lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Polymorphism

message: :Polimorphism should be merged into Polymorphism as it is just a misspelling of the actual term. Ben W Bell 14:29, 15 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed.  Maybe this can be used as a redirect page, though. MToolen 02:16, 3 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Polimorphism 

message: I propose that Polymorph be merged into Polymorphism. There is a lot of overlap between these two pages and readers will be better served by a single disambiguation page with all relevant links on it.--NHSavage (talk) 17:51, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Having fiddled about a bit, I also think that we should reinstate the dimorphism page as another disambiguation page.--NHSavage (talk) 19:31, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
replies: text:  A draft of how the two pages would look after I split them and add in the content from polymorph is at User:NHSavage/polymorphism_merger. --NHSavage (talk) 20:01, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merger proposal
Talk:Prime Minister of Australia

message: Section on his true origins. These facts are important. There is no Italian that wouldnt admit his surname means he is not Italian by origin. 81.99.34.176 (talk) 22:53, 27 May 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: If that can be reliably sourced with sources also confirming that this is a significant part of his heritage/identity, it would belong in the article on Albanese, not this article which is on the office of PM. Nick-D (talk) 23:27, 27 May 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: To the IP editor, I recommend you try rewriting that final sentence without the triple negative. HiLo48 (talk) 05:29, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Geez. How low can you go? Now you are throwing bricks at other editors whose first language is not English. If you don't understand something, politely ask for clarification instead of immediately sinking in the pointy boot. --Pete (talk) 20:36, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Albanese literally means Albanian in the Italin language. Why is there no section on his Arberesh heritage. These are Albanians who migrated to Italy before the Ottoman Empire invaded. 
Talk:Philosophy of religion

message: What is the "first PO cause argument"? We need to be told Myrvin (talk) 20:27, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Philosophy of religion as a part of metaphysics 

message: There would seem to be a good deal of overlap with Philosophical theology William M. Connolley (talk) 23:20, 31 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Philosophical theology 

message: The text here seems too closely related to its single source, section 2 of Hiddenness of God at Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. — jmcgnh(talk) (contribs) 04:20, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copy or too-close paraphrase in /* Problem of Divine Hiddenness */ 

message: The article about "Philosophical theology" presents an intellectual argument put forward seemingly largely by one individual Mortimer J. Adler, about the nature of the philosophy of religion - attempting to draw a distinction between what he calls "philosophical theology" by religious outsiders, such as Aristotle, and Natural theology, by insiders. Its most appropriate place would likely be as a much-contracted entry in the philosophy of religion article (and possibly as a mentioned criticism on the Natural theology page. As it stands, having an article entitled Philosophical theology provides significant scope for confusion with the Philosophy of religion and  Religious philosophy pages to the extent that casual readers could readily be confused. Iskandar323 (talk) 15:08, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Closing, with no merge. Klbrain (talk) 00:39, 31 August 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed merger from [[Philosophical theology]], 16 October
Talk:Panda (disambiguation)

message: I don't think we need to list every panda item that anybody can think up.
If panda fictional characters are really that important, make a new article
for them.  --Alan Millar
::i agree. however, THIS group should be added as we are starting to hear refs to "PANDA" in the US news: http://peopleagainstndaa.com/ 66.105.218.9 (talk) 05:36, 29 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Untitled 

message: Shouldn't this page be a redirect to Giant Panda? 惑乱 分からん 19:41, 16 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No, enough different uses, particularly the two other animal-related meanings of panda, are well-known. --Kiand 20:12, 16 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Untitled 

message: PandA, as in P and A, is supposed to do something with computers, I don't remember what, but it should be included on this disambiguation page. 71.250.1.198 14:27, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  computer term 

message: Is an "Emo Panda" a real thing?  A search around the Internet didn't seem to reveal any information on it.  Could anyone source this for me? If this entry is about an emotional state that panda bears go through, maybe that information should be moved to the panda bear page instead of this one. Sirmorphix 09:09, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've removed Emo Panda.  If this is sourced as accurate please re-add, however this seems to have been erroneous, or at least erroneously placed, information. Sirmorphix 09:17, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Emo Panda 

message: Where should I look for it if it isn't even referenced here? Wikiak (talk) 05:12, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Panda the Coin 
Talk:Presbyterianism

message: Knowing nigh on nothing of the history, I am curious if the lede and article more broadly should emphasize that the presbytery was adopted as a rejection of the hierarchy of bishops, as is noted in Footnote 13, quoting James Rankin. This may not be the case and it might be offensive to describe the faith as based on what it rejects but I expected to find much more discussion of bishops here. Czrisher (talk) 16:34, 20 October 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Should probably be emphasized in the history section, which needs a lot of work.  --Jfhutson (talk) 16:41, 20 October 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, and also of the idea of the "only king and head of the church" being Jesus. StAnselm (talk) 16:42, 20 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Should There Be More Emphasis on Rejection of Bishops?
Talk:Polygamy

message: Why map say "Polygamy is legal in some regions (Indonesia)"? There is no national law than ban polygamy national wide. Even the latest law (the 2019 Marriage Law) does not prohibit it. (Poke ) -- BayuAH Let's Talk! 09:25, 1 March 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Polygamy in Indonesia 

message: An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect :Bigamy (in Canon Law) and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 March 12#Bigamy (in Canon Law) until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.  Veverve (talk) 12:51, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Bigamy (in Canon Law)" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]] 

message: An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect :Bigamy (in Civil Law) and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 March 19#Bigamy (in Civil Law) until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.  Veverve (talk) 13:49, 19 March 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Bigamy (in Civil Law)" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]] 

message: The prevalence section of the article says „Research into the prevalence of polyamory has been limited“ but then doesnt stick to it. I think we should be trimming this section, specifically the percentages. We should be grounded here and stick with the simple fact that there is not much solid research.
Also, Amy Moors specifically is not a good source. There is a lot of criiticism against her, like her messing around with samples and sample sizes. At the very least we shouldnt quote her. But generally I think the section should be smaller. 141.15.24.32 (talk) 13:22, 8 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lack of research
Talk:Pharisee

message: Is it true that one of the contributing factors for the Pharisee practices to prevail over the others is their relatively flexibility in the face of the loss of the Temple?  If you're a Torah-literalist it's harder to find a way to *practice* religion without the Temple?  I've read this, but I'm far from feeling secure enough about it to change the last paragraph of this article. --MichaelTinkler
No problem at all. As soon as the legitimate priesthood was compromised in 175BCE the Zadokite Kohanim realised the end was comming once more and gave up on the 2nd temple once and for all and began the messianic meals in an attempt to ussher in the messianic era where the new temple would be established. From that time onwards the temple priesthood was frowned upon by those in the know. The Hasid house of Hillel was certainly in contact with them and promoted their ideas. By the time the second temple era came to an end, the Hillelites were already very well prepared for life without the temple. Zestauferov 01:10, 19 Jul 2004 (UTC)
Talk:PostScript

message: What tools are available to edit postscript files?  To downsample or remove embedded images? -69.87.200.8 23:56, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I always used vi.  Gah4 (talk) 23:26, 9 September 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  ps edit 

message: Previously there was a more accurate description of the unit of length before a lot of the technical detail on postscript was removed from the article.
Given that this material was removed, is the mention of the units of length even relevant?
Also, as cited by the PLRM (the all important and accurate red book):
"Note:  The default unit size (1/72 inch) is approximately the same as a "point," a unit widely used in the printing industry.  It is not exactly the same as a point, however; there is no universal definition of a point."  (Pg 183, Postscript Language Reference Manual, 3/e)
ergo:  claiming the unit is typographical points is inaccurate.
Akunokuroneko (talk) 04:35, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I thought of the same thing, and now I can see, someone else already mentioned this. Yes, indeed, the PostScript document specifically says that 1/72 inch isn't a point. I believe this should probably be fixed in this article, although I am not sure the best wording to use. --Zzo38 (talk) 05:38, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mention of Units 

message: As far as I know, %! is supposed to be enough for a PostScript printer to know its input is PS.  It seems, though, that many HP printers just check the %.  Print a plain text file starting with %, and nothing comes out.  Gah4 (talk) 01:07, 12 July 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Did you try adding a form feed? Does still nothing come out? --Zzo38 (talk) 05:38, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  %!PS 

message: The article indicates that conversion can be done to/from PDF, but also that PDF lacks the general programming model. So, PS pages that use the general programming model can't be converted. Gah4 (talk) 10:33, 26 August 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: The graphical output of a PostScript program can be stored in PDF format. --Zzo38 (talk) 07:43, 5 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  PDF 

message: "Warnock left with Chuck Geschke and founded Adobe Systems in December 1982...." Okay, but what firm did they leave? The article doesn't establish this, but simply says that Warnock was working with Gaffney (at Evans & Southerland) on a 3D harbor visualization project, with no mention at all of where Geschke came from. 2001:9E8:AD8:2700:1D4C:786F:8A67:6D78 (talk) 06:12, 26 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Warnoch and Geschke left...
Talk:Pong

message: I heard this game is the granddaddy of video games.--Nate-Dawg921 (talk) 05:12, 27 December 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: I've not heard this nickname before. It was not the first video game, but it was the first arcade and home console game to take off with the general public.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 07:09, 27 December 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pong's nickname 

message: Pong was created by a group of Students & Teachers at Texas State University in 1971...I played the game with my brother on a console that had t sides I was on one side & my brother was on the other side...This was the Summer of 1971 or 1972..According to my memory it was Summer of 1972 & Pong was still being perfected by the students who were working on it,two of them being my Aunt & Uncle Janice & Ray Gay.... 2600:6C55:7C00:1282:E887:D8BA:59C3:47CE (talk) 14:53, 13 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  The creation of Pong
Talk:Peripheral Component Interconnect

message: :The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. 
The result of the move request was: Consensus to move page. (non-admin closure)  — YoungForever(talk)  22:59, 24 June 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Conventional PCI →  – There are no sources listing PCI as being ever called Conventional PCI in any official capacity. Nabeel_co (talk) 22:00, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

text: This is a contested technical request (permalink). —Nnadigoodluck🇳🇬 23:05, 17 June 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: 
*Support. I think I am for the rename, but surprised that there was no discussion. Yes I did always think that Conventional PCI was wrong, and would have just named it PCI, (unless that is already taken for something else).  As well as I know, PCI-express is designed based on PCI higher level protocols, if not the bit level. Gah4 (talk) 02:59, 18 June 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 17 June 2020 

message: The article contains both claims that 64-bit PCI was supported in the v1.0 spec, and also that 64-bit PCI was added in v2.1 of the spec. Can someone familiar with the subject clarify this? 66.8.153.181 (talk) 01:04, 16 October 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  64-bit and the v2.1 spec
Talk:Technology in Star Trek

message: I honestly think this whole article would be better served with a short paragraph on the main article on the universe. Thoughts? Nerflet (talk) 19:08, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Merger with Star Trek

message: The article does not look like an encyclopedia article the way it is now; it looks more like a debate forum or a TV review.  I would list it on Votes for Deletion, but I have tried that already with other Star Trek pages and I don't think it would work.  Resistance (against Star Trek) is futile.  --NoPetrol 01:40, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cleanup 

message: Per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Subspace (Star Trek) (2nd nomination), it has been suggested that Subspace (Star Trek) be merged either here, Warp drive (Star Trek), or Hyperspace (science fiction). Any ideas? I prefer here. Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:06, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merger proposal
Talk:List of premiers of Victoria

message: :The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
The result of the move request was: NOMINATOR WITHDRAWAL. (non-admin closure) ––– GMH MELBOURNE TALK 06:44, 1 October 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Premier of Victoria →  – To make consistent with List of prime ministers of Australia. This article is more of a list rather than an article with the majority of the page being a table rather than prose. The page 'Premiers of Victoria' should be reserved for a prose dominant article (as is the case for Prime Minister of Australia). ––– GMH MELBOURNE TALK 02:24, 1 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 1 October 2023 

message: Does the Legend for political parties need to be there (at the top of the 'List of premiers of Victoria' section) when it states the political party in the 8th column? ––– GMH Melbourne (talk) 01:39, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think the legend needs to be there. Steelkamp (talk) 02:21, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

text: my take is most lists have it so lets leave there Friendlyhistorian (talk) 05:07, 4 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Legend for political parties 

message: Are the Monarch and Governor columns necessary when we have Governor of Victoria and Monarch of Australia articles as well as this information in the infoboxes of most of the premiers. To me is seems like clutter. Thoughts? ––– GMH Melbourne (talk) 01:38, 30 November 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Personally i am  ok with with keeping  Governor columns but removing the monarch column that being said i would not mind removing both i think keeping only the Governor column would be the best solution  Friendlyhistorian (talk) 01:52, 30 November 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Additional Comment: By removing the two columns, the list will be able to become sortable. ––– GMH Melbourne (talk) 05:25, 8 January 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: @GMH Melbourne I've tried playing around with it and I don't think it's possible. This is because some premiers have served more than once but split up by another term. Bolte is an example of this occurring. HoHo3143 (talk) 05:54, 8 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removing the Monarch and Governor columns
Talk:Princess Mononoke

message: It is surprisingly anti Lady Eboshi considering the nuance the film gives about nature and humanity, nature does not care for the weak, it cares not for the good nor the evil.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:448A:1082:3380:98C7:BFA:64D3:95EE (talk) 01:42, 4 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  What in the World is the theme section 

message: In the release section, it was written that:
However, according to the reference source of this information, this was supposed to be more of a rumour. Case in point:
My question is, should this part be rewritten to not be mistaken as fact? Duong0810 (talk) 08:12, 11 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  The authenticity of the "samurai sword" anecdote  

message: While reading I noticed that in this part the source is in the text instead of cited. I wanted to fix it, but to be honest I don't know how. Could someone do it, or tell me how to? 190.100.118.81 (talk) 02:32, 23 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  The source for the Karma sub-section of the Theme section is in the text 

message: The redirect Mononoke hima 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.  —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 02:01, 21 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  "[[:Mononoke hima]]" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]] 

message: — Assignment last updated by Daniel Yu (talk) 19:09, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: Writing Workshop
Talk:North American P-51 Mustang

message: :The "In China and the Pacific Theater" subsection has an inline "citation needed" tag dated March 2021. There are inline "page needed" tags in the "Cuba", "Italy", and "Poland" subsections dated September 2011. 
:The B-class criteria (#1) states, 
:The "External links" section has 15 entries that do not conform to WP:ELPOINTS (#3), far surpasses being a LINKFARM, and needs drastic trimming. --  Otr500 (talk) 13:09, 3 June 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article issues 

message: I just noticed that this article lacks the usual section, giving a list of squadrons operating the type (broken down by country/service).
I'm assuming that this is simply an random omission and there isn't an actual, obscure reason for this being absent?
Considering the large number of Mustangs built, and used by numerous air forces, I suppose a separate, fully detailed article, with a mainlink from this one might be the way to go.
Grant | Talk 03:32, 7 October 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: There have been a large number of units that operated the P-51, so a separate article would probably be the way to go to not dwarf this existing article, but all turns on having sufficient references. - Ahunt (talk) 11:57, 7 October 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: I had started a draft of an operators article in my sandbox, but I eventually abandoned it and requested deletion.  I could request a WP:REFUND if anyone wants to finish what I started. - ZLEA T\C 19:13, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  List of units operating?
Talk:Pope Alexander VI

message: The redirect Alex 6 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.  Rusalkii (talk) 05:47, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  "[[:Alex 6]]" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]] 

message: "Alexander's papal bulls of 1493 confirmed or reconfirmed the rights of the Spanish crown in the New World following the finds of Christopher Columbus in 1492."
There needs to be context for this claim. PortsManteau (talk) 05:23, 16 December 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Follow the wikilink provided? There were two bulls, of different ambits. The description is accurate. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 09:30, 16 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  You can't just say "or".
Talk:Pointless topology

message: There's got to be a good joke or two about this title... --LDC
Thats why I added /Talk, but I bottled it... How about "Isn't the title a tortology"
(I think that's "tautology") :)
:Only if it has something to do with pie.
If the topology is so pointless, why is anyone studying it? — JIP | Talk 06:50, 25 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Joke

message: There is some overlap between this article and complete Heyting algebra and Stone duality that could/should be refactored. -- Tobias Bergemann 07:08, 25 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Overlap with other articles

message: For example, "Regarding the advantages of the point-free approach let us point out, for example, the fact that..."
72.136.16.173 (talk) 05:54, 15 April 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Written like an abstract not a wiki page
Talk:Perl

message: Talk:COBOL#Section_"Influences_on_other_languages". Apokrif (talk) 23:22, 4 September 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: What about Python? Perl influence on Python, I'm having trouble to see this. Apart from the infobox Python is mentioned only two times in the entire article. Surprising enough, but certainly not due to influence, at least not in that direction. Perl came out in 87, Python 91, did Guido even know about it by the time? And influenced what? Python is about as different as it gets, and if it's about regexes then Perl "influenced" just about anything, only problem is it didn't exactly invent those either. It is less easy to argue that Python rather influenced Perl 5: Larry Wall pretty much took his inspiration for the OO extension from there. Not a secret and quite easy to cite. If anything, Python is listed in precisely the wrong row. -92.76.164.116 (talk) 04:05, 3 June 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Influence of COBOL on Perl? 

message: The article references https://www.wired.com/2007/12/dec-18-1987-perl-simplifies-the-labyrinth-that-is-programming-language/ but the Wired article says (Source: Wikipedia). This might warrant source removal/ensuring accuracy of any circularly cited facts. Bcjordan (talk) 01:41, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article cites wikipage, wikipage cites article