lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Mission to Mustafar

message: Wasnt Shu killed after wat?-Gpigr
I completely redid the end of the article, giving the details of the duel. Bly1993 7 Nov
I have just redone the majority of the article, as I found the quality to be somewhat lacking. 64.252.169.240 17:08, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Is there source material for the statement a sheet-metal cutting droid did the surgery? Kafziel 17:19, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

text: The star wars databank lists the droid as being a chopper droid, specializing in chopping metal. ViceroyInterus 23:39, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

message: Should a higher power come here to look for the previously non-existant argument on whether or nor to merge, I am for merging. Despite having written a good deal of this, it is not in proper form, and covers information already mentioned on the Episode Three page. ViceroyInterus 21:01, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I am redirecting this article per Wikipedia:Notability (fiction) number four. This information can be extracted and moved to Wikibooks or Wookieepedia if anyone sees fit. — Deckiller 18:43, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

text: Yeah, my current mission is to tackle the 75+ battle articles. Most of them are just summaries of a chapter or two of a novel/game, so the information should be merged into the novel article or video game article. But in this case, this information would be excess for the ROTS article. I'm also going to be resparking the Star Wars WikiProject that has been somewhat slow while I was on vacation; I think I'll start work on a notability page and see what the other project members think. Lots of stuff going on in the star wars Wiki land right now. — Deckiller 19:22, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merging
Talk:Anneliese Michel

message: "Michel and her family became convinced she was possessed by a demon."
"Anna Elisabeth Michel" is the name under her picture, her last (sir?) name in Michel.
Should that read "Anne and her family" or "Anne Michel and her family" Or was it just her family that thought it? Then it should read "Michel's family became convinced" 
P.S. Is it normal to refer to people by there last name in Wikipedia? I find that odd, it's sort of confusing when talking about members of her family.
ImWACCo (talk) 05:51, 10 November 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, it's normal. --Hob Gadling (talk) 18:24, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Who thought Anne was possessed by a demon? 

message: The last paragraph of section "Psychiatric treatment" states:
"However Goodman contradicts herself stating Roswitha remembers that Michel often took less than three tablets of Tegretol a day when her prescriptions began to run low, then would..." 
Goodman is never introduced prior and is not mentioned anywhere else in the article.
The Spinches (talk) 23:45, 29 October 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Seems to be a relic from earlier versions. Goodman is a bad source, so it was deleted, but seemingly not in toto. --Hob Gadling (talk) 18:24, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: I deleted the paragraph. --Hob Gadling (talk) 19:43, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Goodman appears 

message: I could not parse this sentence into making sense. "Brought"? It sounds like she had beliefs about her "future exhumation". --Hob Gadling (talk) 06:19, 5 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Stigmata
Talk:Telecommunications in Brunei

message: Brunei is currently nominated on Wikipedia: This week's improvement drive. Come and support it with your vote! --Fenice 18:06, 13 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Improvement drive
Talk:Istana Nurul Iman

message: — Preceding unsigned comment added by Maryoumi13 (talk • contribs) 03:14, 1 February 2022 (UTC)

message: Brunei is currently nominated on Wikipedia: This week's improvement drive. Come and support it with your vote! --Fenice 18:07, 13 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Improvement drive

message: I've been to Versailles and the Royal Palace in Madrid, and there is absolutely no way the latter is two and a half times larger. Olborne 15:53, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This encyclopedia should not repeat egregious errors. There is no conceivable doubt that Versailles is much, much larger than the Royal Palace in Madrid. The official site may be referring to the size of the plot, or it may have been put together by someone who just doesn't understand numbers and made a huge error, but a huge error has been made. It would have to have about ten levels of basements to have that floor area. I will delete the facts that just cannot be believed. Press releases put out by the palaces are basically puffs aimed at tourists, and such things are typically riddled with errors and exaggerations. Most people have no idea what a building of X square feet looks like, and that would appear to include the people responsible for the Madrid Palace site. A credible source would be one put together by someone with a knowledge of architecture and statistical awareness. Official sites made for non-architectural purposes should not be believed blindly. Mowsbury (talk) 00:36, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: And so far as I can see the figure has been removed from the site, so perhaps they realised it was wrong. Mowsbury (talk) 01:03, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Impossible stats

message: I've always been curious, I figure it will save others from having to hunt around. --Bobak 06:45, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Added the coordinates. 

message: Official site of the chamber of deputies. http://www.cdep.ro/pls/dic/site.page?id=27  330,000 sq.m. surface.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.120.77.189 (talk) 01:03, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: But it is not a royal palace, or a residential building, any more than a big hotel or office building with the word palace in its name is really a palace. Mowsbury (talk) 00:47, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I beg to differ, it's the Romanian seat of political and administrative power, thus making it a true palace, and it's far more ostentatious than some island kingdom's palace.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.252.84.100 (talk) 03:42, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Palace of the Parliament, Bucharest, is bigger
Talk:North Borneo Federation

message: Brunei is currently nominated on Wikipedia: This week's improvement drive. Come and support it with your vote! --Fenice 18:08, 13 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Improvement drive

message: The article originally claimed that most oil revenues goes to Kuala Lumpur which is not true, it goes to the federal government. Since this becomes a part of the federal government budget, I don't think you can make any comment about where it is spent. A better claim would be that the federal government doesn't spend enough on Sabah despite getting a sizeable chunk of their budget from oil revenues from Sabah but IMHO this is unnecessary.
Another claim was that the failure of Brunei joining the federation was because of poor diplomacy by the part of Malaysia. My Malaysian history is rather hazy but the Malaysia article mentions that there were disputes of oil revenues which I recall as being a factor. The history article also mentions the opposition of the Brunei people in the referendum (which I guess was partially related to the issues of oil revenues etc) and the revolt as other factors. I also vaguely recall that the Sultan of Brunei may have wanted to be permanent agong (king). In any case, it seems clear that there were many factors and disputes preventing Brunei joining the federation. Malaysian diplomacy may have played a part in all of these but it seems more likely that the biggest problems was the disagreement between the Malaysian (especially the Malayan) side and the Brunei sides about the nature of the federation (and it's government and powers) and the sharing of state resources and revenues from state resources which probably couldn't have been resolved no matter how good your diplomacy was. Nil Einne 15:32, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article improved
Talk:Jaegwon Kim

message: I recently added some stuff and cleaned the article up a bit.  However, it can still use some clean up and expansion:
* There is definitely more to add to the "Work" section.  There's some info already about his philosophy of mind and events, but he has other work too that should be highlighted. 
* I think that the section on events should be cleaned up and have references to his work as well. (Just saying where he states certain views would be good.) 
* Adding more of his major publications would be good too, especially his major articles. 
- Jaymay 05:11, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Expansion and clean up
Talk:Brunei–Muara district

message: Brunei is currently nominated on Wikipedia: This week's improvement drive. Come and support it with your vote! --Fenice 18:07, 13 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Improvement drive

message: Moved from article to talk.  If we're going to keep this in the article then it needs to be seriously rewritten. RJFJR (talk) 14:28, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Place of interest in Brunei Muara District
Talk:White Rajahs

message: Brunei is currently nominated on Wikipedia: This week's improvement drive. Come and support it with your vote! --Fenice 18:07, 13 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Improvement drive

message: Aren't the White Rajahs enemies of the fictional Sandokan?—Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.20.17.84 (talk • contribs) 18:15, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sandokan 

message: I have a feeling that this article should be renamed to Kingdom of Sarawak. __earth (Talk) 13:58, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: *True but the article is mostly about Sarawak rather than about the dynasty. __earth (Talk) 03:34, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Surely the article on Sarawak, this article should be about the Royal house of the Brookes'/the White Rajahs. --Counter-revolutionary (talk) 13:48, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The actual title here is 'Rajah of Sarawak'. 'White Rajah' was just a nickname.  I'm suggesting, therefore, we move to 'Rajah of Sarawak' to bring it in line with how Wikipedia deals with other Royal and noble titles. 'White Rajah' could still re-direct here. Indisciplined (talk) 22:53, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

text: Wikipedia is collaborative in nature. Why don't you contribute too rather than just complaint if you feel so high and mighty about it? It's better for you to make good of your words rather than supply us with empty rhetoric about your grandmother. At least other contributors aided. What have you done? __earth (Talk) 02:18, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rename? 

message: *I'm beginning to suspect the Rajah's may have converted to Islam, and am wondering if they were British subjects, if not they couldn't use the prefix "sir", and would only be entitled to postnominal letters.  Anyone have any ideas? --Counter-revolutionary (talk) 13:48, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Religion and Nationality

message: Why are references to "exploitation" in quotes? I think there's no doubt that colonial businesses were exploiting people in other parts of the world, and quite happily doing so elsewhere in Borneo, as they continue to do today.Gymnophoria (talk) 12:12, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: "Exploitation"

message: I don't understand why this category is applied to Jason Brooke.  He's not pretending to be the Rajah and never has.
I think the category should probably be deleted, or expanded.
There were only 2 serious pretenders.
1) John Brooke Johnson Brooke - when he claimed to the British Gov in 1863 that he had been made Rajah (elevated from Rajah Muda in 1861) and James had become the Rajah Tua.
2) Anthony Brooke after Sarawak was ceded to Britain. MatSallehSesat (talk) 11:48, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pretender in the infobox 

message: MatSallehSesat (talk) 09:30, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dynasty
Talk:Amunet

message: The hieroglyphs are wrong. Amuntet is represented by a falcon over a feather ontop of a pole.
Example here: 
:No, thats her determinative - it marks the collection of glyphs as a name of a specific god rather than what the name means. It goes at the end of the collection of glyphs. 
:The hieroglyphs in the article are roughly "A", "M", "N", and "T" (vowels, other than A, were not included - they are usually guessed to be "e", except where the way the jaw works makes it hard to say "e" in their place, preferring "u") "Amnt" => "amenet" or "amunet" (easier to pronounce) or "amaunet" (even easier to pronounce). "T" is the glyph that looks like half a circle - a mound ("tanen" in the egyptian language). "A" is the upstanding feather.
~~~~ ( ! | ? | * ) 01:55, 14 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Too many uses of the word "originally" in the first paragraph; makes it read a bit awkwardly. T@nn 04:16, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Error

message: A lot of Egyptian deities have male/female aspects like Amunet is the feminine aspect of Amun. Could we possibly merge this article with Amuns'? I ask because the Egyptian god articles are numerous and somewhat disorganized. Heilingetorix (talk) 11:00, 12 July 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: All too true. And because Egyptological information is hard to get at, it's hard to say when there just isn't enough information on a deity to justify a separate article. In Amaunet's case I lean toward keeping the article for now, because Amaunet wasn't quite as characterless as many other female counterparts. She had her own priests and was involved somehow in royal festivals (I'll add that to the article). I think it would be somewhat awkward to include all that in Amun's article. Still, I can't object outright to a merge, because information about her is so sparse. A. Parrot (talk) 17:20, 12 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge Amun and Amunet?
Talk:Online university

message: I agree with Lcuff.  This article provides minimal information on the concept of a Virtual University, and parts of it do appear to have been lifted from the igi-online.com document noted. I've merged the key statement from this article into Distance education, and redirected this article. --Davnor 19:29, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: It seems to me that "virtual university" and "online degrees" are synonyms.  Also online degrees has be criticised for being US centric.  A merge with this article would address that.Nowa (talk) 11:30, 22 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge with [[online degrees]]
Category talk:Knoppix

message: Ordinarily, it is the rule (per WP:CLS) that articles do not belong to both a category and a sub-category unless they define the sub-category, and it's only reasonable to believe that the same is true of categories.  Thus, a strict literalist interpretation would call for :Category:Knoppix to be a sub-category only of :Category:Debian-based distributions, and not :Category:Linux distributions.
However, the reason for the rule is the assumption that the child's importance to the "grandparent" category is entirely described by the child's belonging to the "parent" category.  In some cases, that assumption is not warranted, and I would argue that this is one of those cases:  Knoppix is not just a Debian-based distribution, it's a LiveCD, and the many distributions which have used Knoppix as their starting point have almost all done so because it is a LiveCD, not just because it is based on Debian.  For this reason, I am placing this category in :Category:Debian-based distributions and :Category:Linux distributions, because "Knoppix is based on Debian" is not the whole story.  If you disagree, please give your reasons here before changing. -- Antaeus Feldspar 18:38, 13 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Categorization
Talk:Madman (Mike Allred character)

message: There is a lot of focus in this article on "fictional character biography" but very little on the publication history. As an encyclopedia article about the character there should be more references to the creation of the character and how he has been published over the years. A fictional character biography doesn't explain how the character has been presented and evolved over the years. beanlynch 19:29, 31 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Publication History?

message: Madman isn't a character that is exclusively published by Image Comics. It's a creator owned character and title that has been published by a number of publishers over the years. In fact it has been more recently published by IDW. Image was just one of the publishers that published the comic in the past. If this was merged with "Madman (Comics)", it should have been that name that remained, not the Image Comics name. beanlynch 19:11, 31 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Should not be listed as "Image Comics"

message: Should this be merged with http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madman_%28comics%29  ?   Dawn22 19:03, 14 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge/redirect

message: Should The Atomics have a separate page?      Dawn22 19:03, 14 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: --Yes, I think The Atomics should have a separate page. --Madnova777 03:29, 16 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Atomics

message: What about making this page a disambiguation page that links to Madman (comics) so that we can list Madman (software) in it too?
see http://madman.sourceforge.net
86.139.242.37 18:29, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Madman(Software)

message: Madman has two primary locales and Madman is NOT the only superhero on the planet (cf Atomics). Thmazing (talk) 19:01, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  SnapCity/Buzztonw and "only" superhero 

message: Should there be a section related to the Madman inspiring the creation of the TV show Freakazoid? It seems significant enough. 97.105.163.2 (talk) 14:31, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: It's mentioned on the Freakazoid! article, which I think is enough as it's not particularly relevant to the story of the character. That is to say, Madman may have been important to Freakazoid!, but there was little to no impact on the Madman character or series. --Mashed Potate Jones (talk) 19:11, 4 August 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Freakazoid controversy
Talk:List of South Africa Test cricketers

message: 194.176.105.37 (talk) 10:01, 4 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Stats incomplete 

message: 1) hashim amla
2) ab de villiers
3) dean elgar
4) faf du plesis
5) quinten de kock
6) aiden markram
7) JP duminy 2405:201:9007:D051:78A4:EB1D:B527:9FF2 (talk) 09:27, 25 November 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Best modern day test batsman of South africa
Talk:Goroka

message: I've removed the "Twin towns" section for now, as it consisted of Toowoomba and Brisbane, both of which appear to not yet be "sister cities" (or "twin cities" or "twin towns") with Goroka - see Toowoomba city site and Brisbane city site.  This article says that Goroka is expected to become a sister city with Toowoomba in 2012.  I can only find one plausible reference online to a current sister city for Goroka: the capital of Fujian province, China - but there seems to be no strong substantiation for it.
Wantok 01:19, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  sister cities 
Talk:EasyWriter

message: EasyWriter was the first textprocessor for Apple II according to John Draper. Draper ported it to IBM PC. --195.14.198.199 18:49, 13 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: John Draper (aka Cap'n Crunch) wrote an word processor program called "TextWriter" after being sentenced for "Title 18, Section 1343: Fraud by wire" (phone phreaking). Woz gave him Apple II with printer to work with. Later this software was renamed "EasyWriter" after the movie "Easy Rider".  Talamus 20:15, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Easy Rider 

message: It would be nice if an old-timer can expand this article to assert the notability of this software, eg. by providing sales figures, or influences from and on other word processors, or quotes from some important bloke. ~ Jafet (spam) 14:14, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, notability is a concern as the article stood.  "First word processor for the Apple II" and released by IBM with the release of the IBM PC are both pretty strong claims to notability, though, and I've made both statements clear (or I'm trying to at least! ;)   --Joe Decker (talk) 03:43, 3 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Significance 

message: But I do think it potentially could be salvaged, so I'm saving a copy here for future cleanup and reinstatement. 
It seems this version of events was promulgated by the Wall Street Journal. In fact, Draper describes the development of EasyWriter on his own webpage as follows : 
Draper was in prison, in California, at the time, but under a work furlough program. This meant that whilst he had to spend every night in prison, he spent each day working a regular job, outside prison.
This job was at Receiving Studios, a small band practice studio, and whilst there he had access to a computer, where he coded EasyWriter. He did take copies of the code 'home' to prison overnight to work on it.
The implication by 'The Wall Street Journal' that he wrote the code in prison, only to enter it into a computer after completion is clearly a misleading exaggeration.  --Joe Decker (talk) 03:41, 3 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: What I had thought (and I think the previous author had thought) was a contradiction in where EW was authored (Alameda vs. Lompoc) is not in fact a contradiction.  Lompoc isn't in the bay area, the furlough program placed him in (presumably Alameda) the Bay Area at the end of his sentence.  This is consistent with the text of both references.  --Joe Decker (talk) 07:33, 3 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  I removed this section for verifiability.... 

message: Hsusiwjwjiwo1l2ow9e5ftd7 6es is ready still and xtt7x is Z 35xxt7tx73 هو txt8x8xt8xt8xtctct7xtfx7t7xd7t8xt7xf7 f fuufx6rzrz6ze6r6z7fxgcuigcu guxgxf6rze5z5e٨عد٩زعذغ٦طف ظثث٥ظ اهداذل٦طقطف٧خدعخدت٧ذلف٧طدع٩غ٨د فط يق الله ل٨غ٨غلذغ٨ذف 176.29.110.53 (talk) 18:21, 17 February 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Time
Talk:United States of Whatever

message: I went down to the Wikipedia and saw Kiki 
She was all like 
This article about a musical group, band, singer, musician, album, or song does not make it clear whether the subject meets the WikiProject Music criteria for importance.and I was like "Whatever"
That phrase above is so funny!!! :D --SuperDude 16:58, 23 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: I just read the lyrics, and i see no evidence in them that it uses  "whatever" to mean anything different than in "Poor Professor DeSanctis, the Vice President or Secretary or whatever" in William James's letter of Apr. 25, 1905. But i'm no expert; if there are notable critics who think so, cite the evidence they do and attribute it to them. In the meantime, the existing lk is OR, & a perfect place for a link to Whatever (disambiguation). --Jerzy•t 07:51, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Link for "Whatever" 

message: Do the similarities with Funky Western Civilization by Tonio K rise to the level of mentioning them? 65.118.97.26 (talk) 17:43, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reference to Tonio K?