lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Virgin New Adventures

message: The Big Finish Audio productions and the BBC EDA continuation of the Virgin New Adventures
are *really* different.  Both Shadow of the Scourge and Dark Flame were 7th doctor 
adventures where there was continuity, but the books and the audio are completely in 
conflict as far as the McGann character.
Roadrunner 22:30, 5 Sep 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, not necessarily, as we're not sure which time frame the BFAs take place - before, or after (or in the gaps between) - the EDAs. There've been several hypotheses about this, like the three-year gap where he drops Sam off at a Greenpeace rally, or having the BFAs take place after the EDAs entirely. There've also been hints that the EDAs and the BFAs take place in alternative universes. But the new phrasing you've put in is a better representation of the situation. -khaosworks 05:45, 6 Sep 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: A few ages ago, NP Chilla requested a plot overview for the New Adventures.  Well, "the tale grew in the telling", but it's finally done.  I'm sure that it's far too wordy, and some of the novels have much more detail than is necessary.  Everyone, please feel free to edit mercilessly. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 08:29, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: P.S. Since NP Chilla and Angmering helpfully added a few bits and pieces here and there while I was taking forever to finish this, I think that the GFDL requires that we note that the full edit history for this section can be found here. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 08:37, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Plot overview 

message: What's all this stuff about "continuity being open to question"?  Seems a rather irrelevant fanish sentence for an encyclopedia...  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.139.232.6 (talk) 22:48, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: For many years in the 1990s and early 2000s the idea that the New Adventures were indeed canonical was, for a large proportion of Doctor Who fandom, an unchallenged assumption (in much the same way that few people, if anybody, challenge the validity of the BBC Wales series as a canonical continuation of the classic series 1963-1989).  The big spanner in the works was the adaption of Human Nature into Human Nature/Family of Blood as then for the New Adventures and the BBC Wales series to both be canonical, the Seventh and Tenth Doctors must have had two very similar adventures in the same time zones at the same locations with many of the same characters, which is improbable.165.225.81.20 (talk) 14:13, 15 April 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Continuity 
Talk:Battle of New Bern

message: You have an error in the first sentnence of the Battle section.  Fort Macon did not fall until April 26, 1862 after the fall of New Bern and the other coastal cities and towns of North Carolina.  Suspect the original writer met to say Morehead City rather than Fort Macon in the opening sentence.  Morehead City fell on March 22, 1862 and its capture along with the capture of Beaufort which fell on March 25, 1862 opened the door for the seige of Fort Macon.
Sundance08 (talk) 23:04, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Fort Macon

message: In the preliminaries section, it talks about the northern part of the coast, including Cape Lookout.  Cape Lookout is in the very much in the southern part of the North Carolina coast.
13:02, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Cape Lookout was the southern limit of the defensive district that extended to the Virginia border. The adjective "northern" applies to the district, which was indeed north of that covering the rest of the coast. PKKloeppel (talk) 23:51, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Preliminaries
Talk:A Hangover You Don't Deserve

message: God I love the song Ohio (Come Back to Texas). I feel so homesick and this lifts my spirit. Texans, just a note, you don't know how good WE have it until you live outside the state. I have lived in Maryland for two years now and, wow, Texas is the greatest, bar none. Maryland sucks (but not as bad as Ohio or New Jersey). Long live the Lone Star State, Blue Bell, Mrs. Baird's bread, Whataburger, Shiner Bock, Lance Armstrong, Cowboys, Austin, Dallas, Big Spring, Corpus, Aggies, Stros, and all Texans home and away..... --ProdigySportsman 23:51, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ohio (Come back to Texas) 
Talk:Biographical Dictionary of the Extreme Right Since 1890

message: For this article to be NPOV, there needs to be explanation of what the writer of this book regards as people being on the radical right, extreme right and revolutionary right. Intangible 07:35, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  NPOV 

message: *Comment Based on what you all have said, I would rather keep the article as a stub but take off the list of people. I think it's undue weight to define a person by what one book says about him. Also the list is not very useful to the reader since it only gives the name and birth/death dates of each person. There is no other information, say on the group he belonged to, that would make a reader pick out one name to learn more. Steve Dufour (talk) 17:31, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Discussion pasted from AfD

message: There is no reason for the article to duplicate the book: an example of non-encyclopedic content.  I am removing the list entires.  UnitedStatesian (talk) 20:50, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: No it doesn't. The book gives no descriptions of the individuals the way the article does and an alphabetic list of names of real people cannot be placed under copyright. Keresaspa (talk) 01:10, 17 August 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: The article duplicates the book

message: Following both the English and German Wikipedia Friedrich Albert Lange (1828–1875) was not an Extreme Right at all. Probably the entry should refer to Lange, Friedrich (1852–1917) instead. (See e.g.  (in German) or  (in English).) --Joerg 130 (talk) 13:40, 23 March 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Well spotted; I'm shamefaced I didn't notice this before. I've created an entry for him at Friedrich Lange (journalist) and will add him to the list. Keresaspa (talk) 02:20, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  LANGE, Friedrich
Talk:Philadelphia chromosome

message: I've no idea how to edit wikipdeia but someone has inserted random words into this page (ie, balls and penis) could someone fix it. or revert.
I added these pictures, but they probably need re-placement, wherever you think. rhyax 23:51, 5 Sep 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: This is beautiful. I wish I had firsthand access to these pictures :-). JFW | T@lk 00:47, 6 Sep 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: New pictures

message: I think the Bcr-abl fusion protein is better explained by this article than that one alone, so it should be redirected. Mikael Häggström (talk) 14:59, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge from Bcr-abl fusion protein

message: The "e" is missing in the word "chromosome" in the schematic picture. Norman21 (talk) 11:21, 25 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Incorrect spelling in schematic picture

message: Just passing through, and will come back with references, but I highly doubt that Peter Nowell was 'surprised' to see condensed (distinct) chromosomes in a mitotic (dividing) cell. The human karyotype had been defined by the mid-fifties, and the techniques necessary for observing it started to be developed well before that. 72.90.93.234 (talk) 11:55, 30 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: History
Talk:Macron (diacritic)

message: Not for nothing, but we must distinguish overline and bar (diacritic) and provide a quick link across to them in the hatnotes. On the other hand, it's becoming an unwieldy mess there. Omicron is a completely different thing from o macron (its complete opposite, in fact), even if some visitors may accidentally mistype one or the other. Similarly, Emmanual Macron has nothing whatsoever to do with E macron except as a typo. Are either really necessary to discuss at the head of this article? I think they both run afoul of  at this point. — LlywelynII 20:36, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree, some merging in the hatnotes. Don't forget: (near) Homoglyphs need a DAB too. -DePiep (talk) 20:49, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: Hatnotes
Talk:The Jeffersons

message: My gripe comes in the second part of the below section, beginning with the word "surpassed":
The Jeffersons is one of the longest-running sitcoms,[2] the second-longest-running American series with a primarily African American cast (surpassed in 2012 by Tyler Perry's House of Payne by one episode, though The Jeffersons ran for more episodes),[1][3]
Gripe #1: I don't see the necessity of pointing out which specific series overtook THE JEFFERSONS honestly. 
Gripe #2: However, if consensus is that that information ought to remain there is a contradiction as currently worded. It first states Perry's SURPASSED by one episode but that the Jeffersons "ran for more episodes". Logically, both cannot be true. My guess is the editor meant to state The Jeffersons ran for more SEASONS (11 vs. Perry's 9).
I propose to change the section to the following if there are no great objections:
OPTION A (If consensus is Tyler Perry mention is unnecessary)
The Jeffersons is one of the longest-running sitcoms ever.[2] In addition, it is the second-longest-running American series with a primarily African American cast.[1][3]
OPTION B (If consensus is that Perry mention should remain)
The Jeffersons is one of the longest-running sitcoms.[2] In addition, it is the second-longest-running American series with a primarily African American cast. (It was surpassed in 2012 by Tyler Perry's House of Payne though The Jeffersons ran for more seasons),[1][3] GBrady (talk) 09:06, 28 February 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Awkward grammar "Second-longest-running American series with a primarily African American cast" 

message: "The Classic TV History", about the story of "The Jeffersons." 71.247.208.187 (talk) 16:43, 22 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Documentary Series
Wikipedia talk:Requests for arbitration/RickK vs. Guanaco/Proposed decision

message: Proposed finding of fact #2 was resolved by talk page discussions. I agreed not to unblock users just because they're unlikely to reuse the accounts. Arbitration is supposed to be a last resort, so why is this here? RickK may have meant the more recent unblocking/reblocking issue that failed RfC's certification requirement or other issues such as the unblocking of User:Bird because the account was not used for vandalism and because Bird is not banned. Guanaco 00:53, 6 Sep 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: 2.5 seems much more on target. Guanaco 00:35, 8 Sep 2004 (UTC)

message: The current proposed finding of fact #6 does not mention that the inaccuracy in Something Bitchin' This Way Comes was caused by the source used by both Mike Garcia and myself.  It still contains that mistake, which can be seen by clicking "Next >" on the album browser. Guanaco 01:57, 12 Sep 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article inaccuracy 

message: "special commendation"? Have to say, I prefer barnstar. It's a weird term, perhaps, but it is what Wikipedia has been using recently. I'm not sure as arbitrators we should over-ride that based on our personal preference... Martin 15:36, 25 Sep 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  barnstars 

message: Point 1.1 asserts that Michael is 14.  His user page says he is 24.  I realize it once said otherwise, but is it reasonable to make this a "finding of fact" when the information is ambiguous? VeryVerily 07:04, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Finding of fact re age
Talk:Interstate 475

message: Can anyone have a discussion on what to do with these highways as for Wikipedia articles?? (Please make sure at least 10 registered Wikipedians participate.) 66.32.244.69 01:02, 6 Sep 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: This was taken care of, but there are probably others that still need to be expanded. --Rschen7754 (talk - contribs)  23:10, 17 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Spock's Brain

message: "Spock's Brain is considered by some to be the worst episode of the original series of Star Trek." - Where is evidence for this? I would say this is POV without a reliable reference (i.e. not someone's blog) and I recommend it gets deleted until a reference comes along. --JohnLynch
: Live in a cave?  :-)  It should say "considered by many".
* The DAYSTROM INSTITUTE TECHNICAL LIBRARY:
: " This is often nominated by fans as the worst TOS episode ever.  This episode is a nominee for the DITL "Worst of Trek" award."
* EX ASTRIS SCIENTIA
: "For most people this is the worst of all TOS episodes"
* STAR TREK: HYPERTEXT
: "Possibly the dumbest episode in the entire Trek canon"
* TREK NAVIGATOR - The Ultimate Guide to the Entire Trek Saga by Mark A. Altman and Edward Gross (1998, Back Bay Books)
: "Considered one of the worst episodes ever"
--StAkAr Karnak 01:53, 8 Sep 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: * Aaah okay, fair enough. Thanks :) And I don't have much to do with "fans." I just watch the show :P --John Lynch 08:47, 19 Sep 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: So.... considered by three fan created sites to be a poor episode. Is that really citeable? Also, what's noteworthy about the notes in this case? Kirk has a different hair cut, Chekov uses an earpiece etc? Alastairward (talk) 11:26, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Worst episode ever?

message: This probably can't be noted on the page, but it's interesting to me that this episode uses the same "free the natives from their computer god" plot that ST-TOS so often used.  It's just so poorly done, so insipid.  Yes, I believe Gene Coon (writing as Lee Cronin) began it as a self-parody, but I think 3rd season producer Fred Freiberger didn't want any comedies: there are virtually no (intentional) comedies in season 3.  ProfessorAndro (talk) 15:12, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  comment by a Trek nerd 

message: There may be an unmentioned connection to Gene Coon's having access to J. T. McIntosh's 1951 short story, "Machine Made" where a computer mainframe helps a young woman repair her own brain.   The 1966 edition appears to precede Gene Coon's screenplay.   Did any science fiction magazines of the time notice that too?   One appears to be somewhat more than tangentially connected to the other.   I wouldn't be surprised if Gene Coon were familiar with J. T. McIntosh's contributions to science fictiondom.  Dexter Nextnumber (talk) 08:15, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gene Coon's inspiration? 

message: This episode is the basis for this adult movie.  Worth mentioning?  --Weazie (talk) 23:37, 15 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Adult spoof/homage 

message: "Stardate 5431.6" Kirk says Sigma Draconis VII, not VI. AMCKen (talk) 16:48, 7 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Planet Involved

message: 79.176.221.122 (talk) 12:35, 3 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  wrong stardate 

message: 79.176.221.122 (talk) 12:35, 3 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  wrong stardate 

message: If I'm not mistaken, Lynda Carter (wonder woman) appears in a small non-speaking role in one scene of the episode. Uncredited.  --74.38.73.235 (talk) 09:36, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  lynda carter
Talk:Council of Five Elders

message: ... council of five regents seems a little generic for this group. The article on Mori Terumoto originally linked to an article called "the five Tairo" — which is what the Japanese article is called — but no other article did, and Toyotomi Hideyoshi's actually had the phrase 'council of five regents' just asking to be wikified. Still, I'm hesitant to provide a redirect that might need to be overwritten immediately. Any suggestions? --Aponar Kestrel  (talk) 03:13, 2004 Sep 6 (UTC)
:Yeah, I've got lots of suggestions, but are any of them any good? 
#Gotairo
#Go-tairo
#Five Regents
#Five Regents of Hideyori
#Five Regents of Toyotomi Hideyori
#Council of Five Regents (the present title)
#Council of Regents
#Council of Regents of Hideyori
#Council of Five Regents of Hideyori
#Regents of Hideyori
#Regents of Toyotomi Hideyori
#Five Elders
#Council of Elders
#Council of Five Elders
:Don't have any history books at hand, but if they use a single term or a better one, let's adopt it. Anyone have the biography of Hideyoshi? 
:Don't have much preference either... The present title's not so bad. It might even stick!Fg2 07:33, Sep 6, 2004 (UTC)
::Eh, then it can stay until someone comes along who objects. Adding the alias five Tairō now. --Aponar Kestrel  (talk) 18:40, 2004 Sep 6 (UTC)
Now I objects after 1.5 years later. (^^;  "regent" is usually used for translation of Sessho.  An example in Wikipedia is Five regent houses.  So I think it is confusing to use "regent" for "Tairo".  I prefer "Five Elders" or "Five Great Elders" because there were lesser elders called as "Churo" (Middle Elder).  Tairo also existed as a Prime Minister in Tokugawa Shogunate and it is traslated as "great elder".  I think their english translation can be same.  --Corruptresearcher 22:44, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't know if it's too late to contribute to this slow-moving discussion. But if discussion is not closed, I would vote to move this page to "Go-Tairo," or perhaps to "Council of Five Elders" (but not "Council of five elders," as that implies the article refers to any council of any five elders). LordAmeth 02:12, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Naming 

message: The original article says, "the elders swiftly divided themselves into two camps, consisting of 'Tokugawa' and 'everybody else'."
But isn't Maeda mainly supporting Tokugawa in Sekigahara?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.7.255.63 (talk) 20:09, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Division Within Five Elders 

message: The show, and most likely the novel its based on, takes place during this era, although it replaces the names of the lords. Tokugawa Ieyasu is changed to Yoshii Toranaga, portrayed by Hiroyuki Sanada.  Joshuarhuang (talk) 01:03, 24 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Adding Shogun (2024) under "In popular culture"
Talk:Alexander Koshetz

message: Pasted from User talk:134
*Please don't revert war from IP accounts. The reasons were given mutliple times. --Irpen 20:19, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Anon's problems

message: This rv war is ridiculous. This article is practically a stub!!! You're talking about a composer who left volumes upon volumes of written materials behind, travelled the world with a state choir (that didn't even have a state!) promoting his music when travelling wasn't exactly easy, and more importantly taught and/or trained an entire generation of musicians. And you're arguing about an out-of-place sentence that covers a meager 2-year period of this fantastic career. Ridiculous, I say. This whole article needs a rewrite. 
Can we talk about the name? Most scholars will use Koshyts' (because that was his name) as opposed to Koshetz. Can we please correct this mistake?
I will begin gathering materials to expand the article.--tufkaa 04:39, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well I certainly agree on your view of the article, unfortunately this anon freind of ours seems to not take things so lightly, as a result the article was actually protected by the anti-vandalism committee, even that did not stop him. I am dissapointed no less than you are. --Kuban Cossack  08:54, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Not really, as those songs were not Ukrainian but Cossack ones. However that is OT, I would also move the article to Alexander Koshyts, as that would be the correct english name.--Kuban Cossack  16:44, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It does not matter what you think is his "correct english name". What matters is his name under which he is known. And it's not Alexander, but Oleksander --KPbIC 16:48, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well I did not bother to google yet, butI will take your word for it. --Kuban Cossack  16:56, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I know of no manuscript that was signed Koshetz by the composer. While there has been literature printed with the name Koshetz, I do not understand how that changes someone's name. Out of all his students that I know, none refer to him as Koshetz. I don't really know who other than music scholars would know about Koshyts', so what colloquial reference of Koshetz needs to be preserved?
BTW, I'm not familiar with his given name being Oleksander, but rather Oleksandr.--tufkaa 20:34, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Ridiculous
Talk:50th Academy Awards

message: For a September 2004 deletion debate over this page see Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Redgrave speech
----
Do not delete this. Move it to Wikisource as a speech.  I will do it myself when I get home from work. [[PaulinSaudi 02:50, 6 Sep 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: I think the article is putting too much emphasis on Star Wars' success at the Academy Awards, specifically with the inclusion of a Star Wars chapter, and too little on Annie Hall's. As you can see here, Annie Hall is one of the 16 movies with the distinction of narrowly missing the "Grand Slam" of the Oscars by winning 4 out of the 5 most important awards. Star Wars won none of the big 5. Arguably, Annie Hall's AA success was as big as or bigger than Star Wars'.
I would suggest taking out the Star Wars chapter and adding more categories to the Winners section.  -- Repetition (talk) 17:17, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Success of Star Wars overstated 

message: oscar.org says no. ImdB and many other film websites say yes. A newspaper from 1978 says yes. I'm confused. Who knows the answer? --46.142.53.131 (talk) 19:19, 22 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Was Marcel Durham nominated for an Academy Award? 

message: The poster listed on the page looks very modern, especially when compared to the posters that came before and after it. Are we sure this is the original poster? Supertanno (talk) 17:11, 21 February 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Poster
Talk:Carla Speed McNeil

message: As of this date, both lightspeedpress.com and carlaspeedmcneil.com are being camped on by some dubious gambling website. (I think. It's not in a language I know.) No sign of any replacement that searching can find. Anyway, that's why I removed the links. HistorianK (talk) 14:51, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Official Website(s)