lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:I puritani

message: Is there a reason this is in lowercase? Tuf-Kat 23:06, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Apparently not. I'm going to move it. — ßottesiηi (talk) 01:13, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

message: The comment below was placed (wrongly) in the article itself with this edit. I am pasting it here for editors to consider:
::The first cultural reference needs to be totally rewritten. Prince Albert is coached by Baron Stockmar that Vincenzo Bellini is Princess Victoria's favorite composer, and that "I puritani" is her favorite opera. The first meeting (both historically and in the movie) takes place before King William dies and Victoria ascends the throne. The actual dialog has Victoria catching him out on this coaching, to which he responds "I like Schubert. I think, perhaps, you do not." It was his first break away from the rigid training to win her, and it actually marks the thaw in her attitude toward him in the movie. However, later in the movie, the aria being sung during her visit to the opera after becoming Queen but before her marriage to Albert is from Act III of "I pulitani" as sung by Giuseppi di Stefano in the Orchestra del Teatro alla Scala recording, conducted by Tullio Serafino. This is cited in the closing musical credits of the movie.
Voceditenore (talk) 05:03, 20 June 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I have now drastically pruned and referenced that section. The reference to the opera in the film Young Victoria constitutes a minor factoid which does not remotely justify the amount of space devoted to it in this article. That sort of detail belongs in the article about the film (if anywhere)—certainly in not this one. Voceditenore (talk) 05:43, 20 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Comment removed from article 

message: Hello! This is to let editors know that :File:Luigi Verardi after Dominico Ferri - Vincenzo Bellini - Théatre Royal Italien. Salle d'armes dans l'Opéra I Puritani.jpg, a featured picture used in this article, has been selected as the English Wikipedia's picture of the day (POTD) for January 21, 2022. A preview of the POTD is displayed below and can be edited at Template:POTD/2022-01-21. For the greater benefit of readers, any potential improvements or maintenance that could benefit the quality of this article should be done before its scheduled appearance on the Main Page.  If you have any concerns, please place a message at Wikipedia talk:Picture of the day. Thank you! Cwmhiraeth (talk) 20:24, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Featured picture scheduled for POTD
Talk:Super Doll Licca-chan

message: A ★ in the lemma, while of course possible with unicode, is not a good idea. I can imagine a number of related problems. I really suggest moving the article to Super Doll Licca-chan. --Mkill 23:07, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Title

message: Licca-chan is a fashion doll that has been made by Takara since the 1960's, long before this anime series was ever made. Some people call her the Japanese Barbie. "Licca-chan" needs to be directed to an article about the doll. Brittany Ka 02:10, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Very true. If someone wants to write an article, I'm fine with that. Until then, having it redirect here is perfectly acceptable. ···日本穣? · Talk to Nihonjoe 05:31, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

text: I've started one here. I'll do more translation from the ja wiki article tomorrow. ···日本穣? · Talk to Nihonjoe 06:47, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: The doll

message: Expand this .....  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.158.88.59 (talk) 03:16, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: We Should....

message: The Anime Encyclopedia lists several OVAs preceeding the television series and a movie with a different title released in 2001. Can these be confirmed and added by someone who has information? 
* OVA (1990; 2 ep)
* OVA- Licca and the Magic Ring (1991; 60 min)
* OVA- Licca's Sunday (1992; 25 min)
* OVA- Licca and the Wildcat: Journey of Dreams (1994; 78 min)
* Movie- Licca-chan & the Mysterious Sea (2001; 10 min) 
-- CFLeon (talk) 21:06, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: OVAs?
Talk:Gravitas

message: Removing the following sentence from the article because it seems unlikely to be pertinent and is unsourced:
:It was popularized by the media during the summer of 2000, to contrast the Republican Party candidate, George W. Bush and Al Gore, the Democratic Party candidate.
:--Tabor 23:09, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unlikely 

message: It is true that the term gravitas was used (perhaps over-used) during the 2000 U.S. presidential campaign; I found 3 sources that supported this view and I cited them.  I can find more, if anyone believes more would be needed or helpful.  ProfessorPaul 06:45, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: ''Gravitas'' as a political reference

message: The term gravitas clearly came into usage during the 2000 campaign.  A sound bite montage of U.S. pols spouting gravitas over and over received frequent airplay on the Rush Limbaugh radio program.
Jessemckay 14:54, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: ''Gravitas'' usage in 2000

message: --CopyToWiktionaryBot 00:31, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  2007-02-7 Automated pywikipediabot message 

message: Why is there a suggestion that gravitas can be translated as dignity?  The Latin word for dignity is dignitas, which is a completely different Roman virtue?  I'm not removing the reference from the article at this time because there might be a good reason that I'm unaware of.JDZeff (talk) 01:45, 17 February 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dignity?
Template talk:Pontiac timeline 1980s to 2010

message: Someone needs to add the Fiero (1984-1988 sports car)  I'm not sure how to, though...
Clarkefreak ∞ 23:12, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fiero 

message: Someone needs to move the Tempest - it was the same intermediate wheelbase Tempest. Stude62 01:20, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Move Tempest 

message: The following changes were made to the template on 4-1-2006.
1) Shifted "Personal" car size down to just above full size. Rationale+Grand Prix's were based off on the Full-Size platform from 1962 to 1968.  While post 1968 Grand Prix's were smaller in wheelbase, they were priced above mid-size and intermediate vehicles.
2) Changed Large to Intermediate classification.  Rationale: The LeMans was the same car as the Tempest, save for engines and trim appointments and built on the same wheel bases as the Temptest, which was based on the mid-size classification.  Stude62 16:34, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Category shifts 4-1-2006 

message: I was just wondering why the 2004-2006 Pontiac GTO is considered a mid-size coupe, when I think it would more appropriately be placed in the Sport category. Comments? -HumanZoom 06:11, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It effectively replaced the 2-door Grand Prix in the American market.  "Sports" cars typically have limited or no rear-seat space, while the GTO, based on the Australian Holden Monaro, is a full-fledged coupe.  --Vossanova o< 19:17, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Pontiac GTO

message: I updated the template to show that the Parisienne debuted for 1983, not 1982 as had been shown previously, so the gap between the last B-Body Bonneville (1981) and the first Parisienne (1983) is evident. Also, the LeMans was dropped after Model Year 1993, not '94, as the template used to show. Rhettro76 20:36, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Parisienne and LeMans
Talk:Edmund of Scotland

message: There's actually almost no evidence that Edmund was King of Scots. If anything, he was his uncle Domnall's tanaiste (i.e. designated successor). - Calgacus 23:16, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: But shouldn't it at least be mentioned that many works still (incorrectly) call him king? Srnec 21:03, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Now it says that. Next to go, Margaret of Scotland as not-Queen. I wonder if I should add Olaf of Scotland, whose existence is as certain as that of Donald I of Scotland. Angus McLellan  (Talk) 21:49, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  How about Amlaib of Scotland? ;) Calgacus (ΚΑΛΓΑΚΟΣ) 22:19, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

text:  If Duncan is calling him King, then Amlaíb of Scotland can be an article. And what you quoted is not necessarily a stub. This is the same kinda info level we have for lots of kings, for instance it seems to be as much as for the "king" on the current page. Calgacus (ΚΑΛΓΑΚΟΣ) 22:59, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: King
Talk:Ahmadi Governorate

message: American pattern??? You mean that of Buenos Aires or Toronto or Habana? Tobias Conradi (Talk) 23:17, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

message: There should be two articles here: one for the governorate and one for its capital. __meco (talk) 16:22, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  City and district are different entities 
Wikipedia talk:Blocking policy

message: There should be a section that shows how long you can be blocked for certain violations. RowanJ LP (talk) 17:04, 11 April 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Duration of blocks is extensively covered in the article. --Yamla (talk) 17:15, 11 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Add a section about block length 

message: * "Posting excessive and/or frivilous unblock requests" is one of the additions proposed. I mentioned above that I very much like this. I frequently see people making five or ten or even more unblock requests. We don't have enough unblock reviewers for a unique reviewer to look at that many requests. Without trying to get specific about the wording, I believe users should be entitled to three reviews plus one every six months on the low end, assuming they aren't being particularly abusive. I think any more than five, though, is simply pointless. Keeping in mind the limited number of unblock reviewers at any given time, what do others think about this? (I'm hoping the subheading focuses discussion and allows uninterested people to skip sections, but am happy to take feedback if the subheading is actually disruptive.) --Yamla (talk) 17:56, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Posting excessive and/or frivilous unblock requests 

message: Faster than Thunder (talk | contributions) 20:30, 16 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Autoblocks are a very niche area, and autoblock abuse is a niche pocket of this very niche area. It's so niche that I've never come across it. I don't think it needs to part of the blocking policy, which is quite a mainstream and prominent policy. Maybe WP:AUTOBLOCK would be a better place to make a mention, but at the same time I also think it wanders into WP:BEANS territory. I think most admins who deal with autoblocks will know how to deal with 'autoblock abuse' if they ever see it. -- zzuuzz (talk) 20:58, 16 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: I have seen it a handful of times in the time I've been an admin, most in the last three years on ArbCom (since we get requests like that), so I agree with zzuzz that the prevalence (low) vs the risk of BEANS (high) makes it unnecessary to include. People caught by an autoblock tend to figure out pretty quickly how to get it sorted, especially since it gives instructions for how to deal with it. Primefac (talk) 12:38, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Can we add this to section "Collateral damage"? 

message: -formatting per WP:REDCAT:
#REDIRECT Wikipedia:Blocking policy

 2003 LN6 22:04, 29 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: . Thryduulf (talk) 22:25, 29 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Protected edit request on 29 May 2024
Talk:Funeral march

message: anybody know where the famous melody originated?  (the melody that's used in cartoons, which for one, Chopin's Sonata No2 Op 35 has).TriniTriggs 23:43, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Should this be put in?  --80.42.148.168 15:48, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Is there any reason to assume Chopin didn't write it? -128.101.53.240 20:55, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Origination 

message: Wheres the date to the funeral march? duh!  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.101.182.239 (talk) 21:46, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Date 

message: Not sure this needs any citations?  It is after all just a list and all the works are freely available for confirmation of their status as Funeral Marches.  Thoughts? Jubilee♫clipman 19:00, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I am curious though specifically on "this is often called "Trauermarsch," but it is so called without the composer's approval". Is this original research? How are we to freely confirm whether Mendelssohn approved that name? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Citing_sources#When_and_why_to_cite_sources "enable users to verify that the information given is supported by reliable sources, thus improving the credibility of Wikipedia while showing that the content is not original research". This was not mentioned on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Songs_Without_Words or https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Felix_Mendelssohn — 207.38.182.114 (talk) 15:18, 14 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: List needs citations?

message: Is there the song "Posmrtni marš" on the list? LakiBranki (talk) 10:15, 5 April 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Posmrtni marš 

message: As I have seen it, the march itself consists of putting the left (?) foot forward and quickly bringing the right foot even with it. This is repeated at about one-second intervals or slower, in time with the music. If this is on wikipedia somewhere, or somewhere else, it should be referenced. Wastrel Way (talk) 14:20, 3 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  The march itself
Talk:A Profound Hatred of Man

message: :Image:A Profound Hatred of Man.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.
If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.Betacommand (talk • contribs • Bot) 05:09, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:A Profound Hatred of Man.jpg
Talk:Mark Walker (British Army officer)

message: This article has problems, the first line:
Mark Walker (VC, KCB) born Gore Port Castlepollard Co Westmeath 24 November 1912.
doesn't make sense. And it lists him receiving the VC in 1854, and the date of death as 1902, so how could he be born in 1912?
Also, there are other Mark Walkers, including the author of Tickle Cove Pond, from List of Newfoundland songs and a drummer from Jon Weber, that link to this article, so it may need to be disambiuated (is that a word?) but I'm not sure how to do that. Nekura 23:48, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:James Dewar

message: The picture in the article doesn't look like James Dewar.  Is it him?  --  Astrochemist 22:33, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: James was the youngest son and would not inherit the family business, so he left Stirling for London to seek his fortune. There, building on his knowledge and experience of cereal farming, he co-founded a firm called Dewar & Webb in 1872. The company soon also had branches in Portland, Oregon and the American Press of the day rather charmingly dubbed him 'King Corn'.
That doesn't sound like James Dewar the scientist, so I'm removing the picture.  --  Astrochemist 13:41, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Picture 

message: I removed the clean-up tag.  The article appears to be free from extraneous content and is reasonably well-written and organized clearly, so far as it goes.  It certainly does need much more content and, perhaps, some diagrams of Dewar flasks and liquefaction equipment.  The material in the External links section would be a good start.  Also, see "James Dewar, his flask and other achievements" in Physics Today, volume 49, March 1996, pages 32 - 38. - Astrochemist 01:02, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Needs 

message: The first liquefaction ( in 1898 ) and solidification ( in 1899 ) of hydrogen is credited to Dewar.  However this account from Eclectic Magazine, June, 1878 would indicate this had been accomplished by others 23 years earlier.  — The preceding unsigned comment was added by Boborama (talk • contribs) 02:59, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Dewar did the first liquefaction and solidification of hydrogen at atmospheric pressure. Nontheless this is quite a find and should be integrated into the article. The Eclectic Magazine of 1878 can be found at Archive.org.--DrJunge (talk) 21:06, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

text: You'll need volume 27!--DrJunge (talk) 21:23, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Solidification and liquefaction of hydrogen 

message: "...in the investigation of the electrical behaviour of substances cooled to very high temperatures."
Uh, one doesn't cool things ot high temperatures, does one?  66.222.28.28 (talk) 02:45, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  This sure looks wrong 
Talk:Cupeño

message: Most of this article seems to be verbatim from the US National Park Service site on the Cupeno. le as it's a US production, but they should get credit.--Parkwells (talk) 17:28, 18 November 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed. Even better would be to substantially rewrite the content, and then cite the USNPS site a source. babbage (talk) 19:15, 18 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Source
Talk:Ramree Island

message: "Ramree Island is an island off the coast of Myanmar (Burma). The Battle of Ramree Island took place here for six weeks during January and February 1945, as part of the British Fourteenth Army 1944/45 offensive on the Southern Front of the Burma Campaign during World War II." - a stub, lifted from another article, hardly requires verifing does it? Not as if it's got any disputable facts or opinion in there. Grunners 23:50, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Verification?

message: Where specifically is this located? Chris 04:30, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: what state or division?
Talk:Eddie Murphy Raw

message: Folks:
Jaffer here. I was the guy who added the link to a video clip of Eddie Murphy. Ezeu deleted the link and we have had a civil discussion. I understand his pointthat it appears to be a conflict of interest. He suggested that the video link was blatant promotion. 
If you people who work on Eddie Murphy believe it is worthy, include the link in external links. If not, don't. It is up to the Wiki community. Jaffer 23:59, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't agree with the "blatant promotion" argument. The clip shows a snippet from the concert video, a very short one, that shows a sample of Eddie's comedic style. I'm putting the link back, under "External Links". -- 68.239.152.82 03:02, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: A clip from Eddie Murphy Raw, no matter what length, is an infringement of copyright, and a big Wikipedia no-no. --FuriousFreddy 03:37, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Link to video 

message: Why are metrics on the word "fuck" notable enough to be included as a separate header, or even at all, within this article? Should we remove it? aerotheque (talk) 02:55, 16 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Who gives a "fuck"?
Talk:Gülen's movement

message: There should be an article about the movement. It is simple now in the current form but I will be working on it gradually.
Thanks. Resid Gulerdem 00:00, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

message: A movement is usually gauged by the followers. Is there any kind of estimate of either the number of followers, or alternatively, the quality of the followers? Any numeric estimate at all would make the movement appear more notable in wiki-eyes. DanielDemaret 08:57, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Estimate 

message: The movement is far different from the philosopher behind it. It is about millions of people, their actions and motivation. This article will be improved gradually as time permits. Resid Gulerdem 11:18, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Can you please provide resources for the number you mention - millions? Otherwise, there is no need for this article.Caspase 04:50, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Millions if you count everybody who has ever watched their TV station, or read one of their newspapers. Counting is difficult due to the number of organizations involved, but the guess of "Human Rights Without Frontiers" (who consider Gülen's orgs a repressed religious group) is two orders of magnitude lower: "tens of thousands"(p.41) Azate 12:28, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The movement is different from the person himself. Even if they are tens of thousands of people, it still deserve a seperate article considering the number of organizations, institutions and their effect in the society. You should take the fact into considerations that the newspaper of the movement (zaman) is #2 newspaper of Turkey which is read by 600,000 people everyday. So you need to update your records. Mokotok 17:56, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  They should be seperate 

message: The question has been up for months on this page, and nobody except User:Rgulerdem seems to think this article is worth having seperately. Also the entire article is without sources (and VERY dubious, to say the least). SI created a redirect to [Fethullah Gülen] Azate 01:11, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Redirect created
Talk:Melody Time

message: This is the same issue as Fun and Fancy Free, etc. This was part of Melody Time originally and shouldn't be it's own article just because it was released separately later. There is even a separate article for Disney's American Legends. Keep it simple! :) Pigby (talk) 05:03, 16 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: i have no specific opinion at this point about fun and fancy free, but i think that this one ought to remain its own article.  there is quite a bit of independent discussion in reliable sources about this film in particular, and the eventual inclusion of it all might well overwhelm the melody time article.— alf.laylah.wa.laylah (talk) 18:31, 25 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge [[Johnny Appleseed (film)]] 

message: I need to ask, is this segment only censored on the Gold Classics Collection releases, or also the Masterpiece Collection too? I've never seen the masterpiece collection release, and the way it's worded could confuse readers if it's censored on both releases. 24.181.236.186 (talk) 16:35, 28 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Pecos Bill