lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Saint-Jean-sur-Richelieu

message: Can someone abreviate kilometres to km in this case (this template)? Peter Horn 04:09, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  abbreviation 

message: There seems to be various birth location of the Villeneuve F1 drivers. Gilles would have been born in St-Jean-Sur-Richlieu while he grew up in Berthierville, it is not clear where Jacques and Jacques sr. were really born. Gilles Villeneuve article states Richelieu instead of St-Jean-Sur-Richelieu as his birthplace.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.144.126.111 (talk) 11:32, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Villeneuve family 

message: There should probably be a note somewhere in the article that this was the site of the construction, american capture, and naming of the very first ship to bear the name USS Enterprise, given how famous that particular name went on to be...Anyone has an idea where?--Guillaume Hébert-Jodoin (talk) 19:14, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: USS Enterprise

message: Somewhere in the the history it should mention the existence of the large Singer factory, called St John’s in Ste Jean it was there at least until 1970 and was the largest Singer operation in Canada. Singer machines with a J in their model number (221J, 301J, 500J etc) were manufactured in the St John’s factory (it was always called St John’s). 97.119.186.88 (talk) 19:58, 14 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  History of Ste Jean
Talk:Justin Nozuka

message: Insert non-formatted text hereHey, if anyone can supply a picture of Justin Nozuka which definitely isn't under copyright, please upload to replace the image Justinnozukalive.jpg as I am not 100% sure of the legality of this photo. I'm new here, so forgive me for my ignorance. 
Nick 00:27, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: comment

message: I've had the chance to re-edit and organize all the current information in the article (as of October 2010). If there is any information that requires sourcing, please feel free to add it in or leave a "need citation" note. Any additional information that has not previously been mentioned should be appropriately placed into paragraphs following a somewhat cohesive/chronological manner. I have seen to it that events which occurred in the past have been properly changed to the past tense. Redpheonix06 (talk) 07:33, 8 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Editing

message: Shouldn't that be mentioned? --Felix Tritschler (talk) 19:01, 11 November 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nephew of Kevin Bacon
Talk:Bulletin Debate

message: Not sure, but I believe that Alfred Stephens might also have written a verse in the debate. Alpheus (talk) 09:41, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Bulletin Debate. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110408180527/http://www.cultureandrecreation.gov.au/articles/lawson/ to http://www.cultureandrecreation.gov.au/articles/lawson/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110408180527/http://www.cultureandrecreation.gov.au/articles/lawson/ to http://www.cultureandrecreation.gov.au/articles/lawson/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080725005512/https://www.middlemiss.org/weblog/archives/matilda/2006/04/poem_the_overfl_1.html to http://www.middlemiss.org/weblog/archives/matilda/2006/04/poem_the_overfl_1.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
 Perry Middlemiss (talk) 21:32, 11 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I've removed a citation from the article.The identity of H.H.C.C. has been uncertain for most, and at least one commentator believes it to be Henry Lawson – 
However, the real identification of "H.H.C.C." (mentioned in Banjo Paterson: Poet by Accident, Colin Roderick, 1993, page 76) can be made with reference to private Cripps Clark family papers owned by a great granddaughter of Herbert Humphrey Cripps Clark. Among diaries, other writings (and submission letters & copies that include an undated carbon copy of the poem -with slight differences to published versions- and the author credited as H.H.C.C.) and remittance clippings confirm that Herbert Humphrey submitted under names including "Cripps Clark", "Two Seas", "H.H.C.C" as well as "H.H.C" in one of the earliest submissions. A letter from his good friend on 18 January 1889 says "I did a few verses of a parody or reply from "Clancy of the Overflow" see Xmas Bulletin .... You write a reply to "Clancy of the Overflow". Herbert Humphrey was a merchant seaman, prospector, selector-cockie, unsuccessful would-be MLA (Free Trade Ind) and part-time freelance journalist published in many regional and country newspapers papers. His stories and poems also appeared in the Lone Hand (illustrated by friend Norman Lindsay), the Bulletin, the Town and Country and several London papers. It seems to rely on private papers, which are by their nature unpublished, and so wouldn't qualify as reliable sources . Meticulo (talk) 10:55, 3 March 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Herbert Humphrey Cripps-Clark
Talk:Sleeping Dogs (Star Trek: Enterprise)

message: This episode was inspired by the Kursk submarine disaster (August, 2000). 
I found this information in an old Star Trek Magazine Special from 2016, in an interview with Fred Dekker titled "Subspace Turbulence" written by Callum Waddell. (Memory Alpha doesn't even mention it yet.) 
There was also a note saying that article was a reprint, the interview having first appeared in issue 53. 
The magazine was published by Titan magazines, ISSN: 1357-3888 TMN 13163. 
Dekker said it was his favorite of the three episodes on which he was credited, but he complained that his episodes were "meddled with" and "heavily rewritten". The interview also mentions The Andorian Incident and other episodes. 
; WP:SOURCEACCESS
I looked for other sources that were more easily verifiable online. 
So far, I found a book that mentions the connection between "Sleeping Dogs" and the Kursk but it is in German. The google books preview image is not easy to translate so I'm not sure if the author is making a comparison or if he knows the link was intentional.  
Jammer's Reviews noticed it was a submarine movie type episode, but didn't make the Kursk connection.
I will come back to this later, and if I haven't been able to find other more easily accessible sources that say the same thing, I will have to settle for a magazine reference. -- 109.76.142.42 (talk) 11:55, 12 June 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: The Internet Archive magazine rack does have a copy of the magazine special mentioned above. The article Subspace Turbulence begins on page 30, and the Kursk is mentioned on page 33. This makes using it as source (and other editors being able to verify it) a whole lot simpler. He makes some comments about The Andorian Incident that should also be useful, but doesn't comment directly on Vox Sola. -- 109.76.142.42 (talk) 20:28, 12 June 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Kursk submarine disaster 

message: Robert Bianco of USA Today highlighted the episode "What's on TV: Wednesday" (January 30, 2002). The web archive does not have a capture of that specific day unfortunately (only the Thursday a week after or the Thursday a week before) but via TrekWeb we have do have a substantial quote (that I strongly suspect amounts to the entire note about the episode): 
"Those rash explorers on the Enterprise... rush to the aid of a disabled Klingon vessel, only to be trapped in an ambush. How many times are these spacekids going to have bad encounters with the Klingons before they figure out they have to be a bit more cautious."
Does that technically count as a review? Not sure. It is vaguely critical of the episode. -- 109.76.142.30 (talk) 07:17, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reception
Talk:Strange New World (Star Trek: Enterprise)

message: This episode is listed in the introduction as Episode 3. However, technically, it is Episode 4. A few of the other episodes in the season make this same error, so I'm going to change them to match the rest of the articles that follow the sequence on the 1 episode page. — ★Parsa ☞ talk 02:57, 10 September 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Episode sequence 

message: Apparently the book Beyond the Final Frontier by Mark Jones, and Lance Parkin includes a review of this episode but I don't have access to that source and in this case Google Books does not happen to have even a snippet available from the relevant page, so I'm reluctant to add based on a second hand source without checking it myself first. It seems like it would be worth adding though. - 109.79.75.58 (talk) 23:25, 18 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reviews 

message: * 
** "I don't think anyone would even recognize it as Bronson Caves."
A larger article about the VFX of season 1 includes some information about this episode. Found this while looking for other things, but will come back to this later, eventually. -- 109.76.143.155 (talk) 04:50, 27 April 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sources
Talk:Unexpected (Star Trek: Enterprise)

message: I recall that the technology behind the cloaking device and the holodeck was given to the humans and klingons respectivly. This doesn't seem to match TOS and TNG as klongong ships have cloaking devices and not holodecks and vice versa. // Liftarn
I am new to ENT, but I thought this odd also.  Holodecks were on Federation ships in TNG, but Klingons were interested in gaining cloaking technology from the Romulans in TOS.  Yet the Klingons and more concerned with obtaining holodeck technology than the ability to hide they warships ... Tiger-Heli (talk) 12:25, 17 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Technology exchange 

message: The introductory section claims that "[A male character's pregnancy] took the series into the realm of hard science fiction." It is not clear what that claim is based upon, or whether anyone notable made it. As such, it seems simply misplaced, given that the episode deals with an entirely speculative event and does not even attempt to answer the "how" (other than by another unexplaind plot device, a crystal-like substance that the character once sticks his fingers in). 2001:16B8:2CD8:5900:EDC0:A93E:5E01:3359 (talk) 17:16, 5 June 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm really not sure what User:Starspotter was trying to say with that edit and I'm not sure I'd describe any Star Trek episode in the entire franchise as hard science fiction. The WP:LEAD is supposed to summarize what is actually in the article, and nothing in the article makes any such claim or that anyone has ever suggested this comedic episode was hard science fiction, so it shouldn't be in the lead. User:Goose Beak went ahead and removed it. -- 109.79.169.104 (talk) 01:44, 29 June 2021 (UTC)
replies: text:  People have very different opinions about the meaning of "hard sci-fi" but one of the writers at SciFiNow magazine did describe this series as "criminally underrated" and also "hard sci-fi". (A special publication also from SciFiNow listed this as the #1 worst episode of the series.). It still isn't anything I think needs to be highlighted in the article for this episode specifically. -- 109.78.204.126 (talk) 03:10, 22 April 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Claim about Hard Science Fiction
Talk:Space velocity

message: Bit confused here... For astrometry, do we really need this article?... how is "space velocity" different from "velocity"? Astronaut 00:55, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: All velocities are relative to some reference point. The term "space velocity" defines the reference point whereas "velocity" leaves the reference point implied or undefined. – Conrad T. Pino (talk) 03:46, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Tulsa Performing Arts Center

message: This article meets the requirements for Start class. Bruin2 (talk) 05:08, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Article reclassification

message: The image request has been satisfied. I have removed the request banner, Bruin2 (talk) 03:42, 12 December 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Cancelled image request
Talk:Al Aaraaf

message: References link 3 to Alaaraaf is dead.  I could not find a new link on the home page.
rumjal 09:03, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: dead link

message: I've selected this article as my next GA review. Anyone else who wants to review this too, please contact me first so neither of us does unneccesary work. - Mgm|(talk) 11:02, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Per the instructions at GAC, could you please move your review to the proper subpage (Talk:Al Aaraaf/GA1)?  This may help with the confusion of multiple reviews in separate places.  You can get there by clicking the "follow this link" in the GA template above. :) María (habla conmigo) 13:59, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  GA Review (prelude) 

message: I know a bit of Arabic, and the line where it said this meant "distinguishing between two things" just didn't seem right. I looked up the source cited and the word "two" isn't in it, so I took it out. I think it's fine now. Wrad (talk) 03:16, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The triliteral root `-r-f (ع ر ف) has a lot of words derived from it (including Urfi or "customary law"); the basic meaning of the root seems to be "know, recognize, perceive".  AnonMoos (talk) 04:52, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Exactly. That's why I just restored it to what the source actually said, since I couldn't figure out where the "two" was coming from. Wrad (talk) 04:54, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for the fix, Wrad. --Midnightdreary (talk) 02:20, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  arafa 

message: This poem reflects Poe's (1) disgust with his environment and desire to physically escape to another world, and (2) love of mystery, puzzles, and codes as mental diversion and escape activities.Lestrade (talk) 15:19, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: According to whom? --Midnightdreary (talk) 16:08, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Characteristic

message: Maybe to someone ill-versed in metrics (no pun intended). The most ignorant novice in prosody could discern the rhythms/meters of the poems. I'm going to guess this nonsense came from some willingly-stupid free verse devotee. Why do such idiots even bother reading the likes of Poe? Stick to your awful heroes Whitman and his ilk.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.177.61.248 (talk) 22:22, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, some folks can enjoy both Whitman and Poe, oddly enough. The person to whom that line is credited is a Poe scholar, not a Whitman scholar. He refers to the poem as a whole, rather than just pieces of it: the rhythm/meter is inconsistent, as implied by your own reference to the plural form. --Midnightdreary (talk) 23:15, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  no discernible rhythm???
Talk:Cryomassage

message: I've decided to remove the PROD tag. A google search shows several scholarly articles on this topic. It  might not meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines anyways, but the deletion is not uncontroversial enough for PROD IMHO.--Carabinieri 01:01, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, much of the information here sounds highly dubious...  AdventurousSquirrel (talk) 01:17, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

message: While this does seem to be a therapy that has been described in medical research, the unsourced pseudoscience in this article seems to be so far removed from that research to the point of needing a rewrite to be of any value.
I've found a few research papers that seem to relate to some of the claims made here, but I don't know anything about the studies or the subject, but I think it will need far better sourcing.
* treatment of duodenal peptic ulcer
* treatment of bronchial asthma
* facial nerve neuropathy
Any help would be greatly appreciated. AdventurousSquirrel (talk) 01:35, 19 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rewrite 
Talk:Lucky Star

message: So long Madonna :D Area5x1 01:15, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This is totally the wrong attitude to take. This isn't an us versus them sort of thing... we're all trying to make the best encyclopedia we can, and people can legitimately disagree about what that means. — PyTom 01:51, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Yes but I absolutely hate that Madonna Lucky Star song picture :( Area5x1 06:13, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  VICTORY!
Talk:CSI: Miami season 3

message: It seems that this article is using colours in the infobox which don't satisfy Wikipedia's accessibility guidelines. The contrast between the foreground colour and the background colour is low, which means that it may be difficult or impossible for people with visual impairments to read it.
To correct this problem, a group of editors have decided to remove support for invalid colours from Template:Infobox television season and other television season templates after 1 September 2015. If you would still like to use custom colours for the infobox and episode list in this article after that date, please ensure that the colours meet the WCAG AAA standard.
To test whether a colour combination is AAA-compliant you can use Snook's colour contrast tool. If your background colour is dark, then please test it against a foreground colour of "FFFFFF" (white). If it is light, please test it against a foreground colour of "000000" (black). The tool needs to say "YES" in the box for "WCAG 2 AAA Compliant" when you input the foreground and the background colour. You can generally make your colour compliant by adjusting the "Value (%)" fader in the middle box.
Please be sure to change the invalid colour in every place that it appears, including the infobox, the episode list, and the series overview table. If you have any questions about this, please ask on Template talk:Infobox television season. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:30, 2 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Colour contrast problems 
Talk:The Outcast (Star Trek: The Next Generation)

message: I just saw [this edit], which looks like it puts an OR tag on the entire plot section.  I'm not disputing it, but is is the general WP policy regarding what to put for "detailed plot summaries"?  Does Memory Alpha (or Beta) count as an RS for such? Jimw338 (talk) 06:36, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  If the plot summary ''itself'' is orig research, what the heck do you do? 

message: I just saw this edit, which looks like it puts an OR tag on the entire plot section.  I'm not disputing it, but is is the general WP policy regarding what to put for "detailed plot summaries"?  Does Memory Alpha (or Beta) count as an RS for such? Jimw338 (talk) 06:36, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  If the plot summary ''itself'' is orig research, what the heck do you do?
Talk:The Survivors (Star Trek: The Next Generation)

message: I would question the recent change to the last sentence:  "Picard, now understanding Kevin Uxbridge's true nature and realizing that the Federation is in no position to judge (much less punish) such a being, says, 'We have no law to fit your crime', and finally agrees to leave the alien in peace and allow him to find what solace he can in the companionship of his substitute wife." (boldface mine)
Previously, it said "ersatz wife".  Although "ersatz" is a German loan word, it has become a legitimate part of the English language.  Further, I think it's a much better word here, since (in English) it has taken on connotations of an imitation which is inferior to the original — a very apt description, in my view, of this particular situation.
Rather than just revert the change and possibly be accused of trying to claim ownership of this page, I thought I should bring up the matter and see what others might think about it.  Comments?  Richwales (talk) 17:59, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: * I agree with you on this subject. I think "ersatz" better explains the article then "Substitute". I will go ahead and make the change.. then I guess we will find out of anyone else has a prob with it. MattyC3350 (talk) 05:42, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Ersatz" vs. "substitute" wife? 

message: Sorry but the plot summary needs clarification because it doesn't make much sense that a being which is powerful enough to kill 50,000,000,000 people doesn't have a way to non-aggressively defend its home.  2001:9E8:4637:A400:25E5:21CE:8E3E:ADDC (talk) 19:43, 4 May 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: If it is not explained in the episode it is not up to wikipedia to voice conjecture as to the motives and reasons etc. If such as explanation has been covered in reliable sources then go ahead and add it with a citation to back it up. Echoedmyron (talk) 20:14, 5 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Explanation needed
Talk:Wraith (Annihilation)

message: My edit just added some information and fixed some poor wording (no offense to the first person who posted).  I'm still new, I hope I didn't do anything wrong.  If I did, feel free to fix it, I won't contend.DNMN 01:35, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Adding on

message: As this B-Class article has yet to receive a review, it has been rated as C-Class. If you disagree and would like to request an assesment, please visit Wikipedia:WikiProject_Comics/Assessment#Requesting_an_assessment and list the article. Hiding T  14:52, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: C-Class rated for Comics Project
Talk:Peak Performance (Star Trek: The Next Generation)

message: Based on one of the edit boxes asking for real world context, I added a large new section about game theory. This is a case when "garden variety computer chess theory" in 2013 simply wasn't sufficiently available in 1989 for this episode. This is yet another reason science fiction is hard to write, especially for the screen - especially when pressed for time to produce a script, a "generalist" writer can run out of time and make script mistakes. 
Put in chess terms, this episode describes the now more familiar scenario of "my chess computer doesn't blunder, so why did it lose? Doesn't it see everything?" The answer is no - there are clear limits to what a processing engine can perform. TaoPhoenix (talk) 06:03, 28 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Organozinc chemistry

message: Frankland, E. J. Chem. Soc. 1849, 2, 297. 
Frankland, E. Ann. 1849, 71, 213. 
Annalen der Chemie und Pharmacie
Volume 71, Issue 2 , Pages 171 - 213
1849 
Ueber die Isolirung der organischen Radicale
Dr. Edward von Frankland
10.1002/jlac.18490710205
Frankland, E. Philos. Trans. 1852, 142, 417 (pp 438-444)    On a New Series of Organic Bodies Containing Metals
E. Frankland 
Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, Vol. 142. (1852), pp. 417-444. 
Stable URL: http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0261-0523%281852%29142%3C417%3AOANSOO%3E2.0.CO%3B2-0 
Annalen der Chemie und Pharmacie
Volume 71, Issue 2 , Pages 213 - 216
© 1849 Notiz über eine neue Reihe organischer Körper, welche Metalle, Phosphor u. s. w. enthalten
Dr. E. von Frankland
10.1002/jlac.18490710206
--Stone 19:25, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
Talk:1981 FIFA World Youth Championship

message: I have read elsewhere that the final was played at the Sydney Sports Ground not the SCG. Is there any source that gives an answer on this? Tigerman2005 (talk) 04:21, 14 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Sydney Cricket Ground for final