lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Lynch Mob (band)

message: candidate for speedy deletion?
that makes no sense whatsoever.
the more i think about it, it looks like the person who put that notice on here is on wikipedia for the express purpose of vandalism.
Gringo300 01:04, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Please read WP:NPA and WP:AGF.  The article was properly deleted as a non-notable band.  If you want to recreate the article, please do so following the guidelines shown at WP:MUSIC, or it will be deleted again. Naconkantari e|t||c|m 02:24, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

text: I agree that we need to assume good faith, however the speedy deletion wasn't what I'd call "proper" at all.  I've restored this.  If there are questions about the significance of the band, I'd rather see them settled at Afd than by a speedy deletion.  We already have an article on George Lynch (musician), the founder of the band.  Friday (talk) 19:24, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

message: I understand trying to tell a story but lines like "Many feel that songs such as the title track.." is just an opinion.--MattyMetalFan (talk) 17:23, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tone
Talk:Shenzi, Banzai and Ed

message: Do we really need so many? I thought that the single one at the top sufficed. Blue Phoenix 01:04, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, the clutter up the page. The whole article contains spoilers so it is redundant to put them after each heading. Hyenaste (tell) 00:34, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Spoiler Warnings
Talk:Eagle ray

message: It amuses me greatly that there's a "Criticism" section that includes Steve Irwin's death. Like the rays are being criticized for it. Anyway, that should be under some other title. Xikaze 18:27, 20 November 2007
:I agree, I removed that section. --Stefan talk 03:24, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Criticism?

message: This article contradicts itself by first saying that the spotted eagle ray is by far the largest eagle ray. But then the paragraph on manta rays describe the manta ray as being the largest members of all the rays. Just by looking at the actual measurements, I would say the manta ray is the largest of all the rays and therefore definitely the largest of the eagle rays.
I think the person writing the paragraph on the spotted eagle ray may not consider the manta ray as a type of eagle ray, as there is the other type of classification discussed earlier in the article.  I will remove the sentence on the spotted eagle ray being the largest, unless someone can provide an explanation for the contradiction.Beezer137 21:58, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Which is the biggest eagle ray? 

message: I don't get it.  What's with the spaces?  They seemed to be caused by the pictures placed in between the words but showing up right side.Xplosneer (talk) 00:54, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Spaces?
Talk:Videogame Rating Council

message: Too many WRONG "facts". I would re-write, but why bother? I'll just do it at my forum instead. Apple8800 (talk) 19:05, 7 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Not worth my effort 

message: The entire article is written from a perspective that a game with graphic violence would have been an automatic hit during this era. This is a childish assumption with nothing to back it up. Yes Mortal Kombat was a massive hit, but that certainly doesn't mean any game with blood and gore would be (as all the failed copycats attest to), nor does it mean that somehow graphic violence is mature. Appropriate for adult audiences that can distinguish the fantasy elements from reality, yes, but gore does not mean grown up. The article reads like it was written by someone who was in junior high during this time period and is still stuck in the mentality. It's embarrassing. oknazevad (talk) 22:22, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Really stupid, immature underlying assumption to this article. 

message: File:VRC GA.JPG|VRC GA
File:VRC MA-13.JPG|VRC MA-13
File:VRC MA-17.JPG|VRC MA-17
 Happening right now at Wikipedia:Graphics Lab/Illustration workshop#Videogame Rating Council czar ♔ 20:24, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Converting icons to vector
Talk:45 and 46 Clarges Street

message: No sources have been provided for the following people as having been Fox members. Per the verifiability policy, linked under every edit box: 1. Articles should contain only material that has been published by reputable sources.
2. Editors adding new material to an article should cite a reputable source, or it may be removed by any editor.
3. The obligation to provide a reputable source lies with the editors wishing to include the material, not on those seeking to remove it.
I'm moting these names here for now. They should not be reinserted in the article unless they're accompanied by a source citation indicating the person's membership in Fox. This source should meet the reliable source guidelines, i.e. insider knowledge or private Fox Club records will not do. Dpbsmith (talk) 01:18, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: (Note that the above refers to Fox Club (Harvard).) --Lord Belbury (talk) 18:04, 5 June 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Removing unreferenced items

message: All citations can be verified in Fox Club Roster, 1993
1Hoopes, James, Van Wyck Brooks: In Search of American Culture, p. 10
2op. cit. p. 7
3Gale, Mary Ellen, The Harvard Crimson, 11/4/60
4Fox Club Roster, 1993
5Steward, Zachary M., The Harvard Crimson, 3/21/07
6Leibovich, Mark, The Washington Post, 12/31/00
7see Wikipedia entry
Koans 00:25, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: (Note that the above refers to Fox Club (Harvard).) --Lord Belbury (talk) 18:04, 5 June 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  References 

message: At one point, I do think this page referred to the Fox Club in London, and was overwritten to refer to the Club at Harvard. Somehow a redirecxt was ommitted. I have added in a redirect to Harvard, and will make this a page about the London Club. --Duncan 14:52, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reclaiming the page 
Talk:Cathedral-Basilica of Notre-Dame de Québec

message: Is this Notre-Dame-des-Victoires? I can't find any article about Notre-Dame-des-Victoires. Someone should put an article up about this.Rijaman 01:24, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No, Notre-Dame-des-Victoires is a different church in the lower town. - Montréalais (talk) 04:21, 13 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Notre-Dame-des-Victoires

message: I presume the present building was built in 1922 from reading the church website.  Are there are pictures of the previous building?  --jmb (talk) 21:21, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: There is what appears to be a 19th Century picture on the Canadian Archive website.  --jmb (talk) 21:36, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Pre-1922 Picture
Talk:Five-Point Palm Exploding Heart Technique

message: Why delete the article?
The article is a large part of a popular movie, and the "Five Point Palm Exploding Heart Technique" is something that can very possibly be referenced in pop culture, which makes its inclusion in Wikipedia valuable. 
Also, the FPPEHT draws many parallels with things like beat-em up games, Dungeons and Dragons and perhaps more classic martial arts legends; the FPPEHT is a recent addition to a long line of similar archtypes. If it must be edited so that it is no longer an individual article, somebody should have to make an article about the wider archetype of "Quivering Palms"-style pressure-point assassination performances, and merge this article with that one.
At least, that's this IP's opinion.
:That's a reasonable idea. Perhaps you'd like to write it?
:For now it seems that merging the information into Kill Bill and then making this article a redirect to that would be a satisfactory solution, as this move is only related to that movie, and there appears to be no such article about the wider archetype. GreenReaper 22:20, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
Talk:Barotac Nuevo

message: Hello author of Barotac Nuevo history. My haunch that the correct former name of our dearest "Footbal" town
was Malutac instead of Mulatac. I could be wrong but please check it out. I would also like to commend you for writing the article.
Sincerely,
Bernardo P. Siaotong, Jr.
I THANK MR. SIAOTONG FOR MENTIONING BAROTAC NUEVO AS A "FOOTBALL" TOWN. IN FACT WE ARE RECOGNIZED AS THE FOOTBALL CAPITAL OF THE PHILIPPINES. OUR PASSION FOR THE GAME IS COMPARABLE TO THAT OF ANY EUROPEAN OR SOUTH AMERICAN CITY, LONG BEFORE FOOTBALL MANIA EMERGED IN THE COUNTRY VERY RECENTLY.
CAPT. CARLOS BEDIA DONGOR, MASTER MARINER  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.101.118.2 (talk) 21:42, 11 May 2011 (UTC)
Talk:Katherine Stinson

message: Should we add the establishments that are named after Katherine Stinson, such as Katherine Stinson Middle School in San Antonio, Texas?
-SanAntonioGuy 01:29, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Namesakes

message: I am going through Stinson's page and trying to set everything in chronological order, break it down into more sections, and get more and better citations.  If I move some previous work to a new section or delete some repetitive information, my apologies...no offense is meant. KlausVonVilver (talk) 05:51, 23 January 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Page make-over
Talk:David E. Lilienthal

message: No offense, but I agree that this article needs a major rewrite.  It's too lauditory of Lilienthal. 74.215.255.82 (talk) 08:20, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit needed 

message: I think that it is customary to acknowledge your sources early in the article. As I read it, I thought to myself, is all this actually documented? Then I saw the references section and assumed that the article is primarily taken from those journals. But it might help Mr. Szanton to read some other biographical articles on Wikipedia and try to conform to the conventions here. Bear in mind, of course, that there are some absolutely dreadful biographical articles written by amateur character assassins, which is why they had to institute WP:BLP as a policy. But there are also some decent ones. --MaplePorter 08:33, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've tried to repair what obviously are longstanding problems with this article: puffery, original research, and above all a lack of inline sourcing. Evidently one editor wrote this article some years ago after reading some books by Lilienthal, and then wrote this like a personal essay without bothering to insert inline citations. Figureofnine (talk) 14:43, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Comment
Talk:Hills Like White Elephants

message: Anis de Toro is not absinthe, it is a typical anise liqueur from southern Europe such as ouzo. 100.14.47.141 (talk) 15:24, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: It doesn't say that it is absinthe. The taste reminds them of absinthe. Beardo (talk) 03:33, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Absinthe? 

message: The article was tagged with the disputed and unreliable sources tags - but there is no explanation of why. In particular which sources are considered unreliable ? -- Beardo (talk) 03:36, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I will remove those tags. If someone explains what they meant, we can discuss. -- Beardo (talk) 20:15, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Disputed and unreliable sources tags
Talk:Ro-Busters

message: And so it goes. I've started the revamp. The Summary, I think, could do with editing down. I've rewritten the main section and added some trivia, although I need to confirm the episode of "Hammer-Stein's War Memoirs". It's the episode in which one of the human soldiers mentions that, once his tour is over, he'll have work helping to build Mega-City One. Ah, yes. Hammer-Stein spelt using a hyphen. That in itself could be another piece of trivia we could investigate. I would presume the hyphen was dropped during one of the Ro-Busters stories in the annuals or during the Nemesis books. --HalfWhit 20:24, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've started writing up brief synopses for each Ro-Busters story. However, my Starlord collection goes only as far as Starzine 8, so someone else will have to supply the details from there on. --HalfWhit 13:35, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd suggest you stop now and consolidate on the briefest of descriptions and don't both listing individual art and script credits for each. Giving each its own heading is also a bad idea because of the effect on the TOC. GraemeLeggett 14:09, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, it was becoming a tad unwieldly. Unfortunately, I didn't have time to have another bash at it. --HalfWhit 17:09, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

text: I'll double check TPO - it may be the attribution was wrong and they corrected it in the Complete Ro-Busters or I've misread it (it'll have to wait until I've shaken off my Xmas lurgey as I'm not really up for the niceties of teasing this out if it is unclear). (Emperor (talk) 19:42, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Article
Talk:Bright Futures Scholarship Program

message: As it currently reads, this article is biased in favor of spending less on education. Many people feel we don't spend enough, and it is not difficult to locate sources for this view. This article is also lacking any mention of the recent cuts in Bright Futures.
--71.203.35.67 (talk) 04:20, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Bias
Talk:Final Fantasy XV

message: According to several reliable sources; they've stated that Nomura has confirmed that there will be airships (a feature that was missing in FFXIII) in Final Fantasy Versus XIII. Yeah, this time you'll pilot a given airship to travel distant lands. 
news sources
*Siliconera
*IGN PS3
— Preceding unsigned comment added by Zeta Nova (talk • contribs) 05:42, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: News

message: As it stands now the release section is not up to standard. 
1) It has no concrete information concerning the release of the game. This is of course due to two things. The game hasn't been released, and it has, to my knowledge, no current release date. But these are exactly the two things that one would most expect to be covered under a section called release. Which leads us to:  
2) The three paragraph wall of text the section now consists of has little to do with the release, and more to do with trailers, marketing, development and fan feedback. 
I have two alternative suggestions for solving this: 
Alternative A) Move content related to development and fan feedback to the development section. Move content related to trailers to a new marketing section. Leave content related to reasons for delay, and speculation about the release date in the release section.  
Alternative B) Move content related to development to the development section, but keep the rest under the release section. But create subheadings for marketing (trailers etc), release date and reaction.
— Preceding unsigned comment added by Cotopaxi5897 (talk • contribs) 12:09, 11 April 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Release section misleading 

message: "When full, Noctis can command his companions to perform special moves called Techniques: Gladiolus performs a sweeping attack with his sword, Ignis uses his daggers to mark enemies so Noctis can perform a warp strike attack, and Prompto uses his firearm to fire a powerful shot that pierces through tough opponents. After each of these, Noctis can initiate a follow-up attack."
The listed techniques are all just the first of 3 available to the player, but the above statement is very matter-of-fact. Dartman1313 (talk) 21:45, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Techniques
Wikipedia talk:Requests for arbitration/Sam Spade/Evidence

message: I have no idea which page is the proper one for a non-evidentiary view of things.  There are three pages in the process?  At any rate, I just want to express here what I did on Bishonen's user talk page: a repentence before the bar is not a repentence of the heart.  After the RFC generated enormous and one-sided support against Sam's underlying behavior (unilateralism, failure to engage in dialogue, the persuance of a monopolistic POV, and repeated use of ad hominem to change the subject in a discussion from an article's edits to the character and imputed motives of editors), Sam went silent.  Well, what I have observed, over and over again, is that the personal accusations that Sam launches lead to a battle of attrition, and well established editors simply avoid articles that Sam edits.  Thus, new users with an interest in a political (usually) issue stumble into the mine field of Sam's "detective agency" "digging dirt" on his "opponents."  They're shocked at the vitriol, get upset, act in a crazy way, and either get blocked (because they couldn't play the game and instead do something outlandish, and Sam assures everyone else that he's a long time user, whereas this person is a newbie) or wander off.  Therefore, when Sam goes silent, people stop prosecuting, because they were never as motivated, never as bilious, as Sam was.  They never wanted to "dig dirt" on him, never wanted to "get (them) blocked," never wanted to cut off the "hydra's head."  They just wanted the articles to represent a more neutral or more balanced view, so all it takes is a temporary silence from Sam to see evidence gathering fizzle.  The problem is that the other established users have seen this before (remember the Vancouver Skybridge and the boobies?).  Sam has gone quiet before, and that has allowed him to keep coming back with the same inappropriate behavior.  The objective of an RFar on Sam should not be "make Nazi mysticism look better!" or "make Human look better," but, rather, let's stop this bullying.  Let's stop the ad hominems.  Let's stop the needless and incessant attacks on character.  Let's stop the paranoia.  Geogre 01:48, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: If the essense of what you are saying is that Sam's current good behavior needs to be made permanent by one means or another, then I and many others agree with you. WAS 4.250 02:12, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

text: That is the essence of it.  More to the point, I'm worried that he's going to pretend that there is no case because he is temporarily stopping.  The problem isn't temporary, so the solution can't be, either.  Geogre 10:49, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Just to add my support for what Geogre says here. --Mel Etitis  (Μελ Ετητης) 12:02, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

text:  Agreed 100% w/ Geogre here. Thanks a lot for your insightful comments throughout this case. Wile E. Heresiarch 16:49, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Sam went silent
Talk:NUnit

message: It is my understanding NUnit.ASP does not really test the user interface.  What it does is test server responses.  This is different in that it does not trigger events in the UI like firing off Javascript etc.  Unfortunately I have not been able to find a real NUnit extension that tests the web page as presented in a browser.  I guess you would need a combo of COM and XPCOM api in a wrapper ( and one for the Safari K... based browsers) to build this type of framework extension
198.144.208.148 01:51, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

message: It would be nice to compare this framework to CsUnit kevinp2 (talk) 21:38, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Comparison to [[CsUnit]]? 

message: I'm the maintainer of NUnit. One of the users pointed me to this article and suggested I might want to edit it to make some corrections and add further details.
On the one hand, this seems like a good idea, since I'm in a position to provide an accurate information. That makes sense.
On the other hand, it appears that Wikipedia policies discourage or forbid this. This makes sense too - at least if one is writing subjectively (i.e NUnit is good or NUnit is bad) rather than displaying facts. And yet, it seems like an encyclopedia should only have facts anyway.
As you can guess, I'm new to Wikipedia, having set up this account with my real name for the sole purpose of making this post. I read some of the guidelines and decided that this is a COI situation and followed the suggestion to post on the talk page.
 
Any suggestions? Is there any better place to ask this question than on the page itself?
CharliePoole (talk) 17:07, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Editing Quandary
Talk:Bloodlines (Star Wars novel)

message: What's the source for Ailyn Vel being in this book? I'm pretty sure I would have heard about it. -LtNOWIS 01:52, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
Talk:Democracy

message: Hi, I've removed the text introduced here as it appears to have been copied from https://www.britannica.com/topic/consociationalism and http://democracy-support.eu/southafrica/template/Preventing_and_Mitigating_Electoral_Conflict_and_Violence.pdf. Brittanica's content is copyrighted, and while there's no copyright notice on the ECES source, [their https://www.eces.eu/en/ website] has a copyright notice. (They also appear to assert copyright in relation to a "methodology" to prevent election-related conflict, which I think is unrelated to this.) It's possible I have removed a sentence or two here that was not actually copied or closely paraphrased from those two sources. If so, my apologies; I'm double-checking this now. /wiae /tlk 12:45, 8 February 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: The following sentence seems okay from a copyright perspective and could theoretically be reinserted. That said, not sure it necessarily should be, given that we already have a separate article on :Consociationalism). Thanks, /wiae /tlk 13:38, 8 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Text removal 

message: The article defines Kratos as "rule" and cites the Oxford dictionary. However the Greek Kratos is more often translated as power or force. The Greek word "Archon" is a more accurate translation of "rule."  That distinction seem important in light of the distinction between political systems of -archy and -cracy. I think it would be more accurate to define kratos as "power" rather than "rule." 71.105.207.249 (talk) 02:55, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Kratos 

message: The redirect Constitutional democracy 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.   Jay 💬 06:44, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  "[[:Constitutional democracy]]" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]]
Talk:Within the Woods

message: I don't understand the comment about copyright.  It's my understanding that copyright is automatically given to all films.  Does it mean that the film has been released to the public domain, or merely that the film carries no copyright notice?  --203.217.68.248 (talk) 09:48, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: No Copyright

message: There were some major errors in the plot synopsis of this article.  Having just watched the movie myself a few minutes ago (on YouTube), I went ahead and fixed the errors. Kheph777 (talk) 06:10, 30 October 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Plot Synopsis
Talk:Charles Wittenoom

message: Is that meant to be Karrakarra Cemetery, or is that a typo? Ambi 02:05, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Typo. Thanks (for the zillionth time) for picking that up. Snottygobble 02:25, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Kory Sheets

message: That might be a likely thing to happen, but it is by no means appropriate for an encyclopedia.
>One can only lament that this playmaker was not given more opportunities to shine.
Are you kidding me? Ditto.
>the Boilers look to return to a bowl game while winning the Big Ten Championship as they >elevate the offense to a new height.
I think 10 other teams would beg to differ that the championship has been decided.
So, how do we change the picture on this page to one of Sheets in Rider green?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.66.12.108 (talk) 06:53, 24 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Pet frog

message: OK this needs a bettter lead. Dominick (TALK) 02:08, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

message: It focuses on one particular kind of frog, is completely unreferenced, and makes the claim that no pet frog is safe for handling, bullocks.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.227.204.193 (talk) 16:22, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  This article sucks ass.