lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Assault weapon

message: So clearly just describing how ONE political party in ONE country used the word is inadequate. 2604:3D09:D78:1000:377E:61DF:3EAC:2898 (talk) 15:08, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Good point. But as a starting point, this is an article about a fluid American political term, not a type of firearm. North8000 (talk) 15:12, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Is there any reason the scope of the article can't include analogous legislation in other countries? VQuakr (talk) 16:12, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Keeping in mind that "this is an article about a fluid American political term, not a type of firearm."  The issue is "analogous in what way?" North8000 (talk) 18:32, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: In the way that the term and concept is also used in Canadian firearms legislation/politics. . VQuakr (talk) 18:51, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  The page is linked to from pages about Canada
Talk:Charles I of England

message: The title of this article is misleading as England was not his sole kingdom.  Perhaps one of the regular editors would like to review that?  Shipsview (talk) 17:29, 30 August 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: See Talk:Charles I of England/Archive 2#Requested move 29 June 2021. Celia Homeford (talk) 07:27, 6 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Charles I of England

message: Per , all three articles are already linked from this one. Unsurprisingly, that's what I meant by 'repeated links'. Per , it's already in the main body. DrKay (talk) 19:05, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Martyrdom 

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: not moved.  – robertsky (talk) 00:34, 23 February 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Charles I of England →  – Charles was not only the king of England. DieOuTransvaal (talk) 23:27, 15 February 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Not exactly, though. In some instances, no countries are shown at all. GoodDay (talk) 15:03, 17 February 2024 (UTC)

text: Elizabeth II lived & Charles III lives in the United Kingdom. Yet we omit "of the United Kingdom" from there page names. Then there's George III, George IV, William IV, Queen Victoria, Edward VII, George V, Edward VIII & George VI. So apparently 'where' they live is irrelevant. GoodDay (talk) 15:07, 17 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 15 February 2024
Talk:Delaware General Corporation Law

message: I think this move did not make anything "more specific" or more clear. To the contrary, the move rather clouds the issue of Delaware corporations, and has been hiding the term almost entirely ever since. It also looks like the introduction has been given a PR makeover by perception managements spinmeisters. Delaware General Corporation Law is certainly the less well-known and less plausible search term, but I think hiding unflattering factual information was the entire point of that move and intervention. —ReadOnlyAccount (talk) 23:49, 23 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  PR management 

message: What are they for 71.82.105.134 (talk) 18:31, 28 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Faz coins
Talk:Free State Project

message: In case you haven't heard, there's a new series on this project from NBC 10 Boston:
https://www.nbcboston.com/news/local/life-liberty-and-the-pursuit-of-new-hampshire-an-nbc10-boston-original/2920007/ Guy1890 (talk) 02:27, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I just added it in the media section! 98.97.18.19 (talk) 22:40, 22 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Documentary series
Talk:Pentamidine

message: STUDENT 1 – Does the draft submission reflect a neutral point of view? If not, specify… Yes, the draft submission on Pentamidine reflects a neutral point of view. The article summarizes publicly available information and does not include clinical conclusions based on primary research or opinions by the editors.WucCP133 (talk) 21:28, 15 November 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: - Per the training module on wikiedu.org on Sources and Citations, use of "books or publications written by experts in the field, and published by reliable publishers" are permissible references. Jcua28 (talk) 00:22, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

text: - Revision: Removed duplicate source #16 and #15 and changed information previously cited with #16, #15 to #2 Mlmtabs (talk) 05:21, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

text: - Revision: Removed duplicate source #9 (WHO Drugs) because it was a duplicate for source #2 Mlmtabs (talk) 05:31, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

text: - Revision: Removed duplicate source #15 (DailyMed - NEBUPENT- pentamidine isethionate inhalant) and replaced with #8 Mlmtabs (talk) 05:34, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

text: - Deleted "pregnancy category C" since it not a common universal term.NedaNassr (talk) 06:33, 17 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  CP133 Review
Talk:Gabriel

message: I'm wondering about this because the biblical canon does not describe Gabriel as an archangel; only giving that title to Michael. It is (to my knowledge) only in the Catholic Book of Tobit where he is described thusly. Can we therefore definitively call him an archangel in the article if, in the canon, he is not called an archangel?  fr33kman 03:21, 15 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Archangel
Talk:3D computer graphics

message: An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect :3D art and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 December 8#3D art until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.  Steel1943 (talk) 08:31, 8 December 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  "3D art" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]] 

message: An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect :3D material and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 December 8#3D material until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.  Steel1943 (talk) 08:35, 8 December 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  "3D material" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]] 

message: An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect :Digital sculpture and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 December 8#Digital sculpture until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.  Steel1943 (talk) 08:38, 8 December 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Digital sculpture" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]] 

message: An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect :3-D animation and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 December 8#3-D animation until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.  Steel1943 (talk) 08:50, 8 December 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  "3-D animation" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]] 

message: — Assignment last updated by Ktrachsel01 (talk) 01:07, 18 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: Graphic Design History
Talk:The Wiki Way

message: Context switching is the process done by dispatcher.In context switching the data of current process is saved and the loading of data of other process take place. Vksingh1998 (talk) 13:05, 16 May 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Context switching
Talk:Marillion

message: This article was published today (I have no connection, just a long-standing Marillion fan!)
:http://www.virgin.com/music/how-marillion-pioneered-crowdfunding-in-music
The article not only hints that Marillion effectively invented crowdfunding, but that this will be one of their greatest legacies.
With that in mind, perhaps there should be a section of the article highlighting this important aspect of the band?
EdJogg (talk) 14:34, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Possibly useful ref re crowdfunding? 

message: Does she really deserve the attention in this article? What's the point in including a sentence about a writer insulting a band's fans?
Also, I looked at the archives and it's funny to see somebody being torn down for comparing latter-day Marillion to Radiohead and Muse... Jules TH 16 (talk) 21:57, 23 March 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rachel Cooke 

message: Fish was not the original lead singer, Doug Irvine was. LeapUK (talk) 17:36, 15 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Original lead singer
Talk:Plutonium

message: "Plutonium is the element with the highest atomic number known to occur in nature" - not true, see the WIKIPEDIA sites on (1) natural nuclear reactors in Gabon, (2) the Przybylski star...Eudialytos (talk) 19:53, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title: Natural occurrence

message: Someone whose exotic-magnetism chops are less rusty than mine should express an opinion as to whether Study confirms, Plutonium has no Magnetism (currently cited under Science, but no subheading, on Google News) and/or other new Google hits indeed require updating our coverage on the accompanying article, which appears to me be satisfied (as of an unrelated edit an hour ago) with "Magnetic ordering [is] paramagnetic" (in the InfoBox) as the only magnetism-relevant fact.    It also makes me wonder if the new result suggests the paramagnetism would extinguish at temperatures sufficiently low that thermal noise is lower than energy-level differences anomalously close between states differing (i presume) in more than a single quantum number ....? (I'd bet there are at least some editors who have a better idea than i about which related but more general quantum-magnetism topics are likely to have been edited by the most suitable editors for the task.)--Jerzy•t 07:51 & 07:56, 15 July 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Paramagnetism 

message: remove "not to be confused with polonium." The axe article does not say "not to be confused with chisel." wiki does not need to pander to ignorance. 2600:1000:B142:B742:21CA:9B07:83EF:89CA (talk) 14:48, 21 November 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Plutonium and polonium are both radioactive chemical elements with similar-sounding names to those unfamiliar with the subject. Axe and chisel, on the other hand, sound nothing alike, so there's no reason they'd be confused for spelling. ComplexRational (talk) 17:42, 21 November 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Right.  Because I might mix up my polonium with my plutonium. So silly. 57.135.233.22 (talk) 14:24, 25 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pandering to ignorance 

message: Change deuteron to neutron. 207.99.213.120 (talk) 16:32, 1 December 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: "Deuteron" is correct at every occurrence in the article. Complex/Rational 16:39, 1 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 1 December 2023 

message: Please add the  template to the top of the "In popular culture" section. 31.44.227.148 (talk) 12:58, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: Removed the section wholesale. Jonathan Deamer (talk) 19:32, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 22 December 2023
Talk:Edmund Burke

message: I am leaving this here as a note on the Talk page because I fear I won't get the reference formatting correctly. F P Lock (volume 1), page 92, writes: "Burke told his readers that 'it is four years now since this enquiry was finished' (1757 preface), that is, in 1753." A footnote on this reads "To Shackleton, E.B. wrote more vaguely that 'it lay by me for a good while, and I at last ventured it out' (10 Aug 1757) [Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1998] Frank Lynch (talk) 18:51, 27 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dating the completion of "A Philosophical Enquiry" 

message: Useful section has been removed. Mediatelevitate (talk) 14:22, 14 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Restore 'influenced' and 'influenced by' to philosophy infobox 

message: We read the following:
"On 12 March 1757, Burke married Jane Mary Nugent (1734–1812), daughter of Dr. Christopher Nugent, a Catholic physician who had provided him with medical treatment at Bath. Their son Richard was born on 9 February 1758 while an elder son, Christopher, died in infancy."
Has Christopher been born before or immediately after their marriage, i.e., was he conceived out of wedlock? This seems unlikely in that sphere of society at that time. Yet, since Richard was born roughly 11 months after their marriage, Christopher could hardly have been "an elder son". FeliksK (talk) 20:19, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Lock agrees on Richard being born 9 February 1758 and puts Christopher as being born on 14 December 1758 (vol I page 90), so yes, going by Lock "elder" is incorrect. Frank Lynch (talk) 12:18, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Apparently an error in the article
Talk:International draughts

message: Rather than saying "In contrast to popular belief in the Netherlands, captures by crowned pieces do not have priority over captures by ordinary pieces.", wouldn't it be more accurate to say that captures by crowned pieces having priority over captures by ordinary pieces is a Dutch regional variant?  — Gwalla | Talk 00:14, 28 Dec 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: No, the idea is just ignorance and misconception. Not a local variant. Andries 14:30, 28 Dec 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: No, if people actually play that way, then the article should say so, without POV. 71.192.115.15 (talk) 17:39, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Captures 

message: This page should be updated to achieve the same look and information of other Draught pages, notably, the English draughts page. It doesn't include things like game complexity. 70.111.251.203 14:03, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Feel free to find a source of that information that the article can cite. 71.192.115.15 (talk) 17:41, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Comparison to other Draughts 

message: When was this developed? Where? Why does it have the "Polish" name"? These things need to be included in the article. ChozoBoy (talk) 01:11, 31 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes that is a great NEED. --P64 (talk) 20:32, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

text: A good accounting is given in:  Ihardlythinkso (talk) 03:09, 20 February 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  History? 

message: This article is in the Partly solved category - but no information to that end is included in the article.Jonpatterns (talk) 12:35, 31 December 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: @ 77.131.35.86 (talk) 13:49, 1 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Partly solved 

message: The current text states: "When it reaches the edge but have the opportunity to jump backwards, he may not do so. He must first be crowned and at the next move he may move backwards." This seems contradictory with : "A piece is only crowned if the piece finishes the move on the final square. So, if a piece moves onto and off the final row during the course of a capturing move, and does not finish on the final row, it is not crowned." This is also in line with rule 4.13 of FMJD: "A piece is only crowned if the piece finishes the move on the final square. So, if a piece moves onto and off the final row during the course of a capturing move, and does not finish on the final row, it is not crowned." Am I missing something? For now I'll change the article to reflect this, but perhaps this rule was changed over time, or has variations? effeietsanders 05:35, 12 January 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Looking more carefully, this seems to have been introduced by an anonymous contributor a few months ago. I suspect it was incorrect and possibly vandalism. effeietsanders 05:41, 12 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Promotion and jumping backwards
Talk:Copyright law of Japan

message: Does anyone know how this relates to Japanese postage stamps?  They aren't mentioned.  BrokenSphereMsg me 00:04, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Postage stamps 

message: The exceptions and limitations to copyright section in English specifically lists educational use as one exemption to the requirement for express permission from the author. However, this particular exemption doesn't exist in the Japanese version of the page at all (not to mention the wildly differing structure, which makes comparison difficult). How recent is the information on the respective pages? I'd mark this entire page as needing some serious review.
Midnightbrewer (talk) 03:42, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Discrepancy with Japanese Language Version 

message: There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:United States copyright law which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you.  —RM bot 12:45, 16 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Move discussion in progress

message: I think the article should mention the "illegal downloading means jailtime" development as reported here and here (examples of reliable sources). --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 17:23, 1 October 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Autumn 2012 developments 
Talk:Remodernism

message: Is this word used by anybody other than the stuckists? If not, is there any reason for it to have a separate page - can't the info just be incorporated into stuckism? --Camembert
I'm afraid this is en route to becoming a mainstream concept Camembert so best we leave it as is. user:sjc
Fair enough. It's a new one on me, I must admit. --Camembert
Ahem! I submit that this 'movement' has gone nowhere, and takes up far too much brain space on wiki. I think Stuckism itself is barely viable at present, but of course I could be wrong...Actio 07:05, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You can always start a page (if you register a user name). However, beware of writing an essay. It should be drawn from secondary sources per WP:ATT. This is not incompatible with separate articles also. Tyrenius 23:11, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: [Untitled]
Talk:U.S. Route 12

message: Recently, the eastern terminus of US 12 in Detroit was changed to put it at the intersection of Michigan and Woodward avenues based on Google Maps. That notation on GMaps is in error. I reverted the article earlier today to reflect the correct state of affairs. 
To validate the state of affairs, we can look to a few different sources.
*The current MDOT Truck Operators Map does not show US 12 continuing to Woodward on the Detroit inset. The Official 2023 Transportation Map also does not show US 12 continuing to Woodward.
*To be more specific, we can look at MDOT's Next Generation PR Finder. MDOT assigns control sections to all of their highways, and if you select the CS Atlas 2023 layer and zoom into that section of Detroit, Control Section 82062 on US 12 ends at Cass Avenue. (The map additionally shows US 12 ending there as well.) In Michigan, US Highways like US 12 are state trunkline highways, and they would have control sections corresponding to their segments. This is more proof that US 12 doesn't extend to Woodward, even if Michigan Avenue does.
*Lastly, Chris Bessert documents the timeline of changes to US 12 in the state here. Per his site, Michigan Avenue between Woodward Avenue and Griswold Street was transferred from MDOT to the City of Detroit on March 15, 2001. (This was proposed on October 9, 2000 by MDOT.) Additionally, the section from Griswold to Cass was transferred on June 8, 2005. Thus, per his research, Google Maps is 22 years and 17 years out of date. These changes are confirmed through the annual editions of the Official Transportation Map published by MDOT, although not to the precise dates Bessert lists.
In short, US 12 does not extend to Woodward Avenue. The marking as such by Google Maps is in error. I've reported that error to them for correction. Imzadi 1979 →  01:07, 30 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Eastern terminus
Talk:Ogma

message: Put your text for the new page here.
I've only just started researching Ogmios, so forgive me if I am in error, but your page on Ogmios, which redirects to Ogma, appears to have some errors.
Firstly, I'm not sure that Ogma and Ogmios can be regarded to be one and the same. 
I understand that there have been several plausable suggestions that Ogmios may be a derivative of Ogma (or vice versa), however the reference to Ogmios seems to be in the context of the Celtic Gauls merging their faith with that of Roman inspiration and that this distinction should be recognised. 
Secondly, I would say that Ogmios is depicted by a man whos tongue is linked to his follows ears - through his eloquence.
The imagry of the Lions pelt seems to derive from the 2nd Century AD Gauls, who cast Heracles as Ogmios - mixing the lions pelt of Heracles (Roman) with the tongue-chain-ear combination of Ogmios (Celtic). They highlighted the power of the tongue over brawn by depicting Ogmios as an old man.
I'd welcome your comments webmaster@ancienteurope.info
Okay, when I saw Ogma in my dreams, I saw him as the Father of all languages.  He was writing a spell so that I can understand Avestan. Rcschumacher (talk) 17:49, 13 February 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Your article looks good, but all three of those definitions(the reference to D&D and about the graphic design studio) should be presented cleaner. And, sign your posts, please. --Glasgallow 00:09, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: A few things
Talk:Brennan Manning

message: A Glimpse of Jesus: The Stranger to Self-Hatred - is this book released and in the stores? -- Zoe
The book is in libraries now. Check with your local library, or try to get an inter-library loan copy of the book. If you want to purchase the book for yourself, try Amazon.com.
Gardenfli 22:50, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Can anyone provide a reference for the quotation about atheism? In which book or publication did Brennan actually write it?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Apepper (talk • contribs) 21:12, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Atheism quote

message: It seems helpful to highlight some of Manning ideas, but in doing so, they become less than the whole of his thinking. Anyone interested in helping represent his ideas more thoroughly are certainly invited to edit and develop the section. DonaldRichardSands (talk) 12:02, 11 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ideas section of article
Talk:Bulbasaur

message: What happens when it's Bulb get's torn apart or maybe rotten like other plants 41.114.37.31 (talk) 16:35, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Bulb 

message: How come Bulbasaur and Squirtle have their own pages, but Charmander doesn't?
180.235.104.6 (talk) 23:38, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Because Charmander didn't have enough sources to support itself. Charizard eclipsed it in terms of reception to boot.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 11:10, 25 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Notability?