lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Bhanupriya

message: If the author of this article happens to see this comment, please clarify where did s/he get that piece of information : that Bhanupriya is known as the 'other Sridevi'. Thanks. Prophetoffrivolity (talk) 14:55, 17 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Other Sridevi 

message: There are several sources available that points to Bhanupriya being married including the one on the wiki page
http://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/tp-national/tp-tamilnadu/for-banupriya-family-comes-first-now/article3055135.ece
Please remove the incorrect information.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Neil2000 (talk • contribs) 23:14, 16 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Not Divorced 

message: 125.63.77.18 (talk) 11:12, 21 February 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Sam Sailor 12:55, 21 February 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 21 February 2018 

message: Kadaikutty Singam - Tamil Movie - 2018 - Bhanupriya as Panchamadevi - Director: Pandiraj Jaffarsathick (talk) 12:26, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. ‑‑ElHef (Meep?) 12:51, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 14 August 2018
Talk:Chiranjeevi

message: Shouldn't it read as Konidela Siva Sankara Vara Prasad (born ...), better known by his stage name Chiranjeevi, ...; instead of the existing notation? MOS:FULLNAME or did he change his name legally? MOS:CHANGEDNAME -- DaxServer (talk) 12:51, 18 July 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: , he has held a ministerial post with the name Chiranjeevi, so MOS:CHANGEDNAME applies. For other cases such as Ravi Teja where there is no legal name change, MOS:STAGENAME is followed. Ab207 (talk) 13:22, 18 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Name in lead 

message: Since, it is by definition a populist survey and doesn't carry much merit. I propose to remove it or move it down to appropriate article section. -- DaxServer (talk) 12:53, 18 July 2021 (UTC)
replies: text:  I don't know why I was mentioned above by 49.207.203.71. I've never edited this article nor its talk page. Regardless, in my opinion the poll is irrelevant and of no use to the article. It shouldn't just be moved, it should be removed. An award from a notable organization is one thing. A poll? Sorry, no. --Hammersoft (talk) 15:05, 25 October 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Consensus for CNN-IBN popular actor poll
Talk:Gautami

message: I removed the unsourced birth date. It is often the case that birth dates are added without sources, and many do not challenge them. I am in this case based upon an email form the subject who claims it is incorrect. Please do not restore without a reliable source.--S Philbrick(Talk) 17:04, 4 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Birth date 

message: The article is titled "Gouthami", and that spelling is used in the article.
However, not a single source (among the ones I viewed) supports that spelling.
I see 
*Gauthami
*Gautami
*Gautami Tadimalla
I think the last is the best (and is the spelling used by the subject in an OTRS email)
I plan to move the article to this spelling, unless there is consensus for something else.
I do see that she is sometimes referred to as just Gautami rather than a full name, but if I recall my MOS correctly, we rarely use the single name, and would explain the common use of a single name in the article, not in the title.--S Philbrick(Talk) 17:30, 4 June 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I haven't given this a lot of time, but the one thing that is clear is that the old name was wrong. I've moved the article. If there is consensus for a different name, it can be moved again.--S Philbrick(Talk) 19:46, 4 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Subject name and article title
Talk:Krishna Vamsi

message: Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: http://www.idlebrain.com/celeb/interview/interview_krishnavamsi.html. Infringing material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.) For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you.  Dpmuk (talk) 00:22, 4 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copyright problem removed
Talk:Nandamuri Balakrishna

message: This article needlessly duplicates biographical content in the subject's main article. Salimfadhley (talk) 21:47, 5 October 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed merge of [[Nandamuri Balakrishna filmography]] into [[Nandamuri Balakrishna]] 

message: It seems the RS uses the word Balayya, the first two refs in the article. Do we mentioned in the lead, along with the mononymous name? It's already in the infobox. -- DaxServer (talk) 18:25, 27 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sourcing Balayya
Talk:Colin Blakemore

message: Spiny, here you are again editing an animal-rights-related article you know nothing about. Colin Blakemore very famously came to the attention of animal-rights activists over the kitten experiments. He is perhaps better known in the UK than any other research scientist because of this attention. You are quite right to request a source, of course, no matter how well-known a case it is, but to call it speculation is bizarre. SlimVirgin (talk) 07:50, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: "He is perhaps better known in the UK than any other research scientist because of this attention," says SlimVirgin.  I'm calling bullshit.  That's a quite an example of hyperbole you got there.  Ask the commonfolk in the UK to name you one research scientist off the top of their heads--any one.  I'm betting Blakemore doesn't roll off their tongues. 68.46.183.96 (talk) 07:22, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

text: I've restored the material and added two sources (one newspaper, one animal-rights campaign) saying that it was the kitten experiments that made him notorious. There are hundreds of other sources available that say the same. SlimVirgin (talk) 08:05, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

text: It can be (and now has been) removed. Thanks! Semiconscious • talk 19:39, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Are the two related?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.9.115.201 (talk) 08:28, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sarah Blakemore? 

message: It would be good if someone could add a section giving a bibliography of significant publications by Blakemore. Robert P. O'Shea (talk) 06:37, 15 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Significant works?
Talk:Effectiveness

message: The paragraph towards the end making a distinction between the meanings of "Effective" vs "Efficacious" does not seem to be substantiated; not least from the reference cited, which, if anything, seems to claim the exact opposite! It reads more like an unfounded assertion from a person with a strong opinion on the definition, but which is contrary to any real use of the term. While the notion that the word "Effective" could in theory involve a negative effect as well as a positive one is somewhat plausible from an etymological point of view, this is most certainly not compatible with how anyone would use this term in practice, and in any case you could claim the same about 'Efficacious' with an equal absence of evidence. If you say "the swordsman dealt an effective blow to his opponent", I doubt that there would be a single person that might think "Yes but I can't tell if the effect was harmful or beneficial; he should have said 'efficacious blow'.". Plus, in this particular case, 'effective blow' is such an ingrained phrase, it would sound wrong to say 'efficacious blow' in the first place, it's just not used as a phrase. 'Efficacious' instead tends to be more used when talking in pharmaceutical contexts etc. So my own personal impression is that the two are mostly equivalent, but simply tend to be associated with different phrases or contexts, and that no good evidence has been presented for the extraordinary assertion that they differ in meaning in such a stark and specific manner. Tpapastylianou (talk) 14:36, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unsupported distinction between effective vs efficacious 

message: Time management is currently a candidate on WP:IDRIVE. Support it with your vote if you want to see this article improved to featured status.--Fenice 07:51, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Improvement Drive

message: It seems that the explanation at the bottom of the article about efficiency and effectiveness is just the other way around, is it not?
-- 
Hulten 14:21, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wrong definitions 

message: This is not a disambiguation page, as it merely describes different kinds of the same basic concept. bd2412 T 18:40, 6 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Denial is not a river in egypt. There's nothing significant in common between these things other than the term. It looks to me that this is a disambiguation page. There's no evident way this can become a well rounded encyclopedia article.Rememberway (talk) 18:04, 20 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Not a disambiguation page
Talk:La Habra, California

message: Why is there nothing about La Habra within the Wiki site?? Highly disappointed individual........... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.147.17.49 (talk • contribs) 08:11, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: What do you think this article is?? --Dysepsion 21:57, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Little information

message: Demographics section data does not add up. Went to City of La Habra site http://www.ci.la-habra.ca.us/article.cfm?id=86 and found these stats: White 41.4%, Hispanic 49.00%, Asian and Pacific Islander 6.0%, Black 1.4% and all other 2.2%.  These percents equal 100.0%.  Glenn 1-5-11 173.60.12.238 (talk) 23:00, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Demographics data

message: Habra translates as "There will" or "There will be". The "La" makes no grammatical sense. "The there will be" doesn't quite make sense. Perhaps the owner of the ranch had a personal reason for the name, perhaps something like "There will be the future" which might convey a sense of optimism.
This is only conjecture on my part.
LFlagg (talk) 19:36, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: According to the city's website, ... the name referred to the "pass through the hills," the natural pass to the north first discovered by Spanish explorers... —Stepheng3 (talk) 21:06, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Origin of Name
Talk:Agustín Fernando Muñoz y Sánchez, 1st Duke of Riánsares

message: The information on Augustin's page about how his relationship with Queen Regent  Maria Christina was perfectly well known, is not consistent with the information on Maria Christina's page which says that public knowledge of the marriage was one of the reasons she was exiled.  We need a good reference to clarify which story is true. Elonka 08:13, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think it was "perfectly well known" to the inner circle of courtiers, etc. But not generally known to the public. --Michael K. Smith (talk) 03:42, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Knowledge of the marriage 

message: I have removed the following passage which comes from the 1911 Britannica: "and it is said that he declined the offer of the crown of Ecuador".  Britannica has clearly confused the father with his eldest son. 99.242.18.194 (talk) 06:27, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ecuador
Talk:Toronto Maple Leafs (semi-pro baseball)

message: "It is believed that this is the first time in Intercounty League history that a team has posted a perfect record at home."- Doesn't the Intercounty League keep statistics? Shouldn't they know about this? -RomeW
::They have lost some statistics from the early seasons of the league over time. SFrank85 19:03, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: I do not believe semi-pro ball counts as minor league. I believe it's an entirely separate classification. I checked both the IBL's site and the Maple Leafs' site, and can find nothing claiming that they are "minor league". Also, see this passage on the Intercounty Baseball League article: "The Intercounty Baseball League exists so that baseball players who were not signed by a Major or Minor League organization could have a chance at playing competitive men's baseball." That would imply that they are NOT a "Minor League organization". If I'm missing something please let me know. -Dewelar (talk) 01:25, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Minor league?
Talk:Geelong West, Victoria

message: Definitely merge the Ashby article with this one as it forms a part of Geelong West's history. Mal Case 06:01, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree --Mikecraig 06:22, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

text: Done. -- Longhair\talk 06:28, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Ashby merge
Talk:Eastern Beach (Victoria)

message: I am working on it themit 09:12, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Photos

message: Eastern Beach != entire Geelong Waterfront.
Eastern Beach is the 1930s bathing area up from near Limeburners Point to the Yacht Club. Might want to split the rest out? Wongm 06:43, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: See Waterfront Geelong Wongm 02:13, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  How far to go?
Talk:K Rock 95.5

message: the link to grant broadcasting goes to the us company of the same name and not the unrelated australian company —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 61.69.253.211 (talk • contribs).
:Fixed Link Mike Beckham 16:34, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
Talk:Recherche Bay

message: ===Some proposed changes===
The French explorers contributed a wealth of new information about Tasmania that remains important today. Their observations about contact with the Indigenous inhabitants – particularly those recorded in the journals of botanist Jacques Julien de Labillardiere, which were later published in France – today remain the best accounts of Tasmanian Aboriginal society prior to European settlement.
Recherché Bay was added to the Australian National Heritage List on 7 October 2005.
The National Heritage List protects, commemorates and celebrates places that have outstanding Indigenous, natural or historic values of national significance. Heritage values can include the physical elements of a site as well as the stories, people or events connected to a place. Once added to the National Heritage List, a place’s outstanding national heritage values are protected under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999.
This was misplaced, in the article text. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 23:28, 12 December 2017 (UTC)
replies: text:  I'm not sure that this qualifies as a COI edit request. In any event, the proposed text above is an insufficient paraphrase of the source material.  Spintendo  ᔦᔭ  05:07, 13 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Request edit, moved here from the article 

message: The French explorers contributed a wealth of new information about Tasmania that remains important today. Their observations about contact with the Indigenous inhabitants – particularly those recorded in the journals of botanist Jacques Julien de Labillardiere, which were later published in France – today remain the best accounts of Tasmanian Aboriginal society prior to European settlement.
Recherché Bay was added to the Australian National Heritage List on 7 October 2005.
The National Heritage List protects, commemorates and celebrates places that have outstanding Indigenous, natural or historic values of national significance. Heritage values can include the physical elements of a site as well as the stories, people or events connected to a place. Once added to the National Heritage List, a place’s outstanding national heritage values are protected under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999.
This was misplaced, in the article text. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 23:28, 12 December 2017 (UTC)
replies: text:  I'm not sure that this qualifies as a COI edit request. In any event, the proposed text above is an insufficient paraphrase of the source material.  Spintendo  ᔦᔭ  05:07, 13 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Some proposed changes
Talk:MultiFinder

message: Can someone add the year that MultiFinder was introduced to this article?
:Done! MFNickster 08:22, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: With the advent of System 7, MultiFinder became a standard integrated part of the operating system. It remained a part of the operating system until Mac OS X. I don't like the phrasing of this. Taken in context, MultiFinder ceased to exist in System 7. So what exactly was removed from Mac OS X? --Steven Fisher (talk) 18:17, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Integrated, discontinued? 

message: First Paragraph in Switcher section needs a rewrite -- if you actually read the source reference at Folklore.org, the situation was not as cut and dry as the current writing states. He never wanted to sell it to Microsoft, and Steve Jobs essentially told him it was Apple property by nature of his former employment, offered 100,000 and the payment was worked out later.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:8805:9080:C580:A0A7:C507:2B83:8FA1 (talk) 06:14, 24 September 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  First Paragraph in Switcher section needs a rewrite
Talk:Tirapazamine

message: PubChem link, for later additions. JFW | T@lk 08:35, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It turns out the tautomer registered on PubChem is not the most prevalent one. I have uploaded a more correct one at the suggestion of Prof. M. Brown (), who discussed this with Prof. W.A. Denny (see references and ). JFW | T@lk 20:01, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

message: Results of the mentioned  "Dose-defining Study of Tirapazamine Combined With Embolization in Liver Cancer" are available now:
http://www.onclive.com/conference-coverage/liver-2017/combinations-in-hcc-gaining-traction?p=1  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 47.68.124.250 (talk) 12:06, 22 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Study results available
Talk:Market Square, Geelong

message: Is there any chance we might be able to get a map or something explaining where things were over time? I'm having trouble picturing where the various buildings and features were on the site in relation to what is there now. Rebecca 11:27, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It's something I will have to get around to. I haven't seen a map of it myself - I had to piece the article together from bits and pieces of written descriptions. Wongm 08:44, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
Talk:Hi-Lite Park

message: When did this place exist? Ambi 02:34, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Years ago, during the 1970's from my memories. Let's merge or delete this article. I created it in my younger Wikipedia days. It was Geelong's version of Luna Park, though 1/4 of the size. -- Longhair 02:35, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It'd be interesting to have if you can find enough information, I think. I've never heard of it. :) Ambi 02:37, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It would be an interesting article, but information is hard to come by. A lot of people over 30 years of age in Geelong would remember Hi-Lite Park, with it's distinctive Luna Park smile at the entrance. It was actually located near the corner of Bellarine Steeet and Ritchie Boulevard, in the Eastern Beach area, and not on the beach itself. -- Longhair 02:40, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

text: There's an image here. -- Longhair 01:10, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll have to ask my parents about this when I head back to Geelong in a couple of weeks. I wonder if the Geelong Historical Society might have something on this - they're pretty organised. Rebecca 08:17, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: When did this place exist?

message: The image I just added states it's from the 1930s, but the article currently says the park didn't open until the 1950's? -- Longhair\talk 05:56, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Park opening
Talk:Bellarine Peninsula Railway

message: According to the Melway the showgrounds is on the right of the rail line when travelling east making it a right hand branch rather than a left. Anyone agree? disagree? Or was the siding really on the north side of the line? Cheers -- Rick69p 12:35, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The Geelong Showgrounds are definitely on the right hand side of the rail line when travelling east. Not sure on the answer to your other question however, sorry. -- Longhair\talk 12:45, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Paul and Kathleen Kenny's Trains, Troops and Tourists book (2004) mentions little is known about the siding. [snip] Opened 22 October 1891, closed 30 October 1907.The Geelong Historical Society magazine Investigator, September 1978, mentions the siding was at the 47.5 mile post, just east of the St Albans Road level crossing, simple earthen construction with wooden edging. No mention of what side it was on though. Wongm 06:00, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If I recall rightly, wasn't the showgrounds at a different site at the time? Rebecca 09:21, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It has been in a few spots: from Geelong Showgrounds the second site (which had the siding built for it) ran south from Ormond Road to St Albans Road. The siding closed when the show grounds moved to the racecourse, and moved to current site in the 1950s. Wongm 03:45, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Line Guide - Geelong Showgrounds Siding
Talk:City of Greater Geelong

message: @Totallynotarandomalt69 could you please provide the source for the various councillors' party affiliations? FropFrop (talk) 11:09, 19 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Source for the independents' party affiliations? 

message: Logo font looks broken Jordf32123 (talk) 10:33, 4 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Logo