lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Venus (disambiguation)

message: True or false: this article belongs at Venus (disambiguation) with Venus re-directing to Venus (planet). 66.245.125.9 22:03, 2 Aug 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: False. People are somewhat more likely to be looking for the planet than the Greek goddess, but not to such a predominant degree that the article at Venus should be exclusively about the planet. -Sean Curtin 00:52, 3 Aug 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  True or false?? 

message: Why do we have a "Venus" article redirecting to "Venus (disambiguation)"? Shouldn't we just do the disambiguation in "Venus"? --Jcmo 10:33, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Venus and Venus (disambiguation) 

message: This move was originally proposed to place the disambig page as the primary, but it has been refactored to include the possibility of placing Venus (planet) at the primary, after considerable popular support for that option.  Dragons flight 01:01, Jun 24, 2005 (UTC)
Something ought to be at Venus other than a redirect (presently to this disambig page).  The question is whether this disambiguation page should be placed there or whether the article on Venus (planet) belongs on the main page, similar to Earth, Mars and Jupiter.  Please indicate whether you would prefer the planet or the disambiguation page to be the primary in this case.
*Planet. I'm quite sure that the meaning most Americans think of when they hear the word "Venus" is the planet next to earth. How close is this to being true?? Georgia guy 16:05, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Page move: Disambig or Planet 

message: What does "planet" mean as a verb?? (It appears that people are doing so in the above discussion.) Georgia guy 01:02, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: more than "disambiguation" as a verb, which the rest of them are using. :-> Septentrionalis 02:47, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Planet as a verb 

message: I've restored the mention of Bananarama in the entry for the Shocking Blue song "Venus" which was removed in a tidyup.
I'm not a fan of fluff and bloat, and I'd oppose inclusion of most covers in a dab page.
However, the Bananarama version is very famous- a major hit in several countries. Since many people are unaware that it *was* a cover, it's unlikely that they're going to know the "Shocking Blue" song entry is the one they're looking for otherwise.
Ubcule (talk) 20:35, 8 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bananarama cover of Shocking Blue song 
Talk:Victoria Woodhull

message: The opinionated opening sentence,
"She was mistakenly remembered being adamant in opposition to abortion." must be changed.  The statement is excessive editorializing and is not supported by the quotes given.  On the contrary, the quotes strongly suggest the opposite. In particular:
"The truth of the matter is that it is just as much a murder to destroy life in its embryotic condition, as it is to destroy it after the fully developed form is attained, for it is the self-same life that is taken."
The above quote is quite clear and far stronger and clearer than the  tangential final quote:
"Can any one suggest a better than to so situate woman, that she may never be obligated to conceive a life she does not desire shall be continuous?"
This does not not support the opinionated opening sentence.  
Furthermore, there is no reference for, "She is mistakenly remembered..."  This is another unsupported assertion.  Who?
The opening sentence should let the quotes speak for themselves and be changed to:
"Woodhull has expressed thoughts on the ideas of abortion."
The later sentence should remove the "But".
"Later on the same essay she asks:” Dunnpm (talk) 10:50, 14 May 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Abortion Editorializing 

message: Hello! This is to let editors know that :File:Victoria Claflin Woodhull by Mathew Brady - Oval Portrait.jpg, a featured picture used in this article, has been selected as the English Wikipedia's picture of the day (POTD) for September 23, 2023. A preview of the POTD is displayed below and can be edited at Template:POTD/2023-09-23. For the greater benefit of readers, any potential improvements or maintenance that could benefit the quality of this article should be done before its scheduled appearance on the Main Page.  If you have any concerns, please place a message at Wikipedia talk:Picture of the day. Thank you! --Ahecht (TALKPAGE) 04:16, 2 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Featured picture scheduled for POTD
Talk:Antisemitism and the New Testament

message: The article begins with one person's extremely bold claim, there is also no commentary or critique of the 'ten anti semitic themes' of the New testament.
How could we restructure this article so that it's far more balanced and neutral in approach Kind Regards, NotAnotherNameGuy (talk) 03:18, 3 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Change article formatting 

message: Why is his opinion in the Christian Responses section? His father is Jewish and he is speaking from a Jewish point of view. It seems a bit strange to me to be giving any weight at all to a (presumably) Jew who wants to alter canonical Christian texts in such a manner as to serve the interests of Judaism. Tempes1 (talk) 17:52, 18 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Daniel Goldhagen 

message: The lede section of this article has several grammatical errors and is very poorly organized.
I plan to fix this up soon.--WickerGuy (talk) 02:20, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Opening section messy. 

message: has added several edit suggestions / questions, each with a separate section head. To consolidate the discussion, I've gather all of the questions into a single heading.
; How is Jesus and the other 12 tribes views anti Semitic? 
But an Modern European, Asian view makes a genuinely Semitic view anti Semitic? Racially Jews aren't Semitic, some are Arabs ect who convert most are not the Bible is almost 100 percent Semitic views how can it be anti-semitic? TheEngineofProvidence (talk) 11:26, 12 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Questions from TheEngineofProvidence 

message: Hey guys
This part of the lead seems to be rather out of place and problematic:
"James Dunn has said that the New Testament contributed toward subsequent antisemitism in the Christian community. According to Louis Feldman, the term "antisemitism" is an "absurdity which the Jews took over from the Germans." He thinks the proper term is anti-Judaism. The distinction between anti-Judaism and antisemitism is often made, or challenged, with regard to early Christian hostility to Jews: some, notably Gavin I. Langmuir, prefer anti-Judaism, which implies a theological enmity. They say that the concept of antisemitism "makes little sense" in the nascent days of the Christian religion and that it would not emerge until later. In this context, the term antisemitism implies the secular biological race theories of modern times. Peter Schäfer prefers the word Judaeophobia for pagan hostility to Jews, but considers the word antisemitism, even if anachronistic, synonymous with this term,"
What say you? Homerethegreat (talk) 09:21, 24 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lead section problematic 

message: I am sorry, but how can the Word of our Lord be "anti-semitic"??  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:644:8E80:73FA:0:0:0:69 (talk) 22:53, 12 January 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: It is not the word of some kind of lord, but the word of bigoted writers of the New Testament. Dimadick (talk) 01:52, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Misrepresentation of facts
Talk:Vagina

message: An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect :Front hole and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at  until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.   -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she|they|xe) 20:22, 26 December 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Front hole" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]] 

message: The redirect Lower front hole 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.   -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she|they|xe) 03:36, 22 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  "[[:Lower front hole]]" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]] 

message: I just learned that to avoid offending trans people some people want to start calling the vagina a "bonus hole". Is this really true?? Georgia guy (talk) 14:51, 10 July 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Some trans men use the term for their own genitals. See relevant content at Transgender sexuality. I am not aware of any effort, by trans men or otherwise, to replace the general term vagina.  -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she|they|xe) 07:25, 11 September 2023 (UTC)

text: no Aaaspennn (talk) 08:01, 14 September 2023 (UTC)

text: The term front hole is sometimes heard. Mathglot (talk) 10:24, 14 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bonus hole
Talk:Visual Basic (classic)

message: Hi folks - my first ever Wikipedia entry!  Happy to be on board.
Added brief info (w source) about Windows8 support for VB6.  Also added a link to an article about same.  Appreciate feedback if anything was inappropriate.
Apollograce (talk) 23:45, 21 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Support in Windows 8 

message: VB used Hungarian notation, why is it not used in the code examples?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hungarian_notation  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 180.149.192.133 (talk) 22:12, 25 March 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Code Notation 

message: Having often heard incorrect remarks from uninformed people about the nature of VB6, ranging from "it's interpreted" to all manner of supposed failings, I wanted to add a note about deep enterprise usage. Unfortunately, although I have first-hand experience, I cannot find an acceptable citation for Wikipedia. By "enterprise", I am referring to the depth of its application, including access to Win32 APIs, hooking, shared memory, threading (apartment model), and distributed servers using MSMQ -- all of which I have been heavily involved in. The production of the VB6 product was very clever considering the previous history of the language, and also very polished. When VB.Net appeared, Microsoft ignored this particular company (despite its Gold Partner status) because they knew the language conversion tools would be useless. Trying to transition gradually by mixing VB6 and VB.Net was problematic and the company eventually folded. TonyP (talk) 09:01, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Enterprise VB6 
Wikipedia talk:Policies and guidelines

message: Detail aware how they are and name birthday and job private. 24.223.82.124 (talk) 17:08, 15 December 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry, but I can't parse that as an English sentence. What are you trying to say? Phil Bridger (talk) 18:45, 15 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lifestyle of people  

message: I need some help with closing a discussion that IMHO hinges on the interpretation of the words "widespread consensus" in WP:PGCHANGE. Please reply at this Discussions for discussion thread. Thank you. Szmenderowiecki (talk) 16:57, 19 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Interpretation of "widespread consensus" 

message: :The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
The result of the move request was: not moved . (closed by non-admin page mover) – Hilst [talk] 16:04, 30 March 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Wikipedia:Policies and guidelines →  – The reason for this controversial move request is so that the topics are listed in alphabetical order, per WP:AND, and because I think the words 'guidelines' and 'policies' sound clearer and make more sense in that order. PK2 (talk) 09:27, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

text: Oppose per the above !vote. –Gluonz talk contribs 13:55, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Butwhatdoiknow (talk) 16:45, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

text: Oppose - as said above, policies carry more weight than guidelines, hence they come first. estar8806 (talk) ★ 20:38, 26 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 25 March 2024 

message: You are invited to join a discussion about history of CFDS at Wikipedia talk:Categories for discussion#History of instruction changes of Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Speedy. —⁠andrybak (talk) 12:41, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Discussion at [[Wikipedia talk:Categories for discussion#History of instruction changes of Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Speedy]]
Talk:West Bank

message: Crossing Points section, in the 2nd sentence: "...is controlled by...", would be improved written as, "... has been controlled by". Thank you! MxBuster (talk) 11:31, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Small grammar error 

message: Rephrase the following line from:
"It has an estimated population of 2,747,943 Palestinians, and over 670,000 Israeli settlers live in the West Bank, of which approximately 220,000 live in East Jerusalem."
to:
"It has an estimated population of 2,747,943 Palestinians and 670,000 Israeli settlers. Approximately 220,000 of these settlers live in East Jerusalem."
---Side Note: if you are able, check the two sources cited, I don't see those exact figures in either of the sources. These numbers may need to be updated. Agent4911 (talk) 21:44, 10 October 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Andumé  (talk) 04:49, 11 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rephrasing a sentence 

message: Under Israeli occupation, which is considered illegal under international law
The source for this line in the infobox is from 1990, which cannot account for 30+ years of development. A more contemporary source is needed to confirm this status as of 2024. –Zfish118⋉talk 12:15, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Considered illegal under international law" 

message: Hello - would someone with editing access change the opening sentenc to the history section. This from 'From 1517 through 1917, the area now known ..' to 'From 1517 to 1917, the area now known ..' The reason  is 'through' in this context is minor use, which is just one country. The use of 'to' in this context is near universal. The article does not require the use of a niche English language. Thank you. 93.216.106.183 (talk) 17:49, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. Selfstudier (talk) 18:14, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Danke.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.216.106.183 (talk) 19:55, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Minor edir request  

message: While the West Bank territory did not first emerge in the wake of the 1948 Arab–Israeli War, the name "West Bank" did emerge as a term in the wake of the 1948 Arab-Israeli War, as being on the West Bank of the Jordain River. The West Bank Territory is the historical and biblical name for the central region of Israel, bordered by Judea to the south and Galilee to the north.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samaria Yaffalandis (talk) 13:29, 22 April 2024 (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 and provide a reliable source if appropriate. M.Bitton (talk) 15:23, 22 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 22 April 2024
Talk:Wharf

message: At this point the "well-known wharves" is basically an advertising section for various seaside locations. Most of the content is not notable enough for this article. Frankly I don't believe a list of "well-known wharves" is necessary regardless for this article. I propose stripping the section entirely.
--Mcorazao (talk) 19:41, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, since there was no feedback I went ahead and removed this section as advertising. Please feel free to object/revert/whatever ... --Mcorazao (talk) 20:41, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Well-known wharves? 

message: FYI: I merged quay with this article and redirected quay accordingly
--Mcorazao (talk) 20:41, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: The etymology section does not even mention quay any longer.  This merge seems inappropriate. 67.86.75.96 (talk) 17:50, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Not sure I understand. The original "Quay" article did not provide an etymology for the word. So what does "any longer" mean? --Mcorazao (talk) 04:39, 27 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merged 

message: Should terms like "pier", "dock" and "jetty" be defined and differentiated from "wharf" and "quay"?   98.244.137.86 (talk) 10:28, 7 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Other Terms
Talk:Worm (disambiguation)

message: This is pretty silly now ,having the city on the bottom of the computer games .I suggest to "put the computer games back to "Worms series" or "Worms computer games".
H. Jonat
It should be moved, but it has about about 30 subpages, so moving it is a lot of work. Your attempt at moving it shows that you have no idea how to do it, so we will have to wait until someone else volunteers. Before moving it, we also need to agree what the new name should be. Maybe Worms games is best, but someone who has been working on the article should decide. After it has been moved, all links to it will also need to be found and changed. --Zundark, 2001 Nov 18
-----
Ok, that sounds good. Let someone  who is working on it decide and handle it. For now let's leave it as is.
H. Jonat
-----
Various people seem to have been keen on adding to the list the web serial novel "Worm" by John McCrae, only to have it reverted. Is there any particular reason why?
46.208.123.42 (talk) 00:08, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Why adding: it is very popular, perhaps more popular than many other entries on this list (I myself wanted to see if it's listed).Why reverted: I have no idea (though likely because, as with most web-based works, there just aren't enough independent sources). 85.141.139.161 (talk) 08:40, 11 March 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Two years after the original comment, the Worm web serial continues to be popular; perhaps it deserves an article? *Dan T.* (talk) 18:21, 5 January 2016 (UTC)
Talk:Wind generator

message: Hi.  When I got here, this was a redirect to wind turbine.  That's not appropriate, since non-turbine reciprocationg wind generators (e.g. Windbelt) exist.  So I recreated this stub.  We should move non-turbine portions of wind turbine here and reference this article from there. --Treekids (talk) 22:46, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wind Generator vs Wind Turbine
Talk:Warsaw

message: It's redundant to say Old Town is a designated World Heritage Site both in the first and last paragraphs. I think it fits better in the last paragraph, but if you want to keep the sentence in the first, we should remove it from the last. Modulus12 (talk) 21:25, 28 July 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Old Town in lead 

message: I thought I would comment here to atleast get some consensus as there is a comment under the Demographics section saying no more images; can the population pyramid graph on the right be placed under the Demographics header, it shows the compositional makeup of the city by single year age and sex for 2021. Tweedle (talk) 11:50, 8 April 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Been BOLD and added it. Tweedle (talk) 08:29, 9 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Addition of population pyramid data for the Demographics section 

message: I was looking at a night light map of Europe and noticed a big splodge in the south of Poland.  Wikipedia says Katowice's metro area is 5.3 million, whereas Warsaw's is shown as only 3.1 million! PeterR2 (talk) 19:19, 7 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Warsaw largest city? 

message: This sentence is dumb. a) Literally the previous sentence states, that when the name was given Warsaw was a small fishing settlement, not a large city. b) there is plenty of settlements all over Poland with names dirved from personal names and endings -awa, -ewa, owa. (Limanowa, Bychawa etc.)  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.200.216.9 (talk) 10:29, 4 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  However the ending -awa is unusual for a large city; the names of Polish cities derived from personal names usually end in -ów/owo/ew/ewo (e.g. Piotrków, Adamów). 

message: "name Warcisław, which etymologically is linked with Wrocław." Is it a joke ? The old (latin) name Wratislawia is of Czech origin.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:9E8:20DD:9C00:6CCD:FA8A:899F:BC1A (talk) 00:29, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Warszawa - Wroclaw (Breslau)
Talk:Wiki

message: An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect :Wikiwikiwiki and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at  until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.  Capsulecap (talk • contribs) 08:43, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: That is what I thought too! It sounded like WP:COI, but a bit more subtle. I do not know how to change it so it could be more neutral. My best guess is we add examples of other wikis, but the problem is there are not really any other wikis. Otherwise, we could have moved it to the history paragraph, and with a little bit of editing it would probably fit. But, there is a paragraph with roughly the same idea. Candylinsky (talk) 09:38, 20 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Wikiwikiwiki" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]] 

message: An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect :Transwiki and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at  until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.  Rusalkii (talk) 21:48, 6 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Transwiki" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]] 

message: An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect :Wiki Wiki Wiki and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at  until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.   Jay 💬 04:55, 7 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Wiki Wiki Wiki" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]] 

message: I am editing the body of knowledge by rephrasing the sentences to suit the proper grammar and clarity of language. I am also updating the reference list to be more abreast with modern and current knowledge that is related. The decision-making topic should be a subtopic under responsibilities and should be updated to suit the current trends. Pbuahbas (talk) 02:11, 29 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Editing body of knowledge and reference list
Talk:Wikify

message: Why is this redirecting to the glossary?  If you have a good reason, revert my edit.  For now, it's going to Wikipedia:How to edit a page.
Superm401 22:11, 8 Jan 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why to Glossary? 

message: What is this page doing here?  Is it to be redirected somewhere useful or dispensed with? Niffweed17, Destroyer of Chickens 03:51, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nature of Page