lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:United Church, The Chapel on the Hill

message: This article is almost identical to the history section on the church's website.  A few words are different, but it will probably need further re-wording.  Bms4880 (talk) 18:34, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  possible copy-and-paste 

message: I moved the page to a shorter title because I see no potential for ambiguity with another church of the same name. However, note that http://www.coth.org/ is a similarly named church in Seminole, Florida. --Orlady (talk) 21:47, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Page move
Talk:Sparky the Sun Devil

message: # (cur) (prev)  11:35, October 4, 2009 Hammersoft (talk | contribs) (2,066 bytes) (Not for this use it hasn't) (undo)
# (cur) (prev) 09:41, October 3, 2009 Justin Z (talk | contribs) (2,075 bytes) (Undid revision 317087486 by Hammersoft (talk) -- Rationale has been added) (undo) 
In my view, it meets every criterion on NFCC.  It certainly meets #8, as an article about a mascot without the official mascot is ridiculous.
Finally, rather than reverting the edit, how about adding the fricking article reference on the Sparky.png page.  What a concept.  I have done that (took about 25 seconds), so I am now returning to my previous edit.  If you have a problem with it, please discuss it here before taking further action.
Justin Z (talk) 05:03, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

message: The page linked in reference [4] contains no mention of the logo copyright dispute between ASU Alumni Asscociation and Orange Julius mentioned in the article. It does seem to provide information from the previous paragraph, however. While researching this topic I found that most search results (Google) on the aforementioned logo dispute return verbatim wording from this article. Therefore, a solid citation here would seem important. I'll share whatever I find in further research.
Kurisu Paifuaa (talk) 20:59, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  False link to Orange Julius logo lawsuit reference
Talk:Walnut Street Bridge (Chattanooga)

message: You describe the stone contractor, Slayton, as a 'former Union officer' with a birthdate of 1854. The term Union officer is usually applied to men who served in the Civil War, which ended when he was eleven years old. Do you just mean an officer of the US Army? 86.179.62.95 (talk) 08:47, 22 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Former Union officer? 

message: The first picture shown, with the blue, is Market street bridge, not walnut street bridge. 23.251.65.147 (talk) 00:14, 18 July 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: It is the Walnut Street Bridge. See the 2 bridges in the photo at right. BilCat (talk) 00:37, 18 July 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bridge picture incorrect
Talk:Medicalization

message: ...Medicalisation of Addiction? Addiction as a disease model?...  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.6.100.68 (talk) 23:31, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: :Article is due for a rewrite. The areas designated as medicalized in medical sociology are nearly endless, but I think addiction should be included in a revised version. It will be a couple of weeks before I can start in on this article properly. Any help would be welcome. FiachraByrne 01:15, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: I think there may be scope for distinguishing narrow definition from broader implication. The narrow definition offered (quantifying social, cultural or other non-medical phenomena with  diagnoses) almost covers the topic. Is there s a broader sense in which medicalization applies at a conceptual or institutional level.http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0271712380908044 Does enterprise value-add their products by using the prefix medical to boost sales? Is there a critical sense in which medicalization applies to imperialism by the profession? Tradimus (talk) 04:54, 31 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: implications

message: This article needs an overhaul. Anyone want to discuss/debate the issues?
82.2.75.224 (talk) 12:24, 6 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  re-write required 

message: 2620:72:0:9999:A413:6974:168:BE77 (talk) 18:26, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  This article sucks 

message: The information needs to be updated and please provide page numbers so the information is easier to fact check. M0318 (talk) 18:23, 6 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Needs Updating  

message: The "Areas" feels like a WP:UNDUE violation as it gives heavy attention to antipsychiatric viewpoints all throughout and doesn't mention any other branch of medicine at all and feels like nothing more than a rant using other people's voices. CheckSuruWayo (talk) 11:33, 31 August 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: POV?

message: This looks interesting. It'd be good if there was a bunch of literature and not just one source. Not sure if this belongs in an article on the response to covid of here.
https://muse.jhu.edu/article/775403
Talpedia 12:57, 13 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  COVID-19
Talk:Acetabulum

message: In case anyone thinks this serves the article better than straight text, I'm storing it here.
Bone   	Boundary           	Contribution
ilium  	above              	a little less than two-fifths
ischium	laterally and below	a little more than two-fifths
pubis  	medially           	the remaining fifth
Figma 23:13, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Table removed 

message: This article is not about a unit of measure, even though it contains a link to an article about a unit of measure.  A unit of measure category is not appropriate. --BostonMA talk 05:51, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Categories 

message: Yes, I thought that Larousse Gastronomique was a strange ref here.  Should've lopped it myself earlier.  Figma 06:36, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reference 

message: Could someone pls. add/ explain/locate: acetabular roof, primary acetabulum, acetabular growth plate ???  
—Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.236.23.251 (talk) 10:30, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Parts not found 

message: Maybe that can be modified since we later discuss “Reptiles and birds”. Kortoso  (talk) 03:06, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Human anatomical region?
Template talk:Romanianethnicgroups

message: I don't think the percentages are wright. The 6.6 % of Hungarians contains the Szekely and Csango people too. If we include the Szekely and Csango in the template we have to specify the right percentage of each three of them. --Roamataa 19:34, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, that's right. I personally don't think putting the percentages in the template is a good idea anyway, since the point of the template is not to offer any information about the groups, but rather just to provide a listing of them. If we were to put percentage figures for the unrecognised minorities, this would be very difficult, since we would have to rely on estimates that often tend to be overstated, and are hence not directly comparable to the census data. The only exception to this is the Chinese minority, since we have accurate census data for them.  Ronline ✉ 00:31, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Have removed percentages per the above; other similar templates also don't seem to include them. Regards, David Kernow (talk) 03:10, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Szekely and Csango

message: This template is quite nice. I found it on the Danube Swabians article, which includes a link to the published results of the 2011 Romanian census, including Table 2 with totals by ethnicity of people there.  --Prairieplant (talk) 11:18, 18 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  New census in 2011 by ethnic groups, template is outdated
Talk:Woodlawn Baptist Church and Cemetery

message: Hi Doxtxob, i see u have been active.  I updated the NRHP infobox using output from the Elkman NRHP infobox generator, plus some editing to use the coordinates already in the article, rather than the NRIS ones.  I over-rode the NRHP listing date that was given in the article, with the NRIS info.  The article stated that it was added to the NRHP in September 2, 1996;  NRIS says it is December 2, 1996.  Perhaps the infobox in the article was cut and pasted from another NRHP article, and the wrong date was copied in?  Anyhow, check the changes.  Thanks! doncram (talk) 03:56, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  NRHP infobox, date info
Talk:All This and Puppet Stew

message: ( Not sure of the importance of this to the main article , so , I'll leave it here , and main article writer can decide. ). The album originally included a cover of Elvis Costello's "Clean Money" - even listed on the Amazon.com pre-sale listing - but , at the last minute , Stan & Leonard decided it was not up to snuff and deleted it. 75.104.174.236 (talk) 16:51, 4 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Clean Money
Talk:Agreement of Saint-Jean-de-Maurienne

message: The article has a number of mistakes, which emanate from the first version in 2006  and do not match the source used. In particular, the opening sentence that an agreement was "signed at Saint-Jean-de-Maurienne on April 26" is simply not correct. Onceinawhile (talk) 21:17, 27 April 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mistakes in this article
Talk:Princess Olga Pskov International Airport

message: The sources on this article point out that the facility is mostly used as a military airbase for the Russian Air Force, and has been for decades, since even Soviet times, and has only ever been lightly used as a commercial airport.  Large service disruptions to its commercial service across the history of its limited commercial airport use.
Yet the article calls it an "international airport." Huh?  -- it may meet some technical definition of that, but the article also says the airport does not even have instrument landing capability.  That is one unusual "commercial airport."
Article needs a lot of work.  And likely, also, a title change. — N2e (talk) 15:00, 30 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  More a military air base; only secondarily an airport
Talk:Fdformat

message: The current version of the article () says that "[the Fdformat program] according to the author of the program, Christoph H. Hochstätter, enhances the speed of your diskette I/O by using a technique he calls "Sector Sliding"" and the paragraph is marked as needing citation. The citation can be found in the documentation of the program, available from the external presented in the article, where it says: "FDFORMAT is a replacement for the DOS-Format program, which has the following advantages: [...] Enhance speed of your diskette I/O up to 100% with sector sliding. This is a method of physical ordering sectors in a  way, that your drive is ready to read the next logical sector, when your head advances one track." I think that this statement is enough to remove the "citation needed" tag. Razvan Socol 20:03, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Citation for speed enhancement 

message: Where can I get a DOS copy of this, duz it work w/ Windows XP and Windows 98?? Do u have to pay or is it freeware? Realg187 16:27, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You can get it from the link mentioned in the article (). I don't think it will work under Windows, but it may work if you restart in MS-DOS mode (from Windows 9x). Razvan Socol 18:27, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Software 

message: No concensus reached in Merge, removing tag. Kobuu (talk) 14:03, 8 September 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removing Merge
Talk:Bratmobile

message: "In 2000, Bratmobile released their second full length studio album, Ladies, Women and Girls, to an audience who had never forgotten them and never found a replacement for their unique brand of punk."
Gag.  Sounds like a press release, not an encyclopedia article.  --Andersonblog (talk) 14:19, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Who wrote this, the record company?
Talk:Aldose reductase

message: I've now expanded the article, adding more details about the function of the reaction, and in which tissues it is to be found.
Mortsggah 20:01, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Discussion

message: Hi, in 'reactions' the text formula for the conversation of glucose to fructose differs from the image.
Can anyone confirm which on (or both??) are correct? Thanks Jkokavec (talk) 22:30, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Inconsistent reaction formula
Talk:Hout Bay

message: The Hout Bay page contains several references to Mariner’s Wharf (note that Mariner’s Wharf is not a wharf or quay or some other historic entity in Hout Bay, but simply a business: restaurant, souvenirs, fish & chips etc.):
1. Under the heading Geography -- “Mariner’s Wharf a seafood emporium ... 9th most visited tourist attraction”
2. Under the heading Leisure and tourism: “The famous Mariner’s Wharf restaurant is widely visited”
3. Under the heading Attractions: Here it’s listed as one of only two attractions, along with ... the museum!
I suspect advertorial masquerading as information. I doubt whether any reference to Mariner’s Wharf is warranted other than in a listing of restaurants and other places where tourists can be relieved of their cash.
And should Mariner's Wharf have a Wikipedia page of its own (which it has)?
Gawie 20:10, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Mariner's Wharf

message: As a local Hout Bay resident (with no ties to Mariners Wharf) recognise the contribution this development has made to the Hout Bay area. Mariners Wharf is modelled on Pier 39 in San Francisco (recognised on Wiki too) and is a well known tourism drawcard in Hout Bay. In seasons hundreds of tourists visit every day, there are several restuarants in the area- and the Wharf includes curio shops, takeaway shops etc  —Preceding unsigned comment added by MattMercer (talk • contribs) 21:10, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  I disagree! 

message: I appreciate that Hout Bay is a beautiful area, but I feel the imagery should be kept to an encyclopedic standard, rather than a catalogue of pretty photos. That said, I have just produced two extensive panoramae of Hout Bay: one from Suther Peak (the North-Westish mountain range) and one from Constantiaberg. While the latter is more scenic, I think the former more appropriate because it makes clear (a) the valley structure of Hout Bay, (b) the bay itself, (c) Imizamo Yethu, and (d) Chapman's Peak drive. I feel these are important features, so I'm going to work out where to upload it, do so, and place it at the bottom of the page (similar to other suburb/city pages I've seen which boast panoramae). It might not appear immediately. Warrickball (talk) 09:29, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Imagery 

message: This used to be a thing. Is it encyclopedic, and should it be mentioned?Park3r (talk) 23:30, 15 February 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Republic of Hout Bay 

message: Sand dunes were once a significant feature of Hout Bay but have since been covered with vegetation due to housing development. I don't know much about it but it should be mentioned and written up by a credible/respected environmentalist. Agbneill (talk) 07:11, 6 September 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dunes
Talk:Community Front in Defense of Land

message: Why is the acronym FPDLA?  It's supposed to stand for Frente del Pueblo en Defensa de La Tierra, right?  Is this an error?  Thanks, delldot | talk 20:10, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I have found it written FPDT elsewhere, so I'm going to change it.  delldot | talk 19:02, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: FPDLA?
Wikipedia talk:WikiProject British Columbia

message: Sorry if this is the wrong place; a lot of enrollment numbers in infoboxes for BC schools are outdated/inaccurate - e.g. Princess Margaret Secondary states 1500, but according to the bc gov. site, its currently ~500. I don't really know what to do about this issue so I'm posting here if anyone has any ideas. :) Highfire1 (talk) 23:15, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  School wiki pages 

message: Anyone know of sources to add to Shroom House about the Vancouver location? ---Another Believer (Talk) 16:13, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Shroom House 

message: You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Content assessment#Proposal: Reclassification of Current & Future-Classes as time parameter, which is within the scope of this WikiProject.  This WikiProject received this message because it currently uses "Current" and/or "Future" class(es). There is a proposal to split these two article "classes" into a new parameter "time", in order to standardise article-rating across Wikipedia (per RfC), while also allowing simultaneous usage of quality criteria and time for interest projects. Thanks! —CX Zoom[he/him] (let's talk • {C•X}) 21:31, 1 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Discussion at [[Wikipedia:Content assessment]] 

message: A discussion is taking place, which may effect provincial/territorial politician bio leads. GoodDay (talk) 20:15, 4 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rene Levesque 

message: Would appreciate input at this RFC about Levesque. GoodDay (talk) GoodDay (talk) 21:03, 12 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  René Lévesque RfC
Talk:Amnion

message: Please see Amniotic sac talk page topic. /skagedal... 08:43, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge with [[amniotic sac]]? 

message: The article as is says "the extraembryonic ectoderm on the inner side" in the lead paragraph as well as in the subsequent section. I am totally inept in biology but when I looked at the "Section through the Embryo" and "Model of Human Embryo 1.3 mm long" pictures in the Additional Images section I saw the term entoderm being referred to instead of ectoderm. Can someone double check whether it's just my paranoia?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.60.114.129 (talk) 10:42, 25 April 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ectoderm or Entoderm? 

message: Quoting without attribution is plagiarism. When the source is quite old, it is also a terrible way to write a scientific article. If you notice passages in this article which sound archaic in style, just Google some of their phrases, and Gray's Anatomy will pop up in the results. Pathetic.--75.164.142.57 (talk) 03:41, 14 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lifted from Gray's word for word
Talk:Ancient accounts of Homer

message: Cleanup Co-ordination	Cleanup Co-ordination
                     	This article has recently been tagged as requiring cleanup to meet Wikipedia's quality standards.
The article may have been flagged as needing cleanup because it has been suggested that:
*the article needs formatting, proofreading, or rephrasing in comprehensible English. 
*the article has multiple overlapping problems. 
*the article is very short and might need expanding, removal or merging with a broader article
For a full list of possible problems see Wikipedia:Manual of Style.
As part of the cleanup process, the automated bot PocKleanBot has generated this notice as a focus of cleanup efforts, and also contacted several contributing editors of the article to bring their attention to the problem. You should use this section to discuss possible resolution of the problem and achieve consensus for action. Only when there is a consensus that the article is now cleaned up should you then de-list it by deleting the cleanup tag from the article, this causes the article to drop off the monthly cleanup-needed list page.
                     	
===Discussion===
The article was created from 1911 EB write-up, which serves as the starting point for so many articles. In the case of this particular topic a lot of discoveries have been made since then. The topics also are not very clear. For example, what documentation? It can't mean biographies as there are plenty of those. What, does it mean inscriptions? What is the assertion looking for, a birth certificate? The underlying problem is variability in the assertions of the extensive sources. I see this as a total rewrite. Nothing is being said here. We need to say something. Too sparse, too general, too devoid of content, too full of vague and undefined terms.Botteville (talk) 18:51, 19 November 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article Cleanup Co-Ordination Point 

message: The article was created from 1911 EB write-up, which serves as the starting point for so many articles. In the case of this particular topic a lot of discoveries have been made since then. The topics also are not very clear. For example, what documentation? It can't mean biographies as there are plenty of those. What, does it mean inscriptions? What is the assertion looking for, a birth certificate? The underlying problem is variability in the assertions of the extensive sources. I see this as a total rewrite. Nothing is being said here. We need to say something. Too sparse, too general, too devoid of content, too full of vague and undefined terms.Botteville (talk) 18:51, 19 November 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Discussion
Talk:The ipswich ripper

message: This article needs work: it is poorly written.  The addition of references has helped some.  I've tagged it as a current event and as needing cleanup. Aleta 20:14, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: And I have tagged it for deletion. Although the event is current and verifiable the term "Ipswich Ripper" is not, except for usage in one newspaper. The sources cited except for that one refer to "Ripper" (alone) or "East Anglia Ripper". IfUnless the term gains wide acceptance (as it may) it's a neologism. Tonywalton  | Talk 20:29, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
Talk:Liberty Law

message: This article was cited as not explaining the importance of its subject. But the poster didn't explain what his/her objections were which makes them difficult to answer. The Liberty Law was a stepping stone in Hitler and the Nazi Party's rise to power - it was the point when they crossed over from being a bunch of ousiders to being part of the establishment. And I'm assuming nobody's disputing that Hitler and the Nazis went on to have a noticeable impact on history. MK2 20:16, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
Talk:Stinson Aircraft Company

message: Could someone write an article about Eddie Stinson, the founder of Stinson Aircraft Company? --Eastmain 04:31, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Eddie Stinson]] 
Talk:Red Rider

message: "The album did not sell as well as Neruda and a dispute with Capitol Records over the future direction of the band resulted in Red Rider being dropped from the record label later in 1984.
The band subsequently signed with RCA."''
???  All three "Tom Cochrane and Red Rider" albums (1986-1989) were released on Capitol.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 154.20.190.173 (talk) 08:00, 21 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  RCA? 

message: I created a timeline to help keep track of the members more easily; however, I've been informed before that I shouldn't post timelines without consulting the article's talk page first, so here goes. Tell me what you think. --208.76.203.145 (talk) 00:40, 20 September 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Timeline
Talk:Rogachevo (air base)

message: The NATO name of the Yak-28 bomber was indeed BREWER, but the NATO name for the Yak-28P interceptor was FIREBAR. Names for bombers start with 'B', names for fighters and interceptors start with 'F'.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Xblurt (talk • contribs) 21:02, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  NATO names for soviet fighters and interceptors 

message: The claim that "The base developed an interceptor role during the 1960s, partly to deter SR-71 operations in the Arctic region." is problematic. The Yak-28P (Firebar) and the Tu-128 (Fiddler) did not have the capability to intercept a Lockheed SR-71, and this throws the whole sentence into question. The aircraft mentioned did have a capability against slower, lower flying aircraft, and would have posed a serious threat to RC-135 aircraft.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Xblurt (talk • contribs) 22:19, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reference to SR-71 operations in the Artic region