lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Template talk:CBM computers

message: I removed the entry for the C65 on the grounds that, if we were to include all unreleased CBM products (which we should if including the C65 in the first place), I think the list would become unfeasably big (and confusing). But we should of course make sure the C65 and others is clearly visible in the Commodore Int'l article, perhaps under their own heading ("Unreleased products"?). --Wernher 16:31, 14 May 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Regarding C65 and other 'Secret Weapons of Commodore'
Talk:Coal

message: I understand why many Wikipedia editors don’t like coal, I don’t either, but the suggestion that it isn’t economical (and the citations supplied to support this assertion) aren’t serious and greatly diminish the quality of the rest of the article. The article is also incorrect to suggest that new coal isn’t being developed, Japan alone is constructing 22 coal power plants as of 2023 https://www.nsenergybusiness.com/projects/yokosuka-coal-fired-power-plant/ 2600:8801:204:CC00:E5CF:2985:6F37:1F38 (talk) 13:45, 9 June 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: It's only economical if you ignore externalities, which is the point the cited sources are making - and on Wikipedia, we follow the cited sources. MrOllie (talk) 13:54, 9 June 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Who chooses the external factors and gives weight to them? So many variables and opinions as to become meaningless, it approaches faith. 2A00:23C6:F680:2C01:ADCA:1417:790C:605A (talk) 15:14, 18 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  The part on economics is laughable  

message: + Ash composition, weight percent Rander4675 (talk) 19:11, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Jamedeus (talk) 21:48, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 5 March 2024 

message: The following factoids or comments were removed
*Although coal is known from most geologic periods, 90% of all coal beds were deposited in the Carboniferous and Permian periods, which represent just 2% of the Earth's geologic history."
so what
*"Jet, a compact form of lignite, sometimes polished; used as an ornamental stone since the Upper Palaeolithic"
"ornaments" seem distracting
*Fossils and amber may be found in coal.Poinar GO, Poinar R. (1995) The quest for life in amber. Basic Books, , p. 133
For a big article, these hobbyist details are distracting
*when dead plant matter was protected from biodegradation and oxidation, usually by mud or acidic water" removed "biodegradaton".
--Smokefoot (talk) 14:28, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title: Revisions of May 18-

message: This topic is vast and important.  The article is too long.  I will remove "Transition away from coal" since we have a article focused on that aspect: coal phase-out
Main recommendation: 
1) An article about coal, period.  What is it? Where did it come from?  Many classifications (rank, grade). What is it used for?  
2) The rest: mining (and economics), environmental impacts
--Smokefoot (talk) 14:14, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Can you be more specific? There are already articles on coal mining and the health and environmental impact of the coal industry. Also I suggest excerpts, for example of coal phase-out. Chidgk1 (talk) 21:04, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title: Split proposal
Talk:Mount Emei

message: I deleted the link leading "Black Dragon River" to its Wiki page since the river described at that page is the Amur River (going by Heilong Jiang/黑龙江 in Chinese) in Heilong Jiang province, all the way in northeastern China bordering Siberia.  I'd like to make that passage more accurate, but I don't know enough information. Anyone else? Tir-anna (talk) 16:56, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rivers 

message: Why is there no mentioning of the Giant 40~ meters Golden Buddha statue at the summit?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 61.173.98.137 (talk) 15:31, 30 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Golden Buddha 

message: Could it be a phonetic connection of the name with the Mount Imeon Range nowadays known as Tianshan ?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.176.120.156 (talk) 09:00, 15 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mount Imeon 

message: The link to the golden stutue of mount emei http://scenery.cultural-china.com/en/109S128S521.html does not go anywhere.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by FrankBerninger (talk • contribs) 09:25, 20 June 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Missing link 
Talk:Mount Wutai

message: The following coordinate fixes are needed for Mt Wutai, Shanxi Province China; 39°04’44.71”N, 113°34′00.60”E
—86.164.155.93 (talk) 16:23, 29 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: . Deor (talk) 11:05, 30 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Coordinate error 

message: The first source is a dead link, and the second is an op-ed by the Chinese Ambassador to Britain and therefore is not a reliable source210.72.20.1 (talk) 08:04, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ties to Tibetan Buddhism 

message: Why no reference to the area being one of the main bases of the communist 8th Route Army during the war with Japan and subsequent civil war?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by WestNab (talk • contribs) 22:10, 28 February 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ties to CCP & PLA
Talk:Emperor Ōjin

message: The Imperial  mon (emblem) was added  here.  In 2012, the image was removed from other articles about Japanese emperors -- compare here. Zenwort's edit summary is clear and reasonable --img of Imperial seal removed, this was not used before the Muromachi era 
The use of this symbol is justified because this emperor and this article is an important part of a grouping of articles about the emperors of Japan -- see Imperial Household Agency (Kunaichō):  応神天皇 (15).  Does this rationale provide a good enough reason for it to be restored? --Enkyo2 (talk) 13:58, 27 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Image of Imperial symbol
Talk:Burgas Province

message: There was a move request to "Oblast", but a small majority was opposed. Radiant_>|< 00:17, 30 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: [Untitled]
Talk:Greifswald

message: I can't quite get behind the concept of adding the Polish word for Greifswald. Why not add French, Italian, Russian, Estonian, Spanish, etc. then, too? Anyway, I took it out. There never was a sizeable Polish speaking population in Greifswald. It would make sense to add the Swedish form, but I don't know it.
To answer your question, Gryfia was a Pomeranian city that had belonged to the Kingdom of Poland before 1199, by all means the Danish monks were NOT the first ones to have settled here, I'm not certain anyone in Germany believes that Greifswald was only settled in 1199 or that it is originally a non-Slavic town,  most people in Greifswald are aware that the city had a clear Slavic Pomeranian history. This German propaganda is way beyond belief,  see the article: Dukes of Pomerania for more. The town was germanized and lost its slavic feel around 1295, the same goes to Wołogoszcz ( Wolgast), Dymin ( Demmin ) and Bardo ( Barth ). As you know Pomerania was a fief of Poland therefore these territories had belonged to Poland at one point. I am not saying that Polish name has to be included but there is a clear feeling among some Poles that the some of the Vorpommern territory incl. Gryfia, Wołogoszcz, Strzalowo ( Stralsund ) should have been given to Poland in 1945 as well. Germans can try to revert history but these territories have a clear Pomeranian past and therefore are very dear to some Poles. VicFromTheBlock
That is the largest nonsense, which I ever read. Here is a Polish
nationalist at the work! Muggmag 11:04, 11 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nationalist bias? 

message: The images are very repetitive. I'll clear some, according to the German article. Feel free to suggest new photos. Ahoi Horst-schlaemma (talk) 18:05, 31 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Illustrations 

message: Why is this place described as a city? Does it have official administrative status as a city? Because it's home to just one-third the number of people as Germany's 50th most populous city/town, it really does seem like a town and not a city.Rayman60 (talk) 19:47, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is it a city? 
Template talk:Non-Aligned Movement

message: This box is way, way too large, especially since many of the countries on it already have many other boxes on them. Is there some way that we could possibly shrink the box down? Snowspinner 20:54, 14 May 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I think it may be too big an organization for a box. You'll note that the United Nations also does not have a series box. I think that, when the box gets this big, it is better to have a sentence or two in the article linking to List of NAM nations than this. Series boxes already get a lot of criticism for being too big - this really just goes over the line. Snowspinner 16:25, 15 May 2004 (UTC)

text: I've blanked the box for the time being, so as not to continue having this hulking thing on all of the pages. I'm not going to go change the articles, so that the "What links here" list can easily be used if someone wants to mention membership in NAM on the actual article list. I would do it, but my knowledge of NAM is limited enough that I'd rather leave it for someone who knows more about it. Snowspinner 18:30, 16 May 2004 (UTC)

text: Note that these boxes are already looking like their days are number due to the discussion on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Countries. Snowspinner 21:20, 17 May 2004 (UTC)

text: It wasn't meant to be. It was meant to clean up your (minor) disruption of Votes for Deletion and convince you to not do it again. -- Cyrius|✎ 18:14, May 22, 2004 (UTC)
so you don`t have an answer? texas box can be big as mountain and to include biggest cities blah blah blah but NAM has to be deleted. nice very nice--Avala 21:43, 22 May 2004 (UTC)

text: The Texas box is not at issue here. -- Cyrius|✎ 22:34, May 22, 2004 (UTC)
i am just making an comparison and you can not tell me where is the difference. there is no difference. i think we should post texas box too if we posted nam.
Avala 13:52, 23 May 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Comments

message: Hey @MirkoS18, I feel like the Members section of the navbox as it is set up right now implies that NAM contains only these 8 member states. I've thought about renaming the section title to "Members and the NAM" (implying the topic of the eight entries currently present) or adding another entry at the end of the list such as "(other member states)". –Vipz (talk) 05:55, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: You are right, and in fact even out of the eight mentioned one is a former state (Yugoslavia) and two are not members anymore (Cyprus and Malta). I would say it's a negative side effect of my personal interest in certain aspects of the topic (Cold War period primarily) as well as the fact that for now there are no other editors working as much in the same area of bilateral NAM topics. Adding the list at the end of the line is therefore certainly a good idea.--MirkoS18 (talk) 09:00, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Alright, I made a change to the navbox that hopefully improves clarity. –Vipz (talk) 09:14, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Members" section
Talk:Battle of Fallujah

message: This is a difficult entry to write with a NPOV, especially since it is about recent events. The sentence Several of these attacks were on minarets of mosques, which were used as fighting positions in violation of the laws of warfare. needs clarifying. Religious buildings are mentioned in the 1977 protocols additional to the 1949 Geneva conventions (which the US didn't ratify), but I don't think they are mentioned in the 1949 Geneva conventions (which the US did ratifty). I have changed 'private mercenaries' to 'contractors' for the time being, as I can find no reliable evidence for the former being true. Betelgeuse 21:13, 14 May 2004 (UTC)
Talk:Acting

message: The info under the Professional Actor was about training/system/courses.  It's better under a heading that says something like that.  I decided to Be Bold and change it. That leaves the Professional Actor heading, which I haven't taken out yet.  I added a definition, along with the existing line about not all being trained and added an example (Bob Hoskins).  (I believe he could be well known some other placed than England, as I believe he may have done a couple of films, as well as the TV we all know him for!!!!) Dannman (talk) 11:31, 30 May 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Professional Actor & Training/System 

message: This article seems to conceive the subject as limited to conventional Western illusionistic speaking theatre. No epic theatre, no Asian theatre traditions ... The section on "Semiotics of Acting" is either fluff or BS; it's best to throw it out completely until the structure of this article somehow does justice to the broad field of theatre aesthetics. Wegesrand (talk) 10:48, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Wikipedia has been accused of having a systemic bias.  Frequently, the articles are written from a modern, Western viewpoint, as this reflects the background of the majority of its editors.  Google Books might be a good place to search for sources to expand the article.  Beyond that, I'm not exactly sure what to suggest, as I'm not overly well-informed on the topic. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 19:57, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
replies: text:  In addition to the Western bias, I suspect a certain amount of pop-culture bias is at work here too. Wegesrand (talk) 14:51, 14 August 2015 (UTC)
replies: text:  It's a mess from start to end. I've trimmed away some of the most obviously incorrect material, but it all needs substantial work.  • DP •  {huh?} 17:14, 30 August 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Woefully limited and perhaps outdated 

message: Looking at the content of the two subject articles, it appears that the article [Acting] has more content relevant to the topic of actors (e.g., Resume and Auditioning, Stress, Training), while the article [Actor] has more content relevant to acting (History, Types, media). I'm not sure how to address the problem. Maybe a merge? Rewrite each? Swap content? I don't know, but if the two are articles are kept, I think at least there should be some kind of understanding about the scope of each. Sparkie82 (t•c) 20:44, 8 May 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Differentiating the articles: [[Acting]] vs. [[Actor]]
Talk:Hendecagon

message: What is the Susan B Anthony Dollar? Thanks! Mark Richards 21:24, 14 May 2004 (UTC)

message: Math equation extends far off page. Can anyone look into a way of fixing this? Beyond my scope.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jhahner18 (talk • contribs) 02:14, 10 January 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: This edit was the culprit. Fixed, thanks. Don't know why nobody else noticed in a year and a half. —David Eppstein (talk) 05:23, 10 January 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Equation extends off page
Talk:Pronic number

message: How about
:
    	    	    	
12+1	22+2	32+3	42+4
Hyacinth (talk) 22:08, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: What do you think this adds relative to the existing image? —David Eppstein (talk) 22:17, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: n squared plus n

message: Nth pronic number is just the nth triangular number times 2. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Santropedro (talk • contribs) 
:It's also the nth square number plus its square root. Should we merge with square numbers then, too? —David Eppstein (talk) 06:56, 1 August 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge with triangular numbers: they are just their doubles. 

message: I removed this bit: If  is a pronic number, then the following is true:
: \lfloor{\sqrt{n}}\rfloor \cdot \lceil{\sqrt{n}}\rceil = n 
If x = a x b, then root(x) is equal to a or b if they are equal, and somewhere between a and b if they are different. So obviously if a and b differ by 1, the root is somewhere between then, and rounding the root down gives one, rounding it up gives the other. Imaginatorium (talk) 19:21, 30 November 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: It's an easy-to-prove statement, based on the argument you give, but it's not vacuous. It describes a property that is not true of most other numbers (although it is of course also true of the squares). —David Eppstein (talk) 20:23, 30 November 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vacuous statement 

message: Are the illustrations with Cuisenaire rods actually helpful to some users in demonstrating or explaining various properties? (For me, they are more befuddling than anything else.) IMO, if we use images, a better use is the illustration of two equal triangular configurations combining to form an  by  rectangular configuration.  --Lambiam 14:28, 1 March 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with you, both that Hyacinth's Cuisenaire images are confusing and that the two-triangle image is a better choice. —David Eppstein (talk) 17:05, 1 March 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Rods are out, balls it is.  --Lambiam 13:11, 6 March 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cuisenaire rods
Talk:John Young

message: ----
I turned this page into a disambiguation page, moving the Australian and US politicians to their own pages, and reformatted to wiki style a bit.  Does anyone know if the John Young who was the US Navy officer is someone distinct from the astronaut?  The astronaut was in fact an officer in the Navy.
FelineAvenger 22:57, 14 May 2004 (UTC)

message: : * John Young (bishop) (1578–1605), English
:: info for editors: "...of Rochester" ==> English: Rochester, NY#Founding and early history sez founded 1800s
: * John Young (brewer) (died 2006), business manager
:: info for editors:  Chairman of brewers Young & Co
: * John Young (coach), in soccer 
:: info for editors: soccer coach in the North American Soccer League
: * John Young (cyclist) (fl. c. 1960), Australian 
:: info for editors: winner of 1958 Herald Sun Tour
: * John Young (professor) (c. 1555), English
:: info for editors: presumably 1555 is a fl. date; Regius Professor of Divinity at Cambridge
: * John Young (publisher) (fl. 1698–1732), English 
:: info for editors: publisher of later editions of The Dancing Master (that's the Playford dances)
: * John Young (sociologist) (fl. 1980s), 
:: info for editors: sociologist who opposed the opinions of the DIMPAC report
: * John Young (soccer) (1872–1958)
:: info for editors: , member of the U.S. National Soccer Hall of Fame
: * John Young (SOE) (fl. c. 1940), British spy  
:: info for editors: field agent
: * John Freeman Young, American religious leader 
:: info for editors: Second Episcopal Church bishop of Florida and translator of the carol "Silent Night"
: * John Frederick Young (1871–1890), Canadian songwriter 
:: info for editors:  ("My Own Canadian Home")
--Jerzy•t 18:27, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Potential future entries
Talk:Sweet Polly Oliver

message: This song is an old english tune - it has no copyrights attached to it!
:Is it? Can you provide a source showing how old it is? Is there anything exceptional about the song which makes an encyclopaedia article for it desirable, because Wikipedia is not a lyrics repository. -- Jim Regan 00:16, 15 May 2004 (UTC)
replies: text:  Benjamin Britten set it to music. And a composer's musical works may be given their own articles on WP. CRCulver 22:21, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Wu

message: True or false: These articles about different things named "Wu" can be put on separate pages and this page can be put into a dis-ambiguation page. 66.32.132.150 00:14, 15 May 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Disambiguation page

message: Please add also a link to information about the "Wu" typing method, used for writing Traditional Chinese. Since "Wu_method" is already taken, I suggest "Wu_method(typing)" or similar.
87.186.89.38 (talk) 00:00, 15 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: More Uses Of "Wu"
Wikipedia talk:Content disclaimer/Archive 2

message: How do you think about Wikipedia has no responsibility about the contents of external pages to be included in each article that contains external links? optim
:It is obvious that Wikipedia has no control over the contents of external pages, and I for one am getting pissed off about the number of disclaimers floating around. --snoyes 18:53, 16 Dec 2003 (UTC)
replies: text: What problem is this a solution to? Martin 19:24, 16 Dec 2003 (UTC)

text: I see no point. I think that it is obvious that we aren't responsible for other internent sites. Just my 1 franc. Also, many articles include links, and there haven't been any problems with people blaming wikipedia for their content.  Greenmountainboy 19:31, 16 Dec 2003 (UTC)
replies: text: It would seem to be stating the obvious that we have no control over external sites, but having said that, a lot of sites do include such a disclaimer. Maybe just a note in Wikipedia:About would be a good idea if people feel it is an issue. I certainly wouldn't want it appended to every external link though! Angela. 21:05, 16 Dec 2003 (UTC)
replies: text: My opinion: All disclaimers and such should be stated on About wikipedia or such, with the exception of maybe the spoiler warning. I too see no reason to state the obvious every here and there.  — Sverdrup (talk) 21:11, 16 Dec 2003 (UTC)

text: I thought that a disclaimer like this might be a good idea for articles that contain external links that the reader could find questionable or offensive. Sorry I was at the netcafe and I hadn't enough time to explain my point very well. I propose such a disclaimer to be included in some page like About and also in every article that contain questionable external links. I just want to make sure that the Wikipedia reader will understand that we give the links only for informative purposes. Such a disclaimer would be probably useful for articles regarding politics and sex etc. I thought about this when I was adding some links about culture & politics in some article, but because I knew that some people (esp. in my country) could find the material very questionable, I added a small disclaimer under the External links section. Then, I thought that it would be better first to ask other wikipedians about their opinion on this disclaimer, so I removed it and I asked this question here. Thanks for your answers. Optim 23:17, 16 Dec 2003 (UTC)
replies: text: Seems unnecessary.  This is the type of warning we used to see 5 years ago from companies fearing the unfamiliar.  Our big "Wikipedia" boilerplate stuff at the top and left of each page is enough to let people know whether they're still on Wikipedia.  Tempshill 01:49, 17 Dec 2003 (UTC)

text: I think its good practice to describe quite fully what lies beyond an external link whether its liable to be offensive or not. Pete/Pcb21 (talk) 02:27, 17 Dec 2003 (UTC)

text: We already warn users if a link is offensive (see Shock site), so this has already been addressed. Greenmountainboy 03:51, 17 Dec 2003 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wikipedia has no responsibility about the contents of external pages
Talk:Bibi Pak Daman

message: I can't find any other mentions of this tomb on the Web. Does anyone have a cite? -- The Anome 01:08, 15 May 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Book : http://www.marfat.com/BookDetailPage.aspx?bookId=bda6e9bd-e96a-43af-882f-2b8517dcbb05 Taseer007 (talk) 10:32, 1 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: 2004 comment

message: Some scholars consider Ruqayah to have been the daughter of Sayid Ahmed Tokhta (12th century). How one can rely on the legend, in view of difference in period:
*1. In the period of Mahmud of Ghazni his army  general Malik Ayaz  arranged the construction of Khanqah for these ladies, during their stay in Lahore.  This reference is earlier to 12th Century. See History of Shiyan-e-Ali,  by Ali Hussain Rizvi (in Urdu Language) published through Imamia Academy, Karachi 2nd Edition-(2006) Pages 734 to 736 Chapter-Bibi Pak Daman.
*2. If Data Gunj Bakhsh was a devotee of Bibi Pak Daman,  who died in 1077 CE.
Thus legend of  wife of Muslim ibn Aqeel is the acceptable legend. Nannadeem (talk) 21:40, 31 July 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Daughters of Sayid Ahmed Tokhta