lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Ishkur's Guide to Electronic Music

message: the search for Ishkur was originally redirected to adad and was changed to this page without explanation. I have reverted to the original--Ted-m 21:09, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: seems OK. A disambigutation would have been a solution too. Regards --LimoWreck 00:35, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ishkur redirect 

message: We need to possibly get a database of guides that give samples like Ishkur's guide. This would greatly enhance Wikipedia.
:Are there others? If there are, I doubt they'd meet the notability guidelines, that's the thing.. - Zeibura (Talk) 21:52, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Getting more guides 

message: A musicological non-sense: this article refers to a non-trustable and non-peer-reviewed source, that violates WP:OR, therefore should not be (troll-)listed as a reference or a guide in every "electronic" "galactic" "psycho" article (see the list of so called electronic music genres); the latters pseudo-(faked)-genres are just styles-variations of modern technopop. You can't fool the world. Be serious please.Doktor Who 18:46, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That's not the definition of a hoax. A hoax is a Wikipedia article which is not true, not a Wikipedia article about a website which may not be true. This article covers the questionable accuracy of Ishkur's guide, so there's no reason to call the article a hoax. I agree that Ishkur's Guide shouldn't be cited as a source, and I doubt very many people consider it citable. - Zeibura (Talk) 18:52, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, right, I agree with you, I mean only that this ishkur site is acting like a hoax because some "key" articles link it as a trustable site (and this is not difficult to check).--Doktor Who 20:14, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Hoax

message: First of all, please excuse my English, it is not perfect.
Quote of the Jpop description:
I mean, I'm sure the culture is swell once you get past all the incest and pedophilia and giant robots and all, but after that--huh? Japan is super crazy place, 100 PERCENT!
Quote of the French House description:
If anything of value has ever come from France, it's this music right here. At this point, you can't NOT deny the genius that is Thomas Bangalter. He is the only reason why the world does not sack France.
Am I the only one offended by these words ? Is there anything to say about that in the wikipedia article ?--Bollzy (talk) 13:29, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: If you consider racist comments to be offensive to only "some" people and consider them forgettable minorities, you're a sociopath.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.94.242.194 (talk) 08:37, 29 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ishkur's insults ?
Talk:Knightsbridge University

message: The Knightbridge University previously redirected to the University Degree Program. I believe that this is incorrect because Knightsbridge is run by some guy named Henrik Fyrst Kristensen from his home in Denmark so I created the beginnings of an article for Knightsbridge University. Bill Huffman 04:26, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Redirect Link 

message: Based on the fact that the KU website appears to be down, it would seem that this institution has been "put to rest"? Anyone have any information on this situation? TallMagic (talk) 18:28, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Defunct? 
Talk:Gaijin/Archive 6

message: I created a simple graph of the above source data. Dotted lines indicated sources where the intended reading is unknown. Solid lines are confirmed readings. I left Heike off because it was getting crowded and also "circa 13th century" is quite vague.
Notice that the term "gaijin" starts off with no reference to foreigners. Around the middle of the 19th century, the term "gaikokujin" emerges. It refers to foreigners (ie, non-Japanese). A few decades later "gaikokujin" is abbreviated to "gaijin". Thus, "gaijin" and "gaikokujin" merged, and now "gaijin" can refer to foreigners. That is the purpose of this graph.
I also agree that neither terms are necessarily pejorative.
Artistic design is not one of my strong suites. Feel free to redesign it. Perhaps it can be integrated into the article. Bendono 02:19, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Graph
Talk:Catnapped!

message: In the light of the recent Afd, especially, I don’t think those 2 edits (1: 2)(by the same user who had taken the page there) are justified. I don’t think that the sources in question are all either unreliable or user-generated. I mentioned this here as the page now seems rather not as good as it could be but, in these conditions, I am from now on unwilling to improve it. Best, -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 19:04, 2 October 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I removed those because they appear to be WP:USERGENERATED or otherwise WP:RSSELF. Just Another Cringy Username (talk) 05:33, 3 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recent removal of material
Talk:Declarative Referential Integrity

message: Wow, I never knew an article this short could be so wrong. SqlPac 04:29, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Exactly. Clarification on generic SQL meaning added. PPOST (talk) 17:15, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Remark

message: This is just a grander name for the more commonly used "referential integrity", right?  So let's merge this material into that article. Bertport (talk) 17:30, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: OK with me. I suggest to just move the picture from Referential integrity and the "see also" into this article here and remove the other text as it covers the same information but in a less clear manner for a novice. Referential integrity should get a redirect to Declarative Referential Integrity then. PPOST (talk) 19:00, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

text: Yes, so I would say that this concept is not independently notable of Referential integrity so the merge does sound like a good idea, to prevent this article from being deleted in a notability challenge. I would also think that a general concept would have lower case letters, declarative referential integrity.  The only reason to use upper case on all words would be to only describe one specific technology (a proper noun), but I see the one source given uses lower case even for the Microsoft usage! W Nowicki (talk) 20:17, 9 October 2016 (UTC)

text: Klbrain (talk) 09:03, 30 June 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge with Referential integrity
Talk:Pro-Life (Masters of Horror)

message: The word "baby" is used her often. ✏✎✍✌✉✈✇✆✃✄Ⓠ‽ (talk) 17:41, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: POV?
Talk:Fastway (album)

message: There is no entry here or talk page dispute over the content of this page so I removed the Wikify and NPOV that flagged this page. I created the page so please dispute it here.
--ZapperZippy 04:46, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

message: I'm looking at Fastway - Fastway and I see no mention of Pete Way, mine is a Canadian pressing, and is a very good album!!!  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.68.50.33 (talk) 00:46, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pete Way credited on Fastway - Fastway
Talk:Misr American College

message: Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: http://www.mac-eg.com/. 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, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that 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.  Sideways713 (talk) 11:46, 3 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copyright problem removed
Talk:Ronnie Rocket

message: Doesn't this article meet the Wiki is not a Crystal Ball criteria? Would tag it for deletion for that but, unsure what tag is appropriate. Please let me know. Jasynnash2 (talk) 14:51, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I would definitely say to delete it, since it is not even on imdb.com yet. Mynameisnotpj (talk) 12:44, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

text: As a matter of fact, this isn't planned on being shot any time soon.  It is only a script, as it has been for the past 32 years.  That said, whether or not a script by a noteworthy filmmaker is itself noteworthy, I do not know. SoManyWhales (talk) 06:16, 5 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Crystal Ball
File talk:MRstatue.jpg

message: The Masked Rider says this statue was created in 2000.  That would make it still copyrighted, and this photo a  work - i.e. fair use.  I would tag it as such, but it's currently protected (and of course, as fair use it shouldn't actually be on the main page).  --dave pape (talk) 02:49, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for the heads up. I'll fix this as aoon as it is unlocked. I wondered when I listed the DYK so I provided with a link to an alternative image. →Wordbuilder (talk) 17:38, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fair use rationale
Talk:Kristina Lilley

message: This article should not be deleted as its the biography of a great actress. I made this article being an admirer of this Kristina Lilley who currently acts in one of my facorite telenovela, Dame Chocolate which airs monday thru friday at 7pm ET. In my humble opinion the administrators should really consider not to delete this article as I've put time and effort to create it. I plan to improve the page with time providing more information, pictures, and citations (if needed).
Unsigned and undated, but this was written in 2007. Obviously the article continues to exist. David notMD (talk) 01:30, 25 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Alf (name)

message: Bkonrad, you keep removing links, citing the MoS. Can you show me which section of the MoS you're referring to? SlimVirgin (talk) 18:08, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Wikipedia:Manual of Style (disambiguation pages)#Individual entries. older ≠ wiser 18:20, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think they're just advising against overlinking. There's no harm in linking to something directly relevant and interesting. SlimVirgin (talk) 19:42, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No, the practice is well-established. If you doubt it, ask on the talk page there. older ≠ wiser 22:02, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Could you respond to my query about your abuse of admin tools, please? You deleted the ALF dab page to make way for a move. Not only has this lost us some history unnecessarily, but you should not have done it, as you're a principal in the content dispute. Please undo your move and the deletion. SlimVirgin (talk) 22:04, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: As I explained on my talk page, there were no admin tools involved. When a page is a redirect, you can move the page over the redirect. WikiMedia records a deletion of the redirect. It does not require a separate deletion (and in the case where the redirect is to the target page, I don't think it is even necessary to check the box on the move page). older ≠ wiser 22:16, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I moved the page without having to delete. If you have to delete, it means you should ask an uninvolved admin to do the move for you. This has been mentioned several times by ArbCom. Any and all use of admin tools to benefit yourself in a content dispute is forbidden. Please undo it. SlimVirgin (talk) 22:24, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Links

message: I've solicited opinions on some issues raised here. Hopefully we can keep the focus on substantive issues and avoid petty vindictiveness. Your comments are welcome at Talk:ALF#Request for Comment regarding ALF, Alf, primary topic, and appropriate disambiguation standards. older ≠ wiser 02:16, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Request for Comment regarding ALF, Alf, primary topic, and appropriate disambiguation standards
Talk:Smoke grenade

message: Just a total shot in the dark here, does anyone know anything about the legality of these devices?  Specifically in the Commonwealth of Australia?  I believe that due to the fact they are categorised as 1.4G in the explosives act they're legal to eat and use to up to ten kilograms worth of the devices; however there are some criminal cases where people have been charged under the prohibited weapons act for 'grenades' even though it only loosely meets the criterion.  Anyone?  Jachin 05:05, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Legal to eat? Besides, just because something is legal, that doesn't necessarily prevent the state from trying to prosecute people for doing it. 62.196.17.197 (talk) 11:03, 24 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Legality

message: I've been reading some of wikipedia's guidelines about adding links to articles. So far all I've found is that they have to be relevant (of course), and be of good standing (reliable links, not someones blog). Well, I've found a whole lot of "How To" videos on youtube, and I wanted to know whether or not it is okay to add them to this page.
Paladin Hammer (talk) 21:01, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Adding some "How To" links. 

message: Hello, what is a smoke discharger? Is it a smoke grenade launcher? --Diwas (talk) 13:30, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  smoke discharger 

message: Well, obviously, this article isn't in an outright perfect state. I may take the time to make another sandbox for this and add some more references to the text portions of the article. I think references and putting the users of smoke grenades into a table of sorts. Thoughts? Info-Deathmatch (talk) 14:23, 30 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Updates regarding the overall quality of the article
Talk:A Flowering Tree

message: Information to add to this article:  a description of this work's style, as well as information about its reception/reviews. 173.88.246.138 (talk) 22:37, 25 October 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: To add to article
Talk:A Life for the Tsar

message: Was Ivan Susanin really the "orginal name" of this opera?  I had always heard that Ivan Susanin was just the name given to it during the Soviet period (when a regime that began  by killing the Tsar could hardly approve of an opera whose title supported the opposite course of action)
18.100.0.86 (talk) 19:21, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: From Richard Taruskin's article on the opera at Grove Music Online: [Like its predicessor by Catterino Cavos,] "Glinka’s opera, too, was originally to have been called Ivan Susanin: its eventual title was conferred upon it by Tsar Nikolay I in return for the dedication."  If I recall correctly, Victor Borge, too, explains the title as well in his book on opera (My Favorite Intermissions). Mademoiselle Fifi (talk) 11:36, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
Talk:A Streetcar Named Desire (opera)

message: This is an automated message regarding an image used on this page. The image :File:014381578829.jpg, found on :A Streetcar Named Desire (opera), has been nominated for deletion because it does not meet Wikipedia image policy. Please see the image description page for more details. If this message was sent in error (that is, the image is not up for deletion, or was left on the wrong talk page), please contact ST47. STBotI (talk) 00:27, 27 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: An image on this page may be deleted
Talk:A Wedding (opera)

message: I am having trouble placing a reference.  I haven't been able to cite the fact that I took the synopsis from the 2008 Summer Festival Program Book copyright 2008 Music Academy of the West.  I have thoroughly enjoyed this editing process! KRay 06:49, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: reference
Talk:Adelson e Salvini

message: I don't understand what this article says. At the start it states the opera was never performed and then it goes on to list a number of professional performances.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.132.105.230 (talk) 18:04, 26 May 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I have revised this a bit and, based on Holden, the intention was to state that it was given amateur productions but the various 1826-28 were never turned into a professional production until 20th C. Bellini clearly had success quite quickly, so it is not surprising that this one was ignored.Viva-Verdi (talk) 23:38, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

message: There is a poor translation into English (from Italian?) as far as the story of the opera is concerned. --Zbrnajsem (talk) 22:33, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Poor translation
Talk:Grazing in the Grass

message: This page is confused.  There are two different Grazing in the Grass's.  Friends of Distinction, and the instrumental. 132.177.65.214 (talk) 22:26, 5 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: The Friends Of Distinction version is covered under "other versions". While it would be nice to have more about that version, I don't think there's anything confusing or incorrect about what we have. They ARE the same song. Was there something specific you object to? Brettalan (talk) 14:30, 6 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Friends of Distinction

message: Why is there so much information about the Raven-Symone version?  Not at all notable. Delmlsfan (talk) 11:26, 22 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Raven-Symone?

message: This is the only clip I've found online of "Mr. Bull No. 5".  I can discern no obvious connection between it and this article's subject.
This is "Mr. Bull No. 4", as released on the album Ice Cream & Suckers (South African Soul) (which also includes a "Mr. Bull No. 3").  The notes aren't all there, but if it had been labeled a cover of "Grazing in the Grass", I wouldn't have doubted it.
I know what conclusion I draw from the above, but it's strictly OR and contradicts published sources, so I'm leaving this here and not in the actual article. — I'm Gonna Regret This Username (talk) 06:29, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Good spot. Perhaps Freddie Gumbi deserves a mention. Certainly looks like that should be a 4 and not a 5. Martinevans123 (talk) 07:31, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Sshhh.... don't tell anyone...    Ghmyrtle (talk) 09:45, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mr. Bull No. 5... or 4?
Talk:Alessandro nelle Indie (Pacini)

message: There is a relatively new chronology of the San Carlo(Il Teatrodi S. Carlo vol. II, Naples, 1987)p. 191 which gives ALL the operas each season. Thus Sep. 30 was Alessandro, Nov.4 was Berenice in Roma(35 days later), which makes70 consecutive perfs. impossible.
Note that 70 consecutive perf. is also highly unlikely since singers need a rest.
Tom 15:57, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
Talk:Arabella

message: Am making edits to this page, with the idea of making the prose clearer & making the synopsis clearer through added detail, and through amplifying the sequence of on-stage events. Also a few changes for accuracy (e.g. Arabella is the 6th operatic Strauss-Hofmannsthal collaboration, not counting revisions, but they also collaborated on other projects).Herbivore (talk) 04:56, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
Talk:Aroldo

message: This article is in no way a stub, and I have removed the characterization from it. I suppose it could be considered a B or C class opera article. 
Moreover, I think that the majority of the introductory paragraphs can be put into a new section entitled 'History of composition', similar to the one in the 'Rigoletto' article.
Desiderius82 (talk) 08:58, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: You are correct that it is not a stub. But it lacks musical analysis and discussion of critical reaction to the work. It's performance history is rather scant as well. This is just a start article at the moment.4meter4 (talk) 19:45, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Class of article
Talk:Attila (opera)

message: See here. --Kleinzach 08:08, 9 July 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: discussion started --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:15, 9 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Two navboxes with the same content 
Talk:Axur, re d'Ormus

message: The Marriage of Figaro was first performed in Vienna on 1 May 1786. Axur was first performed in Vienna on 8 January 1788. Don Giovanni was first performed in Prague on 29 October 1787, but first performed in Vienna on 7 May 1788. The sentence on the film seems confusing to me. I have not checked the film to see how it is presented there. --Robert.Allen (talk) 05:07, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I checked the DVD. The problem appears to be that Leopold Mozart's death is presented as occurring after the premiere of Axur rather than before. This was apparently done so that the news of his father's death could immediately precede the excerpt from Don Giovanni, which is dramatically effective, if inaccurate. --Robert.Allen (talk) 06:16, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Timing of ''Figaro'', ''Axur'', and ''Don Giovanni'' in Vienna
Talk:Ayodhya (opera)

message: -- Hello, this is the composer of "Ayodhya".  Please remove this opera from the category "Thai language operas" as Ayodhya, like all my other operas, is in fact composed in English.  You may watch any of the clips of this opera on youtube to see what language it's in - Thanks - Somtow  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Somtow (talk • contribs) 07:23, 23 January 2011 (UTC)
Talk:Azora, the Daughter of Montezuma

message: Without citing references, the article as it stood before I got my hands on it gave December 18, 1917 as the date of the world premiere in Chicago; according to the article history, Museslave added that information on March 20, 2006.  The New York Times review of January 28, 1918, however, although not a model of clarity on the point, seems to indicate that the Chicago premiere took place on December 26, followed by one more performance on an unspecified date.  The Virtual Gramophone (Canadian Library and Archives) entry on Forrest Lamont, the tenor who created Xalca, likewise cites the December 26 date.  On the strength of two known sources vs. no reference, I changed the article to show Dec. 26, but I can't escape a nagging suspicion that the premiere could have been on the 18th and the second performance on the 26th.  If Museslave (or anybody else) has more reliable authority, I'd certainly encourage further revision.  Drhoehl (talk) 02:25, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Date of World Premiere

message: The same January 28, 1918 Times article refers to plans for another single performance in Boston in the month following the New York premiere: "It is due for at least a fourth hearing when the singers proceed next month to Boston...."  In favor of that proposition, Boston was the librettist's home town.  On the other hand, I have found nothing indicating that performance ever actually took place, and one source, far too sketchy to contribute to the text, in passing describes the opera as having had only three performances, presumably the two in Chicago and the one in New York, which would suggest that the projected Boston performance in fact did not occur.  I therefore have made no reference to Boston in the text, but, again, I would strongly urge anyone who has better access to pertinent resources than I do to check into the matter and add an appropriate paragraph if warranted.  Drhoehl (talk) 02:25, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Possible Fourth Performance?
Talk:Cleopatra's Night

message: vocal score first section from Sibley does list members of the chorus etc - the list here is incomplete. Schissel | Sound the Note! 03:26, 30 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Why don't you expand it and add ref to the score? Markhh (talk) 22:06, 30 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  btw