lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Nambour State High School

message: This page is not to mooch off Kevin Rudd by way of the 1974 Rudd image. I gained permission for the Kevin Rudd article, and even then it's still iffy as to whether it can be used on wikipedia, there is one fair use rationale which is for Kevin Rudd for which the image directly (primarily) relates to. The image relating to the school is a secondary. Timeshift (talk) 08:00, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Image 

message: The name needs to be updated.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bonnffdo (talk • contribs) 03:02, 14 October 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  The name needs to be updated
Talk:Dykebar railway station

message: Although I was not responsible for dismantling the station or shelter, I may have well set fire to the resultant wood on Guy Fawkes circa 1970. The ground was levelled to make way for a school football pitch some time later because there is no trace of the station or platform on the site.
--Eric144 (talk) 01:07, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
Talk:Jemeni

message: This article is about the Caribbean-Canadian hip-hop poet and broadcaster, not the porn star. This person is becoming an influential figure in Canadian broadcasting. 
I have added the page as she is the only one of the 2008 Canada Reads invitees who does not yet have a Wikipedia entry. SuW (talk) 01:10, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: article
Talk:James Gerard Kennedy Sr.

message: I'm confused, what source did that According to Florida Institute of Technology come from?  It is unsourced and although I do not doubt its accuracy, That author of that section needs to cite the original source from Florida Tech and merge the information into the rest of the article.  - Jameson L. Tai talk ♦ contribs 01:12, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Florida Institute of Technology Section
Talk:FIRST Overdrive

message: *https://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/gadgets/a2811/4259798/ archive
*https://www.ajc.com/news/photos/first-robotics-competition-championship-2008/xXaSwkxxjm1o2xY5i4HfYN/#1 archive
*https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AcgR2WM6qso
Chris857 (talk) 14:27, 26 June 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Available sources
Talk:James Rest

message: James Rest developed the four component model of moral maturation.  The components being:
1. Moral Sensitivity
2. Moral Judgment (Kohlberg's cognitive construct)
3. Moral Motivation and Commitment
4. Moral Implementation  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.240.239.52 (talk) 19:48, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:No More Fish, No Fishermen

message: It is on 3 CD's.  Check Google under the title, against playlist.  I think you will find it is widely broadcast in the US and Canada. Pustelnik (talk) 23:25, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: On that notability template have you clicked on the link that reads references? Is this song notable enough to warrant a stand alone article? Have you checked WP:MUSIC for criteria for songs. Please take note of, "Most songs do not merit an article and should redirect to another relevant article, such as for a prominent album or for the artist who wrote or prominently performed the song." It seems to me that by the criteria this would be better covered at the artist's article? Sting_au  Talk 23:50, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

text: Well the two refs seem independent enough? Nothing much at allmusic.com which is an accepted resource per WP:MUSIC but I'll kick the notability tag anyhow. Must say that the refs really need to utilize citeweb templates for best effect. Authors of articles need to be cited. I might add one to show you what I mean. Sting_au  Talk 02:18, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Notability
Talk:Breathing performance of regulators

message: Not much more than a stub at the moment, but hopefully may attract further contributions (outside the EU perhaps?) without clogging up the main Diving regulator page. RexxS (talk) 17:06, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

message: I've added an intro paragraph to give context and allow readers to find the articles that it is relevant to. I think I've followed the guidelines, although I can't really put the subject into the first sentence. RexxS (talk) 17:05, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wikification 
Talk:Lottery (disambiguation)

message: Turns into a share Msndhemail (talk) 19:24, 1 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  The topic is Abha Ashoff my share is possible 

message: uk 49 3 fixed number 16 may 2024 41.122.130.52 (talk) 14:33, 16 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  uk 49 3 fixed number 16 may 2024
Talk:The Fire (Seinfeld)

message: larry david introduced jerry's stand up near the end.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.189.212.150 (talk) 05:29, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: larry david
Talk:Rho Persei

message: This page says the magnitude is 3.39, but List of stars in Perseus says the magnitude is 3.32
: Probably an error on the list. Regards, RJH (talk) 18:51, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: magnitude
Talk:Silk Road (disambiguation)

message: I know I shouldn't assume....
but assuming the online marketplace known as Silk Road ends up with its own wiki entry in the near term future should the link be included? News articles that have included the ian.....onion hyperlink have begun to catch flak. http://radar.oreilly.com/2011/06/four-short-links-3-june-2011.html ...And thats criticism from a open source guru. Eventually the link may become well known enough I would imagine. But my concern is that the online marketplace known as Silk Road will have it's own wiki containing the link to silk road once other news outlets catch on, but other respectable news outlets might likely omit the actual URL. Any thoughts for those who are already aware of what i'm talking about?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tunafizzle (talk • contribs) 04:27, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  making an assumption...an upcoming wiki/redirect that will likely be added here. 

message: This New York Times article refers to a "Silk Road initiative in Central Asia", which from the context appears to be a trade agreement between China and Central Asian nations. Do we have any coverage of this agreement currently? --BDD (talk) 23:04, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Missing usage?
Talk:Cabinet wars

message: It is highly confusing to mention C.v. Clausewitz in an article on cabinet wars without qualifying his famous statement that war is but the continuation of politics by other means. If Clausewitz was opposed to anything at all, then to the concept of cabinet wars. He spent a good deal of his career to explain that war, as an 'absolute' (i.e. purely philosophical) concept, tended to extremes and had to be pursued with the highest possible effort. This has only little to do with 'civilian control' as the article implies. According to Clausewitz all wars were political, whether they were limited wars or absolute wars. He simply regarded absolute wars as the 'superior' form - not for ethical reasons by the way, but this you can look up yourself :-)  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.73.88.101 (talk) 23:54, 18 November 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Feel free to edit, to me I see the root of etymology tracing back to "On War", but the book was not finished. He delineated between the three wars. If you know of better sources point me to them.
If you feel the inference is forced or incorrect feel free to remove. I am by far an expert. Jgmac1106 (talk) 18:06, 20 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Clausewitz

message: In the wargaming and reenectment community this era runs with "Lace Wars". Would it be appropriate to mention this term in the introduction? ASchudak (talk) 17:36, 29 April 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lace Wars 

message: Should wars that were fought between European Empires exclusively on the colonies of the European Powers, and with exclusively colonial aims, be included in the list of "Cabinet Wars"? If so, I have three examples to suggest:
*Anglo-Spanish_War_(1727–1729)
*Spanish–Portuguese_War_(1735–1737)
*Spanish–Portuguese_War_(1776–77)
I didn't feel like including these on the list because it was an examples list and it would add too much content to it, besides I was not sure if these "Colonial Wars" counted as "Cabinet Wars". But I will leave the idea here if anyone else find it appropriate to be added to the mentioned list.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 187.36.176.42 (talk) 18:22, 27 February 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Colonial Wars 

message: I don't agree that the great northern war fullfils the criteria for a cabinet war. For reference check this article:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Wrath
In the region of Finland the war was total warfare and the general population suffered from the occupation and fought guerilla war until the end.
The great northern war should be removed from the list of examples. 91.159.102.161 (talk) 22:29, 8 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  The great northern war
Talk:Everyone Loves Shabbes but the Chickens

message: According to the WikiProject Songs Project page, there is no notability criteria for songs.Pustelnik (talk) 03:05, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It says "There are currently no specific guidelines for the notability of songs." Notice the word "specific"? So WP:N would apply per WP:MUSIC. Sting au Buzz Me... 04:18, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Notability
Talk:David Bowes

message: There has been a edit history on this article by a user Bowesdd and Dirrane.cove who appears to have a connection to this article, and even possibly autobiographical. If these edits persist with bias, please follow WP:AUTO. Jooojay (talk) 20:11, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: COI
Talk:Stone Bridge (Skopje)

message: ===mentioning the earthquake of 1555:===
===About the bridge===
Not sure if these count as "reliable sources".  --Coppertwig (talk) 02:50, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Sources

message: Not sure if these count as "reliable sources".  --Coppertwig (talk) 02:50, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: About the bridge

message: Best source for this is if You ask local people, they know it also as Dušanov most. Also You can check in Google, You will see foreign tourist gropus mention it as Dušanov most, there are also other pager to mention it as that, and of course also Serbian Wikipedia. I understand Macedonia dont want to name it like that, but thats matter of policy and this is encyclopedia, not Foreign office. --94.140.88.117 (talk) 09:23, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Dušanov most (Bridge of Tsar Dušan)

message: What part of this entry is an opinion? Or someone's view? And what part is controversial?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by BenFranklinPhilly (talk • contribs) 22:43, 11 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Controversial?

message: Hello, The plaque on the bridge states the first reconstruction, over 6th century Roman foundations, occurred between 1421 and 1451, during the reign of Sultan Murad II. - Dominator1453 (talk) 10:31, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  First Rebuilding 
Talk:So B. It

message: eggs?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.252.19.74 (talk) 01:51, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: This article needs one. It reminds me of a 6th grade book report. :P I'll work on it a little tomorrow. Insert formula here
yeah fo shiz  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.224.189.177 (talk) 01:58, 19 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rewrite 

message: It's better, but Alice is missing. It's still a 6th grader book report  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.58.208.22 (talk) 14:20, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Goodie 

message: The book has many interests such as Hiedi thinks her last name is It. Or maybe even perhaps that her mother has a mental disability and her neighbor has a disorder as well. In the search to find who she is she meets numerous people. She eve lives with two that she meets. Not to give to much away but it's not as bad as people say. My daughter loves this book. She is reading it in school.75.167.242.133 (talk) 21:30, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Book Interests 

message: This page needs a review of the plot!  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 116.240.225.76 (talk) 10:32, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Plot
Talk:128th New York Infantry Regiment

message: Article reassessed and graded as start class.  Referencing and appropriate inline citation guidelines not met.  Campaigns Section should be split up into SubSections to make it easier to read.    --dashiellx (talk) 14:52, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Tag & Assess 2008 
Talk:1st Brigade, Polish Legions

message: "Brigade I" is a pretty awkward name/phrasing. The general formulation in these cases seems to be "First Brigade of..." or "1st Brigade of..." Volunteer Marek (talk) 06:54, 10 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Name 

message: Brigade I of the Polish Legions →  – "1st" or "First" rather than the Roman numeral "I" is inline with other first brigades in 1st Brigade list. Also currently, it's easy to misread it as "Brigade ay".Volunteer Marek (talk) 08:03, 10 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks. All three should be moved.Volunteer Marek (talk) 08:25, 10 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move
Talk:Travel plan

message: I have made a lot of changes to the original page, which was an excellent overview of workplace travel plans in the UK.  I have amended this to make it more generally applicable to all Travel Plans in the UK, Australia and NZ.  My aim was not to delete anything.
The page could be further improved by some input from other countries and especially from the US.
Travelplanner (talk) 02:58, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
Talk:Taurus PT1911

message: At was distance do the average groups correspond to?  25 yards?  This is crucial information that needs to be added to the section.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.154.189.192 (talk) 18:48, 15 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Accuracy Section 

message: I added an "advert" tag to the article because it has a promotional tone to it. It's fine to include the views of reviewers, but if that's the approach then a good sampling of views, pro and con, should be included. In this case, it looks like some sources have been cherry picked to just give the positive side. If this is just another M1911 clone maybe it's not really worth writing about anyway. Felsic2 (talk) 17:22, 11 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Advert
Talk:Red Mercury (film)

message: I was willing to assume that the creators of this article, who added a bunch of
unreferenced material, may have been new contributors unfamiliar with our policies.
So, when I added referenced material, about the 2005 film that premiered at Cannes, I did not excise their unreferenced material.  I wanted to give them an opportunity to add referenced.
The article creators excised my referenced contributions.  They haven't made an attempt to add references, or participate in the .  So my assumption of good faith has eroded.
I am now prepared to excise the unreferenced material.
Cheers!  Geo Swan (talk) 03:08, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
Talk:Tea processing

message: I was reading the article and noticed that a section seemed to end mid sentence. I don't know enough about tea to be able to fix it so I looked through the history. It happened here, while new material was being added. Girlwithgreeneyes (talk) 10:15, 27 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  December edit that accidentally left incomplete sentence 
Talk:Georgy Girl (song)

message: Lyrics are probably copyright violation... AnonMoos (talk) 03:20, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

message: "It was listed at #36 on Rolling Stone magazine's ' issued in 2002." OK, there are several online sources mentioning this factoid, but there is no sign of "Georgy Girl" on Rolling Stone's 2004 list, much less the revised 2010 list. Unless Rolling Stone published some earlier 2002 list of pop songs that I don't know about? Muzilon (talk) 10:53, 13 May 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: I've removed the factoid. --jpgordon𝄢𝄆 𝄐𝄇  05:46, 31 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rolling Stone's "500 Greatest Songs" list?
Talk:Solve ME/CFS Initiative

message: re: "Members prefer the term chronic fatigue immune dysfunction syndrome over CFS, or myalgic encephalomyelitis, which are more common in the medical community."  Do you have a cite or other basis for this? also CAA doesn't have members anymore, just donors, so i will change that as well.JustinReilly (talk) 08:30, 25 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  CFIDS
Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Companies/Member information

message: ===2008 Quarter 1 (Jan-Mar): Talk page monitoring survey===
This survey is meant to provide a feeling for how long queries placed on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Companies would need to remain open before being considered as seen and commented on by most interested Project participants.  Please list yourself in the group(s) you feel you might fall into below. section started by User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 03:42, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Activity surveys

message: This survey is meant to provide a feeling for how long queries placed on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Companies would need to remain open before being considered as seen and commented on by most interested Project participants.  Please list yourself in the group(s) you feel you might fall into below. section started by User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 03:42, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: 2008 Quarter 1 (Jan-Mar): Talk page monitoring survey

message: ;Look at talk page changes whenever they show up on watchlist
* User:Ceyockey (talk to me)
* Pocopocopocopoco (talk) 04:05, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Talk-page monitoring

message: ;Interested in engaging in discussions
* User:Ceyockey (talk to me)
* Pocopocopocopoco (talk) 04:05, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Discussion and notification preferences

message: *Comment: One list of WikiProject Newsletters is found at Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Newsletters. --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 03:28, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Newsletter

message: ;Project talk page on watchlist, mostly interested in saving viable articles from deletion, willing to provide sources and copyedit
* Addhoc (talk) 10:36, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Other
Talk:Yellowtail amberjack

message: I propose that Yellowtail_kingfish and Yellowtail amberjack are merged, as the first one is not a real subspecie, but just a population of that specie, which is seperate only by some anglers. The main article is so poorly developed, that creating a sub article about Yellowtail_kingfish is not necessary : everything can be said (if sourced) on this article. I'm not good enought in english to do the job.--Lilyu (talk) 19:43, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merger_proposal 

message: I believe these articles were merged absent sufficient discussion to gauge consensus adequately. This article describes two separate entities, whereas each article should only describe one entity to avoid confusion to readers. It is clear that the article describes disparate subspecies, and therefore there should be a disambiguation at this title, with separate articles describe separate subspecies. This page is completely the inverse of a disambiguation as it stands now. Intelligentsium 21:21, 27 November 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Read my response above for the merger; i now oppose any such re-splitting of the article. The reason is because the scientific literature does not distinguish between subspecies in nearly all papers i can find. So the problem is this; i find an article on Seriola lalandi with the study based in the Atlantic. Do i assume it is S.l. dorsalis and assign that information to the S.l. dorsalis article? That would be bordering on original research and apply to papers containing any mention of S. lalandi. I am in massive opposition to making this page a disambig page, as it is a species page. If there is consensus to split, this article should remain and detail the taxonomy and phylogenetic reasons for their being subspecies (but there is no such evidence for 3 genetically distinct subspecies). My biggest fear is that without being able to put peer reviewed scientific information into subspecies articles, they will end up like they were before - full of unreferenced horseshit information such as what size hook to catch them on. I really believe a single species article which has a section detailing the possibility of subspecies is the best way to go. Kare Kare (talk) 00:16, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Also note both Fishbase and ITIS, which the fishproject uses as its primary references for taxonomy do not mention subspecies, and fishbase actually lists them as invalid junior synonyms. The only way then i can see that there would be any reason to split this article is if a recent peer reviewed scientific paper can be found which clearly demonstrates the subspecifity of these three taxa using rigorous phylogenetic analysis. I have looked extensively and found none. Feel free to point me in the right direction though. Kare Kare (talk) 00:27, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Split proposal
Category talk:Renewable energy certification

message: Wouldn't something like "Green energy certification programs" be a more appropriate title?  "Schemes" makes it sound like they're just out there to spread propaganda and take our money.  --Gueneverey (talk) 04:06, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Given that we don't have a :category:energy certification, and that there are only a handful of articles here, and that some are not green, but white, maybe we should rename this one to :category:energy certification. — Sebastian 08:25, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: ''Schemes''?
Talk:List of number-one albums of 2008 (Australia)

message: Prose. It features professional standards of writing.
 Lead. It has an engaging lead that introduces the subject and defines the scope and inclusion criteria.
 Comprehensiveness.
  (a) It comprehensively covers the defined scope, providing at least all of the major items and, where practical, a complete set of items; where appropriate, it has annotations that provide useful and appropriate information about the items.
  (b) In length and/or topic, it meets all of the requirements for stand-alone lists; it is not a content fork, does not largely recreate material from another article, and could not reasonably be included as part of a related article.
 
 Structure. It is easy to navigate through and includes, where helpful, section headings and table sort facilities.
 Style. It complies with the Manual of Style and its supplementary pages.
  (a) Visual appeal. It makes suitable use of text layout, formatting, tables, and colour.
  (b) Media files. It has images and other media, if appropriate to the topic, that follow Wikipedia's usage policies, with succinct captions and "alt" text if necessary. Non-free images and other media satisfy the criteria for the inclusion of non-free content and are labeled accordingly.
 
 Stability. It is not the subject of ongoing edit wars and its content does not change significantly from day to day, except in response to the featured list process. -- Sk8er5000 (talk) 21:03, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Featured List 