lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:1111

message: I added a comment about the 11:11 phenomenon and sorry to see it deleted after 5 minutes. A search at google for "11:11 phenomenon" will reveal its something experienced by a LOT of people.
That happened to me as well.
I just wrote a simple and honest entry about the 1111 phenomenon and suggested that the reader do other research into this matter on any search engine to verify this growing interest.
Whoever is checking the entries for Wikipedia should consider researching true entries before they go and delete facts on this site.1111 is an actual occurrence for thousands of people who are not related and/or know each other and growing every day, regardless of how it can be explained.
This is very important information for many of us at this time.
 I thought Wikipedia was open to public input. I'm beginning to wonder...
John Squeechfl (talk) 19:02, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: maybe add a "see more" with https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/11:11_(numerology) in it?? 173.73.49.137 (talk) 17:42, 16 November 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  My comment was deleted after 5 minutes. Oh well 

message: Even those who delete all related opinions, fail to realize that it does little to discourage those others who continue to "stumble upon" the fact that this is an appearant growing awareness.  Its meaning may be debated, and I have no answers, however the very significance of this unusual coincidence, as reported by meny ( myself included )is intriging at minimum.  The fact that forums now exist for the many who share this curiousity, only verifies the comminality which many are interested to understand.  ( Please excuse the misspelling errors ).
65.11.123.163 18:15, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  1111 happens 

message: So... did anything cool happen on 11/11/1111 ?  That would've been really neat, in a totally arbitrary sort of way.
lol, the devil came...who knows  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.19.93.147 (talk) 20:41, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  11/11 

message: The date 11.11.1111 11:11:11 was the first, and so far last time in history when there were 14 same digits in the date. The next time it will happen won't be in quite a while. The next time when all the digits are the same will be on 2.2.2222 at 22:22:22, with 12 same digits but this wesite is sheeet because its unreliable, then 22.2.2222 at 22:22:22, with 13 same digits. This will also be the last time for quite a while with that many digits. Thereafter will come 3.3.3333 3:33:33, 4.4.4444 4:44:44 and 5.5.5555 5:55:55 with 11 same digits, 6.6.6666 6:6:6, 7.7.7777 7:7:7, 8.8.8888 8:8:8 and 9.9.9999 9:9:9 with 9 same digits. Then we have to wait until 11.11.11111 11:11:11. That is over nine millennia after today. JIP | Talk 05:28, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  11.11.1111 11:11:11 

message: The years 1111 and 999 are both common years starting on Sunday in the Julian calendar. 2602:306:B8E0:82C0:6113:D3A:FCF8:8E6C (talk) 00:52, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  1111 and 999
Talk:Aaron Burr Sr.

message: From the article:
:Jonathan Edwards is significant in that not only is he considered by many to be one of the greatest minds of colonial America, but he was also responsible for the Great Awakening which helped to bring America back to its spiritual roots in Christ, in time to defeat the British forces against all odds and form the greatest nation in the world. Without this awakening revival, it is highly doubtful America would have ever been independent of the British Empire, and Edward's son-in-law, Aaron Burr did his part to preserve the tradition, keeping the flame alight through his preaching and for his part in forming one of America's finest Christian Universities.
Doesn't sound too NPOV to me. — Timo Honkasalo 18:27, 11 Nov 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Bushwick Bill

message: News came out today that Bill had died. Then news came out that he hadn't. . Apparently music "journalism" has sunk so low that they just repeat what TMZ says without the slightest attempt at fact-checking. To repeat, Bill is alive as of now. Beeblebrox (talk) 16:35, 9 June 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Unfortunately it is now confirmed that he has died. Beeblebrox (talk) 20:57, 10 June 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is he dead or not? As of right now, not, apparently
Talk:Brutal Truth

message: Brutal truth are a grindcore outfit, not deathgrind which is a misnomer, whatever that is supposed to mean. check their own website ! they refer to themselves as GRINDCORE.
thanks, E Dunlea, London  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.136.190.7 (talk) 18:44, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Let's be honest here, Brutal Truth began as a death metal band with shorter-than-average song lengths, occasional punk riffs, and a few d-beats--which is pretty much what deathgrind is--and soon moved on to something more along the lines of experimental death metal. I mean, if you were to take an early Entombed or Autopsy song, add a blastbeat, and shorten it to half the original length, you'd have just about anything off ECDER. Brutal Truth were a deathgrind band, plain and simple. 68.47.13.178 (talk) 07:17, 26 May 2012 (UTC)

text: What you "reckon" is irrelevant. If you're going to change genres, provide sources supporting those changes. I have undone your unsourced edits. MrMoustacheMM (talk) 23:45, 27 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Genre 
Category talk:Windows software

message: Should this category not logically be for software that runs in windows?
--Joe Llywelyn Griffith Blakesley 19:30, 2004 Nov 11 (UTC)
I've removed the :Category:Microsoft Windows category from this page.  The Microsoft Windows category is focused on Windows, its history, components, and technologies that are a part of the product itself... but not third-party software, or indeed, even other Microsoft products.  Warrens 22:29, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
Wikipedia talk:Avoid blanket statements

message: At present there are many articles in the Wikipedia namespace that seek to give guidance on how to write better articles. I propose consolidating these into a much smaller number. On User:Jongarrettuk/Better writing guide I propose how these could be consolidated. The proposal is not to change advice, just to consolidate it. If I have inadvertently moved what you consider to be good advice that is currently in the Wikipedia namespace, please re-add it. I'm hope that the proposal to merge all these articles, in principle, will be welcomed. Of course, it may be preferred to have 2, 3 or 4 inter-connected articles than just one and would welcome advice on how this could be done. (In particular, perhaps all the guidance on layout should be spun off into one consolidated article on layout.) I'm also aware that putting lots of different bits of advice together may throw up anomalies or bits that people now disagree with (including bits that I myself disagree with:) ). I ask for support for the consolidation. Once the consolidation has happened, the advice can be changed in the normal way. Please feel free to improve on the current draft consolidation, but don't remove or add advice that is not currently on the Wikipedia namespace. If all goes well, I'll add a new Wikipedia:Guide to writing better articles page on the 19th. I'll also take care to preserve all the archived discussion in one place. jguk 19:35, 11 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Talk:Erico Verissimo

message: VfD summary: 3 keep, nomination rescinded--Wikipedia:Votes_for_deletion/%C9rico_Ver%EDssimo. Niteowlneils 19:35, 11 Nov 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: His name is Erico Verissimo, without accents. Whether his name was written
that way since birth or he chose to publish without accents I don't know, but his books in Brazil bear the name Erico Verissimo without accents on all covers. People names don't need to follow orthographic conventions and the "correct" form is whatever his parents and himself chose. (The same is true for his son, Luis Fernando Verissimo). His name without accents can be seen on his catalog at Companhia das Letras (the publishing company that prints most of his books in Brazil - direct link to the book list: Erico Verissimo books.
By the way, I am brazilian. Please don't revert his name to the accented version before discussing the issue here. Fbergo 18:34, 10 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: This article has been renamed after the result of a move request. violet/riga (t) 21:39, 20 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Accents in his Name

message: His name is VERISSIMO, and not Veríssimo. Stop reverting. 
2804:14D:4CA5:8B97:3C3C:3F82:74D0:4556 (talk) 21:40, 10 September 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Verissimo
Wikipedia talk:How to break up a page

message: At present there are many articles in the Wikipedia namespace that seek to give guidance on how to write better articles. I propose consolidating these into a much smaller number. On User:Jongarrettuk/Better writing guide I propose how these could be consolidated. The proposal is not to change advice, just to consolidate it. If I have inadvertently moved what you consider to be good advice that is currently in the Wikipedia namespace, please re-add it. I'm hope that the proposal to merge all these articles, in principle, will be welcomed. Of course, it may be preferred to have 2, 3 or 4 inter-connected articles than just one and would welcome advice on how this could be done. (In particular, perhaps all the guidance on layout should be spun off into one consolidated article on layout.) I'm also aware that putting lots of different bits of advice together may throw up anomalies or bits that people now disagree with (including bits that I myself disagree with:) ). I ask for support for the consolidation. Once the consolidation has happened, the advice can be changed in the normal way. Please feel free to improve on the current draft consolidation, but don't remove or add advice that is not currently on the Wikipedia namespace. If all goes well, I'll add a new Wikipedia:Guide to writing better articles page on the 19th, though maybe some bits of the new article will need to be phased in over a longer period. I'll also take care to preserve all the archived discussion in one place. jguk 19:46, 11 Nov 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Proposal to consolidate advice on writing better articles

message: Why doesn't this guideline cover the issue of preserving edit histories when breaking up a page? Carcharoth 11:19, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I presume this is the point of the line at the top, that starts Important:.   Adding the parent article in the edit summary is basically saying edit history continues at <parent>. -- Rick Block (talk) 13:44, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Which was added after my comment above... :-) Carcharoth 13:43, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Edit histories when breaking up a page

message: I made what really should have been marked a minor edit. 
But since I'm involved in another policy page, and people are accusing me of trying to "change policy" there, I thought it better to avoid cliking the "This is a minor edit" box, in case it slips under someone's radar. --Uncle Ed 15:36, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Removing and moving
Wikipedia talk:Long article layout

message: At present there are many articles in the Wikipedia namespace that seek to give guidance on how to write better articles. I propose consolidating these into a much smaller number. On User:Jongarrettuk/Better writing guide I propose how these could be consolidated. The proposal is not to change advice, just to consolidate it. If I have inadvertently moved what you consider to be good advice that is currently in the Wikipedia namespace, please re-add it. I'm hope that the proposal to merge all these articles, in principle, will be welcomed. Of course, it may be preferred to have 2, 3 or 4 inter-connected articles than just one and would welcome advice on how this could be done. (In particular, perhaps all the guidance on layout should be spun off into one consolidated article on layout.) I'm also aware that putting lots of different bits of advice together may throw up anomalies or bits that people now disagree with (including bits that I myself disagree with:) ). I ask for support for the consolidation. Once the consolidation has happened, the advice can be changed in the normal way. Please feel free to improve on the current draft consolidation, but don't remove or add advice that is not currently on the Wikipedia namespace. If all goes well, I'll add a new Wikipedia:Guide to writing better articles page on the 19th, though maybe some bits of the new article will need to be phased in over a longer period. I'll also take care to preserve all the archived discussion in one place. jguk 19:48, 11 Nov 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Proposal to consolidate advice on writing better articles

message: There are Wikipedians calling the length of articles obsolite. (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Adolf_Hitler "Rewrite")
This, I know, is not true. By taking out the consideration of the length, it leaves room for unnecessary information that does not help the article. Disregarding the length and treating Wikipedia as dumping grounds for information seems to me not very helpful to those using the site as a reference. Colonel Marksman 19:52, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Length not an Issue?
Wikipedia talk:Make a personal copy

message: At present there are many articles in the Wikipedia namespace that seek to give guidance on how to write better articles. I propose consolidating these into a much smaller number. On User:Jongarrettuk/Better writing guide I propose how these could be consolidated. The proposal is not to change advice, just to consolidate it. If I have inadvertently moved what you consider to be good advice that is currently in the Wikipedia namespace, please re-add it. I'm hope that the proposal to merge all these articles, in principle, will be welcomed. Of course, it may be preferred to have 2, 3 or 4 inter-connected articles than just one and would welcome advice on how this could be done. (In particular, perhaps all the guidance on layout should be spun off into one consolidated article on layout.) I'm also aware that putting lots of different bits of advice together may throw up anomalies or bits that people now disagree with (including bits that I myself disagree with:) ). I ask for support for the consolidation. Once the consolidation has happened, the advice can be changed in the normal way. Please feel free to improve on the current draft consolidation, but don't remove or add advice that is not currently on the Wikipedia namespace. If all goes well, I'll add a new Wikipedia:Guide to writing better articles page on the 19th, though maybe some bits of the new article will need to be phased in over a longer period. I'll also take care to preserve all the archived discussion in one place. jguk 19:48, 11 Nov 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Proposal to consolidate advice on writing better articles
Wikipedia talk:Pronoun

message: At present there are many articles in the Wikipedia namespace that seek to give guidance on how to write better articles. I propose consolidating these into a much smaller number. On User:Jongarrettuk/Better writing guide I propose how these could be consolidated. The proposal is not to change advice, just to consolidate it. If I have inadvertently moved what you consider to be good advice that is currently in the Wikipedia namespace, please re-add it. I'm hope that the proposal to merge all these articles, in principle, will be welcomed. Of course, it may be preferred to have 2, 3 or 4 inter-connected articles than just one and would welcome advice on how this could be done. (In particular, perhaps all the guidance on layout should be spun off into one consolidated article on layout.) I'm also aware that putting lots of different bits of advice together may throw up anomalies or bits that people now disagree with (including bits that I myself disagree with:) ). I ask for support for the consolidation. Once the consolidation has happened, the advice can be changed in the normal way. Please feel free to improve on the current draft consolidation, but don't remove or add advice that is not currently on the Wikipedia namespace. If all goes well, I'll add a new Wikipedia:Guide to writing better articles page on the 19th, though maybe some bits of the new article will need to be phased in over a longer period. I'll also take care to preserve all the archived discussion in one place. jguk 19:52, 11 Nov 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Proposal to consolidate advice on writing better articles
Talk:Issachar Jacox Roberts

message: There is a malformatted citation. I've tried to fix it — both with AWB and manually. I've managed to get it half-fixed, but it still shows an error. I think somebody who knows Chinese needs to have a look at this one. Thanks. David Cannon (talk) 11:51, 29 November 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Malformatted citation
Talk:Deva, Romania

message: the Hindu Religion paragraph belongs to a disambiguation page on DEVA, i'm curently figuring out how to move it -- criztu
: done Alren 17:24, 12 Nov 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: There are some sources that consider Thracian/Dacian toponym DEVA, DAVA or DABA 
for example:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dausdava
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Desudaba
Generally, its primary meaning was camp, place of gathering.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.72.50.73 (talk) 18:47, 1 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Name 

message: I see no flags here unlike other cities(County capitals). Can anyone search for the flag? 46.143.69.216 (talk) 19:14, 7 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Flag
Talk:Nullsoft

message: When did AOL buy Nullsoft? Might be good to have in the article.
--217.74.217.54 12:32, 22 Nov 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Added from here http://www.corp.aol.com/whoweare/history.shtml CraigF 16:17, 24 Nov 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: AOL

message: The news has nothing specific about Nullsoft. In the official WinAmp forum, http://forums.winamp.com/showthread.php?t=360236 an insider on "the WinAmp team" states "No, Winamp & SHOUTcast are safe". Waiting for RS to confirm/contradict that. --Lexein (talk) 06:43, 8 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nullsoft's demise 

message: Should the shutdown of winamp website(s) the 20 december 2013 be mentioned here?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.229.36.10 (talk) 18:36, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  question
Talk:The Cougar (newspaper)

message: We say that the only non-student content in the Daily Cougar is the crossword puzzle, but what about Coogie?  Palamady, though directly involved with the UH community as a master plumber for the University, isn't enrolled as a student, is he? Thephotoman 19:59, 11 Nov 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: It's nice to see Palamidy is still there. I always got a kick out of his strips.  Retropunk 08:22, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Coogie
Wikipedia talk:Stay on topic

message: At present there are many articles in the Wikipedia namespace that seek to give guidance on how to write better articles. I propose consolidating these into a much smaller number. On User:Jongarrettuk/Better writing guide I propose how these could be consolidated. The proposal is not to change advice, just to consolidate it. If I have inadvertently moved what you consider to be good advice that is currently in the Wikipedia namespace, please re-add it. I'm hope that the proposal to merge all these articles, in principle, will be welcomed. Of course, it may be preferred to have 2, 3 or 4 inter-connected articles than just one and would welcome advice on how this could be done. (In particular, perhaps all the guidance on layout should be spun off into one consolidated article on layout.) I'm also aware that putting lots of different bits of advice together may throw up anomalies or bits that people now disagree with (including bits that I myself disagree with:) ). I ask for support for the consolidation. Once the consolidation has happened, the advice can be changed in the normal way. Please feel free to improve on the current draft consolidation, but don't remove or add advice that is not currently on the Wikipedia namespace. If all goes well, I'll add a new Wikipedia:Guide to writing better articles page on the 19th, though maybe some bits of the new article will need to be phased in over a longer period. I'll also take care to preserve all the archived discussion in one place. jguk 19:59, 11 Nov 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Proposal to consolidate advice on writing better articles
Talk:Reynardine

message: VfD summary: 7 keep + nominator changed to keep--Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Reynardine. Niteowlneils 20:31, 11 Nov 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Note 1 says, "Pimroy does not appear to be an actual place-name." Sure it is. The village of Pomeroy is on a hill in Ireland... the old song "The Mountains of Pomeroy" by George Sigerson has many of the same phrases and theme including the name. /Friendly Person (talk) 01:27, 3 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Place name Pimroy 

message: seems to make sense to me 2A01:4B00:E20C:6A00:6D4C:56EE:4234:FE14 (talk) 17:34, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Add phonetics for the names
Talk:Ollerton, Cheshire

message: #Article needs to be massively expanded using Wikipedia:WikiProject UK geography/How to write about settlements as a guide.
#It should make use of sections, using Wikipedia:WikiProject UK geography/How to write about settlements as a guide.
#Infobox to be added (use Template:Infobox UK place.)
#Photos need to be added.
#References and Citations are crucial for wikipedia, and so these must be added as the article is expanded. Make sure that as many as possible are "in-line" citations.(See WP:References, WP:V, and WP:CITE for guidance.)
Peter I. Vardy 10:23, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Assessment Report 

message: Could whoever gave the population as 300 provide a reference? Which census are we talking about? Or was it just a guess? — Trilobite (Talk) 20:50, 11 Nov 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I've flagged this up, but will try to get the 2001 census figure later.  DDStretch  (talk) 12:26, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Population
Talk:Live After Death

message: The album begins with one of Winston Churchill's speeches, as noted in the article. Is it actually a recording of Churchill's voice, or of an actor hired to record the words for the purposes of the tour? -Ashley Pomeroy (talk) 20:32, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Beaches 

message: There is not only a reference after 2 Minutes to Midnight, but also during Running Free, where Bruce also clearly states in the video this is Friday night, the second night, also refers to the previous night being Thursday.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dLgvA7fLVZk - from 9:14 he says 'it's the Friday night in Los Angeles', and we gotta show it to the Thursday night crowd. 79.121.14.44 (talk) 13:30, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recorded nights
Category talk:Macintosh software

message: Sigh.  A month after this was moved from :Category:Macintosh software, someone recreated the category. We need to integrate these two, and mark Category:Macintosh software as not to be created, eh? (See Wikipedia:category cleanup JesseW 21:03, 11 Nov 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Is there any chance someone could infobox Printer Setup Utility, AirPort Admin Utility, Keychain Access, Image Capture and Internet Connect? I'm unsure as to the tech specs of these apps and know nothing about OBDC Administrator, Console, Directory Access or NetInfo Manager so it'd be nice if someone could set those up - help appreciated, thanks The Fish 19:27, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Call for Help

message: Instead of categorizing all Mac software as "Mac OS software", would it be better to categorize software as either "Mac OS 9 software" or "Mac OS X software"? And maybe even "Mac OS X Intel" and "Mac OS X PPC" as subcategories of "Mac OS X software". —ShaneCavanaugh 22:08, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  OS 9 and OS X subcategories