lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:D. M. Turner

message: The article may be improved by following the WikiProject Biography 11 easy steps to producing at least a B article. --KenWalker | Talk 07:16, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Wikipedia:WikiProject_Biography/Assessment#Class_parameter|Biography assessment rating]] comment 

message: why were the links to the relevant erowid pages removed?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.22.173.201 (talk) 13:37, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: erowid does not appear to meet the criteia for external links. MM 207.69.137.39 (talk) 05:31, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: please elaborate.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.22.170.228 (talk) 20:16, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Did you read the policy WP:EL? erowid does not meet any of the criteria for a link that should be added: it is not Turners official site, it is not a legal copy of a score or script, it is not content that "cannot be integrated into the Wikipedia article due to copyright issues, amount of detail". The only other possible contention would need to be proved by you that it met WP:ELMAYBE #4 "Sites which fail to meet criteria for reliable sources yet still contain information about the subject of the article from knowledgeable sources." while not meeting any of the criteria in WP:ELNO. I dont think that you can make such a defense, but you may go ahead and try. MM 4.158.222.240 (talk) 04:40, 29 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: at least D. M. Turners books stored at erowid should be linked.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.23.99.79 (talk) 17:11, 31 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: If erowid is selling the book WP:EL #5 - we dont make a link to a site for commercial purposes. If it is because erowid has the full free text of the book, then you need to show that erowid has the legal right to  display the content WP:ELNEVER #1. MM 207.69.139.142 (talk) 02:29, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Update: WP:ELNEVER applies. The site clearly states that it does not hold the copyright nor have permission from the copyright holder to display the work. MM 207.69.137.11 (talk) 14:08, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  erowid link 

message: I've removed the prod as this is clearly not an uncontroversial deletion.  The Little Book of Ketamine covers him in a section over five pages and he is discussed on a total of 14 pages. SpinningSpark 20:22, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi! If you have access would you mind adding? Not a requirement of dePROD, of course, but helpful for others like me who also don't have access to this particular book. Thanks! Star Mississippi 20:43, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed deletion
Talk:Defensive vomiting

message: I agree that this article should be deleted or redirected somewhere else, but it isn't really complete garbage, so it shouldn't be deleted speedily. I don't know, is it an actual phenomenon? XYaAsehShalomX 20:18, 3 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I found a number of apparently reliable online soruces that use the term, mostly in the context of eating disorders, and one as a defense by vultures. DES (talk) 20:48, 3 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: No, "defensive vomiting" is not an eating-disorder-related word. People with EDs may "purge," which includes induced vomiting and misuse of laxatives and diuretics. 
Google search for operators “’defensive vomiting’ ‘eating disorders’” turned up 905 results, the first 3 of which from Wikipedia. Change that to pages updated within the past year: 5. Similar results from Google books. 
It seems that the term “defensive vomiting” isn’t often used regarding humans, but it does make sense as a term. From an evolutionary perspective, vomiting is a defense mechanism to rid the body of noxious substances before they can be fully absorbed. Ergo: vomiting when you’ve had too much to drink; vomiting spoiled food; vomiting poison; vomiting from chemo; etc. Vomiting when there’s something at the back of your throat is actually a defense against choking. So "defensive vomiting," then, can be differentiated from both induced vomiting and vomiting caused by a serious disease.
So I'm still not sure it shouldn't be deleted, but I need to at least get rid of the eating-disorder misinfo.
Uberfrauleine (talk) 01:14, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Reasoning for changes
Talk:Armed Forces (album)

message: (What's So Funny 'Bout) Peace, Love, and Understanding was definitely on the us release in 79. it says so in the article on the song, and i remember it on the album i had.76.254.33.165 (talk) 05:14, 24 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: US track listing
Talk:Michael Drakos Soutzos

message: His proper name (and the one most refered to in sources), is not Şuţu, but Suţu. I know the first one is more used nowadays, but you should also add the second (as main usage, or at least as an alternative - "or", "also known as"). Dahn 20:22, 3 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Francisco (moon)

message: On the satellites page the pronunciation was given with the stress on the first syllable. I assume it's really /fran-SIS-koe/, as commonly pronounced, and have 'corrected' accordingly. If the stress really is on the first syllable, could someone give a reference? kwami 03:43, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: My original pronounciation was just a placeholder.  thanks for correcting it. Volcanopele 18:01, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  pronunciation 
Talk:Glenn Anderson

message: I think the comment about Anderson being better than Lafontaine and Neely is not really NPOV and should be reworded.  Both players are better than Anderson anyway.  He was a good player, but his stats were hugley inflated playing on the Oilers and were quite average after the first few years of his career.  There might be issues around the HHOF not inducting him yet and players with similar bakcgrounds, even though he was not a spectacular player, but his name does not deserve mention above guys like Lafontaine and Neely. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.97.64.50 (talk) 17:59, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: POV
Talk:Terristrial

message: The title of this article is misspelled, and the essential basics are duplicated at terrestrial television.
Please merge. - CobaltBlueTony 20:29, 3 November 2005 (UTC)

message: See Wiktionary search.
I intend to redirect this page to terrestrial, but I don't even think Wikipedia supports misspelled article names, so this should just be deleted. - CobaltBlueTony 14:03, 9 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: This word is misspelled, and this page should not exist.
Category talk:Environmental issues

message: I feel that a better name for this category would be Category:Environmental issues. Alan Liefting 20:54, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not quite sure what to do with this category.  I added several articles the other day with it as "threats" -- cars and such -- because I like that cars fall into the category of "environmental threats."  If it became issues, it might be a lot like the category of "environmental subjects."  Maybe the whole thing can be merged into a single environment category.  I mean, the most useful thing seems like a link at the bottom of every imaginable page you could click on to pull you back to a nice, long category page. Envirocorrector 15:41, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: "Environmental threats" is quite an emotive heading and limits it to some of the more serious issues. The list of environmental issues is a good start for guidance on what sort of articles should be added. Like many other categories it must be watched so that the boundaries are not pushed by the addition of irrelevant articles. -- Alan Liefting-talk- 04:46, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Category name
Talk:Trust (Elvis Costello album)

message: "Commercially, none of the singles on Trust entered the charts: the first time this had happened since My Aim Is True, his debut album"
That's not true.  "Clubland" charted at # 60 in the UK.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.152.94.132 (talk) 16:50, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: ===
Talk:King of America

message: The attribution of first names (Henry and Howard) to the "Brothers" was different in the section 'Release history' from that in the section 'Track listing'. I decided to remove it from 'Release history' until some verification can be obtained—that way, the article might be mistaken but at least it doesn't contradict itself. Harfarhs (talk) 01:10, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Coward Brothers
Talk:Psamathe (moon)

message: There's probably also a Greek form ending in eta, I just haven't found it. Derived from the word for sea sand - I guess we could nickname the moon 'Sandy'? - and both alphas are short. kwami 20:58, 3 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: NIX is in the pipeline; it just hasn't been announced yet. kwami 01:32, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Tyler Arnason

message: WikiProject Biography Summer 2007 Assessment Drive
Barely a Start class.
The article may be improved by following the WikiProject Biography 11 easy steps to producing at least a B article. -- Yamara 17:13, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Wikipedia:WikiProject_Biography/Assessment#Class_parameter|Biography assessment rating]] comment 
Talk:Free Software Award for Projects of Social Benefit

message: I mentioned on Talk:FSF Award for the Advancement of Free Software that information on the two awards should probably be contained in the one article.  One of my reasons is that a lot of info will probably overlap, such as venue and date of ceremony, and who were the judges, but that info hasn't been confirmed yet.  Until it's known if that this award indeed shares a ceremony and judging panel with the other award, I guess this info can live on it's own page.  But it may be worth merging later. Gronky 21:07, 3 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Both Awards in one article?

message: I have removed the WikiProject tag, as this article is either a redirect or deleted. If you oppose, please restore the tag. Thank you, fahadsadah (talk,contribs) 16:04, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wikiproject Computing
Talk:Combined Federal Campaign

message: The main section is rather gushy. -- Beland 03:12, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Doesn't read that way to me. What specifically is the problem? The only thing dubious I see is "largest and most successful workplace fundraising model in the world": "largest" is probably factual but deserves citation; "most successful" begs for clarification as to the criteria for success. - Jmabel | Talk 19:27, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: POV

message: I did not see any mention of this requirement in the CFC charity application materials: "Have a dedicated office that is open at least 15 hours a week, and a dedicated phone number."  Can anyone confirm whether this is an actual requirement?  If not, it should be removed from the article. Jfredrickson (talk) 19:15, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, now I see that it's a requirement in the local charity application, but not the national/international application.  Will add a clarification. Jfredrickson (talk) 19:18, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Charity listing requirements

message: Since articles with photos get more exposure, i added the photo. Geraldshields11 (talk) 22:22, 22 May 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Added photo
Talk:Tillicoultry

message: Yes, I have removed several external links on the grounds that they are extremely poorly designed. Quality not quantity.
And dear Anon., please refrain from editing my profile. If you want to discuss the article, this is the place to do it.Hellinterface 19:49, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  External Links 

message: Do we know hard facts about the Stewpot Cartel, and if so, why have the police not done something about it? We should not publish possibly derogatory stuff based on rumour or conjecture. If they have been arrested, tried and punished, then we should say so, with references. What has been written may well be correct, but is someone knows, please come forward and fix it. If not, we should consider removing it.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tiger99 (talk • contribs) 20:51, 14 September 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Crime
Talk:Funk & Wagnalls

message: Besides the title, all references to the name of the publisher in the text are to Funk & Wagnalls. Why does the article title use and? Tskoge 21:21, 3 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Funk & Wagnalls 

message: Needs style cleanup, since quote appears more relevant than the list of references (it is bolded and unindented). Added a tag accordingly. Biblbroks 23:58, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Citation from Buck Rogers 

message: Thiat article should be split into articles on the publisher and the various works it published (especially the encyclopedia). —Ruud 21:35, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree, although maybe there won't be enough material in two articles if this one is split. But, if you think it will, go ahead. BiblbroksTalk2me]] 09:04, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: How about start a section on the various publications in this article and then see how it goes. If it grows so it is taking over then it can be split of later. I'm a fan of F&W Standard Dictionary of Folklore, Mythology, and Legend which is still a definitive reference book in the field. (Emperor 21:49, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Split 

message: I have the publication "The World's One Hundred Best Short Stories", from 1927. There are apparently two bindings, one in blue and another in red.  I am very interested in knowing what the difference is between the two color bindings, since they were both apparently published in 1927?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.226.53.84 (talk) 14:08, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Publications 

message: I purchased a set of Funk and Wagnalls Encyclopedia in the Grand Union Supermarket in the 1980s so i know for a fact it was available that way after the 70s.  I still have the set.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.221.93.180 (talk) 01:52, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  1980s 

message: Was often mentioned on this show... AnonMoos (talk) 10:33, 11 June 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Rowan & Martin's Laugh-In]]

message: :The dictionary was one of the few recommended by author L. Ron Hubbard in his Study Hat Course[2], which became the basis of Study Technology, a "how-to-learn" course. Hubbard termed it "one of the most grammatically correct dictionaries there is and... probably the best American dictionary available".
L. Ron Hubbard is not a notable reviewer of dictionaries. This entire section should be removed from the first paragraph. 141.228.250.141 (talk) 02:27, 8 October 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  L Ron Hubbard is not noteworthy 

message: Is there any value of these , they obviously wouldn’t use them for teaching anymore , but it brought back alotta memories and questions for the the kids too relive as they were growing up 2601:446:600:8D30:F177:72E5:124F:F60F (talk) 18:39, 9 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  FUNK AND WAGNALLS new Encyclopedia of Science all 22 books in Brand New Condition ! 1979 Copyright, 1984 Text copyright edition
Talk:363 (number)

message: 363 = BB  a repdigit in base 32. Rich   Farmbrough 21:23, 3 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: 363 has somehting t do eiht this. Rich   Farmbrough 00:14, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  US BAnkruptcy 

message: Numeric keypads, if typing with number lock on, will display 363.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.140.137.81 (talk) 01:43, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  LOL 

message: 36310 = 1111103 = 30011 is not palindromic in bases 3 and 11. Just as, say, 11010 is not palindromic in base 10. See Palindromic number: "There are 90 palindromic numbers with three digits:
{101, 111, 121, 131, 141, 151, 161, 171, 181, 191, …, 909, 919, 929, 939, 949, 959, 969, 979, 989, 999}." Boris Tsirelson (talk) 18:49, 11 November 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Palindromic?
Talk:Integrated circuit design

message: What about incorporating a reference to Signoff (electronic design automation) into the article Integrated circuit design? It is out of my knowledge to say if this is appropriate, but it feels like as if it was. --Abdull (talk) 22:32, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Signoff 

message: I have proposed a merge from Integrated circuit development. It is possible that Integrated circuit development is a better final name for the article but Integrated circuit design is more fully developed so I think it would be easier to and better for the revision history if we merged here first and then considered a name change as a potential second step. Sorry for not starting this discussion earlier. Is there any objection to this proposal? ~Kvng (talk) 15:50, 1 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Integrated circuit development]] merge proposal 
Talk:Clocker (train)

message: I've been working with Bruce Goldberg's otherwise comprehensive Amtrak: The First Decade and there's no mention of the Clocker name. Now, he does list train numbers 200 through 282 on the New York—Philadelphia route, but according to him as late as 1979 they didn't have a name (or at least weren't given a name in the timetables). Interestingly, he gives the end date for those trains as October 27, 1979; there's a number of new "named" trains appearing on October 28 (such as the Philadelphian or Manhattan Limited). Does anyone have a source clarifying the early history? Mackensen (talk) 02:45, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Source issues
Talk:Gallery Row, Los Angeles

message: There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Bunker Hill, Los Angeles which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you.  —RM bot 19:30, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Interested editors can also comment at Purplebackpack89 (Notes Taken) (Locker) 22:06, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Move discussion in progress
Talk:First class constraint

message: The layout of this article is confusing and this article is too technical. Bodera 21:36, 3 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I think that First class constraint, Second class constraints, and Dirac bracket should be more tightly related. Perhaps, there should be one article "Dirac's modified Hamiltonian formalism" (clunky, I know) which just goes through first class constraints, second class constraints, primary constraints, secondary constraints, Dirac brackets etc, and have corresponding redirects to it. Then again, that may become too large an article. So it could have links off to more detailed articles on Dirac brackets and first class vs. second class functions of phase space (note that the terms are defined for any functions on phase space). I think I wrote a good portion of useful material in the Dirac bracket article, but the result was a long lead into the definition of the Dirac brackets. It would also be good to see the connection between first class constraints and gauge transformations illuminated.Steve Avery (talk) 19:18, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

message: The section called "Geometric theory" goes by too quickly. It doesn't define things fully enough to understand it. For example, the "extended bracket" is introduced so quickly that the reader has no idea why it might be nonzero even if the original bracket was zero. Also, it's hard to tell what we need the level set of f for. Also, what is a "smooth section of f "?
2001:67C:10EC:5787:8000:0:0:231 (talk) 09:57, 26 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Geometric theory
Talk:Woodlawn Cemetery (Bronx, New York)

message: Shouldn't this article be "Woodlawn Cemetery (Bronx, New York)"? OlEnglish (talk) 18:51, 28 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Simpler names are usually better.  I don't see the need here for additional complexity; as the saying goes don't use excessive (unless (really) necessary) parentheses.  Jim.henderson (talk) 16:17, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, it would look better on the Woodlawn Cemetery disambig list anyway, but you're right. OlEnglish (talk) 23:32, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  rename? 

message: The article says nothing about who owns the cemetery. It should. Since the article tells how much burial there costs, it should tell who gets that money: the city of New York, a for-profit corporation, or whatever.—Jim10701 (talk) 23:28, 6 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Who owns it? 

message: is buried in Westminster Abbey.  Staats Morris Dyckman is buried in Dyckman-Nagle Burial Ground – (near the 215th Street 1 train Station) - See more at: http://myinwood.net/forgotten-cemeteries-of-inwood/#sthash.fbFgSohs.dpuf
BlaiseP644 (talk) 14:52, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Staats Long Morris 
Talk:Nanokernel

message: * I think the article has become more confusing again with the edits by User:Ruud Koot and User:Eyreland. The "definition" section only refers to the use of "nanokernel" in the sense of "microkernel". Yet the examples refer to completely different uses. The definition should make it clear that the term has been used inconsistently, rather than confusing the reader by examples which are inconsistent with the definition.
* The reference to standards bodies is also confusing IMHO
* What's the point of the "Classical examples" section? The list only contains systems that were never ever to my knowledge called "nanokernels". QNX is certainly a classical system, but Minix 3, being about 3 years old, is hardly, so this list is highly biased, and seems to add no value. 
* "Kernal" is incorrect spelling, kernel doesn't have an "a".
* Time to remove the diagram-needed tag
Heiser (talk) 00:13, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recent Edits