lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Cicely Mary Barker

message: It's a pity that the first external link continuously spells Croydon wrong, the town where Cicely Mary Barker was born and lived for a long time. I have added the local link with the town for this reason.  Dieter Simon 15:38, 17 Apr 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Untitled 
Talk:Night of the Stormrider

message: After buying the remastered version of the album - on the inside of the booklet contains the original artwork and one alternate artwork, the same applies for IE. Should those be included, too, in the Alternate Cover section?
I'll show you what I mean:
http://www.truemetal.org/metalwallpaper/images/nightofthestormrider.jpg
That's the "other" cover for Night of the Stormrider. There are similar ones for Iced Earth. Check there too.Mattz1010 14:42, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't see what the problem is - both of the covers are there... The link you have is of the original cover but very dark... take a second look.  Also, I've done the same for Iced Earth and Burnt Offerings in case you are wondering.  Dan 18:22, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Second Alternative Cover?
Talk:COMSEC equipment

message: att, I'm inclined to disagree, as COMSEC equipment is different than commun secur. A related topic certainly, but not quite a subset even. 
And, many folks have a fascination with the equipment itself. Note the number of websites etc which deal with it. 
It's not my interest particularly, but I think this article desrves a substantial expansion. Battle of Wits has some comments on RAM equipment, that, as one interested in the history of computers I find fascinating. Most of that might find a place here. 
ww 15:52, 17 Apr 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed. — Matt 15:57, 17 Apr 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge [[COMSEC]] ?
Talk:Red Pike (cipher)

message: Matt, I didn't know about this. YANE of US provincalism, I suppose. Is CSRG actually trying the Clipper thing over there? Will the suits and 'crats never learn to think clearly!!?  Maybe it's really Skipjack and they're trying to hide the evidence of plagarism? 
Sign me, disgusted. ww 16:12, 17 Apr 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Heh, yes, there was some fuss at the time (Ross Anderson being a particularly vocal opponent). I'm not sure what the ultimate resolution is, but I presume the issue was dropped, since I can't find any reference to it more recent than about 1997...we should prob include some dates. — Matt 16:22, 17 Apr 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Matt, I think it is probably useful in this context (ie WP) to note both the opposition and why the opposition, at least briefly. This is a relevant issue, and now that I bring it up, I guess I'd better go check at Skipjack and see if these points are covered there. Thaks for info. ww 17:28, 17 Apr 2004 (UTC)
Talk:Eye on Springfield

message: Did you know that the firey tire pile was started in year Jebidiah Springfield so called founded springfield it's said that he lit a match and burnt his leg and a tree burnt but nothing else caught on fire. So trough Summer,Winter,Spring,and Fall the tree burned.So as the town of Springfield grew people started putting flat tires there and thats what started the pile of firey tires. 199.97.121.99 16:40, 17 Apr 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Simpson'sFan
Talk:1 centimetre

message: I removed a note about the length of napoleon's toenails, as it was added: 20:31, 25 July 2005 by 69.162.101.23 and added in the Napoleon article on 20:25, 25 July 2005 by the same annon.  Semi-subtle vandalism. JesseW 17:30, 4 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Napoleon's toenails
Talk:USND at Hoople

message: I deliberately didn't link to Hoople as I thought they'd probably had enough grief from PDQ and his academic followers. On the other hand...
ww 17:45, 17 Apr 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hoople, ND 

message: N, Certainly it's fiction, but saying so immediately kills the amusement. Is there a WP policy which forces this? ww 17:12, 19 Apr 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Have restored amusement potential, as have gotten no response to query. ww 17:07, 30 Apr 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fiction 

message: I'd forgotten WOOF the radio station. Thanks for including it. Unfortunately, I think that all the " " around things and similar warnings have lost the article most of its attraction. No reader can now have the delight of figuring out that it's a spoof after missing a hint or two. Too flat footed in my opinion. In short, I think we've lost just about all the tone. Prof S has gone to considerable effort to construct a spoof -- and to hardly any effort to keep it secret beyond the surface. We've lost all of that by now, I think, and that quality is perhaps the most significant aspect of the entire PDQ / USND at Hoople effort. Should WP play such a spoiler role in such cases? Comments? ww 18:52, 14 Jul 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: There is an actual station WOOF (560 AM) in Dothan, Alabama. Their web page seems to make no reference whatever to their fictional Hoople cousin. Snezzy (talk) 02:15, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  WOOF 

message: The University, even a fictional one such as this, by definition cannot be a composer, although its "proprietor", Schikele, certainly is.  Rlquall 04:27, 13 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Oh, for Pete's sake! 

message: Moving this external link to Talk.Fails WP:VERIFY (Somebody's page of joke photos is not a reliable source, no matter what they or we pretend.)Fails WP:NOT (Wikipedia is not a humor/hoax site.)*Alleged photographs of the University of Southern North Dakota at Hoople
-- Writtenonsand (talk) 21:43, 30 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  These policies / guidelines should apply 

message: Actually, I think this is far and away one of the more amusing WP entries I've encountered – the conceit that USND at Hoople is a fictional creation is worthy of Swift, Carlyle, Orson Welles – or Buckaroo Banzai!!! (Sincerely Secretly Yours, John Whorfin, Esq) AtomikWeasel (talk) 03:24, 11 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Yet Another Section Title
Talk:Skipjack (cipher)

message: I can't verify the below suggestion; anyone have a source? Schneier's Crypto-gram article implies that he has a different theory to this. 
:Some, including Bruce Schneier, have suggested this was done as a part a NSA initiative to have Skipjack adopted as a standard encryption algorithm.
— Matt 10:04, 18 Apr 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Matt, It was my memory of Scheier's account from which I wrote this. You seem to have checked Schneier and I've summarized it wrongly, I take it? I've made a note to check for myself. ww 17:34, 18 Apr 2004 (UTC)
replies: text:  There's a link at end of article to the only Schneier comment I could find — Matt 17:38, 18 Apr 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Matt, Mea culpa. That was (I'm pretty sure) what I had in mind. Wider adoption of Skipjack by various folks isn't exactly a standard is it? ww 18:32, 18 Apr 2004 (UTC)

text: Oops — I didn't realise it was also a fish! (Also various boats, it seems). Skipjack (cipher) would bring it in line with the other dab'd ciphers — Matt 10:40, 19 Apr 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Schneier suggestion about adopting Skipjack as a standard

message: The article claims that there is a slide attack on 32 rounds of Skipjack.  Are you sure?  I can't think of what that might refer to.  I think the claim should be deleted; it does not sound right to me, and I consider myself reasonably familiar with the research literature on cryptanalysis of Skipjack.  Also, it is not documented or cited, which further strengthens my skepticism.
63.197.31.112 (talk) 00:29, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: 32 rounds still secure

message: Guys, the paper attacking 31 rounds clearly states that their attack is only slightly better than brute-force checking of all the keys. I've added a comment.
I hope you approve.
Max  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.205.213.166 (talk) 04:58, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: The fact that it breaks 31 rounds, not 32, means it's a theoretical attack to begin with and can't be applied to the real cipher. How fast it is, is mostly irrelevant to theoretical attacks. -- intgr [talk] 20:15, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: 31 nearly secure
Talk:List of NPR personnel

message: Seems like there is a lot of confusion between NPR and PRI shows and personalities. Perhaps we should just move this to List of U.S. public radio personalities? Bkonrad | Talk 20:10, 17 Apr 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: This list still includes many people who don't actually work for NPR.  NPR itself only produces the "flagship" news programs and the four-minute hourly newscasts.  18.26.0.5 (talk) 17:08, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: [Untitled]

message: The link for the NPR reporter Peter Kenyon goes to the wrong Peter Kenyon (the CEO of the Chelsea football club). The should a new personal page, and most likely a disambiguation page, but I am enough of a newbie not to try to attempt it.--Nufftin 20:05, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  2 Peter Kenyons 

message: Article needs clarity on "legacy" programs and personalities.  Example, Neil Conan and "Talk of the Nation" are no longer on the air.  And Marian McPartland has passed away (August 2013) but the program that she hosted is still titled "Marian McPartland's Piano Jazz" on the NPR website... so should she be included in this list or not?  Finally, Corey Flintoff once did newscasts but is only a foreign correspondent now.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Craig Collins 108.250.184.53 (talk) 10:05, 1 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Deceased/Past Personalities
Talk:TV-Turnoff Week

message: Does this article really need all these redirects?
Simon Arlott 21:13, 17 Apr 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Pretty much, if it's to be found. Wikipedia doesn't find mixed case titles like this (unless the user happens to type it exactly as listed), and the hyphen usage for the occasion varies between countries. The "network" ones are mostly because I didn't see the need to create an article for the organization, and if someone's looking for it, it is probably in relation to the week. If someone feels the network is notable enuf to have its own page, then the "network" redirs should point to it, for the same reasons as the "week" article. Niteowlneils 21:12, 18 Apr 2004 (UTC)
Talk:Truth/insults?

message: This section is an ongoing list to deflate some of Banno's many uninteligible or redundant statements and make them more comprehendible.
#"positing a definition of truth" - defining truthBensaccount 16:52, 17 Apr 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Why do you feel the need to adopt such a rude and belligerent attitude? Banno 21:20, Apr 17, 2004 (UTC)
If you make a simple point that I disagree with and you use confounding language and phrasing I have to clarify it before I can dispute it. If you arent intentionally confounding your points to make them difficult to argue, I am sorry; but if you are, you deserve to feel insulted.  "So, if pigs fly, if pigs do indeed fly, then it's true that pigs fly" - From the former deflationary theory of truth - Bensaccount 21:52, 17 Apr 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Deflating Banno's unintelligibility
Talk:Victoria Beckham

message: Under “Power and Influence,” the conversion of pounds to dollars is incorrect.  It should be closer to $125 m, not $225 m. 173.72.18.72 (talk) 03:47, 18 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Currency conversion 

message: (Edit reopened with new references)
Add " Songwriter " to Victoria Beckhams occupations.
 
She has many writing credits, such as on majority of "Spice Girls" songs, and has writing credits on her own Solo songs.
References:
*When viewing the writing credits on the "Spice" album, Victoria Beckham has writing credits on every song.Spice album on Spotify
*On the website "Lyrics.lyricfind.com" she is labeled as one of the writers under numerous songs on various Spice Girl albums.Say You'll Be ThereSpice Up Your LifeStop
*Her solo album titled "Victoria Beckham", she has also been credited on songs such as "A Mind Of Its Own", "Like That" and "Girlfriend" under the name "V Beckham"Victoria Beckham album on Spotify
: Not done: you need to provide reliable sources that describe her as a songwriter. M.Bitton (talk) 23:53, 19 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 17 January 2024
Talk:American President Lines

message: So:There!\Jesus:'I Am',[Ex3:14!]:THNX.Lrding U,for My Death,'74,{6 Mo.Coma!}:Just to allow me free opp.to Pursue my,Re2:4,"1st.Love!",which='s U,also! U did mention,Jesus,that U were,"All,in All, etc.!" 24.183.145.185 (talk) 17:20, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  "APL"=Only K.Iverson's,Programming L.! ALL Else=Bolderdashfull Baloney!/How will,"Standing",get me,67 y.o.Virgin,married to,"AllaLynne"?<=THNX.Jesus!:Amen!!!
Talk:Western Coal Field

message: It bothers me when the MediaWiki table is bigger than the entire article.  RickK 01:53, 18 Apr 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: You ain't kidding. I'm beginning to be less and less a fan of those boxes with each passing day. -- Decumanus | Talk 01:54, 18 Apr 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: In a case like this, someone more knowledgeable about the area could easily make it significantly bigger than the table! jaknouse 03:02, 19 Apr 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: We're going to try and remedy the situation. Wanna help? see Wikipedia:WikiProject Kentucky -- CQ 00:42, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:MC ADE

message: Article listed on Wikipedia:Votes for deletion Apr 18 to Apr 24 2004, kept as consensus not reached.  Discussion:
* Existed since 2002 as a single line of dubious quality. --Tagishsimon
* Keep.  The line is dubious, but the artist is real--albums listed on amazon.com.  Should actually be "MC Ade"--so make this into a redirect to a stub article with the proper capitalization.  Postdlf 00:59 18 Apr 2004 (UTC)
*Redirect Bensaccount 03:54, 22 Apr 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: VfD
Talk:Percival's sister

message: Who were her parents?  Was Elaine able to trick Lancelot twice?  RickK 06:06, 18 Apr 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Percival's parents weren't Elaine and Lancelot; that was Galahad. Percival was the son of King Pellinore and his wife. 92.17.128.229 (talk) 13:48, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Graham Hancock

message: under the “pseudoarcheology” section it is claimed that hancock is linked to racism and white supremacy, the evidence of which are quotes from people who actively oppose hancock. Why would on a scientific description of a persons career include opinions instead of fact, especially opinions that demean and discredit the career? 216.175.38.109 (talk) 00:01, 26 March 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Because Wikipedia is based primarily on reliable secondary sources.  Cheers. Dumuzid (talk) 00:03, 26 March 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: This is false as the page currently written on Graham Hancock is not based on any reliable source as all sources cited here are of biased opinion with no supporting evidence thus not a reliable source even if its written by self proclaimed professionals this interpretation of Grahams work is biased and a insult to Wikipedia and its integrity to uphold the most accurate information 2605:8D80:6E3:1D35:4CD2:514B:99FB:F090 (talk) 14:11, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: In Wikipedia, "reliable" is not defined as "agrees with the opinion of 2605:8D80:6E3:1D35:4CD2:514B:99FB:F090". Instead, it is defined as described in WP:RS. --Hob Gadling (talk) 14:35, 5 April 2024 (UTC)

text: They seem to be attributed, so they are statements of opinion, not of fact. Slatersteven (talk) 11:15, 26 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  claims of racism with no evidence? 

message: Hes a journalist not a scientist or archeologist 2605:8D80:6E3:1D35:4CD2:514B:99FB:F090 (talk) 14:02, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Where do we say he is? Slatersteven (talk) 14:12, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  False information provided  

message: It's probably not worth adding, but in GH's "debate" with Flint Dibble on Rogan's show, he stated that this Wik article on him was written by one archaeologist  and that editing it was blocked.  I just checked:  its editing is restricted but not blocked, per Wik procedure on controversial living individuals. And there is a host of (often "warring") editors working on this site. 136.36.180.215 (talk) 16:31, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, indeed. I watched the interview and was surprised by the claim. If something is contested, a discussion can be opened. The majority of objections went towards the claims of using "racist" sources and not being able to edit that out of Wikipeida (as far as I can remember). I can even see this reddit post . I've personally never been involved in this article. I've just read what the article says, and I can attest it just reports what SAA published.  Bilseric (talk) 00:33, 4 May 2024 (UTC)

text: As his debate with Flint showed time and time again, Hancock isn't afraid to make claims that anyone can easily disprove: more than 50 people have collaborated on this article. – Joe (talk) 07:28, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text:  I think he was referring to the parts that bother him, not the whole article. But at least with reporting who said what, there should be no complaints towards Wiki. Things were said and those are just reported here.  Bilseric (talk) 21:55, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Disingenuous
Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Croat Catholic Ustashi clergy

message: *From the vfd page: irrelevant to the discussion.
**c) I removed your stating something about someone which at the very least was insulting. Pfortuny 09:51, 17 Apr 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: It is a fact that user Igor has in a sense been vandalizing for a while all pages concerning Croatia and Croatians, not just inserting his POV, he also does the same thing on pages about Bosnia and Bosniaks. On his talk page he’s now sworn to me that he’ll follow me around and revert all my edits. The guy has problems, he’s a major problem maker with his own shady agenda. He’s acting like he’s on some God given mission to give wikipedia a Serbian radical POV. To sum it up, he’s trolling and spreading hate. And in addition he’s trying to intimidate users who don’t share his radical, revisionist worldview. --GeneralPatton 23:30, 18 Apr 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Another lie by you, he just said "now in spite I'll go after you and correct everything" (emphasis mine). Can't blame him after your ZDS... Nikola    07:44, 19 Apr 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: What he said was pretty much “don’t play with big boys (as in he is one), to show you im a rough guy,  I’ll go after you and revert all your stuff”, but the fact is he’s acting like a high school bully, of course he knows most of the people here don’t know the language, you can translate it in any manner you want, and completely distort the truth by your translation, the same methods are by the way being used by the British revisionist historian David Irving who by tinkering with the translations is trying to downplay the Holocaust. And Nikola, please stop labeling, im not calling you nor your friend names, so please try to be mature. And also, what are these other lies of mine? And please, don't provocate any more. --GeneralPatton 12:26, 19 Apr 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: No he didn't, you lie again. There are more people here who know Serbian, don't worry. Nikola    21:01, 19 Apr 2004 (UTC)
Talk:Shorten (codec)

message: It should be noted that an identical digital signal does not guarantee identical audio output.
User:TMC1221, consider the use of such a signal on different audio equipment. Mr. Jones 08:46, 18 Apr 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay. The statement as written had no such provision. I'm replacing the statement with the different hardware notation. TMC1221 17:39, Apr 18, 2004 (UTC)
I put a short note in this article (given that this is apparently an obsolete/deprecated format) just so that people are aware (if they don't follow the logic of lossless versus lossy) that there is no harm whatsoever in converting from Shorten to FLAC, etc. Plushpuffin (talk) 20:55, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

message: The three sections on converting on Mac, Windows, and Linux should be deleted as Wikipedia is not a how to. Though it's probably what most people are looking for, so I left it. SchmuckyTheCat (talk) 14:10, 9 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: How to guides

message: Hello @SchmuckyTheCat, would you mind reading back the sentence of the latest edit made for thee page here: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Shorten_(codec)&diff=1153981105
There’s the typo of « already » that was written with a missing « e », but I didn’t change it since I’m not sure to understand what « used to trade concert recordings » means.
Thanks for your continued work on Wikipedia! Aeiouyaeiouy (talk) 23:41, 25 May 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I corrected the spelling and included a link. I hope that addresses your concerns. SchmuckyTheCat (talk) 14:04, 26 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Review sentence of recent edit
Talk:List of people associated with the French Revolution

message: Ben Mizrahi|| Legend Please explain this entry.
Quite a while back, I inserted the "Please explain this entry." request.  Who was Ben Mizrahi anyway?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.63.16.82 (talk) 20:30, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  What is the following doing in the entry?
Talk:Doomsday argument

message: This source: https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2022/04/quantifying-human-existence/ says that around 117 billions humans have ever lived and I thought this was common knowledge; the article relies on the wrong premise that only 60 billion humans have been born so far.
Use: YlmbWP 8 Oct 2022  — Preceding unsigned comment added by YlmbWP (talk • contribs) 17:15, 8 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Page is out of date? 

message: Current article fails to mention the simplest rebuttal constructed thus far: Elon Musk's admitted aim of creating a multi-planetary human species in the foreseeable future. By disseminating Homo Sapiens throughout the Solar System first and then among the stars and galaxies, it becomes ever less likely that any natural or intentional force could exterminate ALL the people. (Unless whoever said Fiat Lux! eventually says Lights out! - but that possibility lies firmly outside the domain of science.) 78.131.76.69 (talk) 22:10, 15 December 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: This is already addressed in the article. If something happens that significantly increases the ability of humans to survive hardship (meteor, or whatever), then humans today may expect to be in the first 5%, which is the first rebuttal listed.  Replace cyborg with extra-planetary inhabitant. Closhund (talk) 18:42, 22 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Elonite rebuttal omitted? 

message: What is the point of an argument with a ridiculous premise; 'the total number of humans that will exist is fixed'? 49.186.53.128 (talk) 02:01, 10 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  What's the point?