lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Sour Patch Kids

message: "The product's inspiration and design came at a time when UFO sightings were exciting the Western world."  If we are presenting a higher than normal level of UFO interest as existing at the time SPK were created, we need a source.  Otherwise the line should be removed.
:Don't be such a square. --Jon in California  12 August 2007
ha ha nice pw3n jon.  —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 141.157.195.144 (talk) 05:01:37, August 19, 2007 (UTC) 
Who wrote this garbage?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ngarwood (talk • contribs) 07:04, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Citation Needed 

message: The lede to this article is close to being an advertisement. 86.185.217.104 (talk) 00:38, 3 June 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ad-like 

message: "Sour Patch Kids were originally named Sour Group Kids" - The citation at the end of the sentence goes to a website which reads "Sour Patch Kids were invented in the late 1970's. At the time it was invented, the candy was actually called Mars men aliens. Eventually the name was changed however, to the now recognizable Sour Patch Kid brand."  The word "group" does not appear on the website.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.215.118.44 (talk) 17:53, 10 April 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Citation Needed 

message: Maynards is now defunct so I think it should be removed from the page.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by TheJack15 (talk • contribs) 16:31, 23 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Maynards? 

message: " In the late 1970's the Mondelez international and the Malaco Licorice Company of Sweden formed the M & A Candy Company in Hamilton, Ontario, Canada" This is impossible Mondelēz didn't exist until Kraft bought Cadbury (2009,) and split into two companies to do snack foods and packaged foods in 2012.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.240.231.252 (talk) 16:45, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Time traveling? 

message: here in nz instead of extreme we have max, anyone know the difference? 125.239.89.44 (talk) 08:26, 18 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  sour patch kids max
Talk:Karur

message: I searched in internet for the etymology of Karur. I could not find it. If any one can find it in some books please the origin of the word karur. It will be a valuable information. Balaji (talk) 03:16, 22 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Etymology of Karur 
Talk:Montgomery County Public Schools secondary schools

message: Is there any reason this couldn't be merged with Montgomery County Public Schools?  That would be more in line with the way other school district articles are set up. --BaronLarf July 8, 2005 16:35 (UTC)
:I did it this way because of the size--Montgomery County Public Schools is already 35k, even without this part of the list (another 15k). Niteowlneils 9 July 2005 00:38 (UTC)
::Couldn't we wikify the HTML to decrease the size of the articles and then combine? — MATHWIZ2020 TALK | CONTRIBS 00:32, July 12, 2005 (UTC)
:::I am in the process of wikifying the HTML.  See the current revision at Montgomery County Public Schools/Temp. — MATHWIZ2020 TALK | CONTRIBS 18:51, 9 October 2005 (UTC)
Talk:The Filthy Critic

message: Is there someone who could clean up this page?  I am not a very good writer and I would really like to see someone do The Filthy Critic some justice.
---
ok, someone keeps upping the ante for statistical data.  the challenge is on! ;-)
---
Also, we could use some more quotes from his reviews to help emphasize the synopsis and make it more NPOV.  I'm new to the 'pedia, but I recall reading that simply describing someone w/o quotes or statements is discouraged.
Added a couple of quotes.  I'm also pretty new and uneducated at this editing thing, so please chime in if you disagree with the presentation.  I'd also like to see a good page for Filthy.  I love his reviews. Rufus Sarsaparilla 19:21, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Mark Sweep: The last post to this page was from May 2006.  Gershwinrb's concerns seem to have been addressed.  The other comments have been lingering for some time.  Do you really think we need to keep these old bits around?  Would you have preferred an archived page, for just these few random comments? Scott Carpenter 02:57, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Contents of this page 

message: Should there really be lines that read "very often astutely points out", "He is very succinct with his criticism", et al... This article does not seem very objective because of commentary like that. Gershwinrb 05:23, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  NPOV 

message: That was it. I came here looking for answers but found nothing.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.67.237.54 (talk) 06:14, 5 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Filthy is back with a new blog, and a new persona
Talk:Dharmapuri

message: Drathnak (talk) 09:20, 31 October 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. Cannolis (talk) 09:52, 31 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 31 October 2014 
Talk:Philip Morrison

message: Anyone have any objections to the insertion of the following sourced material:
:Morrison joined the Young Communist League in 1938 and the Communist Party of the United States (CPUSA) in 1939 while studying physics at the University of California Berkely.
:Source: * Philip Morrison testimony, 7 and 8 May 1953, "Subversive Influence in the Educational Process," U.S. Congress, Senate, Committee on the Judiciary, 83rd Congress, 1st Session, part 9, pgs. 899-919.
Thank you. Nobs01 8 July 2005 16:40 (UTC)
Tell us more. How long did he remain a member? A week? Forty years? A card-carrying Communist at Los Alamos in the inner circle of the Manhattan Project? Or had he left the CP before than , just as Oppenheimer had (long) left it? Groves kept Bohm from a clearance, why not Morrison? (For example of an interesting question.) Tell us more of this most interesting phase of his life. Is that ref the Congressional Record, or what is it? GangofOne 21:42, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Speaking of Feynman, I've heard that he and Morrison shared an office while they were both at Cornell.  Does anyone know if this is true?   Rglovejoy 02:18, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

text: no , everyone did not Join! such hyperbole! no I know communists from the 70s.  dont knwo if they still are , but they were not "everyone" , wager that many joined to meet women, they were nerds, geeks, etc Juror1 (talk) 18:10, 20 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Would an interview with Philip Morrison from 1986 be useful here as an external link? Focus of conversation is nuclear weapons policy. http://openvault.wgbh.org/catalog/V_D4A1F75C37684257996166085F52961B (I helped with the site, so it would be conflict of interest for me to just add it.) Mccallucc (talk) 22:03, 23 March 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Added. I like the readers to be able to see and hear the subject where possible. Hawkeye7 (talk) 23:25, 23 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External link to interview on nuclear policy? 
Talk:Seer stone

message: trough google seems that seerstone is used mainly by mormons 
it's correct saying the true meaning of kepha is  seerstone? --Melaen 8 July 2005 16:58 (UTC)
:The only Aramaic meaning is stone: nothing more glamorous than that. I've edited the article to say so, but maybe someone who believes in the other interpretation should write why they believe so. --Gareth Hughes 15:57, 8 October 2005 (UTC)
Talk:Louise, Princess Royal

message: How pompous is the current heading of this article's, Princess Louise, Princess Royal and Duchess of Fife! 217.140.193.123 8 July 2005 17:09 (UTC)
Not really pompous as those were her titles. (jayboy2005)
Why is this article titled "Louise, Princess Royal" when the succeeding Princess Royal's article is title "Mary, Princess Royal and Countess of Harwood"??? Make up your mind its either this one should be changed to "Louise, Princess Royal and Duchess of Fife" or the other should be changed to "Mary, Princess Royal"  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.238.181.119 (talk) 18:58, 23 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Except that the subject of this article was the only Princess Royal called Louise and there were two called Mary. The "Countess of Harewood" is there as disambiguation (though I think their dates of birth and death would be better). Opera hat (talk) 04:27, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pompous? 

message: Why isn't the article just Louise, Princess Royal? She has been the only Princess Royal with that name - just see Charlotte, Princess Royal and Victoria, Princess Royal.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.154.135.138 (talk) 20:21, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: She was very commonly known as the Duchess of Fife, so this is why the article is where it is. PeterSymonds | talk 15:32, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Name 

message: Maybe I'm a little dense today, but why is there a title change on 22 January 1901 from Her Royal Highness Princess Louise to Her Royal Highness THE Princess Louise?  I assume the date corresponds to Queen Victoria's death, but am I missing something else? Mapjc 02:44, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The importance of that date here is not that Victoria died, but rather than Louise's father ascended the throne as Edward VII, so she became a child of the sovereign, and therefore "HRH The Prince/ss" DBD 11:31, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unclear 

message: I've just done a search of the London Gazette and after her creation as Princess Royal in 1905 she is only referred to by that title and not as Duchess of Fife. (The sole exception is the account of the 1911 coronation where her status as a peeress as well as a Princess is mentioned.) I'm amending the "styles and titles" section accordingly. Opera hat (talk) 12:12, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Use of the title Duchess of Fife 

message: The article was assessed C-class, for lack of in-line citations. Boneyard90 (talk) 19:33, 11 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  WP: Women's History Assessment Commentary 
Wikipedia talk:Doppelganger account/Archive 1

message: Since no objections have been raised at this point, it seems that our voting will begin Monday! --HappyCamper 07:38, 10 July 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I shifted the vote early by 6 hours with this edit  as requested in Zscout370's edit summary so that his/her vote becomes valid. Vote time will not be changed anymore, since this was the first vote. In the future, maybe it's a good idea to make a Wikipedia vote start the same time that the first open vote that has been cast. But this is for a different time and place to discuss. Also, what's really strange is that in the edit summary, although the time is 7-something UTC, the history indicates that it's 3-something UTC! Maybe this is another WikiBug? Anyway, the vote has begun, so let's get the word out and start voting! --HappyCamper 13:04, 11 July 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I mainly voted since I thought it has begun when I did. I found out about the voting through the Signpost article released yesterday. But if you wished for me to rm my vote, then put it back, I would have happy to have done that. Thanks anyways. Zscout370 (Sound Off) 22:41, 11 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Voting starts Monday

message: This is instruction creep. Why not just redirect your doppelganger user page to your normal one, using your normal account so that people know it's you? I don't see any need for a template or a complicated policy on this. Angela. 19:08, July 11, 2005 (UTC)
:I should clarify that I am not the author of the original proposal, and so I speak only for myself. I interpret the sentiment of the proposal as an option that one can choose to follow. If it becomes sanctioned as "official policy", I would feel much more comfortable dealing with doppelganger accounts than if the policy were absent. Although it should be obvious to any well meaning Wikipedian that one should not create nor edit from a doppelganger account, I think that Wikipedia has grown enough that it warrants an explicit annotation of these unspoken expectations and behaviours.
:I also do not think the proposal itself is intended to be a definitive means to prevent doppelganger accounts from being made. Nevertheless, it is an idea that has resonated well with a few Wikipedians, and I suspect it has at minimum to do with the appearance of the template as being discouraging to potential doppelganger account creators. A redirect does not nearly have as striking of an effect as the template because the redirecting behaviour is much more passive. --HappyCamper 21:39, 11 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Instruction creep

message: ===Support===
* Zscout370 (Sound Off) 07:53, 11 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  The votes in their original, unaltered form 

message: * Zscout370 (Sound Off) 07:53, 11 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Support

message: * Angela 19:08, July 11, 2005 (UTC) (seems like needless instruction creep)
* Instruction creep. There's nothing useful on this proposal that isn't policy already. --cesarb 19:16, 11 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Object
Talk:The Big Idea with Donny Deutsch

message: Not sure but I think this show is no longer running.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.198.99.84 (talk) 03:01, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Off the air? 

message: yeah, this article is trash and not much more then an ad. please, delete this comment again and ill report this page to moderators or something.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.167.203.218 (talk) 00:56, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Totally biased pov
Talk:ZDoom

message: Several months ago, I downloaded & played both ZDoom and JDoom.
For internet play, I have now converted to ZDaemon, which lacks the graphical sophistication, but works well over the internet.  I see here ZDaemon grew out of ZDoom, but I had somewhere read (either a FAQ file, Websites, or Readme.txt's) that earlier on, ZDoom and JDoom were collaborative.
Can anyone ellaborate on Zdoom and JDoom's connected history?
:They are not related. ZDoom is based on Linux Doom and has been in development since 1998. JDoom is based on the Hexen source code (it was actually predated by JHexen), and has been in development since 2002. There has never been any collaborative development as far as I know, and the special features of the two are for the most part incompatible. Fredrik | talk 00:05, 10 July 2005 (UTC)

message: Would anybody mind if I updated the ZDoom Banner image? It was created(and last updated) in mid-2003, and since then it seems to have been changed to the one with the red, big capital letters that can currently be seen on ZDoom.org, be it the main page or the forums. DomRem 03:41, 19 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Banner Update? 

message: Somebody's doing vandalism to this webpage. V_V - Bouncy
:Can't someone just ban Timthedim? He's vandilised the page several time over the past 5 minutes alone. -- TheDarkArchon 16:18, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  sigh
Talk:Soundness theorem

message: I took a whack at an opening paragraph to try to give some context. I'm leaving the 'context' tag in place though so that other editors can take a look at what I've written.  I also added some section heads, and wikified the reference to he completeness theorem (the other direction of soundness).  Any feedback, corrections and improvements are of course most welcome.
Zero sharp 09:33, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi, thanks for the edit. However, I felt that is too general to be interesting, and that the part regarding the preservation of truth was misleading (in fact, incorrect in general). I tried to add context by remarking on why the property is interesting from a metalogical point of view. So I deleted the context marker. There is certainly more interesting stuff to say about the importance of soundness, e.g., that it is not particularly interesting without completeness (nor is completeness without soundness). Nortexoid 00:05, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for the corrections.Zero sharp 07:31, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Context

message: : It most cases, this comes down to its rules having the property of preserving truth, but this is not the case in general.
So what _is_ the case in general? I'm not getting it from the balance of the article Zero sharp 22:37, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: clarification
Talk:Consciousness Revolution

message: The American High (Television) link leads to a page about the TV show, not the cultural period. Perhaps someone could write a page about this and change the link? Vneiomazza 8 July 2005 17:48 (UTC)
Link fixed--An Extropian 17:18, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: American High

message: This article is really awful.  Do ANYONE but Strauss and Howe talk about a "consciousness revolution"?  This is a BUZZWORD created by TWO authors; it does NOT, therefore, merit an encyclopedia entry.  It lacks sources, citations, and credibility.  I'm sorry but this is just unacceptable. --Dylanfly 15:57, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Nomination for deletion

message: If this thing is to be kept at all, it needs to be pared down and merged with the Strauss and Howe gobbledygook.  --Dylanfly 14:46, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: If not a DELETE, then a MERGE

message: Yes, I understand that Strauss and Howe may not be "gods", or even uncontroversial authorities in the social science academic establishment.  They do, however, have a significant following in the popular culture, and used to have quite a presence here on Wikipedia.  Since Wikipedia is home of multitudes of articles on even minor pop stars, celebs, athletes, music genres, etc., why not have a place for Strauss and Howe "gobbledygook"? Besides, they are hardly the only ones who have referred to the 1960s/70s era as being some kind of consciousness raising or major cultural change/realignment; haven't you ever heard of the "New Age" (which by the way, it seems safe to say that Strauss and Howe are basically not affiliated with), but do you get my drift? Shanoman (talk) 09:20, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: What's so bad about this?
Talk:List of companies of Nigeria

message: The quasi-governmental corporations are obviously somewhere in the middle of privatization.  The bilateral chambers of commerce are more or less lists of corporations.--McDogm 8 July 2005 17:55 (UTC)
===Links===
I don't think that any of these companies have a seperate wiki article associated with them, yet this page has a link to all of them.  I'd recommend getting rid of the links and making it all plain text (unless there actually is a wiki article for any of the companies, or if there is a good chance that one will be made in the forseeable future).  The only reason I stumbled upon this is because this page has a link to a company named "Cobranet", which is also an existing wiki page on something completely different with the same name.  I've changed the Cobranet link to go to a non-existant page called "Cobranet (ISP)". Snottywong 19:12, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: List

message: I don't think that any of these companies have a seperate wiki article associated with them, yet this page has a link to all of them.  I'd recommend getting rid of the links and making it all plain text (unless there actually is a wiki article for any of the companies, or if there is a good chance that one will be made in the forseeable future).  The only reason I stumbled upon this is because this page has a link to a company named "Cobranet", which is also an existing wiki page on something completely different with the same name.  I've changed the Cobranet link to go to a non-existant page called "Cobranet (ISP)". Snottywong 19:12, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Links
Talk:The Jungle

message: This seems to be a rather pivotal quote from President Theodore Roosevelt, however it seems as though at some point Wiley has acquired Blackwell Reference and this page now redirects to a splash; Archive.org has a Archive from 2016 which makes reference but it is a link to what would be a paywall. The DOI is included, but a DOI lookup seems to return nothing.   — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2603:6080:840:2FD:5CF8:F083:44D1:8ECC (talk) 19:10, 30 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: [http://www.blackwellreference.com/public/tocnode?id=g9781405184649_yr2012_chunk_g97814051846491361 Citation 20] Expired

message: The reference for the film adapation of The Jungle cites this very wikipedia page as one of its sources. This can't be right, right? Jaysbro (talk) 21:11, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reference given cites wikipedia as a source 

message: The last paragraph under Federal Response discusses a Cosmopolitan article:
He complained about the public's misunderstanding of the point of his book in Cosmopolitan Magazine in October 1906 by saying, "I aimed at the public's heart, and by accident I hit it in the stomach."
but the #27 reference goes to the book instead of the Cosmo article. Tallard (talk) 02:15, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Federal Response: Reference to Cosmopolitan article links the book itself, not the article.
Talk:Ceephax Acid Crew

message: You're telling me that the only reference in the article was the one I put? Are you serious! That's why somebody had to put the  template?! That's some serious bad news. I just had to rant 'cause I'm so shocked. Lighthead...KILLS!! 23:03, 4 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Are you kidding me!! 

message: I made a comment in the last (at the time of this writing) edit summary. I take it back. Even if it is true that there is an IP address that I suspect is R.D. James's; that address itself made no significant, harmful edits to this article. That said, I won't retract the banner I just placed. Even if it isn't, this article does eerily read like a personal reflection. Despite the fact that there are no references besides the ones that I provided to back up those statements (not my statements, the unsourced ones). Lighthead...KILLS!! 06:53, 5 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  My bad. 

message: stated in a couple interviews that he's at least a year younger than is written in the page, however i can't find a record of him stating his DOB. i'll keep looking, just a heads up for right now. Skynnyrr (talk) 23:39, 10 September 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Seems like he was born in 79. No idea where March 12 came from though. Skynnyrr (talk) 17:49, 10 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ceephax age