lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Internet child pornography/Archive 4

message: This article has tested my morals to the limit. I fund the article personally repulsive, yet I do believe in freedom of information. I'm uncomfortable about deleting it, yet I don't like the idea of keeping it either.I disagree with the notion that "No one has a legitimate interest in this subject". As a mother of teenage daughters, i think I have a legitimate interest in how pedeophilles get hold of pornography, and I belive that many other concerned citizens have a legitmate interest as well. I do not, however like the tone of the article as it stands at the moment. I am therfore in favour of a ruthless editing to make it less of a how-to and more of a "this is what they do" Theresa knott 10:23, 10 Oct 2003 (UTC)
thread_title: Repulsive yet should remain, says [[User:Theresa knott|Theresa knott]]

message: Having read this article a second time, I oppose deletion. However, it needs some editing. I hope that Paranoid and other Wikipedia users will co-operate to do that editing. I also hope that we'll avoid the kind of ill-informed hysterics that accompanied, for example, the Brass Eye "paedophilia special". Martin 11:14, 10 Oct 2003 (UTC)
thread_title: [[User:MyRedDice|Martin]] opposes deletion

message: I laughed myself silly at Brass Eye. I think this should be deleted. This is not a "free speech" issue at all. Let's face it - some things simply don't belong on Wikipedia. Removal of material may make total-free-speech people uncomfortable, but they're missing an important point: Wikipedia is certainly not required to carry somebody else's message. If somebody finds it oh-so-important that pedophiles can find their fix, they should pay to host this page themselves.
Kirun 19:23, 10 Oct 2003 (UTC)
thread_title: Someone else's agenda doesn't belong to Wikipedia

message: Delete:
# Cyan 02:28, 15 Oct 2003 (UTC)
thread_title:  Opinion poll
Wikipedia talk:Yellow Pages

message: My idea for this project is to create a hierarchy and directory of the meta pages. I created a few of what I thought were natural categories. ANybody who thinks of another should add it, or if you think of pages to add within the existing categories, please do that. An essential part of this system, as far as meeting the need I hope it will meet, is to create on the linked-to page a prominent link back to the index that links to it. My idea of a prominent link has been to make it a notice across the top, as in A Community Information page or A Style and How-to page. Right now, the "see also" links are unreliable. Sometimes the ideal link is there, sometimes it's not, often there are a bunch to choose from, and the titles don't make it obvious just how related the topics might be. Once people get the idea of the top link, they'll know that that's where to go to get a lay of the land. Instead of leap-frogging from one page to the next on a random search of uncertain duration, they can go to the index and see exactly what related articles exist grouped together and with names that help to make their relationship clear. I think this will not only make info a million times easier to find, I think it will make the meta content better. I think it will diminish the number of redundant and overlapping pages, because people won't be creating pages or appending to them in ignorance of the related pages, and because they are more liable to pick just the right page to add their thoughts to. Perhaps ultimately if there remain just a handful of primary taxa in the directory, they should just appear on the Main Page, and the Main Page in effect will become the top directory page (then we won't need a name!). BTW I picked "Yellow Pages" because the meta pages are yellow in the "classic" Wikipedia skin (which I use) and because the mode and purpose of this Wiki thing--categorization to help people easily find what they're looking for--seemed more or less the same as this familiar name for the phone book pages. Some people have objected to the name, which stuns me, because it seems absolutely perfect to me.  168...|...Talk 06:26, 11 Feb 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, it's nice to know the reason for the name. It makes sense, but it can't cure the connotation of containing commercial listings, so I still object to the name. Regretfully, because it essentially feels like I'm being dour and objecting to a little sly humor. The problem is, when people are looking for information, humor can be confusing. I'll throw out a suggestion for a replacement: Information Library. --Michael Snow 23:41, 12 Feb 2004 (UTC)

message: *I had started something similar a long time ago. See User:Optim/Links and use it if you like it. Optim 00:47, 20 Feb 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Optim's Linkies

message: With the new community main page, I think 168's project is no longer needed. We should be able to get everything we need on the new community page, so I propose to redirect there. --Michael Snow 20:15, 26 Feb 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Redirecting to community main page
Talk:Lunokhod 2

message: What does "4850 kg (approx. 4.77 tons)" mean? I thought 4850 kg would exactly equal 4.85 tons.
: There are nonmetric tons as well as metric ones - clarified. Dysprosia 07:32, 11 Feb 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Just what is in the external links of the Lunokhod pages... About 5 images total, I think. Perhaps someone who can read Russian might find something more on the Internet. Ricnun 14:24, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Some time ago, I found a website where some of the original image data was run through modern computer processing to recover all of the original data. The data was stored on magnetic tape at full quality, but the methods used originally to produce viewable images could not reproduce the full quality. I just tried a search on google for lunokhod data processing and was unable to find that.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bizzybody (talk • contribs) 06:14, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Other topics

message: In the third paragraph in the section "Landing and surface operations", the first sentence reads:
"After stopped and charging batteries until, it takes more images of the lander and landing site, and then sets out over the Moon."
This sentence is not grammatically correct.  Not knowing what the author's original intent was, I am hesitant to change it.  Does anyone know how this sentence should read?
: I think it means that the rover descended from its landing vehicle, charged batteries, took images of the lander and landing site and then started its explorations. Ricnun 14:24, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Landing and surface operations 

message: Understandable, but the image shown is not quite correct. See Phil Stooke's correction at http://www.unmannedspaceflight.com/index.php?showtopic=6514. According to Phil Stooke, the dark circle is actually where the radiator accident occurred and not the final location. We may have to wait for the media to produce corrections so that wikipedia can cite them. -84user (talk) 18:32, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Not quite correct

message: Large sections of this article lack inline refs, and there is no bibliography. Chaosdruid (talk) 11:04, 24 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Refs
Talk:Crayak

message: I don't have the book anymore, but I seem to remember Toomin's friend on his home planet (who he is playing the game with in the beginning of the Ellimist Chronicles) is a lot like Crayak.  Also, wasn't there an allusion in one of the books to Crayak being the being who designed viruses (as in creating them when there had previously been no such thing, not just creating new types)?  Possible that I just imagined that at the time of reading the books, though :)  -VetteDude 15:02, 4 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  History? 

message: why is he the only one that has a picture, along with Andalite?70.124.132.176 05:45, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  picture 

message: If he's "omnipotent", why would you need to point out that he's "super-powerful" in the very next line? Are you people high or something? If so, put down the effing bong while you're effing editing the encyclopedia, capische?
:And you need to tone down the arrogance and elitism just a tad. 152.31.229.30 (talk) 15:27, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Heh? 

message: I didn't read anything in the book about the Ellimist being an entire fleet of ships, just one megaship. Should that be changed?
He started out as one megaship after the events with Father, but later divided himself into components.  By the time he fell for the black hole trap, he was simeltaneously controlling around 3,000 small(er) craft, and believed that he was on the verge of becoming more powerful than Crayak. 152.23.101.108 19:38, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ellimist as a fleet of ships 

message: Where's the part about him ranting and it possibly indicating insanity come from? He only spoke in short sentences in #26, aside from "SLEEP WELL, HUMAN..." (all he said in Jake's dream was "Soon"), and after the Drode was introduced in the next book, he was rarely seen at all. Actually, was he ever? In any case, I want an instance of ranting delusionally. --67.10.175.242 02:36, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Insane?
Talk:TSMC

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians, I found the claim in leading section, that "Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company, Limited, also known as Taiwan Semiconductor" is highly misleading. Currently, Taiwan Semiconductor also redirects to here.
I've searched the web and found that there exists another independent company called "Taiwan Semiconductor". According to its website, 
So, it appears that, 
* Taiwan Semiconductor's abbreviation is TSC.
* It's a major manufacturer of discrete semiconductor components, not state-of-art integrated circuit.
* The company is traded on the Stock Exchange Corporation of Taiwan, as Taiwan Semiconductor Co Ltd. 
In conclusion, it's certain that TSMC and TSC are two unrelated companies, the current claim is incorrect. To fix this issue, I'm going to remove the claim that it's "also known as Taiwan Semiconductor" and will add additional clarifications. I'm also going to submit the redirect Taiwan Semiconductor for deletion.  
If anyone has disagreements and is willing to defend the previous version of the article, I'd like to hear your opinion, don't forget to provide some citations for verification. Thanks. Bieraaa (talk) 08:28, 21 January 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Update: The result of the deletion of the redirect page is Keep, I've withdrawn the nomination. I'm persuaded that adding the clarification is enough to avoid confusion. Bieraaa (talk) 15:49, 21 January 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  TSC and TSMC are NOT the same company 

message: The information under the "History" heading is not very helpful as history. Please add the company's history from its inception. I recall it was started as a joint venture between a Taiwan or other Asian company and Dutch company Philips. 166.216.158.21 (talk) 13:10, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  History 

message: With this linked: https://www.cnbc.com/2023/07/20/tsmc-q2-earnings.html
Where in the article did it actually stated that? 210.195.246.145 (talk) 16:26, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  "it is the world's second most valuable semiconductor company"
Talk:Internet child pornography/Archive 6

message: *User:Cyan/Internet child pornography - this article was deleted prematurely, so I undeleted it and moved it to my user space. I have a feeling this one may become contentious, so let's do the commenting at User talk:Cyan/Internet child pornography -- Cyan 22:50, 9 Oct 2003 (UTC)
thread_title:  Text from "Votes for deletion" 

message: Why is an otherwise good article effectively promoting child abuse, and violations of many national laws? This article starts out by describing child pornography, and the spread of child pornography to the internet. Fine. We need an article on this immoral crime. But then this article does somthing horrifically irresponsible, and actually gives instructions on how to obtain child pornography for themselves! What is going on?  Should our articles on biology also give terrorists information on how to make and distribute biological weapons, in the name of "intellectual freedom"? Should our articles on chemistry also give terrorists information on how to make and distribute chemical weapons, in the name of "intellectual freedom"?  I think the radical left wing culture of Wikipdia is showing a problem here; too any people believe in absolute and total freedom, yet seem to have no idea of responsibility. The two, however, go hand in hand. Civilized people have a responsibility to make it difficult for sick people to spead and obtain child porn. And aiding and abetting others in doing so is a Federal offense in the USA and most European nations. Teaching others how to access child pornography, as a part of this article does, will only increase its viewing, and increase the trade in photos of abused (and sometimes raped) children. This needs to be corrected. RK 14:19, Nov 16, 2003 (UTC)
===Shouldn't be a howto===
: This article certainly needs to be corrected to avoid the appearance of it being a "how to", given that "how to" articles are in any case deprecated on Wikipedia. Various folks have started on this, but more needs doing. Martin 14:24, 16 Nov 2003 (UTC)
thread_title: Article on abuse or Article promoting abuse?

message: : This article certainly needs to be corrected to avoid the appearance of it being a "how to", given that "how to" articles are in any case deprecated on Wikipedia. Various folks have started on this, but more needs doing. Martin 14:24, 16 Nov 2003 (UTC)
thread_title: Shouldn't be a howto

message: * Internet child pornography
** An article with a troubled history, this has previously been listed on Vfd for seven days with no consensus to delete, but the fact that it had been outside the article space during the discussion period may well have prevented people from realising that its status as an article was being seriously debated. Now that I've moved it back into the article space, perhaps we should start all over again. (Please could people not, in future, move articles out of the article space before their status has been decided. It does nothing but cause confusion. Thanks.) -- Oliver P. 08:00, 16 Nov 2003 (UTC)
thread_title:  More text from "Votes for deletion"
Talk:The IPCRESS File

message: Need to mention Funeral in Berlin and Billion Dollar Brain.
:Done, I put them in the "See also" section. --Commander Keane 13:02, August 3, 2005 (UTC)
IMDB lists  Bullet to Beijing and Midnight in St. Petersburg. as 1996 - this should change, yes?
Capitalisation error: the name of the film is the IPCRESS File, not the Ipcress File.  IPCRESS is an acronym —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.96.102.152 (talk • contribs) 
: Yeeeessss... that would appear to be correct. And its what the book cover sez William M. Connolley 19:23, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Maybe President Bush was thinking of this novel when he referred to size 10 shoes in the shoe-throwing incident. Size 10s are mentioned in chapter two, paragraph two, sentence two. 89.240.202.111 (talk) 10:35, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: "size tens" is familiar British slang e.g.   so not necessarily from this novel. Perhaps from his old mate Tony Blair..  Cormullion (talk) 22:24, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Shoes 

message: In the Plot section, the acronym IPCRESS is explained as Induction of Psycho-neuroses by Conditioned REflex with Stress", but in the Background section it is now "Induction of Psycho-neuroses by Conditioned Reflex _under_ Stress". Can we get some clarification on this??
Thanks! WesT (talk) 21:46, 29 May 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Clarification request 

message: The new wording is fine, rather more subtle than the old; but the edit comment is wrong; on p 210 our hero tells the American "I told him about Dalby being killed," William M. Connolley (talk) 13:05, 9 February 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  It is nowhere stated or implied that Dalby was executed 

message: I've just re-read the novel, and came to read the Wikipedia article out of curiosity. The plot section seems to have been edited down from a longer one, but badly, since there are references to characters (Ross, Murray and Carswell) without context. 84.13.231.137 (talk) 19:42, 12 December 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Plot Summary is a shambles
Talk:Sanjak

message: Googling for the terms in English gave following results:
*Sandjak: 5320
*Sanjak: around 16,000
*Sandzak: 9280
Seeing into the contents of the first ten pages, I have found that following numbers are dedicated to Novopazarski sandzak:
*Sandjak: 7/10
*Sanjak: 0/10
*Sandzak: 8/10
If these are taken as averages, it might be concluded that there are around 3700 pages mentioning Novopazarski sandzak as 'sandjak' few or no pages mentioning it as 'sanjak' and around 7400 mentioning it as 'sandzak'. So, I will move and split thispage accordingly. Nikola 08:35, 11 Feb 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Move

message: Is it Sançak or Sancak in Turkish? The transcription san(d)jak suggests it to be Sancak. –The Phoenix 20:22, 17 Jun 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: It is sancak and i changed it. at0 01:50, 20 Sep 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Turkish

message: When Sultan Mehmed Fatih came and conquered Bosnia and beheaded King Tomashevich, the Bosnian Villayet or state was divided into districts called Sancaks (pronounced Sanjak as in Jack).  This particular area was a border area with one of the Serbian city states of Rashka (about 20 km from Yeni Pazar.  The Serbs like to talk about how Yeni Pazar and the Sanjak were part of the Serbian City state of Rashka, but they were not.
The ruler of a Sancak was called a Sancak Bey and most of the time had bey as part of his last name although not all the time.  There were other title during the Ottoman empire that were specific from place to place.  They were called Spahis, Kadis (Judges), Pasha, Binbashi, Beyler Bey, Sancak Bey, and more.
I was reading some of the comments left on the discussion list regarding the population of Montenegro.  There were almost 370,000 Montenegrins, 30,000, Serbs, 70,000 Albanians some Roma and some croat while the rest of the population of Montenegro was Bosnian.  how they are coming up with such low figures regarding the Bosnians is beyond me.  Show me the census of 1991!  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.175.44.248 (talk) 18:35, 24 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The term sandjak is much older than the ottomans ! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Koi_Sanjaq , that´s where it comes from, the ottomans just took the term...  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.195.18.219 (talk) 11:08, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: You guys are hilarious but actual etymology listed. — LlywelynII 19:07, 10 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  How the name Sancak came about 

message: Does anyone on the English Wikipedia actually run any risk of confusing sanjak with St-Jacques? That part of the banner seems entirely unnecessary. — LlywelynII 19:09, 10 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title: Saint-Jacques
Talk:Stockwell tube station

message: I'm sure Stockwell opened long before 1971 - wasn't it the original terminus for the City and South London railway back in 1890? -Timrollpickering 09:36, Feb 11 2004 (UTC)
I think the deep level shelter is used for archive storage like most of them. When I last looked (about 4 years ago) it was - the Studley Road entrance is the main entrance with signage etc- the other is for emergencies. Secretlondon 23:26, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Adjective

message: There were several problems with the semantics section which I have tried to fix.
* Partee (1995) uses the non-hyphenated term 'nonsubsective'.
* It's not clear that Partee (1995) considers 'plain' a category of adjective. She does describe "plain nonsubsective" adjectives (p. 355), but its not clear to me that she considers that the name of a category of adjective, rather than just a generic description of such adjectives. I've changed the name to 'plain nonsubsective', but 'nonprivative nonsubsective' might be better.
* It is not the case (incl. according to Partee) that an intersective adjective is 'one that is essential to the meaning of the referent to which it applies'. While that is true of the example 'carnivorous cat', it is not true of Partee's (1995, p. 323) example 'carnivorous mammal', as being carnivorous in _not_ essential to the meaning of 'mammal'. Instead, an adjective is intersective if and only if the extension of its combination with a noun is equal to the intersection of its extension and that of the noun its modifying. An adjective which is essential to the meaning of the referent to which it applies would be pleonastic.
* The denotation of an adjective is normally said to have members, rather than tokens, and can be more precisely described as an extension (Partee 1995 does both).
* A subsective adjective, together with a noun, need not only hold for a _proper_ subset of the noun. 'Carnivorous' is subsective, but the extension of 'carnivorous cat' is equal to the set cat.
Finally, this section only discusses are small part of the semantics of adjectives, and should be extended. Ted BJ (talk) 20:57, 5 August 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Problems with Semantics Section
Talk:National poetry

message: Rather a strange title, isn't it? Deb 18:22, 11 Feb 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm kind of struggling to understand the purpose of the list in any case.  What was wrong with "List of articles about poetry"?  Come to that, what is wrong with the list that already exists on the "Poetry" page?  I can't imagine anyone thinking of searching under this title. "Biblical poetry" can hardly be described as "national".  For another thing, there is no such word as "poetries". Deb 19:05, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: It seems a little unorthodox, but I think this can be a useful resource. I strongly suggest breaking it down by "language" rather than "nation," however. Of course, I realize the limitations of that--some languages are highly international (English, Arabic, etc). However, I believe it would be more practical, because readers of any given language have access to all poetry in that language, regardless of nation of origin. On a side note, it's interesting how many notable languages are not listed: German, Greek, Latin...
Category?
Would this information be better served by using categories? I think so, but I admit that I don't quite understand the purpose of it either.Blackskyshining (talk) 03:18, 5 April 2009 (UTC)