lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Wikipedia talk:Series templates

message: Something that I noticed is that there doesn't appear to be a trivial way to make the background color of the currently active page in the navigation template to be gray. I was thinking something along the lines of...

<table cellpadding="3" cellspacing="0" style="float: right; margin: 5px; border: 3px solid;">
<tr><td style="border-bottom: 3px solid; background: #efefef;">
<small>This period is part of the<br>[[Paleozoic]] era.</small>
</td></tr>
<tr><td {{{Perm|style="background:#efefef;"}}}>[[Permian]]</td></tr>
<tr><td {{{Carb|style="background:#efefef;"}}}>[[Carboniferous]]</td></tr>
<tr><td {{{Devo|style="background:#efefef;"}}}>[[Devonian]]</td></tr>
<tr><td {{{Silu|style="background:#efefef;"}}}>[[Silurian]]</td></tr>
<tr><td {{{Ordo|style="background:#efefef;"}}}>[[Ordovician]]</td></tr>
<tr><td {{{Camb|style="background:#efefef;"}}}>[[Cambrian]]</td><tr>
</table>

But of course this is all just wishful thinking... I wish we had something like WML's mp4h. Then again, maybe I just need to fiddle with it some more... --Joy [shallot] 16:54, 25 Sep 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  emphasizing current page better 

message: Does this page still need to be listed at RfC? Maurreen 05:53, 2 Dec 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: RFC?

message: I do not agree. Quite a many series templates provide actual value, unlike most of navigational templates that would be better to be replaced by more convenient categories. If the two get merged together no one will be able to solve the current mess in templating. Pavel Vozenilek 00:43, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed merge with "Navigational templates" 

message: :Please help with the   Latino template.  --JuanMuslim  1m 18:52, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Latino template 

message: I've noticed more than one article where some editor has designed a template and just stuck it in the article without so much as a by-your-leave.  This usually displaces a nice image that says more about the article than the template box (which, in my opinion, more often than not just rehashes trivia found in the lead paragraph).
Being relatively new here (~250 edits over 6 months), I would like to know if templates automatically trump all other content (the way that, say, the absolute worst public domain photo auto-trumps the best Fair User photo)  and whether the template must always appear at the upper right of an article.
Thanks, MrHarman 00:14, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: What's up with all these templates??

message: If there are other images placed at the top of the article, should the series template always sit above them? Example in Train article where there are 3 images above the Rail transport series template which I think looks odd. Rodney Baggins (talk) 08:43, 31 December 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Placement of other images
Template talk:Prime ministers of Canada

message: Why was the Laurier image deleted? It was clearly a public domain image of a political leader and historical figure. 23skidoo 17:15, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Laurier image

message: I have removed all the images from the template as the majority are fair use and there is a strong drive to get fair use images off templates across the project.--nixie 23:35, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Please see Wikipedia:Fair use, fair use policy number 9:
Fair use images should only be used in the article namespace. Used outside article space, they are often enough not covered under the fair use doctrine. They should never be used on templates (including stub templates and navigation boxes) or on user pages..--nixie 02:58, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Images

message: I miss the pictures of all the PMs. Is there a broken link for the flag image?--Sonjaaa 07:46, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: images
Talk:Theory of equations

message: I simply do not understand the topological proof at all. Can anyone help me out?CecilWard (talk) 23:41, 23 June 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: There is no proof at all in this article. If you want to discuss the article Fundamental theorem of algebra, please, ask your question there, and be more specific on the exact sentence(s) that you can understand. D.Lazard (talk) 08:32, 24 June 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: A question
Category talk:Radio

message: It seems illogical to me that there is a fork here between the article "Lists of radio stations" and subcategory "radio stations".  Should a given radio station be included in both?  I think it would make more sense to replace the list with subcategories. Spalding 07:49, Sep 5, 2004 (UTC)
There are too many articles; some need to be sorted into subcategories. -- Beland 20:12, 5 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm removing the cleancat tag.  Things seem to be sorted out, more or less. Shalom Hello 19:18, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Comment

message: There needs to be categorization for the actual, tangible physical objects called radios, and the companies who make them.  I'd suggest :Category:Radios which does not exist yet, but consideration has to be made not only for specific brands and models, for lines of related models, for possible subcategorization by type and by place of manufacture and by company and by use (military is one possibility, aviation, marine, weather other) and by frequencies and the like.
This would also, of course, help alleviate the problems illustrated by the big colored box about keeping the Radio category itself from having too many members that would be better put in subcategories.
I bring it up here in case I'm missing somethig that already exists, and to avoid having to do a whole lot of tweaking after I do it.  Any ideas?  Gene Nygaard 11:26, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: In specific, I suggest that :Category:Radios be created and then populated with a significant number of articles before any subsequent considerations of subdividing it.  Or, perhaps an initial subcategory for something along the lines of :Category:Radio manufacturers (or "companies" but need to distinguish from broadcast companies, whatever), to keep them separate from the radios themselves, but not a bunch of subcategories of either. Gene Nygaard 12:24, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Radios need categories
Talk:J. B. Stoner

message: "Stoner served three and a half years of a 10-year sentence."
this sentence was in the introduction and is not a prime element in defining the identity of J.B. Stoner.  In should be listed later in the article with the details of arrest/punishment.    — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.17.109.131 (talk) 19:09, 20 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  bias 

message: A thought and a question
1 - there might be a better way to describe Stoner in the intro
2 - Does anybody know his specific birthdate?
--RobbieFal 08:04, 5 Sep 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Untitled 

message: While certainly a nationalist racist did he actually advocate fascism or nazism? - DNewhall
In any case, thank god he's dead.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.174.162.67 (talk) 19:34, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Was he really fascist?
Talk:Self (programming language)

message: A reference was recently added to this article using the Cite DOI template. The citation bot tried to expand the citation, but could not access the specified DOI. Please check that the DOI doi:10.1.1.30.1652 has been correctly entered.  If the DOI is correct, it is possible that it has not yet been entered into the CrossRef database.  Please  complete the reference by hand here. 
The script that left this message was unable to track down the user who added the citation; it may be prudent to alert them to this message.  Thanks, Citation bot 2 (talk) 10:52, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reference to broken DOI 

message: I removed the 'vague' tag after I edited, but the 'unusual dialect of Smalltalk' phrase which is there now suggests vagueness also. What was so unusual or extreme about this dialect? If we can put info in about this then I think we can avoid the 'vague' tag, otherwise it needs to be re-inserted. Suggestions welcome.
TonyClarke (talk) 19:55, 31 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Extreme/unusual dialect of Smalltalk -?

message: This article claims that Self "was a dialect of Smalltalk". Why is Self no longer considered to be a dialect of Smalltalk? Jarble (talk) 04:02, 15 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: "Self was a dialect of Smalltalk"

message: :There are eleven entries in the "External links". Three seems to be an acceptable number and of course, everyone has their favorite to add for four. The problem is that none is needed for article promotion. 
*ELpoints #3) states: 
*LINKFARM states: 
*WP:ELMIN: . -- Otr500 (talk) 06:36, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links
Category talk:Computing

message: Can I add "Artificial intelligence" into this category? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hfgong (talk • contribs) 09:21, 5 September 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Interdisciplinary fields are now out of Computer Science and into Computing (AI, AL, CL (comp lings), BioI), on similar grounds as to why Programming is also under Computing (now in accord with Category:Computing's own definition).  — danakil 22:52, 5 September, 2004 (UTC)
How about "case modding", hardware cooling, and various faddish alterations to home computing? Kickstart70 07:17, 10 January 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Artificial intelligence 

message: Many articles in this category need to be moved into subcategories. -- Beland 03:18, 25 March 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Even more now that [Category:Computer terminology] has been removed and its contents put into here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by R. S. Shaw (talk • contribs) 23:07, 9 June 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Clean up 

message: Now that there are many articles in this cat, the user can have a hard time seeing the available subcategories because they may alphabetically fall on pages other than the first.  So I've set up the category keys for the subcategories to fall on the first page by using "*<cat>", e.g. for Cat:Software using *Software. -R. S. Shaw 23:07, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: This is a horrible hack, but I don't blame you, R.S.  Interested parties should lobby for the fixing of Bug #1211 at MediaZilla (AKA Wikipedia's Bugzilla). - dcljr (talk) 10:42, 12 June 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: One way to lobby is to use the "Vote for this bug" link on the Bug #1211 page. BTW, I think it's the bug that is "horrible", not the workaround. -R. S. Shaw 19:15, 26 June 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Subcategories 

message: The subcategories getting paged is very annoying. I'm going to try to sort pretty much all the articles into subcategories. If anyone disagrees with how I do it, feel free to put them in different places, but let's get this category cleared out. -- Jake 03:23, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: This category should be cleared out indeed. Can anyone clarify it? --Meno25 02:33, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sorting 

message: Computing is listed as a subcategory of Computers. Computers is listed as a subcategory of Information Technology. Information Technology is listed as a subcategory of Computing which complete a cycle. I don't believe that category build ups should ever cycle since they as supposed to provide a (or multiple)taxonomies of the material. I suggest that the way this should be broken is to use Computing to be the most general and philosophical category and treat the others as either direct or indirect descendants of it. After all, you certainly don't need a computer to compute and the original term was a job title, not a machine. There was a great deal of work done in the intellectual area prior to the creation of the first functional general purpose computer. I don't have an opinion as to whether Information Technology is child, parent or sibling to Computers. Dfletter (talk) 20:44, 29 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Categories
Talk:Henry Hoese

message: Important note: according to the current listing of Henry Hoese in the Wikipedia list of Lord Wardens of the Cinque Ports for which this item is being prepaired Henry lord warden can not be either the first or second lord as cited below. Thus it would seem his listing is incorrectly placed or the Lord Warden and was infact from an earlier generation of this family.
This user invites further research by anyone with the time, and ability to correct this confusion. This item may therefore need to be renamed or moved?
:I agree because Lord Warden are not proper Lords in the United Kingdom, the position is appointed by the monarch and expires on their death. They are not included in Order_of_precedence_in_England_and_Wales. Therefore Henry Hoese was a Lord Warden but his ancestors received a peerage and became Lords. I hope that corrects the confusion. ant_ie 17:02, 1 October 2005 (UTC)

message: I updated the references using COPAC as no reader without effort would find these books.
Before we remove the clean up tag, I suggest the following.
A stub should be created out of this article for Henry Hose as information is limited but can be expanded upon if someone like to do further research. The first two Lords in the article could be received a new article titled Lords Hose as this can be developed into a larger article. 
ant_ie 17:14, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: * I have commented out the actual info about the stuff mentioned, and added two links and the disambig template. Now its just up to someone to add the content to the missing articles from the info left in the article (just edit the page, and you'll see all the content within comment tags). Thanks for clarifying the information and suggesting how this can be cleaned up, it was useful. — Wackymacs 11:13, 9 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: * Stil new here, I cant seem to find the content, unless I look under history. Is that right? ant_ie 19:55, 9 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: * No, click edit this page on the article, and you'll see the content inside the edit box, right below the links I made at the top. Wackymacs 06:41, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: * Thanks. ant_ie 07:20, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Changes on 01/10/05
Category talk:Business

message: I replaced the included portal with the standard template linking to a portal. The portal made the category much harder to use, in my opinion. Most (if not all) categories that have related portals do not include the portal, but instead link to it (e.g. :Category:Archaeology, :Category:Medicine, :Category:Greece). --Mairi 07:01, 9 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: If that's the way its done in :category:archaeology, it must be the "right" way. :)  mydogategodshat 05:25, 10 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Included Portal 

message: I've added the template:cleancat box as this large category really needs some work in refining the categories. I'll have a go at some obvious ones... Cnbrb 12:26, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Need for cleanup & subcategorisation 

message: Why is this categorized under :Category:Applied sciences? (Added four months ago.) It does not appear to correspond to what is described in the Applied science article, nor does it seem remotely similar to anything else in the Outline of applied science. There is a sense of the word "science" that encompasses everything that is an object of study, which business certainly is; but I thought "applied science" denoted the application of knowledge that is scientific in a more specific sense than this. ~ Ningauble (talk) 16:33, 23 July 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I went ahead and removed it. Notwithstanding a plethora of theories and practical studies in the field, any field of endeavor in which the majority of new ventures fail within the first couple years is evidently more of an art than an applied science. ~ Ningauble (talk) 13:29, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Applied science?
Template talk:Infobox Arcade Game

message: I've made a few minor/cosmetic changes to the table (no fields added or removed). I didn't notice the talk page had a warning with regard to changes, so hopefully these are agreeable and/or go unnoticed. :P It makes the table, code-size-wise, smaller. If you notice any problems, please discuss here or revert if necessary. --Locke Cole 08:17, 15 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cosmetic changes 

message: A user added a "notes" section to the template.  Unless I missed a discussion somewhere (which is very possible), this was voted down a long time ago when we first came up with the template.  We decided it would just be used for subjective information, which is contrary to NPOV.  Everything else in the box is strictly factual (dates, other facts).  So unless another discussion took place somewhere deciding that it needs to be in there, it should stay out.  Peace. :-) — Frecklefoot | Talk 19:36, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That's my understanding too. Pagrashtak 22:59, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Notes

message: I don't know when this happend, but I just noticed the "Input" line doesn't display, even when it contains information.  I don't know how to fix it--templates confound me.  Anyone else? — Frecklefoot | Talk 18:54, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It seems something broke it.  All the uses of it seem to not display many of the fields.  I don't know how to fix this myself; can someone who does help?  MrLeo 10:01, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Input gone

message: Could someone help me out with what's going on with the Arcade Infobox converting to the CVG infobox?  Is this something in progress?  I ask because much of the information is not being displayed properly in many articles.  MrLeo 17:41, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Check WP:CVG/T. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 18:44, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't know if this is new, but the "ports" aren't showing up in the infobox at all--even when it has entries.  See Paperboy for an example of this. — Frecklefoot | Talk 05:44, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Old issue. Ports works after the template has been converted; I recall discussing whether to add a legacy field to cover the old, unconverted implementations and deciding not on someone's advice. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 01:16, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Convert?
Talk:Butyrka prison

message: https://www.factsandfiles.com/en/shot-in-moscow.html
https://coldwarsites.net/country/russia/butovo-execution-and-burial-site-moscow/
https://www.tagesschau.de/inland/meldung131374.html  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:8109:B00:4776:45E1:EE0B:5B20:D1BB (talk) 20:47, 28 November 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  1000 Germans shot in Moscow
Talk:Cascade

message: Moved from article, needs to moved to wiktionary:. --Lexor|Talk 12:05, 5 Sep 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: A cascade is a chain of consecutive events.  The original meaning, a waterfall or a series of waterfalls over rocks, was first incorporated into the english in the 17th Century from French, where it stems from the Italian word cascata, coming from cascare to fall. Its etymological root is ultimately the Latin word cadere, to fall.
It's also a chain of posts on usenet.
I couldn't find an article about cascade in databases. 158.193.85.212 02:55, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Some of the links to Cascade connection (which redirects to Two-port network) were not appropriate so I have created two more redirects, Cascade motor connection and Cascade connection (capacitors).  Mock wurzel soup (talk) 22:15, 22 February 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cascade connection
Talk:Kangaskhan

message: While the baby Kangaskhan may not be playable by itself, doesn't the "substitute" model used in the Pokémon Stadium series of games look like a baby Kangaskhan?  Also, that model substitutes the glitch Pokémon that are imported into the game, such as Missingno..  Please note this.  --Geopgeop 09:39, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Substitute in Pokémon Stadium 

message: i am wondering why this pokemon has no baby form. It just seems a little creepy for a pokemon to hatch out of its egg and already have an offspring. If it where to have a Babey form it most likely would be blue like the babey in every Kangaskhan's pouch (including a newly hatched one, sorry, can not get over that fact)HHS.student
:That's just the way the game was made.  -SaturnYoshi THE VOICES 15:33, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Why no baby?

message: The category "fictional dinosaurs" was removed before, then re-added a while later. I have removed it again, as per the discussion on the WikiProject Dinosaurs talkpage. Please don't add it again without discussion. -pinkgothic 14:14, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Category: Fictional dinosaurs
Talk:List of the most popular names in the 2000s in the United States

message: Please go to the discussion at Talk:List of the most popular names in the 1880s in the United States#Please extend the lists to the top 50 given names regarding the extension of the lists of most popular names. Ar Colorado (talk) 20:38, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Please extend the lists to the top 50 given names
Talk:Horror film

message: I feel like the banner tags could be removed from this article; it's been revised heavily in the past seven years since they were added. Valereee (talk) 17:02, 19 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tags 

message: Maybe the above comments by User:GoneIn60 were meant to be a Third Opinion.  If so, the Third Opinion request can be closed.  If not, I concur with the above statement by GoneIn60  that Christmas horror is a valid subgenre of horror.  Robert McClenon (talk) 06:21, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for weighing in, . Just for clarification, I stumbled across this discussion after following a bread-crumb trail that began with this post. --GoneIn60 (talk) 06:33, 26 January 2024 (UTC)

text: Thanks for weighing in, @Robert McClenon. Valereee (talk) 10:23, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title: [[WP:3O|Third Opinion]]

message: After re-writing the Japanese horror film section, looking at the "Section sizes" section in the article, I feel like our regional area has gone a bit long to read comfortably, even if I don't think it should be cut down per se. I'm suggesting we possibly move some sections to their own articles. I'm thinking Asian horror cinema and European horror cinema to help lighten the load, just as how we moved the History of horror films section earlier. I'd like to hear what other think before just moving them though. It might look weird to have Australian and a few others still together for example, but there's probably a simple solution to this. Andrzejbanas (talk) 14:27, 5 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Section Sizes
Talk:Does exactly what it says on the tin

message: We know it purportedly does what it says on the tin but the article omits to inform us what that is. Mutt Lunker (talk) 23:47, 14 July 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: This kind of thing, apparently. Added. Mutt Lunker (talk) 09:55, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  What, exactly, does it say on the tin?
Talk:Mean-field theory

message: I disagree with the change in title. It is not that mean field is a compound adjective. In fact, field is a noun, and we discuss a mean field in the same sense as we discuss a statistical field -- a field with states at each point. In this case, the approximation in MFT reduces each point in the field to the mean of the generating process. I've changed this in text, but it would be nice for the title to change too, for consistency. Dalton.sakthi (talk) 21:54, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: title of the article

message: I have discovered an orphaned article called Molecular field. This is just another name for mean field theory, so the two should be merged. RockMagnetist (talk) 18:30, 27 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge discussion 

message: Fyi. Last successful state was https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mean-field_theory&oldid=1095624711 17387349L8764 (talk) 17:15, 26 July 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for notifying, it was only 2 edits ago so I manually undid the two edits. Change to citation tag in last edit will have to be redone.  CyreJ (talk) 11:59, 27 July 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Math corrupted