lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Austin Princess

message: '1956 saw a new Princess Mk IV. This more modern styled car had more 'integrated' looking front wings in the modern style, but was little changed under the skin. This model lasted until 1959; subsequent limousine-only handbuilt cars were made in limited numbers as the Vanden Plas 4-Litre Princess Limousine until 1968. This formed the basis for the eventual Daimler Limousine.'
The Vanden Plas 4-Litre Princess Limousine does not form the basis of the Daimler Limousine. The Daimler DS420 limousine is based on a modified Jaguar Mk X / 420G platform which has nothing to do with Austin. Deconstruction 21:08, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Indeed. I've just found this (having been fixing a link to the "Daimler Limousine" from Jaguar Mark X article – the actual link is Daimler DS420) and so have corrected this present article by removing the claim. – Kieran T (talk | contribs) 21:52, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

message: A later model than is displayed on this page with a much less traditional front was fully developed and announced perhaps about 1963/4 but (at the very last minute) may not have gone into full production. Either MOTOR or AUTOCAR showed a full cutaway drawing of the new car on its announcement. It was a Rolls-Royce size luxury car and not a lot cheaper. There was no limousine version. I think the very much smaller PrincessR with the 4 litre engine may have been cobbled up and pushed into the market slot - to use up engines? Eddaido (talk) 10:50, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  There was a later model 

message: The article talks about a 1275 and a 1300 version as if they were different things but as far as I am aware there was no "1275" - the 1300 actually displaced 1275cc. I suspect they would have had trouble squeezing more cc out of the A series block as borewise the wall between cylinders 2 and 3 was already paper thin, and probably the stroke was taken to the limit in the 1275cc. Bagunceiro (talk) 23:23, 12 January 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: The article is referring to the model names used, not to the actual engine capacities. Please refer to the in-line reference. GTHO (talk) 08:50, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  1100/1300 
Talk:Jaimoe

message: It finishes off with Trucks is still with the band. This article is on Jaimoe... When did he leave? Redwolf24 1 July 2005 22:16 (UTC)
This article goes into great detail about the ABB, stuff that's not really Jaimoe specific and would be more appropriate on the ABB page.
Also: The article says that Jaimoe came before Butch, but on the Beacon DVD, Butch says he was there 1st and Duane subsequently brought in Jaimoe. Dlchambers (talk) 13:20, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: This article needs references bad! It was also written like a band article, not an individual member's article, which has got to be changed. Some events are vague, and next to nothing is said about the individual as opposed to the band's story, at all. --leahtwosaints (talk) 21:29, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Problems

message: Hi all, is his name pronounced as JY-moh, or JAY-moh? I.e. in IPA: /ˈdʒaɪ.moʊ/ or /ˈdʒeɪ.moʊ/? It's just not entirely clear.EvidentialEditor1556 (talk) 06:21, 19 August 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: confusion about the pronunciation of his nickname
Talk:Mott problem

message: Hunting for refs.  Appearently John Bell (of Bells thm) discusses this in several papers, giving several interpretations.
Modern references that mention the Mott problem are:
* Andrew Platt, Ken Kiers, Wytse van Dijk, Numerical Simulations of Alpha Tracks  (appears to be a student project guided by a professor) 
* Mario Castagnino1 and Roberto Laura, Functional Approach to Quantum Decoherence and the Classical Final Limit: The Mott and Cosmological Problems, International Journal of Theoretical Physics, 39 no 7 pp 1737-1765. 
* J.J. Halliwell, Trajectories for the Wave Function of the Universe from a Simple Detector Model, (2001) Phys Rev D 64 pp 044008.
Appearently, astrophysicists enjoy looking at this problem. linas 16:36, 10 July 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Note also: I have NOT verified any of the journal references; I have the impression that one of the two Mott references may be incorrect, and possible one of the Renninger references may be incorrect.  linas 16:48, 10 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: References

message: On 5 July 2005, this article was nominated for deletion. The result was keep and cleanup. See Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Spherical decay experiment for a record of the discussion. – ABCD 18:31, 11 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: VFD
Talk:12 Downing Street

message: Congratulations on making it to today's listing on the "Did You Know..." section of Wikipedia Main Page.  The process of making it the listing takes a bit of effort and involves the quick cooperation of many editors.  All involved deserve recognition, appreciation, thanks and applause.
:Best Regards,
::  Bfpage |leave a message  21:37, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Congratulations
Talk:Eric Elfman

message: I have searched, at some length, for references to removed the  template from this article, but failed. All of the sources that I have found are sales sites, Goodreads, blogs, and announcements of book releases. Nothing that I would consider reliable. The best that I could do was to update the article a little and add a list of his books. Leschnei (talk) 00:53, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Utterly failed to find references
Talk:Runs created

message: Reading this I don't know what 'H' and 'BB' stand for in the simple formula, it may be obivous to others, but not me.  Please provide a link for these or a description like some of the others have.
: Okay, I filled it in for myself, hopefully correctly, please confirm. WilliamKF 03:33, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article assumes knowledge 

message: Can someone with a reference please confirm the formula for D please?  I saw it elsewhere with the first term being HR not H with runners in scroring position.  Thanks. WilliamKF 01:53, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Confirm D ? 

message: I read somewhere (I forget where) many years ago that a simple arithmetic formula for Runs Created is R+RBI-HR. Simply put, it is how many runs and runs batted in a player creates, minus HRs because a hitter gets one run and one RBI for a homer. Has anyone else heard of this? Who originated this simple formula? Kingturtle 05:04, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That formula (R+RBI-HR) is called "Runs Produced".  "Run Produced" is a fairly well-known stat, but its unrelated to Runs Created and should go in either its own article or in an article summarizing run estimation formulas.  Unlike RC, its a teammate-dependent stat in that it includes R & RBI which are affected by who bats near you in the batting order.  Plus, subtracting HR's seems logical from an individual perspective, but on a team level it double-counts runs that are not HR's.DavidRF 15:24, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

text: I just created Runs produced, based on this conversation. I marked the article as a stub, and it probably needs work. Kingturtle 15:48, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  a simpler formula 

message: There are other versions or Runs Created. I reject the idea that Bill James owns the right to refer to his version as "Runs Created" and no one else is able to do so. I have made edits that have been undone by some Bill James fan-boy that point to other versions that use the name, Runs Created.
IrishPrince (talk) 13:52, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: "Runs Created" is not a generic term.  Its specific to Bill James' formula.  The generic term is "run estimator" and there are dozens of them.  Linear Weights, BaseRuns, ExtrapolatedRuns, Batting Runs, Equivalent Runs, Contextual Runs, etc, etc.   See .  As I understand it, many of these have indeed been shown to be more "accurate" than Bill James' formula, so calling me a "fan-boy" doesn't really make any sense.  If you think your run estimator is better than Bill James', then fine, just don't try to call it "Runs Created". DavidRF (talk) 14:15, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  other versions
Talk:Pentium Extreme Edition

message: "The only chipsets that will work with the Extreme Edition are Intel's 955X and NVIDIA's nForce4 SLI Intel Edition. Attempting to use an Extreme Edition with an Intel 945-series chipset will disable Hyperthreading, effectively turning the processor into a Pentium D."
Did the Pentium D have an unlocked multiplier, though? If not, then this statement is technically not correct.
:I think the Pentium D's multipliers are unlocked downwards; not too sure though. Regardless, taking a Pentium XE and disabling Hyper-Threading will, for all intents and purposes, give you a Pentium D. Granted, one with unlocked multipliers, but the same as the Pentium D in most other regards. --DaveJB 15:10, 12 July 2005 (UTC)
Talk:The Eternal Idol

message: The body of the article states that the lyrics were written by Bob Daisley, with some modifications by Geoff Nicholls.  The tracklist states that Ray Gillen and Daisley wrote the lyrics.  Which is the truth? 73.81.114.72 (talk) 01:19, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Lyrics
Talk:Philip III of Navarre

message: We say he was the eldest son - which was also my understanding, but we also say that his brother Charles was born in 1305, and that he was born in 1306.  I'm assuming Charles's birth year is probably the wrong part here? john k (talk) 00:04, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  eldest? 

message: Marianne Mahn-Lot (d. 2005), daughter of Ferdinand Lot, wrote a thesis for the École des Chartes titled Philippe d'Évreux, roi de Navarre (1328–1343) in 1937. Unfortunately, it does not seem to have ever been edited or published. See here —Srnec (talk) 03:13, 16 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Biography of Philip III
Talk:Thinking Putty

message: Apparently this page had already been on VfD once, and was voted to keep (by 3 people, one of whom was probably a sockpuppet). This makes no sense. The page should be merged with Silly Putty and deleted. I wiped out the "external links", both of which were to vendors. This page can only be an ad, and since "thinking putty" is just another brand of silly putty, it should be discussed on that page. Jeeves 1 July 2005 23:33 (UTC)
I agree this page needs to be merged with Silly Putty.  For now, I've cleaned it up a bit, but would rather see it as a footnote on the Silly Putty page.  They're the exact same base compound...  --Rehcsif 03:31, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This page has had a 'merge' tag on it far too long, with almost no discussion.  I'm going to be WP:BOLD and suggest that after July 5, 2006 (about a week from now) if there are no serious objections, that any relavant info from this page be moved to Silly Putty and this page turned into a redirect.  Please discuss at Talk:Silly Putty --Rehcsif 21:59, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

text: Not every product/service on Earth is deserving of a separate Wikipedia article. See Wikipedia:Notability for more information. 
204.246.5.67 (talk) 20:07, 20 January 2020 (UTC)
Talk:Planeswalker

message: What non-M:tG sources use planeswalkers as characters (using the term "planeswalker" and not just alternate universes, plane travel, etc.)? If there are other notable sources, they should be added and this page made less Magic-centric; it there aren't, maybe this page should be merged with another Magic article?
68.53.127.229 (talk) 15:43, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Her spark was ignited. She was the only survivor of the trio that formed Karona, because she was a proto-planeswalker. Noneofyourbusiness 20:05, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: "In some works of fantasy..."

message: needs see also, needs external links. Needs to link to all video games with planeswalker in the title.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.160.131.17 (talk) 23:39, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  needs a SEE ALSO section asap 

message: The "Cards" section is getting ridiculously huge as a new set comes out. We either need to fork the section to a new page or maybe have the names of the Planeswalker and note which sets he/she were in. For example:
Elspeth Tirel (ALA, SOM)
Jace Beleren (LRW, WWK, M12)
Just a suggestion since I've been noticing the Cards section eat up the rest of the article.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by ChaoticHeavens (talk • contribs) 17:13, 29 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cards Section 

message: I'm really sorry I tried to fix a spelling error and one of my add-ons removed everything it recognized as the name of a card and I can't revert it because it will keep all the card names off please fix this TT.TT  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.190.101.254 (talk) 23:54, 5 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  I BROKE IT D:
Talk:Double-crested cormorant

message: Both of the last 2 subspecies claim that they are the smallest. P. a. floridanus says, "the smallest of the five subspecies" and P. a. heuretus says, "Physically, it is the smallest."  Kidsrad (talk) 15:42, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Conflicting information 

message: Hello! This is to let editors know that :File:Double-crested cormorant at Sutro Baths-6460.jpg, a featured picture used in this article, has been selected as the English Wikipedia's picture of the day (POTD) for September 27, 2022. A preview of the POTD is displayed below and can be edited at Template:POTD/2022-09-27. For the greater benefit of readers, any potential improvements or maintenance that could benefit the quality of this article should be done before its scheduled appearance on the Main Page.  If you have any concerns, please place a message at Wikipedia talk:Picture of the day. Thank you! Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 7.9% of all FPs 18:07, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Featured picture scheduled for POTD 

message: . 204.235.213.5 (talk) 15:12, 9 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Do they have waterproof feathers?
Talk:Phenetics

message: This article appears to confuse Phenetics on the one hand and Numerical Phenetics (better known as Numerical Taxonomy), on the other hand. - Dendrid (talk) 06:10, 4 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Confusion? 

message: A merger between the articles Phenetics with Linnean taxonomy has been proposed here. The proposal arose while examining Phenetics with a view of making it more explicit in the article Biological classification and to clearly differentiate cladistics from it. Since the subject is of relevance to this article, may I request comments from the watchers and maintainers of this article on this issue. AshLin (talk) 06:08, 12 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Vide this discussion the proposal has been removed. The old merger proposal with Numerical taxonomy has also been reverted. AshLin (talk) 07:30, 13 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requesting comments on a proposal 

message: The following text, under the heading "Differences from ME" (with ME not explained above) is, in my opinion, neither necessary nor comprehensible. Minimum evolution currently redirects to Maximum parsimony (phylogenetics), although it is not explained there. I don't think that it is helpful to the reader to have this very dense material on this page: 
Like phenetics, minimum evolution uses pairwise distances, and like the molecular version of phenetics it is used for molecular analysis, but unlike phenetics it uses an optimality criterion,  additive trees, tree tests, and tree scores, which places it closer to phylogenetics, and like cladistics it uses a parsimony principle. ML (maximum likelihood), BI (Bayesian Inference), clique analysis (character compatibility), and cladistics all use an optimality criterion, additive trees, tree tests, and tree scoresPhylogenetics-Building Phylogenetic Trees, 2010(cs.rice.edu). Sminthopsis84 (talk) 05:26, 4 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unclear text 
Talk:Copyright law of the Netherlands

message: * Article: nl:Auteursrecht
    * Corresponding English-language article: Netherlands copyright law
    * Worth doing because: Specialized local knowledge. We have servers in Amsterdam now, and several people say that we editors have to conform to the laws of the server country. It would be nice to know what we're going to be sued for.
    * Originally Requested by: --Yannick 02:35, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Original Translation Request 

message: I'm not familiar with the Netherlands but I was editing the intro earlier because it sounded like a definition of the word copyright in some parts. Iequivocated "Auteursrecht" (NL word for copyright) with "Nethelands copyright law" - if auteursrecht is in fact not the law but the concept, I apologize. Schrei 11:19, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Introduction 

message: "Copyright lasts for a finite time, specifically 70 years after the death of the author" is listed as a misconception but I think it is true. Is the bulleted list things that are commonly believed but are false (as the title suggests) or is it a mixture of true and false things? Barefootliam (talk) 05:17, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Misconceptions 

message: There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:United States copyright law which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you.  —RM bot 12:46, 16 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Move discussion in progress

message: Yes Puto brabu (talk) 00:02, 13 February 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Yes
Talk:Penthouse and Pavement

message: This needs to be removed. The 1982 US LP shown is a completely separate entity that has nothing to do with being an "American" release of Penthouse and Pavement.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.138.205.180 (talk) 01:32, 26 November 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. SilkTork ✔Tea time 12:43, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  American LP cover
Talk:Ghetto Brothers

message: [moved from User talk:Jmabel/Archive 31]
Hello out there ! I am just trying to find out what the ghetto brothers emblem or tattoos where, I remember a scull with a top hat. Can anybody help me? please drop me a line or two. At: cubanmulato@yahoo.com Thank you for your time and effort.
[end moved query]
Why call the heading of this wiki post ghetto brothers instead call it ghetto sisters.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.45.118.23 (talk) 07:32, 10 November 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Query 

message: I see that someone proposes that we should have separate articles on the gang and the band. That seems to me like a very odd choice: the band (whose lineup varied) consisted entirely of members of the gang, who also were the promotion apparatus for their shows, and I don't see how the two topics could reasonably be separated. - Jmabel | Talk 20:14, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gang and band
Talk:Benjamin Melendez

message: I question the appropriateness of . Has Melendez ever even been charged with a crime? I dropped a note to the person who added this, unless it's explained I intend to remove it. -- Jmabel | Talk 06:13, 1 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree - but then I don't really know the subject area. I think a "gang" stub would probably be better. Megapixie 10:47, 1 December 2005 (UTC)

text: Street gangs are generally involved in crime, and while the little I've seen indicates that the Ghetto Brothers may have been the exception that proves the rule, there isn't a present a better stub. If the proposed  gets created, it would definitely be a better stub type than  in this case, but it doesn't exist yet. Caerwine 14:43, 1 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Stub-sorting
Talk:Draining law

message: To User:LucVerhelst: You added, For the purpose of this law, those parties are considered undemocratic "that, by their own effort or by the effort of their components, lists, candidates or elected officials, clearly and with several similar signs, show that they are hostile towards the rights and freedoms guaranteed under the European Convention on Human Rights." This is why in French, the law is called "law to cut funding to anti-freedom parties."
Can you provide the proper citations for these? Aplomado talk 17:42, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Cites needed

message: Due to the extensive rewrites, I'm removing the tag. If someone still feels that the article is still POV, feel free to re-tag the article and state your reasoning here so it can be fixed. Aplomado talk 17:45, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removing "disputed" tag 

message: See discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Belgian "dry up" law --Jvb – May 15, 2006
:Sorry I apparently removed the tag too soon. But if the nominator delists, then isn't the discussion closed? 1652186 17:53, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, but wait until the administrator officially closes the discussion. Aplomado talk 18:00, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vote for Deletion 

message: I think this article should be renamed, 'The Belgian "dry up" law' is not a good name for an article on the English wikipedia. I think something like 'Law to cut funding for liberticidal parties' would be better.--Ganchelkas 14:27, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Name

message: I think the article is confusing. It states: "At the moment the law would in particular be used against the right-wing Flemish party Vlaams Belang." This seems to suggest that this is currently not a valid law. But it is also stated that the las was approved and signed.
So, is this law effective now? If yes, is it applied against "Vlaams Belang" ?
95.89.101.192 (talk) 14:51, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Current state?
Talk:Nina

message: This talk page originally redirected to Talk:NiNa. The older discussion concerning the creation of the Nina disambiguation page may be found there.
Ayla 13:51, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: I removed the  tag - hope that's OK. 58.8.9.23 (talk) 08:47, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you for cleaning up the article, I know that the split was a little messy. It looks much better now! Fortdj33 (talk) 12:19, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cleanup 

message: Why no mention of La Niña  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.169.177.99 (talk) 21:59, 31 January 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  La Niña
Talk:Hand saw

message: A picture would be nice...
...Yeah, pictures would make this article perfect. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 165.139.139.129 (talk • contribs) .
I can submit a photograph of a better saw, a top of the line Disston handsaw.Disstonian (talk) 13:01, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: We're using both the one word and two word version in the same article. RJFJR (talk) 21:10, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: hand saw/ handsaw
Talk:Crew-served weapon

message: Crew-served weapon would be better. "Crew served weapon" is the headline to a news story about an airline steward stabbed with a salad fork, no? .  The unspoken context here is that there are now weapons that are not crew-served weapons: there is no identification of what they might entail, and no link to them. --Wetman 2 July 2005 01:52 (UTC)
Much of this article seems dubious.  The phrase "crew-served weapon" refers to a large infantry support weapon, like a machine gun or mortar.  Perhaps it is also used for something like a naval gun.  But an aircraft is not a "crew-served weapon".  Intelligence, and command and control are certainly not classes of crew-served weapons, they are subjects in military science.  "All military forces are, broadly speaking, crew-served weapons"—that's just a silly statement.  —Michael Z. 2006-02-22 17:13 Z
I absolutely agree, and have edited the article.  How can one change the title to "crew-served"?
GMan552 05:58, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

message: To my knowledge, at least as far as the US Army or Marines are concerned, firearms like the MK 19 belt fed automatic grenade launcher - which is a crew served weapon fired from a turret or tripod - are still considered small arms.
I'm not sure if this is the same for other militaries, but perhaps the bottom section referencing small arms and personal weapons should be amended.
https://asc.army.mil/web/portfolio-item/small-arms-crew-served-weapons/
 71.210.205.191 (talk) 13:55, 21 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Crew served weapons can still be small arms