lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Template talk:WikiProject Law

message: I am adding a category class.  A number of the items listed at :Category:Unassessed-Class legal articles are really just categories that aren't counted.  It should help clear up the backlog immediately. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 03:07, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Template-class as well now. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 18:47, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  New classs 

message: Could an administrator please add C-Class to this template's code? --Millbrooky (talk) 05:33, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks, PeterSymonds (talk) 10:51, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  C-Class 

message: Could an admin please make a few changes:
# change the portal image to :File:JudgesTools Icon.png
# see if |category=no is functional, if not please add it.
--Jeremy ( Blah blah...) 10:38, 27 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  I made these changes. However conversion to WPBannerMeta is advisable. Ruslik (talk) 18:09, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

text: There's a version in Template:WikiProject_Law/sandbox if you want to convert it over to use WPBannerMeta. -- WOSlinker (talk) 15:28, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

text: Done Doesn't look like it broke anything.--Aervanath talks like a mover, but not a shaker 20:17, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  A few changes 

message: Add ASSESMENT_LINK parameter and add substcheck. SkyBonTalk\Contributions 16:40, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Please provide more exact instructions about what needs to happen. —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 01:29, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

text: —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 09:48, 20 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Request 

message: I have raised an issue about changing the template to allow it to link to more than one portal within the WikiProject's scope at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Law#Changing the WP Law template to include a link to Portal:Law of England and Wales.  As this page is little-used, it seemed best to start discussion there.  Anyone who sees this and has a view, please comment. Thanks, BencherliteTalk 18:42, 13 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Suggestion for template change
Talk:Redmond High School (Oregon)

message: I added the infobox, but was unable to find the date founded online. I go to school there, so I will get first-hand knowledge of the real date! I put 9 sept 1973 because it sounded the most logical to me at the time. If I didn't put a date in, the template freaked out and gave an error. I felt that the best way to avoid a template error is to just put some-odd date in for less than 24 hours.JoDrRe (talk) 07:49, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Infobox

message: I'm requesting a photo of this school. It has a logo, but a picture from the front of the school would be great. tedder (talk) 06:33, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: reqphoto

message: There are two Academics sections for this article. 
The first one, with the 48% graduation rate, is for Redmond High School.
The second, with the 81% graduation rate, is actually for Cascades, also in Redmond School District.
Both items appear in the spreadsheet noted in footnote #4.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.113.19.47 (talk) 20:02, 12 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Academics
Talk:Yehoash (poet)

message: I assume that the named is more accurately transcribed as "Caleb" (rather than Kolev),but since this is only an assumption, I do not want to make the change. --PloniAlmoni (talk) 16:15, 8 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Kolev? 

message: You should link to the PDF of his Bible translation on archive.org.  You should also say when this was first published.
71.163.114.49 (talk) 21:55, 8 March 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: the pdf through Kings II is here:  https://ia800304.us.archive.org/24/items/nybc200109/nybc200109.pdf
through Chronicles II is here: https://ia600406.us.archive.org/31/items/nybc210565/nybc210565.pdf
100.15.120.162 (talk) 16:21, 27 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  missing link
Talk:Big-Bang Cannon

message: The reason I tagged this article non-NPOV is mostly due to the first sentence. If noone objects, I'd like to rephrase that first sentence somewhat... more to come. MagnusW 07:19, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: NPOV

message: I was looking for safety records of toys of this type (the bamboo cannon being the another, but as this is a commercial product its record would be more importantly scrutinized). The only thing I could find was a thorough review at [davescooltoys.com/bigbangcannons/ Dave's Cool Toys], in which the author reports that the only thing they could find is a thermal burn from direct contact with Bangsite that spilled while undergoing exothermic reaction (i.e., the acetylene was not burning). A photo is on the page, but reverse image search and google-fu reveals no online source for the original story, so it may have been scanned from elsewhere or lost to the early days of the internet. One can always contact the site owner.
But one anecdotal case is not enough to produce a safety record, and I would think in all the years the cannon has been around at least a few kids would have aimed it at their face which could easily damage the eardrum or eyes. Alas, no source on that. (With the bamboo cannon, most injury cases I saw came from either breech failure or loudness (a function of volume).)
I think it would be encyclopedic to include "safety information" of a sort using said website and the original manual as a source, as well as the heat of reaction of the Bangsite to show that it can potentially cause burns, as well as perhaps the heat released from the ignition of the high acetylene/air ratio in the cannon, just to add some theoretical background as well. For now I'll just add Dave's review in the "External Links", but please let me know if you find any extra safety information or have thoughts.
P.S.: There may also be legal incidents regarding use of these cannons, even if they are not banned. The discussion of a SF arrest claims the person in the subreferenced news article had fired a Big-Bang Cannon. As this claim didn't seem backed up elsewhere (is there even a 2-foot BBC?), I don't think it merits inclusion, but there are surely other such cases. SamuelRiv (talk) 00:58, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Safety record
Talk:Zhambyl Zhabayuly

message: Could anyone please correct the grammar in this article? It seems to be a very poor translation from Russian and I'm not good enough in English to do it myself. --Martewa (talk) 20:51, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Zoé Laurier

message: EDITＡＮＤHELP  — Preceding unsigned comment added by YOPbottle (talk • contribs) 22:54, 10 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  HEY! 
Talk:Maiwand District

message: Should this be Maiwand District?  If so, the stuff about Maywand Osman and "gay flower" would be incorrect and removable.--S. Rich 03:47, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Bravo!  Thank you so much.--S. Rich 19:26, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Maiwand 

message: The current district center is actually located at Hutal (not the village of Maiwand, which is about 8-9 miles north of Hutal), near a bazaar and a combat outpost. 
Benbanner (talk) 02:26, 14 February 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  District Center Location 
Talk:LdB FC Malmö

message: LdB Football Club Malmö is the official name . Please change the title back. 84.216.45.97 08:01, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No, check their official site: http://www.mff.se/dam/nyheter.asp?ID=1304 – Elisson • T • C • 12:12, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That's not updated. From the article: "Kent Widding Persson says that everything was created in haste and that "women" will be replaced with "Malmö"." Throughout the article which is two days newer than your article LdB FC Malmö is always used. 84.216.47.164 17:08, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Then let's wait and see. – Elisson • T • C • 17:24, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Can we stop waiting now?  84.216.45.159 13:52, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: LdB FC Malmö
Talk:Rhamphochromis

message: Hi there. I'm trying to de-orphan some old articles from 2008. I came across Rhamphochromis leptosoma. It's not listed as recognized species, though the stub says it's a species. Think there is room for it as a see also or a mention on this page? Thus de-orphaning it? Or perhaps someone has a better idea of how the page can be de-orphaned - this subject is out of my league :) Thanks! SarahStierch (talk) 04:45, 4 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Any room for this fishie on this page?
Talk:List of England One Day International cricket records

message: This page was a red category on the England Cricket Team page.
It seemed a glaring omission so I clicked on the link and started to put some information in, starting with a table for the highest scores.  This was flagged for deletion before I'd had chance to save it.  Perhaps we might be given just a few minutes grace to do a page?  Such summary executions are such a waste of time and it puts people off creating anything.  Nick mallory 08:13, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

message: I'm sure I've raised this elsewhere, but the qualifiers for bowling average and strike rate should be based on wickets, not balls bowled. Howstat uses 50 wickets, and cricinfo use a lower number of balls (1000) for their overall records than they do on the England team records (England strike rate, Global strike rate) and the top-6 on overall page don't appear on team lists (or at least they don't for full-member nations). Spike 'em (talk) 12:18, 18 July 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  qualifier for bowling figures 

message: I find rowspans that merge cells that are in different sections earlier in the table look really confusing and am going to revert most of today's changes, as I have done in the past.
Just because you can do something doesn't mean that you should. Spike 'em (talk) 13:39, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: And I've seen it mentioned that it messes up e-readers too. Spike 'em (talk) 13:42, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rowspans
Talk:Istana Budaya

message: The old article has been removed entirely due Wiki policy that does not allow copy / plagiarism. It was traced that the old article was taken straight from Istana Budaya webpage. I have replaced the content to what it is now. If you have any additional info especially the auditorium's photo, feel free to add it on or improve the article's quality. - Jay 09:40, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Brand new article

message: The following coordinate fixes are needed for this article.—Jay (talk) 08:01, 1 August 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Done, corrected it --Jay (talk) 08:05, 1 August 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Coordinate error
Talk:Photodarkening

message: Photodarkening is also seen in high-energy physics because of the interaction of xrays with glasses. [Sakka's "Radiation-induced Color Centers in Glasses", 1970]. It seems to be a similar process, whereas electrons and holes are being formed, leaving ions in the matrix.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.34.3.134 (talk) 12:39, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
Talk:2109

message: Help 2600:6C5E:2E7F:6917:F8F9:560F:ECE1:CAC1 (talk) 06:45, 21 January 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Thomas Hawarden** BrianR124 (talk) 00:11, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Thomas Harden's book still has not been found. 

message: T.H. We believe in you! 24.161.90.103 (talk) 23:24, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Still no book has been reported to be found… 🤞🏼 one day
Talk:Nahal

message: The IDF website uses Nachal. Should this switch be made?http://dover.idf.il/IDF/English/units/forces/ground/infantry/nachal/Headquarters/default.htm Bob0513 (talk) 19:26, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Nachal vs Nahal

message: The gadsar article is non-referenced and I doubt that anything substantial or notable can be found about it to justify a seperate article. --Shuki (talk) 19:12, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: merge with Gadasr

message: The new Nahal group article is non-referenced and some of the information better merged into this article where the information is better located for now. --Shuki (talk) 22:46, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: merge with Gadasr

message: Im supporting the merge suggestion, but into the article Nahal. Nizzan Cohen (talk) 13:19, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: merging

message: There is also a Gadsar Nahal-article. Should we merge and redirect it to here? Best regards,Jeff5102 (talk) 13:18, 14 January 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: No, it shouldn't. This is a special program, it has no connection with the "Gadsar". It (Gadsar) just has revived the name "Nahal" on 1985, when the IDF needed a new brigade while their war in Lebanon, while the "real" Nahal established on 1948, and they are doing another things in the IDF and in the Civil's Life in the cities of Israel. Therefor they should not be together. Have a wonderful day, Niles אנדרסן (talk) 17:23, 14 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Another merge? 
Talk:Birdman Rally

message: Shouldn't this article be rolled together with International_Bognor_Birdman?  With this as the primary page?  I'd started adding some Melbourne details to this one and found the other page linked from here:Moomba
RobTrotter 08:38, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No. The Bognor (now Worthing) Birdman event is notable enough, as it is deemed to be the original, to have its own article. I would say the function of this page is is a general overview of Birdman competitions, specific competitions to have their own pages if they become notable. MortimerCat (talk) 10:13, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge?
Talk:International Birdman

message: As the competition is now called Worthing Birdman, and originally it was Selsey Birdman, should we not move this page to a more generic term? How about just International Birdman or is that going to cause controversy with the rest of the world? 
Alternatively, we could move it to International Worthing Birdman, and International Bognor Birdman will be a redirect.
MortimerCat (talk) 10:19, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Article rename

message: I have changed the links back to Bognor as it will be running its Birdman again this year. I appears there never was a good reason for it not to run, it just took someone with some "get up and go" to prove it ;) This does mean we now have a split. As Bognor is the Original event, and Sir Patrick Moore one of the founders of the event in 1971 is a patron on the Bognor event it makes sense its considered the original and worthing a copy of that original event. If you disagree with my logic please discuss it here BEFORE changing the main page.
Amunra reborn (talk) 08:02, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: If nobody owns the trademark "International Birdman" or is calling their organising company (just) "International Birdman", and if for whatever reason (I really could care less why), there are now two events calling themselves the the 'International Birdman' or variations thereof, then the only thing I can see happening is International Birdman becoming a disambiguation page, and the content being split between International Bognor Birdman and Worthing International Birdman, appearing to be the current names of the two events. Wikipedia naming policy frankly doesn't give a toss who out of two warring parties thinks they have more 'right' to being called 'International Birdman', it only goes on what is proveable, and what is proveable is that on a Google Search for 'International Birdman, both the sites for Bognor and Worthing appear in the results. MickMacNee (talk) 18:41, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I think that makes a lot of sense. There are now two events and the "International Birdman" is not specific to either. Although there is a lot of shared information unless the Worthing Birdman page starts in 2008 linking back to the Bognor one. I am unsure which is the best way to structure these changes. Amunra reborn (talk) 10:46, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Back to Bognor
Talk:2007 Challenge Cup

message: Waterhead was eliminated in the first round; can anyone say which place of this name the team is named after? Saga City 15:46, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Waterhead
Talk:Patrick Donnelly (bishop)

message: This bio needs to be fixed. references aren't in complete agreement. It needs to be rewritten and wikified
* This is a work in progress, not requiring deletion DDB 09:30, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Template talk:Philippine territorial disputes

message: The template does not specify whether it is about past or current disputes so i've readded [[ Palmas island. -23prootie 08:56, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It does leave the impression, that the territory's status has to be resolved. If it has been resolved, it simply is not anymore disputed. — scorpion prinz 13:24, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: But if past disputes are all resolved then this template would cease to exist.-23prootie 21:36, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Exactly. If all disputes are resolved, this template would be irrelevant. --Scorpion prinz (Talk | contribs) 07:46, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If there are no more disputes, we'll have to delete this. --Howard the Duck 14:24, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Indeed, no more disputed territories this should be gone. --Scorpion prinz (Talk | contribs) 00:43, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

text: But why keep this template in the first place if it is to be deleted anyway? Why can't historical disputes be included for historical purposes? and when all disputes are resolved, why can't we rename this template to historical territorial disputes of the Philippines? 23prootie 18:00, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Until there are active disputes, there should be no historical ek-ek here. --Howard the Duck 16:17, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

text: But your acting as if this never existed so that the problem. Anyway I'm putting it inn this template so it does not get lost in the multitude of wiki articles.23prootie (talk) 09:03, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Lets put it this way, does Template:NBA include the defunct franchises? No. Neither should this. When the NBA dissolves, now that's the time to add all of the defunct franchises, or even delete the template. --Howard the Duck 16:58, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Miangas

message: What is the source for this being a disputed region?  The only reference I've found for it says its part of the Bicol Region, not really near any contested areas.
 76.235.196.28 (talk) 04:30, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Benham Rise 

message: Does the Philippines claim Labuan too? Labuan was never part of Sulu. The Sultanate of Brunei granted only the northeastern part of Sabah back then to Sulu. Labuan actually remained under Brunei even when that part was submitted to Sulu.__earth (Talk) 13:05, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Labuan
Talk:The Spaces Between

message: I have rated this article as "Start" class on the assessment scale - it has an infobox, is fairly well laid out and has a couple of references.  More info about chart positions, critical reception, cover art etc. is necessary.--Phil500 (Talk / Contribs) 08:57, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Rating

message: Firstly,
"in the Californian desert about hours out of LA."
How many hours? Secondly, the reference that supports most of this paragraph isn't on Drum Media anymore. I haven't removed it so someone can follow it up. VaughnJess 10:54, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Video
Talk:Umbrella (song)

message: I can't fix it because I have no clue what it's trying to say. InspectorMendel (talk) 12:47, 13 February 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Concur.  The paragraph is an incoherent mess.  In my experience, when a paragraph with apparently proper sources is that incomprehensible, either the writer doesn't know how to write, or if you trace back, it used to make sense and then it was heavily vandalized and no one caught it.  But I don't have the time or interest to figure out which scenario is true right now. --Coolcaesar (talk) 22:21, 13 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Last paragraph of "Background and development" makes no sense
Talk:Quartz-porphyry

message: Somebody who thinks that geology rocks please help out here.  I'm having difficulty sorting out what is pertinent here and what is not.  Zab 09:08, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cleanup April 2007 

message: Why does this article start with an light left and Table-of-Contents to right? RJFJR (talk) 14:48, 22 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Layout

message: The two templates  and  have been removed from the article. It seems the article was originally basically a copy/paste of the 1911 Encyclopedia Britannica (such copy/pastes were quite common way back when) with wikification. As such, saying Please help improve it by rewriting it in an encyclopedic style. and This article may be too technical for most readers to understand. as the two templates stated seems a bit off. Yes, the article can be improved - mainly by modernizing some terminology and finding more modern references (assuming they exist - archaic usage), but the removed templates rather missed the point. Vsmith (talk) 15:55, 8 February 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Template removal
Talk:2000 Indonesian census

message: I have made a proposal to move the name of this article to Census of Indonesia, 2000, to discuss this please go to Talk:2001 Bangladesh census#Requested move where a full debate is taking place. Any comments or discussion on this page about the proposed move will not be counted. Shatter Resistance (talk) 15:59, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 

message: There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:2001 Bangladesh census which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you.  —RM bot 16:01, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Move discussion in progress
Talk:Barlekha Upazila

message: 'barlekha i my town_onik upzila chattar barlekha  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.76.106.26 (talk) 04:49, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Sreemangal Upazila

message: Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: http://www.banglapedia.org/HT/S_0601.htm. Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.)
For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, and, if allowed under fair use, may copy sentences and phrases, provided they are included in quotation marks and referenced properly. The material may also be rewritten, providing it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Therefore, such paraphrased portions must provide their source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you.  Moonriddengirl (talk) 19:45, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copyright problem removed 

message: sreemangal (Bengali: শ্রীমঙ্গল, romanized: Srimongol) is an upazila of Moulvibazar District[1] in the Sylhet Division of Bangladesh. It is located at the southwest of the district, and borders the Habiganj District to the west and the Indian state of Tripura to the south. Sreemangal is often referred to as the 'tea capital' of Bangladesh, and is most famous for its tea fields. Other than tea, the rubber, pineapple, wood, betel, and lemon industries also exist in the upazila.[2] 103.120.201.171 (talk) 14:36, 27 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Discribing you home town?