lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Bigelow Tea Company

message: Why link Ruth Bigelow's name back to the same article?  Seems a bit pointless.
Aalgar 10:09, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Link? 

message: This doesn't seem to be accurate as of now, unless you hold an excessively strict definition of "tea garden". see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tea_production_in_the_United_States --Jaybeanstalk (talk) 04:00, 6 October 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Only Tea Garden in the U.S?
Talk:Big Star Markets

message: There are Stores in Alabama using the Big Star name. So, it's not defunct. 72.148.31.114 (talk) 23:46, 21 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Still Exists

message: Stores currently operating under the Big Star name in places like Alabama, Arkansas, Mississippi, and Tennessee, were part of a franchise operation that was never directed to the connected to the Big Star chain proper.
What does “were part of a franchise operation that was never directed to the connected to the Big Star chain proper.” mean?
2601:483:101:86B5:DDED:AA1D:6667:747C (talk) 05:59, 8 January 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  What?
Talk:Big Sky Brewing Company

message: Moose Drool--Best beer ever.  If I could only drink one beer for the rest of my life, it would be Moose Drool.  I love Moose Drool.
71.37.213.189 16:05, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
Talk:Big Machine Records

message: This article needs an overhaul.  Big Machine Records is part of the Big Machine Label Group which also consists of Valory Music, Republic Nashville and the newly revived Dot Records. Steelbeard1 (talk) 15:41, 27 March 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I was just about to comment on this! What do people think is the best way to proceed? Article name change, or redirect? Regards,--Soulparadox (talk) 07:37, 10 January 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: It already tells what the parent company is. -- Joseph Prasad (talk) 07:38, 10 January 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, I guess that is fair. Even though I didn't explain it clearly, I was wondering if both pages are necessary, as the Label Group page is merely a paragraph long. Regards,--Soulparadox (talk) 07:54, 10 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Big Machine Label Group 

message: I mean should she be on the "Pop" roster of BMR I mean she's only made a single Pop album and four country albums and is still considered a Country act. Finaltwo (talk) 04:30, 31 May 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Speak Now and Red both have pop elements too. Pop is a more general term than country so we should stick with that. Calidum T|C 04:47, 31 May 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Taylor Swift pop or country 
Talk:Big Cat Records

message: This page is written as though it is a direct advertisement and has no citations or references. Please check the factual accuracy of this page.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zyxab (talk • contribs) 19:53, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I added a source to keep it from getting deleted and cleared out some crap, but it still needs some work. --Explodicle (T/C) 18:13, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Neutrality Dispute
Talk:Bethlehem Sparrows Point Shipyard

message: This article is about an entity named Sparrows Point Shipyard and Industrial Complex. It was formerly named Bethlehem Sparrows Point Shipyard, but it apparently hasn't had that name for quite a while. 
Why was it renamed? Lou Sander (talk) 23:33, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Improperly Named Article?  

message: Perhaps a list of historical or significant ships built or scrapped by the yard might be insightful.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 144.183.224.2 (talk) 20:49, 12 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  List of significant ships 
Talk:Bethany House

message: There is also a Bethany House in Pittsburgh, PA, USA. Located on Chicago Street in the Northview Heights part of the city, it was built as an early 20th century farmhouse, later renovated into an ancillary building for a nearby church.
Typofixer76 (talk) 17:32, 12 September 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bethany House, Pittsburgh 

message: The statement, "Historical fiction is considered any book that is set prior to 1950. Contemporary Fiction is defined as any book which is set in the last fifty years," leaves fiction dating from 1950 - 1967 (as of this note) not classified.  I do not know what the actual definitions are, but they should be more precise than this.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.245.169.2 (talk) 15:01, 21 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Historical Fiction vs. Contemporary Fiction 

message: I need to talk to someone concerning the copy right law for a study guide that is  no longer being published. I found two on aamazon. If I biy one, will it be okay for me to copy the guide for our Bible study since I cannot find them anywhere. Destined For The Throne by Paul Billheimer. We can purchase the book bit we cannot find enough study guides for every one to have their own copy.
Joyce Davis 512-468-2837
joycedavis1946@gmail.com 2600:1700:270:24C0:339C:E614:C806:BB39 (talk) 20:22, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copy rights
Talk:Best & Co.

message: The history portion of this article seems to be copied and pasted directly from the history section of the Best & Co.'s official website.  See:  http://www.bestandcompany.com/customercare.cfm?siteid=14&uuid=0&t=13#beshis
The article makes reference to specific articles of clothing, which it refers to as "our."  
--Toiletsewere (talk) 23:47, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copy/Paste from Best & Co.'s website 

message: By all means, can anyone explain to me why two companies that aren't related to each other should share the same article? I sincerely, genuinely, do not understand this. I've so far been unable to locate a policy or guideline that explicitly states that an article should not be about multiple topics that have nothing to do with one another, but it seems thoroughly self-evident to me. If an example is necessary, look at Circuit City, or virtually any other term that's been disambiguated because it has multiple meanings with the same name. You don't just shove it into some other article about something else. Theoldsparkle (talk) 16:22, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Because the article is at least as much about the brand rather than the corporate shell that owns it. Take a look at the Ipana article; that's the way we treat these things. When a car manufacturer revives a model name, we don't create new article for each iteration of it -- especially when the newest variation is of at best dubious independent notability. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 16:46, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you for responding. I can tell you that now that an actual argument has been presented--that the article is about a brand, not about a company--I can see the point, although if we were to agree on that, the article should be revised to make that more clear. However, from the information in this article (and that I removed), I still don't see any indication that the 1990s company was ever intended to be a revival or reconnection with the older brand, as with Ipana. The way that I read it is more like if someone were to write a new book called War and Peace, and as a result the article War and Peace were divided into two sections, one about the Tolstoy novel and one about this entirely different work, which would be silly because we can just give them separate articles. If there were information here about the owner of the new company having bought the trademark from the old company and seeking to present the new company as a continuation of the old -- thus continuing the older brand and not just using the same name -- I could feel differently (although, then again, I think that's pretty much what happened with Circuit City, and yet we have two separate articles for the old company and the new one). Theoldsparkle (talk) 17:10, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unrelated companies sharing an article
Talk:Besson (music company)

message: I assessed this as a mid-importance article for the Wikiproject Musical Instruments, for being an article on a musical instrument manufacture. I rated it start class because it has a fair amount of content, organized into sections, but needs more inline references to let people know where information came from. If you improve it and want reassessment or need help or have questions, please drop me a line. Jacqke (talk) 19:35, 9 May 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Assessment
Talk:FSM Beskid

message: Does BOSMAL stand for "Ośrodek Badawczo-Rozwojowy Samochodów Małolitrażowych"? That's what I see on their website, bur it doesn't make any alphabetical sense. If any of our Polish speaking editors could clarify, it would be appreciated.  ⊂| Mr.choppers |⊃  (talk) 05:41, 4 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: BOSMAL?

message: I question the relation of the Twingo to the Beskid, when neglecting other similar cars such as the Citroen AX. The tone of the article does not seem to fit the content either; Renault 'profited off...  2,400,000' I'm not sure if any other users have better sources about this, but the quote from Renault officials is not in the source either. Viper polo (talk) 14:47, 27 June 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: I've removed most of unsourced content. The article read like ramblings of alt-right conspiracy theorist.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.193.204.141 (talk) 23:51, 7 December 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: Twingo
Talk:Berry Global

message: The paragraph about the purchase of Rexam was a close paraphrase of the source. I did a fair bit of copyediting to make it less close and to tighten up prose. Also, the source says "In millions of dollars, except as otherwise noted" (top of page 18); "an aggregate purchase price of $351" didn't seem likely (!), and I fixed the amounts.
--Thnidu (talk) 23:47, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  History 

message: The title block keeps getting edited, reverted, and re-reverted. If this keeps going back and forth, the page will need to be temporarily page protected. Reverting last change and moving future discussions here instead of having an edit war. Cookrw1989 (talk) 18:11, 29 July 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Location Revisions
Talk:Berman and Company

message: Sorry flowanda. Misread some of the changes you had made to the article. It's a known PR firm with a high awareness of its internet image, so I scrutinized them overmuch. Addisonstrack 21:49, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Bwah-ha-ha-ha-ha! Gee, I suck at evil laughs...but no problem...and I don't mind scrutiny at all. :) Flowanda | Talk 23:57, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Sorry flowanda

message: This article has been edited anonymously by Berman and Company, who are lobbyists for amongst others the American Beverage Institute, the Center for Consumer Freedom, the Center for Union Facts and the Employment Policies Institute.
IP address of 66.208.14.242 traces to Berman and Company, see the Whois report. I Spy With My Big Eye (talk) 11:06, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Good that there are people on the lookout for this kind of thing :D! I'll be going at that users edit with appropriate vigor. But first I'm removing some of the uncited claims. I searched for "employs razor-sharp wit and unconventional tactics to annoy, unsettle and, some say, intimidate its opponents" but could only find it here  http://www.jewishworldreview.com/0803/nanny_science.asp (hardly the chicago tribune). So removed. Sean Heron (talk) 20:17, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Warning: Lobbyists [[Berman and Company]] at work  

message: I've removed an old neutrality tag from this page that appears to have no active discussion per the instructions at Template:POV:
::This template is not meant to be a permanent resident on any article. Remove this template whenever:
::#There is consensus on the talkpage or the NPOV Noticeboard that the issue has been resolved
::#It is not clear what the neutrality issue is, and no satisfactory explanation has been given
::#In the absence of any discussion, or if the discussion has become dormant.
Since there's no evidence of ongoing discussion, I'm removing the tag for now. If discussion is continuing and I've failed to see it, however, please feel free to restore the template and continue to address the issues. Thanks to everybody working on this one! -- Khazar2 (talk) 15:01, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  removing POV tag with no active discussion per [[Template:POV]] 

message: How is a bill to a single client in 2012 relevant to the overall income?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jdabs (talk • contribs) 17:38, 24 July 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Incomplete income section
Talk:Berkley Books

message: Does Berkley Books have anything to do with Berkeley Medallion Books?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dexter Nextnumber (talk • contribs) 21:50, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is there a connection? 

message: I have been reading "Born in Shame" a book by Nora Roberts.  I got to page 296 and the book repeats pages 265-296 then jumps to page 329.  I finished the book but I'm sorry I missed pages 297-328.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.120.191.217 (talk) 14:55, 7 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pages missing in the book I read 

message: I don't know all about Berkley Books, but I do own a number of them (the sci-fi and military ones mentioned, plus some on education).  It doesn't make sense that this entry starts off by saying that Berkley specializes in "erotica romance" and then goes on to list a bunch of well-known sci-fi and military-thriller writers....something seems fishy here....?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.204.241.152 (talk) 03:57, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  erotica?  Really?
Talk:Berkeley Software Design

message: I am proposing this article should revert to its original title - this article has been renamed without any discussion and, IMHO its original title refers to a more historically significant and notable business. Letdorf (talk) 23:13, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Requested move

message: iXSystems may be of questionable notability, but BSDi certainly isn't (see, for instance, USL vs BSDi). Also, the link between BSDi and iXSystems is pretty tenuous - BSDi effectively died while after it was acquired by Wind River. As I have stated above, I propose reverting the name, adding more refs for BSDi if necessary to prove notability. Letdorf (talk) 13:40, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I wouldn't be opposed to just rolling back to the previous title and content right now. The changes are disputed and no sources were provided. Go right ahead. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 13:44, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed deletion 

message: I have added an independent iXsystems page and removed the redirects. I have done my best to be objective and welcome feedback.Maiklsdeksters (talk) 21:18, 18 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Independent page 
Talk:Berghaus

message: Who is the famous Aky?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.153.252.39 (talk) 11:06, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

message: berghaus 2A00:23C7:160B:4101:34A9:1C69:7E2D:AF73 (talk) 22:22, 17 February 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  berghaus
Talk:Franchise player

message: Soriano doesn't fit that description at all.  He is not necessarily going to be associated with the Cubs after he retires since he spent so much time with NYY, TEX and WAS.  He is not very active in commercials and it is not convincing that he is the highest selling jersey in Chicago (over Prior, Wood, Lee, Ramirez, etc).
70.21.243.68 09:08, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Something

message: I'm most familiar with hockey, so I can't speak to other sports, but in the NHL, a "Franchise player" is not necessarily the best player on the team, but generally a good or great player who has played on only one team or played on one team for a long time. Example: Although Joe Thorton is widely regarded as the best player on the San Jose Sharks, Patrick Marleau is considered the franchise player because of his long tenure with the team.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nevcamion (talk • contribs) 02:32, 4 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Alternate meaning of a "Franchise Player" 

message: Would it be possible to get some more examples listed for this article? Specifically to include more recent players.  ChillyBlanket (talk) 02:52, 1 May 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  More examples
Talk:List of law enforcement agencies in Oregon

message: Could you please put the agency names in alphabetical order? Also, it may be better to concentrate on writing articles about the agencies rather than adding redlinks to the list. Thanks. Katr67 23:14, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Suggestions

message: Lists on Wikipedia aren't useful unless they are lists of Wikipedia articles. Because Wikipedia is not a collection of indiscriminate information. I think it can be assumed that every city and county (and other entities) are going to have their own law enforcement, so I don't know if this list is helpful without wikilinks. I'm also not sure every law enforcement agency is going to be notable enough to have an article. We should probably concentrate on getting articles written on some of the larger agencies, and perhaps only include those on this list? Thoughts? Katr67 13:53, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, see WP:LIST, one of the recognized is for development. Lists with red links allow editors to see what articles need to be created. Dsmdgold 02:08, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: My point was that they weren't even redlinks--it was just a list. The people adding to this list need to take a look at that list link more than I do so they know what Wikipedia lists are for. I'm 100% behind letting redlinks stand and list development (see List of Registered  Historic Places in Oregon for a list to which I've added dozens of redlinks, with the assumption that every NRHP property is inherently notable), but I still believe not every law enforcement agency in the state is notable enough to be added to this list. I could be wrong. Feel free to revert my changes but I really wish someone would start writing articles on some of these agencies. Katr67 16:56, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The oddity about the Oregon list when compared to many of the other state lists is that they list every agency as red links rather than as a plain list.  The  notability of police depatments it is an interesting question. I would think that just about any police department, even of the smallest town, would easily meet the [[Wikipdia:Notability#General notability guideline]|General notability guideline]].  I'm glad to see that you are tending the Oregon NRHP list as I do similiar tasks on the Okalhoma list. Dsmdgold 03:35, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  List 

message: The redlinks that were recently added are odd and non-intuitive. I believe each agency should be named as it calls itself, and disambiguated as necessary, without piping unless it's a disambig. Thus: Eugene Police Department and Springfield Police Department.  I wouldn't consider something like this a reliable source. Katr67 (talk) 10:40, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree. Not sure that all those red links really accomplish much. Tiptoety talk 01:53, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Naming conventions for law enforcement agencies?
Talk:Benelli Armi

message: The part about Mr. Knapp's record-setting feat doesn't really seem to fit with the rest of the article. I understand mentioning he used while setting a record but the amount of detail seems unneccessary. Mr. Knapp has his own stump, why not give all the relevant details there instead?199.1.137.105 (talk) 19:45, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Tom Knapp
Talk:Twig Com

message: Renamed article appropriately to reflect the business chronology: from Benefon to GeoSentric to newly formed Twig Com. Working on a separate GeoSentric article and will redirect "GeoSentric" there when ready. - LuckyLouie (talk) 18:26, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  GeoSentric sold Benefon business, new company formed as Twig Com Ltd. in 2012
Talk:Benchmark (venture capital firm)

message: Why do some (but not all) investments get a separate section? what is the criterion? Jeff Song (talk) 18:25, 12 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  investments 

message: Zendesk redirects to Benchmark (venture capital firm) which links to Zendesk ... Did you mean "recursion"?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.50.246.19 (talk) 16:38, 5 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recursion 

message: This is too resume like and within the industry very transient, so not sure it even serves a purpose at the current length.--RedmondKane (talk) 22:09, 30 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Investments section 

message: They invested at sub-700M valuation and generated great returns.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 31.154.30.222 (talk) 16:11, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Read the cited article. It was debacle. Chisme (talk) 17:27, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Investing in a con job isn't good for a firm's reputation, no matter how much of a "killing" is made. Chisme (talk) 18:18, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wework was a great investment for benchmark
Talk:Bell Records (1950s-70s)

message: Because this Bell Records and the British Bell Records were co-owned and both were renamed Arista Records, the two articles should be merged.  What do you think? Steelbeard1 (talk) 01:08, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: They used to be different parts of the same article. I did not break the initial article up, but I also do not see a point in re-merging the parts. Zephyrad (talk) 23:48, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think that the merged article should simply be called Bell Records with links at the top of the article to the two earlier labels called Bell Records. Steelbeard1 (talk) 20:29, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge this article with [[Bell Records (UK)]]
Talk:Beginner Books

message: This information is inappropriate for this entry. Others may view it as appropriate for a sub-article (I don't) but I think it's uncontroversial that it doesn't belong here. Bongomatic 09:17, 18 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  List of 200 books 

message: Is there a reason not to include the publication date for each book? 72.221.121.162 (talk) 17:40, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Publication dates? 

message: 174.125.245.168 (talk) 19:42, 16 December 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. JTP (talk • contribs) 20:40, 16 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 16 December 2016 

message: 69.29.249.94 (talk) 20:41, 4 April 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. Stickee (talk) 23:13, 4 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 4 April 2017 

message: The Cat in the Hat Beginner Book Dictionary
by the Cat himself and P.D. Eastman
Random House 1964
ISBN 0-394-81009-0. ISBN 0-394-91009-5. (Lib. Ed.) 152.208.103.31 (talk) 12:20, 18 August 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Missing book from Beginner Books list
Talk:Beate Uhse Group BV

message: Japan had sex shops before WW2.  My step father encountered them during the US Occupation of Japan.  He said the Occupation Administration didn't like them because they didn't understand Japanese culture.  The statement that Beate Uhse started the 1st sex shop in the world seems objectively wrong and probably based on false advertising.    I wonder if there were sex shops in 1920s Berlin as they had every other form of sex activity.  Saltysailor (talk) 04:30, 6 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  not 1st in world 

message: Please contact me 2001:8F8:1825:AA29:CC79:F312:F234:A0E7 (talk) 19:58, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Please contact me