lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Richard Fleeshman

message: Stockport is not an area in Manchester, it is a town that is completely independent from Manchester and is situated in the county of Cheshire, rather than Greater Manchester. I have changed the article to Stockport near Manchester... Even though this information may still be wrong as it does not cite it's source.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.4.38.81 (talk) 14:49, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Stockport

message: I removed the two external link spams. One of them actually tried to infect me with a virus. Astrotrain 15:39, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Only two :) I've been running a never-ending battle here. The current favourite is http://www.richardfleeshman.co.uk/ - despite what it might look like this is not an official site, it's a fansite like all the others folk have been trying to add/wangi 22:12, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: External links

message: The prize money was originally £100,000, but was actually doubled to £200,000. The citation is wrong. TomPhil (talk) 15:22, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Prize money

message: :If Fleeshman is unusually short for an 18 year old man, then I guess it should be worked into the article. I don't know how short he is though, he could actually be rather average height. JayKeaton 23:03, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Fleeshman is more than simply short - he is bordering on dwarf-like.
146.176.170.16 15:41, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fleeshman is very short

message: Anyone wanna work this into the article?
http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/showbiz/a65633/richard-fleeshman-signs-record-deal.html
Peace,
ViperBlade (couldn't be arsed to sign in!)
:86.221.110.32 23:22, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Recording deal with Universal
Talk:Ion (play)

message: What does the date range in the first sentence: "Ion is an ancient Greek play by Euripides (414-412 BC)."  mean? The dates the play was written? The time it was performed? When its fictional timeline was set? -- Mikeblas 15:11, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's the range of when it was thought to be written.  Scholars aren't sure on the exact year. - Ravenous 15:21, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks! I've clarified the article. -- Mikeblas 16:07, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: The article gives no indication of what Euripedes may have intended when he wrote the play.  Edith Hamilton, in her famous MYTHOLOGY, speculates that it is a veiled attack on traditional Greek religion, depicting the supposedly dazzling Apollo as a coward and a rapist.50.180.19.238 (talk) 03:38, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Purpose?
Talk:Powdery mildew

message: The third photo down is described as 'spider mites at high magnification'. These aren't spider mites, nor do they really resemble spider mites IMO. I wouldn't call that 'high magnification' either.   — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.61.183.199 (talk) 07:18, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Photo Description Incorrect

message: A copy of this article was moved to wikibooks using the Import tool (with all revisions). If this article was marked for copy to wikibooks or as containing how-to sections, it can now be safely rewritten.
If contributors are interested in expanding on the practical information that was in this article, please do so on the wikibooks side. For pointers on writing wikibooks, see Wikibooks:Wikibooks for Wikipedians. --SB_Johnny|talk|books 15:06, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Notice of import

message: I see no need to merge the articles of Erysiphales and Powdery mildew! The first one is a biological order and the other one is a disease caused by species belonging to that order. There are also separate articles for common cold and rhinoviruses for the same reason.
This one is a horticulture article, the other one is a mycology article. Kaarel 20:31, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: No need to merge

message: Hi. Does anyone out there have the skills to correct the typo on the image http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Downy_and_Powdery_mildew_on_grape_leaf.JPG? Best regards, Rui Gabriel Correia (talk) 13:39, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Spelling mistake on image 

message: Whilst the photo of powdery mildew on the Wikipedia page is not wrong it is hugely atypical.  The symptoms shown are extremely unusual and very misleading for the casual observer. 
Phil Taylor  — Preceding unsigned comment added by hj83.244.173.35 (talk) 11:46, 10 March 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Photo of powdery mildew 

message: Significant information in each category could be more in depth and precise with factual reasonings. I think either a scientific previous studies section should be added or descriptions of previous studies under each of the individual plants listed in the article.   Reliable sources are needed for some statements throughout the article so plagiarism isn't a possibility at hand.. Also, there is a misspelling of the word soybean, spelled as "soyabean" on this image https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Powdery_mildew#/media/File:Powdery_Mildew_in_Soyabean_leaves.jpg
Kellyn.hickle (talk) 02:43, 7 March 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article Evaluation 

message: Given the fluctuating legal status of this plant in the United States, Canada and elsewhere in the so-called Western World, and the fact that it's afflicted by powdery mildew, it seems worth a mention. The value of cannabis harvests worldwide puts it well above most of the other plants on the list, and in capitalism, aren't we supposed to venerate THE ECONOMY at every turn? 2607:FEA8:BFA0:47F:6817:49F0:3E77:BCF8 (talk) 11:40, 13 March 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cannabis
Talk:FTPS

message: This article and SFTP (SSH Over FTP) article should all be combined into FTP article.12.110.196.19 18:39, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There certainly needs to be a good disambiguation article for this general area. This is a rats nest of similar and overloaded terms. I'm thinking about this on my user page... - Paul (talk) 16:33, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Combine, Combine, Combine

message: The opportunity for unauthorized third parties to eavesdrop on data transmissions proportionally increased. Some limited efforts were made with other protocols to thwart this behavior, such as Base64 encoding of authentication data within the Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP).
The people developing protocols 30 years ago had 30 years less experience than we have now, but they were not imbeciles. HTTP authentication is just that, authentication. Is is used as a basis for access control, not for preventing eavesdropping. I am removing the "limited efforts" sentence. clacke (talk) 10:05, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Using HTTP authentication to prevent eavesdropping? Come on! 

message: The article says that "the explicit method is a legacy compatible implementation", which made me think that the explicit method is there for legacy purposes and that the implicit method is preferable.  But a few paragraphs later, the implicit method is "considered an earlier, deprecated method".  So I got very confused.  However, on reflection, I think that "legacy compatible" is a typo for "legacy-compatible" (different meaning due to the hyphen), and that the article is trying to say that we should use the explicit method. 195.72.173.52 (talk) 10:31, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Take a look at the new revision, I've rephrased it in an attempt to remove the ambiguity. Edigaryev (talk) 07:35, 10 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Confused 

message: The article says "FTPS (also known FTP-SSL, and FTP Secure) is an extension to the commonly used File Transfer Protocol (FTP)[...]" Is FTP still commonly used? BootOutMoot (talk) 19:57, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is FTP still commonly used?
Talk:U.S. critical infrastructure protection

message: How oes it close and repeat?  Midgley 03:12, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cycle looks like straight process 

message: This article is, partly, in need of re-writing. Several sections are not very encyclopedic at all, with a constant use of the first person (especially "we") and opinions written as if they were lifted from a third grader's persuasive essay on the subject.
First of all whoever wrote the above statements should sign their discussions.  Second, I don't think a third grader has any notions of the subject which are highly complex.  Third, why not contribute and fix that which you think is broken.  Not personal just business. FrankWilliams 15:37, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Page needs rewriting 

message: Having examples is no bad thing but this section is referencing a 12-year old hack on Citicorp's infrastructure with no broad infrastructure impact and only a fairly small financial sum involved (comparatively speaking!). I don't see it as a relevant example of an infrastructure threat.  I think Titan Rain is a better example to use, as this is fairly-well documented and is a relevant as a hostile attack that spanned several sectors and networks with potentailly significant consequences. Ephebi 13:57, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: * I haven't sorted out a good example yet, but have managed to source the relationship between HSPD-7 & PDD-63, & reference the wierd security grant stories which I added in a 'Controvosy' sub-heading. I hope this article now presents itself in a better context. It could still do with a bit of tidying up, with some of the prose moving from 1st person plural to 3rd person, but I'm running out of time at the moment. Ephebi 12:18, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  The importance of CIP 

message: already covered in U.S._critical_infrastructure_protection#National_Infrastructure_Assurance_Plan_/_National_Infrastructure_Protection_Plan fgnievinski (talk) 18:46, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Klbrain (talk) 11:03, 26 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed merge of [[National Infrastructure Protection Plan]] into [[U.S. critical infrastructure protection]] 

message: This article should be updated to ensure the reference and information conveyed are up-to-date and reflective of the current critical infrastructure protection programs throughout the US government.  Lindseywb18 (talk) 17:03, 17 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Outdated Information
Talk:Shakespeare Programming Language

message: [Heading added retroactively. --Xover (talk) 14:00, 19 June 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Because it a program, not a play. And Shakespeare didn't write it. Read the article. --Ysangkok 21:38, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: [untitled comment]

message: near the end of the last example it uses [Exeunt]
is this a typo or a command not previously mentioned?—Preceding unsigned comment added by 146.145.1.155 (talk • contribs) 19. sep 2006 kl. 19:03
:Exuent is antiquated English, used in plays when multiple people Exit. Scott Paeth 05:56, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Not so much antiquated English as Latin: Exit and Exeunt are the third-person singular and plural forms respectively of the word Exire = English 'Go out'. AndrewWTaylor 22:07, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Exeunt

message: is it compulsary to name variables after characters from Shakespear's plays?
82.30.254.17 09:15, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Variable Naming 

message: These languages are not preticularly related. This should be corrected.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.81.141.151 (talk) 22:53, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why is Inform 7 under see also? 

message: The text outputted by the example program is "HELLO WORLD" (in caps), not "Hello World" as the article mentions. (If you think this doesn't make any difference, then you are NOT a programmer, I guess)  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.110.246.192 (talk) 08:17, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Just for information, this issue is resolved. I just tested the current version (12 september 2023) with this shakespearelang interpreter and it works fine. Roman FW (talk) 12:01, 12 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  "HELLO WORLD", not "Hello World" 

message: Should we add a line-by-line explanation of what each line in the play script does? I am happy to do it. ChesterChow (talk) 06:24, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes that would be great! For now I just added a short paragraph before the code to give a sense of how it works but feel free to make changes. A more detailed explanation would be nice I think (or maybe the corresponding pseudo-code next to each line ?) Roman FW (talk) 11:17, 12 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Explanation of the Code
Talk:Manuel de Mederos

message: I noticed that a wikipedian who suports the independence of several countrys in the world seems to not understand that the correct spelling of Manuel de Mederos parents, since he was portuguese, must be also in portuguese, not in spanish. Please, respect the portuguese language. Mistico
:Ok, but I need some evidence that he was most commonly refered to by his Portugese name. Thanks. --Khoikhoi 01:05, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Allright, I agree now. By the way, when you sign your name, do it like this: ~~~~ so it doesn't link to the actual Mistico article but your user page instead. --Khoikhoi 06:45, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Manuel de Mederos Parents
Talk:Entitative graph

message: Jon Awbrey 15:32, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Notes & Queries

message: Peirce's Qualitative Logic of 1886, for all its merits, has nothing to do with the entitative graphs. Peirce devised the latter around 1895, in work published in vol. 3 of CP. The entitative graphs are such that disjunction interprets concatenation, and a dot on the blank page, not enclosed by cuts, can be read as a universally quantified variable. Peirce soon lost interest in the entitative graphs when he saw that if conjunction interprets concatenation, then a dot unenclosed by cuts denotes an existentially quantified variable. He worked on the resulting existential graphs from 1896 to the end of his life; his writings on this subject fill more than 100pp of vol. 4 of the CP.
Zeman (1964) showed that the existential graphs are isomorphic to first order logic with identity.  Because entitative/existential constitute a dual pair, this isomorphism carries over to the entitative graphs. (A better, but less known, term than "isomorphism" is Tarski's "equipollence".) Peirce strongly preferred the existential graphs because in his view, they handle quantification more easily. I have yet to encounter any discussion in the secondary literature that does justice to the entitative-existential dichotomy.202.36.179.65 16:23, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: My completely wild, unfounded intuitive guess is that Pierce stumbled over the distinctions between "boolean-logic or", "exclusive or", and "menu choices" (pick this or this or this). These are clearly quite different things, and of course, Pierce would have clearly understood this, but it is easy to accidentally intermix these during casual thinking. Try talking about menu-choices with a young student who just learned about boolean logic -- violent argumentation typically ensues. Working with existential graphs avoids this kind of confusion. 116.49.32.104 (talk) 01:23, 5 April 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: This entry is mistaken

message: Not only is it incomprehensible, someone has gone through it writing 'why?' on ever claim. Someone has to explain what the hell this stuff is before asking why. Who know why people use mad stuff like this? I certainly don't.--Cuthbert Bargepole (talk) 03:44, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: The article is hilarious
Template talk:College football award navbox

message: I deleted the Disney's Wide World of Sports Spirit Award and the NCFAA Contribution to College Football Award awards from the template for now. No article links to them except via this awards template. — Bellhalla 15:47, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

message: Shouldn't this have a link to the Cingular All-America Player of the week/year? -- KelleyCook 17:17, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm going with no for now but if you want to do so, bring us a compelling reason to include it.--Paul McDonald (talk) 15:07, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Cingular All-America Player?

message: Does anyone know how to get the "V-D-E" (View-discuss-edit) links into the header for this template?  It would make it easier to get to, like every other template.  Also a "show"/"hide" function could be added too.  Thanks.  --Mtjaws (talk) 20:10, 23 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Header links
Talk:VLSI Technology

message: Tomtab (talk) 22:33, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

message: There is no (NASDAQ: VLSI) symbol now. A5b 15:47, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: NASDAQ

message: I am not sure of the exact date when the VTI logo was dropped.  The VTI logo was used consistently between 1982 and 1985. It appears on the company's 3rd quarter (September 30) 1985 report to shareholders.  But it is absent on the 1st quarter (March 30) 1986 report to shareholders. A new logo (a series of parallel diagonal rays forming a stylized letter V inscribed in a circle) appears on the shareholder report for the first quarter 1987 and this logo continued in use for the life of the company.  So it appears that the VTI logo was phased out around the end of 1985. Tomtab (talk) 19:37, 12 November 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: VTI logo

message: A somewhat trivial comment on the Trivia section.  I doubt that Don McMillan's employee number was 36, as claimed here and in one of his videos. I started working at VLSI Technology in 1981 and my employee number was 39. My best information (based on company phone lists) is that Don started in 1985. So his number would have been much higher than 36.Tomtab (talk) 22:33, 1 August 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: I just went ahead and removed the section altogether as it was unsourced, and much more suitable information to have in McMillan's article instead (where it's already mentioned). On your information, while I have no reason to doubt you, it would unfortunately be a form original research, so we wouldn't use it. EditorInTheRye (talk) 07:02, 2 August 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: Trivia
Talk:National Railroad Museum

message: The table of cabooses is illustrated by three photographs of cabooses.  Two are identical.  I don't know enough about them to prefer one caption. J S Ayer (talk) 02:03, 22 October 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Duplicated Illustration
Talk:48th Highlanders of Canada

message: I am a former member and Commissioned Officer (1976-1989)of the 48th Highlanders of Canada (Canadian Forces Primary Reserve) and a former student (1973-1978) and Cadet Commanding Officer of what you called, "the 142nd St. Andrews Cadet Corp  . . . All Boys Cadet Academy".  I am also currently a Trustee of the St. Andrew's College Foundation.
This last statement is incorrect, ". . . and the 142nd St. Andrews Cadet Corp based in Aurora as an All Boys Cadet Academy . . ."
The proper name of the corps is, "#142 St. Andrew's Cadet Corps".  St Andrew's is not a Cadet Academy, and never has been.  It is an independent boarding school for boys in Aurora Ontario that was founded in 1899 in Toronto before its move in 1926.  The Cadet Corps became part of the school programme in 1906, and has been a part of the school ever since.  The school is however, in no way a cadet academy or military school of any sort or descrition.  Cadets is but one of the activities that is offered there.  Please refer to the school's website for more information, www.sac.on.ca.  Thank you for correcting this error.
Major John D. Stewart
Toronto, Canada
The preceding was added to the article (not talk page) on 19:08 MST, 11 January 2006 by 70.51.120.89 (Correction of two names and a misleading description.). Moved to talk page by Indefatigable 15:56, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on 48th Highlanders of Canada. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140512231549/http://pm.gc.ca/eng/news/2014/05/09/south-west-asia-theatre-honours to http://pm.gc.ca/eng/news/2014/05/09/south-west-asia-theatre-honours
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
 --Lineagegeek (talk) 00:00, 10 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified
Talk:Adolphe Adam

message: On the first radio broadcast in 1906, Fessenden actually played on his violin a song by Gounod called "Adore and Be Still", and sang the last line of it as well. He later misremembered the title as "O Holy Night", but it was clearly "Adore and Be Still": , , . The incorrect myth that it was Adam's "O Holy Night" (which Fessenden never even said or wrote) has been perpetuated over the years by various pop-culture publications, but it's just a myth. I have removed the myth from the article. Softlavender (talk) 01:12, 10 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Adam's "O Holy Night" was not played on the radio in 1906
Talk:Best-selling music artist

message: This is a section made to talk about the best selling artists and albums.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 104.219.190.70 (talk) 08:10, 9 March 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Additional Information...

message: The International Federation of the Phonographic Industry (IFPI) has just published its updated list of the 150 highest selling artists ever. IFPI has finally come up with a list of the top-selling acts in History. Its about time.
The Top 9 is as follows:
01. The Beatles 40 400,000,000 UK 60s (1962-1970) Rock/Pop Guinness/EMI 
02. Michael Jackson 14 350,000,000 US 70s-00s (1979-2009) Pop/R&B 
03. Elvis Presley 150 300,000,000 US 50s-70s (1956-1977) Country/Rock 
04. Madonna 16 275,000,000 US 80s-00s (1984-) Pop/ Dance and Techno
05. Cliff Richard 60 250,000,000 UK 50s-00s (1959-1969,1977-1979,1986-1999) Rock/Pop
06. The Rolling Stones 54 ~250,000,000 UK 60s-00s (1964-1981) Rock
07. Mariah Carey 14 230,000,000 US 90s-00s (1990-) Pop/R&B 
08. Elton John 43 ~220,000,000 UK 70s-00s (1972-1976,1989-1991,1997-) Pop
09. Celine Dion 21 220,000,000 Canada 80s-00s (1990-) Pop Music/Pop
Source: IFPI http://mjtkop.com/home/ http://www.madonna.com/
It is quite intersting this. I'm not sure whetehr we should structure the page around their list, but it could well be worth at least a mention, perhaps its own section within the page. However, I can't find this anywhere on the IFPI's webiste. Indeed, the only place I can see it referred to is on madonna's website; I think we'd need something more concrete Robdurbar 10:28, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: AH, hang on a minute - I found a webiste that said 'the IFPI are the organization that provide the WMA with their figures'; so we'd have the same problem as we do with their figures Robdurbar 10:29, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

text: This list = fake, phony MJ fans propaganda. Itisnt even an IFPI list.
Why theres so many artist missing in the list like Patti Page, Shakira, and Enrique Igleasias?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 112.198.101.97 (talk) 04:52, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  So Called "Sales List" 

message: En la lista considero que Bing Crosby debería estar entre los 2 o 3 primeros puestos el fue el artista más vendido durante varias decadas no obstante aquí  y claramente vendio mas Michael Jackson, aquí toman en consideracion la certificacion Riia pero en el caso de Crosby Decca no lo ha solicita y es injusto descartarlo de la lista.
SALUDOS. Espindolacristian (talk) 17:03, 1 April 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bing Crosny