lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Supreme War Council

message: Did the Supreme War Council officially replace its name by the term "Allied Supreme Council"? It was used e.g. on July 19, 1919 in an New York Times article. ----130.83.23.163 (talk) 13:57, 15 June 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I found a reference from February 1920 (a correspondence from the Military Representative on the Supreme War Council to the U.S. Secretary of State) that suggests the name was not changed. The correspondence is an official report did not include "Allied Supreme Council." I believe that this would support that the name was not officially changed. https://history.state.gov/historicaldocuments/frus1914-20v02/d147 21:30, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Allied Supreme Council 

message: This will one day be cleared up by the minutes kept by Maurice Hankey, when transcripts of the Allied meetings are available online.  Until then, the start dates of these secret meetings vary from source to source.  This is what I have:
The January 1918 SWC meeting appears to have commenced on January 29th at 2:30pm, per Douglas Haig. Link. The last meeting was held Feb 2nd at 10:30am.  Link, bottom left
The May 1918 SWC meeting officially started May 1st at 2pm, but unofficially began on April 27th with a high level conference in Abbeville.  The English returned to England on the 28th, and crossed back to France on May 1st.Marlowe, pg 306 Link
The June 1918 SWC met at Versailles on the 1st. The British held a preliminary meeting at 10:30am, a second meeting took place to discuss American troop deployments near the Swiss border, and a 2:30pm meeting was held in PM Clemenceau's office about British troop losses due to enlistments ending by September.  At 4:45pm, the larger 'formal' meeting scheduled for 3pm took place, one to appoint a Supreme Commander to the Mediterranean theater.Haig, pg. 417-18Edmonds, Military Operations in France & Belgium, Vol III, pgs. 152-154
Lord Milner (talk) 20:06, 16 July 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Ho ho! Just been reading about the deployment of US troops to Alsace - I thought it was an error at first, but it turns out that some US divisions were indeed parked in the Vosges for a bit, before being redeployed for the St Mihiel Offensive. The proposed Mediterranean Supreme Command to which you refer (French in favour, Italians against) was naval not military - Jellicoe was pencilled in for the job, but it never happened. As for ground troops, Foch was given Doullens-style powers to coordinate the Italian front but not Beauvais-style command powers. Don't think he was ever given command authority over the Italian Front, but I'm happy to be corrected. He had quasi-authority over the Salonika Front by virtue of his job as Chief of the French General Staff, a post which he notionally retained throughout 1918 (Salonika had reported to Joffre in 1916, but never to Nivelle or Petain; North Africa was always completely separate). Paulturtle (talk) 23:34, 20 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Time & Dates of the Supreme War Council Meetings
Talk:Mona Vasquez

message: I have tagged this BIO for Notability. There do not appear to be secondary sources that would have this be anything of than possibly a WP:BIO1E due to her hunger strike which appears to have been covered in French media.
:*Echo Magazine, interview with Mona Vasquez, October 2004, "Scientology, a true control".
:::This is an anti-Scientolgy group interview and not a reliable source
:*Dahlburg, John-Thor (2000-02-29). "Report Urges Dissolution of Scientology Church in France".
:::Vasquez is quoted in the piece but it is not about her at all, does not establish Notability
:*prison sans barreaux, scientologie, sortir d'une secte
:::This appears to be a poem written by Vasquez, although some pieces contradict her BIO (she mentions her children - plural when her bio said she has only one, for instance)
:*The prison without bars- Mona Vasquez. La Croix, 4th of June, 2004. Mirrored here.
:::Same as above
:*"Décès de Mona Vasquez" (in French). UNADFI. Retrieved 13 December 2011.
:::Obituary, no notability established
Thank you, Tgeairn (talk) 05:27, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you for updating the citations. I meant to do so and my browser froze (teaching me for the nth time to copy/paste into notepad more often). It doesn't seem likely that the additions have the article meet WP:BIO or WP:AUTHOR, but perhaps others will have some new sources as well. Tgeairn (talk) 07:06, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Notability 
Talk:Skoda 305 mm Model 1911

message: After having read entries on the Skoda 305 mm Model 1911 and Big Bertha, I was struck by the fact that they are both labelled Mörser in German. This means mortar, not howitzer (that would be Haubitze). Any particular reason to relabel them as howitzers in English? I have also raised this question in the general howitzer section.
: Mojowiha (talk) 18:18, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
replies: text:  It depends which definition of "mortar" and "howitzer" one uses. For example, in France, when the de Bange system was introduced, anything less than L/10 was called a mortar, even though before then only much shorter guns were called that. If you look at Talk:Mortar (weapon), you'll see there isn't much in the way of agreement, even between modern sources. Someone not using his real name (talk) 21:02, 27 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Howitzer or Mortar? 

message: We have varying numbers in circulation. Please assist at Talk:Battle of Liège#Siege_artillery numbers? Andy Dingley (talk) 12:16, 6 February 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  How many were used at Liège ?
Talk:144th Battalion (Winnipeg Rifles), CEF

message: Hello 
 
I was taking apart an old radio. In the back of it pressed between class. I Found an ( In Honour Of Duty Nobly Done)
certificate for a Harry Towns. WW1 1914 - 1918.  
Canadian 144th Battalion. Reg No. 829343. Birth place England. Residence Winnipeg, Mb.
 
Was wondering if you folks wanted it or if you could find 
Family who would.
Please let me know one way or the other.
 
Thank you
 Charles Saunders H81500850.71.21.14 (talk) 02:40, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  certificate of Honour
Talk:Tobita Shinchi

message: I have edited the price list but feel this and the vocab section chould be deleted completely. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Osakadan (talk • contribs).
:The price list appears to have been removed due to being unencyclopedic. ···日本穣? · Talk to Nihonjoe 00:53, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Price list

message: Does anyone know what the monument in the picture actually commemorates? -155.198.202.82 (talk) 17:15, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Monument
Talk:Unheilig

message: Which is it?  The introduction reckons a four piece.  The infobox states there is just the lead singer.  They can't both be right!  Skinsmoke (talk) 06:11, 30 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Band composition 

message: No mention of the unsuccessful attempt to represent Germany in the Eurovision Song Contest 2014 (they came second in the national contest)?  Skinsmoke (talk) 20:42, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Alles Hat Seine Zeit and Gipfelstürmer (2014-present)
Talk:Union (band)

message: There was a one-hit-wonder in the 80s with a song called "Mainstreet USA".  YouTube upload with album cover  This guy says 
:“Mainstreet U.S.A.” 1981, #38 
:I’ve never heard the lone full Union LP (On Strike) to see if it’s any good but this horrendous abomination of a single surely only got airplay because this was Randy Bachman and Fred Turner – of course of BTO.
This is also referenced in the article on BTO.
Titaniumlegs (talk) 00:05, 17 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Not the first band called Union
Talk:SM U-151

message: If the statement: Jänckendorf was noted for following the traditional rules of “cruiser warfare,” letting his targets be evacuated before sinking them.
Then why does featured article on the Deinsk  state:  Dwinsk was torpedoed by U-151 about 400 miles (640 km) from Bermuda.[2] After the ship sank, U-151 remained in the area, using the survivors in seven lifeboats as a lure in order to try and sink additional Allied ships.[1] Given that 22 men died whilst being watched by U-151 this would make Jänckendorf a war criminal. Yet this article makes him out to be an honorable warrior of the old school?!?!57.67.164.37 (talk) 13:30, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  War Crime?
Talk:Carl Hans Lody

message: The article mentions that the Lody case was picked up later in defining "war treason":
::A later revision of the Manual of Military Law rejected the view that a spy commits a war crime and alluded to the Lody case in suggesting that war treason was not an applicable charge in such cases.
Out of interest, does Simpson give a date for when this interpretation came about? I have a copy of the Manual from WWII (1929 edition reprinted with amendments 1939; actual printing date ~1943). It seems quite firm that some forms of espionage were still interpreted as war treason, which it defined as a war crime (albeit with a defensive footnote saying that general usage now interprets "war crime" more narrowly than the legal definition) Andrew Gray (talk) 22:40, 28 September 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes - he gives 1958 as the date of the change. Prioryman (talk) 20:55, 29 September 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Legal precedent 

message: Maybe it should be pointed out that this was compulsory for any healthy German mariner of the time. (Also men from inland Germany but with work experience on riverboats, shuttle duty, as lake fishermen and similar professions were automatically drafted into the navy rather than the army.) Except that the usual service was longer (IIRC 3 yrs, but I would have to look that up...) so either he was dismissed due to health reasons or he may have served as an Einjährig-Freiwilliger. Just saying, the article should not convey the impression that serving in the navy was a free choice for him. Especially when it's saying that he wanted to pursue a career as officer, it might easily come across that way.
Source: Das kleine Buch vom Deutschen Heere. Ein Hand- und Nachschlagebuch zur Belehrung über die deutsche Kriegsmacht. (The little book of the German army. A hand- and reference-book for instruction about the German military.) Lipsius & Tischer, Kiel, 1901. Reprint Weltbild Verlag 1998. --BjKa (talk) 10:28, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  "served with the Imperial German Navy for a year " 

message: Why is a military one being used when his claim to fame is for his execution as spy and a criminal? 
Surely infobox criminal should be used because that is from where his notability arises? Having an uninteresting military career shows the current infobox has nothing to do with the article's point of notability. He was a spy when he was captured and died for one. He was a criminal tried for War treason, a crime not a military act. 86.180.176.235 (talk) 22:22, 6 November 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Infobox? 

message: This article, which was recently promoted to FA-Class, has 22 quotes, some of which are long! Isn't this a violation of WP:OVERQUOTE? Jonas Vinther (speak to me!) 01:42, 22 November 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Talk about Overquoting 
Talk:UDD (band)

message: Why are the 'Fansite' and 'Unreferenced|article' tags being taken off this article when nothing is being done to change the article itself? I'm going to replace them again, but unless they are addressed, I'm going to assume that they are just being deleted by fans without good reasons, especially since all the deletions are being done by unregistered users. --Furrysaint 03:55, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: So did "Up Dharma Down" do the song in the "sped-up" McDonald's Premium Roast Iced Coffee commercial showing in the US now (March/April 2008)?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.159.170.30 (talk) 17:47, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: McDonald's Premium Roast Iced Coffee

message: The background section is a copy of this article.  I've removed the section as a copyvio. -- Whpq 01:57, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah-hah. That explains things. My thanks. --Furrysaint 15:34, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Copyvio
Talk:Uptown 3000

message: I'm not sure there's anything notable about Uptown 3000 that justifies its own article. I have added most of the info in this article to the Uptown article already. Would appreciate if someone with experience nominating articles for deletion would jump in and assess this. Lenoresm (talk) 16:39, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Deletion? Merge?
Talk:Urban Dance Squad

message: I don't know very much about this band, but the article seems too "fan-based" and not neutral.--Palindrome7 17:15, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No... it is a very bad article, even if it is a nice piece of prose.  If this were SPIN it would be appropriate, but this is at least marginally supposed to an encyclopedia.  A neutrally written article well supported by sources would be a much more useful thing than what currently appears here.--208.215.25.131 (talk) 15:44, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  I have to agree, this is difficult to read without cringing. I edited one paragraph to make it more NPOV. Maybe everyone can take on a paragraph and slowly clean this up? --Aaronp808 (talk) 02:12, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Agreed. This band deserves better. Radioflux (talk) 00:59, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It deserves better? How do you know? If you know more about the band, please, rewrite the article. I didn't write it, but it seems that this is the best you're going to get for a band that was, at best, obscure (in America). If this were an article about a war, or whatever, I would agree about POV, but most music articles on this site are biased. Who else is going to take the time to write it? Especially little-known bands with a small, loyal core of followers. You're talking about music, something highly relative. Who cares if it's biased? And what does it matter? Can you dispute any of the facts in the article? You youreself are pointing out something relative ("Tone") as the basis for you're argument, a tough sell at best.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.202.113.132 (talk) 00:17, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

text: Not only that, the same text appears on a second site used by the band; http://raft.vmg.co.uk/uds/history1.htm. I've therefor taken the liberty to remove the part that was a straight copy-paste job and attempted a new write-up of the article. 78.90.187.26 (talk) 00:35, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Neutrality
Talk:Verdun Memorial

message: In the English language "equipment" is a mass noun and therefore does not have a plural.
-- Nick Beeson (talk) 10:30, 12 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Equipment 

message: The Photo is outdated as the building underwent an extensive redesign prior to the 100-years' anniversary of the Battle of Verdun. It was closed to the public 2013-09-01_2016-02-21 --BjKa (talk) 11:09, 29 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Photo
Talk:Samakh, Tiberias

message: This edit   by 93.173.113.243, done 13 May 2009, makes it look as if the "info" is sourced to Khalidi, 1992. Which it is not. Khalidi does not mention anything about "Greek-speaking Jews" or "mishnaic and talmudic sources." Grrr! I *really* hate it when people falcify sources this way...... Huldra (talk) 15:22, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: No need to jump to conclusions. I wouldn't expect an anonymous editor to know what those weird "ref" tags even do. In any case, the content addition was correct, and I'm going to source it. —Ynhockey (Talk) 22:34, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  Not sure about "Greek speaking", but otherwise it is correct.  However, given a gap of 1400-1500 years, "established on the remains of" is dubious language (even though Khalidi uses it).  Zerotalk 23:37, 26 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  recent falcification 

message: From what I get from translate.google, Guérin writes here (from his 1875-visit)  on p. 309 that he also saw  the place in 1870.  Now, that should have been in one of the "Samarie" -books. Alas, I´ve looked and looked...and cannot find it there.  Cheers, Huldra (talk) 20:48, 17 November 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: There is a Tell es_Semak on p274 of Samarie 2.  Is that it? Zerotalk 22:30, 17 November 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Nope, that is Tell es Semak  by the sea, at  Haifa, on map SWP V: see SWP I, p. 352 -353. Huldra (talk) 22:42, 17 November 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Guerin  1870-visit
Talk:Russian battleship Slava

message: Four of the twenty 75-millimeter (3.0 in) guns used against torpedo boats were mounted in casemates
Actually 3 inch caliber is 76.2 mm, not 75. It was a relatively common caliber both in Russian Army & Navy. 95.79.47.249 (talk) 14:35, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Indeed, but it's not worth converting to so many decimal places to show the difference.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 17:05, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
replies: text:  Ok, may be, but AFAIK usually it is designated 76 mm in Metric units, not 75. To distinguish from German 75 mm caliber. Example: 76 mm divisional gun M1902 95.79.47.249 (talk) 18:15, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry, these were guns were a design imported from France and retained their metric designation in the Russian Navy.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 18:24, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
replies: text:  Ok thanks for correction. So, finally, they were 75-mm, and not 3-inch / 76 mm ? 95.79.47.249 (talk) 18:29, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, see .--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 19:57, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  3-inch guns 

message: There's a photo of the ship available in this journal that can be uploaded to en.wiki. Parsecboy (talk) 19:38, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Image available
Talk:Vanilla Mood

message: While don't agree with this policy at all, my opinion doesn't matter here.  The subject of this article IS notable under WP:BAND point 5.  The label they are under is notable and they have released 2 albums under that label.  According to that policy, the subject is explicitly notable.  If you wish to dispute this, please take it to AfD.  I'm removing the SD tag. OlYellerTalktome 23:04, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: AfSD

message: http://www.vanillamood.jp/profile.html I can't find Waka in official website. But I afraid I can't edit this because my English speech is not good. --119.192.47.38 (talk) 11:41, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Waka(Flute)
Talk:Manifesto of the Ninety-Three

message: Some names are italicized, others not. Does this have some significance? Hi There (talk) 15:49, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The italicized names correspond to famous people who have a biography on an other wikipedia (German mainly) but whose biographies don't exist yet on the English wikipedia. Sincerily. Paris75000 (talk) 18:53, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Italicized and Non-Italicized Names

message: Some of the names are in bold type, such as those of Paul Ehrlich, Engelbert Humperdinck, Felix Klein. What is the reason for this? Are they considered more important than other signatories and/or are their signatures considered particularly shocking (and, if so, by whom and why)? In short, it rather looks as if someone is playing games with the list or has compiled it extremely carelessly. What on earth is going on? And, please don't say that the names in bold do or don't have articles on them in the English Wikipedia because there is no such pattern. Norvo (talk) 03:12, 10 May 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree, the bolding seems random and is confusing. The bolding seems to have been added by a bot in February 2013. I think it should be removed. Blart versenwald (talk) 20:13, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Some names in bold. Why?
Talk:Väsen

message: I'm all for adding a link to Väsen's homepage in this article as it actually makes sense to do so, but is it really appropriate to be linking to somebody's fan page? A fan page has no guarantee of being accurate or authoritative. So, is it worth leaving up there, or am I right to want to remove it from there? Sleepsong 02:06, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No there's no guarantee; but it looks like a pretty good one to me, with plenty of information that's not on their own site.  I vote for leaving it. Paul Magnussen (talk) 23:50, 16 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Link Validity 

message: Can anyone give an indication of how to pronounce them: VAYsen? VAAsen?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jonur (talk • contribs) 11:31, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The actual name is Väsen. You know the phonetic sound of the "ai" part in the english word "lair"? It sounds something like that. "Vaisen". (Exterus (talk) 10:07, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pronunciation 

message: What does the name mean? Badagnani (talk) 06:54, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It means two things, "being" or "entity" and "noise". (Exterus (talk) 10:07, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: And also "essence", which happens to be the title of one of their albums.--CodeGeneratR (talk) 00:59, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Name

message: Basic information to add to this article: in which year the group was established. 173.88.246.138 (talk) 16:19, 8 February 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: To add to article
Talk:Damascus Protocol

message: That map, with its caption that the area promised was the green segment, does not match what was actually stated in the Protocol. The entire Arabian peninsula - with the sole exception of the British base at Aden, Yemen - as well as Greater Syria (palestine, Jordan, Lebanon, Syria (Alexandretta included), and Iraq were all to be in within the boundaries of the proposed independent Arab state; in other words, the entire Arabic-speaking portion of the Ottoman Empire as it existed in 1915. A Saudi agent must have put that yellow and pink on this map.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.18.123.223 (talk) 17:44, 26 March 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: The map was wrong. But, as with most things on wikipedia, it is much more likely to have been a mistake than a conspiracy. Oncenawhile (talk) 19:13, 2 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Currently, the article dates the proclamation of jihad by the Ottoman Empire to the 11 november 1914. However, it seems that other sources on the subject date it to the 14th of november, sometimes the 13th (see this article for instance http://nationalpost.com/opinion/scott-van-wynsberghe-the-great-wars-jihad, but never the 11th. I can not find a first hand reference for the specific date, although this page http://www.imprescriptible.fr/documents/djihad.htm cites sources, I was not able to check them. It would be nice if someone could look up these references, or find other ones, and update the date in this article. Jonsku Kremio (talk) 09:30, 27 April 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Date of the proclamation of Jihad
Talk:Jerry Pentland

message: Note: Text merged here from Talk:Alexander A. N. D. Pentland. Abraham, B.S. (talk) 08:17, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Ooppss. Never occurred to me that a relatively minor ace would have a pre-existing article. By all means, merge them, and I'll try to take greater care in the future. Georgejdorner (talk) 12:06, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. Articles redirected and merged. Cheers, Abraham, B.S. (talk) 08:17, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article already exists 