lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Joe Morton

message: This comment wouldn't survive in his bio because it is based upon opinion, but does anyone else think that his death scene in Terminator 2 is one of the best incidents of personal sacrifice in motion picture.  Whenever I watch T2 I always reflect upon that scene and how that character went from being responsible for the creation of a device that would kill billions to giving his life in an attempt to stop that future from coming to pass.  When he takes his last breath and dies (and thus drops the weight) it is like the real weight has been lifted from his shoulders.
I think it is perhaps one of the best scenes to capture self sacrifice in film, but I realize that such things can not be put in the encyclopedia so I decided to discuss it, heh.
He was on House as well, playing a senator.
Should we also note that he was in X-Files?  Episode #167-806 called 'Redrum' from season 8? 148.166.12.204 (talk) 19:48, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: I came here because as I am writing, I happen to be watching an episode of Mission Impossible and I see Joe Morton in this episode (Hunted) and I am not sure of the year, but this looks to be one of his earliest works.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.234.233.203 (talk) 03:41, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  First Apearance? 

message: ...That Mr. Morton's resume doesn't include his indie movie "The Brother From another Planet"!  Nor even his first TV series, produced by PBS-TV "Watch Your Mouth", where he aptly played a dedicated high school teacher amid a group of diverse and sometimes troubled group of studentds --69.119.73.36 (talk) 01:38, 19 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Astonishing And Amazing 

message: Morton confirmed that he signed a three movie deal, saying “It was set up as a three picture deal. The first being Batman v Superman: Dawn Of Justice, the second one being Justice League and the third one being the Cyborg film." But the third film is "contingent on how these movies do. So far, Wonder Woman has done really well, and we’re hoping that Justice League does equally as well.” Because whatever Morton signed was based on a contingency — the specific details of which he has not disclosed (i.e., what constitutes as "doing well") — and considering the requirements of WP:BLP its inclusion in the article should be viewed as apocryphal. — SpintendoTalk 20:57, 16 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cyborg solo film
Talk:Interstate 469

message: Is this right? I can't remember if U.S. 24 followed U.S. 30 or went around the other way on I-469. Also, does Indiana 37 end at I-469, or closer to Fort Wayne? —Rob (talk) 17:19, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  U.S. Highway movements in Fort Wayne 

message: Why is this article a stub. The article is long enough to classify as normal page length. This article is like about 4 pages long, and they cover like enough important fact. I think we should just remove the stub tag.--Freewayguy (Webmail) 01:26, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Having a 2-sentence route description for a 30-mile Interstate is incredibly disappointing. —Scott5114↗ [EXACT CHANGE ONLY] 04:22, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Not only that, it needs references. —Rob (talk) 20:29, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Removal of stub

message: , I doubt I will review for GA, but growing up in the area I remember a botched construction project (maybe 2008 or so?) which was finally mostly fixed by 2012 or so I believe. I remember the right westbound lane was practically unusable, every few feet there were huge dips in the road. You can probably find some sources for it, the initial project was expensive and fixing it was expensive as well. Kees08 (Talk) 06:42, 22 January 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Also, based on the location of the Wabash Erie Canal that they found, I am pretty sure there is a historical marker there now. I always wanted to stop there and check it out and never did...mostly because it was right off another highway. Not sure if it was significant enough, but there was also a windstorm that blew down a few signs that had to be put back up. Sorry for the probably useless information, just excited someone is writing about that region of the US for once! Kees08 (Talk) 06:48, 22 January 2019 (UTC)
replies: text:  There might be some info about the botched construction and windstorm, though I have to wonder if it's noteworthy; there are tons of articles about minor construction projects which wouldn't be worthy per WP:NOTNEWS.  I too am always glad to find editors interested in the Northeast Indiana region, as I don't tend to meet a lot of them for where I usually contribute to Wikipedia.  Red Phoenix talk 14:48, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Sounds good. I will try to find information on the construction this weekend. I do not remember the specifics, but I do remember they messed up the entire highway, so it was a huge cost and not minor construction. I know people that live in the area as well, so I might be able to grab a picture if there are none on Commons now. Kees08 (Talk) 18:34, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Construction
Talk:Battle of Mormant

message: Does this battle even exist, and is if it does, is it a defeat or victory?
is plagiarism legal on wikipedia?
http://www.answers.com/topic/battle-of-mormans —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.235.163.110 (talk • contribs) 05:02, 6 December 2005.
:Because of the fact that Wikipedia is under the GNU Free Documentation License, Wikipedia articles are free content, so anyone can copy from them, as long as it's not used for commercial redistribution. Websites that copy from Wikipedia include Answers.com and NationMaster. --Hottentot 06:12, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

message: So what is it?  French Wiki calls it the Battle of Mormant.  It was fought in Mormant.  I think this was a typo.
Fnpmplf  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fnpmplf (talk • contribs) 14:14, 17 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Mormant or Mormans

message: Reply to preceding comments: Djmaschek (talk) 01:34, 16 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Replies to comments
Talk:Battle of Mookerheyde

message: The article states that a mass grave was found in 1870 near the Groesbeekseweg. I have never heard of this, source? --P.wormer 18:15, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mass grave source 

message: The Duke of Alba is governor of the Netherlands only until 1573, he leaves the region soon after being replace by Don Luis de Requenses, it is unlikely he had any role to play in this battleMaharbbal (talk) 22:27, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Duke of Alba
Talk:Battle of Monastir

message: Name of the town is Bitola not Monastir,so it`s changed. --CrniBombarder!!! | † 18:31, 9 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Move to [[Battle of Bitola]]

message: I have rechecked the references here.  On Google, there are about equal numbers of reference to Battle of Bitola and Monastir (partly because WP mirrors use 'Bitola').  But on Google Books, there are about 10x as many references to M as to B.  If we restrict to publications after 1990 (to exclude old-fashioned material based on old Britannicas etc.) we go down to 3x as many.  Google Scholar has too few (4:2) references to be interesting....  So it still seems as though the English name of this battle is "Battle of Monastir", which is not surprising since that was the name of the city at the time the battle took place. --macrakis (talk) 04:32, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Unnecessary clarification. I was not worried that you could be convinced by me. --Factuarius (talk) 19:59, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  Heh ;-) Don't worry, I sometimes get convinced through the strangest of sources. But it just so happened that Macrakis hit the most relevant argument here: there isn't a general rule that we always use names contemporary to the historical events we talk about. The general rule is merely that we use whatever is most commonly used in English sources today. Conceivably, English sources might or might not have shifted to the new name for this context; in this case apparently they didn't. Fut.Perf. ☼ 21:05, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  Aaa..Understand..After 5 years trying, WP failed to persuade the world to change the name of the battle and now has to go back to the old one. Hope to be more lucky with the name of “Macedonia”. Anyway unlike some friends around I do believe that you are a Greek but I don't want to tell you why because sometime you will be again admin and..I remember very well what that means. But that's irrelevant with the article. The end is good everything is good (ref. Giagia mou). --Factuarius (talk) 05:20, 15 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Move back to [[Battle of Monastir]]
Talk:Battle of Modder River

message: These do not look correct, especially given the effectiveness of the Boer strategy.  At least one source agrees with me... Socrates2008 10:15, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I am tempted to remove the "disputed accuracy" tag. The BB site gives 450 British casualties, not broken down into dead and wounded; the article gives 70 dead and 415 wounded for a total of 485. The BB site gives 75 Boer casualties, the article 150, which might well be replaced by the BB figure. Most sources agree with the sequence of events and results. The "disputed accuracy" tag ought to be reserved for articles with major POV, or bias, or unproven scientific claims. HLGallon (talk) 03:15, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Casualty Numbers
Talk:Battle of Mine Creek

message: The lead section of this article contains a statement to the effect that this battle was "the largest military engagement west of the Mississippi River."  Considering the strength figures given for the Battle of Westport (widely considered to be the decisive battle in Price's Missouri Campaign), and comparing them to those given for this engagement, I can't see it. - Ecjmartin (talk) 01:27, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Largest military engagement west of the Mississippi River?" 
Talk:Battle of Minden

message: Corrected the inaccuracy concerning the court-martial of Sackville after the battle. He requested said trail voluntarily, it was not imposed upon him. Rockfall 17:28, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: In the text it says that "the French lost between 10,000 and 11,000 men," in the side box it says "7,086 killed, wounded or missing." roger.duprat.copenhagen
: Fixed. Rebel Redcoat (talk) 23:29, 19 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Discrepancy re. numbers of French casualties 

message: "Two Batteries from the Royal Regiment of Artillery carry the Minden battle honour." This sentence appears in the 'Minden in regimental tradition' section. 
It could do with a spot of re-wording, because as far as I know, the Royal Artillery does not have any battle honours - apart from their guns. The nearest they have, is the word 'Ubique' (Everywhere), like the Royal Engineers. Unless things have changed drastically since I was 'in'.
RASAM (talk) 21:45, 2 October 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Battle Honours
Talk:Battle of Mikatagahara

message: I moved Battle of Mikata ga Hara to this page to match the naming conventions used in the spelling of other places and battles (eg. Battle of Sekigahara).  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Douggers (talk • contribs) 01:15, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Merging

message: on the other sites it says that the battle of mikatagahara was fought on january 6th, and I'm sure that it was written here too but now suddenly it is january 25th. :S  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.250.100.106 (talk) 22:20, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Question 

message: So according to this article Tokugawa was outnumbered three to one, and he was facing one of the most powerful warlords of the era. Then, in less than one day, he was able to drive out the attacking force and hold the castle they had come to take. How exactly is this a defeat for Tokugawa? I have noticed a tendency to downplay the life and abilities of Tokugawa in post Meiji Restoration histories, I think this article might also be suffering from that bias. Colincbn (talk) 03:08, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Defeat?

message: I have been doing a fairly large amount of research into this time period (for work related reasons) and specifically into Tokugawa's life. During this process I have found several articles like this that seem to leave out (or even contradict) many important points that are brought up in the  peer reviewed histories I have been using. As such I plan on adding these sections to several articles, adding the references of course, and removing unreferenced contradictory claims. I would love to get help from anyone with a deeper knowledge of the events. Cheers, Colincbn (talk) 02:05, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Major update needed

message: The political situation between opposing daimyo should have a pre-quel type summary here.  Instead, the section just jumps into the military aims of the generals. HammerFilmFan (talk) 04:41, 25 January 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Background doesn't cover much ...
Talk:Battle of Miani

message: WOW! How biased is this article?! Utter rubbish.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.164.99.100 (talk) 20:04, 16 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: how do you make contents?
rpriestley  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rpriestley (talk • contribs) 16:59, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  ? 

message: The description page of the image suggests it is of a different battle. Charles Matthews (talk) 11:09, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Image
Talk:Southbridge, Massachusetts

message: Moved from article – Qxz 08:57, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Comment from [[Special:Contributions/Dorothyfontana|Dorothyfontana]] 

message: Can anybody explain to me why "Jacob Edwards" redirects to this page. I'm a bit confused as I don't see how this relates to the article. Should this redirect be removed or have I made a mistake and it has a reason to redirect to this article? --Golem08 (talk) 11:56, 26 February 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Strange redirect 

message: In what year did the Town of Southbridge, MA obtain its current city charter? 173.76.112.250 (talk) 02:36, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Town to City
Talk:Imperial Way Faction

message: What's the distinction between Kodoha, Kodo Ha, and Koda Ha?
:Kodoha and Kodo Ha would be the same in Japanese (no upper case, no spaces in written language). Charles Matthews 18:28, 10 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Difference? 

message: The article British diplomatic movement also political struggle between Toho Kai and Kodoha groups in 1942 has been merged into this one: the original article is preserved at Talk:Imperial Way Faction/Merge archive. Physchim62 (talk) 13:19, 13 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge 

message: this page to kodoha. "Imperial Way Faction" is the direct translation of Kodoha(皇道派), which is  a proper noun. - Ideru 00:42, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  I propose to move 

message: The article has been considerbly revised and is now referenced. It is now specific to the Kodoha army political faction and its disagreement with the Toseiha, and extraneous paragraphs on Hideki Tojo and his conduct of the Second World War have been removed as irrelevant. Tojo was a member of the former Toseiha, not the Kodoha. Also, the Kodoha ceased to exist after the February 26 Incident, and discussions on politics and conduct within the Army post-1936 belong elsewhere--MChew (talk) 08:38, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Revision
Talk:Battle of Nesbit Moor (1402)

message: Be careful with numbers.  I seriously doubt that Scots nobles in 1402 had the capacity to raise anything like 40,000 men in arms. If this number is drawn from a contemporary chronicle it is important to remember that these nearly always exaggerate numbers, sometimes grossly. Rcpaterson 01:45, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Army Size
Talk:Battle of Německý Brod

message: How many English-language sources refer to it as "Deutschbrod" anyway? 173.66.211.53 (talk) 04:01, 19 April 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Shouldn't this be moved back to Battle of Nemecky Brod? 
Talk:Battle of Nancy

message: The article on Charles the Bold gives the date for the Battle of Nancy as 6 January 1477; my Dupuy & Dupuy Encyclopedia of Military History gives it as 5 January.  I left it in the article as the 5th for now, as per the original author; if anyone else has a good source please check; some other articles may need to be updated if that date is correct.  Thanks!  Antandrus  (talk) 22:23, 6 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Richard Vaughan's Charles the Bold gives it as January 5 as well; the article on Charles the Bold is incorrect, and I've changed it accordingly.  It had the correct date for Charles' death at the beginning, however.  Kirill Lokshin 22:29, 6 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Date of the battle

message: If possible, could someone translate this map?
There is not much to translate
* Plan de la bataille - Battle plan
* Bois de Jarville - Jarville forest
* Foret de Haye  - Haye Forest. (Foret and bois are both forest, foret is larger)  
* Commanderie Saint Jean - Saint Jean headquarters, but commanderie can also mean county (in legal enforcement sense, Sheriff's county)
* Avance de l'armee Rene - advance of Rene's army
* Gros des troup - bulk of the troops (bulk of the army)
* Etang Saint Jean - Saint Jean (John)'s lake.
The rest are names of persons or places.
88.159.71.34 (talk) 19:26, 7 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Translation

message: In some interpretations, this was notable as being pretty much an infantry victory over cavalry... AnonMoos (talk) 20:55, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Infantry vs. cavalry

message: Article talks about allied forces without any mentioning of an alliance.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.159.71.34 (talk) 19:27, 7 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Alliance
Talk:Battle of Naas

message: I recommend the UK History stub for deletion on this page not the Irish one, Naas is actually in Ireland after all.
--Damnbutter 15:42, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: 2006 post
Talk:Battle of Mount Gaurus

message: Greetings, my name is Derrek and sophomore Journalism major at Ball State University. I have been assigned a project for my Digital Literacies class to help add content to a Wikipedia stub. There is a draft of the article in the sandbox of the user "Tathea" if you would like to check it out. Sources are from Arthur Gilman and J. Rickard. Thanks!  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dmtipton (talk • contribs) 00:15, 19 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Page changes and new content 

message: Just a small note.
The reference made to the Carthaginian support at this time states that Rome was to wage war against Carthage soon. However, there was a gap of 100 years between the Battle of Mount Gaurus and the 1st Punic War, so I would advise that this statement is revised. Even using the end of the Samnite wars there remains a 25 year gap and this statement seems to imply some kind of link between the friendship between Rome and Carthage in the 4th century BC and the Punic wars of the 3rd a 2nd centuries bc. If attention is to be drawn to the change in relationship then perhaps some reference to the slow deterioration in relations would be more advisable.
77.97.199.216 (talk) 01:06, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reference to the Punic Wars is misleading 

message: In April 2023, :File:Pozzuoli NASA ISS004-E-5376 added names.jpg has been turned and cropped so that Mount Gaurus is not visible any more. E.g. :File:Pozzuoli NASA ISS004-E-5376 modified.jpg still shows Mount Gaurus, but without labels. --Kuhni74 (talk) 14:54, 18 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  satellite image was cropped
Talk:Battle of Mortimer's Cross

message: Tripled the size of the article, inc. refs etc. No longer a stub. Basket Feudalist  19:53, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Detail 

message: the format should be corrected. I tried to do so, but I do not understand the issue.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by GS-216.1993 (talk • contribs) 10:01, 24 December 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Fixed. It was an unclosed square bracket --Cavrdg (talk) 14:11, 24 December 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  format
Talk:Battle of Okehazama

message: This page says that Tokugawa was an officer of Imagawa. He was a hostage. He was kept at Sunpu until Yoshimoto's death.
Also noted is Hanzo and Tadakatsu. Who would have participated in this battle in the game Samurai Warriors. Hanzo and Tadakatsu were fiercely loyal to Ieyasu, and likely would not have participated.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.13.14.122 (talk) 03:24, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Accoring to the article Siege of Marune, Tokugawa led the siege of marune as a forced retainer. So maybe he also fought as a forced retainer in this battle? Taketa (talk) 09:17, 23 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Samurai Warriors

message: I assessed the article according to the WP: Mil History B-class criteria. Points to improve:
* References: There are no in-line citations. More sources are needed.
* Coverage: Coverage of the battle itself is rudimentary but adequate for Start-class. More background is needed. Why was Imagawa travelling to Kyoto? Why did Oda Nobunaga want to stop him? Why was Nobunaga so under-strength? Did he not have any allies or other reinforcements? How was Imagawa Yoshimoto significant in the context of the period? 
* Supporting Materials: The infobox and photo are sufficient for a B-class. In the future, a battlefield map would be helpful. Also, map coordinates of the battlefield or of a modern-day monument to the battle would be very helpful.
Boneyard90 (talk) 12:38, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: WP:MH Assessment Commentary