lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Jamie Andrew

message: I believe this page should not be deleted. This preson is well known in Britain for his true story of story of survival and Heroism. He also has written a famous book well known in the UK. I intend to create sources and fix this page very soon. 
:I don't usually remove someone else's tag, but I believe that the subject of this article is notable. WWGB 12:02, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Large-group awareness training/Archive 3

message: ;Comment by Smee
*Usage of the term Large Group Awareness Training is NPOV
Large Group Awareness Training is an NPOV term, utilized by psychologists, psychiatrists, and other academics, and defined in psychology textbooks :
#
#
#
# -- Defined in academic journal articles by psychiatrists/psychologists.
# -- Defined in textbooks on psychology.
#Taught in college-level psychology courses:  "Developmental Effects of Participation in a Large Group Awareness Training", at the University of Minnesota.  Hughes, Steven J., "Developmental Effects of Participation in a Large Group Awareness Training", University of Minnesota, presented at "Educational, Intructional and School Psychology", Symposia: SY EDC (18) 4], Universidad Complutense de Madrid.
#  -- A study which was made into a book, Evaluating a Large Group Awareness Training: A Longitudinal Study of Psychosocial Effects, won an award from the American Psychiatric Association.  This study was commissioned by Werner Erhard and Associates, so they therefore paid these scholars to analyze the phenomenon and classify them in it accordingly.  
#Page. 54. :"Mind Dynamics, founded by Alexander Everett, was the major forerunner of large group awareness trainings.  Although Mind Dynamics was only in existence for a few years, it sparked an entire industry of similar trainings." -- This book was written by 2 graduates of EST who think highly of the coursework.  Therefore, the fact that they use this terminology shows it is NPOV.  
Smee 18:56, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Comments by involved editors 

message: *Please follow WP:RS.  Please stop citing internet message boards as sources.  Thanks.  Smee 01:03, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Internet mesage boards are not reputable sources 

message: The citations in the first paragraph:
*The term Large Group Awareness Training has been used by x y z
Are those citations of "psychologists" using the term, or are they citations where someone else said that psychologists used the term? Lsi john 05:18, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  clarification on citations
Talk:Burton–Judson Courts

message: I think that the independent page Burton-Judson Courts should be deleted. I know that the result of previous discussion was to keep, but all of the reasons mentioned in the deletion proposal pertained to the building's history architectural history, but the article doesn't mention much about that. In fact, besides the notable former residents section, this page has the exact same information as the BJ section under Housing at the University of Chicago. The article offers nothing new besides the former residents section, information which is already under any article having to do with notable alumni of UChicago or that could easily be moved the BJ section under Housing at the University of Chicago. Is there a way to have this page deleted? Pandabearm (talk) 19:37, 20 November 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Second Proposal for Deletion
Talk:Doc Films

message: Any particular reason there's a link for Ida Noyes Hall but no article that it leads to?  A pyrate's life for me... (talk) 14:42, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Redlinks often are left in articles for various reasons. In this case Ida Noyes Hall will probably be written at some time in the future. Leaving a redlink is one way of reminding Wikipedians that the article still needs to be written.--Gimme danger (talk) 22:28, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Link to Nowhere 

message: One or more portions of this article duplicated other source(s).  Infringing material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.) For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you.  --Moonriddengirl (talk) 15:52, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copyright problem removed 
Talk:Malayan night heron

message: 20,000 individuals?
They are even all over the parks here in Taiwan. Jidanni (talk) 20:43, 11 October 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  20,000 individuals?
Talk:Gerald Ratner Athletics Center

message: Who is the Gerald Ratner this place is named after? </br>
The famous (infamous?) Gerald Ratner was British; presumably this was someone else.</br>
If he has a sports centre named after him he must be a bit notable; shouldn’t he at least be red-linked? (eg Gerald Ratner (whatever), or something). Does anyone know? Swanny18 (talk) 21:43, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Who? 
Talk:Milton Mayer

message: "letters flowed in attacking him as an anti-Semite, even though he emphasized his belief that Jews had become so assimiliated that they did not live prophetic lives." - what on earth is this supposed to convey? 82.93.10.238 19:11, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: What?

message: I added some from NYTimes online, but did not (yet) try The Progressive nor the Saturday Evening Post. Would be great to find an obit. somewhere.Acwilson9 (talk) 01:22, 11 May 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Needs more citations.
Talk:Peltzman effect

message: The CSI: Crime Scene Investigation media ref is valid: Stokes is pondering out loud about a college driver's accident.  Why remove? 71.234.215.133 (talk) 11:53, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  in Media ref 

message: A reference to the original publication/first occurance is still missing in the lemma! --DrJunge (talk) 13:33, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reference to the original publication still missing
Talk:University of Chicago Divinity School

message: The citation in the introduction meant to point to the National Research Council's ranking doesn't actually link to any evidence of the ranking in question. Instead, it links to "page not found."
Until this is fixed, I'm adding a "citation needed" tag.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.189.192.46 (talk) 16:09, 30 November 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  National Research Council citation…
Talk:University of Chicago Medical Center

message: The subsection titled "Trauma Center Controversy" contains a considerable amount of general information on the funding of trauma care which is uncited and not linked directly to issues at UCMC.  Frankly, it reads as rationalization/justification from the UCMC administration, violating NPOV.  I have flagged the first two sentences as particularly egregious examples needing citation.
I wanted to raise the issue before making major edits.  But I politely ask that those who believe that the current text of the article is justified please make their case and provide citation as soon as possible.  If I see no response within the next several days, I will treat that as agreement with these concerns and likely edit the article myself.  Thanks.
Mgllama (talk) 19:19, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Having received no objection, I plan to start editing the article soon.  I would also not that the current text of this section came from an anonymous IP address at the University of Chicago.  While this could have come from many sources, if there are UCMC public relations staff editing this, I would remind them of the importance of NPOV and sourcing. Mgllama (talk) 18:08, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unsourced and questionably relevant material in "Trauma Center Controversy" subsection 

message: I think this page and Pritzker School of Medicine need to be assessed and made a bit clearer about the distinction between them.
UChicago Medicine redirects to this page. But from what I can tell, UChicago Medicine is the overarching system, which is comprised of three parts:
*1. The medical school Pritzker School of Medicine 
*2. The hospitals called University of Chicago Medical Center
*3. The biological science faculty Biological Sciences Division
I think The UChicago medicine redirect page should be made into a page that summarises all three areas, and then the other two pages can try to focus on their own roles and history. Which are intertwined, but also distinct.
Thoughts?
AdaWoolf (talk) 21:11, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Chicago medical vs. UChicago Medicine vs Pritzker School of Medicine
Talk:Dormand–Prince method

message: I recall hearing that very high order (8/7) is used for very non-stiff problems.
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0771050X81900103
There is also the Runge-Kutta-Nystrom formula
http://imajna.oxfordjournals.org/content/7/4/423.short
I was wondering if someone would mind adding these to the page.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 150.135.223.100 (talk) 19:27, 14 November 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Is mentioned at Runge–Kutta methods#Runge–Kutta–Nyström methods, otherwise Be bold. Regards 17387349L8764 (talk) 11:00, 24 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  There are even higher order RK methods attributed to Dormand and Prince 

message: What does "embedded" mean in this context? 159.162.102.250 (talk) 06:56, 21 April 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: The original paper is from the 1980s, right now it is sorted as part of Runge–Kutta methods#Adaptive Runge–Kutta methods if that helps. Regards 17387349L8764 (talk) 10:59, 24 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Clarifications
Talk:Cash–Karp method

message: There are some interesting further facts mentioned in the answer of an sci-comp stack-exchange question "Which Runge-Kutta method is more accurate: Dormand-Prince or Cash-Karp?", (URL version: 2016-11-04) by Julia ODE solver suite  developer Chris Rackauckas. "[...] Then it also was derived to have embedded 1st, 2nd, 3rd, and 4th order methods [...]. They are spaced in such a manner that you can find out where a stiff part starts by which difference is large. [...]" If this could be checked against sources and expanded in the details it would make a good addition to the article.--LutzL (talk) 16:06, 7 November 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  multi-order estimates of stiffness
Category talk:Anti-Protestantism

message: User:Kendrick7 has continued to remove the category description. It should be discussed here first so consensus can be obtained for its removal. StAnselm (talk) 06:01, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Category description 

message: People (i.e. biographical articles) should not be categorised here. A separate sub-category for people was deleted, see Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2021_March_20#Category%3APeople_involved_in_anti-Protestantism. 
– Fayenatic London 06:59, 24 April 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  People
Talk:Shrimp DeJonghe

message: As a speaker of the Dutch language, and seen how this dish was invented by Belgian immigrants, I am certain the 'proper' spelling is De Jonghe. However, I am not familiar with the common writing style in Chicago. 109.130.233.107 (talk) 23:47, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  De Jonghe or DeJonghe?
Talk:Vienna Beef

message: Yeah this is all well and fine, but where does the "Vienna" come from?  What does this beef have to do with Vienna or Austria?  Is there some particular type of cow from Austria that is involved?
--Atikokan (talk) 03:43, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: The company was founded by two Austro-Hungarian immigrants. Maybe they just wanted a bit of nostalgia. Here is a helpful history of the company on their website . - Burpelson AFB ✈ 15:12, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vienna?  Why "Vienna"?
Talk:Ciconia

message: There's an article at Adjutant (bird) that uses the Latin name Ciconia argala.  Is that another species that should be referred to in this article?  The Lesser Adjutant and Greater Adjutant have their own articles, but they would appear to be from different genus.  Rojomoke 11:41, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've deleted that unsourced and unverifiable article. It can only be an old name for one of the adjutants. Jimfbleak 12:26, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Argala? 

message: The article says "Six of the seven living species..." but later says "The genus contains eight extant species." These cannot both be correct. 70.172.240.198 (talk) 18:58, 19 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Number of Species?
Talk:Lesser adjutant

message: The stork article says this animals hunts in marine environments, unlike most other storks, but there's no mention of this in the article. Imagine Reason (talk) 23:24, 30 March 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Marine environments
Talk:Transmutation

message: Disambugation page needs to be created here. The way, the truth, and the light 12:15, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Done! Thanks for the move. PaladinWhite 17:04, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: He too late Vipinl1 (talk) 02:59, 1 August 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Transformation
Talk:Kingston Bypass

message: I'm moving the following here as it's an uncited opinion and therefore obviously unencyclopedic. (It originally appeared after the first sentence about Algona Rd.)
 "This road is the ideal road to connect the Kingston Bypass to Blackmans Bay as it was originally constructed for such as task and has available space dedicated for a second carriageway"
If a working citation can be found, it should be added, and the spirit of the above text, minus the POV, could be expressed, for example, as:
 "According to [cited source], Algona Road is the ideal road..."
--TyrS (talk) 00:58, 2 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Try this source. Wiki ian 19:30, 9 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Algona Rd "ideal" opinion  

message: further reading: Kingston bypass bridges, Project profile and Parliament of Tasmania
In regards to the route description....
While I may be wrong on a technicality, I have my doubts as to whether on ramps/merging lanes qualify the Kingston Bypass for Dual carriageway status in the area of Summerleas Road. The second lane exists purely for traffic merging from the interchange as opposed to overtaking/passing opportunities. Evad37's thoughts on this matter would be appreciated.
Regards,
Wiki ian 09:48, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Dual carriageway doesn't actually have anything to do with the number of lanes. The dual carriageway refers to separation of the carriageways (which may have any number of lanes) by a central median. If it was a single carriageway, then it wouldn't have that grassed area (median) between the northbound and southbound lanes. - Evad37 [talk] 13:27, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thank you for the lesson in Humility. I feel kind of stupid and am going to hang my head in shame. Forgive my stupidity, Wiki ian 01:57, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Accuracy of route description
Talk:Gusli

message: Why is this in the "Lyres" category? Badagnani (talk) 19:01, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Lyre?

message: I know it like Ukrainian musical instrument. The name is not correct while there was no Russia when this instruments where very popular. It is an unstrument of Kievan Rus I would say. It will be more correct if write in such a way.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.94.60.164 (talk) 05:07, 18 September 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Russian musical instrument?

message: There's a very nice example of traditional gusli playing over here. Esn (talk) 03:57, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Example

message: If the gusli has bridges, why not mention this in the article? 173.88.246.138 (talk) 17:35, 14 May 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: Bridges
Talk:Gillian Lynne Theatre

message: The infobox looks really weird as it shows the building having been rebuilt well before it was ever constructed; reading the article text one learns that one date is that of the construction of the current theatre, the rebuild date being that of the previous one on the same spot, but on the whole it seems quite odd.  2600:1004:B109:2956:E910:1349:4E85:946B (talk) 03:32, 24 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Infobox 

message: The article is headed “Gillian Lynn Theatre” but the text doesn’t make clear when the New London Theatre was renamed to Gillian Lynn Theatre. 143.159.35.36 (talk) 12:16, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Theatre’s change of name
Talk:Novello Theatre

message: Can some evidence of 'notability' be provide - eg link to review in a National newspaper. I've removed some anticipatory productions! I'm all in favour of claiming notability for anything done by the RSC - but can't this be dealt with in the prose section as a 'season'. In the prose section, I'm not convinced about the space given to two musicals that closed after 8 weeks - they're only worth mentioning for their loses - it should be noted in a record year for British audiences. So, perhaps good to drop details of the turkeys? Kbthompson (talk) 14:58, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Notable productions 
Talk:International Falcon Movement

message: I would consider the info box very useful. It is used by a number of differnt orgs. and provides a powerful way to get information across in a small space of time, Listing the sec. general, websites, and elected members of the board is not just a directory it provides a useful service and i would re-introduce it but with more information of use.
--Lloyd rm 09:59, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
Talk:Leicester Square

message: Leicester Square is undergoing a major redesign that has been planned for the upcoming Olympic Games. As of today, the Square is nothing more than a building yard, and a tall fence (which has "Getting ready for 2012" written on it) forbids public access. According to the sign there, the Square will be under construction until March 30th 2012. I think this info has to be put somewhere in the article. --188.39.25.248 (talk) 22:12, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Leicester Square, a construction site

message: Apparently there was a plan to build an opera house there at one point:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/arts/yourpaintings/paintings/leicester-square-london-with-the-design-for-a-proposed-new50836
©Geni 04:27, 16 November 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Interesting to see the statue of George I. Lozleader (talk) 10:19, 16 November 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Here we are:  I don't have access to JSTOR any more :-( but the first page is visible to all. Lozleader (talk) 10:27, 16 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: of possible interest

message: The article say: "Leicester House was briefly the residence of Frederick, Prince of Wales from 1742 until his death the following year." But Frederick did not die "the following year" (1743), he died in 1751?--Aciram (talk) 13:00, 26 June 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Got it. The source (Survey of London, vol. 33-34, pages 441-472) says "Some time before June of that year he [sixth Earl of Leicester]  agreed to let the house to George II's eldest son, Frederick, Prince of Wales, (fn. 86) but he died in July 1743", so he must refer to Jocelyn Sidney, 7th Earl of Leicester, not the prince. Should be fixed now. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 13:26, 27 June 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Frederick died nine years before his death? 
Talk:Concordia University massacre

message: The article gives all the details about the shootings, but little about what was behind it, as twisted as Fabrikant's mind may have been.  It is unbalanced as it stands.  Also needs more reliable third-party sources, not Fabrikant's website.--Parkwells (talk) 16:57, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Needs more context and content

message: There doesn't seem to be a citation made specifically for the motive, which is listed as "narcissistic personality disorder;" in addition, the wiki page does not seem to mention that at all, and if it did, it glossed over it. Finally, the external links don't seem to use the term "narcissist" or "narcissism" in a clinical way; moreso in a casual way that resembles an regular person referring to an incredibly insensitive person as a "psychopath." Am I completely wrong here? 2600:8801:8D0F:4C00:2960:76E:7D0:AEC3 (talk) 23:57, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Citation for motive
File talk:Bono honolulu.jpg

message: Tina Vanbeveren's permission is not sufficient, alone, to allow us to use the image on Wikipedia.  We need her to release all rights of the image and to release it into the public domain or keep the copyright in her name and allow the image to be used for any purpose.
What needs to be done.
#Author needs to be contacted.
#She needs to:
##Release the image into the public domain or 
##Keep the copyright and allow the image to be used for any purpose.
#After such information is released, we need to switch the tag to  or  dependent upon which she picks.
Chupper 13:30, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've e-mailed the author and I'm waiting for a response. Chupper 13:43, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The author is willing to allow Wikipedia to use this image, but because this image is being used in other projects they cannot allow anyone to use it for any purpose (release all rights). Therefore this image cannot be used on Wikipedia and will be deleted. Chupper 15:16, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

text: The author has contacted me again allowing the work to be used for any purpose.  I've changed the licensing information on the image page to reflect this. Chupper 15:53, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This is nice, but what is meant by "recreated"?? Lupo 15:58, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Feel free to change the wording, but basically if the image is put up on another website, or printed for commercial use, etc... Chupper 17:17, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah, so this is a non-commercial Wikipedia-only release? In that case, the permission is not good enough. This image is not "free", and thus must go, unless you'd like to try making a fair use claim. Lupo 18:49, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Oh, I see what you mean now, the conditional license, "It is also requested that Tina Vanbeveren is contacted before this photograph is recreated."  If that was in the licensing terms for the photograph, it is indeed not free.  Incidentally, can we please stop removing the  tag?  It is still disputed...  --Iamunknown 18:55, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

text: *  I'm sorry, I see it was an OTRS-er that removed it, I feel stupid --Iamunknown 18:57, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Lupo - notice my wording - it is "requested", but not necessary that they be contacted prior to reproduction.  This is not a "non=commercial Wikipedia-only release".  The author has released all rights.  Again, this is just a request, not a necessity. Chupper 03:22, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: All right, then let's make that clear. I'm going to change the license description. Lupo 06:45, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  I like the wording that you and Iamunknown have come up with.  I wouldn't be a good lawyer ;).  Thanks for your help guys, Chupper 12:24, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Copyright tag