The Revenue's position in this case seems to me a significant extension. For the first time, they seek to apply the concept to what has been found to be a normal commercial transaction between two adults, to which each is making a substantial commercial contribution, albeit not of the same economic value. Such a difference, by itself, is not enough to my mind to take the arrangement into the realm of "bounty", as it has been understood in the existing cases. If the legislature wishes such an arrangement to be brought within a special regime for tax purposes, clearer language is necessary to achieve it.'
The Professional Contractors Group announced the result this morning on their website http://www.pcg.org.uk/LatestNews/10161.html PaulSC 14:26, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Taxpayer wins s660a case in CoA
Talk:First Amendment Center

message: Please everyone note that Wikipedia is not a web directory; links in the external links section should be directly relevant to the article. Recently a slew of links, all to pages on the same website (that of the FAC itself), were added; I have removed them, and replaced them with a link to the main page of that website. Sdedeo 14:26, 10 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: External links
Talk:Sarat Chandra Chattopadhyay

message: I am afraid I am new to the Wiki uploading process and do not know how to upload the three pics I have linked to. Anyone may please do so on my behalf. There is no copyright infringement.  All three are owned by me. DrSubrotoRoy (talk) 04:01, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sarat writes to Manindranath 1931 

message: This article lacks information on the ideologies of Sarat Chandra Chattopadhyay's works, the features of his work, the literary movements his works are a part of as well as his views on various os social, polital and philosophical issues.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Niljana (talk • contribs) 19:39, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Scanty information on the subject of his work
Talk:Army general (France)

message: I saw that an anon user had pretty much scrapped the entire article and written a new one in its place, deleting the picture in the process and not containing any links or syntax.  While some of the info in the new article was very valid and informative, I feel that it should have been added to the existing article instead of the first article blanked and a second one put on top.  Rather than pick out the various items from the new article, I reverted to the last full version.  Hopefully, the new info can be added in, inside of simply replacing the existing article. -Husnock 14:43, 10 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Nov 9 Revert
Talk:American Conservatism/removed

message: I wanted to preserve this text, but it isn't about American Conservatism.  Some general info needs to be there to define the terms used in the AC article, but we don't need five paras on Burke and Classical Liberalism etc. - they belong, and are present in, the main article about Conservative thought.  Kaisershatner 15:01, 10 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Removing large sections that discuss general Conservatism
Talk:Kenwood Corporation

message: "The difference is the "K" stylized in red, instead of the Kenwood (Electronics) Corporation with a stylized "W" in red." - An illustration would be pretty useful. --Oop 15:02, 10 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  

message: I added the company infobox. It is very hard to find the operating income and revenue figures. I have used Google finance and Yahoo finance to source the information.
--Visik 14:11, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: company infobox added

message: I see no discussion, no consensus and no need for this split and I am reintegrating the article. Please discuss and achieve consensus before making such major changes. GlassFET 17:36, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Splitting of article 

message: Kenwood is such a storied company in the audio world it is a shame there is almost no information about the brand on Wikip. other than the short synopsis on the orgin of the firm. Please consider adding informaton about their important hi-fi models, the Accuphase spin-off, and mention that test equipment was also produced. Anyone? 99.32.160.175 (talk) 03:33, 11 November 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Limited Information Here 
Talk:Crying Fist

message: The previous version was a copy of www.subwaycinema.com/frames/nyaff05-cryingfist.htm. Bobet 15:07, 10 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Abu al-Fida Ismail Ibn Hamwi

message: I created this. --Striver 15:12, 10 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Great. Now, want to explain why you think a huge, ugly, useless, redundant, mostly-empty infobox is merited by this stub? -Silence 11:46, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I see no "huge, ugly, useless, redundant, mostly-empty infobox" --Striver 11:53, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
Talk:Woodland jumping mouse

message: Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources.  Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.)
For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, and, if allowed under fair use, may copy sentences and phrases, provided they are included in quotation marks and referenced properly. The material may also be rewritten, providing it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Therefore, such paraphrased portions must provide their source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you.  CactiStaccingCrane (talk) 13:03, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copyright problem removed
Talk:Dave Marsh

message: My god, what a screed. 18.173.1.42 15:36, 10 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: The Creem article does not include Marsh as a co-founder. Can anyone provide evidence one way or another? Verne Equinox 03:04, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: CREEM

message: When doing a Search on Wikipedia for "David Marsh", this disambiguation page is returned:
David Marsh
However, when doing a Search on Wikipedia for "Dave Marsh", it directs to this page here.
I propose that the title of this page be renamed to something like "Dave Marsh (Music Critic)" or "Dave Marsh (Rock Critic)" to help differentiate it from the other Dave and David Marshes out there.  Then, the page for "Dave Marsh" I feel should be a redirect page that goes to the David Marsh disambiguation page.
I think that would be fair to the other Daves and Davids.
OtakuMan (talk) 20:30, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Disambiguation Concerns 

message: There's a whole section titled "Derision of musicians" - eight or so paragraphs showing Marsh's disdain for a number of popular musicians. It wouldn't be hard to come up with eight or so paragraphs to show his appreciation for quite a few other musicians (even besides Springsteen). I think that would be of equal value in an encyclopedic entry. PatConolly (talk) 01:01, 11 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Appreciation of musicians
Talk:John Earman

message: I removed the vanity notice. I came to the page because one of my professors gave me a list of good current philosophers of science, and Earman was first. Incidently, my professor had previously been at UPitt... In any case there are like 25,000 google hits for "john earman" -wikipedia. Intangir 05:28, 6 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: As other evidence of notability there is an article in the sept. 2002 Scientific American about Earman's hole argument Intangir 05:38, 6 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removal of vanity notice
Talk:Road crew

message: If I'm not mistaken, The song "Stay" was written by Maurice Williams, not Frankie Valli
--Dudeness10 15:43, 10 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: [Untitled]

message: If I'm not mistaken, the term "roadie", while originally referring to a road crew, can now refer to technicians who assist with stationary or one-shot productions, as well as travelling affairs.  Some session musicians, particularly drummers, hire roadies to set up and break down their kit prior to/after recording sessions, for example (the session guy can pass the cost along to the client).  
Likewise, don't roadies work for productions other than musical concerts?  --EngineerScotty 04:33, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Expansion of term 

message: "Road crew appearances" -- this section takes Wikipedia trivia-gathering to its incredible limit !!! 84.227.241.98 (talk) 10:56, 8 September 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rad crew appearances
Talk:Cotton Mouth (disambiguation)

message: Please don't remove work without discussion. In fact, Cotton Mouth is a homemade candy popular for decades in the midwest. It was first made in small pharmacies (when sodas were still around). Thanks. Superclear 15:47, 10 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Well perhaps, but Wikiquette also obliges editors to provide some evidence other than their own say-so (verifiability). The idea of "liquid candy" dispensed from eye-dropper bottles seems unlikely at first hearing. This doesn't mean that such a thing could not exist, but the onus is on you, Superclear, as the author to provide some verifiable sources. If such is not forthcoming, other editors may delete material at will. There is no "ownership" of one's work on Wikipedia. -- 84.176.78.213 01:09, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  Ok, this is fair. I wanted to understand why the original deletion, thanks for taking the time to explain. I understand I should in theory know all the rules before I post, but a little common courtesy is not too much to ask from society I hope (??). I resent the implication it's a hoax or lie. I am a respectable person, but didn't understand that when I added a page it needed to be google verifiable. See it from my uninformed point of view ... I grew up with this stuff when I lived in the U.S. in midwest states like Wyoming and Montana. We made it for people when they had dry mouth from allergies or medical treatments (now there are many over the counter alternatives). In fact, I added the page because I was looking for it on wikipedia because of my allergies, not to make a "joke" or "hoax". I thought I could help some people. In the process I even learned to merge some pages that needed it and fixed a bad link from the Garage Band section of all places. I am friends with studsmc, and we collaborate on many pages in our field of work ... I don't think that is wrong (she is also familiar with cotton mouth candy). In fact, I will delete the page if I can figure out how and move it to my user page until I can find a way to verify. Please any of you who are interested, look at my user page (it might take me 24 hours or so to get it on there). I will put up a picture of my ingredients and the two bottles I currently have right here by my computer (it's no joke!!). It is not medicine so you can make it yourselves for fun too! I will repeat this on the original page too and agree it should be deleted. By the way, there are many things, you youngsters ;-) should know, that are real even though they are not on google searches! I understand the problem, though ... and don't forget, much can be avoided by a little niceness from person to person (it might not even kill us :-o ). Superclear 06:22, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

text: oh, and as I try to read up on Wikiquette, don't forget ... not biting the newcomers Superclear 08:27, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Etiquette