lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Panthera tigris trinilensis

message: Unfortunatelly this reference is dead. There is no word "tiger" on linked site, waybackmachine is unable to read the site. Bulwersator (talk) 20:59, 15 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dead reference 

message: The article in three different places gives three different dates for the specimen, without suggesting that these represent a temporal range of appearance. 1.66 my, 1.2 my, or 50 ky? Which is it? 2601:441:467F:9E00:489D:D076:2E5A:72DF (talk) 04:37, 8 February 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dates inconsistent
Talk:Tomlinson Fort (congressman)

message: This article was started using public domain information from the Biographical Directory of the United States Congress. LarryQ 03:58, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Untitled 

message: No mention of slave-owning. I feel that this category should be restricted to people whose slave-owning history was notable in itself. Valetude (talk) 18:23, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Category:American slave owners
Talk:Swingin' Utters

message: Why is Bombing the Bay not listed in their discography?  Just wondering. - Enzo Dragon 12:13, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Good point; I've added the singles, EPs and split albums (like Bombing the Bay in a seperate category now. Responsible? 16:47, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Why is it that the infobox states that the band formed in 1998, but yet their first album was released in 1992. What's going on? Should it be changed? Violask81976 20:12, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: They were formed in 1988, eighty-eight, I don't think the infobox has ever said 1998, just a misreading. Cheers - Responsible? 14:44, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  starting dates? 

message: I'm pretty positive that the band name is In fact the "Swingin' Utters" WITHOUT the $ (money signs). thats only in the logo, all their stuff elsewhere is labeled with letter "s"s, even in my iTunes.  I just want to make sure before we move the page to "Swingin' Utters".
: That is correct, and in anycase, the article would be named Swingin Utters regardless of whether they only used $. As an encyclopedia, wikipedia is only interested in facts, not stylistic or artistic preferences. There are a load of articles that will need to have the links to $wingin Utter$ redirected to Swingin Utters....I have done some...Nouse4aname (talk) 09:09, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Band Name
Talk:Multiprocessing

message: This page has it backwards putting all of Flynn's here. It's true that in some books it's discussed in relation or as a way of framing what Multiprocessing as defined in the lead here means, but that's not say that everything in Flynn's is multiprocessing as defined here. Quote from: :
So it's clear that this page should be discussing only narrower topic(s) not repeat/WP:CFORK all of Flynn's. Someone not using his real name (talk) 19:35, 12 February 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. I've deleted that section. Wingedsubmariner (talk) 22:38, 7 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Flynn's taxonomy here 

message: The article formerly claimed that "SIMD multiprocessing finds wide use in certain domains such as computer simulation, but is of little use in general-purpose desktop and business computing environments."  The edit removing it said "At least Excel now can run multicore, and could be a common business use of computers.", but multicore is "multiprocessing" in the sense of this article, and, as this article says, "In Flynn's taxonomy, multiprocessors as defined above are MIMD machines.", so that doesn't seem to be an example of SIMD in general-purpose computing.
However, SIMD is used in video processing, which is a lot more common on general-purpose computers these days.  IBM's added some SIMD instructions to z/Architecture for "big data" analysis, and SIMD instructions are probably used on other architectures for the same purposes.
(Does anybody know whether Excel uses the various generations of Streaming SIMD Extensions?)
So, yes, the claim that was removed no longer appears to be true. Guy Harris (talk) 22:28, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  SIMD multiprocessing now used in more than just supercomputing 

message: I've created an AfD for Multiprocessor on this page. That page started as a redirect to this article, was made it a content fork of this article, was again replace by a redirect, and has again been resurrected as a new content fork. Both forks were created by the same user. Their edits may have been in good faith, but the result was disruptive. I think it would be best if the redirect was restored. Wingedsubmariner (talk) 22:28, 7 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Deletion of Multiprocessor article 

message: While most of the industry has used the term multiprocessing only to refer to multiple processors, Burroughs initially used it to refer to multiprogramming. Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz Username:Chatul (talk) 16:39, 14 March 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Alternate definition
Talk:First Battle of Polotsk

message: According to St Cyr's bio in Chandler's "Napoleon's Marshal's", this was a French victory, which earned St Cyr his marshal's baton...? And the Wikipedia article about St Cyr says the same thing :S I'm confused! /MatteusH
:The result of the battle was inconclusive. That is why both French and Russian historians contend that it was their country who won the battle. So did Napoleon. As the author of this article I wrote that it is more likely to be Russian victory because Wittgenstein though outnumbered by St Cyr's troops stopped the French offensive on St. Petersburg. Blacklake 16:17, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: My understanding is that it was the French who were left in possession of Polotsk as a result of this battle. Wittgenstein ordered a small withdrawal to the north. He broke off combat and abandoned territory. Thus, in spite of the inconclusive nature of the battle and in spite of Wittgenstein's success in guarding the road to St. Petersburg, Polotsk I was really a French success.Kenmore (talk) 12:58, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Old talk
Talk:Gozo

message: I've gone through and edited the article, removing duplicate bluelinks and improper external inline links. I rewrote a few sentences to make the article more encyclopedic and less like a travel guide. Better sources are needed, since many of the refs are from the government or tourism pages. I've tagged the biggest issues (as well as the entire film section, which is unsourced). PaintedCarpet (talk) 16:04, 30 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Copy Edit

message: Aside from  and the lack of a source and the fact it's just the American English pronunciation, there's no reason for this. It's covered at the Wiktionary entry; it's a mispronunciation; and it's the default pronunciation Anglophones will come up with anyway from the spelling of the word. — LlywelynII 15:00, 22 November 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: What's the source of the spelling, anyway? Is it Italian, and if it is, does the z stand for [t͡s] or [d͡z]? Italian Wikipedia gives [dzdz] (i.e. [d͡zː]), but that should be spelt Gozzo (ItWiki calls such spelling antiquato). 195.187.108.4 (talk) 18:02, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: Pronunciation
Talk:Kingston SE

message: I have just been looking at the 2011 census, and it has come to my attention that the article that the article references the population statistic for the state suburb, when I think it might be more meaningful to use the locality data, which includes the suburb below it. I suggest this as the article is about the town.
For 2006:
http://www.censusdata.abs.gov.au/ABSNavigation/prenav/ProductSearch?&areacode=UCL411600&producttype=QuickStats&action=401
For 2011:
http://www.censusdata.abs.gov.au/census_services/getproduct/census/2011/quickstat/UCL415018?opendocument&navpos=95
Tspshilt (talk) 00:26, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Use of Census Locality
Talk:Robe, South Australia

message: Images by KymFarnik (talk) 04:42, 21 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Images by KymFarnik
Talk:7th New York Militia Regiment

message: I know the organizational history is tangled and a bit complicated, but for the general reader (like me) there needs to be some explanation of the 7th NY Militia's relationship to the Seventh Regiment of New York, now the Seventh Regiment New York State Militia; or if none exists, then a clear distinction made for those looking for (e.g.) the Seventh Regiment Armory or the Seventh Regiment Band. Perhaps a disambiguation hatnote would be in order (I won't make one myself until I'm clearer on the distinctions). A link to the 7th Reg't of NY is certainly also in order; again, I may put a naked, unannotated link in "See also", but the link might be better embedded in an explanation of the two units' relationship or lack of one. I'm posting a link to this discussion at the Seventh Regiment's talk page. —— Shakescene (talk) 05:46, 10 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Relation to Seventh Regiment of New York
Talk:Visual design elements and principles

message: This page should not be speedy deleted as an unambiguous copyright infringement unless it can be shown that the academic sites were published before the WP article.  --Just plain Bill (talk) 14:26, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Can you show to the contrary? Dawkin Verbier (talk) 06:18, 22 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Contested deletion 

message: I split the article into Design elements and Design principles before both pages were flagged as copyvio and deleted. I now see that the copyvio investigation has concluded, and that the external pages had copied this page, rather than the other way round. I am wondering now how and whether it would be appropriate to re-split the article? Dawkin Verbier (talk) 04:31, 13 March 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: If you want to split articles you'd need to formally make a proposal. See Talk:Democratic_Labor_Party_(historical)#Split:_To_Democratic_Labour_Party_(Australia,_1980) as an example. TarnishedPathtalk 10:47, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Re-splitting
Talk:Timeline of United States railway history

message: Looks like this article has been pranked: 
The Timeline of U.S.A Railway History depends upon unicorns, as follows: A means of unicorn conveyance of passengers and marshmellows on wheeled vehicles running on rails, also known as tracks.
Was John Stephens really a British ex-patriot or was he just a British expatriate?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.101.95.244 (talk) 13:57, 13 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Timeline of Jersey City, New Jersey-area railroads

message: For what it's worth, I found the timeline useful in getting a handle on the development of RRs in Jersey City. In case a "vote to keep" would help. Jwbkmn (talk) 21:11, 18 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  useful
Talk:Rustlers (convenience food)

message: There is no source of controversity caused by the advert in 2007.
Im removing it as there is no source, I even google'ed it. Nothing. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 84.70.251.62 (talk • contribs).
:Hi. I also did a Google search, and the first result mentions controversy on the ad. I reverted your change, and added the page as an external link. :) --Dreaded Walrus 01:47, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: That whole "GameSafe" paragraph is nothing but a marketing-blurb, if nobody rewrites it (I won't) we should remove it! 217.93.238.161 (talk) 02:08, 5 September 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Did it myself, as it's completely unsourced as well. 217.93.232.238 (talk) 02:18, 5 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:   Rustlers GameSafe 

message: How recent, when, you need to cite these thing. If you put recently, it'll be recently forever, there needs to be something more specific in an encyclopedia.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.128.31.122 (talk) 00:14, 2 August 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Not sure what you mean - can you please explain? Notthebestusername (talk) 07:44, 5 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Recently modified" 

message: Re the above image request: I have categorised the existing image, and added a commons category to the article. However, I have not removed the above image request tag because the current image in the article does not show a Rustlers burger in the form in which it is sold (it has added salad). So we are still waiting for an image which properly represents the product. Storye book (talk) 16:55, 7 October 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Image request
Talk:Over the River and Through the Wood

message: If my English class is any good, the correct title is "The New England Boy's Song about Thanksgiving Day" and it's about going to grandfather's house. However, it was later adapted into a Christmas song. I recently had to memorize this poem. Mathnerd314 23:54, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Change it if you want.  The book from your english class would be a good reference concerning the name. - Peregrinefisher 06:19, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  If my English class did me any good... 

message: The lyrics to the song/words of the poem should probably be put onto wikisource and be left out of the article. The Manual of Style suggests that long poems should be kept on wikisource and that this project should contain the article describing it. Mrathel (talk) 21:15, 4 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Song's Lyrics

message: We are told that the poem was set to music by an unknown person, but we are not told anything about the music.  Is it 2/2, 3/4, 4/4 or what?  What else can be said about the music of this song? 2600:6C67:1C00:5F7E:50A7:B581:550A:769 (talk) 15:40, 21 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Melody
Talk:Dolly (magazine)

message: The second paragraph currently reads, "Dolly was the basis and inspiration for Sassy Magazine (1987-1996) in the United States. The magazine is aimed at older teenage girls (14-17 age group) and covers celebrity news and gossip ..."  I believe the intent here is that "The magazine" in the second sentence (and the rest of the paragraph) refers to Dolly, not Sassy.  However, grammatically, this is all wrong -- the second paragraph sounds like it's discussing Sassy, not Dolly.  I would suggest that someone who knows more about the magazine review this paragraph, and if appropriate, move the sentence about Sassy magazine to the end of the paragraph or to its own paragraph.  That would remove the confusion and make it clear the discussion is about Dolly.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Macoukji (talk • contribs) 03:29, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Intro paragraphs 
Talk:Aveland

message: This article has been categorized as having an invalid ISBN number. In the article, there were hyphens between the groups digits though the book itself had the number with spaces. When I replace the hyphens with spaces, the number after the first space does not highlight as a link. Can anyone tell me what is invalid about it? (RJP 13:02, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The ISBN number in the article has now been changed from 0-859558-604-9 to 0-85958-604-9 though 0 859558 604 9 is the number which appears on the book itself. I should like to understand how it works so that I can get it right in future. (RJP 07:33, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
Talk:Banda Sea

message: Of the Pacific Ocean - by what criteria and how? SatuSuro 14:50, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Technically part
Talk:Solo River

message: Why is this article called "Bengawan Solo River"? It is either "Bengawan Solo" or "Solo River" as Bengawan already means river in Javanese. Meursault2004 20:09, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You're right. Move? — Indon (reply) — 08:20, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

text: Yes I think so. I think "Solo River" would be the wisest choice as this is the English language Wikipedia :-) Meursault2004 12:42, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

text: Hmmm - my Lonely Planet calls it "Bengawan Solo". Remember, sometimes direct translations aren't necessarily the common name. Maybe Bengawan Solo is correct? --Merbabu 13:28, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Lonely Planet has a habit though of using native Indonesian names for everything (from memory, don't have it available right now): Danau Maninjau instead of Lake Maninajau and Gunung Merapi instead of Mount Merapi. It annoys the heck out of me. Britannica is exactly the opposite, translating both Indonesian and regional language geographic terms. Maybe we should do something in between and only translate Indonesian language geographic terms into English and avoid translating regional language (eg. Javanese) geographic terms. The problem in this case is that Bengawan Solo is a DAB page, so maybe "Bengawan Solo (river)" is more appropriate? (Caniago 14:52, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

text: Well actually this title name already is a compromise. But I couldn't manage to find any other river name at this moment without mentionning the word "river". Meursault2004 19:52, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Name of the article
Talk:Aboriginal Protection Act 1869

message: When was this act passed? RJFJR 17:02, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I found it in the external link: 1869
Also, it's referred to as a 'document'.  Is that accurate?  Should it say 'act' or 'law' instead? RJFJR 17:02, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: When enacted?

message: article re assessed as start, limited information Gnangarra 03:53, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: WP Aust B-class review

message: It clearly has an critical and negative bias on the Protection Act 1869, words like "'forced' to assimilate in white society" has a strong opinative 
stance. The society in those times was incredibly racist, they actually did the opposed to what was done in Apartheid a century later, they believed that people should be able to live with the same benefits that whites had. Clearly they were trying to "empower" those people, but the text has the opposed bias and never contemplates a positive stance, only the negative bias. Even "'Stolen' Genaration" are too strong words, and if you want write a biased article, make sure you exposed the opposing opinion. The article makes sure you will never forget that those were bad things when you are reading the text, cause the words used are clearly chosen in order to mainting a negative stance about the acts, but even if those acts were bad, you have to respect the contradictory and search for other scholars.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2804:14D:BAD7:4699:A157:D5BD:334E:602A (talk) 18:24, 25 September 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Biased 

message: Hello all,
I have removed some information which was either unsourced or did not have a NPOV and replaced it with sourced information. The article is still unbalanced because it is just as much about the 1886 Act as the 1869 Act. Happy to discuss.--Aemilius Adolphin (talk) 03:41, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Revisions of article
Talk:String Quartet No. 11 (Beethoven)

message: First- the references section needs updating, but someone who knows the books, knows what editions were used (first? third?... edition of the Kerman? etc....) would need to do that...
Will have to add mention of some interesting features of the quartet. Noticeably lacking even in the sketchy description of the inner movements: any mention at all of the transition between the second and third movement, which gives the opening of the latter movement its characteristic opening chord progression. (And such chord progressions and motives, not just key relationships, help make this piece "go", as they do many others.)
Also: the keys of the trios in the scherzo-like movement, the second of them in G♭ major, for instance. 
The movement may well be a scherzo; it shares a form with that of many Beethoven scherzos - those of symphonies 4 and 7, string quartets 10, 12 and 14, etc. - generally something like A - B - A (or A') - B' - A - coda, coda often beginning the same as B. 
And there is something rondo-ish about that, though not exactly. As to whether or not it's a march and trio- whether to call the main section a march isn't a matter of form but of rhythm, character and other qualities. (Hrm. Well, Liszt's Scherzo and March are two pieces in a row, not the same in one, to my knowledge.) Schissel | Sound the Note! 13:13, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: References, and the Scherzo

message: Regarding the tempo marking, it says that Beethoven "invented" a word, while serioso is an actual italian word, meaning approximately "serious" (often in a mocking or ironic way). http://forum.wordreference.com/showthread.php?t=92886
I don't know what's the source of the author of the article, though, so I'll wait for someone to enlighten me. Thanks. 22:30, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: The nickname

message: interesting use of silences, 
What does "interesting use" mean? This is a useless phrase. One needs to be more specific.
seemingly unrelated outbursts
Define "outburst." Are they supposed to be related? I'm not sure that this tells us anything of value. This is almost a useless phrase for being so unspecific.
The historical picture of this time period helps to put the piece in context
This part is totally conjecture. Unless there's evidence to support some "extra-musical" meaning in a piece of music, let's be careful about the psycho-interpretation. This paragraph has no credibility and no value. It ought to be deleted, but, except in the case of a clear falsehood, i'm reluctant to be the one to delete what others have added.
PJinBoston (talk) 04:44, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  parts to be either improved or removed.
Talk:Nata de coco

message: This article makes claims claims specifically for Nate de Coco but the nutritional information cited is for coconut products in general. Not only this, this is an English-speaking wikipedia site. Since when are our nutrition facts labels presented as a percentage of the Thai RDI? If you cannot present clear, accurate information then don't bother wasting the reader's time with poor information.
This comment may come across as abrasive so FTY, I am not anti-Nata de Coco. In fact I'll reference an article which speaks of some possible health benefits.
12.165.250.13 (talk) 05:43, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nutrition claims lack verification and need clarification 

message: The writer or writers of this article are confused.  Nata De Coco is made from coconut water.  This is the liquid suspended in the center of immature green coconuts and is virtually fat free.  As such, Nata De Coco is also virtually fat free.  The line about Coconuts being high in fat especially saturated fat bears no relationship with Nata De Coco.
: I add that steps 3 and 4 of the "Production" section are confusing.  For instance, 
:: 3. Separation and cutting of the produced surface layer of nata de coco, and 4. 
:: Cleaning and washing off the acetic acid.
: What is the "surface layer," and where does the acetic acid come from?  Is it an added ingredient or is it produced in the fermentation?
Iwasathought (talk) 13:11, 25 October 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Confused Writing 

message: Nata de Coco, a product of bacterial fermentation of coconut water (or other substrates, technically) is far older than suggested. Someone needs to dig and find its origins, but I have found citations from 1967 mentioning it - and in fact pellicles of cellulose from this origin were first described in 1886:
Brown, A. J. XLIII.—On an Acetic Ferment Which Forms Cellulose. J Chem Soc Trans 1886, 49 (0), 432–439. https://doi.org/10.1039/CT8864900432.
I  — Preceding unsigned comment added by El.vegaro (talk • contribs) 09:11, 23 March 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  History of Nata de Coco
Talk:Atlas V (tugboat)

message: Fix this article up and take out the context part and the image
Mrld 16:07, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Why? They are in the French version.--GW_SimulationsUser Page | Talk 13:29, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

text: I think you'll find they do. They show why the events below occurred. --GW_SimulationsUser Page | Talk 14:13, 27 August 2006 (UTC)