lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Canadian Albums Chart

message: The Jam! Music website does not archive its charts. To make matters worse, the website is excluded from archive.org, which makes it all the more frustrating to check sources. Does anyone here know of a more permanent Canadian albums chart? Thomsonmg2000 (talk) 05:36, 24 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  jam.canoe.ca albums charts not being archived.
Talk:Dijing Jingwulue

message: Warning tags placed. This appears to be an original work and unverifiable. Alternate translation available? 
Article seems unimportant. Enfermero (talk) 06:43, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

message: I've removed an old neutrality tag from this page that appears to have no active discussion per the instructions at Template:POV:
::This template is not meant to be a permanent resident on any article. Remove this template whenever:
::#There is consensus on the talkpage or the NPOV Noticeboard that the issue has been resolved
::#It is not clear what the neutrality issue is, and no satisfactory explanation has been given
::#In the absence of any discussion, or if the discussion has become dormant.
Since there's no evidence of ongoing discussion, I'm removing the tag for now. If discussion is continuing and I've failed to see it, however, please feel free to restore the template and continue to address the issues. Thanks to everybody working on this one! -- Khazar2 (talk) 02:54, 14 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  removing POV tag with no active discussion per [[Template:POV]]
Talk:Sandridge

message: Talk:Sandridge
I would like to add some information from my website Living survey.com  (http://www.livingsurvey.com/st_albans/sandridge.html)
This is NOT a SPAM site and is NOT for profit, & as far I can tell fits in with the Wikipedia Spam Filter
09:11, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:National Revolutionary Police Force

message: The Intelligence Directorate is also an organization that handles intelligence operations and can be compared to the CIA. This qualifies as a law enforcement agency. Twillisjr (talk) 04:10, 7 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Intelligence Directorate 

message: "a warrant is a serious requirement under Cuban law"  This phrase could mean that it is difficult to obtain a warrant, that it is necessaary to obtain a warrant in all cases, that no arrests or searches proceed without a warrant, or that the issuance of a warrant is a serious matter that nearly guarantees a conviction.  What does this mean?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.229.234.110 (talk) 18:50, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Ambiguous Language
Talk:Bees

message: 'Disambiguation'
This page redirects to Bee, however, per the article 2C-B, Bees is a street name for the drug, and I feel it is important to make this link available to a user familiar with and searching for the street name of that drug.  I want to remove the forced redirect and allow one to either choose the Bee page or the 2C-B page.  However,  it appears that there are 100+ articles which link to the Bees page, and per WP:D, these double redirects should be removed (which would be a fair amount of work - but I am willing to do so).  I have not looked at all the links, but I would presume that the majority if not all would be concerned with the Bee article.  
My question is, then, is it more appropriate to add an 'other use' or 'see also' link to the Bee article which links to the 2C-B article (which would require the least amount of work), or change this page to reflect the options, then change the links on the pages which link to the current Bees redirect page?  (If the answer exists on WP:D or some other page, I have not been able to ascertain.)  I ask this here since my adopter is away on holidays and may not be able to help me with this promptly, before many more pages link to the Bees page.  Thx for your help. SteinAlive | ☎ | ☉ 09:30, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think you should probably just add a line to Bee (disambiguation), similar to the one at Weed (disambiguation). -- Cielomobile talk / contribs 19:15, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
Talk:Sherard Vines

message: There's a photograph on page 500 of Snell's "Five Previously Unpublished Poems" which could be used to illustrate this article; however, as is ofen the case, I don't know how to navigate the necessary copyright gobbledigook to upload it. – Arms & Hearts (talk) 22:46, 4 May 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Photograph
Talk:Literature (card game)

message: Anyone aware of online Literature game? If so we could include it in references/games section. 
Vrajaram 10:04, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: ola 179.108.91.34 (talk) 05:08, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Literature Online 

message: This section seems to be no more than a group of friends having fun by mentioning themselves on Wikipedia, and the statement that the DLL is the "only currently known club" doesn't really seem to justify going off topic to discuss them. Any objections to this section being removed? — eruditionFISH (talk) 19:48, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Deletion of "Organizations" Section
Talk:Light Pupil Dilate

message: It is currently not clear why this music group is notable enough for an article in Wikipedia. 
* It seems that they have released one album, and will (probably?) release a second one; this would then be enough to pass WP:MUSIC if the albums have been released with notable labels. But currently that is speculation; Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. 
* Some hints to national(?) tours are given in the article, but press coverage is not explicitely cited and hence cannot be verified.
See the guidelines for notability of musicians for details of the inclusion criteria.
All in all, I think notability is in question here, although it might become clearer in the near future. I am therefore resetting the date counter of the notability tag for the time being (old date was Oct 06). 
Please add more sources to the article that establish notability. 
Sorted as part of the Notability wikiproject. --B. Wolterding 10:25, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Notability 
Talk:Bridgend County Borough

message: Proposal to move page to Bridgend County Borough following discussion of naming policy at Wikipedia talk:Welsh Wikipedians' notice board Skinsmoke (talk) 02:30, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Move discussion
Talk:Caerphilly County Borough

message: "Its main town is Caerphilly. Other towns in the county borough are Bedwas, Risca, Ystrad Mynach, Nelson, Newbridge, Blackwood, Bargoed, New Tredegar and Rhymney."
Nelson is Not a town.--Lord Don-Jam (talk) 20:01, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  A town? 

message: Please, could someone who knows the area and its history tell us something about the link between Caerphilly County Borough and the County of Glamorgan.
I know the town of Caerphilly was in the historical county of Glamorgan before 1974 (when Glamorgan was not an "historical  county" but a "county"). I know that since 1996 the town of Caerphilly and a good number of surrounding settlements are in Caerphilly County Borough. But what happened in between? Was there a change of boundaries between Glamorgan, Gwent and Monmouthshire in 1974? Was there a further change of boundaries in 1996?
As a provider of information for a worldwide website dealing with family history, I need to be able to trace settlements through the administrations to which they belonged. 1974 was 46 years ago--in family history that is a generation and a half. Looking at it from now (2016) the events of 1974 may seem a long time ago, but in the course of history of a place, it is only yesterday. Please think about those of us who have never lived in the area, but who want to tie details of its geographical evolution together.
--Oldontarian (talk) 10:27, 18 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Expanding the article
Talk:Torfaen

message: Is there a source for the Welsh translation being Tor-faen?  Welsh Wikipedia, Torfaen County Borough Council and the Welsh Language Board all use Torfaen.  Skinsmoke (talk) 14:24, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: References to "Tor-faen" now removed. -- Picapica (talk) 10:36, 26 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Welsh name
Talk:Mellonius

message: The speedy tagging under CSD1 is quite wrong. I quote:
:Limited content is not in itself a reason to delete if there is enough context for the article to qualify as a valid stub.
There are two references and a good definition. This kind of abuse of CSD makes me cross. Charles Matthews 10:34, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I absolutely agree, however an English reference would be nice. Bfp  (talk) 10:50, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, the guy is called Mellon, Mellonus, Melin, Melain and so on; it takes time to find refs. Charles Matthews 10:56, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes I suppose that is very true, I was just chipping in that I also think the CSD is not warranted, good luck hunting those refs. Bfp  (talk) 11:08, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Wikipedia talk:Requests for mediation/2006 Lebanon War/Archive III

message: OK, that helped a lot, thanks. Now, because this is a little bit of an awkward dispute (as Sm8900 outlines directly above) in that I have very little room to move, I'm going to need your help in this first stage.
What I need you to do is list any and all possible alternate names you can think of. Even if you would not accept them at the present, I really need to know all the possible alternatives. From there, we can work towards a solution.
If this mediation is totally successful, the article won't be at Israel-Hezbollah War, nor will it be at 2006 Lebanon War. That's the concept of acceptable comprimise which mediation works from.
So, anyways, lets brainstorm collegially. What I simply need is a list of possible names, any at all, which could be used to descrive this (ie. we obviously don't want "Pink Fluffy Bunnies" or similar). In the form "* ~~~~" would be great. There's no need to rebut the proposals at this stage, but you could always prepare your (brief) thoughts on each outside of this page for if/when we get to that stage. Cheers, Daniel 02:23, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Do any other ideas come to mind? I can only guide you through a process to work on the suggestions you give me (I'm not knowledgeable enough in the topic area), so I'm kinda relying on you guys a bit :) Daniel 02:07, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Hmm... I honestly don't. I did see 2006 Israel-Hezbollah/Lebanon War used once, though it seems a bit excessive, and counter to the guidelines of not using more words than necessary in titles. — George [talk] 06:09, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Does anyone think that soliciting other input about other possible names through an RfC would be effective? Daniel 08:33, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: To be honest, no. The question is not one of which name do we like the best, or which is the most neutral; only one name will satisfy most parties and wikipedia policy, and that is whatever name can be shown to be the common name for the event. Unless we're debating for a temporary name to use until such a consensus emerges. Iorek85 08:52, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think Iorek85 hit the nail on the head. The current title, Shamir1's proposal, and the two names listed above (the colloquial Second Lebanon War, and location-descriptive 2006 Israel-Lebanon War) encompass all the major names used for the event that I've ever seen, so if a single name meets policy and achieves consensus, it will most likely exist in that list. — George [talk] 10:30, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Fair point, you both are probably correct. Lets move on, then. I'm going to create a straw poll to determine some things about the four names. Cheers, Daniel 07:30, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Brainstorming
Talk:La Push, Washington

message: The british band New Model Army wrote a song named "La Push" which can be found on their album "Today is a good day" from 2009. For the lyrics see https://www.newmodelarmy.org/the-music/lyrics/175-la-push 217.254.253.129 (talk) 21:24, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Song "La Push"
Talk:Nógrád County (former)

message: Hi, we can discuss the matter here if you want. Tell me if your intrested and I will begin to outline my opinion on the matter. Hobartimus 10:52, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: By that time, the borders of the dismembered Austria-Hungary were no longer internationally recognized. Tankred 21:04, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: We are not talking about Austria-Hungary here I think you can see that just fine. Im gonna rv. * Also you never addressed any of my points, from the question of legitimacy(of the so called "leaders") to the actual act that would change pre existing borders of Hungary.  Hobartimus 22:37, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The "pre-existing borders" that you have mentioned ceased to exist together with their state - Austria-Hungary. Czechoslovakia, one of the successor states, was founded on October 28, 1918. As to the legitimacy, the Czechoslovak government was recognized by the Allied Powers. You keep deleting the sentence "In 1918 (confirmed by the Treaty of Trianon 1920), the part of the county north of the river Ipeľ became part of newly formed Czechoslovakia, and the southern part stayed in Hungary." If you do not agree with this description of the history, could you tell me please to whom the northern part belonged in 1919? And why do you think so? Tankred 12:54, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: (The legitimacy question was about the Slovak "leaders" you mentioned, not about the czechs) To answer your question in 1919 the northern part was actively contested in an ongoing war, and this is exactly why you cant claim it belonged to the Czhecz already. By moving the correct date around to 1918 you want to retroactively proclaim victory in a war earlier than the peace(which later turned out to be more like a truce) happened. I'm not sure how familiar you are with historical concepts such as the difference between occupation and annexation. I'm also not sure why is it so important to try to alter this date to make it two years earlier, when the war was not yet fought. Also I would be very intrested to hear what you think in this matter? In 1918 Slovak leaders already gave away all the land as a nice birthday present to the Czhecz, and the next day it was already theirs? Only Slovak leaders have this god given right or can German, Hungarian, Roma, etc etc etc leaders also give away some land to a neighbouring country? Hobartimus 22:35, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: [Untitled]
Talk:Decker Township, Richland County, Illinois

message: I seem to have found the origin of Decker in doing some genealogy research.  The reference URL on findagrave.com is not playing nice with MediaWiki.  Would be swell if someone could help with that.  Qwidjib0 (talk) 16:56, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
Talk:Christianity in Thailand

message: The Church... of Latter-day Saints does seem to have a substantial following in Thailand. Their website reports 15,457 members, so they probably should be mentioned here too. --Paul_012 (talk) 11:47, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Latter-day Saints, by many expert estimations, are not counted as christians. I think, they should not be mentioned in the article. Ans-mo (talk) 13:36, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, the first half-sentence of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints stating that The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is the fourth largest Christian denomination in the United States doesn't seem to point that out. Sorry if I was misunderstood. --Paul_012 (talk) 20:10, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: As far as I know, most Christian denominations (Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, Protestants) do not count LDS's as christians. Maybe some part of outside observers count them as christians. My personal opinion is, that they should not be mentioned in this article. Ans-mo (talk) 07:36, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  LDS? 
Talk:List of European stock exchanges

message: Russian markets have unified into a single Moscow Exchange (see www.moex.com).  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.163.9.39 (talk) 17:35, 1 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Russia

message: Where does Virt-X fit in with this list?
what is dax, ftse, cac?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.178.163.229 (talk) 07:15, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Question

message: Hi, at the moment the see also section seems a bit long. Under the link List of stock exchanges you can find links to all the other continental lists of stock exchanges. Thus there is no important need to list all of them separatly here. ("Purity" = focus on the main important links.)
The links in the "See also" section should be relevant, should reflect the links that would be present in a comprehensive article on the topic, and should be limited to a reasonable number. As a general rule the "See also" section should not repeat links which appear in the article's body or its navigation boxes. Thus, many high-quality, comprehensive articles do not have a "See also" section. (citation from here)
--W like wiki (talk) 00:05, 25 October 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi W like Wiki;
I fail to see how the "See also section" could be considered to be "long". Please elaborate. Thank you.
KazLabz (talk) 00:11, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

text: Hi Kevin, sure, I can try a conclusion: The link List of stock exchanges should be enough. The other links to all the continental lists you can find there. (For more details please read my posting above.) --W like wiki (talk) 00:23, 25 October 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: The articles are much cleaner and the "See Also" sections are more succinct.  Thanks for consolidating the links.  --Slazenger (Contact Me) 00:25, 25 October 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi Slazenger, thx, did I understand you correct or did you mean this version? --W like wiki (talk) 00:40, 25 October 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: W, I was referring to your edit to consolidate them into just one "List of Stock Exchanges". Sorry I didn't embellish upon that.  There's no reason in my opinion to have more than that...it just causes unnecessary clutter! --Slazenger (Contact Me) 02:58, 9 November 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I see. So until now there is no argument against cleaning up the See also section. So I can do my edit again. --W like wiki (talk) 14:21, 9 November 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  See also section
Talk:Jonas Ekfeldt

message: I contest the deletion of this page and intend to expand it. I request that this page not be deleted in the meantime. Hang on. --Bensin 11:25, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I removed the speedy deletion tags, because you have asserted notability by indicating the artist was signed with a record label and achieved success (as opposed to just saying he's an entertainer). Also, you were the one to add the tags, so there was no real reason to have them on the article, unless you wanted the article deleted yourself. Leebo T/C 12:33, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Bomakellia

message: Images added to any article should be encyclopaedic. Any artistic representation should be based upon WP:RS and be Verifiable. I do not see any evidence to make me believe the images in this article meet that criterion, and I feel that the page would be better served without them (unless they can be shown to be based upon proper scientific research). For these reasons I propose to remove the images until sources are provided which justify their inclusion. Nick Moyes (talk) 02:04, 23 January 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: So you're going to go on a campaign of spite to have me run out of Wikipedia, too, like all of my other critics?  I mean, I did base both illustration from the sources in the article, but, that's never good enough for those of my critics who want me run out of Wikipedia on a rail.  I mean, all of the people who say and want all artistic representations of anything removed from all Wikipedia articles for not being properly sourced have, in practice, only wanted my artistic representations removed from Wikipedia.--Mr Fink (talk) 03:25, 23 January 2022 (UTC)

text: By the way, do you plan to try and humiliate me like this on all of the talkpages of articles that use my art?--Mr Fink (talk) 05:00, 23 January 2022 (UTC)

text: This is an unfounded false statement. The reconstruction of Bomakellia as a proto-arthropod is based on B. Waggoner's reconstruction and corresponded to the original M. Fedonkin's description ( https://academic.oup.com/sysbio/article-pdf/45/2/190/19501692/45-2-190.pdf ). Frond-like reconstruction is based on the opinion of J. Dzik ( https://www.paleo.pan.pl/people/Dzik/Publications/ctenophoraDzik.pdf ) The Mr Fink's reconstructions are quite adequate and accurate. Aleksey (Alnagov (talk) 10:07, 23 January 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unreliable images
Talk:Bibi

message: I am not of South Asian origin, but AFAIK the assertion that "bibi" is a surname is incorrect. Rather, it seems to be a name used to refer to women - doesn't it mean "sister" and isn't it a sort of female conterpart to "bhaai" (brother)? The sample of the women who are referred to in this article confirms the impression that "Bibi" is not their surname. Please correct accordingly! Lumendelumine 11:25, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Surname?
Template talk:IAST-hi1

message: There is something wrong with the formating. in the IAST section it gives output as the characters "IAST" instead of the value of the parameter. Can someone help here? -Deepraj | Talk 11:26, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Now it seems to work. I'm not sure what the problem was: it seems that only when I moved the example into a subpage, it displayed correctly. Also, I used the new cleaner  here.--Imz 11:47, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks. This is indeed better.-Deepraj | Talk 13:18, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Formatting/parameter issue
Talk:List of American films of 1984

message: ::[See Talk:List of American films of 1950. -Wikid77 (talk) 16:29, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Format

message: 04-Oct-2008: Today, I noticed the addition of a new "Quality index" to the film article "List of American films of 1984" but rating films will violate Wikipedia's neutrality policy, WP:NPOV. Any rating or criticism about a film should be noted within each particular film article, to allow for quoting multiple opinions about a film: it is not possible to give a film an absolute rating of "three-stars" and such, because all viewer judgments must be traced to sources and allow multiple ratings for each film. A column for film "Quality index" is not possible in Wikipedia. -Wikid77 (talk) 16:29, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Quality index

message: 04-Oct-2008: I have re-split the one table A-Z into multiple tables, with table A-B able to reformat as more narrow to fit alongside the sidebar navbox.  Using other multiple tables helps to pinpoint any future coding errors, such as an extra ending column "|| ||" that will reformat an outside bracket on all entries within a table.  The article had about 130 films, but the separate tables limit the errors to checking about 26 film entries (per table) for incorrect coding, rather than proofreading all 130 entries to spot new coding errors. -Wikid77 (talk) 16:29, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Split table into parts to wrap and pinpoint errors
Talk:Staunton chess set

message: The claim that the Staunton pawn was based on the Freemasons' square and compasses sounds far fetched to me.  I'm not seeing any likeness whatsoever.  The Sean Evans source from which all the historical influences are taken would not be considered reliable by modern Wikipedia standards.  A Short History of Chess says the Staunton pawn was an elaboration of a traditional design of a simple cone with a knob on top.  That is so much more believable. SpinningSpark 18:37, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: I've now removed "square and compasses" and added the Davidson source. SpinningSpark 12:15, 4 December 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Square and compasses.