lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:John Romero

message: An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect :Idclip and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 May 19#Idclip until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.  MrMeAndMrMeLet's talk 16:07, 19 May 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Idclip" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]] 

message: I find it amusing that Romeo's favourite game was Chrono Trigger, as I always assumed he'd like FPSs or action adventure games Red dwarf (talk) 03:30, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Chrono Trigger
Talk:Dassault Mirage III

message: We have the Dassault website stating 1958 for the Mirage, BAE Systems stating 1957 for the EE Lightning. 
Someone has taken umbrage at this. If they believe the manufacturers' own websites are not a reliable reference, can they please provide a reference from a reputable source (e.g. flightglobal, Janes, reputable newspaper article from 1958 that states "this is the first time Lightning has achieved Mach 2") that is actually available to others for verification? 
If they believe that there is a genuine reason why the Lightning claim is invalid, can they explain here and not just remove perfectly good information and references from the article with a claim of "Lightning bias"?— Preceding unsigned comment added by 146.198.21.13 (talk • contribs) 
:BAE systems articles have errors in them. For example, their Vampire article  states that the mk.25 was an export variant for New Zealand. However no historical source mentions a mk.25. Neither does adf-serials.com.au , a website run by people doing actual archive research. Baesystems.com most likely just took the previously misleading information found on the Wikipedia EE lightning article for their article. Here is a brass plate that sat on XA847 for display following its mach 2 flight in 1958. --Blockhaj (talk) 01:32, 6 July 2021 (UTC)
replies: text:  Looks like this is a basic typo on the BAE Systems website. It should say 25 November 1958 instead of 1957. We have a couple of sources listed on the English_Electric_Lightning#Further_testing article confirming the year. --McSly (talk) 01:44, 6 July 2021 (UTC)

text: Oooh yes it was. Nice try though.  :D --FabBar (talk) 09:34, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mirage was not the first W. European aircraft to achieve Mach 2.  

message: in the article on the central rocket booster it talks about a number of things that seem like they would be relevant on the page about the jet itself. Like how when the rocket pack was fitted the cannon pack was replaced with a fuel tank for the rocket, making it a missile-only interceptor, and how the tanks find be swapped in half an hour or so, and how when not being used the space for the rocket booster was filled by a fuel tank that fitted the same envelope. The book i have here says 110 gallon, while the article says like 87.
Not sure if this all applies to the IIIC or the E, or both, but it seems like it would be relevant to the jet itself more than the rocket booster. 
Idumea47b (talk) 20:02, 16 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rocket pack
Talk:Marlène Jobert

message: Removed one picture as it was contained in the other... hope you don't mind. Evercat 16:21, 30 Jan 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Had put it in as a placeholder (other has been prepared meanwhile). I somehow believe in placeholders, has maybe something to do with my programming experience..:) Palapala 19:13, 30 Jan 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removed picture 

message: Question: About the "è" = "è" in "Marlène", would it be a good idea to create a simple page for redirection titled "Marlene Jobert" (without the accent), or what is the accepted policy in such a case?? Palapala 19:19, 30 Jan 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, redirects for that sort of thing are good. I'll do it: Marlene Jobert <- here it is... Evercat 21:07, 30 Jan 2004 (UTC)
replies: text:  I'm pretty nosy, how can I have a look at the redirecting page (which obvously has something like #redirect in it)...? Palapala 21:40, 30 Jan 2004 (UTC)

text: Followed it up - thanks. Palapala 08:13, 31 Jan 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Spelling 
Talk:Japanese human experimentation

message: * Japanese human experimentation has merit, but is just too hackneyed and likely NPOV as it stands. Title needs a change too... Human experiments by Japanese government? -- user:zanimum
**Delete and merge if only focused on Unit 731 (which has its own page).  Expand if there is more to it. - Texture 17:20, 30 Jan 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  From VFD
Talk:Index of urban studies articles

message: I think this article should be renamed Urban studies. The links in this list go way beyond urban economics. When I did a course in urban economics, the scope of the material it covered would be found in no more than about 10 of these links. mydogategodshat 16:33, 30 Jan 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I have done the name change and some cleanup.mydogategodshat 08:38, 31 Jan 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Notes

message: * National Square 
* National Boulevard 
* Urban salon
* Urban Balcony 
* Urban space 
* Urban Room 
* Secondary Central business district
* Metropolitan Central business district
* International Central business district
פארוק (talk) 19:41, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Another Topics to expandable
Talk:Pingfang, Harbin

message: If the web-site I am paraphrasing is public domain, please paste more in. Barbara Shack
Pingfan is what? A town? A base? A building? Someone coming to this article for the first time, as I did, has no idea what it is on about. Needs a link and explanation for Unit 731 at least (I presume that's what Unit 73 means). DJ Clayworth 16:56, 30 Jan 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: I removed the text pasted from the website:  . If someone can determine that it is public domain, put it back in.  Dario 01:15, 9 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Pasted text

message: The article states that "the incinerator where the remains of victims were burnt remains and is still in use as part of a factory."
Frankly, I have no knowledge of the matter, but this sounds outrageous. There should be a source added for this claim - if it is even true, which I doubt. Wikibedia (talk) 22:23, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dubious claim, source needed
Talk:Franklin stove

message: === Peter Johnson (05:30, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Timeline 

message: The article gives: According to Tom Burnam in Dictionary of Misinformation, Franklin's stove could not work, because it was supposed to draw heated air downward, whereas heated air will only go upward--a principle of thermodynamics unknown in Franklin's time. There are two problems with this sentence:
* The idea that hot air rises was, in fact, understood at the time, e.g. hot air balloons, and chimneys.
* The hot air can go down at the start of it's flow, and then rise to a higher level (at the top of the chimney) the same way you siphon gasoline from a car: the fluid starts going upwards (when you prime the flow with suction) then ends up draining to your gas can below the level of the tank. The flow continues by itself, without contradticting the law of gravity, because the gasoline ends up lower than where it started. Hot air can move the same way, starting out flowing downwards, but then up to a higher point through the chimney, without contradicting bouyancy. 
I'd be inclined to just delete the reference. Franklin was a real scientist who built real working prototypes, and you can see them working at museums and historical sites up and down the east coast. Pete St.John 19:52, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Thermodynamics
Talk:Jewish views on Jesus

message: The opening of the article states (with no citation) that “ The rejection of Jesus as Messiah has never been a theological issue for Judaism” and that “Judaism has never accepted any of the claimed fulfilments of prophecy that Christianity attributes to Jesus.” However, given that Christianity began as a belief within Judaism, this is provably false I💖平沢唯 (talk) 10:02, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Never? 

message: :The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
The result of the move request was: Page moved. (closed by non-admin page mover)  Jerium (talk) 18:14, 23 December 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Judaism's view of Jesus →  – Page was moved from Jewish view of Jesus a long time ago, but the current title seems odd. My proposal  seems to be in line with other "Jewish views on..." articles (e.g. Jewish views on homosexuality, Jewish views on slavery, Jewish views on religious pluralism). Thoughts? GnocchiFan (talk) 16:02, 16 December 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Since a few users have already voted here, perhaps a separate RM for Judaism's view of Muhammad → Jewish views on Muhammad could be considered, with a note at each RM, pointing to the other one. It should be also noted, with regard to the subsequently-proposed alternative header Jesus in Judaism, that Muhammad in Judaism is a redirect to Judaism's view of Muhammad —Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 18:29, 16 December 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: i support this move too if you want to group them—blindlynx 20:12, 16 December 2023 (UTC)

text: Comment Maybe Jesus in Judaism, to match Jesus in Christianity, Jesus in Islam, Jesus in Manichaeism, and Jesus in Mandaeism instead? Orchastrattor (talk) 18:02, 16 December 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I would also support this as preferable; apologies for not searching further before making this move discussion. GnocchiFan (talk) 18:06, 16 December 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I would likewise support the proposed alternative which also conforms to WP:CONSISTENT. —Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 18:29, 16 December 2023 (UTC)

text: The key difference between all those and Jewish views on Jesus is that Jesus isn't a part of Judaism in the way they are in all of those other religions.  In other words Jesus isn't in Judaism but is in the other four—blindlynx 20:16, 16 December 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: That's a good point. Striking out my other response as I think my proposal is still preferable in that case, but ultimately ambivalent. GnocchiFan (talk) 20:19, 16 December 2023 (UTC)

text: Support Jewish views on Jesus per nom. Orchastrattor (talk) 23:53, 19 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 16 December 2023 

message: They are jewish their perspectives should be included 213.28.225.234 (talk) 15:38, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Messianic jews
Talk:Chieftains of the Dúnedain

message: Don't we normally put in brackets what fictional universe characters are from? Should this be Chieftains of the Dunedain (Tolkien) or LotR?207.189.98.44 21:35, 30 Jan 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: This is only done when there is some possible confusion, such as with Gimli vs Gimli (Middle-earth). Since Dúnedain is a word in Tolkien's own Sindarin, it is extremely unlikely there would be any confusion. The article mentions that this is a fictional subject. Jor 21:39, 30 Jan 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Format
Wikipedia talk:Wikipedia holidays

message: to add WPians with Wikipedia Holidays named for them to List of people by name? --Jerzy 22:01, 2004 Jan 30 (UTC)
:IMO, No. These people are only famous inside our little world here. --mav 22:41, 30 Jan 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Would it be appropriate

message: Is Jimbo going to declare a new holiday this year?  I haven't heard anything about one... --WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 21:17, 11 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Still don't know if there will be new ones, although we now know it won't be in 2005... --WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:08, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Will there be any more? 

message: Can I declare Feb. 30, 2018 the official "WHOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO WIKIPEDIA" day?
--—Preceding unsigned comment added by Harvardgraduate1987 (talk • contribs) 
:WHOOOOOYES, but it won't have the same authority as a Jimbo declaration. So you'll only be able to publicize it on your userspace, not here. \sim Lenoxus " * " 17:36, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pomp and Circumstance 

message: I think we should declare a wikiholiday on 20 June to mark the anniversary of the Wikimedia Foundation's birth. the wub "?!" 23:05, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I totally agree with you. -- Felipe Aira 09:10, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wikimedia Day 

message: Where is the International Talk Like a Pirate Day celebration? (September 19) I remember admins at ANI following it this last year --Enric Naval (talk) 16:28, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  talk like a pirate day 

message: So I wonder if Jimbo will make WP:NODRAMA an official Wiki-holiday.. he sure was in favor of it, and it was quite a success. -- œ™ 17:25, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Wikipedia:The Great Wikipedia Dramaout]] 

message: Mark as historical?  Kayau  Voting  IS   evil  05:25, 1 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mark historical
Talk:Los Alamos National Laboratory

message: Can some update update this LANL page? The following are incorrect or out of date: LANL's mission, logo, science pillars, and most of the numbers in the "Institutional statistics" section. The correct numbers are on the Lab's linked 'facts and figures' page. 15:26, 8 Jun 2022 (MST)
If no one objects, I'm going to remove the mentioned section tonight. There was some discussion of this the better part of a year ago, but nothing was done. Maury 13:05, 22 Nov 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Time to actually do something
Talk:Trial by drowning

message: The reason for placing an accuracy dispute on the article is that this story has no sourcing and is never told with a source: it has the marks of an historical urban legend. 
According to Kempin's Introduction to Anglo-American Legal System's In A Nutshell, a West legal text, the actual practice in an "ordeal of cold water" was to hurl the tied-up victim into a body of water. If the water received the defendant, he was innocent and hopefully pulled out of the water and freed. Kempin notes that the historical record indicates a preponderance of acquittals. Also per Kempin, this was not a method of trial exclusive to charges of witchcraft, but was for villeins and other "unfree" people in medieval England. 
The other reason the "trial by drowning" story smells phony is that it assumes that medieval legal authorities were really stupid: anyone with half a brain can figure out that everyone tried by this method would die. 209.149.235.241 23:52, 30 Jan 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: There is an example in the autobiography of Usamah ibn-Munqidh, where the crusaders subject a Muslim criminal to this ordeal (he didn't sink, and he was blinded as punishment). I'm sure there are more examples; it's certainly not an urban legend. Adam Bishop 01:33, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  What is objected to is the idea that if you sink you drown, but if you float you are executed (i.e. its a no-win situation). That is clearly nonsense. Its not how ordeal by cold water worked, nor how witch trials were carried out, nor is it credible that the Mediaevals were as stupid as that. Obviously to our mind treating whether someone sinking or floating as being determinative of guilty seems odd, but it made sense to them. The example you give is of someone not sinking and being punished. No-one argues that that is something that happened (though decreasingly after the fourth lateran council). I will revert unless someone finds either a source or example of this having happened. Francis Davey 10:48, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh, I see...I misunderstood. Yeah, I don't know of any trials by water where the person was executed if they floated. Adam Bishop 16:36, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

message: Kempin isn't discussing any such thing as a "trial by drowning".  What he is discussing, trials by ordeal and petit juries, we already have better covered at trial by ordeal.  Ironically, it is the World Wide Web, and even Wikipedia itself, that is the major source of this erroneous name. Uncle G (talk) 16:47, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Erroneous name
Talk:Molly O'Brien

message: Before I started writing this article I shoudl've looked up who played Molly O'Brien as a baby and as a 20 yrs old. I'm going to google for it but if someone finds them before me and puts them in here that'd be fine. ShutterBugTrekker 00:25, 31 Jan 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you very much. At least you've been able to find one of the names. I hadn't been able to find either name. ShutterBugTrekker 22:49, 31 Jan 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Georgian scripts

message: I don't know how to edit this part, but the part near the top where the Asomtavruli, Nuskhuri and Mkhedruli alphabets are each in a horizontal row, stacked on top of one another, includes lasi where tani should be. (Lasi is then included again in its correct placement.) Just wanted to let someone know that could fix it!  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.132.40.203 (talk) 17:59, 10 December 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Error in Nuskhuri Horizontal Listing 

message: The article says that there is only one typeface. This is clearly untrue. Why is that written?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mothglob (talk • contribs) 15:40, 21 March 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Perhaps it meant to say that Georgian typefaces come as single-style font families (no bold or italic). This should be rephrased. Daashu (talk) 09:51, 9 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Typefaces 

message: The CSS for the article specifies "sans-serif" for the Georgian text. This means on my Mac the text is rendered using Helvetica. In the variations section, Helvetica renders many of the characters in their "simplified" form. I.e. without hooks and with straight lines. It might be a good idea to specify a serif font when listing characters if you're referencing specific parts of those characters which may not be rendered in a sans-serif font. noktulo (talk) 16:26, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sans-serif typeface makes "variations" section not make sense 

message: Greetings User:Verdy p! Mtavruli has no historic significance in development of the Georgian scripts. It is simply the all-caps version of Mkhedruli script. Regards, An emperor ✖ 23:56, 23 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mtavruli 

message: According to the official records of the Republic of Azerbaijan there is a latin scripst, developed for ingiloy dialect of georgian language that is teached in the ingiloy secondary schools. You can find this info even in wiki. pls check https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%98%D0%BD%D0%B3%D0%B8%D0%BB%D0%BE%D0%B9%D1%86%D1%8B 85.132.122.140 (talk) 05:26, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  latin scripts for georgian language in Azerbaijan
Talk:Variation (music)

message: Anybody, continous variation, or continous variations form?
Hyacinth 03:09, 31 Jan 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Continous

message: Hmm, I searched for Variations in the sense of Combinatorics. Any volunteer to restucture this article so that this could be included?
:Well, isn't the first step for the Wikipedia to include material on Variations in this sense?  I didn't find any on the Combinatorics article.  I suggest you put a comment on the Discussion page for Combinatorics, in hopes of finding mathematical (as opposed to musicological) expertise.  (Please bear with me if I didn't understand your comment properly.)  Opus33 00:21, 13 May 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Combinatorics

message: One important difference between Variation form and Development (which involves Variation) is that typically, in music before the modern era, music in variation form keeps the phrase structure almost constant - the musical periods, the half-closes and full-closes, will occur at relatively speaking the same places. This is more true with some composers than others, far, far less true with some (Elgar, Reger etc.) whose variation sets are indeed much more fantasies on the themes than variations as Mozart, Beethoven or Brahms understood the form, and while some composers tended to also keep the harmonic structure intact (without making of it a passacaglia) etc., Beethoven stretched the form considerably- yes to all points, but this may have been the essential difference (Thorpe-Davie, Musical Structure and Design- not exactly a recent book but seems quite sensible on the point...) Schissel | Sound the Note! 07:10, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Variation vs development

message: Internal links should be provided in text to distinguish them from citations as Wikipedia can not cite itself. Hyacinth (talk) 23:17, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Internal links as footnotes

message: The first movement of Karl Goldmark's Ländliche Hochzeit (Rustic Wedding Symphony), Op. 26 is a set of variations.  This is unusual for a symphony, where variations normally occur (if they occur at all) in later movements. While it wasn't significant in the development of variation form as such, it might be significant for its placement in the 1st movement of a symphony.  Is this worthy of mention here?  --  JackofOz (talk) 21:08, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Goldmark's Rustic Wedding Symphony

message: Could an editor who has access to the Raybar source check to see if it actually contains the misspellings 'accomanied', 'repetiton' and 'lead'? Chris the speller (talk) 05:06, 8 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Misspellings in quotation?
Talk:Piers Anthony

message: Is Anthony a middle name or a surname? WikiArticleEditor (talk) 12:02, 12 January 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Anthony 

message: Let me start by stating I'm not attempting to discredit the claims... I've read these books... but if the Wiki page is going to say , shouldn't there be more than one source to back it up? John Bullock (talk) 22:22, 29 November 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree. It's just one source, which to me seems like WP:UNDUE for such extreme, WP:BLP skirting claims. I'm removing it. —<B>Torchiest</B> talkedits 06:00, 11 December 2021 (UTC)

text: I've added a new version of the controversy section; I think the criticisms of Anthony are fairly wide-spread, a significant part of his reputation as a writer in science-fiction and fantasy circles, and should be reflected here. In an attempt to redress the previous issues with the section, I've added more sources, I've tried to use less charged language in summarizing the criticisms, and I've added some comments made by Anthony in various interviews. 198.27.248.4 (talk) 05:09, 13 January 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Sources look good. Purely in the interests of readability, I'd be tempted to reword . It could easily be read like people have taken issue with themes of underage sexuality (one item) and eroticism (another item). I presume it's intended to mean "sexuality and eroticism" as a single issue (I've not seen any criticism of Anthony's eroticism except where it concerns children). Perhaps just "themes of underage sexuality" would be sufficient? It's a nitpicky change though so I won't make that edit unless I get some agreement. John Bullock (talk) 10:31, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Controversy Section 

message: Pretty sure something's happened to him, as it's been 3 months since any update on his website newsletter and he's gone silent on his email. 97.107.37.1 (talk) 07:55, 26 May 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: He's still alive, although you are correct that his newsletter hasn't been updated. This was the last post  Psychologist Guy (talk) 01:37, 15 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Anthony MIA