lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Bagatelle

message: I moved this here.: "Some French soldiers carried their favorite bagatelle tables  with them to America while helping to fight the British in the American Revolutionary War." The game first surfaced in 1777. A first mention in an American context would be more enlightening. --Wetman 22:58, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Any early American sources

message: While trying to find the origin of pachinko, I presumed that it would be bagatelle, the common ancestor of pinball and originating in France or Italy based on billiards. However, at about the same time as the first bagatell boards are being sited in france there is a "Billard Japonais" board in Alsace (France/Germany). Does anyone know the origin of Billard Japonais? Did bagatelle in fact come from Japan? The Japanese have quite a history of making mechanical toys. --Timtak (talk) 23:08, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Worth looking into! — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ʕ(Õلō)ˀ  Contribs. 18:10, 19 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Billard Japonais

message: In sources  by James Masters says:
While Master's article is not the most reliable, it would make a reasonable template for what to include in this article and for possible section headers eg:
*Old English bagatelle --perhaps "Old bagatelle"?
*Children's bagatelle  --perhaps as Masters calls it "Parlour bagatelle"?
It is the children's type game which is closely connected to Pinball & Pachinko. Reading this current Wikipedia article with its emphasis on a game like bar billiards one is hard pressed to see see the similarities. -- PBS (talk) 00:35, 1 November 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed it needs work, and two sections are probably the best way to handle it.  However, I think that the article should focus on the more billiards-like game, as it is the older and more widespread.  The children's version was essentially a short-lived intermediary variant, a proto-pachinko.  Another way of looking at it is that eminently reliable sources like Shamos and Stein & Rubino devote a lot of time and detail to the "grown up" game, and solid sources on the kiddie version seem to be scarce.  That said, the children's game is certainly notable and is important to the history of pinball.  I'll see what I can dig up on it over time.  I'm slowly amassing a lot of game-related reference books. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ʕ(Õلō)ˀ  Contribs. 04:40, 23 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Children's bagatelle 

message: More on the game and its variants at EB9 and 11, though more modern authoritative sources are  also welcomed. — LlywelynII 03:08, 7 December 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Sources for article expansion
Talk:Sociology of fatherhood

message: I think it is a great idea to merge the subject of fathercraft with fatherhood because of the relativity of both of their information.
I very much agree. No idea how to do that; but I agree!
dont think this is a particularly inspiring article really. lacking in information thats actually valuable, and doesnt contain any real sociological aspects on fatherhood in it.
:: It would be a better idea to merge 'sociology of fatherhood' and 'sociology of motherhood' to form one coherent and decent article. e.g. 'sociology of parenthood'. If anyone has the energy to do that, you have my consent to go ahead.--Tomsega (talk) 23:47, 25 November 2009 (UTC)
Talk:Firstrade Securities

message: THE WORST COMPANY THAT I HAVE EVER DELT WITH WATCH YOUR MONEY WITH THESE GUYS THEY ARE SCAMMERS. WARREN TUCKER COMPLANTANT!!!!  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.249.1.122 (talk) 20:49, 22 January 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  FIRSTRADE SECURITIES
Talk:Pingback

message: There are three types of Linkbacks - Pingbacks, Refbacks, and Trackbacks.  Here in Wikipedia, only two were referenced, and there was no article for Linkbacks in General.  I created an additional article to represent all three, added some missing material for the two that were in existence, and created the parent article, Linkback.  
I propose that we merge Pingback, Refback, and Trackback into a Linkback article, with redirects from each to the Linkback article.
What's your opinion?  - Mugs 11:41, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Tidying up

message: I see it mentioned that pingbacks are less prone to spam then trackbacks.  Can anyone explain why please? --24.180.103.242 22:35, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I read that article, and it was pretty good. Unfortunately, it's now gone. Will it be coming back? TRiG (talk) 22:24, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Can someone explain WHY pingbacks are less prone to spam?
Talk:James Finch

message: This article should be about James Finch, not Phoenix Racing. --JAYMEDINC 00:34, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Zooomr

message: People Tags were part of Zooomr before August 22. So removing that too.--71.163.64.48 14:00, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  People Tags 

message: Zooomr also does not yet have the full privacy features of Flickr, which would enable a user to make private photos viewable only to friends or family.
Um Yes it does. I'm removing this line.--71.163.67.245 14:54, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't see how it has. They don't even delete your pictures when you delete them. --till (talk) 14:32, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Privacy Features 

message: *Support merge. Tate is not notable independent of Zooomer. AKRadeckiSpeaketh 22:21, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge discussion

message: article read like a company brochure. removed the selective comparisons to big successful sites, removed 'unique features' and the like. terrible this even remained so long. i'm keeping an eye on it. Jw2034 (talk) 23:00, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: The Ads...The Ads..oh dear god, the ads...

message: Can someone please explain how a site ranked 800,000+ in Alexa and with only 2 sources is on wikipedia?  This article:
http://en.wikipedia.org/Yuniti
Was deleted despite being in the top 200,000 site in Alexa and having 5+ sources (talk) 13:38, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Not notable
Talk:Accelerated reference frame

message: 87.217.89.114 said in edit line "In an accelerated frame there is no curved spacetime" which DMS.  Accelerated frames are extremely useful in many spacetimes, including Minkowski vacuum and also various curved spacetimes.  Also, frames are a coordinate-free concept and can be written in various coordinate charts.  Thus one has the Rindler frame (on part of Mink) which can be expressed in various charts; see Rindler coordinates-Bell's spaceship paradox.  One has the Langevin frame (on part of Mink) which can also be expressed in various charts; see Born coordinates-Ehrenfest paradox.---CH 23:08, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  All these articles need to be rewritten
Talk:Canadian Olympic Committee

message: According to what I think is probable, all summer Olympics Canada will host will be in either Montreal or Toronto. Anyone who disagrees?? Georgia guy 23:12, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Disagree This really isn't the place for this type of discussion, but I would disagree with this seeing as two other cities (Calgary and Vancouver) have proven themselves capable of hosting Olympic Games and mulktiple others have hosted Canada Games, Commonwealth Games, and other events. Certainly Montreal and toronto would be good choices but I don;t see how you count out many other cities such as Ottawa, Quebec City, or many others. HalifaxRage (talk) 16:57, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Canada Summer Olympics

message: How would one go about changing the logo on this page? The new official logo is: https://cdnolympic.files.wordpress.com/2017/02/coc_cmyk.png.
Mnadolny (talk) 18:49, 2 February 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi Mnadolny, and thanks for your suggestion. You are asking that a non-free (i.e. Wikipedia is using the logo under the fair use criteria instead of obtaining a legal waiver from the COC) logo be uploaded to Wikipedia. Please read Wikipedia's Non-free content policy, and then request that the logo be uploaded at Wikipedia:Files for upload. It will then be possible to insert the photo in the article. Altamel (talk) 21:26, 7 February 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Changing the logo on this page
Talk:Mr. Rooter

message: From what I see here and elsewhere, the companies are completely different. Yet the name is very similar and the typeface and imaging on the Mr. Rooter logo is just about identical. Close enough that if I were Roto Rooter I'd be slapping them with tradmark infringement.
I'm sure I'm not the only person getting confused.
Could someone with definite info address this?
Thanks
wiki-ny-2007 (talk) 04:09, 3 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is there any connection with Roto Rooter? 

message: This small franchisor gets no coverage in the general press.  Occasionally a franchisee gets a mention in a shopper's guide.  In my opinion, it does not belong in an encyclopedia. Rhadow (talk) 10:59, 28 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Not notable
Talk:Margaret Mahler

message: Margaret Mahler studied what is today known as regressive autism. She mistakenly classified it as a mental illness due to her pseudo-scientific, psychoanalytic approach: according to her, it was a form of "infantile psychosis" which she described as emerging around the third year of life of the child. The symptoms were deterioration of speech, echolalia, and general regression of functioning, among others, which are described as Autistic Disorder by modern, evidence-based medicine.
This article has a fringe psychoanalytic point of view which opposes that of modern, evidence-based medicine, and therefore has to be checked for neutrality. --AnEternalSkeptic (talk) 00:32, 4 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Pseudoscience, non-neutral point of view
Talk:Extended Pilot

message: Could someone please the "or cocaine" line? I don't get it. I get the "or candy" line; that one is funny. --Mathew5000 23:30, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That's probably why candy was in the version that aired. Cocaine kind of shows that GOB doesnt care what the kids hear - or is oblivious.  Candy is more of a coverup DrIdiot 01:40, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
Talk:Shjon Podein

message: isn't he supposed to be friends with Matt Damon? 204.38.195.216 17:23, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: I think a note should be added regarding the pronounciation of his name (Shawn). Also, his name is a combination of Shawn and Jon. I dont know if that is worth adding  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.34.20.110 (talk) 03:06, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Name
Talk:The Room

message: A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Oh hi mark. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 May 15#Oh hi mark until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.  Ahecht (TALKPAGE) 00:10, 15 May 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Oh hi mark" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]] 

message: Could this section on a musical spinoff please be added to the "Other media" section under a new heading "Music" or anywhere else that it fits? On February 14, 2018, Irish Alt-Pop group Dr. Mindflip released 'Roominations: An Unauthorized Parody', a rock-opera concept LP inspired by the original film, and Sestero's book. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:bb6:1495:2700:c79:dbd0:b707:67a7 (talk) 10:03, 16 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Musical spinoff
Talk:Ehrenfest paradox/Archive 1

message: My advice at this time is to leave that tag alone.  IMO, Harald88 "owns" it, and it gets removed either by him or with the approval of a consensus of the editors.  I don't see that the dust has settled on this article anyway, although the Harald does not appreciate the fact the the "paradox" as presented in the stub wasn't even paradoxical.
In any case, I advise that we continue to refine this article, and then if Harald is still standing his ground after we are happy with it (with "we" including Peter and anyone else interested in this topic) then we can do a poll and (given a consensus to do so) remove the tag.  I don't see any good reason not to respect the tag for now or not to listen to Harald and see if we can come to an agreement with him without exeerting an undue amount of effort.  (I don't expect such an agreement, but a consideration of his objection may lead to better article anyway.) --EMS | Talk 20:01, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  The "disputed" tag 

message: OK, I think Peter's figures pretty much solved the problem.  All I had to do was to cram the distracting trigonometry into another article :-/ and provide a verbal description of the figures to make an entirely new first section.  The other sections are almost untouched.
I removed the fact flag from the history section because that section clearly points the reader to the 2002 paper by Grøn which is available on line, quotes (in translation) from Ehrenfest's 1909 paper, and gives complete bibliographic citations to all of Ehrenfest's papers which deal with this topic.
Comments?  ---CH 16:26, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This is a definite improvement.  There is still too much jargon in the other sections, but at least that is the issue now.  Already people can read this article and get some idea as to what the fuss is all about. --EMS | Talk 17:07, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

text: I now see a new problem:  We have lost the statement of the topology conflict between the two observers, which is the crux of the claim of a paradox. --EMS | Talk 20:17, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: New first section
Talk:Quaker Bible

message: Does anyone know where someone could pick up a copy of this version?  I would be a interesting historical read.
:If you're a member of a university, it's in Gale Group's Eighteenth Century Collection online. 82.36.26.70 (talk) 22:30, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: That is an outstanding collection, but a the present I do not have access to it. 66.191.19.68 (talk) 22:15, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: A link to the text would be great.  Might be difficult to come by though. Surv1v4l1st (Talk|Contribs) 23:33, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Finding copies

message: The new contribution concerning the contrast with the New English Bible sparked off by an article in the Expository Times of 1970 was given by The Reverend Dr Michael Foster, from his unpublished manuscript on The English Bible - with permission.
--Osjknights 09:10, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Excellent additions!  Any chance of getting an external link to the text itself?  A tall order, but an interesting one. 208.110.200.189 00:42, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: New Contribution

message: The link on the third footnote appears to be broken. 66.191.19.68 (talk) 22:14, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Indeed.  So does the second footnote. Surv1v4l1st (Talk|Contribs) 15:30, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  The second seems to be working now.  I have replaced the broken link in the third (http://www.theologybooks.com/site/feature.cfm?tkey=33) with a paper reference.John M Brear (talk) 15:50, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: The link goes to a page stating "Sorry, the page you were looking for in this blog does not exist."  Just a heads up.--Surv1v4l1st (Talk|Contribs)  22:43, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Third Footnote
Talk:Pascagoula

message: Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: https://web.archive.org/web/20090207191743/http://www.etv.state.ms.us/Singing_River_Website_20031204/Singing_River_Website/tg_legend.htm. Copied or closely paraphrased 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, and, if allowed under fair use, may copy sentences and phrases, provided they are included in quotation marks and referenced properly. The material may also be rewritten, providing it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Therefore, such paraphrased portions must provide their 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.  MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 20:43, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copyright problem removed
Talk:Dimitris Voyatzis

message: Many of the information about this article, I gathered by a phone interview with Tasos Aggelopoulos, a close associate of Mr. Voyatzis and probably the current copyright owner of Lary-Skot productions.
--Haris 23:56, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Shahawar Matin Siraj

message: I wrote the entire article myself and now I need someone with an eye for detail to wikify it. I feel that it is very neutral, but neutrality issues will probably result and they can be resolved here at the discussion page.--Screwball23 talk 00:06, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wikify the article 

message: I don't know if i should change the article's name to 2004 NYC Attempted subway bomb or Shahawar Matin Siraj v. US (2004). if anyone knows how the voting procedure on an article's name is run, please contact me.--Screwball23 talk 19:41, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Article's Name

message: /* Verdict */ Martin Stolar; no Mike.
Thank You.
[[ hopiakuta  | [[ %c2%a1 %c2%bf  %7e%7e%7e%7e  -]] 16:56, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  /* Verdict */ [[Martin Stolar]]; no [[Mike]]. 

message: I cited references from NYC newspapers and they were deleted for no good reason. They were adequate sources and cited details that appear on the article. Unfortunately, another editor chose to remove them because they were not online and not easily accessible to them.--Screwball23 talk 19:19, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Other editors have no way to tell if those references are correct because you did not provide URLs. Linkable references are not hard to find. KazakhPol 19:25, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You're telling me nobody reads papers anymore? What does that mean about the other editors? They're just piling junk from the internet and collaborate to polish it up until whatever's on Wikipedia looks right to the most number of people? Not every fact on wikipedia cites a URL--Give me a break. --Screwball23 talk 19:29, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I am saying that if the references you cited are valid then you should have no trouble finding online equivalents. I, theoretically, should not have trouble finding references for the content on this article, if the information is valid. I will try to reference it now. KazakhPol 19:31, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  References 
Talk:Corpus Christi School (Pennsylvania)

message: Why are do people like user:Adolphus79 and user:TruthbringerToronto think they have the power to remove things from this site just because they do not want to believe it happened. They were not there they do not know what happened. They just do not share the ideals of the leaders. (Googleyii 00:04, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: because it's non-notable nonsense, your KFA article already got deleted once for not being notable, what makes you think it belongs on the school's article? some club that a couple kids made one afternoon is not encyclopedic information... we've had this discussion several times, on several pages... stop adding nonsense to Wikipedia, or you will be blocked from editing... - Adolphus79 00:18, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vandals 

message: Can this article ever comply with Wikipedia standards? Does it belong in an encyclopedia? Skittle 13:16, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: as a school, yes... but it needs attention from someone with information about the school... unfortunatly, it was started by one of the students who only made this stub to advertise a made up club... (see above comments) if someone could find a website for the school, or at least a fact sheet somewhere... I think schools are notable... - Adolphus79 13:46, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: My concern is that the article will always get pushed around by the students, and not ever really say much. Also, if schools are notable just by being schools, we're going to end up with millions of articles that say little more than this, probably dozens of them about Corpus Christi Elementary Schools. In my hometown, we have about 20 primary schools, 2 state comprehensive secondary schools and a couple of private secondary schools, and it isn't a very big town. Should each of these have an article on it? I don't see what they add to an encyclopedia. Maybe someone should make a spinoff 'wikidirectory' which can feature every school in the world, every post office, every business and shop. Skittle 08:31, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Notability

message: I have no connection with, or interest in, this school. However, as a service to the credibility of WP I have cleaned up this article. I hope that if any responsible person from the school is reading this that they agree to build on my version and not allow a revert to the childishness that was there before. BlueValour 06:59, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Clean up
Talk:Jehoahaz of Judah

message: The verse given in Jeremiah (22:11) is incorrect.  It would be helpful if someone could fix that. Micah McGowan (talk) 00:28, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Regarding the statement "On his return march from the Babylonian campaign, Necho ... deposed Jehoahaz and appointed his older brother Eliakim as king", this doesn't seem to be correct. If Jehoahaz was appointed to reign in 609, and he ruled for three months, then he would have been deposed in the year 609 BC. Pharaoh Necho put Jehoahaz in prison at Riblah (2 Kings 23:29), which is north of Jerusalem, which implies he is on his way to north. Finally, Necho brought Jehoahaz down to Egypt, where he died (2 Kings 23:29), which was probably after his first campaign. I propose changing the two paragraphs "Necho proceeded with his campaign against the Babylonians... where Jehoahaz ended his days." to one:
Necho deposed Jehoahaz and appointed his older brother Eliakim as king, changing his name to Jehoiakim. He also imposed a tribute of 100 talents of silver upon Judah. Necho brought Jehoiakim  north to Riblah and imprisoned him there.  Necho proceeded with his first campaign, joining forces with the Assyrian Ashur-uballit II and together they crossed the Euphrates and laid siege to Harran, which they failed to capture and the Assyrian Empire collapsed. On his return march from the first Babylonian campaign, Necho brought Jehoahaz back to Egypt as his prisoner, where Jehoahaz ended his days. 
DrFrankencelery (talk) 20:11, 29 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Necho Deposing Jehoahaz

message: I didn't see any reference to the wording "third son". Could anyone provide a reference? Bennylin (talk) 10:49, 19 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Third son reference
Talk:The Arrangement (novel)

message: is there a signficant difference between the 1967 () and the earlier 1951 () versions? if not, shouldn't the article name reflect the first edition? --emerson7 13:18, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: moved article from The Arrangement (1967 novel) → The Arrangement: A Novel to reflect correct name. --emerson7 18:34, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  1951 v. 1967