lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:James Kaye

message: The article may be improved by following the WikiProject Biography 11 easy steps to producing at least a B article. --KenWalker | Talk 02:26, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Wikipedia:WikiProject_Biography/Assessment#Class_parameter|Biography assessment rating]] comment 

message: James Kaye is also set to race a Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution X in the Britcar Series
http://www.britcar24hr.co.uk/cms/e107_files/afm/Silverstone%20Britcar%2024%20Hour%20Entry%20List%202008.pdf
Artists impression of the car...
http://www.mitsubishiukworksrallyteam.com/images/groupncarmockup.jpg  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.33.16.99 (talk) 08:51, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  James Kaye and his Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution X - Britcar
Talk:James Keelaghan

message: I am fixing links to "Celtic" disambiguagtion page. I don't know what to do with this link. I can't think that "Celtic lilt" actually has any real meaning. Perhaps "Irish lilt"? "Celtic lilt" is certainly evocative, but this is an encyclopedia. I don't really want to just change the link from "Celtic" to "Celt" since that does not seem really to address the issue. There is nothing in the "Celt" article which would explain "Celtic lilt." I am thinking of changing the words to something like, "his lilting barritone voice."  --Sean Lotz 19:39, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Celtic lilt?

message: The third paragraph reads:
I suspect that the latter's name is actually "Silverman." However, no search terms that I tried turned up a reference to either of the professors listed, so I left it as is. Could someone with better knowledge of this item please look into it and change it if it's incorrect? Thanks…--HughGRex 12:40, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Quite some time has passed since the above editor's comment. Based on his inability to find any reference to the two subjects, he should have removed their names as unnotable, especially since nothing at all is noted regarding their influence. The absence of a citation further favors removal, which is what I intend to do under WP:BOLD and WP:NOT. See my other post on James Keelaghan. Allreet (talk) 05:02, 13 November 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Typo?
Talk:James Kelman

message: Isn't the comment that the film "Greyhound for Breakfast" was "disappointing" in contradiction of the principle of NPOV? I haven't seen the film or read the book so I offer no comment as to whether or not the comment is accurate.
Meltingpot (talk) 19:30, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: It is, I've removed that description. Robofish (talk) 14:08, 15 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: In 2014 it appears his website went offline and is now what appears to be a Japanese holding page. I removed that link from the writer infobox template. Archive.org has the last snapshot in December 2013 https://web.archive.org/web/20131202234425/http://www.jameskelman.com/ which may be useful for scholars seeking more information. --Chippyy (talk) 22:41, 4 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Website 

message: I'm guessing this is the same James Kelman who wrote A History of Banking, which I don't think is mentioned.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vwaju (talk • contribs) 16:54, 30 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  History of Banking 
Talk:James Killen

message: According to a Australian article, it says he left Brisbane Grammar yet somehow he subsequently entered Law School at UQ. Does anyone know where he finished his schooling to enter UQ Law?
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20867,21051491-601,00.html
:I've got his autobiography lying around here somewhere, so I'll have a look a bit later and see if I can find out for you. Rebecca 01:08, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: The Communist Party candidate was the first to be knocked out, and so had little effect on the final result. The Democratic Labor Party's preferences were what won Killen the seat.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 123.2.96.240 (talk) 04:59, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Or perhaps the donkey vote, though in the count it transferred ideologically - see Andrew Bartlett's analysis and the actual count figures at Sir James Killen: Moreton, Menzies and Mythology. Timrollpickering (talk) 20:16, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Preferences 

message: Although the article refers to Killen as a wit, with friendships from both sides of parliament, it does not mention that he was also considered a larrakin, often playing pranks on other members.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 123.2.96.240 (talk) 05:03, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wit and Larrikin 

message: I have peer reviewed this article.  You can find the comments at Wikipedia:WikiProject Australia/Peer review/James Killen.  Giggy UCP 04:23, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Peer Review 
Template talk:Neon Genesis Evangelion

message: Angels and Evas are all on one page, er, two pages. Why are all listed in the template box? - HKMARKS 23:31, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Angels and Evas are all on one page

message: There are at least three NGE manga (see :Category:Neon Genesis Evangelion). Since it's already listing by medium, there should be a manga line. --Gwern (contribs) 20:32 15 April 2007 (GMT)
:Done. Willbyr (talk | contribs) 13:31, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Manga line

message: Should the template include links for the WikiProject and the Portal? Willbyr (talk | contribs) 05:21, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Project and Portal 

message: I came across the Chamber of Gauf article - if noteable in the eyes of the EVA project, you may want to include it here. Ninja neko 15:39, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The vast majority of that information is already covered in Rei's article; that article serves no purpose and should be speedy deleted.  Also, I think the term used in the series is "Chamber of Gaff," not "Chamber of Gauf."  It's been a while, I could be wrong. Willbyr (talk | contribs) 16:23, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Chamber of Gauf]] 

message: Is it worth providing a clearer distinction?  Like 2 music sections or split the existing one?  BrokenSphereMsg me 22:56, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Music - distinguish between singles vs. albums? 

message: What do you think? Willbyr (talk | contribs) 23:38, 12 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Dunno; calling them characters seems somehow wrong. They're really more monsters or plot devices than 'characters'. --Gwern  (contribs) 05:35 15 January 2009 (GMT)
I agree with gwern, they arent really much characters, more like tools often used in the series.Bread Ninja (talk) 15:42, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Move Angels and Evas to Characters section?

message: It's true that the band Fightstar did do a concept album based on the series, but I can't find a good reason for why they would be on this template, so they've been removed. ChaosAkita (talk) 17:02, 23 July 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree.  They have nothing to do with the series at all, and don't belong there.  Dream Focus 06:59, 16 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fightstar in Music section
Talk:James Kurth

message: I can't for the life of me understand the connection apparently asserted by the word "accordingly" between this man's membership in the Presbyterian Church in America and his opposition to "Operation Iraqi Freedom" asserted here:
"Kurth is an evangelical Protestant as well as a traditional social and political conservative; he is a Deacon at Proclamation Presbyterian Church in Bryn Mawr, Pennsylvania. Accordingly, he objected to Operation Iraqi Freedom and the broader U.S. push to promote liberal democracy in the Middle East."
:The "accordingly" relates to "traditional ... political conservative" - a traditional conservative, not a neo-con (like Bush and his gang), would generally be isolationist. 130.58.241.224 06:15, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:James Laurenson

message: He played in "Paint Me a Murder"
Reference here:  https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0213138/
And here:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h2jzngjd2jU
I don't know how to edit Wikipedia or what the standards are;  I just wanted to share this because I did not see it in his list of work in the article.  Thank you.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.241.210.52 (talk) 04:30, 31 July 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  I think there is a film missing from his biography
Talk:James Lavelle

message: In what universe can this person said to be noteable?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.150.83.45 (talk) 09:31, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Who? 
Talk:James Lawson (activist)

message: It seems a shame that the only citations here are to the flap over intemperate remarks at the 9/11 commemoration in 2006.
I suggest the article would benefit from more citations, ones beyond my competence to add.
--AndersW (talk) 19:59, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I've removed the brief controversy section as criticism of Lawson's comments by FOX News is not relevant to Lawson's notability, as required by WP:BLP. If the "controversy" had been solely about Lawson (rather than criticizing all the speakers at the event), and had had some sort of lasting impact, rather than just being a 24-hour conservative pundit football, it would deserve to be in an encyclopedia article about him. Otherwise, it gives undue weight to what was actually one of the least notable events in Lawson's life. Kaldari (talk) 18:18, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Check out the talk page of the editor who added the controversy section: User talk:143.231.249.141. Apparently someone at the U.S. House of Representatives is interested in smearing Lawson. Kaldari (talk) 18:35, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  References
Talk:Shining Wisdom

message: Can someone else also confirm that all the external links are dead and remove them?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.39.20.30 (talk) 15:14, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  External Links all Dead 

message: Saying things are WD's "fault" seems too POV for a wiki article. Someone who knows the subject better than I should re-write to eliminate the bias.76.226.125.246 (talk) 18:14, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. It was just a matter of eliminating some unnecessary wording.--Martin IIIa (talk) 12:35, 22 June 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Translation section is too POV 

message: In the Development section of the article, it is stated that localizer Working Designs was unable to use certain character names because Sega "owned the copyrights ... and would not release them". This seems unlikely to me, and I am unable to find any evidence of this anywhere. There are a lot of fansites that repeat the statement, but I can't find an interview with or a statement from President Victor Ireland or anyone at Working Designs or Sega that could have originated this idea. The source cited, a write-up on the fansite Shining Force Central, states this as fact but does not source the information itself and does not seem credible enough to stand on its own.
I think that it's possible that this story is being conflated with a documented dispute that did exist over the names that were to be used in Working Designs' localization of a different Sega Saturn game, Magic Knight Rayearth, but in that case it was due to Working Designs being asked to use the same names that were used in the English dub of the anime instead of Working Designs' own original names.
Victor Ireland is somewhat notorious for openly discussing the localization process of the games Working Designs published, but I still can't find anywhere on the Internet where he mentions any kind of a problem with the names in Shining Wisdom. Shining Lore (talk) 00:09, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copyrighted Character Names?
Talk:James Lileks

message: The trivia line about giving his goldfish an "coffee enema" is someone's failure to read subtext.  From the article in question, where he's talking about guests: "Someone updates your wikipedia page - with photos - and you're dead forever. So you really clean. The goldfish gets a coffee enema, that's how much you clean."
Removing. --64.24.181.150 06:42, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Trivia 

message: How does someone figure he's not notable?  Regular columnist, noted humorist (by Dave Barry, of all people) and five of his books are published by Crown, which, according to Wikipedia is: "The Crown Publishing Group is a subsidiary of Random House, the world's largest book publisher."  There seem to be enough citations to meet any reasonable baseline, though of course, more is always better.Mzmadmike (talk) 11:40, 14 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Good point. I've removed that tag. Cheers, CWC 15:58, 14 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Notability 
Talk:James Lovegrove

message: I have in my collection a paperback by "J. M. H. Lovegrove" titled The Guardians: The Krilov Continuum, which is "a Millennium Paperback Original First Published in Great Britain in 1998 by Millennium, a division of Orion Books Ltd" (ISBN 1-85798-536-2). The verso opposite the title page carries the declaration "J. M. H. Lovegrove is the pseudonym of an Arthur C. Clarke Award shortlisted author."
Curious to know whether this was the same writer James Lovegrove with whom I was already familiar, I did some web searching, starting with but not confined to this article.
It appears from various sources easily discoverable (including James Lovegrove's own website, various reviews, etc.) that "J. M. H. Lovegrove" is indeed a pseudonym of James Lovegrove, and that this is seemingly the only book on which it has been used. Though obviously intended as the first of a series, tied in with the (then) Sci-Fi Channel [sic] (whose logo the cover and title page carries, as does a last page advert for the channel), it appears that no further volumes have (so far) appeared. I have seen no evidence that "James M. H. Lovegrove" is the writer's actual (i.e. fuller) name, though I may be mistaken on this point.
In view of this, I suggest that:
* the first line of the lede should be amended to remove the "M. H.";
* a new subsection "Writing as J. M. H. Lovegrove" should be inserted after subsection 3.5, "Writing as Jay Amory", with this title as the (sole?) entry;
* a redirect from J. M. H. Lovegrove to this article should be created. (Currently, searching Wikipedia for J. M. H. Lovegrove does not suggest this article as a page containing it, although searching for Jay Amory does as the first entry.)
Does anyone have further or alternative suggestions? {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.211.131.202 (talk) 19:37, 5 March 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Omitted Title; Name clarification 

message: I see no mention of the short story "The Wheezing Man" contained in a post War of the Worlds anthology called Scarlet Traces.
It is a Sherlock Holmes cross over into (of course) H G Wells. 2A00:23C4:2204:7D01:2C65:184A:408F:1A20 (talk) 13:01, 16 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Wheezing Man (Scarlet Traces: A War of the Worlds Anthology)
Talk:Milnet.ca/Archive 1

message: Two points;
*LFRR is not defined - it should probably be spelled out so casual readers may infer what this means
*the use of the army.ca forum to "prove" that the LFRR forums recommend army.ca is unconvincing. It refers to a temporary page long since gone (if indeed it ever existed), and even if such a page were to appear again at LFRR, it would not represent official Army policy, which is what seems to be inferred by its inclusion here (and the suggestion at the AfD discussion that army.ca is somehow an offshoot of the "official" Army site, a faulty suggestion given army.ca's own disclaimer). As it stands, the army.ca forum discussion saying that LFRR "recommended" army.ca seems like mere gossip, unless there is something in that thread I am missing.If someone could post the relevant information here, that would be an aid to discussion. For now, I am putting up a dispute tag on this section.
*EDIT - final comment. The wording as is does a good job at conferring the actual intent of the notice - ie "refer" rather than "recommend". I just don't see a message forum as being reliable evidence that this occurred.  Was it a one time thing? How long was the notice up? Who placed it there? It seems trivial merely to say the notice existed once upon a time.Michael Dorosh 17:31, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: LFRR

message: I've removed this - Sometimes when this happens these members have demonstrated a tendency to try and attack the site, either through repeated attempts to form new accounts and make abusive posts, or indirectly through such actions as the persistent and uncomplimentary editing of this Wikipedia article.
Internet trolls are not peculiar to any one site, so I see no reason to mention them here.  The last part of the sentence also seems unfair - I see no evidence of "uncomplimentary" editing of the article, in fact, I see an amazingly well-balanced NPOV description of the website in question. This bit seems like sour grapes and an unveiled message which probably doesn't belong here. Probably best to keep dirty laundry out of wikipedia articles, especially if they are unsourced and irrelevant. If there are inaccurate statements in the article, editors are advised to correct them rather than simply complain about them.  As for persistence, congrats to all who have contributed to the article so far.139.48.167.125 20:58, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removal of para
Talk:Royal Adelaide Hospital

message: Someone deleted a picture of the new RAH! Why?? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 175.103.25.137 (talk) 12:03, 4 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Picture 

message: I suggest this article be split into two and some decent photographs be incorporated into the "Old RAH" article. Doug butler (talk) 22:12, 18 February 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  History 

message: Would be good to quote @PremierMiekRann who stated "Yes its true!Let me repeat. Any clai that we are spending $2.7billion on construction costs for new RAH is bullshit!" 2001:8003:6A23:2C00:483F:6824:35DC:F7D7 (talk) 12:38, 17 March 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: That would be a very unhelpful contribution to the article. Best to just leave it alone. Jkokavec (talk) 13:44, 17 March 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cost blow out 

message: This article is about the hospital as an institution, (ideally) containing historical info about how it was on the old site and updated info about the new hospital (building and operation). Lot Fourteen seems to be the name adopted for the site of the old hospital, and this is a separate entity (which may or may not acquire a new name in the future), about the new cultural precinct and other buildings planned on the site. Unless anyone objects in the next few weeks, I'll create a new article when I have time. Laterthanyouthink (talk) 04:26, 1 July 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh, this post is from 2019. Dont worry, not a lot has changed. Things move slowly.129.127.32.138 (talk) 01:43, 2 December 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Split discussion
Talk:James Loy

message: I added Loy's affiliation with the Cohen Group.  Tooptoo 21:45, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Comment

message: I have been bold and written the previously un-explained IMO as the 'International Maritime Organization'. If it is wrong, could somebody please fix it ?
RASAM (talk) 22:11, 18 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: IMO
Talk:James Mackay (police officer)

message: The article may be improved by following the WikiProject Biography 11 easy steps to producing at least a B article. --KenWalker | Talk 04:41, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Wikipedia:WikiProject_Biography/Assessment#Class_parameter|Biography assessment rating]] comment 
Talk:James Mackay, Baron Mackay of Clashfern

message: Currently, the page seems not to mention his connection with Halsbury - see
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halsbury%27s_Laws_of_England - perhaps it should.
82.163.24.100 15:16, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Halsbury
Talk:James Madio

message: The article may be improved by following the WikiProject Biography 11 easy steps to producing at least a B article. --KenWalker | Talk 04:29, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Wikipedia:WikiProject_Biography/Assessment#Class_parameter|Biography assessment rating]] comment 
Template talk:The Big O

message: I've removed the epiode article links from the template, please see Talk:The Big O#Episode articles for why I've done this. -- Ned Scott 06:16, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Episode articles

message: The template you named is not sufficient enough as mine. I spent a lot of time working on that edit there is no reason to revert. You made it so that the navbox isn't even necessary. -The Big X 21:07, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Take a look at Template:RahXephon. GunnarRene created articles for all 26 episodes but they're not in the main navbox. He did use the Episode navbox in God and Man Awaken, God's Uncertain Music and the rest. And, per the above, you shouldn't add articles to the navbox that aren't created (yet).--Nohansen 22:04, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

text: Why is it that the moment I edit this template you feel the need to change it? You have made this template obsolete! You could just replace it with:
== See Also ==
*Characters
*Setting
*Megadeus
*Etc.
And that is one, one example. The way I made it will help editors to see, when they scroll to the bottom of The Big O, "hey, there are some incomplete articles I think I can make them," that template you named only covers three pages, to the 26. What if I wanted to jump to the 5th episode from the 1st? -The Big X 20:10, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

text: Then, create something like Template:Avatar episode for Big O episode articles (when you create them). The purpose of a navbox is a lot like a "See also" section. See Template:Avatar.--Nohansen 20:26, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

text: You ... are ... being ... a ... control ... freak. There is nothing wrong with having the episodes there like that, it looks fine that way and it stimulates editing by anyone who sees the red links. Do you know why Avatar has a box just for its episodes? Because there are 50+ episodes to Avatar. There are simply 26 to The Big O, so there is no reason for another template, it looks much nicer the way I put it. -The Big X 22:59, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

text: Alright I reverted it to the way it was, lets keep it as it is. -The Big X 23:42, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  My edit
Talk:James Mangold

message: As per WP:DOB (a section of the WP:BLP policy) I have removed the uncited exact date of birth from the article. It should not be restored unless it is not only cited, but cited to a source or soures which make it clear that the date has been widely published, or else published with the subject's approval. This might be clear if the sources is itself notable and widely published, or if there are multiple reliable sources, or if the sources says or plainly implies that the date was published with the subject's consent, or in other ways. The day and month of birth of a living person are of little encyclopedic value, while making them public can contribute to identity theft and other problems. The year suffices to place the subject in chronological context. See WT:BLP#Dates of birth and info boxes for discussion. DES (talk) 00:03, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Date of birth 
Talk:James Manson (Australian footballer)

message: The article may be improved by following the WikiProject Biography 11 easy steps to producing at least a B article. --KenWalker | Talk 04:04, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Wikipedia:WikiProject_Biography/Assessment#Class_parameter|Biography assessment rating]] comment 