lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Smith machine

message: Please reference this article on WebMD, which discusses the improper form that the Smith machine encourages. 
http://www.webmd.com/fitness-exercise/features/9-least-effective-exercises?page=2
Quixotism22 (talk) 08:53, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Additional controversy

message: I have had several personal trainers giving me conflicting information on the weights you add to the Smith machine.  One trainer says because it is counter-balanced, you can put different weights at each end and it wont impact the repetition (where a barbell would leave you off-balanced, and too much weight at one end).  Other trainers have told me to place the same weight on both the left and right sides of the bar.  I tried my own experiment placing two 45lb. plates on one side and leaving the other side empty. When I bench pressed, it did feel like one side (the side with the weights placed) was a bit more stressed or is this my imagination?Cjnj926 02:48, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Balancing the Weights on a Smith Machine 

message: Although I'm sure some deletionist would remove this if I posted it in the article proper, here's a video of a guy almost managing to recreate the quadriplegia incident noted in the article: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iYnUUErz0Yk .  Horrors.--Father Goose (talk) 06:23, 12 February 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Yikes
Talk:Peter Angelos

message: I think the Peter G. Angelos should redirect to this page. In the Baltimore Sun I know that he is addressed with his middle initial included. 144.126.76.73 02:28, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Redirect

message: This article is NPOV. I hate him as much as the next man, but i don't think the article is biased against him.
Rm999 22:25, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: NPOV

message: Could we please get some attribution for the "Peter Angelos was recently voted by Sports Illustrated as the worst owner in all sports. Oriole fans everywhere feel he should sell the team immediately." comments?  Did a quickie search, only found an article from 2007 where an SI columnist ranked him second worst owner in MLB, was this a more recent article? --rsgdodge (talk) 02:13, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Worst Owner
Talk:Jack Dunphy

message: Was the character played by Joan McCracken Silvie or Elvie?--Srleffler 02:33, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: In this sentence under == Books ==: John Fury (Harper and Brothers, 1946), is the story of an Irish working-class man who moves from a happy marriage to an unpleasant one in a life of poverty, hard work, and frustration, where his only reprisal [sic] is anger." I think you meant "reaction" or "emotion". Reprisal means an act of retaliation; who is he retaliating against? Autodidact1 (talk) 21:33, 31 May 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Questionable usage of "reprisal"
Talk:Drumchapel

message: "It was the largest housing estate in Europe - at one time there were over 50,000 people living there."
Virtually all articles about housings estate seem to make this claim.  It seems unlikely in this case as Knightswood is the largest estate in Glasgow, and that pre-dates Drumchapel by about 20 years.    Should be removed unless it can be verified.
For the history of Drumchapel see the book by Allan Craig called "The Story of Drumchapel", I highly recommend it. [Posted by a long time resident]  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.20.24.204 (talk) 00:49, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  

message: I find this part of the opening paragraph problematic - "Drumchapel is also well known for table-tennis, lawn tennis, gymnastics, and football." There are no references or citations relating to these claims. In what context is it well known for these things? Has it produced international champions in these fields? Or is it famous simply for having an abundance of participants in these sports located in Drumchapel? I know many famous footballers have emerged from Drumchapel and it has produced at least one internationally recognised Table Tennis player (Moira Brown MBE) but to say it is well known for table-tennis, lawn tennis and gymnastics has left me a bit baffled. Are there sources for these claims? Calamity Hill (talk) 02:14, 22 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sporting Claims 
Talk:Graceland

message: Is "-land" pronounced like "land" or like "England"? BlueSwede92 (talk) 00:41, 2 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pronunciation? 

message: Biltmore is public?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biltmore_Estate  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:183:4481:7A10:3CBE:F698:C40D:2FF1 (talk) 16:09, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Biltmore Estate 

message: This page lists the current owners as the children of Lisa Marie. But Riley Keough's page lists her as the sole owner of Graceland 2A02:A44A:9879:1:4980:DD2E:69CF:27F9 (talk) 18:20, 4 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Conflicting information about the current owner 

message: If you research you will find that blue eyes crying in the rain is not Willie Nelson's song you're welcome.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:845:8100:1240:345C:6BC0:8A93:E63 (talk) 21:44, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: The Dead Milkmen released "Going to Graceland" which covers many of the rooms and items listed in the article on their album Bucky Fellini from 1987. 2001:1998:3500:4A:0:0:0:544 (talk) 03:34, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Another Graceland Reference
Talk:Battle of Jemappes

message: "At Valmy avoided defeat the French army, and thereby forced the Allies to flee to France, but in Jemappes had the increasingly revolutionary French army actually an army defeated by Austrian regulars and forced out of the field."
English please.  In fact that entire section looks like Yoda wrote it.  173.8.132.118 (talk) 15:52, 14 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  This needs to be rephrased because it makes no sense. 

message: Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: http://www.historyofwar.org/articles/battles_jemappes.html. 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, providing 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.  ♠Vami_IV†♠ 11:33, 2 October 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copyright problem removed
Talk:Ecstasy (drug)

message: This page has been merged back into MDMA, as the two subjects overlap to a considerable degree. Any future split should be discussed on talk:MDMA, to ensure that there is consensus for it. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 16:26, 18 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I see it's been split again with no discussion. I'm restoring the redirect because I think there's just too much duplication of content. Also "ecstasy" does often refer to MDMA, whereas this article appears to be about "ecstasy pills" which may contain other ingredients. I hope anyone considering a split will propose it on Talk:MDMA to get wider input.--Pontificalibus (talk) 19:05, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge
Talk:Charles Oudinot

message: The link to the Encyclopaedia Britannica 1911 "Charles Nicolas Victor Oudinot" is not working. Any other source ? Lgtrapp (talk) 21:02, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reference 
Talk:Roderick Flanagan

message: Hi Maustrauser,
I notice in the article on Sir Henry Parkes a reference to him owning"several" newspapers including "The Empire", "The People's Advocate" and " The New South Wales Vindicator".
I notice that this information appears to come from a reference to Roderick Flannagan which you have compiled.
Being one of his great great grandchildren, I have done considerable reading and research on Henry. I read with interest you reference to him owning several newspapers. I am of course aware of the Empire but had not read or come across any prior reference to him owning the "The People's Advocate" and " The New South Wales Vindicator". Would you be kind enough to point me towards your references so that I can research this further.
Thanks
Henry* 03:06, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Re the para:
:In 1988, to commemorate the bicentennial of European settlement of Australia, the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Committee of the Queensland Bicentennial Council reprinted "Aborigines in Australia", saying that reprinting "enables the earliest unbiased account of the Australian Aborigines to be re-introduced to the people of modern Australia."
I find this an odd claim as there are earlier works. Was this statement really made? Dougg 01:43, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That's what it says in my copy! Maustrauser 13:47, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sounds perfectly reasonable to me.  It was Don Watson who wrote that statement.  I wonder if his view comes about from the word 'unbiased.'   Perhaps he considers the earlier works biased  Cheers Henry Maustrauser 03:34, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

text: I think that is a more accurate statement.  You have a genuine copy and not the reprint?  Lucky chap. Maustrauser 11:31, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  'earliest unbiased account...'?
Talk:Six Days' Campaign

message: STOP MESSING WITH MY ARTICLE, 
http://napoleonistyka.atspace.com/La_Rothiere_battle.htm
Read that before you edit it! It may not cover the Six Days but it shows the numbers.
-King of Rome.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.58.59.146 (talk) 23:53, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: 2009

message: Is there any explanation why it is referred to as the six days campaign but only battles on five days are included? --86.129.6.0 (talk) 05:41, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Six days? 

message: Since the coalition forces marched into Paris and disposed Napoleon, I think the battle result should read decisive coalition victory, no?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.69.74.184 (talk) 17:16, 1 December 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: It was a brilliant series of tactical victories for Napoleon, but in response the Coalition decided that rather than defeat him in the field they would simply ignore him and march on Paris and so defeat him strategically. -- PBS (talk) 21:17, 27 February 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: I have yet again reverted the result from a simple "French Victory" because that is misleading. It was a brilliant tactical victory, but it was a strategic failure, as it did not prevent Blucher marching on Paris, but a strategic success in so much as it forced the Coalition to re-asses their stratagy.  -- PBS (talk) 12:04, 8 October 2021 (UTC)

text: user:Lilyyuuta if you are going to revert an edit then engage in a discussion on the talk page (see WP:BRD).  The effects of this campaign are different from the ones yous list in the history, as both outcomes happend simultaneously, not with one as a belated outcome of a war. — PBS (talk) 18:02, 13 October 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  French Tactical Victory 

message: Is this accurate to put it that way?  The French had already invaded and occupied Switzerland in 1798, an actual violation of Swiss neutrality.  The Allies liberated Switzerland from French influence, and after Napoleon's final defeat, the Congress of Vienna reaffirmed Swiss neutrality.  So unless the cited source puts it as "violated Swiss neutrality", this would be better edited for better clarity.TheBaron0530 (talk) 19:10, 8 July 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Coalition allies "violated Swiss neutrality"?
Talk:St. Paul's School for Boys (Maryland)

message: This reads more like an admissions pamphlet and less like an encyclopedia.  I graduated from SP (Maryland) a few years ago; I'll edit it some in the next few days.
--Evanarmurphy 03:00, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Tone
Talk:Anglo-Swedish war of 1810–1812

message: See the original source for the s:Treaty of Orebro (Britain and Sweden). The Wikisource is taken from the British and Foreign State Papers official translation and uses as a title:
And within the treaty spells Orebro, "Orebro" (as does the original French), but within the treaty the name Lawrence Baron d'Engeström is spelled with an ö (as is the original French). Therefore the spelling of Orebro is deliberate and not a mistaken transliteration. -- PBS (talk) 06:55, 30 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Treaty of Orebro
Talk:War of the Pyrenees

message: The following user mistakenly removed all the WP tags in the talk page. That edit was undone to restore the WP tags. The user left the following comment, which I am now restoring. Djmaschek (talk) 03:31, 12 January 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm afraid there is a misquotation. The General de Brigade LAVICTOIRE attacked BERDERIZ/BERDARITZ PASS(not Izpegi) and there he died after appointing Jean Harispe as Colonel of the Half Brigade, then Harispe attacqued the "Casa-Fuerte"..... Izpegi Pass and Maya (Otsondo) Pass were85.84.136.75 (talk) 19:16, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm using cited data from Digby Smith. You may have more accurate information. Please add it to the article ("According to another authority ...") and be sure to give the source. Djmaschek (talk) 03:38, 12 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: User 85.84.136.75 comment restored

message: Hi there, I have not followed all the sequence of reverts with the presumable sockpuppet. The thing is the information is as accurate as it gets. I do not see any content related reason whatsoever to remove this . The decision was made in the Treaty of Basel I guess. Other than that, that is the territorial result (one of them at least) of the war. Iñaki LL (talk) 20:23, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Irrespective of the user, the issue remains, what is it exactly? Regards Iñaki LL (talk) 09:39, 21 January 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Spain cedes the eastern two-thirds
Talk:Nose guard

message: The nose guard should be merged into nose tackle, seeing as how the 3-4 defense is more commonly run than the 5-x defense.
they are the same position most 3-4 defenses play 5 up anyways
I reverted the merge of nose tackle and nose guard because:
*It was a cut and paste move, essentially.
*Which title is more common? Because that should be the one that everything should be merged to.
*Should it even be merged at all.
Zzyzx11 (Talk) 03:10, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Guard vs tackle

message: The nose guard and the nose tackle are the same.  You claim they're different yet you have no sources.  Provide sources or the merge should go through.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.159.67.168 (talk) 18:33, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Not True 

message: Merged into Tackle (American football)#Nose tackle. 69.3.72.9 (talk) 15:11, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge September 2010
Talk:War of the Fourth Coalition

message: While the Continental System was enacted in the middle of the War of the Fourth Coalition, I am not sure that it really belongs in the discussion, blocking the flow between the Prussian phase and the Russian phase.  If anything, it might be move to the end, or reduced to a single sentance after the fall of Berlin.  While the Continental System was certainly significant to the Napoleonic wars, I just don't think it adds much to the discussion of the War of the Fourth Coalition.  -Gomm 00:26, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree, since the Continental System has a main article, a reduction in size (with link to main article) would be a good idea. --Bryson 00:36, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Continental System 

message: Nobody knows how to remove the extra brackets at the start of the article? JMK (talk) 19:13, 30 October 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: After experimenting removing the different templates and previewing the result, it seems to be caused by the  template. As I don't know how to create templates I have no idea exactly why it does this, but you can see that it happens on all the articles where this template is being used. --Saddhiyama (talk) 19:37, 30 October 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: It wasn't that template but . It should be fixed now. --Saddhiyama (talk) 20:17, 30 October 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Extra brackets

message: The infobox shows that Spain was in this war on the French side. However, nowhere else in the article (that I see) mentions Spain in this war. Also, if according to the infobox, Spain had 6000 men in this war, where did they operate? (And did they really exist?) King Philip V of Spain (talk) 05:30, 6 March 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: They didn't operate independently, they were intergrated to Napoleon's army. They were foreign legions under French command, just as the Polish Legions, the Irish Legion or the Portuguese Legion. Blaue Max (talk) 09:03, 6 March 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not saying you're wrong, but the Peninsular War had not begun yet and Spain was still independent, so was their army integrated into Napoleon's? King Philip V of Spain (talk) 06:37, 7 March 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Spain was independent but was allied to France until 1808 and sent troops in support of France. Only after the Dos de Mayo 1808, Spanish troops turned against France (except for the troops raised by Joseph Bonaparte). See the Division of the North, by example, which was sent to Denmark and then sided with the British. Blaue Max (talk) 11:40, 7 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Spain in this war 

message: In commanders and leaders section, the then monarch of the United Kingdom should be mentioned.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.218.223.0 (talk) 22:12, 19 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Commanders and Leaders
Talk:Franco-Swedish War

message: Deleted reference to Norvegian victory at Lier, as this was in 1814. In 1808 the Swedes won. Kingvald 13:59, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

message: He had even tried to elected Crown Prince two times before the his successful election in 1810. However, he later put his people before his pride.68.47.64.121 (talk) 23:58, 26 December 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: No, the new Nowrewgian source you use states that he was elected crown prince on August 21 1810. This war ended on January 6 1810. These are two separate events. You claim he was elected crown prince AND head of state at the same time(!) as a result of this war. And if you look again on this  you can read it says "One of the most controversial of Napoleon Bonaparte's marshals, Jean-Baptiste Bernadotte was a committed republican whose career, mainly a self-serving one, can be divided into three stages." He didn't try getting elected three times. You must stop using sources that doesn't support your statements. Shellwood (talk) 13:04, 27 December 2018 (UTC)

text: No, you listen and don't libel me as not listening on my talk page. The Norwegian royal court article specifically says "Sweden needed a new crown prince, and a number of Swedes conceived the idea of offering this position to one of Napoleon’s marshals. Bernadotte was the most well known of the marshals and was related to Napoleon through his wife (although relations between Bernadotte and the emperor were not good at this point)" Also is noted by the fact that Napoleon sacked him.68.47.64.121 (talk) 15:01, 27 December 2018 (UTC)

text: However, the Crown Prince had earned enough trust in Napoleon to ask him for assistance in carrying out an invasion of Norway.68.47.64.121 (talk) 15:06, 27 December 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Napoleon's trust over Bernadotte has nothing to do with this war. The second hunt for a new crown prince in May 1810 is completely unrelated to this war...Shellwood (talk) 15:21, 27 December 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Bernadotte was at first Napoleon's puppet leader
Talk:One-pocket

message: 2006 Rule changes at , they will be in effect until 2008. 70.111.251.203 03:14, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rule changes 

message: After I wikified this article I realized it looked almost like a cut and paste. I can find very similar content here but it's not exactly the same. -- Heptite (T) (C) (@) 14:36, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Clearly no longer the case.  Marking this "Resolved". — SMcCandlish [talk] [contrib] ツ 12:23, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copyright violation?
Talk:Intro5pect

message: Where is this band from? Kaldari 03:25, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Imran Farhat

message: After Saeed Anwar and Aamir Sohail pair now i think that we have another left handed pair, the pair is Imran Farhat and Salman Butt. These two players have a lot of talent, they can play very good cricket for Pakistan. Specially Imran Farhat is very talented boy. He has the technique like Sanath Jayasuria. He is a very good hard hitting batsman and he is also a very very good fielder.
Muhammad Muneeb Aslam, Chakwal
What rubbish is this Article ? ?  , 
Is it the same person in question, throughout the article ?
First it speaks of subject being Indian and then goes on to mention his records playing for Pakistan
Imran Farhat is a Pakistani cricketer , and was never Indian , either by birth or team allegiance. 
'''
C@S 01:24, 27 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Template talk:Pistol-stub

message: Hey sorry about creating a stub without permission.  I didn't know I had to until now, just read it in the Stub creation rules. Lkegley9 03:27, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

message: This stub template was previously nominated for deletion at WP:SFD. The logged discussion can be found here. --TheParanoidOne 10:08, 16 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Stub types for deletion