lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Kénédougou Kingdom

message: This is a good article. I will link it to the History of Mali. It could use a bit more on the connection with Korhogo and how it fit in overall Senufo history. --A12n 21:53, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Which would explain the language problems.  I would suggest you tag it as such, remove the sources warning, and clean up the language. :T L Miles 19:42, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  This appears to be based on a Britanica 1911 entry 

message: According sources the french don't besiege Sikasso in 1888-1889, in fact in this times Tieba was an ally of France and the french forces were still far from the zone. I believe that author of the article confused the siege of Kinian by Tieba of Sikasso (with suport of a french captain and indigenous auxiliars) with a siege of Sikasso; or perhaps confused a military siege with a political siege (the french were pressing Tieba against Samory while they were conquering Segou and Kaarta). Or perhaps is a confussion with the siege that happen ten years later (1898, when french conquered Sikasso). I don't know, but certainly there's not siege in 1888-1889. And unafortunately this mistake is now extended to others languages.83.41.44.235 (talk) 15:02, 19 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Wrong info
Talk:Stinson L-5 Sentinel

message: ;My reasons to merge these two articles in the manner presented are as follows:
# The article name convention of other planes is their aircraft series number and their knickname (i.e. KC-135 Stratotanker, B-52 Stratofortress, etc.).
# The USAF lists this aircraft as the "L-5 Sentinel" on their AFHRA website.
# The article is about a military aircraft, not a civilian aircraft, and the naming convention should reflect that.
# Admittedly, the "Stinson L-5" article has more information and data than the "L-5 Sentinel" article, but the article should follow the standard naming conventions.
Please add your comments, thoughts, criticisms, and accolades below! - NDCompuGeek 02:10, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree.  Stinson L-5 should be merged into this. Respectfully, SamBlob 03:04, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

text: Merge has been effected. Respectfully, SamBlob 17:35, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merging from "Stinson L-5" into "L-5 Sentinel" 

message: This text taken from the 'Stinson L-5' discussion:
NDCompuGeek 02:29, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  For More Information 
Talk:Body swap

message: What about http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0094593/
: ???--Johnsoniensis (talk) 21:04, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: [Untitled]

message: I'm a bit confused why someone decided it was necessary to tag this article as "unreferenced." Perhaps you could explain what in particular you feel needs referencing? This article already contains six footnotes and seventeen external links. Do you feel we need to cite a source for saying Freaky Friday or The Hot Chick contain a body swap scene? I respectfully beg to differ with you in that I think this article is already adequately referenced. Perhaps you could explain on this talk page what, specifically, contributors can do to fix this perceived deficiency. Thanks! 66.17.105.226 17:07, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Added a slew of in-article citations and cited six general references in a new section at the bottom. Removed the "unreferenced" tag. If you add "unreferenced" back to this article, please use the talk page and give us some specifics as to why you're tagging the article. Contributors: please cite your sources when adding new material. Thanks! 66.17.118.195 14:47, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Unreferenced?

message: I removed these from the front list as they seem like more like possessions and incarnations rather than a swap. The main character takes over the body without any note about what happens to the target person. -AngusWOOF (talk) 05:12, 2 October 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  questionable entries 

message: Found this on the Internet, perhaps this can be used to beef up the article: -AngusWOOF (talk) 06:46, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reference article on body swapping 

message: There is text on this page that is "Freaky Friday" that is linked but when it is clicked it goes to the Wikipedia article about the book, not to one of the two movies.2604:2000:C682:B600:ACAC:C7A:13ED:B560 (talk) 14:23, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for the find. I cleaned up the link so it points to the original novel and rewrote the adaptation part. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 17:12, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Bad Link

message: Why is there a Wikipedia article titled "Body swap" which includes a list of body-swap uses in media and also a different Wikipedia article titled "Body swap appearances in media"? What determines whether a particular body-swap story goes into the one list, the other, neither, or both lists?2604:2000:C682:B600:ACAC:C7A:13ED:B560 (talk) 14:29, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: The media one is the more comprehensive list. This article should only focus on the most prominent examples. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 17:12, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Why are there two articles?
Talk:Masada (band)

message: There was a redirect from the page "Bar Kohba", so I decided that the disambiguation type header was appropriate. If not, the redirect needs to be removed.
Gerryfarm (talk) 13:15, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: I propose that Masada Quintet be merged into Masada (band). I think that the content in the Masada Quintet article can easily be explained in the context of Masada (band), and the Masada (band) article is of a reasonable size in which the merging of Masada Quintet will not cause any problems as far as article size or undue weight is concerned. DISEman (talk) 03:17, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merger proposal 
Talk:Francis Burdett

message: :The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section. 
The result of the debate was PAGE MOVED to Francis Burdett per discussion below. -GTBacchus(talk) 23:35, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

message: Add "* Support" or "* Oppose" followed by a brief explanation, then sign your opinion with ~~~~
*Support. See WP:MOSBIO#Honorific prefixes, which states that "No baronet should be shown with the postfix but without the prefix, e.g. John Smith, 17th Baronet." Wikipedia:WikiProject Peerage#Articles on baronets concurs: when Firstname Lastname is not unique, the article should be at Sir Firstname Lastname, nth Baronet". This should, in fact, be uncontroversial, Gene's comments notwithstanding. Choess 00:56, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: *Support. move to Francis Burdett. After I have gone through the other baronets with the same name, I am of the opinion, that they aren't notable, so disambiguation would not be necessary at the moment, since also apparently no additional articles of persons with this name exist. (My intention to request the move from Francis Burdett, 5th Baronet to Sir Francis Burdett, 5th Baronet was to revert the former total wrong move from Sir Francis Burdett, 5th Baronet to Francis Burdett, 5th Baronet). ~~ Phoe talk 16:45, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Survey 

message: Needs a link to here as this was his ancestral home Victuallers 16:15, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Foremarke Hall
Talk:Superstition Mountain

message: This man claims to live here. He's notably full of himself. Nice digs if it's so! Potatoswatter 22:15, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  residence? 

message: After doing research, I discovered that Superstition Mountain may not be a volcanic plug as stated in the article.  From what I've gathered, the Superstition Mountain range (including Weaver's Needle, also mentioned on Wikipedia as a volcanic plug), are all left behind from volcanic activity in the area of 20 million years ago.  I went ahead and I updated this article, and removed Weaver's Needle from the Volcanic Plug category (may need another change to remove this).  Please make any other changes as necessary.
--Dpaulat (talk) 09:19, 27 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Volcanic Plug?
Talk:Old World vulture

message: This identical sentence, "They were widespread in both the Old World and North America, during the Neogene," appears in both this article and the New World vulture article.  To what group, New, Old or all vultures of whatever clade does "they" in this statement refer?μηδείς (talk) 17:47, 3 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  "They were widespread in both the Old World and North America, during the Neogene." 

message: I'm deleting the paragraph
:In Southern Africa, the name for a Nubian vulture is synonymous with the term applied to lovers, because these vultures are always seen in pairs, mother and child remaining closely bonded together. Pairing, bonding, protecting, and loving are essential attributes associated along with the vulture's size and its ability to soar high in the sky.
It is
* Not relevant to the section on ancient Egypt. Even in ancient times, Egypt was not located in Southern Africa.
* Vague. Hundreds of different languages are spoken in the southern half of Africa. Surely this metaphor isn't found in all of them.
* Undocumented. I see no evidence for this statement in published sources.
ABehrens (talk) 20:57, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Name for vulture applied to lovers 

message: The title New World vulture and Old World vulture is like saying American football and European football.
Reason?
From New world vulture article:
New World vultures do not form a monophyletic clade with the superficially similar family of Old World vultures, with the similarities between the two groups being due to convergent evolution.
They do not seem closely related.
They are called vultures because when people see a unfamiliar animal, such as those first colonists who arrived in america, they try to compare to the most similar animal that it looks like, for example rakali or water rat is called a rat even though it is not.
Not everything that eats carcass and has slight biological similarities is a vulture.
What is my argument?
Take for example rails and grebes, they are not called ducks even though a ignorant person could mistake a duck for a coot.
New world vultures could be called condors, while Old world vultures are just vultures.
: it would be much simpler if new-world vultures were collectively called condors, but unfortunately that's not the term in most common use.  Pelagic (talk) 11:36, 27 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Suggestion: Rename Old World vulture to vulture
Talk:Tit (bird)

message: What exactly is a bottle tit? See page 27 here. It's probably an old name for a long-tailed tit, but I'm not sure. Anyone know anything? Can a redirect be introduced? Malick78 (talk) 20:57, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It is the Long-tailed Tit, named for the shape of its nest, jimfbleak (talk) 07:37, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Bottle tit?

message: Uh, it says they're penisivores. And that they eat HUGE-nuts. I'm pretty sure this is wrong.
:Not even that clever. People anymore sadden me.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by VarikValefor (talk • contribs) 05:46, 10 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vandalism 

message: I propose that chickadee and titmouse be merged with Poecile and Baeolophus, respectively. There has been a good deal of confusion over these matters and an awful lot of old world tits are called titmice on their pages. (I'm going to try to clean this up.) Stop using these North American terms willy-nilly, please! Innotata 15:01, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Can someone put the appropriate merger tags onto Poecile and Baeolophus? I can't find the right ones to use. And can you put merger tags on redirect pages? Innotata 17:33, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm going to put this onto Baeolophus and Poecile. I'll also reword the mention of american tit radiations. Innotata 16:12, 31 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Chickadee and titmouse 

message: Some old page history that used to be at the title "Tit (bird)" can now be found at Talk:Tit (bird)/Old history. Graham87 03:55, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Old page history 

message: At various points in the article there are statements that some bird or genus is 'unique to North America' or something similar, but it isn't clear what is being referred to. At one point there is an implication that all titmice fall into this category, which is clearly wrong. Could a suitable expert editor go through the article and clean this up? --Ef80 (talk) 09:43, 8 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  North America 

message: Where does the term Tit come from?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.93.176.178 (talk) 02:33, 9 June 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Etymology? 

message: As these birds change their feeding habit based on time of year and local food abundance I propose the following change to the first sentence in "Behaviour:Diet and Feeding" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tit_(bird)#Diet_and_feeding).  Insectivores only eat insects.  Omnivores consume both plant and animal material as food.
The tits are generalist omnivores that consume a wide range of small insects and other invertebrates, particularly small defoliating caterpillars as well as consuming seeds and nuts, particularly in the winter.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.75.142.142 (talk) 16:24, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Feeding Behavior
Talk:Beating Heart (TV series)

message: The Cast and characters section needs expanding, and the article could also do with some episode summaries. I do intend to work on this some more, but I'll have to watch the series again first to re-familiarize myself with the finer details. PC78 22:24, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Things to do 

message: IMHO should be renamed to Beating Heart TV series. --Nevit (talk) 10:52, 17 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rename
Talk:Luna-Glob

message: Article has "A Luna-Glob 2[2] joint orbiter-rover mission (the orbiter will be the Indian Chandrayaan-2), is also planned for in 2012, ...".  But the Chandrayaan-2 article says 2013. 82.163.24.100 (talk) 11:57, 2 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  2012 or 2013 ? 

message: The article has three completely different dates in it (2014, >2015, >2019). 77.97.184.245 (talk) 21:18, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: And then it became 2024, and then it became 2025. The Russian space progamme has not been in a very happy state for quite a while. Double sharp (talk) 05:33, 13 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  When does it launch?
Talk:Komi Republic

message: Was there no Komi people history at all through Russian eyes before 1918?
Well I know a long list of villages and larger settlements there before 1918.
If the people have lived there at least 4.000 years, they must have had also
a history.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.112.173.55 (talk) 04:00, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Komi Republic 

message: Komi was unspoiled and inhabited only by the nomadic dwellers ? Komi people have hundreds of years of history, Abur alphabet dating from 1372. History section seems very biased and should be removed totally.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.78.205.242 (talk) 09:41, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  History section ? 
Talk:Udmurtia

message: As far as I know there is no such thing as Kievan Russians, a term frequently used in the article. Kievan Rus was the name of a state founded and for a long time lead by Scandinavians, with Kiev as its capital, hence the Rus in the name, Rus (in Swedish Ruser) being the name most commonly used in eastern Europe to describe ethnic Scandinavians aka Vikings (the name most probably stemming from the region of Roslagen, the coastal area of Sweden north of Stockholm). Allan Akbar 02:15, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Kievan Russian?

message: There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Republic of Adygea which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you.  —RM bot 11:00, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Move discussion in progress

message: Ezhiki: there was some problem that was causing an error message in red to appear in the {reflist}. it's obviously OK now, and you have restored the reference. Good. Regards  --Greenmaven (talk) 20:26, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Some glitch... 
Talk:Bryansk Oblast

message: Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: http://www.archive.today/41gVy Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.) For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, and according to fair use may copy sentences and phrases, provided they are included in quotation marks and referenced properly. The material may also be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Therefore such paraphrased portions must provide their source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you.  Mkativerata (talk) 21:42, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copyright problem removed 

message: The map is depicting incorrect information. Its depicting Crimea as a part of Russia.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.35.249.13 (talk) 10:56, 5 July 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Fixed. Reverted to the previous version of the map. If there were a version of that map that showed Russian-claimed but not recognized portions of Ukraine, that would provide the most information, but I don't know of such a version. 208.127.94.174 (talk) 03:26, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Incorrect map 
Talk:Chelyabinsk Oblast

message: The article is phrased oddly, presumably because much of it has been written by editors who have Russian as their first language. I'm going to add a copyedit template. --Ef80 (talk) 21:12, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copyedit 

message: Should we add Some links about olympiads? There are some of them: https://rcokio.ru/olymp/winners/1/9/ , https://rcokio.ru/olymp/winners/2/9/ , https://rcokio.ru/olymp/winners/3/9/ , https://rcokio.ru/olymp/winners/4/9/ , https://rcokio.ru/olymp/winners/5/9/ , https://rcokio.ru/olymp/winners/6/9/ , https://rcokio.ru/olymp/winners/7/9/ , https://rcokio.ru/olymp/winners/8/9/ , https://rcokio.ru/olymp/winners/9/9/ , https://rcokio.ru/olymp/winners/1/10/ , 
 https://rcokio.ru/olymp/winners/2/10/ , https://rcokio.ru/olymp/winners/3/10/ , https://rcokio.ru/olymp/winners/4/10/ , https://rcokio.ru/olymp/winners/5/10/ , https://rcokio.ru/olymp/winners/6/10/ , https://rcokio.ru/olymp/winners/7/10/ , https://rcokio.ru/olymp/winners/8/10/ , https://rcokio.ru/olymp/winners/9/10/ , https://rcokio.ru/olymp/winners/1/11/ , https://rcokio.ru/olymp/winners/2/11/ , https://rcokio.ru/olymp/winners/3/11/ , https://rcokio.ru/olymp/winners/4/11/ , https://rcokio.ru/olymp/winners/5/11/ , https://rcokio.ru/olymp/winners/6/11/ , https://rcokio.ru/olymp/winners/7/11/ , https://rcokio.ru/olymp/winners/8/11/ , https://rcokio.ru/olymp/winners/9/11/ . 
There you can see lists of students that take awards. It may be useful for article.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.222.98.48 (talk) 16:21, 13 November 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Information about olympiads
Talk:Irkutsk Oblast

message: Most of the sources here are peripheral to the topic, or Russian language-only. Article does not yet qualify as C-class. KokoPhantom (talk) 03:46, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Lots of improvement this year! Still needs more sources to reach B class, though. KokoPhantom (talk) 03:33, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Needs sources
Talk:Kaluga Oblast

message: This map shows Crimea as a Rusian oblast, despite internationally not being recognised as such. 5.10.181.81 (talk) 15:41, 7 October 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Replaced with disputed Crimea. Mellk (talk) 15:48, 7 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Map 
Talk:Kirov Oblast

message: This article has been revised as part of a large-scale clean-up project of multiple article copyright infringement. (See the investigation subpage) Earlier text must not be restored, unless it can be verified to be free of infringement. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions must be deleted. Contributors may use sources as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously. Mkativerata (talk) 12:37, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Possible copyright problem
Talk:Murmansk Oblast

message: Why is the map in another hemishpere?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.102.251.165 (talk) 23:34, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for catching that!  A stupid copy-paste error that was.  My bad.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 23:58, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Map issues
Talk:Voronezh Oblast

message: See flag of Voronezh region on russian version. --80.82.47.234 14:53, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Flag 

message: This article has been revised as part of a large-scale clean-up project of multiple article copyright infringement. (See the investigation subpage) Earlier text must not be restored, unless it can be verified to be free of infringement. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions must be deleted. Contributors may use sources as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously. Mkativerata (talk) 03:26, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Possible copyright problem