lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Leonard Strong

message: In 2012 I entered negotiation with the LAG Strong Estate to obtain acknowledgement and copyright of several novels and short stories that my grandfather, John Francis Swaine, had written and which had been published under Strong's name. Agreement was reached with the Strong Estate and subsequently Swaine's manuscripts and other papers were accepted by the National Library of Ireland. Inter alia, the Oxford Companion to English Literarture Editor, Professor Dinah Birch, expressed an interest in rectifying the incorrect entry in this authoritative reference book by crediting Swaine with those works that he had written. The relevant amended OUP entry is sent separately217.43.165.20 (talk) 12:53, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  John Francis Swaine (1880 - 1954) - copyright agreement with L A G Strong Estate
Talk:The Monocled Mutineer

message: Surely there should be a description of the film itself, rather than just a huge criticism section? Whoever wrote the criticism section must have known enough to write a normal description of the film, too.--91.148.159.4 (talk) 12:35, 4 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Description

message: Was it really that the Monocled Mutineer got its' facts wrong, or - as with Black Adder Goes Fourth and Oh, What A Lovely War - was it that the Tory Party Ministers objected to anything that painted the Army top brass within a more honest light?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.30.22.209 (talk) 19:30, 28 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  What is the true about army Mutineers?
Talk:Selig Brodetsky

message: In asigining importance we need to compare with other mathematicians. Pierre-Simon Laplace, John Napier, Sophus Lie and many other well know mathematicians have the mid rating. See []. To gain this rating the person must have Important in their discipline. He may be important due to being President of the Hebrew University of Jerusalem but the maths importance tag is purely for their contributions to mathematics. The St Andrews bio http://www-groups.dcs.st-and.ac.uk/~history/Biographies/Brodetsky.html does not attest to any real lasting significant mathematics work. Further I was a post-grad student at Leeds and I never heard his name mention in the five years I was there. To gain a mid maths rating authors of this article will have to cover his mathematical contribution. --Salix alba (talk) 00:02, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Importance
Talk:Neko (software)

message: It might be interesting to point out that IBM OS/2 version 2.0 came with Neko as one of the entertainment programs back in 1992 or thereabouts. dreddnott 18:00, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: All I've found is this regarding RISC OS. --Trevj (talk) 15:02, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Neko ports
Talk:Ii Naosuke

message: I added it because of sentences like "Despite this Ii was a true patriot who carried out all of his acts in the belief that they were for the good of Japan and the Emperor." which could be cleaned up. -- Deville (Talk) 19:55, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I think you're taking one sentence out of context. The next sentence starts "Historians base this theory upon Ii's 1853 proposal ..." which attributes the view to undefined historians. All that really needs to be done is to attribute the view to specific historians, which I have now done. Overall, this is a good article that fairly represents the historical sources, and I don't think there are any problems that can't be fixed by a bit of copyediting or that would justify keeping the NPOV tag. 112.136.102.20 (talk) 05:08, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[WP:NPOV]] tag 

message: The intro and body of the article state that Ii became lord of Hikone in 1850, but the infobox says 1846. Which is it? 131.111.184.8 (talk) 10:36, 24 March 2015 (UTC)
replies: text:  Lord of Hikone (1850-1860)Yosakrai (talk) 11:46, 2 October 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dates for lordship over Hikone
Talk:Prince Kuni Asahiko

message: While trying to add in-line citations, I found that this article may be relying too much on one source (Keene). Darwin Naz (talk) 23:59, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Update 

message: T/O 高堂升平 (talk) 23:52, 1 June 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  朝彦 can be read Asahiko or Tomoyoshi.
Talk:707 (band)

message: ==Untitled==
This article is now about the group with a listing at allmusic. I could not find sufficient google hits or an all music listing for the other. Please see the article's AfD discussion. :) Dlohcierekim 18:07, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Comments

message: This article is now about the group with a listing at allmusic. I could not find sufficient google hits or an all music listing for the other. Please see the article's AfD discussion. :) Dlohcierekim 18:07, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Economic and Financial Crimes Commission

message: I'd like to know how much is the cost to get an EFCC certificate?  And, if there is an EFCC branch in U.K.? 
Thanks!  MMM Manalac    10:10  20 September 2007 (RP)  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.92.14.92 (talk) 13:28, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

message: Would someone who understands these things better than I do mind looking at this diff and letting me know why the first attempt didn't work but the second attempt did?  I can't see what I did differently.  Heather 18:10, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: If you click on the link of the image that didn't work and look at the URL, you see there's an extra character after the "png".  It's been discussed at the village pump before, I think it's some invisible unicode character that sometimes gets caught up when you copy-and-paste text.  --Interiot 19:33, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks!  Heather 21:59, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Diff
Talk:Moira (military)

message: From its name I would think it a Meros (Merẽ)/Turma. From its commander's title its a Drungus/Chilliarchy and from its unit tree half the Imperial Tagmata. Could this be a modern term that the author used to identify a portion of the Byzantine military administration?What ever it is it needs attention. Opinions and information is greatly appreaciated. --Dryzen 13:03, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Other than for our own article (to be found on many other sites) I can`t find a web mention of this type of formation.--Dryzen 13:42, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Does anyone mind if I delete this or change it to Meros?--Dryzen 13:28, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  anachronism? 

message: I propose moving Moirae (military) --> Meros, a more common (in english literature such as Treagold or Haldon) name for what seems to be the same Byzantine formation. --Dryzen 18:00, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed move 

message: Add "* Support" or "* Oppose" followed by an optional one-sentence explanation, then sign your opinion with ~~~~
*As the presenter of this move I support, due to too many inconsistancies (includint the title) within the article prior ot displacement.--Dryzen 19:22, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Survey
Talk:Riemann–Lebesgue lemma

message: The first sentence of the proof is confusing, and it is not clear which "special cases" it refers to, and which if any of them is the "first one".
Perhaps it could be replaced with something like the following:
"The proof can be organized into steps, proving increasingly general special cases; the 4th step extends the result to the original formulation."
but personally I think that it might be better to remove that sentence altogether --AmitAronovitch (talk) 18:35, 21 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: The statement of the Theorem seems to be flawed. f is assumed to be a measurable function from R to C. But the proof deals with an interval [a,b]. Should we say f:[a,b] to C? or should the proof omit [a,b]?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.142.45.52 (talk) 01:22, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Also the proof is only for f on R, while the statement of the theorem has f on R^d  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bzhao2017 (talk • contribs) 04:10, 2 December 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  which "special cases" in proof? 

message: The proof in the research gate article is wrong, the reference was removed.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.243.243.97 (talk) 21:10, 21 November 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Abstract measure spaces 

message: The lemma is first proof for step functions but is applied to g a simple function. 
It is not explain how we can jump from step function to simple function and it seems unclear (and difficult) to me.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:861:3DC3:44B0:A07:DFC0:8480:1E9 (talk) 12:59, 12 March 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Does this proof work? 

message: The theorem says the domain of f is \mathbb R^d but the proof works only for \mathbb R^1. Michael Hardy (talk) 21:50, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Deficient proof 

message: This proof only seems to work for real z. In fact, I think that along the imaginary axis the theorem does not hold.
Perhaps this should be stated explicitly — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.130.90.163 (talk) 13:16, 26 May 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Does this hold for complex z?
Talk:Acceptants

message: The article claims this source is free. The copyright page on the article says otherwise. :) Dlohcierekim 18:21, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I am rewriting this to restore the content without the copyvio. :) Dlohcierekim 17:08, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: [http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01094c.htm copyvio]
Talk:Reversed field pinch

message: Dave 18:21, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

message: :I reverted the page because the only "expansion" so far had been the addition of a link to a new article by the same contributor, that's been ed as a POV dicdef. But now I see you've actually added some content here so you needn't worry about me or anyone else reverting it. :-) (Just be sure to keep it NPOV.) - ∅ (∅), 23:02, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: What is the distinction between this and Field-reversed configurations?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:306:CCDD:E740:30CF:A0B7:D64E:7452 (talk) 22:11, 9 March 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merger proposal
Talk:Mark Lamping

message: Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: http://www.jaguars.com/team/management/mark-lamping.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, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, 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.  64.85.215.87 (talk) 06:13, 26 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copyright problem removed 
Talk:Marcomanni

message: I'm not sure about the second theory: (2) the tribe has taken on the name of a Roman captain named Marcus Romanus who deserted the legions of Drusus during his German campaign in c. 13 BC, and is thought to have banded together a ragtag group of Germanic tribes into a cohesive fighting force (see POMOERIVM, vol.3, 1998). Not only would Marcus Romanus have been commonly referred to as "Romanus" (praenomina were regarded as being less important and are frequently omitted), but is it really likely that a Roman captain could have pulled together a group of tribes into what was a cohesive empire just fifteen to twenty years later? (Note that Tacitus apparently views the Marcomanni as one tribe, explicitly stating others that were part of their empire.) Well, I suppose you had to mention the second theory to be encyclopedic. What is the source, though? --Helmold 18:30, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Etymology 

message: Where are there references to Early Celtic Spain and Portugal here? Jorgenpfhartogs 14:01, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm sorry, what do you mean? The Ogre 15:04, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Spain?

message: I think the last battle of the war in 180 AD shortly just before Marcus Aurelius death was against Quadi ..--Blain Toddi (talk) 08:51, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Trivia 

message: It should be mentioned that the Marcomanni are thought to have formed the core of the Bavarians after moving out of Bohemia.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.171.168.80 (talk) 17:40, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bavarians
Talk:Glacier Express

message: Wikipedia has a separate page (Fiesch derailment) for the Glacier Express accident that occurred on 25 July 2010, in which a woman died and 42 were injured. This incident is mentioned in the third para under (§1.3) Recent developments. The first two paras mention improvements to the service and facilities - so the derailment doesn't seem to fit under that heading - but it would under a separate top-level heading of Safety. Prisoner of Zenda (talk) 08:45, 26 April 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for the amendment, Aaron-Tripel. The change is for the better! Prisoner of Zenda (talk) 08:16, 25 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Should the numbering be expanded?
Talk:Roger Fenton

message: Why does a link for "Valley of the shadow of death" in this article link to a punk band? 67.110.49.135
:Well spotted. In the absence of an obvious target (unless I've missed one) for any wikilinks, I have removed them. Sorry it took so long.--Old Moonraker (talk) 20:25, 17 June 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Anon question 

message: According to his blue plaque on the Crimble hotel, which is in Heywood,  Fenton was born in Heywood, and not "Heap, Bury". Anyone care to confirm that ?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.3.71.221 (talk) 21:35, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: This is a direct lift from ODNB, but its distorted by two fat-finger typos: "near Bury" becomes "Heap, Bury"—see what I did there? I'll fix this, to take into account modern boundary changes. Whatever, this is a good catch—thanks. --Old Moonraker (talk) 10:04, 27 July 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Retracting my fanciful theory: Heap was a "chapelry" within the parish of Bury—nothing to do with typos at all. --Old Moonraker (talk) 13:24, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  origins 

message: The version in the article at present shouldn't be the last word, as there has been a lot of confusion in the previous history of the topic on Wikipedia and further illumination would be useful. What is here is now referenced from books, and this shouldn't be overturned without proper sources. 
I've looked at contemporary maps, in particular the French military map of the terrain, and compared it with this panorama; it's instructive, but "comparing" is itself a bit like WP:NOR, and needs to be used judiciously.  I'll probably get round to uploading the panorama somewhen or other. 
I haven't found anything definitive, but I'm still hoping. New suggestions welcome! 
--Old Moonraker (talk) 07:49, 5 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Confused valleys near Balaklava 

message: why is the word "ambush" used?  as i recall the poem and the discussions, the charge was head-on into a clearly visible artillery emplacement.  isn't an ambush a surprise and/or hidden attack?Kdammers (talk) 05:48, 13 October 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ambush? 
Talk:Mosholu Parkway station

message: I recently came across the October 23, 1952 Mosholu train crash. I wasn't sure whether it belongs in the article or not, but if so, here are two references about it.   - HugoHelp (talk) 23:16, 5 February 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  October 1952 train crash Comment 
Talk:Active Member

message: I think that the following two sentences need to be verified since they include accusations that as far as I know are not real: "The group has caused controversy throughout the years, mainly when foreign hip-hop artists accused Active Member for illegally using musical compositions of their own (a practice known as beat jackin', which is rather frowned upon in hip-hop). However, formal lawsuits never occured." I know none foreign hip hop artist that has accused Active Member for beat jackin', and even though is an accusation commonly made (and possibly true) by greek fans of other greek hip hop groups, I do not think that this should stay here unless backed up by some verifiable source.--daydreamer 18:36, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No proof provided yet, therefore I've removed the above mentioned in italics part.--daydreamer 16:28, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

text: I see no signs of repeated vandalism, imo there is no need for this article to be locked.--daydreamer 15:54, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Beat jackin'?? 
Talk:Irminones

message: The article says that "They may have differentiated into the tribes Alamanni, Hermunduri, Marcomanni, Quadi, Suebi) circa 10 CE. At this time the Suebi, Marcomanni and Quadi had moved southwest into the area of modern day Bavaria and Swabia. In 8 BCE, the Marcomanni and Quadi drove the Boii out of Bohemia. The term Suebi is usually applied to all the groups that moved into this area, though later in history (ca. 200 CE) the term Alamanni (meaning "all-men") became more commonly applied to the group. This became the basis for the French name for Germany and the Germans." It should maybe be noted that the first mention of the Alamanni is in AD 213, when they undertook their first serious assault on the agri decumates. What's more, this can't quite have been simply a new name for the Suebi, since the Suebi took part in the great Rhine crossing of 406 and afterwards settled in the north-west of the Iberian peninsula. I also doubt that the Marcomanni and Quadi in Bohemia are "usually" collectively called Suebi; I have come across no such convention in my reading. The Alamanni probably settled in modern-day south-west Germany, not in Bohemia (at least, that's what the thrust of their attacks into Germania Superior and Raetia would suggest). --Helmold 18:41, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Theory rather than fact? 

message: Could "Irminones" in fact be "Ari-mans" - Ari-men - Aryans? 
Ari in Indoeuropean, meaning "elevated", from which the german "Herr" (sir, or lord) comes from.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 161.53.149.242 (talk) 13:05, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Irmin > Proto-Germanic *erminaz, *ermenaz or *ermunaz, meaning "great, high, exalted". You will have a hard time linking it to Aryan, and why would you want that anyway? In any case, you would need to provide some evidence for such a claim. 95.166.163.48 (talk) 08:35, 28 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Aryans ?
Talk:Nuclear power in Russia

message: That's true that Finland imports electricity from Russia. In 2005, a fifth of Finland’s energy was covered by net electricity imports of which two thirds came from Russia. Definately this electricity includes also nuclear power. However, the sentence "In August 2005, Russia and Finland agreed on Russian imports of nuclear energy to Finland" is incorrect because no agreement was concluded. There was reference to the article in "The Moscow Times", which, referring to the HVDC Russia-Finland, says that Russia plans to sell nuclear power to Finland. However, there is no reference to the Finnish position. The submarine cable between Russia and Finland needs approval by the Finnish Government, but the decision is not made yet. Therefore, I deleted full above-mentioned sentence as incorrect.Beagel 18:53, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

message: It seems strange to include the information from List of nuclear power plants of Europe and CIS#Russia because it's a 100% repeat, and repeats will inevitably get out of sync.  It could be a good thing, but I don't think any other article in this series is going in the direction. theanphibian 06:49, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: List

message: There is a discussion which is also related to this article or category. You are welcome to take a part of this discussion. Beagel (talk) 15:24, 2 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Naming
Talk:Vinnie Caruana

message: He is also a pioneer for being so devoutly straight-edge while in The Movielife.
I fail to see what this sentence means.  Does it imply that there were no people in bands who lived a straight edge lifestyle before him?  If so, that's hardly the case. --AndyMcKay 00:15, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Straight edge pioneer? 
Talk:SS Copenhagen (1898)

message: The coordinates need the following fixes:
* The Florida Bureau of Archaeological Research Coordinates for this site are
26° 12’ 20” N, 80° 5’ 6” W 
Bureau Underwater (talk) 18:24, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Coordinate error 
Talk:Urca de Lima

message: The coordinates need the following fixes:
* The Florida Bureau of Archaeological Research Coordinates for this site are
27° 30’ 19” N, 80° 17’ 57” W
Bureau Underwater (talk) 18:35, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Coordinate error 

message: *concerning nao de refuerzo: The given source explicitly states , that it might indicate reinforcement of the ship's structure. If you want to argue something else please provide a source. The source used is not a "brochure of some diving club" but a brochure of the "museum on the seas", that is the museum managing the archeological site.
*regarding the source addition and the the line about King Philip: That line is taken out of context and in particular makes no sense at the place where it was introduced and gives misleading impression. While it is true in general that Spain during this period occasionally had to rely on French help to to secure/escort its ships on he routes to the Americas, this is not a statement with regard to single French ship El Grifon. On the contrary it did not join the trip to protect the Spanish ships from pirates but to seek protection from them by the larger Spanish fleet. In addition the source which was incorrectly referenced for it, was referenced for that section already in a different style (named references).
--Kmhkmh (talk) 04:34, 27 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: recent edits
Talk:Jules Verne's Rocket to the Moon

message: The second image on the page—the US poster for the film—fails WP:NFCCP#8, so I removed it. As this is a UK film, the UK film poster is preferred, as are UK details in the infobox, rather than bloating out with foreign dates and companies. - SchroCat (talk) 08:26, 26 May 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Rather than simply deleting the information, perhaps an "alternate versions" section is warranted. The US release is a significant re-edit, not just a new title. - Dravecky (talk) 16:38, 26 May 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I think it would be useful to have coverage about the re-edit, but that does not necessarily mean displaying the related poster image. A non-free image in the infobox tends to be the identifying image for the topic, and any secondary non-free image needs a more specific rationale. That's why we do not include soundtrack cover images or images of home media (DVD/Blu-ray cover) unless there's contextual significance. Showing the U.S. poster does not increase readers' understanding of how the film was re-edited, though. Erik (talk | contribs) 17:18, 26 May 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I can certainly live without the poster and, barring extensive discussion of the US re-edit and marketing decisions in the article (backed, of course, by reliable sources), I have no plans to re-add it. - Dravecky (talk) 06:46, 27 May 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  US Film poster