lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Lists of places in Wales

message: This list page may state that the various lists are for principal areas, but the titles of the pages themselves are ambiguous. They just state 'List of places in X', where X could possibly mean more than one thing. For example 'List of places in Caerphilly'. In ordinary parlance Caerphilly means the town of Caerphilly, not the local government principal area of the same name. Similarly, where local government areas share the name of a traditional county but have a different area, confusion can arise. Perhaps a suffix of 'UA' or 'principal area' on the article titles would be useful? Owain 11:01, 5 May 2005 (UTC)
Talk:Richard Harrison (actor)

message: Look. Just because he was born in Utah, does not mean he's a practicing Mormon. I am getting really sick of mormons coming along claiming everyone who ever set foot in Utah as a mormon. STOP IT! He is my uncle, and he is most certainly NOT A MORMON!  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.89.136.65 (talk) 22:24, 5 December 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mormonism
Talk:Ise-class battleship

message: I'm just curious about the part where it says they never saw combat operations due to the lack of aircraft. Most things I've read about Japanese aircraft (a special interest of mine) mention how many carrier aircraft (such as the Yokosuka D4Y in the article) lost much effectiveness towards the end of the war because most of the ships intended to carry them were lost. Thus they were forced to operate from land bases, to the detriment of performance. Lack of pilots was an issue, but they found enough young and poorly trained pilots to carry on operations. So I'm curious why it says they lacked planes when most places say the planes lacked ships. I got here from the article on Operation Kita, which says they were being used in 1945 to bring supplies from Singapore to Japan, but they were sent out in 1944, without knowledge that they were going to be given this task. All I can think is that in 1944, when they embarked, there were still enough carriers to demand all the available aircraft and so they sailed without any. Later, when the aircraft were operating from land for a lack of carriers, they were already in Singapore and thus were too far away to be of any use?.45Colt 20:50, 10 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lack of aircraft? 

message: The caption list the ship as Hyuga, but the images says it's the battleship-carrier Ise?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 132.198.84.191 (talk) 16:25, 11 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wrong ship name in photo caption? 

message: There a some different numbers i don´t understand. Infobox says Bulkheads: 199–224 mm. But in the text it is 102 to 203 mm The same with the deck. At the infobox 85 mm and in the text its 34 to 55 mm. Mr.Lovecraft (talk) 15:18, 25 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  general information
Talk:Unexploded ordnance

message: UXO 41.191.104.240 (talk) 11:01, 5 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  UXO  

message: There are only nine countries in the ten countries list. Also, none of the sources mention China's 10 million UXO.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Solo1y (talk • contribs) 19:45, 9 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ten countries  

message: Unexploded Ordnance has many effects on post-conflict societies outside of physical harm to the people who live in contaminated areas. The segments of society negatively affected which are often overlooked include foreign direct investment, education, aid distribution, industrialization, and the environment. Each of these sections of society is affected in drastically different but intertwined ways which will be discussed further in subsections of this article. User0030 (talk) 19:51, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Societal Effects
Talk:Mineral turpentine

message: My parents use Paint thinner for everything: if there are oil stains on, let's say, a fan (residue from cooking), stains in the washroom sink, even for a chandelier that they thought needed cleaning.
Are there any dangers to using this? I know it's volatile, but what about the chemical residues?
-T 65.92.163.117
:Well, fire, of course. And who knows what carcinogenic and mutagenic effects may be discovered over the years, ehh? But I've been known to use various (relatively) non-polar solvents for cleaning as well, although I tend to prefer to use WD-40 rather than paint thinner and where I use it, a slight oily residue is often desireable. Paint thinner should evaporate without residue. It might have the tendency to dissolve some surfaces, of course.
:Atlant 12:52, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hazards? 

message: Paint thinner is also known as Ghost tonic because when thrown on paint in an haunted house, the paint forms into the shape of the ghosts that live there. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.118.125.24 (talk • contribs) .
:Reference? Citation? Or just something you heard?
:Atlant 12:56, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ghost Tonic 

message: I have removed the following text from the article:
In South Korea, Thinner is called (sin-na) and used as illegal substitute for gasoline due to high tax rate. Some teenagers inhale thinner as alternative to drugs since South Korea's illegal narcotic market is well kept controlled under government enforcement.
The remarks regarding South Korea are irrelevant. The use of turpentine substitute as an inhalant is already mentioned. If turpentine substitute (rather than "thinner") can in fact be used as a functional alternative to gasoline, this deserves to be mentioned, but then I doubt its usage is limited to South Korea, or any more prevalent there than in many other places. -- scwimbush 17:15, 7 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Deleted material 

message: Is this the same thing as the (patently false) "odorless" turpentine?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.93.40.145 (talk) 21:38, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Odorless" mineral spirits?
Talk:Ashton, Stalybridge and Liverpool Junction Railway

message: I can see little justification for this railway having a separate article. It was only in existence for less than three years; it then became part of the M&LR - which does not have an article, since the existing one, for no apparent reason that I can see, was moved to become the L&YR!!!! - which then became part of the L&YR. The L&YR was itself the amalgamation of a large number of constituent railways, only one of which was the AS&LJR. I am sure that the majority of the others do without an article - so why this one? Peter Shearan 11:48, 5 May 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  The AS&LJR was an important line, forming part of the present day principal line between Manchester and Leeds. A number of things have changed since the above commentary was written: the M&LR does have its own article. Contrary to the assertion above, the AS&LJR didn't become part of the M&LR. In 1847 the L&YR was formed from two existing railways, the M&LR and this one; a third constituent was under construction and had not been opened. Afterbrunel (talk) 12:33, 14 February 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Untitled 
Talk:Manchester and Leeds Railway

message: There was NO good reason to remove this article to emerge as the Lancashire and Yorkshire Railway. It is NOT the same thing: admitting that the M&LR became part of the L&YR, it was not the only one: the L&YR has been described as "amalgamations, leases, agreements, extensions, widenings and deviations" [Railway Year Book 1912, Railway Publishing Company] and as such the major parts of it should have separate articles. Peter Shearan 11:54, 5 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Grinling says (page 61) "a line from Askern, near Doncaster, to Methley, near Leeds, was already authorized
to the Great Northern's ally, the Manchester and Leeds." Shouldn't we be told about this? Afterbrunel (talk) 08:33, 25 July 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: The line between Knottingley and Askern Junction was a branch of the Wakefield, Pontefract and Goole Railway (WP&GR), it was authorised on 16 July 1846. The Manchester and Leeds Railway amalgamated with the WP&GR and the Ashton, Stalybridge and Liverpool Junction Railway by an Act of 9 July 1847 and was renamed the Lancashire and Yorkshire Railway. The WP&GR main line was opened for public traffic on 1 April 1848, the Askern branch following on 6 June, at the same time as the first part of the Great Northern Railway to open - between Askern Junction and Stockbridge (Arksey). --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 18:19, 25 July 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Askern
Talk:Liberation Day (Netherlands)

message: "The nation was liberated largely by Canadian troops and to thank them each year thousands of Tulip bulbs are sent to Ottawa where the annual May Tulip Festival is held."
This statement is incorrect. Tulpis are sent to Ottawa each year not because Canadain troops liberated the Netherlands but because Canada shelterred the Danish Queen Juliana during WWII. In fact her daughter, Margriet Francisca, was born in Ottawa during the war, but the maternity wing of the hospital was tempoarily declared dutch territory so that the princess would be ellilgible to ascend the throne.
:You mean the Dutch Queen, I hope? (Who was, at the time, still a princess, and is no longer alive)
:Mistaken nationalities not withstanding, the statement IS incorrect, so I removed it. I'm not sure if it were the Canadians who largely liberated the Netherlands, so that part can stay. It would be nice if someone could verify it, though. Lunapuella 12:30, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  The Dutch wikipedia at least says that it was Charles Foulkes, a Canadian General, who negotiated the capitulation. I added this information to the article. esmi 13:11, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Some contemporary amateur film of the liberation - stated to be "Dutch Public Domain" - here:  and here:   — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.150.18.165 (talk) 19:33, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Canada and tulips

message: An article explaining a national Dutch holiday shouldn't be about Canadian troops for 95%. That Canadians took part in the liberation is mentioned in the article already. The topic of the article is the Dutch Liberation Day, not the Canadian invasion into occupied Europe. I have changed this again, please don't set this back. Especially when not replying to the explanation for removal.
Trebaxus (talk) 22:47, 27 December 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removed all non relevant information (again)
Talk:The Adventures of Willy Beamish

message: The section now labeled "Controversy" doesn't make much sense to me. The line about political incorrectness was removed, and the first paragraph now seems to be an abrupt segue from "humor that hasn't aged well" to "things that might be considered objectionable". Then there's some sort of rebuttal about the environmentalism mixed in with comments about a parody of Rush Limbaugh and a cameo by Star Trek characters. Could someone please explain the flow of this section? I don't want to simply revert the edits since I made the last major edit before this new change. Don't want to appear overly proprietary and so on. -DynSkeet (talk) 13:22, May 5, 2005 (UTC)
:I agree.  This section is very POV as written.  -- 64.60.140.146 21:32, 27 July 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: You're right, it's not really something that'd belong on the wikipedia article.  If there's another page that explains how to make it work under Windows though, feel free to add it as an external link...  if not, perhaps people will find the solution on this discussion page anyway. ;)  --CherryMay 19:55, 6 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: As mentioned by several people above, the "reception" section was too POV and much of it struck me as barely relevant (mentioning characters from "Star Trek" appearing in the background as some sort of "balance"). I've rewritten it to try and get rid of the POV, but it still doesn't look right and all the information under "Reception" seems wrong. Might be better to remove the reception part and distribute the information elsewhere.
I removed quite a bit of stuff and if there's any of it that people think might fit in elsewhere, the original text I edited is as below
Willy refers to a bar's bouncer as a "tinker bell", the school bully smokes cigarettes, and a family of Japanese tourists (complete with cameras and stereotypical accents) transform into Ninjas. Yet, the game does have a solid environmentalist theme, a parody of conservative radio talk show host Rush Limbaugh, and characters from the humanist Star Trek: The Next Generation television series made cameo appearances as audience members at the frog racing contest. The game also has several none-too-subtle sexual innuendoes (not least of which is "Horny", the name of the frog); while the main character is a nine-year old, the game is obviously intended for a much older audience.
Zagrebo 12:40, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I can sort-of understand the reasoning behind including eBay price listings etc - it's reminiscent of Record Collector magazine. The problem is that this kind of thing is either impossible to source authoritatively, without it being original research, or so transient that it would have to be continually updated. -Ashley Pomeroy (talk) 16:33, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Reception
Talk:Gottschalk of Orbais

message: There are different spellings of his name like Gottescalc, Godescalc or Godescalchus, I have no idea if there is some need to add them here. And there is some confusion with the place of birth. Here is listed Mainz but other sources give Bern. And of course the date. I have seen 803, 804 etc. And his death is also a bit uncertain I think years like 868/869 would be a bit more accurate.
* Above commentator, please sign your comments! --Treekids (talk) 02:01, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Spelling

message: According to the The International cyclopedia: a compendium of human knowledge, Volume 6 By Richard Gleason Greene, p. 810 (I found an excerpt in Google Books) Gottschalk of Orbais was also known as Fulgentius. I don't know if this is an *encyclopedic* fact.  --Treekids (talk) 02:04, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Fulgentius
Talk:Pegasus Bridge

message: I believe, after further research, that the bridge is over the Caen canal, not the River Orne. I believe this because of this reference, which I think is more reliable than the others I've found, many of which are copies of us. Also this reference which even shows an ariel photograph. DJ Clayworth 14:14, 5 May 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: "British veteran's organisations" would imply that there is one British veteran, and that he has several organisations. "British veterans' organisations" would be used when there are many veterans. DJ Clayworth 15:21, 21 November 2005 (UTC)

text: I think it's too dodgy to be going on with, so I've removed it, leaving not a lot left. --Dtcdthingy 00:10, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: The waterway over which it goes

message: As far as I can determine, the RUR were not involved in the coup-de-main but landed by glider near Ranville (LZ-N) later on D-Day.  I'll keep looking but if I can't find a ref, or one isn't addded, I'll remove the info. TheSmuel (talk) 09:24, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I can't find any source that confirms this so I'm removing it TheSmuel (talk) 09:38, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Royal Ulster Rifles 

message: There is a level about operation Deadstick, which is very similar to the bridge and how it was taken over. Heroe Of Time (talk) 09:48, 18 November 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Should there be any added reference to the first Call of Duty game?
Talk:Civil Engineer

message: I'm going to change the redirect to Civil Engineering from Engineer's Degree.  I'm a Civil Engineer working in the US and I've never heard of an "Engineer's Degree".  Most of the European Civil Engineers I've met hold Masters Degrees.  Regardless of the degrees they hold, I think the Civil Engineering page holds the information that people linking to Civil Engineer are looking for.  Toiyabe 14:22, 5 May 2005 (UTC)
Talk:Percy Hobart

message: His name should be pronounced like "cupboard", but with t at the end rather than d. Source --his brother Charles.  Seadowns (talk) 15:33, 23 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pronunciation of Name 

message: Anyone know what Hobart's rank was when he was given command of the 79th?  DJ Clayworth 14:29, 5 May 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: He was a Major-General from '37 and never promoted above that rank, though not due to a lack of talent IMO. Leithp 17:42, 5 May 2005 (UTC)

text: The Sherman tank was, the DD bit wasn't. GraemeLeggett 15:04, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Untitled 

message: :Image:79th armoured division badge.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 Wikipedia articles 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 fair use rationale.
If there is other 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 uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.Betacommand (talk • contribs • Bot) 04:17, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fair use rationale for Image:79th armoured division badge.jpg 
Talk:Barnburners and Hunkers

message: I changed the name of this page from "Barnburners" to "Barnburners and Hunkers."  There is no separate article on just Hunkers, and the article that was originally called just "Barnburners" had equal information for both groups.  Also, the way the article was constructed, the causal observer would think that Hunkers were the same thing as Barnburners, rather than their opponents (I made that mistake when I first saw it).  I just felt that this change would help to clarify. Kakashi-sensei 14:32, 5 May 2005 (UTC)

message: Arthur Schlesinger's The Age of Jackson explains this a lot better 108.28.145.40 (talk) 19:11, 5 July 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Schlesinger is better 

message: I see that the folk etymology of Hunker was removed earlier this month. A better source could be useful - The Bold Brahmins by Lawrence Lader notes the 'hankering for political power' language (p.134), incidentally, though doesn't cite anything - but I think it's a useful bit of information to include. As the page stands now there's a clear reason Barnburners were called Barnburners but Hunkers is left a mystery. Mainstay17 (talk) 15:36, 18 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Etymology of "Hunker"
Talk:Dunman High School

message: I have done a rewrite of the article. If you are changing the article for the first time, please read Wikipedia:No original research and Wikipedia:Neutral point of view before adding anything. In particular, please take note to add the source of your information, and don't include your opinion of the fact (or its potential effects) inside the article itself. Thank you. Kimchi.sg | talk 21:55, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rewrite 

message: This is clearly an important academic school in Singapore and a high importance rating would therefore seem justified. Keep up the good work and continue to add references. With some more content and a few pictures you could be a B. Dahliarose 22:25, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Assess
Talk:Kateb Yacine

message: je cherche imail de la famille kateb sirtout le fils de kateb yacine envoyer le moi sur mon imail *****_*****@yahoo.fr et merci
:I censored the e-mail, since it would be a target of spam. ← ANAS Talk? 11:53, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Taoyuan County

message: someone find out what this historical person Hale has to do with the taoyuan uyghurs please- http://en.cnki.com.cn/Article_en/CJFDTotal-ZYMD200703005.htm .Дунгане (talk) 22:29, 8 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  uyghur population 

message: Taoyuan's making international headlines:  http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/dec/10/chinese-government-investigates-cancer-village-pollution-case 71.235.191.13 (talk) 18:12, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  In the News
Talk:Political Liberalism

message: The utilitarian element remains, does it not, in overlapping consensus?  The definition of "reasonable" must be set at somewhere less than 100% of the population; there are fringe Others with radical beliefs that are in opposition to any liberal, democratic government.  Thus, the minority must still be ignored for the interests of the majority.  I suppose that is unavoidable, but original position and overlapping consensus, while probably the most fair in practice, do not eliminate the inherent societal oppression of an Other.
----
I don't think so (but I could be wrong). Overlapping consensus is designed to garner agreement from 100% of the people in the original position (OP)- the consensus generated out of the OP is based in Rawls' view of the fact of shared rationality (cf. Habermas' concept of communicative rationality). This shared rationality will produce some form of minimal liberal standards akin to Rawls' two principles. I suppose that Rawls would say that those "fringe Others with radical beliefs" are essentially wrong in their understanding of justice, and are on some level being unfair. 
In a sense, utilitarian considerations could be seen as applying to ideas, rather than people; it could be argued that somewhere less than 100% of the ideas are covered by the criterion of 'reasonableness' and therefore that there is an element of majority rule in the realm of ideas, but I don't think this captures Rawls correctly because it ignores the fact that he is essentially an absolutist, at least on the level of societal justice. The OP tells us what type of justice is objectively correct for the public sphere- this is non-tyrannical (and non-utilitarian) because everyone's shared rationality comes to the same conclusion. The only people who are excluded are those who do not have this basic human reason- examples might include the mentally handicapped or children who do not yet have the ability to reason. Everyone else in the OP reaches unanimous consensus.
Of course, in one sense, you are undeniably right. Any system of morality that says anything meaningful will exclude some things, otherwise it would be pointless. Rawls is trying to be as inclusive as possible by grounding his system in a fundamental facet of humanity. {Frekja 22:00, 9 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Comments
Talk:Fusion (Yu-Gi-Oh!)

message: I'm replacing Example 3 from the article; it's so wrong it's not even funny. The XYZ series (X-Head Cannon, Y-Dragon Head, and Z-Metal Tank, along with the various fusions) isn't that hard. 
:Example Three:
:*Player A has "Z Metal Tank" on the field. He summons "Y Dragon Head" to the field. Due to these monter's Effects, they instantly Fuse and are sent to the Graveyard, and "YZ Tank Dragon" is Special Summoned from the Fusion deck immediately.
#they instantly Fuse. Nope, sorry. Yes, they can fuse together, but it is not mandatory.
#sent to the Graveyard. Again, sorry. Due to the effects of all 4 XYZ Series fusions, the fusion material monsters are removed from play. A subtle, but very important difference. Cards that have been "removed from play" are seperated from the Graveyard, and cannot be brought back by cards that target the graveyard, like Monster Reborn.
I'm fixing the example, and cleaning the page up a little bit. --DennyJay 15:30, 5 May 2005 (UTC)