lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Template talk:West Coastway Line

message: How do you think we could show this on here? It is on both the SWML and the West Coastway. Simply south 12:15, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry but what am I missing here, it's a simple junction, I suggest straighting out the line (rather than have the dog leg) and using the icons I've used on the East Coastway Line at Lewes. But on a wider issue I'm not at all sure that we're not storing up all sorts of problems by using service routes (which are liable to change with TOC, Timetable or franchising changes) rather than distinct routs that cross refer to each other and stations - but hay lets go with the flow and sort it when a big bang happens! :) (SouthernElectric 12:57, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, what do people think of this version, here on my sandbox? Fit for purpose or not, baring in mind the available icons we're never going to get a geographically accurate representation. (SouthernElectric 15:24, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

text: Further to the above, looking more closely, there are other errors (mainly around Farham) which really calls for a rethink / rewrite - unless this map is to just stay representative of the service rather than the line... (SouthernElectric 11:38, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not really sure about that this represents geographically. And what is missing from Fareham, other than the ex-branch to Gosport, which i will soon add...? Simply south 12:00, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Please see my remarks/suggestion on the Talk:West Coastway Line‎ page. (SouthernElectric 13:11, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  St Deny's 

message: Sorry about the recent changes, now reverted, thought I was working within my sandbox! Blush... :( SouthernElectric 17:49, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Opps! Sorry...
Talk:Martin 2-0-2

message: This note on the Martin 2-0-2 appeared in the January 16 2023 “Morning Brief” emailed by the Seattle Times.
I cannot vouch for its accuracy but it appears that HistoryLink.org would be a reputable source. The information is not in the article on the 2-0-2, though it may be in the referenced Killion The Martinliners p 168.
I leave it to editors with knowledge of Wikipedia standards and rules to decide if the information is appropriate to add to the article:
{| class="wikitable"	
{| class="wikitable"	Today in history
 173.31.106.133 (talk) 19:11, 16 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Additional Accident Information
Talk:J. Ludwig Mowinckels Rederi

message: I have added two articles from the media as reference that should be sufficient to prove notability:  and . Arsenikk 20:46, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Importance/significance
Talk:Penumbra: Black Plague

message: There is no Mac or Linux version of this game.  Should I remove the reference?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.52.119.89 (talk) 10:03, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: There are indeed Mac and Linux versions. I bought the Linux port a couple weeks ago ;) --geekux, 19:58, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Platform(s) 

message: Somehow during the three trials, what happens if you just being "selfish" during the trials? Would the ending be different than the one where the turnngait has faith in Philip and that he then send an email to a friend? I havent tried it out yet, couldn't be bothered to play it over again. Hanchi 19 Feb  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hanchi (talk • contribs) 09:11, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Alternative ending? 

message: "Phillip reveals his desire to exercise his free will, instead of blindingly obeying a higher power."
You can tell, some liberal/libertarian wrote that ;)
I just completely disagree with the feeling here, what Phillip felt wasn't some moment of great individualism's triumph but fear, fear of  what this alien entity could pose as a threat for his kind.
This fear got the better of him, and he  instead of honouring his word he gave to this pleading alien entity and loosing his chance of comming out from this without any more suffering and bloodshed, made sure the entiti(es) would be slaughtered.
ironically he displayed some of the  traits the Turingat entity held, by sacrificing himself for the rest of humanity by doing that.
I think this was a very well-placed flaw in the character, which gave it a superb ending to the game.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.157.250.206 (talk) 14:04, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Regarding the protagonist motives in the end

message: Shouldn't there be a spoiler warning for the plot as there is in films on wikipedia?
Edwardando (talk) 22:23, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Spoiler Warning 
Talk:The Idiot Box (TV series)

message: Is it possible to move this page to the "The Idiot Box" page? I tried to move it, but it says that page is already being used. All it's being used for is just to redirect to THIS page.Skibz777 21:15, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: The Idiot Box (MTV) to The Idiot Box

message: This show along with Liquid Television was utter crap and exactly what brought down MTV to its current abysmal state it's in today.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.85.8.245 (talk) 11:21, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: The Beginning of the End for MTV?

message: Just curious as to why the 'DVD Release' section was removed. Skibz777 06:32, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: An anon IP removed it. There is a citation for the quote, so I'm considering it vandalism and restoring it. MMetro (talk) 08:18, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: DVD Release
Template talk:Book rationale

message: "Copied from  web site, and intellectual property owned by ."</br> 
(for instance, if the image is from amazon and is the property of the publisher)?
CaNNoNFoDDa 21:26, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: mmh, must have been doing something wrong. I'll try it again next time i need it.  CaNNoNFoDDa 13:27, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: {{{2}}}

message: In the purpose of use section on  the name of the article isn't being wikified.  Any ideas why? --Rockfang 09:35, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've reincluded:   which has solved the problem. Addhoc 13:03, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: So did I put it in wrong or did the site have a bug? --Rockfang 19:19, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  purpose of use 

message: I don't know how to edit templates like this, but it seems to be an error for the rationale template to always say that the article doesn't exist.  Could someone fix this?  Thanks!  Schwael (talk) 17:05, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: "Any article" is a placeholder use the name an actual article the image is used in.--BirgitteSB 20:52, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article Does Not Exist??
Talk:Tasgaon

message: in tasgaon there is a old ganesh temple.he has historical background nearl 250 years old.
Shehzaadbee urdu highschool(gotewadi rd.near by shree garege )  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.212.153.219 (talk) 11:13, 4 November 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Murakami

message: Within the iOS app, a page says it’s the disambiguation page for “Murakami,” but does not disambiguate. Instead, it displays the article on the Japanese emperor & his reign.
Now I’m accessing the page directly on the Safari browser, and it works correctly. Odd. 
(My device is an iPhone 6S running iOS 13.7. Tho I will update to iOS 14, I think the app still ought to work.) Emo Elli (talk) 20:36, 6 November 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Murakami: disambiguation fails in app
Talk:Ed Subitzky

message: I am currently working on improving this article in order that it has NPV and suitable WP formatting, but I am a WP newbie (started on WP this July) so I am learning as I go along. Any helpful suggestions on what to do and how to do it would be welcomed. Thanks. Invertzoo 21:32, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: A note
Talk:Funeral for a Friend discography

message: I'd like to know what qualifies as a b-side? I've added a few entries but I don't know if a live recording (of a single or album song) - even though it is technically a b-side to the single - is to be considered as a b-side? This question also applies to Edits (Radio or Video Edits) of songs. Kynch 21:32, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: B-Sides
Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Diplomacy

message: Started project to experiment with a few different ideas.--Steve, Sm8900 21:34, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Idle curiosity. How would this be different from, say, Wikipedia:WikiProject International relations? Unless you can find a way in which the two have at least somewhat different focuses or scopes, it might be best to just turn this into a redirect to there. John Carter 19:05, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You may be right. appreciate the comment. thanks. --Steve, Sm8900 15:26, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Project scope
Talk:L-shell

message: I believe that the extensive discussion about Charged particle motions in a dipole field, written by Wwheaton is beyond the scope of this article.  If there is no objection, I intend to delete it and provide a link to the appropriate material at magnetic field.  Drdan14 (talk) 00:02, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Instead of deleting all of it, we could summarize it and link to the appropriate articles.  We also have cyclotron resonance, providing adequate coverage of the topic elsewhere in the encyclopedia.  Nimur (talk) 00:30, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

text: Begging your pardons gentlefolk, I think an article entitled "L-shell" should aspire to describe what the thing is.  That means describing the motion of charged particles in the dipole field, including their cyclotron orbits, their bouncing between mirror points, and their drift in longitude, so that they sweep out a surface.  Of course I will be ruled by consensus, but as this is a specialized article, I hope we can wait a while for other editors to weigh in.  Thanks -- Wwheaton (talk) 06:27, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: After re-reading the article, I don't think there was any "off-topic" content; all of it is encyclopedic and relevant.  There is no need delete content unnecessarily.  Dan, what's your particular objection?  Is there a specific section or paragraph that needs to be more concise or rephrased?  Nimur (talk) 18:41, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I suppose it was just too large a block of prose for my liking.  Some figures would go a long way towards making the explanation more clear.  And maybe the title of the section can be changed to "Definition of L-shell in a non-dipole field" or something of that sort. Drdan14 (talk) 18:34, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

message: I like the suggestion that the article should be broadened to other bodies.  The (B,L) co-ordinate system is general of course, and useful for all astronomical objects with strong nearly-dipole fields.  Besides Jupiter, Mercury, Saturn, Uranus, and Neptune have significant dipole fields, while pulsars and accreting neutron stars are other obvious cases in point, as well as magnetic white dwarfs, though I am unfamiliar with the literature on these.  It will be a while before we have more data for Uranus and Neptune, but Mercury and Saturn are rapidly becoming known.  How to organize these needs discussion.  Maybe case by case for the known objects, with a more general overview of planetary magnetospheres, including both the near-field discussed here, and the far-field where interaction with external flows and fields like the Solar Wind becomes important? Wwheaton (talk) 07:35, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: The important criteria is whether scholarly articles that use the terminology "L-shell" are being published about neutron stars, galactic nuclei, and so on.  So far, I only found Jupiter- and Earth- articles.   Nimur (talk) 18:43, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Other bodies
Talk:Mohand Arav Bessaoud

message: *
*
*[http://www.la-kabylie.com/personnages/mohand-aarav-bessaoud/mohand-aarav-bessaoud.html
Note: I'm not sure whether these links, the text I added to the page and the original intent of the page creator all refer to the same person. --Coppertwig 21:46, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Links that may have useful info
Talk:Soul Caliber Legends

message: Just without the space? Soulcalibur Legends RyuuTaichou 21:44, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: changed to a redirect page. This page is uselessBlackbird3216 22:46, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Uh... Soulcalibur Legends is already an article?
Talk:Leptodactylidae

message: I think the time range should be extended to the Late Cretaceous, as Beelzebufo, a member of this family, dates back that time. Giant Blue Anteater (talk) 03:22, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: The Time Range

message: An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Vanzolinius. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so.  Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 17:10, 20 September 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: According to this paper, Vanzolinius is a proposed new genus for Leptodactylus discodactylus.  So, since this promotion of L. discodactylus to Vanzolinius discodactylus does not appear to have been challenged or vetoed, it should either be redirected to Leptodactylidae, and mention of this situation made there, or have the redirect made into its own article.--Mr Fink (talk) 17:51, 20 September 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  " Vanzolinius" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]]
Talk:Phuck

message: I began by trying to turn the wikipedia
community onto my new usage of the word phuck.
(phuck=machine intercourse)
my changes got deleted,
the first censor then allowed my post to exist
then a second censorship happened.
the first censor suggested i create a new article
phuck-a-thon
i tried that and ran into a new censor
i have used and even written in wikipedia for years
but had only participated in talk pages previously
it is quite disappointing to be censored
--3.14thagoras 04:55, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
Talk:Dibamidae

message: External Link is dead... Suggested alternative: http://reptile-database.reptarium.cz/advanced_search?taxon=Dibamidae&submit=Search - 2A02:8070:249C:FA00:3015:6C71:925B:DE81 (talk) 07:35, 18 March 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Catton, North Yorkshire

message: Even including Skipton on Swale I am quite sure that Catton didn't have a population of 17,300,000 in 2011!
Some gremlins have added their signatures to the straightforward information in the article.--Oldontarian (talk) 21:05, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Hello, thanks for the report, I have reverted the IP edits to the article. Keith D (talk) 20:11, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Size of Catton
Talk:32 Variations in C minor (Beethoven)

message: I think the text often focusses on the emotion which it may arouse in some listeners and therefore quite subjective, not really the style of an encyclopedia.
Also technical difficulty is quite subjective.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by RobertKennesy (talk • contribs) 17:04, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: OK.  Removed that part.  Wasn't really necessary.  This article could use quite a bit of polish.DavidRF (talk) 02:22, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Tone

message: An anon asked where the discussion for the last variation was.  The post was lost in mid paragraph above.  Its a good question, so I'm moving it down here. DavidRF (talk) 14:13, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Variation XXXII 

message: I think it is important to note that Beethoven seems to have disowned this piece. I have read that from several sources. At least he thought very poorly of it. I wish there could be some scholarly comment on this. I've always found this fascinating.(71.231.105.38 (talk) 09:46, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: My understanding is that he was irritated that the piece was so popular (like his septet, which came in for similar criticism). I don't think he "disowned" it though. His irritation might be worth mentioning if somebody can dig up a source.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.164.194.112 (talk) 06:13, 3 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Here's a reference somebody may want to add. "Towards the end of his life he heard a friend practicing his 32 Variations in C minor. After listening for some time he said 'Whose is that?' 'Yours,' was the answer. 'Mine? That piece of folly mine?' was his retort; 'Oh, Beethoven, what an ass you were in those days!' (Thayer, ii. 324) Opus131 (talk) 19:02, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I see it's already been added; also interesting would be the quote from Rosen's The Classical Style suggesting that this disapproval is related to his turning his back to the early Romantic stirrings of his time, instead returning to Haydn and Mozart (and indeed in their resurrection of the Baroque passacaglia form the 32 Variations are quite Romantic in construction; their instant popularity showed the way the wind was blowing). Double sharp (talk) 10:15, 12 February 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Disowned?
Talk:Blotched blue-tongued lizard

message: Someone has put a notice on the page expressing concern about the image. before i removed it, i noticed it said that the pic might not be a Blotched Blue-tongued Lizard. i think some one had better check just to make sure. thanks,Ryan shell (talk) 17:45, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It looks like it is. Enlil Ninlil (talk) 03:13, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Image
Talk:Children's python

message: I'm not sure that I'll have time, but this article is in need of a bit of a rewrite. Citations would be welcome, but it is largely written as if a pet guide rather than an encyclopedia entry about a reptile. DreamHaze (talk) 01:57, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rewrite 
Talk:Heuschrecke 10

message: It took a reading or two to understand how it was intended to be used, not because you weren't clear but that it was a distinctly different concept. Once I understood it, can its design be traced as influencing other military vehicles, not necessarily for the same purpose? I immediately thought of Armoured vehicle-launched bridge and wondered if there is any connection. Howard C. Berkowitz (talk) 20:45, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Perhaps... I will add a section on that referes to modern day technology that may have originated from something like this. Dreamafter Talk 20:51, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It is right here. Dreamafter Talk 21:09, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't see this section; the link goes back to the same article.  See Armoured vehicle-launched bridge. Apparently, the first AVLB was German and preceded the Heuschrecke, but it is probably fair to observe that the concept of a self-deploying (?) piece of equipment was German, and the idea has become common in AVLBs. Howard C. Berkowitz (talk) 02:37, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, it was removed becuase it had little relevance. ~  Dreamy § 20:19, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  I hadn't known of this vehicle. Thanks 

message: It would be good to know more about why they needed this vehicle and if it would replace other vehicles or equipment. Who made a request for the design (Amry commanders or just in general) etcGraemeLeggett (talk) 11:54, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  More background 

message: I've completed a full copy edit, added a few tags, and removed unnecessary white-space. If you're going for FAC, I would recommend lengthening the background of the gun. If you need another copy edit, don't hesitate to ask for another at WP:GOCE, or at my talk page. Good luck! EricLeb01 (Page | Talk) 16:12, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Copy edit

message: That is, the dual-use removable turret. Are there any sources explaining the reasoning that led to such "swiss knife of an SPG" concept? Wasn't it obvious that the combination was just too smart to compete against ordinary towed or ordinary self-propelled guns? East of Borschov 10:17, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Incredible

message: The definition of 
This artice may confuses the Krupp-Gruson's design with the  Rheinmetall-Borsig's design in the first two paragraph.They are not one vehicle!And the Rheinmetall-Borsig's design shouldn't be called"The production models".and the defination of "The production models "  is cofusing.Meanwhile,this artice doesn't catch the point very well.--  パンツァー VI-II  ❂Fu7ラジオ❂In the Republic of China 103rd.民國103年 12:16, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  GAR 
Talk:Farnborough Hall

message: So, before 1684, to whom did it belong? DavidFarmbrough 22:08, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: The history starts "The Holbech family acquired the Farnborough estate in 1684" but from whom did they acquire it? 
The National Trust site is similarly silent in this respect. DavidFarmbrough (talk) 16:11, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why is there no history before the Holbechs' ownership? 

message: Hello fellow editors, I've been working on a re-write on the page, and the following points are ones that I have been unable to find a supporting secondary reference for:
*"The family first moved into the house in 1692." (addressed 30.10.22)
* That William Holbech II's Grand Tour had a particular focus on Venice?
* That the hall was used as a hospital in the Second World War. (addressed 30.10.12)
* That Henry Hakewill "undertook extensive remodelling of the gardens" in the early 19th century - the reference given is this - https://whatsonoxon.co.uk/online-leaflet/farnborough-hall - but it makes no mention of Hakewill.
* "The house has been described by historians as a "small but exquisite" country house with the original Roman busts and plasterwork being exemplary" - does not say which historians, or give a source for the quotation.
* That Sanderson Miller was a "good friend" of Capability Brown?
* That reproductions of the Canalettos and Paninis hang in the house. (I don't necessarily doubt this, but a reference needs to be given for the claim)
I would be really grateful if other editors come across references that support this content, that they could add it, and the relevant citation back to the article. The National Trust guidebook from the 1990s might be a very useful resource, but I do not have a copy of it. Many thanks Lajmmoore (talk) 16:17, 1 October 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: @Liz, @Maproom, just tagging you in, so you don't miss what I've done. @DavidFarmbrough, it appears it was the Ralegh family (related to Walter Raleigh) - I can send you the pdf of the journal article that mentions this if you like? Lajmmoore (talk) 16:33, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

text: Hi @DavidFarmbrough, yes absolutely in normal circumstances - it seemed to me though, that for the time being since the page had been subject to repeated vandalism unevidenced edits, that only having verified information on it was the most prudent course. Lajmmoore (talk) 07:50, 7 October 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: In the circumstances, I agree with . As a pedantic note, no criticism intended, there has been no vandalism. The intention of those edits was not, I believe, to disrupt, but to present claims for which no valid evidence was presented. Maproom (talk) 08:02, 7 October 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks @Maproom and thanks for the correction - I've struck vandalism through - you're quite right! Lajmmoore (talk) 08:06, 7 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Page revision
Talk:The Uncommon Reader

message: In case you are wondering about why this story has been categorized as a novel, please see Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2007_September_21#Category:Novels_by_Alan_Bennett for details. <KF> 18:42, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  ''The Uncommon Reader'' is not a novel. 

message: I found the opening phrase "becomes obsessed with books" rather brutal, derisory. I think "becomes passionate about books" says it better; AB's book is sympathetic towards ER II throughout.
2A01:E0A:36F:3040:EEA8:6BFF:FEAC:C1FC (talk) 14:37, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Slight word change ?
Talk:FXE

message: FXE is also the ticker symbol for the Euro currency on the stock market.http://www.marketwatch.com/News/Story/Story.aspx?guid=%7BE3E42302-E0F0-4BFD-AF17-208EE6CFCF86%7D&siteid=mktw.  Does anyone else think this may warrant a disambig somehow? Brianga 22:16, 20 September 2007 (UTC)