lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Diego Maradona

message: I read the talk logs for this article, apparently this image was agreed upon to be the lead image, now it's been replaced by a painting. Petition to return the infobox image back to this one? Yourlocallordandsavior (talk) 10:12, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree, I dislike the current lead image and would support changing it. Lankyant (talk) 22:53, 10 October 2022 (UTC)

text: I agree, additionally the current infobox image covers like half of his face. Why in the world was it changed? Both photos show him holding the trophy anyways. ObsidianRS (talk) 16:25, 22 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Current infobox image looks like a painting? 

message: spelling issue: FourFourTow should be changed to FourFourTwo in the fifth paragraph. 186.137.202.132 (talk) 04:26, 23 November 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Tollens (talk) 07:53, 23 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 23 November 2023 

message: Under personal life > Failure to pay taxes, add the sentence (at the end of entry):
"He was cleared of the accusations posthumously in Jan 3, 2023 by the Italian supreme court" Alfon1917 (talk) 00:34, 6 January 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Next time, please provide a source when suggesting content additions like this to help responders evaluate your request more quickly. I was able to find a Reuters article for this one. Liu1126 (talk) 01:26, 6 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 6 January 2024 

message: The redirect Diego Marradonna has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at  until a consensus is reached.  Mazewaxie (talk • contribs) 13:18, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  "[[:Diego Marradonna]]" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]]
Talk:Harken Energy scandal

message: This article is horribly referenced.  A controversial subject needs hardcore rock solid referencing.  71.86.156.73 (talk) 04:25, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article references 

message: This is yet another article about Bush's business doings. I will take a look at the whole series.  Notability, npov, and non-existent sourcing are problems with all of these articles. Rgr09 (talk) 04:26, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Another article about GWH companies 
Talk:Linguicism

message: Arvindn: Hi. Original (and so far only) contributor here. I'm putting the stub message back because this article really needs some work; it stinks. I'm hoping someone who knows more on this subject will work on it, but it's by no means near complete, or really very valuable at this point. (I'm not an expert in this field; just someone who knows what it is and saw that there wasn't already an article on it.) It is my opinion that it is still very stubbish. S'awright? Garrett Albright 13:13, 31 Mar 2004 (UTC)

message: Is the section on Esperanto really relevant? Compared to the real-world difficulties faced by people with accents or limited vocabularies, whose social status and economic wellbeing may be deeply affected by the language they speak (or can't speak), the difficulties faced by Esperanto-speakers surely aren't much more serious than those faced by, say, devotees of manga and anime. What I mean is, speaking Esperanto is a choice made by people with time to spare. They may feel upset that people don't take them seriously, but it isn't a serious problem like the inability to speak English in an English-speaking country. Perhaps if there was more discussion on the status that people assign to different languages (high prestige for English, low prestige for, say, Hausa -- just a random example) maybe the note on Esperanto would sound a little less ridiculous...
Bathrobe 11:21, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Unfortunately, a disproportionate number of Wikipedians are artificial language advocates, and such people tend to have a bit of a persecution complex. I encourage you to go ahead and smooth out or delete that section, but be warned you may be setting yourself up for an editing war with someone who thinks Esperanto deserves the same status as legitimate languages. (Just for clarification, I, the original creator of this article, most certainly would not be one of those people.) Garrett Albright 09:09, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Esperanto?

message: This page is a mess of synthesis. All content must stem from sources. A blatant example is the the "japanese in france" in the intro. If its from a source, then cite it, if not, why is it there? Thanks! --Cerejota (talk) 11:17, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Synthesis
Talk:ELO 2

message: The article :In Old England Town (Boogie No 2) has been redirected here as a result of the AfD at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/First Movement (Jumping Biz). While consensus at that AfD was to redirect, it may be appropriate to merge material here. If you merge material from that article, please be sure to follow the procedure set out at Help:Merge. Specifically, note that when material is added to the destination article, a direct link to the source article should be placed in the edit summary (something in the order of "Merged from :In Old England Town (Boogie No 2)" would serve). The source article should also be placed into :Category:Redirects from merges by adding beneath the redirect text . This is essential for GFDL compliance. If you have any questions about this procedure, please feel free to contact me at my talk page or to ask at Wikipedia's help desk. Thank you. ----Moonriddengirl (talk) 23:32, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Merging
Talk:Face the Music (Electric Light Orchestra album)

message: The article :Nightrider (song) has been redirected here as a result of the AfD at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/First Movement (Jumping Biz). While consensus at that AfD was to redirect, it may be appropriate to merge material here. If you merge material from that article, please be sure to follow the procedure set out at Help:Merge. Specifically, note that when material is added to the destination article, a direct link to the source article should be placed in the edit summary (something in the order of "Merged from :Nightrider (song)" would serve). The source article should also be placed into :Category:Redirects from merges by adding beneath the redirect text . This is essential for GFDL compliance. If you have any questions about this procedure, please feel free to contact me at my talk page or to ask at Wikipedia's help desk. Thank you. ----Moonriddengirl (talk) 23:40, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Merging
Talk:A New World Record

message: Not sure if this is relevant or not, but for some reason, the album's title in Japan was/is "Savior of Aurora." Perhaps a trivia section could be added to the article? Kouban 19:10, 7 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Further research reveals that the same title was given to the song "Livin' Thing." I wonder if there's anything online explaining the reason for the retitling. Kouban 13:55, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Japanese title 

message: I believe using (even small) images of prior and following albums in the chronology of the album page violates fair use.--Fantailfan 01:15, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Images in chronology 

message: It's in the wrong place, but the note on "Surrender (Electric Light Orchestra song)" correctly states that the supposed chart position is fabricated and the single never charted. Given that the song is therefore a 30-year-old track added as a bonus to the CD reissue of this album, and that the single has no chart history of its own, I suggest the little information about it could easily be merged into the article about the parent album. Richard3120 (talk) 20:25, 15 October 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed.  It may have been available as a special edition single, and download, but no evidence it charted. Merge it. --Escape Orbit (Talk) 20:49, 15 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merger proposal 

message: Hi.  Just a few things that would help everyone collaborate on making this a better article and Wikipedia a nicer place to be.
* Please use edit summaries, however brief.  It helps others understand what you are doing and avoids misunderstandings.
* Assume good faith. Do not refer to other editors' edits as "vandalism", just because you do not agree with them.  This is not vandalism.
* Goes without saying, but whatever; don't edit war.  Discuss edits here if they're reverted.
Thanks. --Escape Orbit (Talk) 12:34, 11 November 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Collaboration on this article
Talk:Endolith

message: Is it worth mentioning Tom Gold's The Deep Hot Biosphere here? (and his theory that hydrocarbon deposits are produced by ongoing endolithic action, and aren't fossil fuels at all)?  I don't know how much of a crank the mainstream community thinks Gold is. -- Finlay McWalter |  Talk 14:47, 31 Mar 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Tom Gold

message: Are all endoliths really extremophiles.  The name merely indicates that they live inside rocks.  References I have found consider algae living within coral to be endoliths.  I would like to remove the reference to extremophiles from this page (or at least qualify it: 'many endoliths are extremophiles').  I'm also putting as similar query on the extremophile page to remove the endolith link.  Jmeppley 01:35, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  extremophiles? 

message: There should not be a redirection from "pulp stone" to this article. Denticles as in pulp stones are a dental/medical topic and have nothing to do with endoliths.
91.18.170.54 (talk) 21:34, 17 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  false redirection from "pulp stone" 

message: As far as I can tell, none of the references in this article refer to "pulp stones". It appears to me from google searches that "pulp stone" is overwhelmingly used as a dental term, as in Pulp stone (tooth). Because of this, I am planning to move that article to Pulp stone, which will no longer redirect here. I am wondering if I should leave a hatnote linking here on Pulp stone - can anyone advise? Are there any sources referring to the endoliths discussed here as "pulp stones"? (Also, are there any objections to moving Pulp stone (tooth) to Pulp stone?) A2soup (talk) 09:03, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
replies: text:  I'll try and check some dental sources tonight to give opinion here. Suspect pulp stone is more commonly used term as far as teeth go. Matthew Ferguson (talk) 13:22, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
replies: text:  I'm looking to make the Pulp stone (tooth) --> Pulp stone move shortly - any reason to not do so? A2soup (talk) 06:57, 15 February 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: , after a quick look at some textbooks on google books, pulp stone is the more commonly used term as far as teeth go. The term endolith is sometimes used as a synonym for this too however. Hope this helps. Matthew Ferguson (talk) 20:23, 15 February 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: I see that this medical dictionary defines "endolith" as "A calcified body found in the pulp chamber of a tooth". Wbm1058 (talk) 13:57, 16 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Redirect from [[Pulp stone]] 

message: Found myself here after watching a video from PBS Spacetime in which he mentioned that you can find Endoliths in all the parts of the tree of life. The article seems to imply the same (though it does not outright state it). Is there anyway that some examples from each part of the tree of life could be added? 73.201.125.85 (talk) 07:38, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Examples
Talk:Philanthropy

message: Financial donations to organized charities became fashionable among the middle-class in the 19th century.  By 1869 there were over 200 London charities with an annual income, all together, of about £2 million. By 1885, rapid growth had produced over 1000 London csiggggggmaaaaaaaaawith an income of about £4.5 million.  They included a wide range of religious and secular goals, with the American import, YMCA, as one of the largest, and many small ones such as the Metropolitan Drinking Fountain Association.  In addition to making annual donations, increasingly wealthy industrialists and financiers left generous sums in their wills.  A sample of 466 wills in the 1890s revealed a total wealth of £76 million, of which £20 million was bequeathed to charities.  By 1900 London charities enjoyed an annual income of about £8.5 million.
Since when was the Young Men's Christian Association 'American' ?
I've never ever seen any of its people or works, so have no personal interest, but Wiki's own article on the YMCA starts It was founded on 6 June 1844 by Sir George Williams in London, originally as the Young Men's Christian Association, and aims to put Christian principles into practice by developing a healthy "body, mind, and spirit".
After which it spread to other countries from the Great Exhibition on;  maybe that was American as well...  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Claverhouse (talk • contribs) 23:14, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  19th Century section 

message: — Assignment last updated by Naarkorful (talk) 18:24, 24 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: Global Poverty and Practice
Wikipedia talk:Requests for adminship/Archive 13

message: BL is a calm, reasonable user (since 2002) diligently working on a contentious set of articles. 172 09:05, 20 Feb 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I dont agree with your vote counting. I personally either count neutral votes as both support and oppose, or I dont count them at all. It's not fair to count a neutral vote as only support or only oppose. Optim 18:58, 4 Mar 2004 (UTC)

text: Are we sure? Has there ever been a case in the past when someone had won the vote on this meta page, but failed to attain admin status? This isn't a rhetorical question; I honestly don't know the answer. 172 02:37, 28 Feb 2004 (UTC)

text: Sorry to be troublesome, but I'm ignorant of the processes involved here. Thus, I'm still wondering if we have a precedent case along these lines on votes for admin. If there is no precedent, this case points out the need to draft clearer guidelines.  172 01:03, 29 Feb 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: [[User:BL|BL]]
Wikipedia talk:Requests for adminship/Archive 14

message: ===Poll 1===
Polls #1 - How long is should an admin candidate have been here before applying, minimally? 
* <3 months
#Meelar 02:15, 1 Mar 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I favor the requirements, but I totally agree that there should be no sense of entitlement of any user after fullfilling them. There are additional considerations, such as the reliability in editing and abilities to get along with others that IMO should be weighed for potential admins. -- Infrogmation 04:52, 1 Mar 2004 (UTC)

text: In a similar boat: I was nominated by someone else (with no request to do so from me) after I'd been here about 6-7 weeks with around 300 edits to my name.  Not that I think that should be the way we do things, but I feel like the community did make the right decision in promoting me (admittedly, we did wait 2-3 weeks and 100-200 more edits before I was promoted). Jwrosenzweig 19:04, 1 Mar 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Polls on adminship requirements

message: Polls #1 - How long is should an admin candidate have been here before applying, minimally? 
* <3 months
#Meelar 02:15, 1 Mar 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Poll 1

message: Polls #2 - Minimally, how many edits should an admin candidate have been here before applying?
* Less than 500
#Meelar 02:15, 1 Mar 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Poll 2

message: Polls #3 - Which combination of requirements?
* #1 only
* #2 only
* #1 and #2
# Dori | Talk 02:20, Mar 1, 2004 (UTC)
# BCorr ¤ Брайен  02:28, Mar 1, 2004 (UTC)
# →Raul654 02:30, Mar 1, 2004 (UTC)
# Jiang 02:31, 1 Mar 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I favor the requirements, but I totally agree that there should be no sense of entitlement of any user after fullfilling them. There are additional considerations, such as the reliability in editing and abilities to get along with others that IMO should be weighed for potential admins. -- Infrogmation 04:52, 1 Mar 2004 (UTC)

text: In a similar boat: I was nominated by someone else (with no request to do so from me) after I'd been here about 6-7 weeks with around 300 edits to my name.  Not that I think that should be the way we do things, but I feel like the community did make the right decision in promoting me (admittedly, we did wait 2-3 weeks and 100-200 more edits before I was promoted). Jwrosenzweig 19:04, 1 Mar 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Poll 3
Talk:1939 in film

message: There should an asterisk and major clarification for GWTW. For one, it only premiered in 1939. But even then, it wasn't really released in 1940 either - it was shown that year in roadshow version and hence despite some box office report from March of 1940 could not possibly have made $198M from those screenings. It's prime year was 1941 when it went into general release and sold an estimated 60 million tickets that year alone.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.248.214.103 (talk) 22:05, 7 April 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Gone With the Wind

message: Is this article about 1939 in Holywood, or may I add films from other parts of the world as well? Halibutt 17:37, 31 Mar 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: The box office chart obviously mixes some values taken as of March 1940 and others that include re-releases to the present.  If the information is available, I think it would be interesting to see how the films did in their first releases.Arnold Rothstein1921 (talk) 14:10, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Box office estimates
Talk:First lieutenant

message: Can anyone verify that attendance of a military academy is required for achieving 1st Lt?  This doesn't sound right to me.  Can't a 2nd Lt can receive promotion to 1st Lt?
Nuffle 17:46, 31 Mar 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: This must be wrong, otherwise nobody commissioned through ROTC could ever get off the bottom rung. -- Necrothesp 22:09, 5 Aug 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Gentlemen - and Ladies - it is indeed WRONG. Colin Powell - he is a great example of this - was the first ROTC graduate to achieve supreme rank. He got his BA at the City University of New York's City College, and completed their ROTC Program in June of 1958. He had a 2LT appointment date of June 9, 1957. He was promoted to 1LT on December 30, 1959, and continued to be promoted.SSG Cornelius Seon (Retired) 14:38, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Requirement for the attendance of a Military Academy for promotion?

message: The capitalisation of ranks seems to me to be good English (for example, President of the United States, Lord High Admiral, Silver Stick, First Lieutenant), but I don't think "30-150 soldiers" can be capitalised, especially if you leave "officers" and "junior sailors" in lower case!  I could accept "A US Marine is a ..." or "A Royal Navy Sailor" or "A Soldier of the Burundian Army said...", but here we're talking about a quantity of people (cf. "A High Court Judge stated that the court relied upon the opinion of 6 other judges in making its decision").  The opinion or policy of the US DoD has no bearing at all on the use of proper English.  Viva Wikipedia! Shem (talk) 16:59, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Capitalisation

message: The image now used (File:Army-USA-OF-01a.svg) is not inclusive for all branches. The present image is the shoulder epaulette of a United States Army Infantry officer, however the silver bar is used regardless of the officer's branch, or service.--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 05:58, 5 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  United States 1LT image 

message: The ranks of First lieutenant in USA and Kama in Israel have little in common. First, the usual senior OF-1 rank in Israel is Segen (look Israel Defense Forces ranks), and, like USA, Israel has two OF-1 ranks. Second, the professional officers in Israel have less authority compare to usual ("comissioned") officers, making them closer to warrant officers. Thus, the Israeli rank in this sections must be Segen and not Kama.Rijikk (talk) 09:00, 14 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  First lieutenant in the IDF
Talk:80 (number)

message: Please see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Numbers#List of British bingo nicknames for a centralized discusion as to whether Bingo names should be included in thiese articles.  Arthur Rubin (alternate) (talk) 23:35, 3 June 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bingo names -
Talk:81 (number)

message: I don't think the link to -20 is what this article wants. Check to see if it is correct. Georgia guy 00:51, 31 Jan 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Link for -20 

message: Where the sum of its digits equal its square root. Is anyone going to revert this if I make an article change?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Da5id403 (talk • contribs) 23:48, 12 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  It is also the only number… 

message: 81 is also the number for the Hells Angels MC.  8=H 1=A  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.231.251.27 (talk) 16:37, 8 September 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hell's Angels 

message: Please see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Numbers#List of British bingo nicknames for a centralized discusion as to whether Bingo names should be included in thiese articles.  Arthur Rubin (alternate) (talk) 23:35, 3 June 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bingo names -
Talk:82 (number)

message: Please see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Numbers#List of British bingo nicknames for a centralized discusion as to whether Bingo names should be included in thiese articles.  Arthur Rubin (alternate) (talk) 23:35, 3 June 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bingo names -

message: 85 2400:AC40:AD9:D982:0:0:0:1 (talk) 09:52, 15 December 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: The infobox already links to the separate article on 85 (number). Certes (talk) 10:56, 15 December 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  85 please
Talk:84 (number)

message: Please see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Numbers#List of British bingo nicknames for a centralized discusion as to whether Bingo names should be included in thiese articles.  Arthur Rubin (alternate) (talk) 23:35, 3 June 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bingo names -