lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Glossopteris

message: A computerised algorithm has generated a version of this page using data obtained from AlgaeBase.  You may be able to incorporate elements into the current article. Alternatively, it may be appropriate to create a new page at Glossopteris (alga). Anybot (contact operator) 16:18, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bot-generated content 
Talk:Alcatrazz

message: For example:
"Dangerous Games" was a desperate attempt at selling out for the Big 80's hit
it's also a bit agressive. I thought it wasnt up to the "parole" level but there's no need to attack it to that extent.Komodo123 (talk) 21:02, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Bit Too much opinion 

message: I couldn't find much in the way of reliable references. Any suggestions?--MattyMetalFan (talk) 17:50, 31 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  References 
Talk:Ralphs

message: # Wasn't this supermarket chain parodied in The Powerpuff Girls as Malphs? --Geopgeop 09:56, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: The correct spelling is Ralphs  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.32.216.202 (talk) 02:47, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Shouldn't there be some information on the different varieties of Ralphs, such as the upscale Ralphs Fresh Fare and the larger Ralphs Marketplace? I saw another one once too, but can't remember what it was.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.124.202.170 (talk) 23:48, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Store Varieties

message: Kroger has bought Ralphs, Food 4 less and more mostly in California, Some in New York and Arizona too. Kroger is Southern California’s well known fresh and organic supermarket and stores chains. Ralphs Link 2603:8001:6601:EE01:DD88:A224:593E:3465 (talk) 00:00, 24 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Kroger
Wikipedia talk:Reverting

message: I have removed the recent addition of the following to the list of exceptions to the rule that you keep the status quo while disputed content is discussed:
The problem with this is that if there's a dispute, then it isn't a clear-cut contravention.  With a clear-cut contravention, you fix it, explain it, and everyone else says, "Oh, I see."  Everything else in the exception list is a case where the damage done by the status quo if it is wrong is so severe that it makes more sense to assume it's wrong until proven otherwise.  With a typical contravention of policies or guidelines, the sky won't fall if it stays wrong for a few days or weeks while the community determines that it's wrong.
This exception largely takes back the entire status-quo-during-discussion advice and invites edit wars while people discuss whether there is a clear-cut contravention.  Bryan Henderson (giraffedata) (talk) 17:59, 25 October 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: "if there's a dispute, then it isn't a clear-cut contravention" is not true. Editors can be in agreement on what the guideline requires, but disagree about whether an exception should be made. In that case, the version that doesn't break the guideline should stand. That certainly doesn't "take back" the concept of favoring the status quo. But that may be a subtlety not worth going into, since the essay isn't binding, so I don't care to fight you on it. —swpbT • beyond • mutual 20:36, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

text: While I can see a situation in which editors agree there is a clear-cut contravention, it would happen so rarely as to make mentioning it wp:KUDZU. Especially since, as pointed out, it would just create a new issue which could give rise to an edit war. - Butwhatdoiknow (talk) 21:06, 25 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Maintaining non-status-quo during discussion if clear-cut contravention of policies 

message: The redirect Wikipedia:REVERT 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.   Jay 💬 07:44, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  "[[:Wikipedia:REVERT]]" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]]
Talk:What Happened to Mr. Forster?

message: It isn't apparent from the summary that this is a book portraying paedophilia or sexual abuse of minors. So why is there a link to that list? It isn't on the list. If whoever included that link thinks it is about pedophilia/abuse, they should say so. Were they assuming that, because he is gay, his interest in Louis must be sexual?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.162.28.69 (talk) 22:12, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Kroměříž Castle

message: I was working in Kromeriz for 10 years, been everywhere, seen everything :-) - but what is "Pleasure Garden"? There are TWO gardens associated with Castle - one directly under the Castle is called "Podzamecka zahrada" (English park style) and the one sligtly away from castle, on the higher grounds (therefore not damaged by recent floods) is called "Kvetna zahrada" and is in distinctly French "Versailles" style. When writing about those things, put more trust in people who were there and actually seen it. I never was in Tibet = therefore I do not write about Tibet. :-)  Ross.Hedvicek 16:25, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: English version of oficial site: Archepiscopal Chateau and the Gardens of Kroměříž. Here are Two Gardens and relatively wide apart. Cinik 05:48, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thank you for proof that it is FLOWER GARDEN, not a Pleasure Garden. Ross.Hedvicek 16:14, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  What is "Pleasure Garden"? 

message: "...bishop Stanislas Thurzo in 1497. The building was in a Late Gothic style, with a modicum of Renaissance detail." The presence even of a modicum of Renaissance detail in 1497 is an extraordinary fact that needs to be made more clear. --Wetman 20:11, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think it's extraordinary, given that the Palace of Facets and Archangel Cathedral were built by Italian masters as far east as Moscow at about the same time. The article says: "The first residence on the spot was founded by bishop Stanislas Thurzo in 1497. The building was in a Late Gothic style, with a modicum of Renaissance detail." Does it follow from this that Renaissance detailing dates back to 1493? I think not. The reference I provided says: "In 1497 the wealthy and well connected Stanislav Thurzo became Bishop of Olomouc. He set about reconstructing and modernizing his castle at Kromeríz. At first this work was carried out using the Late Gothic style of the period, but Renaissance elements began to filter in as the work progressed". --Ghirla -трёп- 14:24, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Renaissance detail in 1497
Talk:Pentecostal Church of God

message: My source for this quotation is Pastor L.L. Collins, of the Pentecostal Highway of Holiness Church in Hamilton, Ohio. He is a senior minister who remembers this phrase being widely used among Pentecostal people during the 1940s and 1950s. Even as recently as the early 1960s, the PCG was the only Pentecostal denomination that would ordain divorced and remarried ministers for any reason. Collins' group, the Free Holiness, or Independent Pentecostal people, holds to a higher standard, comparable to that of the Assemblies of God. I have confirmed this fact with the PCG headquarters office, that divorce doctrine is the only real issue separating the PCG from the Assemblies of God. "The Trash Can of Pentecost" was the way this difference was colloquially expressed.
:Unfortunately that constitutes original research, which Wikipedia forbids. If you can find a legitimate source such as a newspaper or book, the information can be added. David L Rattigan 21:23, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Origin of the "Trash Can of Pentecost" epithet 

message: From one who is a member of the Pentecostal Church of God and one who has studied the history of the Pentecostal Church of God and one who has talked to many people who have been members of the Pentecostal Church of God since the 30's, I must say that neither I nor any of the people I have talked to have ever heard the Pentecostal Church of God referred to as "the trash can of Pentecost".  
The Pentecostal Church of God has a stance on divorce that says if the divorce is caused by either fornication or by the departure of an unbeliever from the marriage then the divorce is legitimate, otherwise, it isn't.  It is almost impossible for a divorcee to get licensed through the Pentecostal Church of God.  I have tried to get licensed through them and have been turned down because I, myself, am divorced.Ķ
I may have a lot of issues with the PCG, but I would never go so far as to say that it is the 'Trash Can of Pentecost'.  I had never seen or heard this phrase until I visited this page.  I appreciate the Wikipedian who pointed out that this epithet constitutes 'original research', and is not permitted in Wikipedia.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.16.105.40 (talk) 16:54, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Trash Can of Pentecost
Talk:Agnes Ozman

message: This is a biography and there is a statement that points to a belief that Agnes Ozman retracted her belief in speaking in tongues without any source or proof such as a witness or written proof that I am aware of.Otr500 (talk) 05:54, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
Talk:Charles Edward Blake Sr.

message: So, this article says that this guy has been on the Ebony 100 most influential list "annually" since 2007.  He does not appear on the 2012 or 2013 edition, the only two that appear online.  165.91.116.155 (talk) 11:22, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Ebony Most Influential?

message: NPOV dispute
The article contains phrases like "sought after by presidents and kings" and "serves with a humility" that sound more like rhetorical flourishes than actual facts.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by ThomasLB (talk • contribs) 18:32, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:John G. Lake

message: : Given the large quantities of positive literature and writing about J. G. Lake, the entire tone of this article seems one-sided. 
I notice that user Barry Morton has made extensive contributions to this article, and also seems to be the 
author of more than one frequently cited reference in this article. 
One of his works titled "‘The Devil Who Heals’: Fraud and Falsification in the Evangelical Career of John G Lake, Missionary to South Africa 1908–1913"
would indicate he is personally quite biased on the subject of John G Lake. Pomke (talk) 11:46, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I really disagree with Pomke, on all three points. 1. The article is not one-sided or biased: read the complete article and you will see a fairly balanced lemma, which could have been much more negative if only half of what is documented in the literature is true. If you read the intro, you might even think the article is indeed going to be one-sided (but in the opposite way of what Pomke claims it is). 2. Morton made several factual contributions, and added many references to available sources in this article. 3. I was the first one to add references to Morton's work to this article (in June 2013), thereby making it less biased. Vysotsky (talk) 15:11, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I concur with Vysotsky, and add that NPOV means that the article should be impartial in its presentation of the facts and opinions on a subject. If the facts and opinions from reliable sources happen to skew negative, that needs to be reflected in the content of the article. Also, I am not aware of any effort on the part of JGL's biographers and proponents to respond to Barry Morton's analysis. -Sigeng (talk) 21:48, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: It's for sure not like a Shoah article. But giving both (or more) sides would still be fair. There is more allegations against him as well in terms of fraudulent practices. There is also rebuttals. So perhaps look at both types of testimony, then. 105.0.6.188 (talk) 14:20, 11 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Very negative tone

message: : Cleaned up article; added photo and info box. --Mikhailovich (talk) 15:25, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Pentecostal Assemblies of Canada

message: Why is there nothing about the beliefs of this religion? How does it differ from (e.g.) Roman Catholicism? Presbyterianism? ...? I don't know anything about this religion and the article does not provide any info except about its organizational structure. Not to sound flippant but it's almost written the way a national bowling league might be described. Can someone add some detail on this? I'm curious but ignorant on the subject. Thanks, Hu Gadarn (talk) 16:03, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi, you're right this article could do a better job of explaining their beliefs. Here is a link to their Statement of Fundamental and Essential Truths. Essentially, the PAOC is the largest branch of the Assemblies of God in Canada. Their beliefs are pretty in line with the AG mainstream. The Assemblies of God are classical finished work non-Wesleyan Pentecostals. The PAOC is extremely close to the Assemblies of God USA and were once organizationally connected to this denomination. I will try to do what I can, but until then I would check out the AG and AGUSA articles. Ltwin (talk) 18:38, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why no info on beliefs ?
Talk:Dream Center

message: If the statement about crime in the surrounding neighborhood is a quotation (it's currently in double quotes) then it needs to be attributed to the person who said it, and sourced.  If it is not a quotation, then the double quotes should be removed and at least the statistics need to be sourced.  Are those from an article in the Los Angeles Times, for example, or are they the DC's own statistics? - Mark Dixon (talk) 15:44, 26 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The Dream Center is located in the Silver Lake neighborhood which during the time period mentioned went through considerable gentrification. That has more to do with reductions in crime than the establishment of the Dream Center, no? 69.233.139.178 (talk) 03:02, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Source for statistics on falling crime rate?
Talk:Donald Gee

message: Samkev.hudson 21:11, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Incorrect Donald Gee 

message: As a Pentecostal myself, I find the present tone and choice of words charming and I personally understand what is meant quite well, because I "speak the language" as it were. However, I would advise the author(s) or anyone else who is both willing and knowledgeable regarding the biography of Donald Gee to set to the task of revising this article's verbiage so as to better conform to the stylistic standards of Wikipedia. After all, Wikipedia is open to any and everyone with a connection to the internet and, as I hope that this article may soon have a manifestation in tongues other than the English one, it is also open to people of many "tongues and tribes and nations" -- including people who do not speak "Pentecostalese". So, with others in mind -- and mindful too of the obscurity of our various British and American (&c.) idioms and colloquialisms -- and out of no disrespect to Brother Gee's legacy and cause, let's see if there are clearer ways to phrase this article for those who are not used to the peculiar expressions and references of Pentecostals -- to say nothing of people who are not well-informed regarding Christianity more generally or the Christian scriptures. 
Sincerely, 
CSG, a Yank  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.99.53.242 (talk) 20:25, 1 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pentecostalese 
Talk:Nicky Gumbel

message: Whether he likes it or not, Nicky Gumbel has been ordained as a priest in the Church of England - this is the official term.  Many priests do not regularly use this designation for various reasons, prefering other ones such as vicar / rector (this depends on the legal status of the actual benefice - in HTB's case it is rector, not vicar), father, or simply being known as a minister. -- MightyWarrior 10:50, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Priest or vicar

message: The  tag seems unwarranted... the material is uncontroversial, reasonably sourced and there's no hint of libel that I can see. Can anyone provide a rationale for it? If so let's fix it, if not let's remove it. Andrewa (talk) 00:38, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually this article is sourced: see the 'websites and resources' section. What it lacks are references to reliable, third-party sources, which are necessary to meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines. Robofish (talk) 11:45, 4 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: ''Unsourced'' tag

message: I have added biographical information on Nicky Gumbel taken from a Deborah Orr article in the Independent, but this was removed, could I ask the user who removed this to explain their thinking? Thanks Keith Johnston (talk) 20:52, 7 January 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi, . Sure thing. What changes in particular were you looking to have addressed? 142.161.81.20 (talk) 20:55, 7 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Deborah Orr article
Talk:John Paul Jackson

message: John Paul Jackson talked about the 'Woes of 2012', however most commentators would say that 2012 has passed without a significant increase in disasters compared with other years. Has John Paul Jackson provided any response or follow up on this prophecy?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.16.228.6 (talk) 20:24, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Response to woes of 2012 prophecy 

message: I've nominated this article to be checked for its neutrality because the vast majority of citations come from either the subject's own works or from his ministries. Additionally, the article states that Mr. Jackson appearance on "It's Supernatural" was seen on several networks/outlets, but the citation provided does not show this. Also, the article states that the "subject of The Perfect Storm has been discussed on multiple mainstream television programs, including Joni Table Talk, and Sid Roth's, It's Supernatural!", both of which appear to be web-based and not "mainstream television". Looking forward to any discussion. Kkbay (talk) 01:11, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nominated for Neutrality Check 
Talk:The Whalestoe Letters

message: There are two identical photos in this article. Why? S Dedalus 17:16, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Double Photo

message: I think it should be noted that said letters made their inclusion in the second edition of The House of Leaves. (see appendix E) --Mewtu (talk) 20:03, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Inclusion in 2nd Edition of The House of Leaves
Talk:Rhema

message: This article needs some improvement. Rhema is the ultimate in bible study as it furthers the understanding of how a word communicates its meaning from the bible to the reader via inspiration and the activity of the Holy Spirit. Rhema is also translated as word in English. The Greek words Rhema and Logos come in handy to distinguish between the definitive word of God and the personal word of God. Alan347 (talk) 11:38, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Clean up

message: This article has zero references and has already been flagged as low quality. It seems to qualify as a Federal disaster area. Unless there are solid reasons not to, I will clean up the unreferenced items and add sourced material. History2007 (talk) 11:18, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Article quality

message: This statement is simply not true and has been removed:
Rhema is Christ's utterance, while Logos refers to Christ himself.
On multiple occasions Jesus says listen to my "logos". His spoken word if his Logos not only his Rhema. In fact these two words are used as synonyms.
From NASB
John 4:41 Many more believed because of His word [logos};
John 4:50 Jesus *said to him, "Go; your son lives." The man believed the word [logos] that Jesus spoke to him and started off.
John 5:24 "Truly, truly I say to you, he who hears My word [logos], and believes Him who sent Me, has eternal life, and does not come into judgment, but has passed out of death into life.
John 6:60 Therefore many of His disciples, when they heard this said, "This is a difficult statement [logos]; who can listen to it?"
NOT EVEN OF JESUS' WORDS John 7:40 Some of the people therefore, when they heard these words [logos], were saying, "This certainly is the Prophet."
Mark 2:2 And many were gathered together so that there was no longer room, not even near the door; and He was speaking the word [logos] to them.
Mark 8:38 "For whoever * is ashamed of Me and My words [logos] in this adulterous and sinful generation, the Son of Man will also be ashamed of him when He comes in the glory of His Father with the holy angels."
Here they are equated John 12:48 "He who rejects Me and does not receive My sayings [rhema], has one who judges him; the word [logos] I spoke is what will judge him at the last day.
Rhema is not from God it is simply something spoken (there are MANY of the cases in the bible) Acts 16:38 The policemen reported these words [Rhema] to the chief magistrates They were afraid when they heard that they were Romans,  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kyle.Mullaney (talk • contribs) 14:44, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Challenge
Talk:This Present Darkness

message: Surely a book that has sold this many copies has had positive reviews as well as negative? --Nerd42 (talk) 19:24, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes you are right to point this out, it has received positive comments. I have one to hand from Leanne Payne. This and Perreti's follow up Piercing the Darkness were definitely popular works during the 1980's and 90's. I have read both.  The article as it stands certainly lacks neutrality with regard to the reviews and comments the book received. In my view comments within this section would be better subsumed as part of a Reception section. 82.18.164.15 (talk) 16:55, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

text: As an aside - a Michael W. Smith album i 2 (EYE) contains an instrumental track called Ashton, which if I recall correctly he stated on the lyric sheet was inspired by This Present Darkness. This could be included in the Cultural influence section. I will try and make some additions to reference this.82.18.164.15 (talk) 17:20, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Critical Reviews" section neutrality?
Talk:The Wedding (Steel novel)

message: Is this book more notable than other works known as 'The Wedding'? If not, it should be moved to The Wedding (novel) and The Wedding (disambiguation) should be moved here.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  15:29, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: What is all this "of lively" business in the characters section? CharacterZero | Speak 19:13, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't know.  I removed the whole section, since it was incoherent. Chick Bowen 22:16, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  of lively