lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Europe

message: There is error Cyprus is not included in the map but its included in the list of countries so either add Cyprus to the map or remove Cyprus from the list of countries 71.169.176.83 (talk) 22:00, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: I stopped counting maps at 14, would you mind posting the filename of the one you're referring to?  - FlightTime (open channel) 22:39, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: They are the 2 maps on top the file names are https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Europe_orthographic_Caucasus_Urals_boundary_(with_borders).svg and https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Europe_orthographic_Caucasus_Urals_boundary.svg 71.169.176.83 (talk) 22:42, 7 April 2024 (UTC)

text: Note: The list also contains countries such as Turkey and Kazakhstan. Both of which have some territory in Europe but are largely considered Asian. User:CanonNi (talk|contribs) 23:53, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: The article explains the different conceptions of "Europe", obviously these conceptions don't align perfectly. CMD (talk) 04:16, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 7 April 2024 

message: The "Name" section reads confusedly, without a proper flow or connection between the various statements. The first paragraph seems to imply, without making the development of meaning clear, that "Europe" derives from "Evros", as a fact. The explanation then restarts with reference to "Europa", with no explanation of how, if at all, this is related to what was previously said. It's all a bit muddled. If there are various theories then the section needs to begin by saying this. There are various theories, which are ... etc. etc. Also, there is a typo "it self" for "itself". 2A00:23C8:7B0C:9A01:7CE5:FD55:FD59:E88 (talk) 22:45, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Confusing explanation of etymology 

message: Wiki if you're mentioning the caucasian countries Georgia ans Azerbaijan ,  why not mentioned the 3 rd republic "Armenia" . Sarocard (talk) 02:50, 4 June 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Armenia is mentioned at a couple of points in the article. CMD (talk) 04:27, 4 June 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Europe page
Talk:Ecuador

message: == Cordero kidnapping ==
There is no mention of th e1987 Cordero kidnapping.199.127.133.181 (talk) 21:21, 8 October 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  The largest city of Ecuador in 2019 

message: There is no mention of th e1987 Cordero kidnapping.199.127.133.181 (talk) 21:21, 8 October 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cordero kidnapping 

message: Some dates are still displayed in mdy format in this article even if the dates should be in dmy, according to the template. I also can't locate the CIA ref, so it makes changing this article harder. Romer234 (talk) 12:25, 17 November 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: sure Bhater13cm (talk) 15:10, 15 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Standardization 

message: Template:Largest cities of Ecuador has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. --Triggerhippie4 (talk) 09:59, 6 December 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: sure Bhater13cm (talk) 15:10, 15 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nomination for deletion of "Template:Largest cities of Ecuador" 

message: The 2022 Census figures were just released https://app.powerbi.com/view?r=eyJrIjoiNWUzMjQwOWMtZjFhOS00NjczLTk0YTItNjcwZmRmY2YxMjkyIiwidCI6ImYxNThhMmU4LWNhZWMtNDQwNi1iMGFiLWY1ZTI1OWJkYTExMiJ9. The data indicates that Guayaquil is still Ecuador's largest city, and supersedes previous projections by Ecuador's National Institute of Statistics and Censuses that estimated that Quito had more inhabitants than Guayaquil by 2019. In addition to this, all population values (national and subnational) need to be updated to reflect the latest available data. I tried to do it, but the census data link was blacklisted for some reason. Cello0894 (talk) 01:04, 22 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Census 2022 results
Talk:Estonia

message: The avoidance of any mention of Soviet suppression of religion is so startling as to raise the suspicion of propaganda. 伟思礼 (talk) 04:22, 15 December 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: @伟思礼 Conversely, it may be due to the absence of reliable sources. —C.Fred (talk) 04:24, 15 December 2023 (UTC)

text: Lithuania was also under soviet domination but stay majorly christian... Respublica1810 (talk) 12:46, 1 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Religion 

message: Jesus christ, is that too hard? It will solve the North Europe or Eastern Europe issue. Undashing (talk) 22:01, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why can't we just call them Northeastern Europe? 

message: The redirect Palojärv 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.  Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 17:09, 22 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  "[[:Palojärv]]" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]] 

message: Following the example of the article about Lithuania, change the tab "Independence from Russia and Germany" to "Formation" and by adding the first mention of Estonia as Aestii with the addition of a link to the tab 'Early Middle Ages' in the article 'History of Estonia. Pronto20 (talk) 23:04, 24 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Change tab "Independence from Russia and Germany" to Formation 

message: The redirect Palojärv (disambiguation) 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.  signed, Rosguill talk 20:18, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  "[[:Palojärv (disambiguation)]]" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]]
Talk:English language

message: Seriously look how much more informative it was a few months ago.
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=English_language&oldid=1150213565 Somarain (talk) 22:47, 22 September 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: A lot of that went into the History section, as the lead section was becoming overcrowded. Wolfdog (talk) 11:55, 21 October 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Overcrowded how? We have no problem with the Battle of Gettysburg having a long lede because it's important. Why is it so important that the international language has the same length as Togo and Icelandic? Somarain (talk) 01:16, 8 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why did the lede get gimped? 

message: If someone is reading an entire article written in English about English, do they really need a two-sentence sample of the English language? Doesn't this entire article serve as a "sample" due to being written in English? It's almost like it's pretending not to be written in English when it obviously is. Eightos (talk) 02:38, 27 March 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that that's ridiculous. Can be deleted unless someone has some compelling reason we can't think of. Wolfdog (talk) 13:03, 27 March 2024 (UTC)
replies: text:    signed, Willondon (talk)  14:21, 27 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is the UDHR sample really necessary? 

message: The source that is used to confirm the number of English words is described as a 1989 Oxford English Dictionary, and links to an archived page. This needs to be updated. Also, I think that the English vocabulary's famous designation as the largest in the world should be addressed here. Norabur (talk) 02:39, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Although I've heard of this designation in pop culture, do we have an actual credible source/study that supports the claim? Wolfdog (talk) 16:38, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Source updates for vocab section 

message: Change "United States of America" to "United States" 4.39.220.106 (talk) 18:13, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: signed, Willondon (talk)  18:19, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 13 May 2024
Talk:Euphemism/Archive 1

message: I removed in doublespeak section: 
:"computer-implemented invention for computer program, or programming method, as used by EU governmental officials to legitimize software patents, which are specifically prohibited by the European Patent Convention but which they seek to legalize."
It is wrong to say that all software patent are specifically prohibited by the European Patent Convention or de jure excluded from patentability under the European Patent Convention: only "computer programs as such" (see Software patent under the European Patent Convention for more information). Especially, once a invention is implemented on a computer, it is not merely an algorithm anymore and the invention is linked to the real physical world, it may present a technical character and is then not de jure excluded (even if it should pass the inventive step requirement). The expression  "Computer-implemented invention" is totally appropriate and is not a doublespeak. --Edcolins 22:16, Nov 3, 2004 (UTC)
::While I agree that the original wording is quite partisan, computer-implemented invention is clearly doublespeak, used exactly to smooth-over the (NPOV-speaking) gray area of software patents. Any program becomes a computer-implemented invention if it's implemented on a computer -- which happens for pretty much any program, and is the least-creative part of the job (it could even be OCR'd). It's just like saying that the contents of a DVD are not information once it's broadcasted on TV, since it's now connected to the real world. Perhaps a rewording should be re-added (it seems to me that simply removing this is not NPOV).
----
I've removed the Doublespeak entry -
"polemic for someone having a fixed position, who is not liked and can't be denounced by other means such as refuting"
- because it's inaccurate (polemic is not and never has been a euphemism, and if it were it still couldn't be a euphemism for a kind of person), whiny ("I don't like you"), and anti-intellectual ("why do people disagree with me?"),  but if I'm in error and someone can justify its inclusion, then please explain the inclusion to me, because I just can't see it. --Chips Critic 03:17, 27 Dec 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Computer-implemented invention
Talk:Eulers number

message: is a number, a fundamental object of mathematics.  
Each section of the article should be accessible to the widest, curious, audience possible.
The nature of curiosity of this sort is not capricious. 
Hilbert's gravestone says it even better: "We can know.  We will know."
Mathematics is a word coined by Pythagorus meaning 'that which is learned'
(according to The Mystery of the Aleph by Amir Aczel p.14.)
Specifically in my (now missing) case, Kronecker in is book On the Concept of Number 
attempted to banish from math what he regarded as unnecessary levels of abstraction,
"anything... that could not be derived from integers is a finite number of steps"
(according to John Derbyshire in Prime Obsession p. 185.)
While recalling Kurt Gödel's proof that proof theory is deniable, 
and therefore that all of math is unprovable, 
I ask simply to play the game that it is, and to add to it.
Thus I wish to continue the now missing discussion I started concerning the short section Stochastic representations please. Where is the archive for the last talk page?  Removing it was a careless mistake. The purpose of my missing discussion was to expand the article's audience.  — CpiralCpiral 21:27, 12 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Delete this discussion
Talk:Existentialism

message: Given that Simone de Beauvoir was a major influence on existential thought it's strikingly odd to put 4 men in the image in the lead up to the subject.   Macgroover (talk) 04:58, 16 February 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I second this and suggest de Beauvoir replace Dostoevsky. Patrick J. Welsh (talk) 03:57, 25 February 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I came here to suggest the same in relation to major global influences on this school of thought (e.g.,I wrote a small section on black existentialism).  I would further recommend the image in question be removed until a more accurate and representative picture can be found. Otherwise let us leave it blank and rather link to individual pages - non representation should never be a lazy default, especially since it is misleading and inaccurate. Archaeoknowlogy (talk) 15:28, 5 September 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed – I added a new version with Dostoevsky replaced by de Beauvoir. It uses , since I couldn't be bothered to make a proper collage myself. Not sure if there's any disadvantage to doing it this way. Jhvx (talk) 13:03, 13 September 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Good.The page needs to diversify; it is too narrowly focused on European thought. This page is about 'Existentialism', not 'European Existentialism'. Archaeoknowlogy (talk) 14:02, 13 September 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Why Beauvior to replace Dostoevskij instead of Sartre? I think French are overrepresented 151.57.134.52 (talk) 02:50, 30 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Four men in the image  

message: Giacomo Leopardi was 19th, not 20th century... looks like he got added late to this list at some point? 185.104.139.72 (talk) 17:35, 18 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Leopardi
Talk:Esperanto

message: The "Linguistic properties" section is generally ordered by increasing scope. I would expect "Vocabulary" to fall between Orthography and Grammar. Similarly, I would expect "Simple phrases" to precede "Sample texts".  Dotyoyo (talk) 20:22, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Linguistic properties subsection ordering 

message: :
I believe Zagreb was the capital of Croatia then too, and would prefer 
:
or, even better, omit any direct mention of Croatia or Yugoslavia, whose relevance is not obvious. That's what links are for. —Tamfang (talk) 18:52, 8 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Zagreb 

message: :
Kaj Tiel Plu ('and so forth', literally 'and thus more') appears to be the name of a performing group, not a work.  Either way, the sentence could be clearer. —Tamfang (talk) 00:43, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: By the way, there exists :eo:Kategorio:Esperantaj muzikaj grupoj. —Tamfang (talk) 00:45, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  KTP 

message: : When did Ayatollah Khomeini recommend Esperanto as a international language?
: When was the Esperanto Koran published?
: Is Esperanto still used in Iran, especially in Qom?
MountVic127 (talk) 04:25, 28 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Islam
Talk:Electronics

message: Should avionics be considered a principle branch of electronics, or simply the application of electronics to one particular field? Just as we don't list Automotive electronics, Marine electronics, Consumer electronics or Audio electronics as principle branches, I don't believe avionics should be considered a principle branch either. Meters (talk) 22:18, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Avionics]] 

message: What is electronic particles 131.226.103.53 (talk) 07:52, 30 August 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Does this help? ~Kvng (talk) 14:30, 6 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tle
Talk:Electromagnetic radiation

message: observed electromagnetic waves from the sky as evidence by marabu birds forming circular clouds oscillation west to east then back west 
cited: F.O.O 
         Farnado Ochieng Odhiambo  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 105.161.102.41 (talk) 15:55, 17 August 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Electromagnetic radiation 

message: This section improperly conflates two completely different types of interference.1.72.4.68 (talk) 23:56, 18 August 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Which section, and care to elaborate? VQuakr (talk) 00:33, 19 August 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Electromagnetic interference 

message: — Assignment last updated by AOXQueen (talk) 14:19, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: Science Communication

message: There is an overwhelming majority of representations of light that are polar. But it would be very beneficial to have more discussion of nonpolar or circularly polarized light that give a more whole view of the concept. I would like to request someone make a representation of the circularly polarized light figure with the magnetic field also included. Psi-Archimedes (talk) 17:55, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  enhancing imagery and demonstration of circularly polarized light 

message: Regarding this sentence in the page: "EM waves carry energy, momentum and angular momentum away from their source particle and can impart those quantities to matter with which they interact."
In trying to figure out a reality for myself, being 70kg of mass, and wondering how E=MC2 relates, any description or definition of energy and how it relates to electromagnetic waves constantly seems to produce tautologies, such as what I quote from the sentence above.  A definition of something can't be tautological, i.e., the saying of the same thing twice over in different words.  
If energy is defined as electromagnetic radiation, then how can "electromagnetic waves carry energy" without it being a tautology? Angwhit (talk) 12:37, 20 September 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Easy.  Energy is not defined as electromagnetic radiation. Constant314 (talk) 12:51, 20 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Electromagnetic waves and energy: tautologies abound 

message: Electro magnetic wages class 12th 2409:40F0:102F:E17F:D0DB:D2FF:FECC:A872 (talk) 06:23, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Electro magnetic waves
Talk:Environmental organization

message: Note that List of environmental organisations topics (before redirect) was redirected here, to Environmental organizations, after its AfD was closed 'no consensus', which defaults to Keep. Another editor may wish to restore it, but I think it needs work before being restored. As I noted in the AfD, it is superior to List of environmental issues in that it lists nearly four times as many articles. Anarchangel (talk) 06:37, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hidden page 

message: Perhaps add this quote to the page:
The long and the short of Roger - The Science Show - ABC Radio National (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)
:* absolutely, The quote I heard was “You know, I have often thought that at the end of the day, we would have saved more wildlife if we had spent all WWF’s money on buying condoms.”  It shows that he was thinking about it a lot.  Gregkaye (talk) 21:26, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Add quote ?

message: Removed the weird assertion / generalisation that environment organisations have trouble managing their finances. Cited reference was dodgy. I believe the comment is too broad to be relevant and removes neutrality of the article particularly when other content is so sparse.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ethel the aardvark (talk • contribs) 01:37, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Weird assertion

message: I removed the history section for the following reasons 1) Gave immensely undue weight to the Sierra club, even though the history of environmentalism is very complicated and had many important actors. 2) Made the history seem much simpler than it was. 3) Relied entirely on a self published source. 
I believe entirely that this article should have a history section, but I think the one that existed didn't belong on Wikipedia. I won't be able to write this section without significant research, and would appreciate someone who is knowledgeable on the topic doing so, or at least dropping off some sources. Toad02 (talk) 13:46, 29 July 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removed history section 

message: I deleted the politics section for the following reasons. 1) Was unclear exactly how environmental groups interacted with political organizations. 2) Contained a lot of unrelated information. 3) Lacked any citations.
I propose creating a section called "methods" that talks about how environmental groups do things, (including lobbying). Toad02 (talk) 13:49, 29 July 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Deleted politics section 

message: The article is of course too short and not clear. What is meant by an Environmental Organization. Examples are good, but Definitions are better. This article from "The Conversation" is very useful, especially for International Governmental level. I have no time to include the useful information in the article, therefore I share it here. 
--Ai24 (talk) 06:55, 6 August 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Many Definitions needed
Talk:Evolutionary psychology

message: A statement in this article uses www.heretical.com as a reference.  This is a white supremicist site run by convicted Holocaust-denier Simon_Sheppard_(activist), which among other things blames Jews and feminism for just about everything wrong with western society.  I've recently removed a large chunk of text from the Suffragette article that made wild claims and was sourced solely to this site.  In this article, there are other references as well, so I recommend someone who knows more about the subject have a look and make sure the claims are supported by more reliable sources.  This applies to Sociobiological_theories_of_rape, Evolutionary_psychology and New_Orphan_Houses,_Ashley_Down,_Bristol. Iapetus (talk) 10:08, 19 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  VERY dubious source 

message: The current state of this page is misleading.
Editors are using this page to push politics and suppressing relevant edits. ApoliticalFactChecker (talk) 21:16, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Misleading 

message: This topic is misleading.
The "ethics" discussion revolves around political positions and concerns belonging to pure philosophy and to human sciences but not to natural sciences.
The discussion on ethics uses a fallacy fallacy to attack EP, and naturally since it is fallacious also the whole matter falls into infinite regression.
Editors are pushing views under the allegation a reliable source has not been presented to necessary edits, when it was, however initially mischaracterized.
Prescriptive, not descriptive, ethical positions do not concern natural sciences. EP doesn't make or promote prescriptive ethics or values.
If third parties make prescriptive claims utilizing EP the third parties themselves should be addressed, an not EP on malicious, unrelated and incompatible philosophical grounds. ApoliticalFactChecker (talk) 21:44, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Instead of continually making vague complaints like this, both here and at Talk:Criticism of evolutionary psychology, you need to get specific. Either add reliably sourced material - and no unsourced commentary - or else make a case that existing material misrepresents relevant sources or uses unreliable sources. I am by no means anti-evolutionary psychology; but you need to stick to what sources say. Editors' personal opinions are not relevant. Crossroads -talk- 22:51, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  NPOV 

message: — Assignment last updated by Joyb3 (talk) 21:46, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: Psychology Capstone
Talk:Emma Goldman

message: Seems like it. I bet there are more recent anarchist writers (as in from around her death to today or so) who cite her as an influence. Sadly, I'm not exactly some scholar on anarchism. I was able to think of Bookchin, though. VintageVernacular (talk) 18:58, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: @VintageVernacular, please see the instructions at Template:infobox philosopher. It says  Schazjmd (talk) 19:09, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: The template also states "only add entries which are explained and cited in the body of the article (or cited here)", suggesting that those who are added to the influenced list and cited may be included. Noe Ito is currently included and mentioned only in the infobox, with a citation. :3 F4U (they/it) 20:05, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Influenced" list underpopulated? 

message: I performed some edits tonight to the "Inciting to riot" section of the article. Most of the edits were copyediting; however, I also edited the statement that she studied medicine when, in fact, most WP:RS (which I added to support my edit) state that she in fact informally studied nursing in prison, which, while having some overlap with medicine, is distinct.Wikipedialuva (talk) 03:51, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nursing and my edits to the "Inciting to riot" section