lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Group 2 organometallic chemistry

message: Great article. Hope I didn't mangle anything by resectioning it.
A few comments:
* Perhaps the name can be adjusted. Something like Organomercury compound? But Organo-alkaline earth sounds weird.
* Lead needs to be expanded, but this is not my field and i can't help
* What is the typical bonding and geometry? I'm not familiar outside of transition metals; does electron counting and the 18 e rule apply?
* Similarities with Group 12 can be expanded
* Perhaps more examples need to be highlighted, and significant contemporary work mentioned with references for further reading? 
--Rifleman 82 21:24, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: The organocalcium section says that the strontium and barium compounds are difficult to make, "and for the case of radium there are none known at all." But the organoradium section states "The only known organoradium compound is the gas-phase acetylide." A quick search showed nothing, so I don't know what section is right. Also, the organoradium section has no source. Any ideas?
--201.78.103.171 (talk) 11:48, 4 August 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Radium
Talk:Đàn tranh

message: Is Đàn tranh really 檀箏 in Chu nom/Hán tự? Particularly the first character seems strange. Badagnani (talk) 19:21, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Hán tự

message: Some IP vandal is trying to add this to the article. But if you check the sources on it, you will see that the sources do not reflect the information and that the user is falsely attributing his/her OR to the sources. --Cold Season (talk) 00:59, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Southeast Asian bamboo tube
Talk:Nevado Tres Cruces

message: The expression "volcanic flux" and abbreviated units of measurement are opaque to me and doubtless tto other interested, moderately well-prepared readers. It seems not to be mentioned in Wikipedia elsewhere. A brief phrase defining the unit of measurement (of volcanic gases?) would help. -Wetman (talk) 21:11, 27 December 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Fair point. I've changed the wording; is it better now?Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 22:38, 27 December 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  "volcanic flux" 

message: I am surprised this was GAed without saying anything on human history. I've added something on Polish climn from 1930s. @Jo-Jo Eumerus - I don't want to suggest GA reassessment right now, but we need more on 'human/climbing history' IMHO for this to meet GA requirement of being comprehensive, IMHO... Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 09:27, 24 August 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Sure, but in practice the problem is that human/climbing history is hard to come by for all but the most prominent mountains (e.g Ojos del Salado). Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 07:23, 25 August 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I understand. I  hope what I've added helps. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 07:49, 25 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Not comprehensive
Talk:Benzilic acid

message: The following paragraph was added without reference:
:Benzilic acid contains many functional groups including alcohol, ether, ester and of course the carboxylic acid. This polar aprotic compound is insoluble in most solvents. The only solvent that can remotely dissolve this compound is ozone liquid mixture.
The same editor also changed "soluble in acohols" to "solumbe in alkanes and water". Both seemed rather dubious (hey, I am just a computer scientist!) so I undid them.  All the best, --Jorge Stolfi (talk) 04:16, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dubious edit 
Talk:Erligang culture

message: Someone wrote a section that says Erligang cities like Zhengzhou cannot be taken as Shang settlements but didn't cite sources. Meanwhile, the article on Zhengzhou Shang City says that Zheng Zhenxiang confirmed that Zhengzhou site belonged to Shang by taking artifact samples. Can anyone find a source to clarify whether Erligang sites were Shang or not? Strongman13072007 (talk) 12:27, 22 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is Erligang culture a period of the Shang dynasty?
Talk:Dong Son drum

message: Title should be singular, as with most other musical instrument articles. Badagnani (talk) 01:11, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: True. Now done. SilkTork ✔Tea time 10:53, 18 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Title

message: the patters seem very similar to indus valley civilization, the round animal procession with a central star is frequently depicted, this also has similar artistic styles to sanxindui golden disc. 202.188.53.210 (talk) 22:36, 18 December 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  should get more researched 

message: :File:Dong Son Drum Design.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a non-free use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
-- Marchjuly (talk) 07:58, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for File:Dong Son Drum Design.jpg
Talk:Doubles (bells)

message: Much of the material here relates to any number of bells.  Should it be moved to a common page "Names for numbers of bells" for example?  Doubles(bells) should then redirect there, as should Triples which currently redirects to Change Ringing.  Alternatively should this material be merged into change ringing? Martin of Sheffield (talk) 11:56, 9 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Common Page
Talk:Drumhead

message: when was invented the drumhead ?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.245.218.166 (talk) 08:59, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Prehistory. Hyacinth (talk) 20:40, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Invention
Template talk:New York Jets

message: This is from the List of NFL champions (1920–1969) article, talking about the first four Super Bowls -- 
"Teams winning the NFL Championship during these years move onward to compete in the first four Super Bowls. The Green Bay Packers continued on to win the first two Super Bowls. The latter two teams, the Baltimore Colts and Minnesota Vikings, lost in their respective Super Bowls. These two losing teams are still credited with the NFL Championship in their official record. However, they are not considered as world champions, but as the less prestigious league champions."
And though it was less prestigious, it was still a league championship. This has been the standard for all the years I have been editing NFL articles. If anything, the standard has been not to count Super Bowls I - IV in total Championships. Don't you agree that if you are going to make this the standard, then you should change all the other articles showing KC, OAK, BALT and Minn as league champs from 66-69? And we are talking about a lot of changes to get to your standard of not counting these titles. We know this is not happening, and we should revert back to showing the deserved league titles as it has been for years.  Thanks. I am posting this in each talk page on each template so others can give their input. Spparky (talk) 19:20, 19 August 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Super Bowls I - IV Comment
Talk:Duophonic

message: These two statements mean the same thing.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.68.94.86 (talk) 07:54, 8 May 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: delaying the left and the right signals by means of delay lines and other circuits, desynchronizing the two channels by fractions of a second

message: Quote from the article:
...and wound up getting "accidentally" reissued on CD throughout the 1980s and 1990s.
Why was "accidentally" enclosed within quotes? Are those scare quotes? Was it an intentional act that someone tried to pass as an accident? Please clarify.Devil Master (talk) 18:55, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Accidentally or not?

message: also see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Precedence_effect  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.49.165.87 (talk) 23:45, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Haas effect 

message: The fake stereo article redirects to Duophonic, while Duophonic is Capitol Records' name for their fake stereo process. Why isn't it that Fake stereo is the main page on this topic and Duophonic redirects to it? 66.67.112.2 (talk) 19:24, 3 November 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fake stereo vs Duophonic
Template talk:Minnesota Vikings

message: Look at all the proof that Minnesota Vikings were NFL champs that season -
: WIKI articles
:: 1969 NFL playoffs
:: 1969 NFL season
:: 1969 Minnesota Vikings season
:: List of NFL champions (1920–1969)
The Super Bowls were NOT counted as league championships from 1966 - 1969. That is standard throughout Wikipedia NFL articles, If you do not count this one, then you must change every Wiki article listed above, plus several others. If you would like to take this to a higher Wikipedia authority, then lets discuss it with them, but in every other article, Vikings were NFL Champs, and the Chiefs were AFL Champs in 1969 season. The Super Bowls I - IV were the games not counted as league Championships, they were 2 different leagues. The Super Bowls I - IV were the AFL-NFL World Championship Games and not NFL Championships till the 1970 season. Spparky (talk) 18:09, 19 August 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Do not take away league championship in 1969
Talk:Duxianqin

message: This is the same instrument as the Dan Bau, just given a Mandarin name because of its use among the Gin people. It doesn't make sense to treat it like a separate instrument, especially since it wasn't even played in China until the islands the Gin lived on were transferred to China  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Himeaimichu (talk • contribs) 17:21, 2 January 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Support the merge I agree with you on this Choixong di (talk) 06:34, 22 April 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge with Dan Bau
Talk:L. Brent Bozell Jr.

message: A notability tag has just been added.  This is quite surprising:  Bozell was the founder of a significant American political magazine (Triumph), was the founding father of an entire sub-branch of American conservatism, and was the ghost-writer of the book that launched the national career of Barry Goldwater and helped to make him the 1964 Republican nominee for President of the United States.
Could someone who doubts his notability be more specific as to what aspects of WP:NOTE Bozell could conceivably lack? — Lawrence King (talk) 21:51, 5 July 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: As no one has argued against his notability, I am removing the tag. — Lawrence King (talk) 23:57, 11 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Notability 
Talk:Azo formation

message: Another page on Azo coupling already exists (as a stub). It is more accurate and can be better extended to an actual article. This one for example, mentions azo couplings must be with phenols, but they can actually occur with a variety of activated aromatic compounds. Since both of the are stubs, I suggest merging the two and expanding as Azo Coupling (more appropriate name). I will contribute to the azo coupling article in the next few days, and then this one can hopefully be merged. 
(Francis The Bird (talk) 16:11, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree - but the other article is now a start class, and there is no need to merge - just a redirect. Christian75 (talk) 08:11, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Up for Merging
Talk:Hydrogenase mimic

message: This article has been improved since it was tagged as being too technical for most readers to understand back in March of 2008.  It seems reasonably understandable now.  If nobody objects in the next seven days, I am going to remove the tag.  If anyone thinks the tag belongs, please point out specific areas where I can improve the article to make it more understandable. Thanks!  Guy Macon  03:23, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Removing tag now. Guymacon (talk) 18:41, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Too technical?
Talk:Íslensk malstöð

message: It should be located at Íslensk málstöð and not Íslensk malstoð as it is currently, I can not move it since it the article allready exists but is only a redirect. If an administrator can delete the current Íslensk málstöð and move this article over then birds will sing and the rainbow shine. --Stalfur 03:09, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Incorrect spelling
Template talk:Kansas City Chiefs

message: This is from the List of NFL champions (1920–1969) article, talking about the first four Super Bowls -- 
"Teams winning the NFL Championship during these years move onward to compete in the first four Super Bowls. The Green Bay Packers continued on to win the first two Super Bowls. The latter two teams, the Baltimore Colts and Minnesota Vikings, lost in their respective Super Bowls. These two losing teams are still credited with the NFL Championship in their official record. However, they are not considered as world champions, but as the less prestigious league champions."
And though it was less prestigious, it was still a league championship. This has been the standard for all the years I have been editing NFL articles. If anything, the standard has been not to count Super Bowls I - IV in total Championships. Don't you agree that if you are going to make this the standard, then you should change all the other articles showing KC, OAK, BALT and Minn as league champs from 66-69? And we are talking about a lot of changes to get to your standard of not counting these titles. We know this is not happening, and we should revert back to showing the deserved league titles as it has been for years.  Thanks. I am posting this in each talk page on each template so others can give their input. Spparky (talk) 18:46, 19 August 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Super Bowls I - IV Comment
Template talk:Indianapolis Colts

message: This is from the List of NFL champions (1920–1969) article, talking about the first four Super Bowls -- 
"Teams winning the NFL Championship during these years move onward to compete in the first four Super Bowls. The Green Bay Packers continued on to win the first two Super Bowls. The latter two teams, the Baltimore Colts and Minnesota Vikings, lost in their respective Super Bowls. These two losing teams are still credited with the NFL Championship in their official record. However, they are not considered as world champions, but as the less prestigious league champions."
And though it was less prestigious, it was still a league championship. This has been the standard for all the years I have been editing NFL articles. If anything, the standard has been not to count Super Bowls I - IV in total Championships. Don't you agree that if you are going to make this the standard, then you should change all the other articles showing KC, OAK, BALT and Minn as league champs from 66-69? And we are talking about a lot of changes to get to your standard of not counting these titles. We know this is not happening, and we should revert back to showing the deserved league titles as it has been for years.  Thanks. I am posting this in each talk page on each template so others can give their input. Spparky (talk) 19:37, 19 August 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Super Bowls I - IV Comment Comment
Talk:Lara Giddings

message: She was pregnant as of January 2012. Page needs updated. I assume she had her baby but even if something happened the page is still old. 
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/opinion/political-leaders-dont-have-the-time-for-babies/story-e6frgd0x-1226258805145  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.134.221.153 (talk) 21:28, 22 July 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Giddings wasn't pregnant—in that article she just said that being pregnant and giving birth while being a political leader was "the last taboo"—she was saying it hasn't happened yet, but she hoped it would not be an impediment to high office in the future. --Canley (talk) 23:45, 22 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Personal Life 

message: The article says that she would have returned to the backbench after her defeat, but "Ms Giddings, now Labor’s justice spokeswoman" and "The former premier and current Opposition Attorney-General" does not sound like backbench to me. --SamWinchester000 (talk) 09:19, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Backbench
Talk:Berthold Bartosch

message: Please include citation for The battle of Skagerrak. According to IMDB, Filmweb.de and other sources, Lotte Reiniger had anything to do with that film. Kjersti Lie (talk) 15:25, 30 March 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  The battle of Skagerrak
Talk:WICR

message: According to http://wicr.uindy.edu/Who%20We%20Are.htm, the station is 5,000 ERP with the equivalent of 30,000 due to tower height.  Is this incorrect?  Also, the infobox still states 5,000 ERP. -John2429 19:46, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The page http://www.radio-locator.com/cgi-bin/finder?sr=Y&s=C&call=WICR&x=17&y=5 on radio-locator.com also states it's 5,000 watts ERP, and they have 2004 listed as the last FCC update, so I'm going to change the ERP in the article body back to 5,000. -John2429 20:14, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Transmitter Power
Talk:Pantsuit

message: > Pantsuits were often deprecated as inappropriately masculine clothing for women. For example, until 1993, women were not permitted to wear pantsuits (or pants of any kind) on the United States Senate floor.[7][8][9] In 1993, Senators Barbara Mikulski and Carol Moseley Braun wore pants onto the floor in defiance of the rule, and female support staff followed soon after, with the rule being amended later that year by Senate Sergeant-at-Arms Martha Pope to allow women to wear pants on the floor so long as they also wore a jacket, thus allowing pantsuits, among other types of clothing.[8][9]
I'm genuinely looking for a canonical source on the above claims. 
Citation #7 does include the line "After all, it wasn't until the early '90s that women were even allowed to wear pants on the Senate floor." -- but doesn't say anything about how that ban was placed or enforced.
Citation #8 Also cites the presence of a dress code. But the dress code itself should be available somewhere, no? 
Citation #9 redirects from <http://www.rollcall.com/features/50th-Anniversary_2005/fifty_anniversary/-9592-1.html> to the front page of Rollcall.   — Preceding unsigned comment added by 4.16.82.118 (talk) 20:08, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Senate Ban 

message: What do people think about fitting the below text into this article?
Good luck, 69.50.70.9 (talk) 04:16, 25 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pantsuit Power
Talk:Bank of Georgia

message: An editor keeps deleting the early history (back to 1903 and its subsequent nationalisation). This seems properly sourced. If the editor has a reliable secondary source which contradicts the existing source, let's consider it here. Dormskirk (talk) 21:47, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title: Early history
Talk:Bhushan Kumar

message: Hello  T series team
How i get lisence from you,to use a copyrighted or any bollywood song in my cover dance video .
If you will  grant and give me permission  i will greatful to you. Raj soumyaranjan behera (talk) 18:35, 19 July 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Request to get lisence on cover dance song 

message: Add info to this article about how Kumar evaded taxes, here are some sources. 344917661X (talk) 00:38, 3 December 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tax evasion
Talk:New Earth Time

message: How notable is all this? Where is it used? Has any technology implement it? Even Swatch Internet Time is more well-known. Pictureuploader (talk) 19:09, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Usage

message: If this is an article it should be marked stub. Who invented, why, why 360°, why CET, references, etc. etc.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Chosig (talk • contribs) 16:36, 27 November 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The website's last copyright date is 2021, and User:Thesevenseas (who appears above) was indefinitely blocked a long time ago, so I think it's fair to say that after twenty-four years New Earth Time has not caught on. -Ashley Pomeroy (talk) 16:56, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I’m inclined to think New Earth Time is at most a stub. Fghijklmn45679 (talk) 01:46, 26 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  It this an advertisment or an article?
Talk:Bill Carter

message: May not meet notability standards. 69.245.114.60 (talk) 08:39, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Obviously incorrect. Flatterworld (talk) 01:26, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Bill Douglas

message: There's a musician called Bill Douglas, you can check it at Google and his CDs at Amazon.
I think there should be a link to him. I put it and someone took it out.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.216.200.197 (talk) 16:48, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  MUSICIAN 
Talk:Larry Pogemiller

message: Removed non-NPOV language. "Pogemiller is known for his combative leadership style" does not cite a source.  Citing a minor conservative writer's nickname for Senator Pogemiller ("the jerk") does not constitute news-worthiness. 98.240.211.232 (talk) 03:16, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It was easy to find sources for Pogemiller's combative reputation, as it is well-known in Minnesota politics. I removed the bit about the blogger nickname. Jonathunder (talk) 17:47, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: non-NPOV language

message: I suspect that the following needs clarification:
 Minnesota State Senator from the 58th District
 In office
 January 1983 – January 1993
 Preceded by 	Eric D. Petty
 Succeeded by 	Carl W. Kroening
depending on how one interprets "MN 58th district" and "succeeded by".
My guess is that Carl Kroening did not represent the same geographic area as 
Pogemiller since district numbers changed.  (Kroening was my State Senator and 
Pogemiller was not.)  Could someone more familiar with MN Senate Districts check 
on this? Fholson 15:00, 24 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Succeeded by Carl W. Kroening ?
Talk:Lekso Aleksishvili

message: This article has some consistent errors in grammar and syntax and could be edited for clarity. -Nostriker (talk) 20:27, 8 August 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Needs copy edit 

message: The citation style used here is not especially clear and could be improved by using footnotes and having a list of references at the end (which it currently does not). -Nostriker (talk) 20:27, 8 August 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Citation style
Talk:Leland Olds

message: Only the link to JFK's statement about the death works. All the others return a page not found error. Is it okay if I remove them? I think I will if nobody has answered this question in a week. Hervigin (talk) 14:32, 5 September 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links 

message: If anyone can find a picture, it would be helpful. American In Brazil (talk) 12:38, 30 December 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Picture Needed