lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:TV's Frank

message: I've removed the unsourced speculation about the origin of the "TV's Frank" name per Wikipedia's no original research policy. I've also restored the deleted behind-the-scenes information in a section titled "Behind the scenes". I left in (and tweaked) the recently added comment about Dr. F not carrying in Frank, which seems a little too much like an off-topic aside (the topic being not the episode, but the "Behind the scenes"), but is a useful tidbit paralleling Frank with the Bots in this particular episode. Maybe someone can come up with an arrangement for better flow? ~ Jeff Q (talk) 14:23, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, after reading over this article again, I realized that this article didn't have any cited sources, so I've added the standard 2 from the main MST3K article. We should go through the various bits of information and ensure that each one has a source that's listed in "References". ~ Jeff Q (talk) 14:29, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  I am searching for a cite, but I can assure you the given reason for the "TV's Frank" moniker was as given in a previous update. However, I again question the validity of some of the behinds the scenes info. The writers were the performers, so it is not unusual to see them deliver their written riffs. It might be for Frank in particular, but not for the rest of the cast. Reverend Raven 22:00, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  I have found it!  states that Frank was called TV's Frank because "TV personality would sometimes be introduced as "TV's" so-and-so." It's in the Official MST3K FAQ, so it must be valid. I am updating the article to reflect this. Reverend Raven 00:15, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Kudos to Reverend Raven for the research! Every little bit of proper sourcing helps improve these articles. We might also consider changing these links to proper Wikipedia:Footnotes, which provide not only the links, but also the citation text for fact-checkers and hardcopy readers. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 04:04, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Name

message: Are we certain about the chauffeur uniform? His ensemble looks very much like a chef's jacket.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.8.24.84 (talk) 19:02, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  The wardrobe of TV's Frank
Wikipedia talk:Centralized discussion/Federal Standard 1037C clean up

message: For starters, I've moved the list of terms from Federal Standard 1037C to Wikipedia:Federal Standard 1037C terms (leaving the article-worthy introductory material as a freestanding article), as this is certainly more in the realm of wiki-projects than of articles. BD2412 T 00:48, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: The same should be done to its spuns-offs, like List of fiber optic terms or List of coding terms. There are categories for these things in any case. Renata3 01:11, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed - they should be moved to subpages, e.g. Wikipedia:Federal Standard 1037C terms/fiber optic terms; Wikipedia:Federal Standard 1037C terms/coding terms. BD2412 T 01:15, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

text: Bam! Done, like a phantom in the night. BD2412 T 01:22, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Wow! 7 mins! :) Renata3 02:02, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Separated the wheat... 

message: # I recommend that, before anything else is done, the list of articles that editors consider to need attention in this discussion be completed.  So far we have reached "C".
# I recommend that editors not conflate "dictionary definition" with "short stub article".  (This is something that I keep meaning to bring up at Wikipedia talk:Deletion policy.)  I've picked three of the articles that were marked as candidates for moving to Wiktionary, and there was a very simple fix for all three: Edit the article so that it is on the "use" side of the use-mention distinction instead of on the "mention" side.  Simply replacing "The term X means" or "X is a term that refers to" in the introduction with "X is" fixes quite a few articles that editors think should be moved to Wiktionary.  The Wikipedia:Guide to writing better articles#Use_of_.27refers_to.27 has clear advice to avoid "is a term" and "refers to", and this is part of the reason for it.Asynchronous operations and back-to-back connections are things.  And addressability is a concept.  The question should be "Is there more to say about these concepts/things?  Are the articles about these concepts/things stubs that have the possibility of future expansion?"In the case of all three, the answer is "yes".  Our article on back-to-back connections could expand using information from Cisco, information from Hewlett-Packard, and information from Intel about back-to-back connections, for example.  Our article on asynchronous operations could expand using information from IBM and information from Tom's Hardware Guide, although it covers much the same ground as asynchronous communication.  Our article on addressability could expand to cover direct and indirect addressing and to relate the concept to memory addresses, address spaces, and pixels.
Uncle G 16:55, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Some recommendations
Talk:List of police-related slang terms

message: The term itself is Japanese pan ...
* The Peter Pan Manga
But I suspect that's user generated content, and not formally citeable. — MaxEnt 20:29, 20 July 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pan for pun? 

message: I'm pretty sure that Blue Canary is common throughout North America, which makes sense given that firefighters in NA are pretty cohesive, with lots of joint training, etc. catseyes (talk) 19:48, 7 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Blue Canary 

message: The term is a direct borrowing from “The 4chan party van” meme and is rarely used outside image board or internet community.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.80.60.185 (talk) 08:19, 12 November 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Party Van
Talk:1830s in Mormonism

message: Two points:
*You can't refer to Mormonism or The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints as "the church".  It is not "The Church"; it is A Church!  Please specify which religion you are talking about.  If any religion deserves to use the epithet "The Church" it is the Catholic Church because of its size and longevity (I'm not Catholic, I'm just making a point).  Calling Mormonism "the church" is naive, ethnocentric, and ignorant.
*When writing about past events, use the past tense: was instead of is, were instead of are.
submitted by  RTCearly (Talk | contribs) at 08:35, 27 November 2005.
Also, there are several instances where events are claimed but they are not well-known enough to be claimed without references.  I have noted those events with the following: (reference?).
:In response to the above, I moved POV tag to this page for discussion.  In my opinion, the article did have a casual LDS slant and used familiar LDS terminology.  &&&&&& did make some improvements but also added his own POV in selected places.  The complaints noted above are relatively minor and I consider the tagging inappropriate.  This is a pet peeve of mine, I'll acknowledge.  People plant these templates on pages very casually.  My response to them is generally negative -- and I attribute (rightly or wrongly) their use to animosity or simple laziness.  I will remove this tag after allowing a couple of days for response.  However ---------
:a)  Use of "the church" for the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Days Saints is appropriate within the context of this or any other Mormonism related article.  Once the identity of the church in question has been established, as ex-moron did, then the use of "the church" is understood in context -- i.e. in articles about Methodist topics, the Methodist church would be "the church." 
:b) the tense on a list like this is generally irrelevant, as long as the tense remains consistent throughout -- so this is a style choice and not a point of dispute.  &&&&&&'s changes to the date style are also a choice issue and not a true dispute.  I prefer the original format myself.   
:c)  tags or questions about reference do not belong in the article itself.  Requests for references belong on the discussion page, along with an explanation of why they are needed.  These are areas &&&&&& believe need references:
:::3 Nov 1838 -- reference on Joseph's Smith's prophecy.
:::13-25 Nov 1838 -- 1)judicial process irregularities 2) robberies in Far West.
:WBardwin 21:48, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Suggestions 

message: It appears that this should be moved to 1830s in Mormonism to be brought into line with similar articles, any thoughts? Paul 20:51, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Move
Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Islamofascism (term)

message: Sorry, mixed up my time zones.  Please go on as if I hadn't done anything.  As it is bad form to make things more like a vote, and grouping the arguments stifles discussion, I've removed my refactoring. - brenneman(t)(c) 15:49, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: It was the bold on my part, wasn't it? Just call me thread ender. El_C 15:56, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  I was just about to start bitching about your factoring, Aaron. Now what the hell am I supposed to do? Babajobu 16:02, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
Talk:IKVM.NET

message: Does anyone know if "IKVM" is an acronym?  I did several searches but was unable to find any mention of etymology.
:Actually the I and K have no meaning. They were simply the next two letters next to J (for Java) on the keyboard.  VM stands for Virtual Machine. - Tonyfaull (talk) 16:43, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: redirected IKVM here. - David Björklund (talk) 22:00, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: acronym

message: Is there anything else similar? Mathiastck 23:32, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Competition 
Talk:Blogging Tories

message: This article went up for deletion, and was deleted a little bit as a result.  Then along came VfU, and a bunch of people, including the closing admin, said "whoops".  So User:Snowspinner undeleted it.  So, that's why it's still here.  Just in case you were wondering.  fuddlemark (fuddle me!) 14:55, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  whether 'tis nobler in the mind ... summary of what's going on with this article 

message: It constitutes bias by inclusion for this to be treated differently from Progressive Bloggers, its equivalent entity on the other end of the political spectrum. They need to be either both kept or both deleted. I am not opposed to further AFD debates if people are unconvinced of notability, but I will absolutely insist that any further deletion attempts batch them together for a single result that applies equally to both. Any process which sees one of them kept and the other deleted constitutes a violation of WP:NPOV. Bearcat 19:47, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You're right.  I suggested the same.  There was a vote on this at the same time, and one on Liblogs, also.  You might want to file a deletion review, if there is still time for that. Watchsmart 23:54, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Deletion

message: Is there any evidence that the site receives 30,000 hits a day?  I find that very hard to believe. Jason Cherniak 18:36, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: We need citations for the 30,000 hits/day. Alexa seems not to agree with the number. Hikingdom 05:45, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Hits
Talk:Herzeg-Bosnia

message: To help abate the edit war between HolyRomanEmperor and Emir Arven, let's clarify some of the things you are "fighting" about. 
First, as long as the article is titled Herzeg-Bosnia, it should be referred to that way in the rest of the article (I have noted the name Herceg-Bosna at the beginning).  
Second, the Croats generally disapprove of their current status in the whole of Bosnia and Herzegovina, and there is no reason to say that they solely disapprove of the Federation.  
Third, there's no reason not to use the term Bosniak, even if the term was actually produced after Herzeg-Bosnia ceased to exist. For example, census figures in 1991 are all stated for Bosniaks on Wikipedia. 
: Sorry, but there is. Census figures in 1991 were all stated for Muslims before someone came and changed them, and that's the way it should be. Nikola 12:56, 1 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  Yes, I remember when they were changed. However, is there really any practical difference between the two terms? Whoever considered themselves Muslim by nationality in 1991 would have considered themselves Bosniak after 1995. It's not like these people suddenly changed nationalities, only the term was changed. --Thewanderer 20:30, 1 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  I disagree, see the example of Montenegro where you actually had 90,000 Muslims in 1991 and later 60,000 Bosniaks and 20,000 Muslims. 'Anonymous'
That should resolve most of the issue at hand. Whether or not the Serbs experienced what the Bosniaks did is something I am not very knowledgeable about, but this back and forth business is not getting you two anywhere. --Thewanderer 15:02, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. I will accept ur advice. Emir Arven 17:04, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Edit War

message: , could you explain what did you mean by that? Thanks, Notrium (talk) 00:00, 15 February 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes.  You created a dab with two targets.  One of those targets did not reference this as a valid term for that target. Please take a look at WP:DAB. Onel5969 TT me 00:59, 15 February 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  "one of the terms isn't referenced in target articles"
Talk:John Thorpe

message: If you look at John Thorpe at (www.pennhenry.co.uk) you will find details of The Thorpe family of Kings Clife Northamptonshire from where this John Thorpe stems.  A book is available from this source by Michael Lee. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.74.115.164 (talk) 15:29, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Self-Made Men

message: Hi, just wanted to introduce myself. I forgot to log in before posting the article. That's why I don't appear as the author. Sorry, it's my first article... Juletrule 15:43, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled section

message: I believe that this page should be moved to Self-Made Men, given that there is no article mentioning another use, and therefore, disambiguative text is not needed. Thanks. 75.53.209.6 (talk) 01:03, 15 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Move request
Talk:Discouraged Ones

message: * http://www.blistering.com/fastpage/fpengine.php/templateid/17680/menuid/3/tempidx/5/catid/4/restemp/N%3B/fPpagesel/2 - Talks a bit about their transition to this album and its sound. Sergecross73 msg me 16:18, 25 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sources 
Talk:Eunos 500

message: The Eunos was made until 1999, not 1993 as the article states.  In Australia, it was sold as the Eunos 500 from 1992-1996.  From 1996-1999, it was branded as a Mazda (as the "Mazda Eunos 500"), after the Eunos brand disappeared.  Davez621 10:49, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
Talk:Key the Metal Idol

message: This article could use a lot of work.  I am trying to get some content down for futuer editing.  Help would be appreciated!
 
I'll be putting some work into this next year after I watch the show again.  Its a favorite of mine, so I certainly won't mind putting a lot of work into it.  Assuming no one beats me to it of course! 
-Quiddity99
The show was a bit disappointing. There was a lot of potential with the concept but the execution just didn't do it. Key was such a lump. Ajo made no freakin' sense. He builds combat robots AND runs a music idol promotion company? And so much of the episodes were just long takes of people staring at each other or stupid flashbacks. Towards the end, all Ajo did was just sit in his seat and gurgle. 
Total waste of time. Go rewatch Cowboy Bebop instead.
---
Yes, why watch a deep and thought provoking series when you can have lots of explosions and two dimensional villains instead?
---
Neither the Key main page, nor this discussion page, werent meant for bickering about the loopholes and perceived "flaws" in the story--its ridiculous to start on this series to open up that kind of fight, anyway, as we're all aware of some of the crappiest, nonsensical anime storylines, and as far as Key goes, it does a good job at managing to avoid cliches. The "trivia" section on the main page seems its just a soapbox for the whiner above me who labeled it a "waste of time" (and by the way, the answer to your question about why Ajo builds robots AND backs Miho? Because SHE IS ONE OF HIS ROBOTS! duuurrrrr), so I am removing it. I will be adding a summary of the story as well. Thesetrixaintforkids 18:11, 15 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: OK the episodes and plot are so convoluted that i'm having a hard time deciding whether I should go episode by episode, or to do a full comprehensive summary. Its hard to understand without seeing the bigger picture, which can be hard to get across with mere episode summaries. Can anyone offer at least an opinion? Thesetrixaintforkids 19:51, 15 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: HELP?

message: So I just watched this. The show makes perfect sense, and this article (and discussion) miss the point. Ajo runs a music production company for one very simple reason. It's the same reason Key needs 30,000 friends. Gel is a physical manifestation of a person's attention given to something. When you pay attention to something, you are spending time doing that. Since we have a finite amount of time to live, that's a part of our life force. That life force is what also powers his machines.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.181.62.106 (talk) 04:35, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Stuff

message: There's hints kinda buried in some character descriptions, but it should really be made clear,I think. Someone with little exposure to Japanese pop culture might imagine that in order to get her 30,000 friends, she'd have to start a religion with her as the object of worship, or the "Idol". Piltdown Yaren (talk) 20:26, 28 September 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wouldn't it help the article to explain what an "Idol" is?
Talk:Molly Hagan

message: Thanks for editing the article so quickly. I created it 15 minutes ago and it was edited quite quickly by a staff member! :)
About Molly: She's just a great actress and I love the Eris character. Her melancholic facial expression (in the role of Eris) is some kind of cuddly and I just adore Eris and also Molly. Keep on the good acting! :)
Going to start adding acting credits. Starting with films, and will work to TV series and video games.Nathraq (talk) 17:52, 2 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: I wrote to Ms. Hagan, and she sent me permissions for the image that is being used on her Wiki page. Nathraq (talk) 12:25, 15 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Image Use
Talk:1968 Pacific typhoon season

message: It needs at least a one sentence description of every storm to be a start.--Nilfanion (talk) 09:05, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Todo
Talk:Alphabet Synthesis Machine

message: Seemingly the links
http://www.alphabetsynthesis.com/ (... #background)
http://www.pbs.org/program/art21/
http://www.ciac.ca/magazine/archives/no_19/en/entrevue.htm
aren't anymore connected to this product of art. I assume, the code for the fonts is still in the net. An images search on the net still gives some font examples. (would be nice to have a font example here) --RueLue  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:67C:2D50:0:CCF5:7CFD:B566:BF89 (talk) 17:26, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Links outdated
Talk:Wang Mang

message: This should not be merged wit Xia, as they are two different topics. Enlil Ninlil (talk) 03:57, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge

message: The years in this page are in the range of mere tens, yet there is only a single mention of the designation of the year (AD). The designation should be mentioned every time to avoid confusion with Chinese reign years. I will add these later tonight, and if the community says otherwise the changes can be reverted. —Aɴᴀɴᴛᴀɢɪᴛᴀ ☍ /  10:26, 17 April 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  The years are hard to read 

message: There's been some back-and-forth regarding which of the below pictures (if either) to use in the infobox for this article. I much prefer the former, which (while not precisely brilliant artwork, nor discernibly historically accurate) at least better resembles Han-era regalia than the picture on the right. 
 Marquisate (talk) 02:04, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, neither of these images is super incredible artwork. The first image is era-appropriate, and published in some book from 1921. The second picture is uploaded as "own work", which means it's either useless or a lie, and it looks like a screencap from a 1980s cartoon show, and it's not historically accurate to within a millennium. Might as well dress him in a three piece suit, or judge robes and powdered wig. The second image is worse than no image at all. Folly Mox (talk) 03:24, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm inclined to restore the first image as long as no one has strong opinions to the contrary. Agreed completely as to the Qing-era image. Marquisate (talk) 00:12, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Infobox picture
Talk:1967 Pacific typhoon season

message: It needs at least a one sentence description of every storm to be a start.--Nilfanion (talk) 09:05, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Todo
Talk:Translocon

message: A few of problems.
1) It is no longer widely believed that Sec61 plays a role in retro-translocation. 
2) As far as I know the translocon ONLY refers to the homologous Sec61 and SecYEG channels.
3) Not all translocated proteins have signal sequences, for example type II membrane-bound proteins.
4) Translocons also have lateral gates that allow transmembrane domains to anter the lipid bilayer.
Microtubules (talk) 18:27, 23 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Issues
Talk:Collective good

message: what is collective goods
A collective good is synonymous with a public good..maybe it should be merged with the article on public goods.
:It is clearly explained in the article that collective (or social) good is a type of public goods. It would be good to expand this article, though.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 20:54, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

message: I have removed the term from the category "goods" and recategorised it as "community building" RichBerry 12:31, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Disambiguation
Talk:John Cordwell

message: Is this bloke really notable?  He claimed to have once heckled Bob Dylan... Chump Manbear (talk) 23:37, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd say yes. This isn't just "some heckle" we're talking about. Bob Dylan caused a massive amount of controversy in the middle 1960s by switching from acoustic to electric. It was seen as a betrayal by a great deal of people. This was a famous event that marked that turmoil.Ingres77 (talk) 05:57, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
Talk:1966 Pacific typhoon season

message: It needs at least a one sentence description of every storm to be a start.--Nilfanion (talk) 09:05, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Todo

message: *Reanalysis of West Pacific tropical cyclone maximum intensity has seasonal change to storm intensity, and one noted category change for Irma
*Philippine impacts
;Judy
*Life Cycle of Tropical Cyclone Judy as Revealed by ESSA II and NIMBUS II 
*Port of Taiwan
*USS Kawishiwi log
*USS Firedrake
;Cora
*The Damage to Structures Caused by the Second Miyakojima Typhoon
;Pamela
*USS Ponchatoula
Cyclonebiskit (talk) 02:58, 6 March 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Links 

message: The redirect Typhoon Viola(1966) 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.  Steel1943 (talk) 22:37, 5 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  "[[:Typhoon Viola(1966)]]" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]]