lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints

message: In reading this article I have been appalled at the lack of effort to make sure only the truth is provided. This was a very one-sided article. The edits I have made are to try to return this article to nutrality. I do not have all the references yet, but I shall be working on getting them. There is still much to change. Please do not be offended if it shows things from the point of view of an FLDS. If you were a Catholic wouldn't you know more about Catholicism than a Budist would? Who knows more about what the FLDS believe than the FLDS?Dr. KTD (talk) 06:31, 7 July 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: @Dr. KTD we know there is child abuse and trafficking in this religion. GeorgeMarg (talk) 00:12, 11 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Truth in Subjects 

message: No, it is not a WP:SYNTH. One sermon claims the tribes scattered themselves into Europe & the other Eve had intercourse with Satan. WP:Reliable sources perhaps. This article needs to be updated anyways. Jioseph-So (talk) 20:08, 10 May 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry about that Jioseph-So (talk) 20:26, 16 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recent change 

message: I found an old crank disinformation campaign that made its way into this article, so I came back to editing a few weeks ago. I made some other improvements over that time before transitioning to correcting this. Jioseph-So (talk) 20:25, 16 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vandalism problem 

message: I see the other problems, but why is it said that this must lead to incest? Clarification needed. 2A00:23EE:14F8:E446:9574:DB54:F24D:CBE4 (talk) 18:11, 15 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title: Polygyny

message: Wikipedia:Citing sources
This article is being butchered and opinion pieces are being prioritized. Lock it. YOURHELLQ (talk) 15:40, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Primary sources
Talk:Aram

message: Moved the following out of the disambiguation page. These belong in articles on these persons and things, not on a disambig page, per WP:MOSDAB.
* Aram (אֲרָם "Highland",  Standard Hebrew Aram, Tiberian Hebrew ʾĂrām) in the Book of Genesis is the fifth semite grandson of Noah; Asshur was among his brothers. He begets the nations of Uz, Hul, Gether, and Mash.  Because of the meaning of the name ("highland"), it is more likely a description of the ancestor's origins or legacy rather than the actual name. He is sometimes regarded as the eponymous ancestor of the Arameans; while the Mishnah and Hadith give that role to:
* Aram the son of Kemuel, son of Nahor, Abraham's brother.
* Aram: an alternative name for Nahor, Abraham's grandfather, a.k.a. Syria.
...
* An Aram sandwich, a kind of sandwich also known as a levant.  It is made by spreading a softened lahvash (Armenian cracker bread) with cream cheese, and laying on it thin slices of meat, cheese, salads and other sandwich fillings.  The whole is rolled up, wrapped tightly, and refrigerated for some time, then cut into slices to serve or for sale.
--Srleffler 18:07, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Material moved out of disambiguation page
Talk:Heber

message: The article is looking much nicer these days.Zestauferov 02:36, 27 Jun 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: ==

message: Gog and Magog and Atlantis and lots of owlishly knowing nonsense...  It is clear that these languages show some affinity with Caucasian languages like that of the Avars. How about quotes from the Book of Mormon and Scientology? Any archaeology or professional linguistics to support any of this 'as legend has it' chatter? Wetman 09:48, 27 Dec 2003 (UTC)
replies: text: so do I. the quote is not mine i can;t remember where from. But that is the great thing about wiki eventually along will come someone who knows the details and will correct/expand/fill-in depending, as long as someone less iterested in expanding knowledge has not come along and deleted it first.Zestauferov 08:02, 19 Feb 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: the other great thing about Wiki is that we can all see that the ridiculous misquote of a perhaps imaginary "ancient authority" Dionsysius was added by Zestauferov on January 4, 2004. Check for yourselves. There's no fool like a dishonest fool. Wetman 08:19, 19 Feb 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I did not say it was not put in by me I said the quote is not mine. I can't remember where it is from. Why would I say I can't remember where it is from if I had not put it in? The object was to leave it there long enough for anyone who knew the background origin of the theme to fill in the details. There is not one fact that I have put on wiki which has not proven to be true in time that I have not removed if it didn't. I don't suppose there will be any appology for calling me a dishonest fool will there? Even for the sake of wikiquette.Zestauferov 02:36, 27 Jun 2004 (UTC)

text: which text are you refering to here please?Zestauferov 08:23, 19 Feb 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: ==

message: Why does haver redirect to here? Highlandlord 23:55, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Haver 

message: Shouldn't this article be a disambiguation page instead??? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Thaddeus Slamp (talk • contribs) 21:16, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  disambiguation?
Talk:Kieselguhr

message: Diatomite just redirects to here. Therefore it shouldn't be a link in this article. Secretlondon 10:12, Dec 27, 2003 (UTC)
:Agreed. I'd removed that link, and someone had added it back again! Morwen 10:26, Dec 27, 2003 (UTC)
----
I remove novaculite since it seems to be a different material... Azhyd 00:15, Jul 13, 2004 (UTC)
----
The text of this article was moved to Diatomaceous earth. Zocky 11:18, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
Talk:Auditory illusion

message: I think this entry should be disambiguated - a link to Illusion in the Psychiatric sense.
--harry 15:55, 17 Sep 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: All perceptions, including illusions, are physical and perceptual. Arguably, there is no real change in pitch, as long as you are moving at the same speed as the object producing sound. However, I agree that the Doppler Effect is questionable as an illusion, but it is not a fine line.Hyacinth 16:55, 27 Dec 2003 (UTC)

text: Yes, but the wavelength relative to the observer actually does change. We can actually measure this. Aranel ("Sarah") 01:46, 27 Sep 2004 (UTC)

text: The Doppler effect is not an illusion. If you experience a sound wave, it's real, not psychiatric, and you have no way of telling whether it came from a stationary object or a moving object by performing measurements on the sound wave only. With the extra information that it came from a moving object, then by the laws of physics, you can now say that the frequency of the moving emitter is not the same as the frequency of the sound you hear. There is no "illusion" involved. The doppler effect is NOT an auditory illusion.PAR (talk) 18:27, 13 October 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: An alternate name for this type of effect is audio paradox.  Just Google it and you'll find a bunch of hits to this same material.  We should include this as an alternate name and direct searches on Audio Paradox to this page.
Potential Sources for the topic of Auditory Illusions
https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/medicine-and-dentistry/auditory-illusion
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/11/091125134655.htm
https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn13355-sound-effects-five-great-auditory-illusions/
https://www.scientificamerican.com/podcast/episode/auditory-illusions-10-04-25/
Amarburger18 (talk) 04:53, 13 February 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Audio Paradox
Talk:Battle of Cynoscephalae

message: I see this also spelled Cynocephalae, which, as it means dog-headed folk might be the correct spelling. Not that I know... Wetman 10:31, 27 Dec 2003 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: I changed the wording of the second paragraph of the introduction. The previous wording made it sound as if the 33,400 number given for the size of the Roman army only counted the actual Roman troops (and we could probably throw in the usual auxiliaries), meaning that with all of their allies they would outnumber the Macedonians by a ridiculously unlikely margin (if we think of the most conservative estimates for the allies it would still be significantly more than 2:1). I might be able to believe the aforementioned details if the battle took place in Macedonia proper where Philip and his troops would be defending their homeland, but considering the fact that it took place in Thessaly I find it very unlikely that Philip V would risk a battle with such an unfavorable ratio of troops. I mean yeah the guy was definitely guilty of hubris, and wasn't the best military commander but he wasn't stupid.- Moshe Constantine Hassan Al-Silverburg | Talk 10:58, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Size of Roman army 

message: Added map :)
Tidied up the article a bit and added a bit more detail from Polybius' account. Removed the part where it says the Macedonians dropped their pikes and used their swords. Although arguable, this is highly dubious. Livy tells us this, but Polybius doesn't mention it. Livy was NOT a military expert and he is known for making mistakes. After listening to the TTC lecture by professor Garret G Fagan on Phalanx vs legion warfare, where he mentions this, it seems clear that there is no way the Macedonian phalangites would drop their primary weapon in favor of short swords. even in rough terrain.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Javierfv1212 (talk • contribs) 05:09, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Map + a few changes
Talk:Rialto Towers

message: Nurg, I think it is the tallest in the southern hemisphere, I'm not aware of it's being surpassed. What I'm referring to however, is the tallest skyscraper, not including observation towers, such as Sydney Tower, which is taller. Perhaps what I had was ambiguous in that way, however, as far as I know, the Rialto is still the hemisphere's tallest skyscraper.
Hypernovean 10:52, 27 Dec 2003 (UTC)
replies: text: You're absolutely correct and I've clarified the article accordingly. I also added it to List of skyscrapers  Nurg 05:58, 8 Jan 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Does anyone think that the height navigation infobox is worthwhile (I added it a while ago, but am looking for comment as to whether it should be used en masse). I was going to include a row for ages as well (see User:Hypernovean/Design for an example including it), but decided it would be too difficult to fill in. Otherwise, the problem I've seen since creating this is that as new buildings are built (and here in Melbourne that's quite common nowadays), the tables would be thrown out of whack fairly often. It would be high-maintainence. I'm starting to have second thoughts, but does anyone think they are a good idea? TPK 14:20, 7 Jul 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Call for comment

message: I thought I heard around the time of the 2001 terrorist attacks that this building was an intended target. Is this true? - if it is it should warrant a sentence or two. (JROBBO 08:40, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Terrorist Target? 

message: I've uploaded an image of the rialto towers, but i'm not sure if it is needed, if anyone wants to add it to the article or use it, its here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Rialto_Towers_LC.JPG — Preceding unsigned comment added by Luke c (talk • contribs) 12:15, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Uploaded Image 

message: The follwong passage, from the article's introduction, makes little sense, as Toronto, Canada must certainly be considered part of North America: "At the time of its completion it was the 23rd tallest building in the world and the second tallest outside of North America (behind First Canadian Place in Toronto, Canada)." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 146.247.223.208 (talk • contribs) 12 April 2012
:I removed the whole paragraph as trivial and unreferenced. --ELEKHHT 00:36, 12 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Height ranking
Talk:Daisy Dee

message: At time of writing I didn't feel comfortable labelling her Dutch in the first paragraph. Now having read Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style (biographies) I'm convinced it's plain wrong, and will remove the label. No link gets lost: The Netherlands are linked in the second paragraph. --Nikai 12:09, 27 Dec 2003 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: there is no proof that her mother is Dutch and her father half spanish 
there is no proof
please delete this  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:908:191:5FA0:2DD3:96E8:9D5B:9471 (talk) 18:39, 28 June 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ethnicity
Talk:The White Stripes

message: This section omits many of the uses of White Stripes just. For example see the uses here: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/We%27re_Going_to_Be_Friends
It would be good to make this section more detailed or link to various sub pages.
I am not familiar with most the cases I just was surprised by the missing Napoleon Dynamite reference from the link above. 104.138.197.172 (talk) 17:53, 4 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Film and Television
Talk:Charles VIII of France

message: The article used to give "On 19 december" as the date of the marriage. Someone added the following note to the article:
:: the official Institut de France info for Duchess Anne de Bretagne at the Langeais Chateau Exhibition says that the marriage took place in the early hours of 6th December, NOT December 19th
Until this issue is clarified, I have removed the note and changed the date to a noncommittal "In december". All the best, --Jorge Stolfi (talk) 00:44, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Date of marriage 

message: Who ruled France during his absence in the Italian wars? Who served as the regent of France during his absence? Was it the queen, Anne of Brittany?--85.226.41.248 (talk) 11:30, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Who ruled France in his absence? 

message: Currently duckbill shoe claims that the medieval long-toe shoe was killed by the duckbills popularized by Chucky 7 owing to his extra toe.
If he has one and if it prompted that, absolutely needs to be included somewhere. — LlywelynII 13:09, 28 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Extra toe?
Talk:Probability theory

message: The article starts with: "Probability theory is the branch of mathematics concerned with probability." By clicking on the last word, we learn that "Probability is the branch of mathematics concerning numerical descriptions of how likely an event is to occur, or how likely it is that a proposition is true." So, combining these two definitions, we now know that
:Probability theory is the branch of mathematics concerned with the branch of mathematics concerning numerical descriptions of how likely an event is to occur, or how likely it is that a proposition is true.
This doesn't make sense. I think the two articles should be merged, and the term "probability" should not be defined as being a branch of mathematics.  --Lambiam 00:37, 8 February 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Probality is the chance of an event to occur. Like if you roll a die, let's say you wan't to get a certain number. For example, if you want get a number, let's say, on a 6 headed dice, there will be a 1/6 chance. But it could also change based on how the die is shaped. A number could get closer and closer to a number, (As defined as a variable in my example) IF the probability is going to increase every time, but cannot reach a certain probability. Evergreen tenal (talk) 22:06, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

text: Hat note at probability uses the wording "mathematical field of probability". Less redundant at least.  Slywriter (talk) 22:26, 13 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  What is "probability"? 

message: When editing the article yesterday, I completely forgot about the fact that die is the singular form of dice.
I pondered why I rarely ever hear the term "die" compared to "dice" (hence me forgetting it exists) and decided to read up a bit on "dice vs die".
From what I have gathered, die is the original singular form of dice, but dice has also become an acceptable singular form, especially in modern English (as stated in multiple online dictionaries).
Does anyone have any opinions or further information on this matter? Wikipolym (talk) 08:57, 28 February 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Personally, I am used to and prefer "die" as the singular form of dice, and an old discussion at the dice article displayed some statistics that pointed in favor of the usage "roll a die" vs "roll a dice". However, the same discussion has been resurrected from time to time at that article's talk page, with various people pointing out (as you noted) that OED and other dictionaries accept dice as both singular and plural. At this stage, I've finally decided to stand off from enforcing one vs the other, since it's clear what's being described in this article. But it would be ideal if there was uniform usage of "die" vs "dice" in the singular case on wikipedia.—Myasuda (talk) 14:13, 28 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dice vs Die?
Talk:Julien de Lallande Poydras

message: I would like to correct the following information:  Julien Poydras was born on April 3, 1746 in Rézé (not far from Natantes) in France.
Hope it will be useful for your paper.
It would be kind of neat if someone would write about the fund that Julien left to establish an annually disbursed dowry available to all those who marry in West Baton Rouge Parish.  This money still exists today.  The  was reported nationally in an NPR broadcast from 2004/2005 produced by local writer Ed Cullen.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.80.65.252 (talk) 15:12, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: correct
Talk:Cardiotocograph

message: Moved from article: Sadly, the early promise of EFM was not realized. It is now apparent that EFM can predict healthy babies well, but is poor at predicting sick babies. Obstetricians failed to appreciate this, and consequently the rate of cesarean sections greatly increased for the presumed diagnosis of "fetal distress". Evidence, please? Sources? Kosebamse 16:47, 27 Dec 2003 (UTC)

message: Nice image of the machine, but how about an image of the woman being monitored? Una Smith 23:37, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Image needed

message: See some discussion about fetal variable decelerations here.  --Una Smith (talk) 18:30, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reading the strips
Talk:2003 Russian legislative election

message: Maybe Duma election, 2003 will suffice. --Jiang 17:21, 27 Dec 2003 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: This article has been revised as part of a large-scale clean-up project of multiple article copyright infringement. (See the investigation subpage) Earlier text must not be restored, unless it can be verified to be free of infringement. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions must be deleted. Contributors may use sources 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. Mkativerata (talk) 11:42, 8 September 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Possible copyright problem
Talk:Publicly funded health care

message: Editors may wish to be aware that I have today placed a blocking request on User:LincolnStfor perisitently vilolating the spirit of editorial co-operation, for demonstrating bias in his edits, for depleting the usefulness of WP articles on health care to its readers and for making changes so rapidly that they seem to be planned aforethought and dumped on the editing community. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#Blocking_request__User:LincolnSt for examples and to express your thoughts if you have any.--Hauskalainen (talk) 08:39, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Hauskalainen, you have never argued anything in the talk page. An editor associated with you, , has already received a last warning from administrators.LincolnSt (talk) 10:34, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Blocking request for [[User:LincolnSt]] 

message: The United States is considering a bill that includes a public insurance company to act as a standard to other public insurance companies. Has this approach ever been used in other countries? Was it successful? I feel this should be added into the main article 74.109.231.139 (talk) 06:05, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Public Option? 

message: Please see WP:MOS#Hyphen: no hyphen after an -ly adverb. Can someone please move the article? Tony (talk) 02:45, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  The hyphen needs to be removed from the title
Talk:Tetrarchy

message: {by naming two "Junior Emperors", or Caesari,} I can't follow the grammar here -- why "Caesari" ? I would have expected "Caesaribus", or "Caesares".
:The correct plural form would be "Caesares," but I have changed it to "Caesar" in the text; two Caesares under each Augustus would have made it a hexarchy instead of a tetrarchy.  Flauto Dolce 23:48, 27 Dec 2003 (UTC)
thread_title:  Grammar 

message: I thought the old Tetrarchy article looked like it could do with some touching up. I've defined 'Tetrarchy' specifically as the Roman system of government which was introduced by Diocletian (since that's the best known Tetrarchy), and appended the other known tetrarchies in a little section at the bottom. Is the Tetrarch page redundant? Is it worth making a disambig page for other tetrarchies or is it sufficient just to have them appended here?
Just one little thing, the location of SIRMIUM, one of the four capitals. You wrote "the SLAVONIAN region of modern Serbia". Slavonia is in Croatia, and the Serbian region you are talking about (where Sirmium is located) is called SREM.
*This question may be a bit old now, but for what it's worth, yes, I think some kind of disambiguation for other tetrarchies would be good, if only because the page Tetrarch, which discusses the office in general, ends up here, which is about a particular case. And no, I don't think the Tetrarch page is redundant, for the same reason.Swanny18 15:39, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Revised article 

message: Who introduced that term? "Tetrarchy" is a "modern" (i.e. not from antiquity) term to describe that system of government; as far as I know, no one ever uses the Latin word, which isn't even attested (neither for the Diocletianic nor for the other examples of a tetrarchy).
I'd suggest removing the reference and possibly the Redirect, too. Varana 19:28, 24 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Quadrumvirate" 

message: I have noticed that Hispania appears as part of Maximian's Territory in the map at the top of the page ( http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/07/Tetrarchy_map3.jpg ).
Yet, further down, on the timeline, Hispaniae is listed as Constantius' territory.  
Could someone explain when Hispania transferred over from Maximian to Constantius?
Jrajul (talk) 00:06, 26 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hispaniae Under Diocletian's Early Tetrarchy 
Talk:Thomas Galbraith, 2nd Baron Strathclyde

message: I have removed a significant section of the article as it seemed to be mostly supposition (and not a little bit of smear) rather than encyclopaedic. I regret I am unable to contribute something back to the article at this point. As a final note, my IP address for this edit is with East Midlands Trains (I will readily confess to being a nerd).
Yours;
Tim Oliver  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.113.183.8 (talk) 13:46, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  30/8/2012 - edit