lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Barnesmore Gap

message: On the Eastern Ridge there are several mountain tracks which prove the best for taking in the idyllic scenery. Hikers and sunday trippers are most welcome. All roads are freely accessible to the public. These include a winding windmill service road constructed of compacted gravel open to the more adventurous driver. The road ends at a metal gate at the farm entrance where you are invited to take a walk through the windmills and take in the truely majestic views. However, as this is the site of extreme ecological importance, you are encouraged to stick to the paths provided. But this in no way detracts from the scenery.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 143.117.47.133 (talk) 15:48, 29 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Legal status of Hawaii/Archive 8

message: Arjuna:I know both of you have been working on this section, but I think the whole thing seems schlocky, in bad taste, and reads like it was written someone with a personal vendetta against the individuals mentioned (I'm not saying JK did/does, just that it comes across that way). But more than that, this section adds little of value and should be cut entirely. If this material belongs anywhere (and if it does it should get a major rewrite, with balance so that it does not seem like tabloid gossip), it would be the Hawaiian Sovereignty Movement article. As it exists now, it simply is not encyclopediac. It's garbage, frankly. Btw, editing is not censorship. Only a government can censor.  Arjuna 19:44, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Arjuna:Again, I'm in favor of cutting entirely, but for what it's worth, Laualoha's language "asserts a claim" is more NPOV and preferable to "claims to be". The latter sounds like inherent mockery -- i.e. "claims to have been abducted by aliens too!" (None of this is "my thing" -- maybe some of them deserve to be ostracized -- my only point is what reads more NPOV.) Arjuna 19:50, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Section

message: Jere:Aloha Arjuna, please feel free to help add balance to the various sections regarding claimants to the authority of the Kingdom of Hawaii, instead of mass deleting sourced information.  Mahalo! --JereKrischel 01:39, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Whitewashing is not balance - add information, don't censor it
Talk:Adnan Hajj photographs controversy/Archive 2

message: Could we move the page to Adnan Hajj photographs controversy? This article so far is on the controversy, not the actual photographs. Republitarian 00:56, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That seems reasonable. Stephen Aquila 01:20, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Proposed move

message: The best overview of this controversy I've found is http://www.zombietime.com/reuters_photo_fraud/. It's a blog post, however, so it is not directly useable as a secondary source. Cheers, CWC(talk) 01:20, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  A useful summary 

message: I agree with Mr. Arromdee's edit that the images of the woman are useful.  If we are going to include allegations of Reuters bias (I believe we should, but there has been reasonable debate on that issue), potentially staged images should be at least as relevant as potentially-photoshopped ones. Stephen Aquila 04:12, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Other images 

message: I propose to merge this article into 2006 Israel-Lebanon conflict photographs controversies to avoid excessive fragmentation. Kosmopolis 12:14, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think they are two distinct things and that that's excessive merging (since Adnan Hajj was already merged with this).  I think that we run the danger of over-merging: This might eventually be merged with Pallywood and/or Media coverage of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, diluting the article and making it seem either more biased or less controversial, depending on how the merge takes place.  Of course, future merges would have to be dealt with separately, but my point is that the Adnan Hajj photographs controversy is more focused and less open to interpretation than 2006 Israel-Lebanon conflict photographs controversies. Calbaer 20:42, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: While I think there are too many subpages related to the 2006 Israel-Lebanon conflict at this point, this page should remain as a separate documentation for the time being. TewfikTalk 04:52, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge with [[2006 Israel-Lebanon conflict photographs controversies]] 

message: You would have thought if someone was going to digitally alter their photos (for whatever reason) they would at least make it look semi-realistic. Did anyone (including Reuter's editors) actually believe that the photos were real? With the one of smoke above Beirut in particular it is just so immediately obvious that it has been edited its silly and the F-16 is obviously firing flares not missiles, regardless of how many it actually fired; anyone with any aircraft knowledge could tell you missiles don't look like that. Oh well, gave me a good laugh. Canderra 16:43, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Was anyone actually fooled by the manipulated photos?
Talk:Hiroshi Mori (writer)

message: Long, detailed, well-written, and well-cited. Probably could benefit, however, from further discussion of his books, his writing style, themes, etc. along with description of the books themselves - plot, etc. LordAmeth 14:18, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Project Assessment

message: I think some of these titles need to be checked for accuracy again, since looking at a few of them I can tell right off the bat some of the translations are off, like 女王の百年密室 is not "God Save the Queen". Other translations I think need to checked over again are 迷宮百年の睡魔, 探偵伯爵と僕(Which I think is "The Earl Detective and Myself"), どきどきフェノメノン, カクレカラクリ(Hidden Trick), 少し変わった子あります, もえない(the original translation isn't too far off I believe but I think something like Unburnable would serve better than incombustables which isn't even a word )and 銀河不動産の超越. And this is just for the books under the Other Novels, apart from The Perfect Insider and the Sky Crawler series it wouldn't hurt if a Japanese fluent translator went over the rest of the titles once more for accuracy. 1Q84 (talk) 15:59, 22 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Translation of Certain Book Titles
Talk:Missouri Crematory

message: I am switching out  with . The subject makes a claim to notability in the first sentence: The Missouri Crematory was the sixth modern crematory built in the United States and holds the distinction of being the first crematory built west of the Mississippi River. There are just no references to support it currently. IvoShandor 06:59, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Replacing template

message: Big chunks of the article match word for word this article (on www.thedead-beat.com). I can't tell which borrowed from which. Or it seems possible that the same person wrote both. Grafen (talk) 08:09, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I've reduced the article to a stub. ---Another Believer (Talk) 16:39, 29 January 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Possible copyright issue
Category talk:Fictional rooms

message: :Category:Rooms only contains kinds of rooms, not notable instances of such. Is it appropriate to include rooms from notable works of fiction here, or just imaginary sorts of indoor spaces? Potatoswatter 07:38, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: scope?

message: :Category:Rooms Would it be apropriate to include Harry Potter's "Room of Requirement" in this category? Dabrio (talk) 00:31, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Harry Potter's "Room of Requierement"
Talk:Term Limits (novel)

message: I added the publishing history section but did not note as much as I would have liked because I cannot source the material so I am unsure of how accurate it is. I believe that this book was self published with Cloak & Dagger Press but have found little information on them. It then went on to be published by Atria Press, which I assumed was the Simon & Schuster Imprint. However, Atria's company profile says that they were founded in 2002 - after the second first edition. It was then published for a third time as a first edition by Atria.
It would be helpful if anyone knew if Atria Press was indeed a separate entity from the S&S imprint Atria. JesseMSmith (talk) 06:12, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
Talk:Behold... The Arctopus

message: Given the number of wiki pages that link back to this band page it seems as though there should be at least a placeholder page. Alternatively you can edit all the pages that link to it and remove the reference.  A page for an album doesn't make sense without a page for the band. Jvespo 07:43, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: I have changed some things on the page.  The band has such a small discography that is made of different types of releases (album, compilation, EP, split etc) that it looks kind of silly for them to have a bunch of sub-headings that have only 1 or 2 releases listed under them.  I put them all in chronological order, maybe in the future when the band has a larger repertoire, it can be changed.
Also, the reissue of Nano nucleonic should be treated as a separate release I think, and not a reissue of the original.  The "reissue" has much more content than the original, and was almost treated more like a compilation album than a reissue of the same thing (even though the original 3 songs are on it).  It was also notable since it was their first release on BMA which (being distributed by metal Blade) was a large step towards more exposure.
The band is on Black Market, not Metal Blade (BMA is distributed by Metal Blade though and the logo DOES appear on the back).
I own Arctopocalypse Now... Warmageddon Later and it doesn't sound like it is done with a drum machine, and Charlie Zeleny is credited as a drummer on it.
I removed the guest musicians section because they both appear on the same album, and it is covered in that albums article.
I hope to update the body of this article in the near future as well.  I own everything they have put out (except the original issue of Arctopocolypse Now..) so I plan on updating the articles with the correct information taken straight from the sources.  I also want to update the band bio and musical style sections.Ibanez Guy (talk) 18:25, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Updates

message: Chris Barnes from Cannibal Corpse as lead singer? It makes no sense.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 186.206.88.150 (talk) 09:46, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Vandalism?
Talk:Ho Chi Minh Mausoleum

message: How is the violation unintentional? It's not like they mummified him by accident.206.167.167.51 (talk) 21:18, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed. Badagnani (talk) 21:28, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Violation

message: I've seen the Ho Chi Minh Mausoleum's architecture described as Stalinist. Is that a good description of the style? If so it should probably be mentioned in the description. Tweisbach (talk) 09:34, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Architectural Style 

message: There is no reason that US spelling should be used for this article. Also, as the earliest case of regional spelling variant used is 'centre', ENGVAR directs that non-US spelling is maintained.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 123.103.241.85 (talk) 06:07, 6 September 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Spelling
File talk:Netscape9.png

message: Ha, I'd already updated the RC1 screenshot yesterday, just forgot to label it on the article itself
Image:NS9_screenshot.PNG
/Marbles 07:54, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

message: I re-uploaded Ns 9.0.0.6 because the version that was already up did not show the Netscape Migrator icon, which should be present. /Marbles (talk) 19:17, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: New 9.0.0.6
Talk:Sanjaya Belatthiputta

message: The Wellcome Trust image of Dhrtarasthra and Sanjaya of Mahabharata is not suitable in this article. Sanjaya of Mahabharata and Sanjaya Belatthaputta were different persons. The image needs to be removed. -- Bodhisattwa (talk) 15:51, 3 June 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Inappropriate Image
Talk:Colin Howson

message: Regarding text in bibliography: 'Peter Lipton in the British Journal for the Philosophy of Science describes the book as "Delivered with pace and consistent intelligence" and suggests that it "covers a great deal of ground, including Hume's sceptical argument, the new riddle of induction, naturalised epistemology, reliabilism, scientific realism, deductivism, objective chances and Hume on miracles, all from a Bayesian perspective...often provocative and repeatedly enlightening."' Since when do Wikipedia bibliographies include blurbs? Remove as self-promotion?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kronocide (talk • contribs) 22:47, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The information provided, especially in its current form, to me also seems somewhat dubious. Anyway, a review of Scientific Reasoning can be found here boombaard (talk) 18:33, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Self-promotion?

message: To describe "God and Science", debate with Nicholas Beale in Prospect May 1998 pp14-17[4]" as a "trivial item" really is a bit harsh!  This was long before The God Delusion and the whole "God is back" and New Atheism had really got going. Neither Colin nor I nor Prospect think it trivial NBeale (talk) 09:37, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: God&Science

message: The article claims Howson "earned his PhD under Imre Lakatos". But Lakatos died in 1973, whereas Howson only earned his PhD in 1981. This historically mistaken claim should therefore be deleted.
Moreover it is also highly doubtful whether Howson would have earned his PhD under Lakatos had he survived to 1981. For Lakatos was strongly opposed to the kind of subjectivist Bayesian probabilist philosophy of probability and of science advocated by Howson. According to Lakatos's anti logical positivist radical fallibilist philosophy of science, all scientific theories/laws are ever false, whereby they all have prior probability zero, and thus also posterior probability zero. But Howson's thesis had no valid arguments against this fallibilist philosophy, even admitting the fallibilist historical fact that all past great scientific theories have turned out to be false, whereby Bayesianism predicts all future theories are likely to be false.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.156.147.180 (talk) 13:10, 31 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Howson's PhD not earned under Lakatos
Talk:Limet

message: Is this actually a separate drink? There reads: It can also be served with a tonic water, in which case it is known as a "beton". According to the Becherovka article, that refers specifically to Be'cherovka and tonic. And, when searching images for Limet herbal bitters, it only gives Becherovka bottle images, and later also images of Angostura bitters. Nothing Czech if I disable Becherovka in the search. 109.240.49.173 (talk) 00:56, 9 July 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Separate drink?
Talk:Mark Daniel Rose

message: Mark Rose is the front man for Chicago based rock band Spitalfield signed to Victory Records.  Spitalfield have sold well over 100,000 albums world-wide to date.  Mark Rose also writes and records music seperate from the group and has his own music available for stream and download on such sites as iTunes, Myspace & Purevolume.
Spitalfield is calling it quits at the end of 2007, and there will be more and more interest in what the band members are doing next.  As the main songwriter for the group, Mark Rose will press forward with new endeavors and will have a high interest rate amongst the bands' fans and new listeners alike. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fall.in.fall.out (talk • contribs) 08:35, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok. So what? You show nothing notable above and beyond his membership of a defunct band. You show no records released (if there is music available, list it (but myspace really isn't a good example as any muppet can pretend to be a singer on there), no 3rd party articles (something from the music press would be a start), you include "fun facts" when trivia is not encouraged on wikipedia, and you list influences with no citations or links to back it up. Please read WP:Note on what makes someone notable. Your article simply doesn't prove it.  I'll remove the speedy delete, and switch it to a prod, which gives you a few days to back up your claims. --Blowdart 08:47, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

text: Ok so; put the photo in the template (there's room for it), classify him using categories, offer proof of his studies, look at WP:Cite in order to see how to cite "properly" rather than just shove links at the end and you're done *grin* --Blowdart 12:13, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
Talk:Aditya Vikram Birla

message: *It is surprising that the article took so long to come up on Wikipedia.However I request the Wiki"writers" to expand this article and include more details on Aditya Vikram Birla's life and career.
*If someone has read a biography on him.Please write in.vineetwin
Is Kumar mangalam Birla adopted son of Aditya Vikram Birla.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.68.73.74 (talk) 12:20, 18 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Comments 
Talk:Reby Sky

message: Might want to add something to the article about her official 3D model available at DAZ 3D. Argel1200 (talk) 08:12, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  3D Model 

message: WHY?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.46.51.146 (talk) 07:31, 28 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Co-signed.  Nowhere on this page is there any indication that she is bisexual. --99.101.160.159 (talk) 14:33, 30 December 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed. There's no verification anywhere in the article, so I've removed the 4(!) categories relating to bisexuality/LGBT, until said info is mentioned and sourced reliably in the article. NiciVampireHeart 17:56, 9 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  LBGTQ
Talk:Time in Indonesia

message: Want to help write or improve articles about Time? Join WikiProject Time or visit the Time Portal for a list of articles that need improving.
—Yamara ✉ 16:40, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Wikipedia:WikiProject_Time/Assessment|WikiProject Time assessment rating]] comment 

message: Year 1400? What does it mean? Reindra (talk) 03:00, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Year 1400 

message: In the historic section it should contain what time the former province Timor Timur was. WIB, or WITA?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 180.189.162.174 (talk) 05:59, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Timor Timur

message: The article does not clarify.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Frotronic (talk • contribs) 20:06, 17 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  When did Bali change from IWST to ICST? 

message: The article mentioned that Indonesia "no longer observed daylight saving time", implying at some point in the past it did. Which is strange considering Indonesia is an equatorial country and consequently should never observe it. According to this Wikipedia article (see the image) Indonesia never observed daylight saving time. Nuclear03020704 (talk) 23:05, 14 December 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Did Indonesia ever observe daylight saving time? When?
Talk:Von Luschan's chromatic scale

message: to see the real Luschan's chromatic scale:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/ismailfarouk/1463583531/  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.232.107.66 (talk) 17:56, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The TAFE computer I'm using right now blocked your site because it is too racist. 2sc945 (talk) 07:46, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: [Untitled]
Talk:Suppressed correlative

message: Strikes me that the description preceding the examples is unclear.  I, for one, can't make heads or tails of it.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.141.217.36 (talk) 01:02, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm stupid too, but I think most examples of this article reflects other related fallacies than the suppressed correlative. I think the article is somewhat garbled, or else the concept might be garbled. Said: Rursus (☻) 07:06, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

text: The above examples have since been replaced in the article. —Mrwojo (talk) 06:54, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

text: The old "black dog" example presumably was from the proverb "At night all cows are black." (see: Black cat analogy). Hegel famously used this saying in The Phenomenology of Spirit in what I would say is the same form of critique as suppressed correlative.  —Mrwojo (talk) 16:37, 14 October 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Perhaps I'm Stupid, But... 

message: Although Actor 1's first statement is false (that ants cannot be small as they are larger than bacteria), his second statement (that nothing is really small) actually seems true to me. Nothing is small on it's own, it's size only exists in emprical measurements (i.e. in m, cm, etc.) or in relation to other things (a mouse is smallerer than an elephant, but is not simply small). Saimdusan Talk|Contribs 20:44, 6 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The above example has since been replaced in the article. —Mrwojo (talk) 06:54, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ant/bacterium example 

message: I've taken a stab at cleaning up this article because previously it was just an unreferenced definition and a few examples that seemed to be causing confusion as noted above.
The article now starts with a conceptual example (X, not X), moves to one of the more straightforward examples I saw in Bain, and then starts getting into more complicated situations. The brakes/no-brakes example I made up; if someone finds a better example with a sly redefinition, feel free to add it instead. In a footnote Feinberg says that Loewenberg coined the name of this fallacy in 1940 but Bain's name and description as early as 1868 seems to refute that. (I don't have access to Loewenberg's paper.) I didn't find many sources for this fallacy except in relation to a form of empiricism and psychological egoism, which is why I've mentioned those two.
The article could potentially mention some criticism (I saw one non-reliable source that disputed the claim that a suppressed correlative results in meaninglessness). —Mrwojo (talk) 06:54, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Would a good example be the old chestnut of defining art as "anything that anyone regards as art" in terms of a debate about whether a specific thing constitutes art? Herr Gruber (talk) 23:48, 15 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Expanded, referenced, new examples
Talk:Just Tricking!

message: I think this article serves no purpose and should be deleted. My reasons are that there are no pages for the other books in the series, and any valuable information about the book that is on this page (there isn't really any, besides the alternate titles) can be mentioned on the page for the series the book belongs do. The information on this page, the bulk of it just being a summary of the plot of each of the short stories, isn't necessary, so I think it should be deleted.
124.190.57.234 (talk) 07:48, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pointless article?
Talk:Behind My Camel

message: i created the page but i'm unsure if behind my camel won the grammy in 81 or 82. sting.com has it as 81, wikipedia has it as 82...ur commnts plz...User:Leif edling 09:15, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The naming of the awards is different, but the content is the same. The work was made after the deadline (currently October 1, according to Grammy Awards) so it counted as work done in 1981. The awards themselves were given in 1982. Apparently Wikipedia uses the date of the award ceremony, while other sites, such as Infoplease, use the year the work was done. I tried to clarify this in the article. Rigadoun  (talk) 15:34, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Grammy in which year?