lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Mushu

message: Soooo... anybody have any ideas how to take care of the glaring in-universe problems throughout this article?  I have some ideas, but it's just such a mess (from an outsider's point-of-view) that I'm not quite sure where to start.  Thoughts, please? Orethrius (talk) 13:05, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: An additional thought: one of the major, MAJOR issues here is that the Kingdom Hearts section (and, perhaps, the entire article, insofar as the movies go) is going to rely on the games as a primary source.  Unless there's mass media coverage of Mushu's abilities in the games (and I must admit, I haven't checked that out yet), the game manuals don't provide any help beyond the basic concept of Summon Magic. Of course, I'm not one to think that WP:OR need be invoked unless "facts" are entered into the page that can't at least be sourced back to the original media. :) Orethrius (talk) 13:31, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Further note: As I lack a copy of the media in question, the best I can do here involves putting in-universe information into an out-of-universe style.  Somebody with actual copies of the media will need to verify the authenticity of information in this article (and, perhaps, add a reference to the media that should contain this information). Orethrius (talk) 13:34, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  *plexes hands at temple* 

message: I really like the referencing used over at Universe of Kingdom Hearts.  Perhaps this is a direction this article could take with the appropriate media? Orethrius (talk) 13:39, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Referencing Style
Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Peter Weibel

message: as far as I know he has nothing to do with the Viennese Activism
—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 83.145.211.110 (talk • contribs).
:Given that at no point was there any claim that he was, I have no idea of the significance of this comment, made long after this discussion was over. - Jmabel | Talk 06:32, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Aha! The reference is to Vienna Actionism, an artistic movement with which he was associated. I believe that you have misread. - Jmabel | Talk 06:34, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
Talk:Europalia

message: Article created to provide additional information on European culture. Pvosta 19:23, 25 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: What is Europalia? Is it a treaty? An Organisation? An institution? An event? CuriousOliver (talk) 16:11, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  What is Europalia? 

message: Who established it? CuriousOliver (talk) 16:13, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Established by whom?
Category talk:Chinese Wikipedians

message: Keep expanding the subcategory "Chinese Wikipedians", and see if it ends somewhere. --Sandycx (Talk) 03:37, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Should Chinese ethnicity also be a subcategory?  It would be relevant to Chinese ancestry.--Einmyria 02:12, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  This category is an infinite loop 

message: There are plenty of overseas Chinese all over the world. Like me, I want a template of overseas Chinese. Cheers! A-yao 15:00, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Add this userbox to your userpage.  Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 17:05, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I added it to the main page.--Einmyria 02:11, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Overseas Chinese

message: Because of the way genes spread themselves through populations, something like 90% of the population of England are said to be descendants of, among others, Henry VIII.
 
I would have thought that the entire human race alive today would be descendants of Shennong and Huang Di.
 
The grand^n-parenthood of the dragon might be in somewhat greater doubt.
 
David Lloyd-Jones (talk) 01:44, 11 September 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  這個用戶是炎黃子孫。 This user is a descendant of Shennong and Huang Di.
Wikipedia talk:Images for blocking

message: Is there a special technical ability to do this here, or would we basically be creating a local protected page with the same name? Night Gyr (talk/Oy) 20:31, 25 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Method

message: My suggestion is that we use the existing processes that we have right now.  If an image would qualify for speedy deletion if it were hosted here, then it may be speedy blocked.  For example, vandalism-only images, recreations of previously deleted material, etc, may be speedy blocked.  Anything that is not a candidate for speedy blocking (eg, bad maps), can be handled on IFD.  Right now, if someone nominates a commons image for deletion, we usually just inform the person that Wikipedia has no power to delete the image, point them to :Commons:Commons:deletion requests, and move on with life.  But there's no reason that we couldn't handle that as a blocking request.  By using the existing processes, we keep it simple. BigDT 22:35, 25 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Are you suggesting to expand this policy by an option of speedy blocking? If yes, please add the corresponding section into the policy page. `'mikkanarxi 02:45, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  One suggestion: there's no need for instruction creep 

message: Is this even possible in the current version of the software? If not, perhaps you should speak to some devs first? >Radiant< 14:15, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Technically 

message: Is this policy necessary? I am having trouble seeing the problem here. If an image from Commons is added to an article to which contributes nothing or violates NPOV or whatever, it can simply be reverted like any other edit. Concensus as to approptiate pictures can be arrived at on the talkpage. Editors not abiding by this would risk blocks for disruption. If the picture cannot possibly be put to any practical use it is likely to fail the criteria for inclusion at Commons and its deletion can be requested at Commons:Deletion requests. Are there any particular examples of incidents where the ability to request a block of an image from Commons would have been particularly helpful? WJBscribe (WJB talk) 03:15, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The biggest reason for it (really, the only reason) is that if the bad image list (MediaWiki:Bad image list) continues to grow, there will be a performance hit with it.  But since the technical ability is there, the more I think about it, I don't know that a proposal is needed - if the bad image list grows too large, we can just do it. There's no formal process for adding something to the bad image list now ... so there wouldn't really need to be for blocking images, either. --BigDT 03:39, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Necessary
Talk:SpellForce: The Order of Dawn

message: Just written in the vast content of this article.
Feel free to give me any tips, or fix it up, as this is my first serious contribution to WP.
Bazarnz 07:57, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Untitled 

message: Isn't it written "SpellForce" with a capital F?--84.73.219.50 18:21, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It does seem to be spelled that way, but its easier read spellforce, if someone feels that it should be SpellForce, they can update both this and its sequal, but i feel it reads easier without itI did alter the article's page title however --Bazarnz 14:32, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Spelling of SpellForce 

message: Obviously this game is real-time. However, would you consider this game otherwise similar to Shining Force, Fire Emblem, or even Rome: Total War? SharkD (talk) 04:10, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, could be. But... what this question has to the shape of article ? Sir Lothar (talk) 05:43, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm wondering if I should add the game series to the list/category of TRPGs. I haven't played the game personally, so I'd like some input. SharkD (talk) 07:14, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: AFAIK it fits to RTS category + cRPG genre :), Sir Lothar (talk) 07:51, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I have played the game, and I would say it perfectly fits the description "tactical RPG" or "strategic RPG". 83.160.172.189 (talk) 04:22, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Game similarity

message: Hokan never planned on bringing Zarach and Nor to Eo, his plan was to merge with Belial and then absorb Ereon's soul to become a God and walk the earth as the new God of Death.
Also, Hokan was wearing the mask looong before he joined the Circle.
I'm not sure what kind of misinformed person wrote all that, but it has been fixed.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.202.147.36 (talk) 16:59, 23 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Misleading plot in the Shadow of the Phoenix section
Talk:Vendyl Jones

message: the link to the The Vendyl Jones Research Institute is dead. should someone remove the link? IsraelXKV8R (talk) 20:41, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: This is a vanity page which should be remove entirely. 173.217.145.196 (talk) 06:26, 12 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Web site dead 
Wikipedia talk:Requests for adminship/DRosenbach

message: User:DRosenbach
      run at Mon Dec 25 19:35:39 2006 GMT
Category:	6
Image:	15
Mainspace	607
Talk:	4
User talk:	18
User:	4
Wikipedia:	7
avg edits per article	2.26
earliest	03:33, 21 July 2005
number of unique articles	292
total	661
Editcount generated using Interiot's wannabe Kate's Tool AQu01rius (User • Talk) 19:38, 25 December 2006 (UTC)
Talk:All of a Sudden I Miss Everyone

message: A simple redirect from the incorrect title All of a Sudden, I Miss Everyone was created.--69.243.90.174 19:39, 25 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Stirrup (disambiguation)

message: I've done nothing about the dict-def-ophilic abuse of the main section of this Dab, but what brought me to this page is Jock Stirrup.  Covering people with his surname solely by a section-less lk to List of people by name: Sti, and misrepresenting it via quasi-piping as List of people by name: Stirrup are outrageous. Because
# There's only one damn name there.
# There's no reasonable expectation of more two damn names being there. (There is only one article on anyone named Stirrup, and only one rd-lk for an elementary school named after another, and only two n-n mentions of others; see the comments embedded in [[Stirrup (disambiguation)#See also].])
# The lk that was used would take the user not to where his name is visible, but to the top of the page, two screen-sized sections above his name.
# Even the lk List of people by name: Sti#Stir - Stit would do the same when enuf Stir..., Stis..., or Stit... names turn up to force subdivision of that section (and abolition of that heading).
# Even tho i I just pre-emptively singled out that section for accelerated expansion with names from :Category:Living people, making resubdivision desirable and thereby making its new section Stir.  which If further subdivided, it will survive and have subsections (relatively easily reachable from its heading). But even with that improvement in the situation, Stia... thru Stiq... names may eventually force subdivision of the page, landing Stirrup on, say, List of people by name: Stir - Stiz or List of people by name: Stir, so the lk will go to the wrong page.
In a line, such use of LoPbN lks is a bad thing, almost as bad as including a search-lk under "External links".
My bottom line is that i made the LoPbN lk less bad by better targeting it, and by making it (currently) redundant to the direct lk to the bio, but i'm not going to resist the LoPbN lk's removal or say more in its defense than "some people like these, and this one happens to now be among the least likely to go bad". And the Jock Stirrup lk 
# is more useful than the LoPbN one for most users, 
# ameliorates the harm of the LoPbN lk,
# is needed for reasonable access, and 
# is harmless here even if there is some kind of meaningful problem on other Dab pages bcz of too many surname lks.--Jerzy•t 19:41, 25 & 01:49, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Stirrup as Surname
Talk:Flanimals

message: How are the flanimals series for children? There's strong suicide, homocide, molestation, and nudity issues throughout the books. I think they;re more of a teenage thing basically 82.18.180.58
:Actually Ricky Gervais tries to put the world of evolution in a very nice way to children. I am not a teenager, I am more than 25 years old and I find it very very amusing. If you don't find "Psquirm - p is not silent" or "this creature is so slow that it is slower than a still creature " etc funny, I don't think you should be reading these 'devastating' books anyway! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.17.111.39 (talk) 07:07, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Children's Book

message: I think we should make a complete list of the flanimals introduced in this book.
Not an anon anymore!!!! Yeah!!!! 18:58, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  List 

message: Should they be merged in to a "List of flanimals" article? YOWUZA TALK 2 ME! 16:03, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  A couple of flanimals have separate articles 

message: It's patently obvious to anyone who is familiar with Gervais and who sees these books that the humour arises solely from the fact that something so ridiculously bad could get published simply because of the name behind it.  In that respect it is quite a funny joke, but has he ever actually admitted this anywhere so it could be included in the article?  Or would the backlash from the people who paid money for these and were consequently the butt of the joke be too much?
Aredbeardeddwarf (talk) 12:13, 26 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Purpose
Talk:Book parts

message: The above is to be distinguished. We are not concerned here with "How to make a book." Rather, we are concerned here with "What is a book", and with "What are the parts of a book. --Ludvikus 19:48, 25 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Book design]] 

message: The Chicago Manual of style has the above reference. It has no reference to "book design." --Ludvikus 22:21, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Book parts]] 

message: Please see merge discussion at Talk:Book design. Thanks. —Quiddity 02:38, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge 

message: Aside from the need for some copy-editing, the article has a lot of duplication of wikilinks, is sometimes unclear in its explanations, and fails to distinguish between usage in different parts of the world.  I've cleaned up some of the WP:MOS problems with headers, etc., but more needs doing. --Mel Etitis  (Μελ Ετητης) 10:19, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: What's your position regarding Merge with Book design? Ludvikus 15:08, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Clean-up 

message: *In the United States the Standard Work on Style is the Chicago Manual of Style. It recognizes that every America book has exactly Three Parts.
*Accordingly, as the author of the Stub herein, it was my intent to give as complete an analysis of the chronological nature of a book, as one opens it, and leaves through its pages, from Front to Back. That "Book parts" idea is given in said manual.
*Furthermore, each specific element was/is to have its own description (not merely a list).
*As an esthetically pleasing writer yourself (in my opinion, from what I've read elsewhere - except for the reference to that "Bristol ... Chart"), Administrator Mel Etitis, I would most certainly welcome your support in this project.
*The idea was/is focused on US books - I do not have any Reference on other countries. I do know, for example, that the Contents of a book go in the back, rather than front, in certain parts of European. 
*Also, as you are aware, Administrator Etitis, User:Dicklyon wishes to Merge. What's your position on that?
Furthermore, I thank you for your cleanup here. --Ludvikus 15:30, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Three Parts of a Book
Category talk:Bibliographies by subject

message: The request to populate this category is not a request to throw random articles into it! A great number of the articles that have been added belong, instead, in :Category:Bibliographies by writer. Someone is going to need to clean that back up. - Jmabel | Talk 19:55, 25 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Request to populate

message: I have a large subject bibliography to add to WP. It will be my 1st one, is there a standard format? I have looked at a dozen or so and can't glean a definitive standard. I am leaning towards a sortable table. EraserGirl (talk) 21:30, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: anyone home?

message: I removed the notice saying that this is a container category. I did that so I could more easily merge :Category:Lists of books by topic with this category. RockMagnetist (talk) 17:53, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Container category
Talk:List of rotoscoped works

message: This list may be belong to more projects than Films. Hoverfish Talk 20:01, 25 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: This article doesn't have any references. Entries need to have some kind of link verifying that the work in question was, in fact, rotoscoped. Otherwise, they must be progressively removed. --Eyrian 17:09, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You want everything referenced? How about going to IMDb and looking for "rotoscope" credits and "rotoscope artists" in the credits? I can add links to these pages but it seems a bit pointless as a lot of articles actually mention that they are rotoscoped or contain rotoscoped scenes. Tartan 22:58, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, it's not really the big films I'm concerned about, it's the smaller stuff. --Eyrian 01:01, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

text: Imdb is not a reliable source, and external links are also not an acceptable way to include references in any case. ~TPW 16:39, 21 August 2023 (UTC)

text: This article is awful. A huge number of the films listed were not rotoscoped. Here's an article explaining the difference between rotoscope and reference, which is what a lot of these films have: Rotoscope vs. Reference. It does cite Thumbelina, as well as mentioning Gulliver's Travels and Lord of the Rings. But I am removing a few films from the list (including Princess and the Frog despite it's citation; again, the citation is NOT talking about rotoscoping). 66.214.242.147 (talk) 02:31, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I also removed Beowulf and Polar Express, being that they are motion capture. Motion capture is also not rotoscope. Honestly, I think this article should be deleted and started from scratch. 66.214.242.147 (talk) 02:35, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unreferenced 

message: The short film A Computer Animated Hand was made using 3D geometry and motion capture which i see it as a 3D equivalent of rotoscoping. Should it be added to the list? 94.180.48.0 (talk) 09:58, 22 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Can geometry + motion capture be considered 3D equivalent of rotoscoping?
Talk:Damien Dante Wayans

message: He made in appearance in that show too. Shouldn't that be mentioned in the article? I mean, he is Keenen Ivory Wayans nephew... Power level (Dragon Ball) 20:05, 25 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: He never appeared on ILC. You may be confusing him with Shawn Wayans. --EndlessDan 19:29, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[In Living Color]]
Talk:Clan MacDonell of Glengarry

message: I believe the article should be moved to Clan Macdonell of Glengarry, which seems to be the recognised name of the clan. See:  "23rd Chief of Macdonell of Glengarry". The Standing Council of Scottish Chiefs website doesn't seem to have its act together for this clan, for nothing is listed, .--Celtus (talk) 07:39, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Move article
Talk:Package film

message: I'm not convinmced this is the same as a Compilation movie. RJFJR 17:00, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I have added a lot of commentary on the topic of a potential merger between this article and anthology film at this talk page. I think we are in need of major definition re-writes in several articles. As for the suggestion of a merger between this article and compilation movie, it seems to me as though "compilation movies" are more like animated "composite films" whereas "package films" are like animated "anthology films." I have opposed merging "composite film" with "anthology film" earlier and by analogical argument I suppose I am opposed in principle to this merge as well. I note, however, that in this case the two articles are much smaller than their non-animated counterparts and as such the merge would be much more readily readily accomplishable if it in fact came to it. -Thibbs (talk) 03:08, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge?
Talk:Monarc Entertainment

message: This has been a suggested merger for the past 11 months and no one has even bothered to comment on the idea. Whether or not the merger is a good idea is still up for debate, but until there is a renewed interest in merging this article or putting the issue to rest I am removing the tags. -Warhorus 20:17, 25 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Merger

message: "MONARC" is also a future German naval artillery system. 213.172.112.58 15:15, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: MONARC
Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Physics/Templates

message: I have started a new template to cover non-dimensional numbers in fluid mechanics. STTW (talk) 21:29, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  NonDimFluMech 

message: Is there on Wikipedia a cleanup template requesting that definition of mathematical variables be provided?  I have come across a lot of articles containing math derivations that need the variables defined (although of course there's much math that doesn't need this formality).  If there is no such template, should we create one?  --Chetvorno 11:09, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is there a 'Definition of terms needed' template?
Talk:French pop music

message: This article doesn't give any real list of French pop artists. Darkyoshi 20:26, 25 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Anyway, "chanson" is simply part of french pop. It does not sound like american pop, that's maybe why we call it french ;-). I remove this comment. --Madlozoz (talk) 23:55, 31 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Examples 

message: Latin pop, Italian pop and African pop on French radio???? I'm French and I can tell you that you will have a hard time finding this kind of music on French radios. The music broadcasted on French radios is roughly 60% of International music, mainly English-spoken (though there are some very rare exceptions, but as in every other European country I guess), and 40% of French or Francophone (Belgian, Canadian etc.) music. Most of our French pop is so bad that I really wish we would hear the Latin, Italian and African pop you're talking about. I think you should consider revising this part. PS: Maybe you've mistaken Zouk music (which is a traditional French music, from French West Indies but which you can also hear on continental French radios), for African pop, that should be an explanation for this one at least.
--Floeticsoulchild (talk) 14:02, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Music on French radios 

message: What is wrong with you???  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 31.204.96.92 (talk) 15:20, 21 March 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: So add her. --Thnidu (talk) 22:48, 1 March 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: There is an article on her, so I have added her. LynwoodF (talk) 23:47, 1 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  No Patricia Kaas in the list?? 

message: Notice: I've made the first edits under my IP adress but now I've created an own account. I think I was right with my deletion. The content I've deleted does obviously not belong on this page, and is wrong, so I think it is right te delete it again. I hope you've seen my point. Trainfox (talk) 21:44, 11 November 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nonsense on the page