lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:St. Thomas Church, Kolkata

message: This church - from the accompanying image- seems to be The St. Paul's cathedral in Kolkata.In fact the image exists as and the description there states that it is St.Paul's Cathedral.
There must be some mistake done in the article.--Dwaipayanc 06:23, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've removed the image. See St. Paul's Cathedral, Kolkata. Conscious 15:09, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: St. Pauls'
Talk:Inferior mesenteric artery

message: Can someone who knows wiki code please arrange these pictures a bit better? - Richardcavell 06:28, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

message: my mother was sick for ten months with numerous trips to the hospital.. she died of a bowel occulsion..  being diabetic her dr's stated her symptoms were masked with being a high risk pt for surgery and after gall bladder SURGERY SHE DIED.. BEING IN THE HOSPITAL X21 MONTHS  HOW COULD THIS HAPPEN?  SHE WAS JUST 69 YRS OLD THIS JAN 9TH.. CAN ANYONE HELP WITH INFORMATION?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.193.159.253 (talk) 11:30, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  my mothers death 2-14-08
Talk:The Untouchables (book)

message: I'm not sure this should be done, since I just separated the different aspects out. I feel the disambig page should be just a disambig page, and the novel should have its own distinct article. --DarrenBaker 06:37, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed merge with [[The Untouchables]] 

message: This article makes zero sense, I mean look, he "Untouchables is an autobiographical book that was written by Eliot Ness and Oscar Fraley in 1957," but the title is "The Untouchables (1947 novel)", how can it be published in 1947, and 1957, and how can it be an autobiography, and a novel?--Dp462090 | Talk | Contrib |  03:29, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Novel or Autobiography

message: Many people agree with this article that the term "Untouchable" refers to the agents.  Are we sure about this?  I have not read the book, but it is not explicit in the movie.  To me, the term makes more sense in referring to the criminals since Ness has such a hard time finding sufficient evidence to arrest them.Mingramh (talk) 05:47, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It's explicit in the book that the Untouchables are the agents, who cannot be influenced by bribery or threats. (For that matter, my recollection is that it's explicit in the movie as well, although it's been a while since I've seen it.) --Paul A (talk) 06:42, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Who's Untouchable

message: Right now the first paragraph ends by saying the unit was nicknamed "the madarjats", but that doesn't seem to be anything. Context strongly suggests it should be "the Untouchables", but there are some other comments that make me suspect the article has been targeted for vandalism before. (There was a time when I cared enough about Wikipedia to try to figure out the mess...) Shanen (talk) 12:11, 30 May 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Possible vandalism?
Talk:Greensburg Central Catholic High School

message: Does anyone have a source on this.  I did a google search, and I found a wikipedia article, Thomas Francis Kennedy, about a 19th century Scottish politician.  Adding "greensburg central catholic" to the search only gave me this wikipedia article.  I'm removing this reference until someone can provide a source. --Phantom784 06:43, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Thomas Francis Kennedy
Talk:Calculus of broadcasting systems

message: The significance of this formalism is not clear. Should it be in Wikipedia? The only citations are to one single author who originated the idea. Is the idea used by others, theoretically or practically? --mcld (talk) 13:26, 22 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Significance not clear 
Talk:Central Bank of Iran

message: In the last version, I was wrote the reference of each text.
Please submit this article or edit it with yourself.
Thanks!
—The preceding unsigned comment was added by MehranVB (talk • contribs) 06:58, 29 January 2006  (UTC)
:We do appreciate all contributions, but please do not simply copy and paste text from other copyrighted websites (such as http://www.cbi.ir), even if you do include links to the source.  To do so is breaching copyright law.  If you would like to write something about the Central Bank of Iran, please do so in your own words - for now it should go at Central Bank of Iran/Temp.  Articles about Iranian topics are especially appreciated, as part of the effort to counter the systemic bias in Wikipedia's content that comes from the fact most Wikipedia contributors are westerners and tend to write more about the topics they know most about.  Thanks, AJR | Talk 20:01, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Comments

message: To the new article --Kash 00:40, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  redirect 
Talk:Joe Sinnott

message: The editor User:JimAE refers in his History page note to Jim Amash being "copyright holder" of the Joe Sinnott interview. A person's quotes are public domain. While the format of the interview, the questions in the interview, the introduction to the interview, and the images and graphic design in an interivew are copyrightable, the quotes of the interview subject are not. An interview subject's quotes may be freely used. As someone who writes Wikibios of often unsung comics professionals, and who believes in going outside the Web for printed sources, particularly first-person sources, and admire Jim Amash, Jon Cooke, Roy Thomas, and Dr. Michael J. Vassallo in particular, no one can change coopyright law and and assert they are the copyright holder of an interview subject's quotes. -- Tenebrae 07:10, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: "Copyright holder"
Talk:Gunnison River

message: Most of the highlighting is virtually invisible to the color-blind; only the lower-left part is clear.  The situation is especially bad because it is irremediable by running the mouse over the figure.  Illegible lettering (such as dark purple characters on black) can generally be made visible by running the cursor over it.  Suggest better contrast.Carrionluggage 07:15, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Comments
Talk:Eldred Township, Lycoming County, Pennsylvania

message: I inserted a rather large block of text, with some cleanup, from: 
History of Lycoming County Pennsylvania edited by John F. Meginness; ©1892
I can't be sure if my cleanup is of errors introduced by the author or by the website. Also, I suppose that the text will be edited further, so it's not best to describe it as a direct quote. In any case (after over 100 years), it must be in the public domain. Can anyone find a way to work in the attribution? John Reid 07:20, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  History 

message: I added the source as a notice and as an external link. I then went through and wikified the township names properly and added the word township to each (Gamble for example linked to Gambling before, not Gamble Township. It needs more work still. 
It seems to be this 1892 History is a potentially useful source for expanding the Lycoming County township, borough and city articles, but decisions need to be made on what level of detail to keep. For example here, I doubt we need the list of Postmasters of Warrensville to 1892, although a reference to the list of postmasters in the external source could be made and the modern lack of a Warrensville post office could be mentioned. 
Also need to modernize what seems to be a geological / geographical discussion (Chemung, Pocono) of the township. Also need to look at the schools and churches listed. If we keep them we should update to list the current schools and churches in or serving the township. I am not sure we should keep them if they no longer exist and are not of much interest. 
Also not sure about some of the red links to people who helped found the township - I would probably keep their names but a red link to me implies the intent to add an article about them at some point and I not sure that is justified. I would cut the current residents unless they are noteworthy 114 years later. 
Ruhrfisch 19:38, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay by me. John Reid 01:15, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Starting to clean History up
Talk:Drawing Restraint 9

message: I've been seeing this statement more and more lately: "...dealing with the relationship between creativity and self-imposed resistance."  Where does this statement come from?  Is it something said by the director, or just something some reviewer made up?  I'd like to see a source for it.  Of all the themes I noticed in this film, that's one that just never crossed my mind.  Elgaroo (talk) 16:35, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Comment
Talk:Henry Mucci

message: Both articles can stand on their own. Even though Colonel Mucci was the commander of the 6th Ranger Battalion, he was not exclusively known for that. --† Ðy§ep§ion † 07:38, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  No merge 

message: The line "The military promoted Mucci to Colonel." in the section on the Cabanatuan raid is confusing as is, as the article makes no other mention of Mucci's rank.  Those not familiar with US military organization might wonder "promoted from what, exactly?  Mucci would likely have been a Lt. Colonel, then, and thus still technically a "Colonel" before the raid.  But the way the article is written, it could also be inferred he was a Major during the raid and promoted to Lt. Colonel afterwards, or perhaps skipped to Full Bird based on the raid.  I'm afraid I don't know for sure my self.  Anyone who does should fix this.  I'm removing the line for now.  --72.23.28.29 (talk) 13:11, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mucci's Rank 

message: This page states there were 513 POWs but the page on Margaret Utinsky (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Margaret_Utinsky) says there were 511 POWs.  It would be appreciated if someone knowledgeable with the applicable references can reconcile this discrepancy.  (This note is also being placed on the other page; please delete/close out both when resolved.) CheMechanical (talk) 23:56, 27 December 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Discrepancy - Number of Rescued POWs
Talk:Larry Dierker

message: * WikiWeakness #1388 - Near-truths, partial-truths, and non-truths are bundled together and presented as fact with no one individual assuming responsibility for validity. In the end none of the information is credible because none of it is verified.
The page states bluntly, “he quit managing after suffering a heart attack during a game.” He didn’t have a heart attack and he didn’t quit managing. 
In fact, the writer of that sentence wasn’t even close to the truth. In 1999, the Astros were on the way to a third consecutive title when Dierker nearly died during a June game against the San Diego Padres. He had been plagued by severe headaches for several days, then during that game, while in the dugout,  Dierker had a seizure that rendered him unconscious. He required emergency brain surgery to live. After four weeks of recovery, Dierker returned to the helm and guided the team through the duration of the season. The Astros won 97 games and won a third consecutive NL Central title.
Source: http://www.astrosdaily.com/hall/Dierker_Larry.html
...hence the book being titled  "It Ain't Brain Surgery"
202.79.62.12 07:41, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  WikiWeakness 

message: The second sentence in this sequence:
"During this game against San Diego, Dierker had a seizure that rendered him unconscious. No one gave two shits."
has no business being in this article.  It is nothing but a childishly mean comment.  I have taken the liberty of removing it. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.251.230.0 (talk) 23:46, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Inappropriate postings
Talk:List of Liberty ships by hull number

message: This page and its subpages were nominated for deletion.  The other List of Liberty ships was edited to present all the information sortable either by ship name or by hull number, making this series of pages unnecessary.  Although the formal outcome of the AFD decision was "Keep", the sense of the discussion was that the retention of this series be temporary, only while data cross-checking between these "by number" pages vs. essentially the same info in the "by name" pages is performed. doncram (talk) 23:47, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: UPDATE

message: These pages are set up in a way that makes them terribly difficult to edit.  I just want to go in and disambiguate a name, but I find myself unable to do this without spending a while figuring out how the pages are generated.
This is kind of bad, considering I'm not some random newcomer; I'm an admin.  Isn't there a more intuitive way this could be set up? Isomorphic 07:48, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: What do you think would make them easier to edit? I'm all for anything for ease-of-use. (As the user that took on creating these pages, please know that I am not in any way being defensive.) — Bellhalla 11:52, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Comments
Talk:Gross-out film

message: The list of examples here is really bad.  I've removed a few that were plainly not gross-out films (Bridget Jones' Diary, for example), but I'm sure that many of these I haven't seen aren't really gross-out films either.  Can people take a look at this list and cull? - Crenner 07:48, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Bad examples

message: How exactly can this movie be classed as Gross-out comedy? What's gross-out about it exactly?--Hibernian 17:34, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think that both parts of Ace Ventura fit the bill. Maikel (talk) 09:16, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ace Ventura: Pet Detective? 

message: I'm removing this film from the list.  It flat out does not belong. SmartGuy 18:57, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  48 Hrs.??? 

message: wtf? I'm taking this out.--Ellissound 00:10, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: THE CAT IN THE HAT?!

message: These are not gross out films. The sole purpose of a "gross out" film is to gross the audience out, which most of these movies do not do. I will remove a number of these films which do not qualify.
Just because a movie has a gross scene does not make it a gross movie.
:Gross-out movies are not necessarily gross.  Animal House, for instance, is considered to be the archetypical gross-out comedy, and it does not contain any really gross scenes. Maikel (talk) 08:34, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  No. 

message: I don't see how Wedding Crashers could qualify as a gross-out film; I don't recall any particular gross-out humor in it. In addition, The Aristocrats is a documentary and clearly does not fit the description, despite its subject matter. Friedo (talk) 09:05, 21 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  List
Talk:Yuji Horii

message: I moved this page from Yuji Horii to Yuuji Horii, because upon looking at his Japanese Wikipedia page, I found that his name does in fact have two U's in it (which in turn makes his name's correct spelling Yuuji Horii). -- Masamunecyrus 07:55, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Moved from Yuji Horii 

message: The opening credits for the DS remake of DQIV spells it as Yuji Horii, but the opening credits for the GBC remakes of the first three games spells it as Yuuji Horii. Which one does Horii himself use? --Evice (talk) 04:15, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Romanization again 

message: I was wondering about if we should have both the original release dates and the western ones or at least state where they were originally released. Any thoughts? Evaunit♥666♥ 13:23, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Published works

message: 陣内Jinnai 22:58, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  interview 

message: That claim is easily disputable as The Bard's Tale (1985 video game) came out before the first Dragon Quest and used a mana system. Therefore in this case Nintendo is wrong as its verifiable that TBT had such a system.陣内Jinnai 10:20, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Also Armor Project having an exclusive production contract with Enix needs citation, as at least four of Horii's games were not produced by Enix (Famicom Jump II: Saikyō no Shichinin, Itadaki Street: Watashi no Omise ni Yottette, Torneko no Daibōken: Fushigi no Dungeon, and Chrono Trigger). Jonathan Hardin' (talk) 13:06, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  First RPG to use mana system 
Talk:What Is and What Should Never Be

message: The external link to the lyrics of the song is not correct. Yeah, I could've fixed this but I'm choosing not to get involved in editing anything here.
-Unbreakable_MJ 08:14, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Link to lyrics 

message: Does anyone else think this song has elements of jazz rock in it? I went ahead and added it but you may remove it if you don't feel it's appropriate right now. Jakob9999 (talk) 19:00, 4 September 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: No.  - FlightTime (open channel) 00:47, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Jazz rock
Talk:Benford's law of controversy

message: Benford's quote comes from his Timescape novel.
:This is now in the article. — SMcCandlish [talk] [contrib] ツ 07:42, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Fine, but more is needed. In what chapter, in what situation, context, was the law stated? Was it called a law in the book? Who said it, a charactr in the novel, or the narrator? Was there any discussion of limitations of the law, were there characters in the novel who agreed or disagreed about the law?67.169.227.132 08:53, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Timescape 

message: I mean, the mild irritation I've been feeling about this thing could be the "passion" I'm supposed to have. And much as I liked Timescape, I wouldn't bother to reread just to look for this smug unoriginal platitude, so my "real information" will stay low. Some editors are responding to requests  for real information in a studiedly unhelpful way. Will that get my dander up? Will I nominate for afd and start a riproaring controversy about a silly article we don't know anything about? Maybe someone is a shrewd psychologist and has set us up. Or I'm paranoid. But I advise all editors to not nominate this for afd until we know more.Rich 10:48, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Is this article a clever hoax. Self referential?

message: :
--One Salient Oversight 01:45, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Userbox available
Talk:Interpretation (linguistics)

message: Why is this article in an encyclopedia?  Shouldn't it be in Wictionary? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.225.177.161  (talk • contribs) 08:42, 29 January 2006
:It does read like a dictionary entry (although wouldn't be good as that either) and repeats itself several times. I'll work on removing (or moving) the top two meanings and leaving the uses in works of art, as well as removing redundancy.
:Joe Llywelyn Griffith Blakesley talk contrib 23:45, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: I agree that this article is not necessary and thus turned it into a redirect. The Interpreting article seemed to cover everything, but if I missed something just add it in there.Man It's So Loud In Here 17:45, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge With Interpreting
Talk:Gold Coast Highway

message: It seems the Gold Coast Highway may be named the Pacific Highway for the 1.5 km long section between Coolangatta Road Junction and the Pacific Motorway, and also for the access road and ramp until the Kennedy Drive elongated roundabout. 
i.e.: Pacific Hwy (Brisway, OSM), Gold Coast Hwy (Google), No Name (UBD), Both Names (WhereIs).
There are very few, if any, signposts or actual street addresses in the area, and the segment still has the same route number. I will presume for the time being that it still runs to the Pacific Motorway, so the article, route length, kml file, junctions etc will reflect this. 
--Advanstra (talk) 00:52, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pacific Highway (South of Coolangatta Rd) 

message: Hi all, the Queensland State Archives have released this image of the "Pacific Highway" in 1952 to the public domain. Please upload to Wiki Commons and use in this article as you see fit.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.102.82.5 (talk) 04:14, 13 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Historic 1952 photo in public domain 
Talk:Methodist Church of Great Britain

message: The topic is fortunate to have a long, detailed section outlining the history of British Methodism. However, the article is very long as a result; much of the history section outlines pre-1932 Methodist history that does not strictly concern the present denomination. I recommend splitting most of the history section off into a separate article titled History of Methodism in Britain (or similar). However, it is important that a summary of Methodism's history is represented in this article – especially post-Methodist Union history. I don't feel equipped to carry that out myself, so I request that another editor comb through the section and moves content while preserving the necessary details.--Hazhk (talk) 21:25, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  History section –  split?
Talk:Blue–green distinction in language

message: The discrepancy between the wavelength range of 530-570 nm mentioned in the "blue-green distinction in language" article and the wavelength range of 495-530 nm stated in the article on the color "green" may need to be addressed. However, a discussion regarding the specific wavelength may not be relevant to an article focused on language.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mfrittman (talk • contribs) 02:50, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title: Wavelengths disagreeing with another article

message: Most of the entries here seem off-topic - only describing various languages (separate) words for blue and green, instead of discussing whether the language distinguishes them. 
Should we be listing all languages that do not make a distinction (or have a combined word = grue), hence assuming other languages do make a distinction; or simply listing the words for blue, green and grue in every language?YobMod 08:40, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: This comment is 100% correct.  The list of languages here is unusable and filled with mostly irrelevant trivia.  A much more useful approach to this article would be to call out a few useful examples rather than try to translate and provide detailed etymologies for blue, green, light blue, gray (and in several cases also red, pink, etc.) for every language in the world.  See how they do it in the article on color terms for a better model. InspectorTiger (talk) 14:55, 1 December 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: It is absolutely excessive to the point of being unhelpful. For the moment, I've tagged it as such. Remsense留 15:22, 1 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Off topic

message: There is someone ("Dr. Jackson Crawford"), who claims on 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fIuqaKLTjsQ 
that "Old Norse Had a Word for Blue" (as distinct from black)
and who claims to have a Ph. D. on the subject. Tmhajf (talk) 16:03, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: He is a well-known scholar among enthusiasts, yes. Remsense留 15:09, 1 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Maybe Old Norse _did_ Have a Word for Blue (as distinct from black)