lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Facial canal

message: I'm not an expert in anatomy, but it does not seem correct that the facial canal is the longest canal in the human body.  Not even in the head.  I would think the mandibular canal would be longer than 3 cm and it is and osseous canal that carries a nerve.  Could someone please fact check this statement and either correct it or better qualify it?  Adamlankford (talk) 23:54, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Dubious Sentence

message: Absolutely no need for this prominence to have a separate article. Much better placed in parent article Tom (LT) (talk) 00:27, 29 December 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Klbrain (talk) 13:49, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed merge of [[:Prominence of facial canal]] into [[:Facial canal]]
Talk:Stretch

message: sdasSuperscript text
Since blogs are automatically wiped out even when of good quality, and since the entry I gave is folk-life, which is hard to document with scholarly sources, I will enter the wiped material below and, per bot's suggestion, make the change in the article itself without a reference.  By the way, I specifically wrote "e.g." to indicate the nature of the ref. Now, it material is weaker. This fear of blogs should stop.
* Stretch (game), a game played by American boys in the 1950s, in which a jackknife is thrown alternatingly by two boys facing each other. If the knive sticks in the ground, the other boy stretches his foot to that spot and draws out the knife (e.g., see http://musingsofanoldman.blogspot.com/2006/06/mumbly-pegs.html).  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 211.225.34.63 (talk) 10:50, 19 October 2011 (UTC)
Talk:Australian Drivers' Championship

message: I note there those series are listed as AF2 series. Weren't they Formula 5000 series that just happened to be won by a AF2? If mutiple classes ran in the series it should say. Similarly weren't Formula 1 eligible for at least 1980 ADC? --Falcadore (talk) 07:13, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I have amended the table with the relevant CAMS formulae names. This does not provide an explanation of the year by year components of these formulae but I believe that would be better addressed within specific articles for “Australian National Formula”, “Australian Formula 1” etc rather than on the ADC page.   GTHO (talk) 02:19, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  1969-71
Talk:Optic canal

message: --Gigilili 12:39, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  can you take an eye from an eye socket???? you need to include this. 

message: :The first image in the "Additional images" section offers little article enhancement and the next three nothing that cannot be found through the two in the infobox or the "Optic canal" image. While it can be argued that adding many images could give some improvement, that might otherwise be lacking in a stub or start-class article, it does not improve an article to be inundated with images just because they are "out there" needing a home. If a policy or guideline specifically states (policy in this case) Wikipedia is not a mirror or a repository of links, images, or media files, nor a "manual, guidebook, textbook, or scientific journal" (or picturebook) then there is a legitimate argument that seven images on a start-class article is providing just the opposite of policy. 
:I can see two, possibly three but an end of consensus by silence is when concerns are voiced unless there is sound rationale to argue improvements by ignoring the "rules".  
:If someone cares to enter into a dialog on some to keep, or boldly make improvement by trimming, that would be great. If not I will delete three or four per above comments and the edit summary rationale of the reverted edits.  Thank you,  Otr500 (talk) 15:15, 29 August 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Excessive images
Talk:Mistake (criminal law)

message: For example, if a defendant goes into a supermarket and places eight items in a basket which is presented to the cashier for payment in the usual way. Both honestly believe that all eight items have been scanned, and the defendant pays the sum shown on the bill. A store detective, however, notices that a mistake was made by the cashier so that only seven items were actually priced. This detective arrests the defendant after leaving the store. Since the defendant honestly believes that he has become the owner of goods in a sale transaction, he cannot form the mens rea for theft (which is usually dishonesty) when he physically removes them from the store. Accordingly, he should be acquitted.
But, if A was in transit through an airport and picked up a bag which looked like his own, and that bag was to contain a bomb, A might attempt to argue that a mistake prevented him from being in possession of the bomb. In fact, this argument would fail because the defendant had the legal right to open, examine, and verify the contents of the bag.
this is contradictory. in the first example, the defendant had the legal right to examine and verify the receipt for the purchase. how are these legally different scenarios? --dan 07:24, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

message: Currently, the lead says what this is NOT, not what it IS.  Can someone please add a definition (preferably in laymen terms)????  Thx.--345Kai (talk) 02:11, 29 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  definition?
Talk:Cats (1998 film)

message: I remember reading somewhere that Jo Gibb's singing voice was overdubbed by another actress for the "Mungojerrie and Rumpleteazer" sequence. Is there any truth to this? -- Annie D 07:26, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Cast

message: I wondered if this film was shot in front of a live audience? Doesn't seem like it, but I think that should be mentioned in the article. Zaglabarg (talk) 00:31, 12 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Audience
Template talk:Real estate developments

message: Silicon Valley is not a planned community for the reasons I have discussed in detail at Talk:Silicon Valley. I strongly suspect that Triadian has never visited Silicon Valley (which I took many of the pictures of on Wikipedia) and has never visited a true planned community like Valencia, California (which I also took the pictures of). --Coolcaesar 07:27, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That's why it was under Miscellaenous. Many planned communities attribute their start to the success of Silicon Valley, and the term "silicon valley" has become a synonym for hi-tech developments. That's why it was included in the list. Personally, I dont care if its in or not. --Triadian 17:03, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Why I am pulling Silicon Valley
Talk:Medea (disambiguation)

message: I've tidied up the redlinks and split the science terms into their own section, but I think the page still needs a bit more work. The topics could do with grouping (books with plays under literature, etc.), but I'm not sure if there are enough entries for many of the topics to do that.
– Sasuke Sarutobi (talk) 14:54, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Tidy-up
Talk:Marjorie Cohn

message: Notability calls for individuals to have been the subject of reliable, third party sources.  The first page worth of Google hits for Marjorie Cohn are her own website, and some cites, such as Huffington Post, where she has authored pieces.  Additionally, the article itself offers no citations that establish notability, and I see nothing here that is covered in notability of creative people.  I am adding the notability tag to this article. Bonewah (talk) 16:00, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok ill buy that google is not a great way to establish notability, after all, wp:notability says that someone else should have done a scholarly treatment of the subject.  So all we need do here is find someone who has written a biography of her, or mentioned her in a more than passing way and notability is satisfied. Bonewah (talk) 15:58, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

text: Happy editing! JFHJr (㊟) 04:02, 8 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Notability 
Talk:Teign Valley line

message: Hi, would an editor please look at Chudleigh Knighton which refers to a Chudleigh Knighton Halt with different dates to the Chudleigh railway station article, and includes an image, and sort out what is what? TerriersFan (talk) 00:24, 19 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Chudleigh Knighton and Chudleigh are two different but adjacent villages with two different stations.  I have corrected the dates in the Chudleigh Knighton article which were incorrect. Geof Sheppard (talk) 08:23, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Chudleigh Knighton

message: The Middleton Press ref needs a page number. However, since MP books don't actually have them, an alternative is required - fortunately, in these books, most of the text is in the form of captions to photographs, all of which have figure numbers. One or more of these should be placed in the  parameter, as in  --Redrose64 (talk) 23:28, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Middleton Press ref 

message: It can be confirmed the spur does indeed exist, you can pick it up on Google Maps where it extends for a few hundred yards from the overbridge at Marsh Barton Rd of Exeter although the rails to the metal yard appear rusted but the gravel seems to be fairly new, there is quite the little yard on this spur which once upon a time was a double track junction but only one section is connected to NR metals, the other connection is now a buffer stop short of the junction itself.
92.25.23.11 (talk) 13:48, 21 March 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Retained infrastructure
Talk:Anterior clinoid process

message: DOI: 10.1227/NEU.0000000000001310
This structure isn't present in most people, and is also not directly attached or related to the ACP. Hence, I removed information about it because it is outside of this page's scope. Just-a-can-of-beans (talk) 17:50, 1 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removed info about MCP
Talk:Pterygoid processes of the sphenoid

message: Needless fragmentation of three articles that could be on the same page. This would benefit readers by centralising information and reducing needless confusion and splitting of articles. Tom (LT) (talk) 00:26, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed and  Klbrain (talk) 14:03, 7 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed merge with [[Medial pterygoid plate]] 

message: as above Tom (LT) (talk) 00:26, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed and  Klbrain (talk) 14:03, 7 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed merge with [[Lateral pterygoid plate]]
Talk:Merycoidodontoidea

message: I added info I found at the Tate museum regarding oreodonts. Not much attention is paid to their adaptations  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Metalraptor (talk • contribs) 17:19, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Adaptations and Such

message: in one line it says it wasn't a ruminant and in the next it says it was a ruminant. According to Wiki, A ruminant is any artiodactyl mammal that digests its food in two steps, first by eating the raw material and regurgitating a semi-digested form known as cud from within their first stomach, known as the rumen. The process of again chewing the cud to break down the plant matter and stimulate digestion is called ruminating. 
This seems to be the way the animal is classified.199.20.2.1 (talk) 22:59, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I take issue with the current wording, which essentially says they are called ruminating hogs "(although they were neither Ruminants nor hogs)". This suggests to the uninformed that they did not ruminate (I thought it meant that when I first read it). It refers to the somewhat obscure fact that Ruminantia does not include all ruminating artiodactyls. I will rephrase it to be less misleading.ErikHaugen (talk) 18:55, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Which ruminating artiodactyls are not within Ruminantia?--Mr Fink (talk) 01:23, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

text: The only artiodactyls capable of chewing cud are those in the suborder Ruminantia, like cattle, antelope and deer.  Oreodonts are placed within Tylopoda with camels, which, last I checked, do not chew cud because they lack the necessary anatomy.  Are you sure that these *lots* of oreodont articles claiming that oreodonts were ruminating tylopods providing evidence beyond a literal interpretation of the literal translations of Merychochoerus or Merycoidodon?  Can someone explain to me why oreodonts chewed cud like exactly like ruminants, but are squarely placed within Tylopoda?--Mr Fink (talk) 01:11, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

text: How does the camelids' three-chambered stomach work?--Mr Fink (talk) 01:36, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  ruminant 

message: Shouldn't this article be merged with the one on Oreodon / Merycoidodon / Merycoidodontidae?  A quick search on Google turns up about as many mentions of Oreodon (no 't') as for Oreodont (with 't').  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.126.121.72 (talk) 20:46, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge with Oreodon / Merycoidodon / Merycoidodontidae? 

message: Did they have hooves or not? The intro says "the typical oreodont... was a... cud-chewing plant-eater with... four-toed hooves." Then further down it says: "All species had claws instead of hooves." It would be great if someone could clarify this. ErikHaugen (talk) 18:02, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  hooves 

message: This article needs improvement.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.91.173.31 (talk) 04:20, 7 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unfinished article
Talk:Battle of Nuʻuanu

message: OK, so I'm extremely new to Hawaiian history, and I'm sure this article is full of errors.  Please just make the corrections.  Don't bitch at me. Palm_Dogg 08:09, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Created

message: As you can see, the current article is very incomplete. Editors, of course, are free to edit and change the content, but I am currently assembling a report on this article's subject which is more detailed. I will try to finish the report in several weeks, condense it, then enter the content. Singularity 08:36, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Hmm...guess not. With a lot of things going on, Iʻm not sure when the report will be finished. Singularity 10:07, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Incompleteness 

message: I updated the troop numbers of Kamehameha's army. It was listed as being as many as 140,000 men. This was clearly wrong. All sources cite from 10,000 to 16,000 men at most. I also corrected the numbers for the number of the Oahu army. It had been listed as 20,000 or more, when there clearly was no source or reference of that number anywhere. I changed the number to unknown because the exact figures are not there. I made the changes for the sake of accuracy. Anyone else have any info on the figures?
99.157.16.20 (talk) 20:56, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Numbers and figures of the battle. 
Talk:CMLL World Heavyweight Championship

message: This article appears to be out of date and no longer compliant with the featured article criteria.  It stops with Corleone as the title holder, but his championship appears to have been vacated in 2018 and seems to have been held by three different people since then.  I know nothing of wrestling, and don't speak Spanish, so I won't be able to make the needed fixes here. Hog Farm  Talk 02:04, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Out of date
Talk:CMLL World Light Heavyweight Championship

message: For: " If he remains the champion until October 2, 2016, he will surpass Estrada's 175-day reign". © Tbhotch™ (en-2.5). 00:59, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Update needed

message: what is the internet  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 61.14.229.26 (talk) 14:44, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  talk about internet 
Template talk:Infobox cemetery

message: Hello, why is there a findagrave parameter? In the past, I've added it to some cemeteries and it just gets removed. Given WP:ELPEREN, it gets removed and it just seems unclear if it should ever be used. --Engineerchange (talk) 19:21, 2 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  FindAGrave param? 

message: I do like @Bluealbion's recent edits to the Infobox template but I'm curious if others agree. BorgQueen (talk) 21:43, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: If there are any objections to it I am more than happy to reverse the changes, I just wanted this infobox to be more similar to other infoboxes with automatic mapframes. Bluealbion (talk) 01:27, 3 May 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: @Bluealbion oh yes, I love it! Please don't get me wrong lol. BorgQueen (talk) 02:23, 3 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bluealbion's edit  

message: If anyone has a fix, please feel free to edit: Brigadier General William C. Doyle Memorial Cemetery. The top map, I added myself because the standard one right below it doesn't even convince me it's in New Jersey, much less that it shows where the cemetery is. Most cemeteries I do are via NRHP articles, a template that is much clearer to me.  Thanks for any help that can be provided on this article. — Maile  (talk) 20:18, 11 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Infobox map not so hot
Talk:CMLL World Middleweight Championship

message: So, I'm a little confused. The article listed Apolo Dantés as being the shortest reign at 77 days, but El Dandy's first reign was only 63 days. El Dandy was listed as the shortest reign in the infobox, so I adjusted the article to match. I then brought it up at Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors, where it was suggested it might have possible meant shortest cumulative reign. To me, the term shortest reign means shortest individual reign, but I don't normally edit championship articles, so I am bringing it here for review/clarification.
Dandy is also noted as having the shortest reign in List of CMLL World Middleweight Champions. I note the revision at which the article was promoted to FA listed Dantes in the lede, but Dandy in the infobox. This was also not mentioned at all in the FA nomination.  as the nominator/main contributor. NiciVampireHeart 17:46, 5 May 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Shortest reign
Talk:Lambdoid suture

message: Merge with Lambda (anatomy)?Ortho (talk)  —Preceding undated comment added 17:04, 6 March 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi ! Thank you for suggesting this. I would personally oppose such a merge on the grounds that the lambda is a specific landmark from the lambdoid suture. This is similar to how the bregma is distinct from the coronal suture. Hoping you are well! Bibeyjj (talk) 22:42, 8 August 2021 (UTC)
replies: text:  Hi ! Thank you for your kind reply! How nice to see one after all these years :) And I agree with your reasoning on my (past self's) merge proposal. Cheers. --Ortho (talk) 02:01, 23 December 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge proposal
Talk:John Tawell

message: Talk:John Tawell
John Tawell pleaded guilty at the Old Bailey in February 1814 for having in his possession a forged banknote (not for forgery) and was accordingly sentenced to fourteen years transportation. Although he had in fact been attempting to commit forgery, the timely discovery of the forged note saved him from the gallows. He was transported to New South Wales, arriving in Sydney in January 1815 where he served part of his sentence before receiving a ticket-of-leave and later a conditional pardon. He established the first retail pharmacy in New South Wales in 1820 then gradually invested in importing and exporting. He made a number of journeys backwards and forwards to England before his final departure from New South Wales in 1838. [Further corrections and additional information will be provided at a later date.] CarolBax 08:24, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Because the five needle telegraph devised by Cooke and Wheatstone, could only handle 20 letters, D-J-Q-U-X-Z were left out.  "Q" could easily be substituted by "KW". http://arthurwendover.com/arthurs/munro/htgrf10.html   Tabletop (talk) 08:42, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why no letter "Q"?
Talk:Inferior orbital fissure

message: I believe the Maxillary nerve runs through the foramen rotundum, not the inferior orbital fissure...  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.104.140.40 (talk) 02:38, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: The article says the inferior orbital fissure is formed only by the maxilla and sphenoid bones, while in the article about the palatine bone, it is said to contribute to the inferior orbital fissure as well. Which statement is true? --79.243.254.17 (talk) 22:15, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Palatine bone?
Talk:Posterior fontanelle

message: A non-registered user edited this article to say that this fontanelle is obliterated at 6-8 weeks after birth, whereas in the description of the anterior fontanelle the time given is 6 months. Because here no name is given I believe the other entry and correct the remark to 6 months, but perhaps the  other editors may seek to verify which statement is correct and act accordingly. LouisBB (talk) 09:41, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Conflict correction
Talk:Anterior cranial fossa

message: This article is completely unhelpful because it is in Latin gobbledygook instead of plain English. Could someone please translate this? Useful would be using the technical terms but explaining in plain English what they mean. e.g.: "The oribital (eye socket)..."  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 144.139.3.231 (talk) 01:25, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: I removed one duplicate (different colored) image. The first two in the "Additional images" section are so similar that I think one of them can be deleted without affecting the article. Otr500 (talk) 17:44, 29 August 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Images
Talk:Zygomatic arch

message: Nowhere for "zygomatic" in general zoology to linkAll the zygomatic-anything articles on WP are exclusively about human anatomy. At least one needs to cover this topic from a general zoological standpoint.  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼  12:24, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nowhere for "zygomatic" in general zoology to link