lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Métis Nation—Saskatchewan

message: http://www.cbc.ca/canada/saskatchewan/story/2010/11/05/sk-metis-election-scandal-wrap-101105.html
And yes, I am also a French-speaking Poitras/Flavel from near P.A on my mother's side regardless of what the poet Morrissey has had to say about my great-grandfather murdering Isadore Dumont.
G. Robert Shiplett 18:31, 6 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  CBC report on final trial in 2004 election scandal
Talk:Wiccan Laws

message: The naming of this page is rather strange and repugnant. These are (apart from inaccuracies) the traditional Wiccan laws (possibly invented by Gardner, but that's another issue). Lady Sheba was a self-aggrandising plagiarist who first published the Book of Shadows when it was intended to remain secret. She is thought very poorly of by traditional Wiccans. I would be very surprised if any traditional Wiccans (the ones most likely to still actually be using these laws) call them "Lady Sheba's Laws". I haven't heard any non-traditional Wiccans use this term either, although obviously some do... I would suggest the page be called "Wiccan Laws", if anything.
Also, it seems rather weird to me to have the entire set of laws published in an article. Wikipedia articles don't generally quote anything at such great length, especially when there are external web-pages that give the exact same information. I would like to propose that the actual contents of the laws be removed from the page, in favour of an external link. Fuzzypeg 03:19, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, I'm going to look for some decent webpages that contain the laws, add them as external links, and remove the entire text of the laws. Fuzzypeg 14:37, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

text: Thanks for the info. One of my colleagues mentioned they thought first publication was in King of the Witches, but my copy of this is buried in a box at a friend's place, so I couldn't check it. I'll change the article if you haven't already. Fuzzypeg 11:29, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Rename or delete this page

message: Both of the external sites that are listed now direct to spam sites.  There is no citation for the last sentance - "In 1979 a Council of Elders at a festival in America produced a set of heavily revised Laws which made them more acceptable to modern Wiccans."  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.167.213.9 (talk) 01:54, 29 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Citations missing
Talk:Harold Cardinal

message: "Propaganda piece" is a little strong. If there is a slant in the subject's favour, it's pretty limited and innocuous. No sweeping claims have been made. It more or less reads like your standard obituary of a public figure. Writing one or two lines in this forum is an easy way to attempt to discredit someone - i.e. with the resulting tag on the article. Do you have a personal or institutional interest in undermining the credibility of Aboriginal people?  What aspects do you find objectionable?  What would you add or change?
207.216.241.232 22:43, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Reply

message: I'm doing POV tag cleanup.  Whenever an POV tag is placed, it is necessary to also post a message in the discussion section stating clearly why it is thought the article does not comply with POV guidelines, and suggestions for how to improve it.  This permits discussion and consensus among editors.  This is a drive-by tag, which is discouraged in WP, and it shall be removed. Future tags should have discussion posted as to why the tag was placed, and how the topic might be improved.  Better yet, edit the topic yourself with the improvements.  This statement is not a judgement of content, it is only a cleanup of frivolously and/or arbitrarily placed tags.  No discussion, no tag.Jjdon (talk) 16:28, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  POV Tag
Talk:Steele Hall

message: When was Steele Hall first elected to the Australian Senate? 1974 or 1975? I think the answer is 1974, but internet sources are ambiguous. Rocksong 03:19, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: First elected

message: In August, 1988, after the then opposition leader John Howard expressed his wish to control Asian immigration in Australia,[1] and we have to search for two lines of a long and partisan Feb 2007 press article for a source! Do us a favour!  Cheers Bjenks 08:35, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Weakest citation ever 

message: It was a Prester John sock, i'm sure contributors can revert one user easily enough if and when it happens again. Timeshift (talk) 03:21, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Please unprotect the page 

message: It's always been 30 November 1928 - see the Parliamentary Handbook - but now it's become 28 November 1928.  There are lots of ghits for 28 Nov, but I suspect most if not all of them are mirrors of this article. 
So, where does 28 November come from?  --  Jack of Oz [your turn] 10:44, 7 September 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: In fact it seems to come from this unsourced edit of 3 October 2005 by User:Roisterer.  --  Jack of Oz [your turn] 10:49, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

text: I seem to recall (and please note my memory won't be perfect on this) that I got my information on the article from a the SA parliamentary site. I would agree that 30 November would be the way to go if the parliamentary handbook says so. --Roisterer (talk) 12:45, 7 September 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  Cheers.  I've made the change.  --  Jack of Oz [your turn] 10:59, 9 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Date of birth
Talk:Carnet de Passages en Douane

message: This page refers to a carnet de passages en douane, yet the title is "Carnet de Passage" (singular).  Is there a good reason for this?  The correct term draws a blank.  Groogle (talk) 00:03, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Name of page
Talk:Nico Assumpção

message: I wrote some from scratch at /Temp ... take a look, see what you think!
03:33, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: It's been a long time, and no one has never looked into it again, so, may i remove the notice and placethe text in /Temp on the main article?
:Copyvio deleted, temp page moved over, feel free to edit.  In future, please wait for us to get around to it before copying and pasting the temp page.  It takes a while, but we will get to it eventually. :)  Thanks.  Chick Bowen 23:10, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  /Temp
Talk:Spiritual direction

message: I edited the article so that it no longer is exclusively about Christianity--and edited the NPOV language treating the New Testament as normative historically--but didn't want to remove the existing and valuable references to early examples of spiritual direction within Christianity.  Because that information is still there, the article is skewed to the one tradition.  I'd like to see us as a community add (i) information on spiritual direction within other faith traditions; and (ii) modern perspectives on spiritual direction.  Mgriffin 03:37, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. However, we would need to have individuals who can supply that content to the article do so. Personally, I cannot, given my own poor knowledge of the subject. Anyone else who does know enough to is certainly encouraged to do so. Badbilltucker 18:47, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  overlapping project tags would help: for example, the Baptism talk page includes both Catholic and Anglican tags because the information included pertains to both groups. Freder1ck 19:10, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The only reservations come when there are too many project banners on some articles. It's for cases like that that at least the Religion Project above was created. There are some pages that have ten or more banners, and that can be more than a little intrusive when you're looking at a talk page. Badbilltucker 19:56, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect :Spiritual counsellor and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 April 27#Spiritual counsellor until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.  Steel1943 (talk) 18:57, 27 April 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Spiritual counsellor" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]]
Talk:Vytautas

message: Maed! Please explain what you wanted to say with this:
< with the title didysis kunigaikštis which would be translated as High King according to the contemporary perception. The later construct for its translation is Grand Duke (for its etymology, see Grand Prince).>  M.K. 20:13, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Explanation needed

message: Please clarify the question in Talk:Jogaila#Kunigaikstis. `'mikka (t) 23:22, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Kunigaikstis 

message: I won't discuss Vitovt/Vytautas question, cause it's allready talked in archives. But the fact remains: you won't find in sources of 13-14 centuries name Vytautas. The same is with "the Great" - Vytautas became "the Great" only in 1920-1939 in Lithuania, when he was declared a national hero, even a bit a cult of a person. In 1930 was a Vytautas mania years, boys were named Vytautas. --82.135.217.70 18:22, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There were no Lithuanian language chronicles at all, that is the case. Surprisingly, the boys are named Vytautas even today, and I know some :) Iulius 20:11, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

text: Showing one source does not justify it. Show 10 sources that say it and then it might get changed. "the Great" is not a surname and cannot be referred to as such. If someone does not know what "Kiejstutowicz" or "Kęstutaitis" is then that person should do more research on it. In addition, writing in an old discussion, which took place ~13 years ago is not a good idea since people would not bother to look at it. Creating a new section for that would be a better solution. – Sabbatino (talk) 16:42, 18 February 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Great? 

message: Just a quick note: Editors may wish to take a look at Wikipedia:What is a good article? as it appears that this article may meet several criteria.--DO11.10 02:06, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Approaching Good article status

message: I would like to know rationale for the article rename, thanks M.K. (talk) 11:33, 26 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Rename

message: ...text removed by anon.radek (talk) 19:34, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  restored... 

message: Does he ever used those titles? I am pretty sure he naver officialy used title of "postulated king of Lithuania", I am not sure about Hussites. Marcelus (talk) 09:47, 23 November 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Postulated King? 

message: This website clearly explains why it is Vytautas and not anything else.--Cukrakalnis (talk) 22:00, 9 October 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  If anyone has any questions about why it should be Vytautas and not anything else 

message: What does the claim of Vytautas as being "postulated as the king of the Hussites" mean?  It is well-known that he was offered the crown of Bohemia by the Jan Žižka, but responded that he would accept only on the condition that they reunited themselves with Latin Catholicism.  This was refused by Žižka and his Hussites, and he never took the crown.  I prepose this claim ought either to be deleted or substantially revised. Zusty001 (talk) 23:19, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Postulated King of Hussites"?
Talk:Imants

message: Imants is also a pre-eminent chieftain in Latvian history and lore, that's the article I would expect here. Peters 04:12, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sadly, since folks have been tied up in other things, the article hasn't grown. Doesn't mean it needs to be deleted. —PētersV (talk) 02:44, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Comments
Talk:White River Junction, Vermont

message: This article really should discuss the railway junction that gave this community its name, and the physical geography that made it a logical place for that junction. 121a0012 04:14, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: This is a historic district map based on the paper map that I have. Some of the curvature may not be quite right. --Polaron | Talk 03:19, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Map
Talk:Kaitain (Dune)

message: Removed a red linked image holder which had been red linked  for 11 months. Found in random articles.--Dakota 04:14, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: I moved this content from the disambig page for Kaitain and cleaned it up, but am not sure if it is accurate — in particular, the exports sound odd to me. TAnthony 21:03, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I wish I knew too.  Could be information from the Dune prequeals.  I'll try to find a copy of the Dune Encyclopedia and check--Eldarone 06:23, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm a bit confused about the references to the present, EG "The Emperor currently resides in the Opal Palace." According to the canon, the books are set thousands of years after our time. Is this written from the POV of someone in Shaddam IV's time -- and if so, why? --BlackTerror 03:56, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I forgot to add the following section to this Talk page after my edit of this article today, it should sort of answer your question. TAnthony 04:16, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Content

message: I added the Corrinth section today, and I believe all information there is carefully referenced back to the appropriate Prelude to Dune novels.  The Luxury of Kaitain and Imperial Opal Palace sections were part of the original article and are the object of the content dispute. I don't know where all of the specifics came from, but they seem like they're from some non-canon source; I have a copy of the Dune Encyclopedia but there isn't an entry for the Opal Palace so it'll take a little more research to see if that's where this info is from (in which case I'll cut it out, or perhaps reference anything significant back to the Encylopedia in a separate section designating it as non-canon or whatever). In the meantime, I'm going to go through the Prelude books and rewrite these sections with whatever info is there. I don't think there are many Kaitain specifics in the original series, but I'll scan those text files too. TAnthony 04:16, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Disputed sections

message: Is the fate of Kaitain after the events of Dune ever mentioned? For that matter, if the Atreides made Arrakis the new capital, is an explanation given for the exile of the Corrinos to Salusa Secundus? It seems to me (not having read the books recently) like something of an inconsistency; if there is a stated explanation, it should be addressed. Leushenko (talk) 12:58, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The Corrinos are sent to Salusa Secundus because it is a prison planet. Paul needed somewhere safe to keep them. I don't belive Kaitan is mentioned again, but I don't see how this is an inconsistancy; Kaitan is no longer important to the story. ATOE (talk) 16:53, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  After Dune 

message: This article is sourced entirely to works of fiction.  Is there any reason not to redirect to List_of_Dune_planets per WP:PLOT?  Sergeant Cribb (talk) 11:43, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Notability
Talk:Battle of Nibley Green

message: Based on the description in the reference, I've added co-ordinates for a spot halfway between Bush Street Farm and the ford.  If anyone has a better documented location, feel free...  --Cavrdg (talk) 10:50, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Location
Talk:Battle of Medellín

message: The event was extremly bloody, but estimation of casualties differ. Sañudo Bayón dialnet.unirioja.es/descarga/articulo/3643294.pdf propose 8,000 deaths and 2,000 prisoners (P.37). But the French army units that buried the deaths after the battle counted 16,002 Spanish soldiers, which were thrown into mass graves (P.38-39). --Bentaguayre (talk) 21:46, 11 April 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Spanish casualties
Talk:Battle of the Cremera

message: John Pinsent ("Cincius, Fabius, and the Otacilii", Phoenix, 18 (1964), p. 29) speculates that the number on the Fabian side was an estimate based on what the tribes had to provide to man the army. "For 300 is the contribution of one tribe to the legionary forces, to one legion of 6,000 or to two of 3,000 based on the first 20 tribes before or after the institution of the consulship, or to two legions of 4,500 based on the 30 tribes in which Fabius believed according to Dionysius Roman Antiquities 4.15.1. The odd 6 would represent Fabian officers fighting on horseback."(This is more a note of something to add than a criticism of the article.) -- llywrch (talk) 23:49, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  About the Roman numbers
Talk:Battle of the Bridge

message: While the citation link remains same, the information about how many soldiers fought on each side varies greatly. If you check the edit history of this article then Muslim fighters range from 8,000 to 18,000 while Sassanid soldiers range from 10,000 to 70,000. The citation link remains the same.
It is highly unlikely that after Abu Ubaid's army defeated 2 separate Persian armies, Persians would have sent an army closely matching the numbers of the Muslim army.
The linked article says that there were 70,000 Persians in Bahman's army and more than a dozen elephants. The minimum more than dozen is 13 so I am going to change their number from 10 to 13. The article also says that there were 8,000 Muslim fighters. Half of the Muslim army perished, 2,000 rallied with Muthanna and the remaining routed towards the desert. Going to add these numbers in the article. WikiHuda (talk) 11:06, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: What is dubious, is removing a published English source and replacing it with a non-English source(Arabic, I presume?). In this case, you should have left the English source and simply added your non-English source. I have re-added the Sykes reference, if you have a problem discuss it here. Thanks. --Kansas Bear (talk) 19:27, 29 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dubious Info in the Info Box 

message: The sourced date for the battle shows 13 October 634, but if you convert back from the traditional Islamic calendar date (23 Sha'ban 13 AH), it appears to come out to 22 October 634. Also, according to another source, this traditional date as provided by Al-Tabari may be incorrect, and that the battle may have taken place in either 631 or 632, during the second reign of the queen Bûrândûkht after the murder of her sister.Parvaneh Pourshariati, Decline and fall of the Sassanian Empire, I. B. Taurus and Co Ltd, London, 2008 , "The battle of the Bridge", .
:The theory of Pourshariati regarding the Arab conquest taking place before Yazdegerd III has not been accepted by mainstream scholars. --HistoryofIran (talk) 09:18, 10 June 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Variance in date
Talk:Dmitry Milyutin

message: Hey, this article mentions Miliutin as creating the framework for the Circassian Genocide, but never again mentions it in the article, nor links to it anywhere.  This feels like there should be a section talking about it, or directing readers of it somewhere.2602:30A:C055:70:FD3E:D3D0:E977:24C4 (talk) 05:47, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

message: In the article, it reads : "He led a successful fight against the main enemy of the world - Great Britain." 77.25.132.159 (talk) 20:19, 18 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  INCORRECT AND BIAISED TEXT
Talk:Second Battle of Fort Sumter

message: I changed this to a "Confederate Victory". I'm not sure what was inconclusive about it. Union forces attacked, were repulsed. It's a victory for the defenders.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.117.148.2 (talk) 15:39, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

message: There is a much larger 'summary' of this article over at Fort Sumter. Perhaps someone should add the information from there to this article. --Pyho T / C 03:15, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Add info
Talk:Siege of Krujë (1478)

message: There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:First Siege of Krujë (1450) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you.  —RM bot 09:01, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Move discussion in progress

message: There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Siege of Krujë (1450) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you.  —RM bot 02:45, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Move discussion in progress

message: "occurred in 1478, following the death of the Skanderbeg"--Antidiskriminator (talk) 15:34, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ten years after death of the Skanderbeg siege followed his death? 

message: Davud Pasha managed to capture the city, which was the last stronghold of the League of Lezhë, thus ending the Ottoman-Albanian Wars.
I propose to investigate possibility to add the information about participation of Davud Pasha in this event?--Antidiskriminator (talk) 00:21, 5 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Davud Pasha
Talk:Siege of Krujë (1467)

message: There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:First Siege of Krujë (1450) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you.  —RM bot 09:00, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Move discussion in progress

message: There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Siege of Krujë (1450) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you.  —RM bot 02:45, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Move discussion in progress

message: This source explains that Ottoman forces chasing Skanderbeg were led by the Mahmud Pasha Angelović. I propose to add this information to the article. I think that this source could be useful for this article.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 21:02, 18 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mahmud Pasha Angelović 

message: Please note that Template:Infobox military conflict#Parameters states against "result" that "this parameter may use one of two standard terms: "X victory" or "Inconclusive"." The infobox has been amended to reflect this. Please read the template "result" guidance in full before amending or reverting. It would probably be best to discuss any proposed change here first to seek consensus. Thanks. Gog the Mild (talk) 21:17, 5 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Infobox "Result" 

message: Would it be appropriate to write this article in a broader and more comprehensive form under the name of the 1467 Albanian expedition? Keremmaarda (talk) 17:57, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree, to be honest. There is not enough information about the siege to write a separate article about it, also considering that there is more information about the raids in Durrës and Shkodër than the one in Krujë. Xhulianoo (talk) 10:37, 22 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Extension
Talk:Siege of Krujë (1450)

message: Would it make sense to add coats of arms for both sides of the siege?
I was thinking of adding one of the following coats of arms for the Leage of Lezhë and its commanders:
Although both are attributed to the Principality of Kastrioti, I've seen them (especially the second one) used in many articles for the League of Lezhë (e.g. here or here).
And for the Ottoman side:
 Xhulianoo (talk) 17:56, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Adding coats of arms to the belligerents and commanders
Talk:Battle of Lake Poyang

message: Realistic estimates of numbers are needed. Clearly there wasn't nearly a million men involved. The population and resources of China at the time could not support such a large force. Hasn't there been some modern research into the numbers - these ridiculous estimates should not be reported at face value.203.80.61.102 (talk) 05:31, 1 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Real numbers needed
Talk:Solicitor general

message: This is a  very poor article, and I doubt it can be revived. Clearly, the name 'solcitor general' refers to quite different offices in different legal systems. My humble suggestion is that this article be dispensed with, and replaced with "Solicitor-General of the United States", "Solicitor-General, Australia", etc. --SilasM 04:26, 12 February 2006 (UTC)