lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Hepburn Act

message: Could some one who knows more than I add to this article information about the problems that the Hepburn Act was designed to remedy?  TIA.
v  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.115.30.163 (talk) 21:43, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Remedy for what social ill? 

message: This Wikipedia article is not inaccurate but it is very incomplete.  A much better description is pages 52-59, "A History of the ICC, From Panacea to Palliative," Ari and Olive Hoogenboom, W.W. Norton & Company, 1976. Does anyone care to get a hold of this book and improve the article?
Qualicum (talk) 16:32, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Improvement 

message: a political cartoon for the legislation and context is referenced at nationl archive http://www.archives.gov/legislative/guide/senate/chapter-07-interstate-commerce.html Mulp (talk) 15:46, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  political cartoon in national archives
Talk:Michael Schumacher

message: MC is one of the greatest drivers of all time so why did you remove that it just seems so weird. 86.128.56.73 (talk) 18:05, 20 July 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: I assume is because thats not fully neutral  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vifvuv (talk • contribs) 16:59, 26 August 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: The sentence was removed following this discussion. It does not seem to be neutral, although Schumacher is still one of the greatest drivers of all time by any measure (wins (dry/rain), championships, longevity, dominance over teammates, et cetera). Eem dik doun in toene (talk) 18:38, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

text: Thats a strange discussion, is Kasparov greatest chess player in all time? Perhaps but while he still competes he is simply the best chess player currently. :) And also I don't understand that "family" idea to stop his career, maybe because I play chess also. :)--Polsci2 (talk) 17:46, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why removed he is the greatest of all time 

message: I just made an article entitled List of career achievements by Michael Schumacher. 
Is it possible to separate the Racing record section from the Schumacher article for inclusion in the article above? Thank you. F1fans (talk) 11:27, 27 July 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Split 'Racing record' section 

message: I was wondering if you guys are ok with a nomination of this article as a featured article.  The article fits the criteria, and is not a vague subject. Vifvuv (talk) 17:01, 26 August 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: The article wouldn't pass the FA criteria in its current form. It lacks (scholarly) references and several sources used are not of FA quality (such as "Snow Industry News" and "cmhelmets"). Some information is also missing (what was his driving style like, what was his impact on the sport, how was he received/regarded in the media/by other drivers?). Eem dik doun in toene (talk) 18:38, 26 August 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Featured Article Nomination 

message: I thought it would be nice to have an image of Schumacher in racing overalls rather the the generic previous image . Thanks to Ryosuke Yage and Danyele for this image--MKL123 (talk) 18:38, 5 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Image change
Talk:Dick Tiger

message: One cannot return an appointment to the order, the insignia can be returned as was the case with John Lennon's MBE, but the person still remains a member of the order unless H.M. chucks em out! Cheers, Lion King 15:25, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I can find no evidence that Tiger was expelled from the Order. I have therefore amended the article to reflect this. Lion King 16:13, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Returned CBE?

message: I think I added an infobox, but it's not looking like I supposed it would be. Please, would somebody help me by correcting the mistake??? And please explain me how to add an infobox... Seems like the encyclopedia is got problems or something. Thanks for your patience.Carmaster  —Preceding unsigned comment added by MXER (talk • contribs) 04:10, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I changed the Infobox to  and filled in as much as I could glean from the article. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 06:32, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Help!
Talk:Destruction of Jerusalem

message: Re: Jesus' supposed prophecy of these events: I recall that this particular section is thought to have been altered after the fact; Mark, which was probably written down before the event, has the prediction that "there shall not be left one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down" -- and that didn't happen; the other Synoptics, probably written afterwards, omit such specifics. --MIRV 17:49, 6 Jan 2004 (UTC)
Talk:Gospel of Mark

message: The redirect Mark, Gospel of has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at  until a consensus is reached.  Veverve (talk) 07:13, 11 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  "[[:Mark, Gospel of]]" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]] 

message: I recently edited the titles for all four of the gospels of the New Testament, seeing as I thought it fit to input one of the four gospels of the New Testament as not so much longer, as the maximum character limit is 90 characters, but as to improve readability and to improve the description so as to give a more ample overview of what the article was, as these are seen as teasers of the article Ai777 (talk) 20:59, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: See WP:SD40. With a topic so prominent as a canonical gospel, a very brief description like "Book in the New Testament" is enough to alert readers that they are on the right article. Additionally, specifying "One of the four", while normative, could be seen as not in keeping with NPOV: there are those who hold/held other gospels as also canonical. In this case, shorter=better. ~ Pbritti (talk) 21:05, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: indeed Ai777 (talk) 04:05, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  concerning recent revisions 

message: You have to obey WP:RS/AC, just like everybody else. If you have been published at OUP, you certainly have read WP:SOURCES such as those listed at User:Tgeorgescu/sandbox3. These sources tell a different story than your WP:POV. tgeorgescu (talk)  13:40, 20 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Academic consensus
Talk:Tubal

message: z.
sorryz what 'luwian' has to do with tubal? isn't it on the wrong page?. may be move it to Tabal page. actually you have it on both pages and then have 'not to be confused' sign...hmm
actually it would be wrong on either one. we need more references proving the linguistic connection of Tubal/Tabal tribes speaking Indo-European Lawinian language.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.212.108.243 (talk) 02:04, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: This page is in need of an overhaul for several reasons. I'll do part of the necessary work, but I'm leaving this note for anyone else who might want to pitch in. There's a number of issues snarled together. First, there's the problem of missing citations. That can be chipped away at, reference by reference. A problem that will require larger edits is organization. As it stands now, the article makes no attempt to differentiate (1) views about Tubal held by scholarly, reliable sources, from (2) speculation about Tubal recorded by tons of medieval people with no particular expertise in Ancient Near Eastern scholarship. Right now, the text is divided into two big sections based on the date that various opinions on Tubal were expressed. However, the first section "early theories" contains some opinions from as late as the twentieth century, while the second section "later historical identifications" contains some opinions from as early as the first century. The two sections, because they are divided solely on the basis of chronology, should have parallel names. While "early theories" is a decent name, "later historical identifications" could mislead an unwary thinker into thinking that he has now come to the part of the article that contains scholarly opinions. He would be wrong to think this.Alephb (talk) 21:49, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Page in need of overhaul
Talk:Fata Morgana

message: I don't recognise the Christie novel referred to - it certainly isn't found on Dame Agatha's own pages, either as a novel, play or short story. Unless someone knows where the reference comes from, I'd suggest deletion. Jon Rob 08:43, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Googling "Agatha Christie Fata Morgana" I find two used copies at Amazon.com. Both are in German. My conclusion: Fata Morgana is the German title of a Miss Marple Agatha Christie mystery. The question: what is the original title? I never delete information without making a simple double-check. --Wetman 12:18, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thank you for the response. A comparison of the German and English pages for Agatha Christie shows that the novel must be They Do It with Mirrors (the only 1952 Miss Marple title). I shall update this page accordingly. :-) Stelio 11:02, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Agatha Christie Novel? 

message: Apparently there's a song by the Italian band Litfiba called Fata Morgana, but given the introductory paragraph to this article, and my lack of knowledge of either the meaning of the song or the year it was released, I won't add it. If anyone's got any information about it, though, go ahead.
:A link here from the webpage for Litfiba is sensible. A link here is (?public relations) cruft. It's worth understanding the difference. --Wetman 08:07, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Litfiba

message: There is no reason to list Fata Morgana (band), which has an article (as of this post), only under the entry for the band's EP Fata Morgana, which does not. There is also no reason to list both the band and the EP in the same line. It does the reader no good to have to sort through a bunch of entries with no articles to find one that does.--Cúchullain t/c 12:12, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Once again, there is no reason to list the band, which has an article, only under the entry for an EP that has no article. That just sends the reader around in circles.--Cúchullain t/c 14:15, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I give up. Having a completely non-navigable line is contrary to MOS:DAB and more confusing than the common sense solution of listing band and EP together. I'll agree to disagree for now, but sincerely believe that in situations such as this where there's no 100% MOS:DAB-compliant solution, combining the two is the most helpful and sensible (and concise, obviously) MOS:DAB#Break rules compromise. 92.11.238.139 (talk) 14:36, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: You're right, there may be no 100% guideline-compliant solution, so the best thing is to link the article where all the information is located, right up front. It's really backwards to have the band article linked only in the entry for an EP that doesn't have an article. It's like having an entry saying: "*Geoffrey Chaucer (character), a character in The Canterbury Tales by Geoffrey Chaucer." Obviously the article on the author Geoffrey Chaucer is where we need to be guiding the reader.--Cúchullain t/c 14:47, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Fata Morgana (band)
Talk:Shelburne Falls, Massachusetts

message: Do we know that the census statisitics are correct for the village and aren't Shelburne's stats?  --Spikey 19:12, 6 Jan 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, the census statistics in the article for Shelburne are different. Or is that not what you were asking?  AJD 22:54, 6 Jan 2004 (UTC)
replies: text:  Well, yeah, I guess so.  Kind of a silly quiestion, now that I re-read it.  I guess, since Shelburne Falls is such a perpetually confusing area for automated systems to comprehend, I wanted to make sure the census data was in fact about the villiage of SF and SF only.  --Spikey 00:20, 7 Jan 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Created History section. Other history can be added there. David notMD (talk) 13:43, 27 November 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Added History section
Talk:Business performance management

message: :The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
The result of the move request was: Merged. Soni (talk)  10:24, 19 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merger from Enterprise performance management 

message: Likewise, Performance management seems to cover the same topic - managing the performance of organizations, mostly businesses. Software performance management is the only other meaning I'm aware of, and that now has a separate article that can be hatnoted or disambiguated to. -- Beland (talk) 02:36, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merger from Performance management
Talk:130 (number)

message: I'm noticing that the divisors entries in the tables for the integers is varying in consistency. As i spot them, I'll change them to include 1 and the number. so that they match [[table_of_divisors]. Cormullion 14:23, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Divisors consistency 

message: Decimal 2600:1700:53B1:1450:5589:9F9D:AC48:B60A (talk) 00:54, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  One thousand and 50
Talk:110 (number)

message: As one hundred ten is a minority usage largely associated with American english, and the rest of the world and its many other forms of english write it as one hundred and ten, the article should be in the international form in an encyclopedia, not the internal US form used principally in one country. Tarquin has moved one hundred twenty to one hundred and twenty for the same reason. FearÉIREANN 20:04, 6 Jan 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Spelling 

message: According to a book review (http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/03/books/review/jordan-ellenbergs-how-not-to-be-wrong-and-more.html?emc=edit_bk_20140801&nl=books&nlid=52791032), The Grapes of math by Alex Bellos calls 110 the most unloved of numbers. 211.225.34.160 (talk) 00:15, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I suppose that's a reliable source, but the importance of the statement is in question.  — Arthur Rubin  (talk) 04:35, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unloved 

message: In Wintersmith, one of Sir Terry Prachett's Discworld novels, venerable elder witch, Miss. Eumenides Treason, passes away at the age of 111-years-old, but had been lying about her age, claiming to be 113-years-old, citing that the former, 111, sounded a bit 'too cutesy' (not unlike a certain hobbit...).
and not in 111 or 113 or both?--S Philbrick(Talk) 01:34, 26 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  why is this here?
Talk:Closer

message: Hi,
I was wondering if another disambiguation page about something called "The Closer" would be meaningful. There are at least two tv shows with this exact name and a lot of songs (and similar) starting with these two words (The Closer I Get, The Closer You Get, The Closer You Get (Alabama song), The Closer I Get to You, …, see all articles starting with "The Closer").
Looking at that, we might also need a disambiguation between "The Closer You Get". :) (The articles about the songs don't even link to eachother.)
I don't know enough about the WP styles and guidelines, so what would be best? — Tauriel-1 (☎) 05:59, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  New disambiguation page for "The Closer"? 

message: Closer (film) is currently under TV. is that correct? Fholson 15:51, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Film vs TV 

message: Isn't Closer also a book? --75.173.18.129 (talk) 00:51, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Book 
Talk:Physical chemistry

message: A discussion is taking place as to whether :Portal:Physical chemistry is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The page will be discussed at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Physical chemistry until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the page during the discussion, including to improve the page to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the deletion notice from the top of the page. North America1000 08:44, 12 July 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nomination of [[:Portal:Physical chemistry]] for deletion 

message: A new editor added content to the first section below the introduction and I reverted it . I wrote that this should be taken to the talk page. I'm looking for input from editors who normally edit this page. Although the content may be generally accurate, it probably needs sourcing, and hopefully it won't be redundant. I contacted the editor on their talk page and let them know I am opening a section for discussion on their behalf.   ---Steve Quinn (talk) 06:31, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: My opinion is that the new content was actually quite well written and should be restored. Yes, there is some duplication of the existing section and sources should be added. However rather than just removing the new content, I would first add it below the existing section, and then reduce the duplication by combining the two discussions of each discipline - therodynamics, chemical kinetics, etc. Dirac66 (talk) 17:17, 27 April 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Edit revert
Talk:Hesychasm

message: Some decent history of philosophy would really help clean up this article. There is a large conflation between "experience" used in The Western sense through thinkers like Locke and Jefferson that does not correspond and cannot be an accurate translation of the Heschasm tradition. The spiritualization of this term "experience" is traceable to the First Great Awakening in the 1740's in Colonial America. The mystical visions and contemplations spoken of here are philosophically a different thing. Knowledge begins in the senses and transcends them by abstracting concepts within the Platonic-Aristotelian-Cappadocian tradition. But "experience" is a question of objects, perceptions, and interpretations of said objects that the Enlightenment West asked about. Hesychasm purports to be a way of being that gets beyond mere experience into mystical unity. Whatever that union is, it is mystical precisely to the degree that it is NOT an experience. God qua Being is not another object of experience like others in the cosmos. If He were, then this would be a Demiurge, not the God that is The Holy Trinity.
There are some serious theological and philosophical problems with the useage of this term, "experience" to translate a tradition MUCH older than The Enlightenment, and especially when applied to religion, to The Great Awakening. From 1 AD to about 1500 "experience" in the West and East was a forger or blacksmith's term. The image was of dirt being burnt up around a lump of gold or silver. Experience then meant to be tried in fire, tested, and proved true, with all impurities melted away. It did not mean "holding an object in one's vision." The allegorical use of "experience" then should only be used to refer to the period of purgation and illumination, but cannot be applied to the unitive state.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zadokum (talk • contribs) 12:02, 24 December 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Experience" 

message: I have started a new WikiProject  - Wikipedia: WikiProject Mysticism. This article would surely be of interest to this WikiProject. Vorbee (talk) 20:58, 16 July 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: WikiProject Mysticism

message: proposed deleting this but also suggested it could be redirected here. I've deprodded so options can be discussed. ~Kvng (talk) 20:05, 23 May 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: At the moment, I have redirected  to Hesychia (disambiguation). Regretably, User:Dispenser/Dab solver hasn't worked in a while, making cleaning up much more difficult than it used to be. I think a redirect to Hesychasm is probably appropriate, but I'm hoping that keeping it pointed to the disambiguation page in the meantime will help the links get checked. Daask (talk) 14:59, 30 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Hesychia]] 

message: Sorry for writing it here. I just wanted to correct a typo ("Sufi's" in note 2 should be "Sufis") but can't see any text when I click "edit". Same for the References section. For your information. 176.88.31.43 (talk) 15:41, 18 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Not a new topic but
Talk:Henryk Grossman

message: I'm a newbie here - this was my first attempt at creating a page. After boggling my brain with TeX, I can't seem to figure out fixing the broken links for Bohm-Bawerk and the Frankfurt School. Any suggestions?
Adhib 00:11, 7 Jan 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: This page should be renamed to "Henryk Grossman" and a new page "Henryk Grossmann" with a redirect to "Henryk Grossman" should be created. The reason is that Grossman(n) always signed his name "Grossman", in correspondence in all languages, and that all of his publications in Englith which appeared under his supervision used "Grossman". He also used "Grossman" for his Polish publications. Only in German was he known as "Grossmann" or, sometimes, "Großmann". --Rickkuhn 05:22, 28 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rename page 

message: If capital exports are introduced into Grossman’s model, the formula for surplus value “S = ……”  must be enlarged by another term describing additional capital exports as another part of S in addition to k and additional constant and variable capital. Rising capital exports eat also into k the same way as constant capital in the model without capital exports, so there would be no crisis-delaying effect of capital exports. --Alex1011 10:52, 2 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Are capital exports a countervailing tendency (as Grossman assumes)?
Talk:50 Cent

message: Why is 'Jackson' being used throughout the article to refer to 50 Cent? FriendlyFerret9854 (talk) 20:37, 23 July 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  50 Cent or Jackson? 

message: "Error: missing redirect parameter". JackkBrown (talk) 00:20, 13 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Error 

message: Dylan Mullin (talk) 04:28, 15 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 15 March 2024
Talk:Ontogeny and phylogeny

message: parts of the organism may be genetically linked with newer parts depending on old ones, but there may also be a functional link, the newer brain cannot function without the old backbone, so that embryos that develop them in the wrong order dies.
More interesting, some (Maturana, Valera, complexity scientists and others) hold the belief that functionally the parts of an organism are intimately linked, with a depending on b, depending on c that may depend on a again. a circular dependence. But in evolution we are presented with a linear dependence a-b-c
Are they both right?
----
I changed the redirect to Stephen Jay Gould's book, as per the second redirect deletion policy item: "The redirect might cause confusion. For example, if "Adam B. Smith" was redirected to "Andrew B. Smith", because Andrew was accidentally called Adam in one source, this could cause confusion with the article on Adam Smith, so it should be deleted." Being that Gould's book is called Ontogeny and Phylogeny, it makes sense for a search of this phrase (which is not "ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny" which obviously makes sense for a redirect to recapitulation) to go to his book. I am not sure about how to make one of those "did you mean _____?" or "For ___ see ____" pages so if someone could do that, thanks.
Batula 18:07, 15 September 2007 (UTC)