lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Great Yarmouth (UK Parliament constituency)

message: I have de-redlinked John Stubbe (1588) from being 'John Stubbe (MP) (does not exist)' to 'John Stubbs|John Stubbe or Stubbs' to link him with the pamphleteer who had his right hand severed in lieu of execution in 1579, the identity confirmed by his article in History of Parliament.Cloptonson (talk) 13:59, 24 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: John Stubbe or Stubbs
Talk:Hartlepool (UK Parliament constituency)

message: ←   Missing MP from the list of Hartlepool MPS. 
Sir Christopher Furness was only MP until June 1910
He died 10th Nov 1912 after being made a Baron on 19th July 1910
Sir Stephen Wilson Furness (I believe he was a nephew of Christopher) was MP from June 1910 until his death August 1914 Rokermanc 15:42, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: "It is the first time the Conservatives have held the seat." "held"? This was a Labour seat before, not conservative. So why do you say "held"? --Cabanero (talk) 07:02, 30 July 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  2021 by-election
Talk:Hexham (UK Parliament constituency)

message: Should this even mention the candidates selected in 1914 ?
Why did Holt not run again in 1918 ? -- Beardo (talk) 02:57, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  1910s
Talk:Islington North (UK Parliament constituency)

message: The article on Laura Willoughby has been nominated for deletion. Timrollpickering 13:35, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Note of article for deletion 
Talk:Leicester South (UK Parliament constituency)

message: This still seems long-winded and repetitous, and could probably be condensed. Harfarhs (talk) 18:09, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  History section 
Talk:Leigh (UK Parliament constituency)

message: I have twice restored edits made by User:Frinton100. Those edits removed middle names of candidates, removed links to three notable candidates and removed marital status prefix from another. Frinton 100 gave no reason for removing this info the first time and claims on the second occasion a consensus which does not exist.
*Removing middle names does not help the reader. For instance there were two Liberal MPs called John Brunner at the time and including the middle names help the reader to easily follow which John Brunner was the candidate. Removing middle names to match with the linked article title is not good practice. For instance, removing the middle name of Raffan assumes that Peter was his common name, but there is no evidence to confirm that Peter was his common name and the right title for his article. It should be noted that Frinton 100 just changed the title of the Raffan article from Peter Wilson Raffan without any explanation or consultation. 
*Removing links to notable people who have not yet had their articles created is not helpful. There is no justification for going around arbitrarily removing red links.
*Removing the Mrs prefix from an un-linked candidate removes key information about a candidate the reader can not access in any other way. Graemp (talk) 08:52, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Candidate information
Talk:North Antrim (UK Parliament constituency)

message: The article on David Alderdice has been nominated for deletion. Timrollpickering 14:10, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Note of article for deletion 

message: An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect :Antrim North (Dail Eireann constituency) and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 June 1#Antrim North (Dail Eireann constituency) until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.  Lithopsian (talk) 14:19, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Antrim North (Dail Eireann constituency)" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]]
Wikipedia talk:Requests for arbitration/WHEELER/Proposed decision

message: Can we have a finding of fact along the lines of "It is reasonable to expect that an article on a concept will begin with and emphasize current usage of the concept, although the evolution of that usage is certainly relevent?" I think this is a major issue that goes beyond POV in this case - WHEELER is a POV pusher, to be sure, but he also has a second problem, which is that he disregards recent developments in the history of thought entirely. This seems to go well beyond what we usually talk about when we say POV, and I think a finding to this effect would be nice.
Could we have a finding on the degree to which WHEELER's incivility, bad faith, and POV pushing made it difficult or impossible to reach a compromise on the inclusion of classicist topics in articles such as Effeminacy, noting particularly the willingness to compromise on the part of many editors (Hyacinth springs to mind) that was rebuffed?
Finally, and this may be something the arbcom wants to run in terror about, what does one do in the case where a very reasonable case can be made that the decision of the community as expressed by consensus is totally wrong? Specifically, I'm thinking of Classical definition of republic. If the findings regarding the quality of WHEELER's contributions pass, it follows somewhat logically that the arbcom is saying the article was not original research and should not have been deleted. I'm OK with that, but in that case, what sort of behavior should win the day? Is WHEELER right to repeatedly relist an article for undeletion because of his perception that he is right and everybody else is wrong? Certainly we frown upon that most of the time. Can the arbcom make some sort of statement about whether or not being right is sufficient justfication to defy consensus? Snowspinner 15:57, Mar 23, 2005 (UTC)
:Your final point alludes to the necessary policy changes I have mentioned repeatedly, and therefore is not something the arb com is going to be able to do alot about. I do think this case would do well to  inspire policy reform and discussion thereof. (Sam Spade | talk | contributions) 12:36, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Some aspects of the decision

message: My compliments to Grunt and his fine work, I think he strikes at the heart of the matter, particularly WHEELER's fine and copious (while classically biased) contributions and the unfair persecution and deletions they have endured, as well as the unfortunate lack of faith on his part (and incidentilly on the part of the a great deal of his opposition as well). (Sam Spade | talk | contributions) 17:08, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  My compliments 

message: As WHEELER's advocate I support all current proposed remedies, and compliment Sannse for her thought and care in writing them. Sam Spade Apply now, exciting opportunities available at Spade & Archer! 17:19, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed remedies
Talk:Sheffield Attercliffe (UK Parliament constituency)

message: I think this section of the page is incorrect. It doesn’t mention Beighton ward in the Boundaries section, when it was part of the constituency - certainly in the latter period of its existence. According to The Almanac of British Politics by Robert Waller and Byron Criddle (2007), the component wards then were Beighton, Birley, Darnall, Mosborough, Richmond and Woodhouses. This page refers to Handsworth, yet there was no such council ward at the time. What’s going on? I could edit the Boundaries for 1983-2010, but I feel this section as whole may have other incorrect information, and therefore needs checking. Having now looked a bit more, it seems there were council ward boundary changes in 2004, which explains it. But the component wards weren’t the same from 2004-2010 as they had been previously. TrottieTrue (talk) 22:24, 25 April 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Boundaries
Talk:Sheffield Heeley (UK Parliament constituency)

message: The vote share changes from 1983 are against the 1979 figures - however the boundaries in 1979 were different so the figures should be based on a notional result or left out as this is not a like for like comparison situation. Dunarc (talk) 21:58, 13 December 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  1983 change figures
Talk:Swansea West (UK Parliament constituency)

message: Is it me or does this section read less as a description of the seat and more as a draft of a Lib Dem leaflet for targetting the seat and proving "only we can win here" [sic]? Timrollpickering 10:58, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Boundaries 

message: To my knowledge, Rene Kinzett has always been the Conservative candidate, not the Lib Dem...  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.143.169.159 (talk) 17:46, 15 April 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: He was Lib Dem, defected after that election to the Conservatives. The article is correct. - JCJ (talk) 20:31, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

text: Addendum: this can be used as a source if you wish to have further evidence. - JCJ (talk) 20:33, 16 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rene Kinzett as a Lib Dem in 2005?
Talk:South Down (UK Parliament constituency)

message: In boundary changes proposed by a review in 1995, the seat was originally to be abolished and replaced by a new Mid Down constituency.
a) Weren't the changes proposed in 1994, not 1995?
b) Wasn't there also going to be a Newry and Mourne seat (basically the local council area plus the Newcastle wards in Down)? Wasn't this as much part of the replacement?
Timrollpickering 03:57, 17 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: 1995 proposed changes

message: I'm dubious about the claim that Enoch Powell had some personal popularity in the Nationalist community that prolonged his stint as MP, can someone support that with a reference?94.168.210.93 (talk) 16:43, 30 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Enoch Powell
Talk:Southampton Itchen (UK Parliament constituency)

message: I am not sure that it is correct to describe the 1983 result as  "Conservative gain from SDP". While Bob Mitchell, the defeated sitting MP was a member of the SDP, he been a Labour member prior to 1981 and had always been elected under the Labour banner including at the last general election. The SDP did not exist until 1981 and thus had never contested the seat. Looking at other cases in 1983 where a Labour member had defected to the SDP the results are described differently. For example Leyton which was won by Labour is described as a Labour hold though the defeated incumbent MP Bryan Magee was standing for the SDP which he had defected to in 1982. In Hayes and Harlington, Neville Sandelson had previously been elected as Labour, but was SDP from 1981 and contested the seat as SDP in 1983. The Conservatives gained it, and it is described as "Conservative gain from Labour". To my mind these two examples are more correct as gain/hold status is usually based on the last general election. I would therefore propose to amend this, but would be interested in other editors' views. Dunarc (talk) 19:44, 19 May 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  1983 - "Conservative gain SDP" or "Conservative gain from Labour"?
Talk:Vale of Clwyd (UK Parliament constituency)

message: I'd like to suggest that Vale of Clwyd no longer redirect here. The geographic Vale is considerably larger than the constituency, and the articles which link to Vale before redirecting here all appear to relate to the geographic feature. -- Arwel (talk) 00:28, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree; I am quite sure that most people wanting information about the 'Vale of Clwyd' will mean the valley, not the constituency.  I was actually looking for an article on the geographical feature when I found this. If there isn't one already then I'll start one.BrynAlyn (talk) 23:04, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:West Tyrone (UK Parliament constituency)

message: I included a refrence for the details I supplied, however adding it in seems to hide all the remaining text on the page (such as the box at the bottom containing links to all other NI constituencies. A similar thing happened to me on the East Londonderry page, but I didn't save it. Any idea why it's so difficult to include refrences on UK parliament constituency pages? Totalitariandemocrat (talk) 04:18, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: You used the wrong code. Don't put <\ref>, put </ref>. Timrollpickering (talk) 11:49, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  West Tyrone Notional 1992 

message: Is it not premature to add this under the list of members of Parliament? No writ has been raised for a by election and there is no reason to expect that a by election if held will be held in 2018.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.32.68.244 (talk) 12:35, 15 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  2018 byelection
Talk:Ynys Môn (UK Parliament constituency)

message: Could somebody please translate "Ynys Môn (pronounced /ˌənɨ̞s 'moːn/; until 1983 formally called Anglesey in English)" so that we can understand it?
Google search for English language
: "Ynes Môn" -wikipedia -site:wikipedia.com 13 hits, displaying 10
Of course, of the 10 hits displayed, the context only shows one of them with the "Ynys Môn" spelling; the other 9 are "Ynes Mon".
So, what does that mean?
#It just isn't known in English at all?
#It is still known as Anglesey in English?
#Something else?
Gene Nygaard 18:30, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Ynys means Island, I dont know what Mon means. I know it is the ancient name though. It was also known as Mam Cymru, or mother of wales, for it was the North Welsh breadbasket, or some such.Drachenfyre 00:37, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

text: Môn is a name which probably can't be translated directly. It is the same name used by the Romans (Insula Mona), and still used for RAF Mona in the centre of the island. "Ynys Môn: Mam Cymru" is more of a slogan than a name, as I understand it, like "Nottinghamshire: Robin Hood Country". I do not understand the point of searching for "Ynes Môn": it is clearly mis-spelt and tells us nothing. I would plump for option 2. In English, I have only heard the island referred to as Anglesey (or the "Isle of Anglesey", as frowned upon by purists for being tautologous). --Stemonitis 14:25, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This is, in any case, strictly incorrect. The island has no doubt always been known as Ynys Môn in Welsh and as Anglesey only in English, but the constituency name was always the English one until 1983. While it is arguable that before 1832 constituencies did not have "official" names, the name that was used for all official purposes was "Anglesey"; from that point onwards constituencies were established by statute, which always used the English names. Rgmmortimore (talk) 20:08, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Translation

message: Has this constituency always been just the islands, since the 16th century? Timrollpickering 10:34, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Oldest unchanged boundaries?
Talk:Witanhurst

message: If anyone knows of any pictures online of this wonderful mansion, please post. This property is currently listed as one of the most expensive in the world; yet, it is described as "debilitated?" A response from the broker a/o representative would be appreciated. Thank you in advance. 
GeorgiaPeach1 04:26, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Any pictures of Witanhurst?
Talk:Herman B Wells

message: Title of this article is "Herman B. Wells". This is inaccurate, as his middle name never had a period after it. His middle name is simply "B". I've attempted to move the page, but despite being logged in, Wikipedia has prevented me from correcting this error. - Durin, March, 2005
:Fixed.  -SocratesJedi | Talk 17:44, 5 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: The bronze statue of Wells was moved to the section on his life as IU president. Is there a photo of Wells available to add to the inbox content? Rosalina523 (talk) 18:36, 25 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Needs image of Wells for Infobox
Talk:Ship in a Bottle (Star Trek: The Next Generation)

message: Does anyone know what copyrights Dame Jean Conan Doyle thought Star Trek was violating when they used the Sherlock Holmes character in this episode?
As far as I know in the states public domain is death +50.  Sir Arthur Conan Doyle died in 1930 making it perfectly legal to use that character...then again, when an English noblewoman threatens a lawsuit..... User:Dowew
It is death plus 70 years in US. --201.1.188.68 03:21, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: One of the the last lines of dialog goes something like:
Picard: "Who knows? Our reality may be very much like theirs, and all this might just be an elaborate simulation running inside a little device sitting on someone's table."
This sounds like an intentional self-reference on the part of the writers to the fact that Star Trek itself is a fictional story playing on the television sets sitting on viewers' tables.
Should this little bit of ironic self-reference be mentioned in this entry? 
- Loadmaster 22:26, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: One of the the last lines of dialog is: <quote goes here>. This is could be construed as a reference to simulated reality, or as an intentional ironic self-reference by the screenwriters.
— Loadmaster 15:39, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ironic Self-Reference? 
Talk:Serge Schmemann

message: "Germany and Japan have dedicated considerable efforts to demonstrating that despite their histories of armed aggression, they have now forsworn militarism. Chancellor Gerhard Schröder's longing to participate in D-Day commemorations, or Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi's visits to the Yasukuni Shrine, which honors 14 major war criminals among 2.6 million Japanese war dead - or both their ardent efforts to secure permanent seats on the United Nations Security Council - reflect parallel yearnings to shed historical stigmas and to proclaim that they have earned a right to a place at the high table."
this is what he says in a recent editorial. visit here: http://www.nytimes.com/2005/03/22/opinion/22tue4.html. 
i really can't believe someone would have this kind of a logic. it's like saying tom killed peter, and tom's family are now not only avoiding telling their children that the murder happened, but also worshipping tom and rubbing it in peter's family's face every year. and in mr. schmemann's opinion, that shows tom's family really did introspect... oh my god... i'm not attacking his personalities but i just don't understand how an intellectual can say something like that. oh my god. i'm from china and i don't know him very well. i googled his name and i found out he has an article here at wiki, so he must be very famous. i really wonder, is he really like this? i'm really really in shock. i always thought though some politicians are tricky, but the american people, specially the intellectuals are logical and upright. but i just don't get why he said this? i understand his point of not raking up the past pain, but that doesn't mean when someone can't fully face his past wrongdoings we should turn away or even justify it.--Wooddoo-eng 17:46, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think you understood his point at all, which is how these nations are trying to cope with their World War 2 legacies decades later.  Moreover, the talk page on a Wikipedia article is not the place for airing of opinions on its subject.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.243.148.28 (talk) 15:41, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  what he just wrote 

message: Schmemann is a 1963 graduate of The Collegiate School in Manhattan. RahadyanS 04:18, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I misspoke. I read in the winter 2006-07 issue of Collegiate's alumni magazine that he only attended Collegiate through 7th grade and graduated elsewhere. RahadyanS 14:01, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Incidentally...
Talk:WPP plc

message: Is there any subsidiary company of wpp plc named firestar? 2409:4055:416:CA8D:0:0:1AD5:E0B1 (talk) 04:57, 25 November 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  About firestar 

message: Has the company liased with the Kenyan government to have it branch in Kenya? 41.89.224.180 (talk) 13:49, 29 November 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  WPP in Kenya 

message: On behalf of GroupM, I've submitted a draft article about the company at Draft:GroupM. I welcome draft improvements and additional feedback on the draft's Talk page.
Thanks! Inkian Jason (talk) 19:38, 26 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Draft:GroupM 

message: Several IPs keep adding excessive detail (without a source in English) about breaches of the law in Vietnam. The IPs want to list details of the violations in detail. I am not clear of the nature of these heinousness crimes (the legislation is designed to combat attacks on the communist party) but they may have just been instances of advertising on YouTube and Facebook, in which case they look to me like the actions of an oppressive regime. Dormskirk (talk) 07:32, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title: Violations of the law in Vietnam
Talk:Xankendi

message: User:Tabib has listed Stepanakert → Khankendi under Wikipedia:Requested moves, and he has linked to Talk:Stepanakert for discussion of this proposed move.
Please visit Talk:Stepanakert to express your opinion. -- Curps 17:54, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)

message: Okay, as such, the map shows Khankendi/Stepanakert within the borders of Azerbaijan. This is bound to draw controversy. I suggest changing the scale of the map so as to show, instead where the city is within the borders of Nagorno-Karabakh, which neither Armenians nor Azeris will dispute. Sound good? DS 12:32, 27 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Makes sense to me, except that it wouldn't be NPOV, as officially Azerbaijan does not consider that Nagorno-Karabakh exists anymore.  The map was done as part of a series of maps for the Administrative divisions of Azerbaijan.  If we are going to NPOV it, we'll need to add a second map from the Aremenian POV and label each map appropriately. Caerwine 15:00, 27 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: NPOV Map

message: This article survived a Vote for Deletion. The discussion can be found here. -Splash 23:57, 30 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Vote for Deletion