lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:List of United Nations Security Council resolutions on the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict

message: This so called article qualifies for AFD. Whats the purpose of having this here.? See What Wikipedia is notVartanM 18:09, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: AFD

message: At present the table only includes the four that were previously listed, but that might have been because the summary was 
:4 UN Security Security Resolutions have been passed during Nagorno-Karabakh war calling on withdrawal of Armenian troops from occupied Azerbaijani territories.
which I have trimmed down to
:Four UN Security Security Resolutions have been passed during the Nagorno-Karabakh war.
My change to the inclusion criteria expands the scope, which was my intention to avoid the list being POV due to a narrowly defined criteria.  It is better to have too many than too few - we can always reduce the prominence of any resolutions that were of minor significance. John Vandenberg (talk) 22:11, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm pretty certain there were only four. I will look into it further. Pocopocopocopoco (talk) 04:38, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: There are only four. VartanM (talk) 05:20, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

text: No, there are no other UNSC resolutions about NK conflict. There are UN General Assembly resolutions that mention the conflict. Grandmaster (talk) 05:54, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Wikisource'em if you have them. VartanM (talk) 16:51, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Ok, I'll look for them when I have time. Grandmaster (talk) 10:56, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  are there other resolutions? 

message: United Nations Security Council Resolution 884 or the other 3 have no prospect of growing out of their stub form. I'm proposing merging the United Nations Security Council Resolution 884 to here and creating redirects for the other 3. This way we can have one article that has all the information on all resolutions and redirects if someone was to search for them. VartanM (talk) 22:16, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  merger 

message: This article is just a summary of what each resolution said. Whatever happened before or after has no relevance here. Here we just summarize the text of each resolution, and link to the articles about the resolutions, where details could be added. Grandmaster 07:41, 17 September 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article content
Talk:Spice Lisp

message: Spice Lisp adhered to the CommonLisp specification before either it or the CommonLisp spec was released to the public. 75.149.30.179 (talk) 17:37, 10 September 2019 (UTC)
replies: text:  Indeed! Guy L. Steele Jr., Author of the original "Common Lisp Reference Manual," sat in on the weekly meetings of the team that developed Spice Lisp while he was drafting the manual. The Spice Lisp team contributed somewhat to the manual, including feedback about what was or was not reasonable to expect from a practical implementation. 74.111.96.172 (talk) 19:56, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Relationship to CommonLisp
Talk:Poor law union

message: "In 1894, rural districts and urban districts were set up based on the sanitary districts (and therefore indirectly on the unions). "
This is slightly misleading as urban districts were not based on unions but on individual civil parishes.
Exile (talk) 22:12, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: And back Jack do it again.be Vigilant vigile 2A00:23C0:9885:DE01:CED2:4B9F:2039:4569 (talk) 07:42, 24 October 2023 (UTC)

message: The present title, Poor law union, doesn't really make sense, as Poor Law is invariably capitalised. The only two sensible options are Poor Law union or Poor Law Union, both of which are represented in the literature, with the balance being significantly in favour of Poor Law Union. The latter would also be consistent with Poor Law Commission, for instance.  Eric Corbett 14:07, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article title 

message: The second one does not work - is there an obvious 'current equivalent'? Jackiespeel (talk) 10:48, 18 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: External links
Talk:List of Vanity Fair artists

message: I've split this off from Vanity Fair caricatures in order to reduce the size of that page. Drutt (talk) 22:16, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Dear administrators,
I came across my name "Nevin Koshy" in this article through a Google Search. I have no clue as to what this article is about and why my name has been added here. So please delete my name from this. You can contact me at nevin [at] tsinghua.edu.cn for any clarifications.
Also, please delete this Talk page section which I have created after my name is deleted. 
Thanking you,
Dr. Nevin Koshy
Postdoctoral Researcher
Tsinghua University
Beijing
China  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 101.5.81.217 (talk) 03:40, 5 November 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: I have removed the name after searching for other places where it appears.  appears to have added it here and in other Wikipedia articles back in 2013. Yngvadottir (talk) 06:29, 5 November 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Urgent: Delete my name from the article (Nevin Koshy)
Talk:Taoyuan District

message: Something doesnt make sense about the climate data chart on this page. The record lows listed are higher than the average lows. This doesnt make sense, as it would suggest that much of the year is colder than the "record" lows. Perhaps the two rows got switched? I am, however, dubious of the data in general as, having lived in Taoyuan for some time, it is VERY hard to impossible to believe the average low in January is either -0.5 degrees OR 3 degrees. Taoyuan is a subtropical area that has probably never experienced subzero temps... an average of -0.5 or 3 degrees would suggest frequent subzero temps.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 114.39.230.87 (talk) 06:18, 16 May 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Climate Data
Talk:Tic disorder

message: it says that tics r not due to a medical condition but for that girl that cant stop sneezing they say thats a tic and is due to a medical condition.????
not due to the effects of MEDICATION.  learn to read.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.226.247.157 (talk) 18:40, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Contradiction

message: "Tourette's disorder is diagnosed when both motor and phonic tics are present for more than a year."
I don't think it's clear whether this is saying someone has Tourette's after a year of tics, or that after a year of tics a test for Tourette's is done. Thoughts?
(sorry if i did this wrong, new to this)
-speaker  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.54.182.194 (talk) 13:42, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ambiguity 

message: There needs to be much more information this article. This article is far from complete. As someone with a tic disorder myself I would love to learn more about them. I am particularly interested in the treatment of them although the article did not say anything about the treatment other than that it is similar to treatment of Tourette Syndrome. I would also like to know more about what experts think may cause tic disorders. This article is severely deficient in information to sum it up and it desperately needs to be expanded. I feel that many people would benefit from an expanded article so that way they could learn about it. There is a lot of misinformation and misunderstanding out there. Believe me, I am constantly having to explain to people that I shrug my shoulders repeatedly because of a tic disorder. I really wish there were greater awareness out there about it and I think a Wikipedia article might help with that.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by AveMaria02 (talk • contribs) 07:37, 8 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  There needs to be much  more information 

message: Per discussion at too many places to name, I have removed the POV video from the infobox, and do not believe it belongs in the article because of that POV.  See  WT:MED, User talk:Jimbo Wales, and Wikipedia:Osmosis/Issues.  In the year 2000, the requirement for "significant distress or impairment" in Tourette syndrome was removed from the DSM, in recognition that the majority of people with TS are not impaired or distressed. Since 2006, I have kept the POV words, "suffer from" out of the TS suite of articles. SandyGeorgia (Talk)  17:36, 28 March 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: POV

message: , could you please better explain your request here, regarding this?  I am not understanding what you want clarified, and a medical citation is provided, so don't know why a medical citation needed tag is added.  Thanks!  SandyGeorgia (Talk)  22:44, 25 September 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: I misunderstood the citation to apply only to the treatment and not the claim that treatment was not needed. Your change corrected the issue I had with the text. Before it read as though there were two conflicting treatment approaches, one of which was unsourced. Thanks. ParticipantObserver (talk) 19:19, 26 September 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Clarification request
Talk:Zhang Shan

message: Am I reading correctly that Zhang won a women’s gold before the associated event existed? It seems like she won an open or mixed Olympic medal which is a triumph!
Am I missing something? I feel like I should know who this if that’s true? 2605:8D80:5A0:B5FC:3441:FBB1:8E5:3D46 (talk) 19:13, 3 June 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Honest Question
Talk:Elections in Austria

message: The party system in Austria is not a multi-party system. It is a two-party system (or arguably a two and a half party system). The author(s) of this article obviously confuse pluralism (the existence of multiple parties competing against each other) with the number of relevant parties. One needs to check the works of political scientists in the field before attempting to make such classifications (a quick overview at: http://www.olemiss.edu/courses/pol628/60227jcp.htm). A cursory reading of politics in Austria, or 'commonsensial' knowledge do not a political scientist make.
totally man  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.166.214.56 (talk) 00:16, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Party system
Talk:Roby C. Thompson

message: A temporary subpage at User:Polbot/fjc/Roby Calvin Thompson was automatically created by a perl script, based on this article at the Biographical Directory of Federal Judges. The subpage should either be merged into this article, or moved and disambiguated. Polbot (talk) 23:17, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Bot-created subpage
Talk:Peach Bottom Nuclear Generating Station

message: The title is "Nuclear Generating Station", but the page calls it the "Atomic Power Station". Is one or the other the official name for it? 104.229.139.131 (talk) 03:51, 26 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proper name question 

message: The section "Surrounding population" seems extraneous or at best not specific to Peach Bottom Nuclear Generation Station.
Much of the "Safety concerns" section includes quoted statements without citations.
There is a general tone of distrust and fear toward PECO.
Perhaps these issues warrant a POV template.
DGerman (talk) 20:31, 6 August 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Serious PointOfView issues
Talk:Susquehanna Steam Electric Station

message: Just a question, shouldnt this page be named as "Susquehanna Nuclear Power Station" instead of "Susquehanna Steam Electric Station"? Rehman(+) 00:41, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rename 

message: This is a minor discrepancy I came across.
In the intro it is stated that "Susquehanna produces 63 million kilowatt hours per day."
* But, daily (average) production based on infobox (annual generation) is 50 GWh
* And daily production based on infobox (nameplate capacity) is 64.8 GWh
Since the citation doesn't explain the "63 million kWh/dy", I guess it should be either:
*"more than 64 million kWh/dy"
*or "about 65 million kWh/dy"
*or even "on average 50 million kWh/dy".
In addition, xyz million kilowatt-hours, rather than xyz gigawatt-hours looks like a misusage of the metric prefix to me. But that may well be a North American industry custom or even a cultural thing, and that would be perfectly fine with me.--Rfassbind (talk) 09:31, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Daily electricity production
Wikipedia talk:Requests for comment/81.9.61.227

message: Some support for the  IP being a sock puppet of Ekajaki comes from this lone edit of the Starwood Festival article  where User talk:81.9.61.227 reverts a tag  that had been bothering Rosencomet on the article. This is notable because User:Ekajati  and her sockpuppets were preoccupied with reverting my edits  and the edits of other editors on the Starwood Festival suite of articles for the eight or so months before they were caught. Since it is a rare editor who dares to edit Starwood Festival that was the only edit for User talk:81.9.61.227 revert there. That my edit was chosen seems significant, given their nortorious reverting of my edits previously.  Thelma was also a know preoccupation of this group of sock puppets. Mattisse 22:50, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Some support
Talk:Maggie Williams

message: There's an extensive biography about Williams here. --165.134.208.120 (talk) 16:30, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: It seems this article quickly became a huge load of WP:UNDUE weight given to scandals or insinuations of such.  These aren't even placed into coherent encyclopedic context and seem to very easily violate WP:BLP. --Veritas (talk) 04:39, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, I agree and I'm removing all of it. It's certainly undue weight and potential BLP problems - looks like people googled her name and found whatever they could of that nature and threw it into the article. I had tried to rework it more neutrally, but it was still out of whack.  Tvoz |talk 18:30, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The Whitewater investigations were a very significant part of the Clinton Administration and Maggie Williams name first gained notoriety in those Congressional hearings.  I agree there were a few far fetched comments on here in the past, but the Whitewater hearings were a very significant part of her public life and I think it should be added under a section with it's own name. (Dbcraft (talk) 18:53, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I do not deny that the Whitewater investigation was important or that Williams played an important role in it.  However, such a section would need to be balanced and extremely well-cited and cannot provide undue weight to the subject in relation to her overall notability. --Veritas (talk) 20:52, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  NPOV 
Template talk:Auto archiving notice

message: Normally, index=ArchiveIndex puts "An archive index is available here.".
If the user also specifies small=yes, the link is not rendered.
(I found this on a page whose "archive index" does not seem to be kept current.)
(Also this template does not link the archives - to find the archives, a visitor has to browse History to see where the bot moved them to. Maybe users should use {Archives} instead, or maybe this template should unify with {Archives}.) -A876 (talk) 20:17, 21 December 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Possibly still relevant. CapnZapp (talk) 11:46, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Hides the archive index

message: That seems like something we'd want, since sometimes people change the period and forget to change this notice. Per don't repeat yourself, it seems like a bad idea to have this notice that needs to fixed every time the underlying metric is changed. (please use  on reply)  talk 19:44, 13 October 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Please consider any efforts along this line to also take  et al into account. Regards CapnZapp (talk) 10:59, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

text: And oh yeah:  CapnZapp (talk) 11:02, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is there a bot fixing instances where this notice conflicts with the actual archiving period? 

message: Template  has recently seen a number of changes/improvements. For instance, the addition of a  parameter. 
Please acquaint yourself with these changes and then consider the following:
Suggestion: synch/update Auto archiving notice to support the same behaviors as Template:Archives. Thank you CapnZapp (talk) 10:47, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: This discussion was referenced at Template talk:Archives#implement upgrades also to Auto archiving notice. CapnZapp (talk) 10:55, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

text: This discussion was referenced at Template talk:Archives#implement upgrades also to Auto archiving notice 2. CapnZapp (talk) 09:01, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

text: This discussion was referenced at Template talk:Archives#implement upgrades also to Auto archiving notice 3. CapnZapp (talk) 10:30, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: good idea to add the "minimum threads" sentence. --Funandtrvl (talk) 18:54, 9 April 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  General Update
Talk:Sarkastodon

message: How big was this critter, anyway? What specimens found suggest six feet at the shoulder and ten feet in length? The claims require a citation or a reference. Has anyone heard anything about this particular creodont?
I found this paper estimating it to be 800 kg. It also estimates megistotherium (=HYAINAILOUROS) to be 500 kg
Sorkin, B. 2008: A biomechanical constraint on body mass in terrestrial mammalian predators. Lethaia, Vol. 41, pp. 333–347Brisio (talk) 12:40, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: That estimate is based on molar length assuming geometric similarity with lions, an incredibly poor choice to estimate the mass of an animal with bone cracking adaptations that comes from a group of animals with oversized heads compared to carnivorans, wouldn't be a surprise if such estimate is off by 400% but alas is the only thing we have. Mike.BRZ (talk) 06:05, 24 January 2015 (UTC)

message: Isn't it presumptuous to assume there's a size limit for terrestrial mammal carnivores, when just about every time someone postulates such a limit, a limit-breaker is discovered? Unless there's some intrinsic reason to believe so, in which case it ought to be listed.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.73.70.113 (talk) 19:57, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Size limit
Talk:Erdős–Kac theorem

message: Before someone gets confused, both
:\lim_{N \rightarrow \infty} \frac {1}{N} \left | \left\{ n \leq N : a \le \frac{\omega(n) - \ln \ln N}{\sqrt{\ln \ln N}} \le b \right\} \right | = \int_a^b \varphi(u)\,du  
as in Mathworld
and 
:\lim_{N \rightarrow \infty} \frac {1}{N} \left | \left\{ n \leq N : a \le \frac{\omega(n) - \ln \ln n}{\sqrt{\ln \ln n}} \le b \right\} \right | = \int_a^b \varphi(u)\,du  
as here are correct, due to the slow growing of  ln(ln(n)) . (Mark Kac: Statistical Independence in Probability, Analysis and Number Theory, Wiley, New York 1959.)
--Erzbischof (talk) 09:20, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  n or N 

message: Q= \frac {\omega(n)-\log\log n}{\sqrt{\log \log n}}  is N(0,1) distributed, Q is normal distributed with mean loglog(n) and standard deviation \sqrt{\log \log n}.--Erzbischof (talk) 19:36, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  N(0,1) or N(loglog n, (loglog n)^½) 

message: The graph whose caption reads:
"A spreading Gaussian distribution of distinct primes illustrating the Erdos-Kac theorem"
is difficult or impossible to understand. What is this graph telling us? The caption certainly does not explain it clearly.
Without an understandable caption, this graph should be removed. 2601:200:C000:1A0:7DFE:6A44:ABC6:796B (talk) 16:37, 21 August 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unclear caption
Talk:STS-96

message: There is no way the landing mass is even remotely that high. It is likely that the landing mass in kg is the landing mass in lbs.Ratsbew (talk) 17:13, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: *I have corected the weights. The payload weight was off and I made sure the orbiter liftoff/landing weights were in lbs and correct per the NASA press kit.--NavyBlue84 18:03, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Weights
Talk:Brunswick Nuclear Generating Station

message: Hello, I am working on a project on the Brunswick Nuclear Generating Station. I see that Duke Energy has recently opened an educational center near the premises of Brunswick Nuclear Station. I was wondering if Brunswick Energy & Education Center
would be a relevant section to add. Here is a link to my sandbox : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Strikebeast/Brunswick_Nuclear_Generating_Station
It would appear that construction was started on the support structure for a conventional cooling tower but never finished.  Investigate?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.209.162.47 (talk) 13:12, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: They apparently had a protracted legal battle with the EPA, who opposed the 'once-through' cooling system and wanted towers instead. It ended with the owners modifying the intakes to reduce impact on marine life.  --Pykk (talk) 18:10, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

message: — Assignment last updated by Docscharn (talk) 17:24, 8 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: Writing 101-The Archive
Talk:Moston, Cheshire East

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 #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.) Unreferenced claims may be deleted without notice.  DDStretch  (talk) 23:11, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Assessment Report
Talk:Piano Sonata No. 18 (Mozart)

message: In all honesty, the only parts of K. 576 that are technically difficult are the passages of two-part invertible counterpoint in the first movement. The perceived difficulty of the third movement is mostly because most performers tend to play it too fast: it should most probably be closer to the Classical tempo ordinario for Allegretto,  = c.76. So it could very well be one of the six "easy" piano sonatas, as Charles Rosen argues this way in Beethoven's Piano Sonatas. Double sharp (talk) 11:51, 11 February 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: He also writes (The Classical Style, p.467) that Mozart (like J.S.Bach for his Two-Part Inventions) must have thought that bare two-part counterpoint was easy to play! (Though perhaps a faster Allegretto is needed if the audience is not to fall asleep today, and to give a difficulty commensurate with that of the first movement.) Well, it is indeed one of the two Mozart sonatas that have made me sweat the most technically (the other being K. 533), and both are heavy on counterpoint. (Still, thank you Mozart for making my barely-a-9th-sized-hands actually advantageous!) Double sharp (talk) 13:04, 15 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Difficulty?
Talk:North Anna Nuclear Generating Station

message: According to this
the North Anna Nuclear Generating Station was built on a  fault line.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.177.152.21 (talk) 09:04, 24 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Geological Fault line 

message: According to this press release from Dominion, "As designed, four diesel generators supplied power to the station while the off-site power was unavailable. One of the four generators was taken off-line to repair a generator coolant leak, but a fifth generator at the station was activated to replace it until the offsite power was restored. Repairs are complete to the diesel generator."
As designed, four diesel generators supplied power to the station while the off-site power was unavailable. One of the four generators was taken off-line to repair a generator coolant leak, but a fifth generator at the station was activated to replace it until the offsite power was restored. Repairs are complete to the diesel generator.  
That doesn't quite match the "three used, one failed" in the article now.
Also, here is a good reuters article summarizing plans for inspecting and restarting.  
Ccrrccrr (talk) 19:51, 24 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  number of generators