lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Point Piper

message: Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: https://www.wyattrealty.com.au/tools/suburb-profiles/. 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, if allowed under fair use, may copy sentences and phrases, provided they are included in quotation marks and referenced properly. The material may also be rewritten, provided 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.  echidnaLives - talk - edits 07:09, 17 December 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copyright problem removed
Talk:Vaucluse, New South Wales

message: Would it help the article to include a pronunciation key? Google tells me it's pronounced Vorcluze, with the first syllable being vor-, not vow- or voe-; and the second syllable being more of a z than an s. Can any locals verify?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 114.198.125.55 (talk) 06:24, 23 March 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Correct, and as you said the z is not pronouced very strongly, listen to the pronounciation here. OSX (talk • contributions) 10:13, 23 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Pronunciation
Talk:East Sydney (locality)

message: "East Sydney" is not a real suburb but it seems like a genuine locality (e.g. there are a number of businesses in the area which have put "East Sydney" in their business name).
But the name is confusing, because the area is fairly central and not really east, and it is to the west of the Eastern Suburbs. Daceyvillain (talk) 17:29, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Confusing name
Talk:Mortlake Ferry

message: According to this article and details elsewhere, there are 10 remaining vehicular cable ferries in New South Wales. I can track down 9 of these. There are 5 ferries in the Sydney region controlled by the RTA:
*Berowra Waters Ferry
*Mortlake Ferry
*Sackville Ferry
*Webbs Creek Ferry
*Wisemans Ferry
There is also the Lower Portland Ferry, controlled by the local council rather the RTA.
Outside the Sydney region, there are a further 3 ferries controlled by the RTA:
*Lawrence Ferry, across the Clarence River
*Speewa Ferry, across the Murray River
*Wymah Ferry, across the Murray River
That leaves one ferry unaccounted for. One possibility is that Wisemans Ferry is being counted as two, on the grounds that there are two ferry boats on the same crossing. Or there may be another ferry crossing I've missed. Anybody know any more?. -- Starbois (talk) 19:17, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Well there is the Comerong Island Ferry, crossing the Berry Canal, but it is operated by the Shoalhaven council and not the RTA.  --Inas66 (talk) 00:57, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tenth ferry
Talk:Vivian Berkeley

message: This article has been tagged for external link cleanup since March of 2010, pretty justifiably so. I cleaned out all of them, since they were, for the most part, a collection of results for Berkeley's competitions and don't really belong there. The external links were functionally serving as references, since the article is otherwise unreferenced, so in case they become useful:
*Vivian Berkeley on Facebook
*Vivian Berkeley on Real Champions
*Vivian Berkeley 2006 Blind Bowlers Quadram Results, Glasgow Scotland
*Vivian Berkeley 2006 CBSA National Lawn Bowls Championships Results, Alberta Canada
*Vivian Berkeley and SVLBC Hosts Coaching Clinic for Visually Impaired in Sunnyvale, California USA, November 2006
*Vivian Berkeley 2001 to 2005 CBSA National Bowls Championships Results
*Vivian Berkeley 2004 International Paralympic Committee (IPC) World Lawn Bowls Championships Results, Kuala Lampur Malaysia
*Vivian Berkeley in City of Kitchener Access Files Newsletter, Issue 17, Spring 2004
*Vivian Berkeley 2002 Commonwealth Games Results, Manchester England
*Vivian Berkeley CBC Sports newspaper article, July 2002
*Vivian Berkeley 2002 International Paralympic Committee (IPC) World Lawn Bowls Championships Results, Adelaide Australia
*Vivian Berkeley in K-W Access-Ability Newsletter, November 1996
*Vivian Berkeley being recognized at the House of Commons for 1996 Paraympics in Atlanta USA, Transcript Ottawa Canada, October 1996
--rahaeli (talk) 15:06, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links
Talk:Football Writers' Association

message: Given that there is already a page about the FWA Footballer of the Year, listing all the winners and breaking down the results, is it not unnecessary for the list to be on this page as well? The Raincloud Kid (talk) 21:15, 1 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  FWA Footballer of the Year Award 
Talk:Amateur Football Alliance

message: It seems that the AFA's own website is wrong about the name 'Amateur Football Defence Foundation'. All of the contemporary sources use 'Federation', but it seems the organisation is actually even older than that, being formed as the 'Amateur Football Defence Council' in May 1906. I'm still collecting together sources, but if anyone else has any other insight, please say! Nzd (talk) 17:22, 9 February 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: This rather fell off my list but I have an update now. According to contemporary newspaper sources of the time, the Amateur Football Defence Council was formed in May 1906. This was renamed to the Amateur Football Defence Federation in September 1906.  In May 1907, the Amateur Football Association was formed and the existing committee of the Federation was elected to the new organisation.There is no mention of an 'Amateur Football Defence Foundation' in any of these sources, so I am assuming this to refer to the Federation.I have sent the AFA a message asking for clarification on the naming issue and that they see the previous Council/Federation as the predecessor organisation (i.e. that the formation date should be May 1906). Nzd (talk) 11:57, 5 April 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: I have now made this change based on these sources (with thanks to  for checking it over). I did get a reply from the AFA's chief exec saying he wouldn't have time to look until June/July, but this has now obviously passed. I'll drop him another note to let him know that our article now contradicts their website. If they come back with anything sourceable, I'll add it in. Nzd (talk) 23:34, 30 December 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Foundation/Federation
Talk:Cambridge University Association Football League

message: I don't believe that the individual competitions are globally important enough to warrant articles in their own right. It would be better to merge them into this article so that the information is easily available in one place. For example, it would be fairly easy to merge the results tables from all the different articles into a single table, which would look quite good. Mrh30 (talk) 14:51, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Nothing more heard, so I have completed the merge. Mrh30 (talk) 09:51, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merger proposal
Talk:Astrolabe Bay

message: Claiming that Jules Dumont d'Urville discovered Astrolabe Bay is a rather colonial point of view. He may have been the first to report on it to the 'western' societies & given the name Astrolabe Bay, but I'd say the locals had discovered it a few millenia before d'Urville was born :) 128.214.61.239 (talk) 12:25, 18 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Colonian point of view
Talk:Millwall Bushwackers

message: The article states that the original Millwall "firm" were called "F-troop". I know there is a distiction between Hooligans and Firms in some people's mind but Millwall's largest group of hooligans were,until the 1980's known as "(The) Treatment ". As for "F-squad" it seems to be have been a name made up out of thin air before the filming of a 1977 Panorama documentary on the club - this is a post directly from the "Millwall Mad" section of Millwall's online forum's:
"F Troop was a name made up in the Crown and Anchor half an hour before filming started..." - I know that this is all technically original research but it does seem relevant. 
I can't believe that this information on one of the most infamous football clubs with a hooligan element has been lost to the mists of time in just 30 odd years.I apologise for any inaccuracies and the general "scrappyness" of this comment but it's been a long time...
Robin J Thomson(Robin J Thomson (talk) 10:59, 16 May 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Is "predominantly white" correct? How many of them were black? 2A00:23C8:9C28:9A01:545:243A:A7C:36EB (talk) 20:07, 21 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Were not some of Millwall black?
Talk:Independent Manchester United Supporters Association

message: IMUSA requests that this article be DELETED - it was not created by IMUSA and is dated and inaccurate. Wikipedia editors have refused attempts to change it - IMUSA remains one of the foremost independent supporters' organisation in England - it is a vibrant, live organisation not an historical artifact - This article does not reflect that and Wikipedia editors will not allow it to be changed - Any IMUSA member reading this or anyone with an interest in IMUSA is asked to request that this article to be DELETED. Those wishing to confirm the veracity of this request - please contact comms@imusa.org RiverMonkey (talk) 01:38, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I am afraid that even though you are part of the organisation represented in this article, you do not have the authority to request its deletion on those grounds. The organisation has had sufficient coverage in reliable, third-party sources to warrant having an article; it is now our responsibility to improve the quality of the article to a reasonable standard. I have explained on your talk page that I and others are willing to help you do that, and I have also explained to you why it is inappropriate for you to do it yourself. We will help you, but it would really help your cause if you wouldn't kick off like this. – PeeJay 11:04, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Deletion request
Talk:Piano Sonata Hob. XVI/52

message: Well, if we are going to be doing pages for the Haydn Piano Sonatas, we're going to have to discuss logistics.  A page for each work, or can they somehow be grouped?  Which numbering scheme to use (to many, this is No. 62)?  DavidRF 00:40, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Haydn Piano Sonatas 

message: Who is this dedicated to?  Therese Jansen?  Can someone confirm?DavidRF (talk) 03:14, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Hello David, Karl Geiringer and Daniel Heartz's books indicate that it was "written for" Jansen, but dedicated to Magdalene von Kurzböck, the daughter of one of Haydn's publishers.  I'm not sure what "written for" means but will try to nail this down... Opus33 (talk) 01:14, 11 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks. My guess is that it was for Jansen to play.  She had considerable skill and Haydn could write more virtuosic pieces if he knew she was going to be playing.  I don't have a citation for that though.  .DavidRF (talk) 01:53, 11 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dedication 

message: Would whoever wrote "unflinching" in reference to sonata structure maybe try to clarify or reword?  Sonata form came very naturally to Haydn and it is hard to imagine him ever flinching about it.  Opus33 (talk) 16:47, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: "Unflinching"

message: In which numbering system is this No. 62? This ought to be moved back to Piano Sonata No. 52 (Haydn) urgently. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 08:23, 19 July 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: PS: I found that Landon calls it No. 62. My point still stands as nobody else does. Which recording calls it No. 62? -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 08:28, 19 July 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: A Google check indicates about twice as many references under the number 52. Opus33 (talk) 23:51, 19 July 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I've found a recording which uses Landon's system for Nos. 59 to 62 (Naxos). Still, Landon's numbering scheme seems to not be widely accepted, including in Wikipedia articles. Only three, No. 9, No. 50 and this one use it. Again, I suggest to move them all to their Hoboken numbering. After all, we are not likely to see articles on Landon's numbers 21 to 27 or 19 vs. 57. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 04:15, 20 July 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Number
Talk:National Assembly (Bulgaria)

message: In Bulgarian, there is a difference between народ and нация, resp, between народен and национален (people's and national). Народно събрание means People's Asssebmly (see, for examle Egypt). Phips, 00:40, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Name

message: BonsMans1 (talk) 05:21, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  2017 or 2021 results???
Category talk:Galicia (Eastern Europe)

message: The category should be renamed :Category:Galicia for several reasons. Central Europe is a vaguely defined region, and for the majority of our readers Lviv and its hinterland is Eastern Europe. I don't think Wikipedia should advertise contentious geographical constructs. --Ghirla-трёп- 00:45, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Eastern Europe is a term which raises even more controversies: geographically (the midpoint of Europe is in Lithuania/Belarus and half of Galicia lies in the western part of the continent) culturally (a mixture of Catholicism, Orthodoxy, Protestantism and Judaism), histrically (a part of Poland, Austria-Hungary, Russia, Germany, USSR, Ukraine), and even linguistically (Ukrainian, Polish, German, Russian...). The region is on the crossroads, therefore naming it central European is the closest to the truth as we can get - it is too far from the eastern border of Europe to be named "eastern European". We cannot move Galicia, as we suggest, to the category without geographical designation because there is already a region with the same name in Spain. Unlike central European Galicia, which is rather a historical region, Galicia in Spain is very much alive, even being a part of Spain.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Martina Moreau (talk • contribs) 20:50, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

message: The region is geographically located in central Europe. It cannot be classified as eastern European, because it is very far from the eastern border of Europe.--Martina Moreau (talk) 18:01, 16 November 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Please cite reliable sources for your assertion. Chris Troutman (talk) 21:07, 16 November 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Move to Central Europe
Talk:Western Distributor (Sydney)

message: Recently, while in Sydney I walked underneath the Western Distributor at its northern end, between Sussex and Kent streets and I could see an abandoned carriage underneath the main roadway. I am very interested in when this section of elevated freeway was used and why the top tier remains in constant use but the lower is suspended in the air; having been severed at each end.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 119.161.71.12 (talk) 22:46, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Article has been renamed with disambiguation following creation of Western Distributor (Melbourne) article. BlackCab (TALK) 09:52, 24 September 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article renamed 

message: This section has been hijacked by a persistent type who leaves no ref or explanation. I do not revert more than once to avoid hassles. Over to others who care! Downsize43 (talk) 01:49, 19 July 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  In popular culture 

message: Ono of the words ‘’’primarily’’’ and ‘’’majority’’’ seems superfluous. Downsize43 (talk) 07:33, 19 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  primarily elevated for the majority of its route
Talk:Balmain Peninsula Parks and Reserves

message: This concerns POV tag cleanup.  Whenever an POV tag is placed, it is necessary to also post a message in the discussion section stating clearly why it is thought the article does not comply with POV guidelines, and suggestions for how to improve it.  This permits discussion and consensus among editors.  From WP tag policy: Drive-by tagging is strongly discouraged. The editor who adds the tag must address the issues on the talk page, pointing to specific issues that are actionable within the content policies, namely Wikipedia:Neutral point of view, Wikipedia:Verifiability, Wikipedia:No original research and Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons. Simply being of the opinion that a page is not neutral is not sufficient to justify the addition of the tag. Tags should be added as a last resort.  Better yet, edit the topic yourself with the improvements.  This statement is not a judgement of content, it is only a cleanup of frivolously and/or arbitrarily placed tags.  No discussion, no tag.
  That's my paste, and generally off goes the tag.  This IS written like somebody's vacation postcard, though - the tag stays.Jjdon (talk) 19:08, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  POV tag 

message: Being a local i can make articles for the parks in Balmain. I can also provide photos for them. Nath1991 (talk) 04:09, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Articles for Parks.
Talk:New Skete (New York)

message: I have classified this article as a start following the addition of material to the sections on the nuns and companions. It still needs more work on the history and component orders. Capitalistroadster 01:15, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Start classification

message: The phrasing of this comment seems to reflect bias: "This openness has brought them criticism from Orthodox conservatives and traditionalists."  It is then followed by New Skete's rebuttal to the criticism.  There are a number of ideas here that a wide range of people might critique.  Criticism of New Skete that is in keeping with Wikipedia guidelines should simply be included in the article.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.245.199.129 (talk) 21:18, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bias in regards to criticism 

message: The article fails to note that the monastery was originally a Catholic Franciscan monastery (or friary) and didn't transfer to Orthodoxy until about 9 or 10 yrs into its existence, I believe that this is referenced on the wiki page of its founder, Abbott Lawrence Mancuso Irish Melkite (talk) 13:03, 6 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Origins
Talk:Carol Iannone

message: The article may be improved by following the WikiProject Biography 11 easy steps to producing at least a B article. --KenWalker | Talk 01:17, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Wikipedia:WikiProject_Biography/Assessment#Class_parameter|Biography assessment rating]] comment 

message: Generally being referred to in the New York Times = notable, so I suppose being "misrepresented" there must be the same.  See blog. --KenWalker | Talk 01:17, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Notability

message: This article has been reverted by a bot to  as part of a large-scale clean-up project of multiple article copyright infringement. (See the investigation subpage) This has been done to remove User:Accotink2's contributions as they have a history of extensive copyright violation and so it is assumed that all of their major contributions are copyright violations. 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. VWBot (talk) 06:21, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copyright problem
Talk:Laurence Mancuso

message: I have classified this article as a start due to its level of detail. There is room for expansion especially on Mancuso's early life and career. Capitalistroadster 01:19, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Start classification

message: What is more appropriate? Town or village? --Ruziklan (talk) 17:29, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cambridge, New York
Talk:Near–far problem

message: This is as said just an analogy, in fact a human is very capable of filtering out loud sounds from other sounds, and sometimes the solution to not hearing your friend would be to actually turn up the stereo, results may vary.
Does this make any sense? --Tmegee 01:33, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

message: I don't think of Near-Far as being related to SNR.  When you add noise to a message, the receiver's rate of detecting the wrong symbol will increase.  Near-Far comes into to play when a strong signal saturates the ADC (or other part of the signal chain).  The information is not obscured by noise, but the receiver lacks the dynamic range to pull out the information.  It is vaguely like SNR in that the receiver's AGC will cut back gain to prevent saturation causing the weak signal to fall into the "noise" (i.e. beyond the resolution of the ADC) of the ADC, but that's not the same thing as noise from one signal onto another.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cgervasi (talk • contribs) 17:41, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is Near-Far Related to Signal to Noise
Talk:Chermoula

message: The image is not of Chermoula, so it needs to be labelled informatively.  Although it would be better to show charmoula in a dish or something that would actually portray the subject of the article.  Keep the current one to illustrate a dish made using it.
Also, Chermoula is not a course in a meal, it is a condiment or marinade used to prepare/eat food, so that should come out.
And its main ingredient is definitely not fish.  You may use it with fish, but there is no fish in it.  
It probably would be best to skip all those image categories since they don't apply.  Perhaps you could use the Other category and say a "mixture of herbs, spices and oil," or something along those lines.  Zlama (talk) 03:09, 10 October 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  image
Talk:Quatre épices

message: Removed this recipe from the article, as Wikipedia is not a cookbook. Geoff Who, me?  01:28, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recipe removed from article
Talk:Kalimba

message: The language of this article seems too poetic for an encyclopaedia text. Reflections about intuition and notes mapping are unnecessary (although what the author says is true). What do you think? Ivan.Lt (talk) 04:15, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

message: I just want to commend the contributors who made this page as nice as it is,
and to offer one minor but important suggestion: whenever you put a 5-line staff
in for an example, the note heads don't mean anything in terms of pitch until you
also include a clef. In this case, it's almost obvious that what's intended was a
treble (G) clef, but it's much better form to explicitly include the clef than to
omit it. This is coming from a professional musician who's been reading music since
childhood. Some rules are unbreakable in written (western) notation. FYI I am equally
critical of rhythmic notation, which tends to be even looser in construction.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fjeinca (talk • contribs) 01:54, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Comments 

message: I too think that Thumb piano should be part of the kalimba artical A.K.A. thumb piano or something  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.42.157.90 (talk) 00:38, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Thumb piano