lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Colin Powell

message: As a lieutenant colonel commanding 1st Battalion, 32nd Infantry in South Korea, Powell was very close to his division commander, Major General Henry "Gunfighter" Emerson, whom he regarded as one of the most caring officers he ever met. Emerson insisted his troops train at night to fight a possible North Korean attack, and made them repeatedly watch the television film Brian's Song to promote racial harmony. 2603:6010:62F0:240:A43B:7952:CC60:60E6 (talk) 23:19, 11 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  error identifying war:  I think the country South Viet Nam, not South Korea 

message: In the second to last sentence in the second paragraph, it states “…many command and staff positions and riding to the rank of four-star general.”  I believe the word “riding” should be edited to read “rising”. 2600:6C60:4D00:7BD:3187:F4FF:7D03:D72A (talk) 23:41, 14 May 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: ‑‑Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 07:26, 15 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Word/Spelling Correction 

message: "President Joe Biden and four of the five living former presidents issued statements calling Powell as an American hero."
Should be corrected to "calling Powell an American hero." Brad Parsa (talk) 22:55, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit to text in segment concerning Powell's death...
Talk:Greek mythology

message: Incest is heriditarily had the human of present world.how was the scenerio of Incest in ancient age? 103.90.1.66 (talk) 07:44, 7 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ancient feature of Incest 

message: At the beginning where it says "the lives and activities of deities, heroes, and mythological creatures, and the origins and significance of the ancient Greeks' own cult and ritual practices." 2600:1700:9580:845F:3D24:F30C:ABE0:76DB (talk) 17:46, 11 May 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. 73.70.236.52 (talk) 19:04, 11 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 11 May 2023 

message: Citation 3 "Greek Mythology" leads to "Page not found". Removing the trailing slash from the link fixes it. Compare the original link with the modified one below:
https://www.britannica.com/topic/Greek-mythology/
https://www.britannica.com/topic/Greek-mythology Classic theory (talk) 09:27, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Fixed. – Michael Aurel (talk) 10:20, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 2 January 2024 

message: Who called it mythology? It was their religion, their faith and their Gods the Greeks were praying to. It is wrong and unfair to call it mythology. 49.190.240.166 (talk) 06:16, 29 March 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: The ancient Greek peoples, like many other ancient peoples, had both a set of more or less common religious practices, rituals and beliefs, which we call their "religion" (see Ancient Greek religion) and a set of more or less common myths, stories, folklore, and legends, which we call their "mythology". The latter is what this article is about. While there is some not inconsiderable overlap between the two, they are considered to be distinct. So as regards "their religion" we are not as you assert calling it mythology. Paul August ☎ 12:01, 29 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Religion not mythology 

message: — Assignment last updated by Irlandacruz (talk) 22:41, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: English Composition 1102 085
Talk:Plurality voting

message: E.g., mayoral elections in Germany use it ... --User:Haraldmmueller 10:16, 18 September 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think either one is much more common than the other. –Closed Limelike Curves (talk) 00:58, 22 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Isn't "two-round voting" much more common? 

message: Similar question to Talk:First-past-the-post voting:
Election inversion is a standard term; and a phenomenon mainly occurring with FPTP (albeit not only: Rounding procedures can produce them also in proportional systems). Why isn't this even mentioned here, let alone discussed - see of course 2000 and 2016 in the US (Michael Geruso, Dean Spears, Ishaana Talesara. 2019. "Inversions in US Presidential Elections: 1836-2016." NBER paper, slides by Nicholas R. Miller). It would nicely fit into the "wasted votes" section, because different amounts of "waste" for each selection directly imply the possibility of election inversion. --User:Haraldmmueller 08:20, 18 September 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: It's not included because nobody's added it. Feel free to add it! Closed Limelike Curves (talk) 00:57, 22 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  No mentioning of "election inversion" - why? 

message: Plurality (voting) and this article seem to have same topic. Suggest merge. HudecEmil (talk) 19:36, 12 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Similar articles
Talk:Anti-psychiatry

message: This article is about a pseudoscientific movement, and yet it presents everything as if they are facts (except for a few throw-away lines that seem to have been inserted in order to pretend that this article is NPOV). The entire article reads as if it were written by a pseudoscience true believer. This is especially pernicious because it deals with a topic that has life-and-death consequences.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.195.76.57 (talk) 20:01, 8 January 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Psychiatry is not science in the first place. 79.18.247.218 (talk) 20:20, 15 April 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed.The regular inability to replicate results from experiments should strongly suggest so. ProofCreature (talk) 22:30, 15 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Severely non-NPOV 

message: 85 and 87 are dead links. Shoesoft93 (talk) 09:29, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorta fixed it. The nofreelunch citation goes to archive now. All I could find for the other one was this google scholar page, which is where it goes now. Donna's Cyborg🏳️‍⚧️(talk)(contribs) 17:06, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dead links 

message: since szasz is mentioned.... maybe note that Szasz embraced "anti-coercion" rather than "antipsychiatry". 
Anti-Coercion Is Not Anti-Psychiatry 
The Case against Psychiatric Coercion Michael Ten (talk) 02:37, 27 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  anti psychiatry vs anti coercion 

message: ...is www.cchr.org - Website links to a antipsychiatry human rights org founded by Scientology. I have a Satellite TV unit and I do have the Scientology Channel on it. My unit has it as SCNTV, channel 320. Can that be used as well? Thanks. Nuclear Sergeant (talk) 16:46, 8 July 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I've seen several anti psychiatry documentaries on this system. Nuclear Sergeant (talk) 16:48, 8 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Website...
Talk:Recreational mathematics

message: I've just disentangled this topic from mathematical games.  Although they are clearly related, these two are not the same thing.  In the most simple terms "recreational mathematics" is a field of activity; a "mathematical game" may be one the elements within that field of study.---User:Eclecticology
: I'm baffled. The two pages are quasi-identical. Is it your intention that they gradually grow apart? --Tarquin
: it really should be merged.  how did they end up apart?  adding merge tag.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 118.13.87.249 (talk) 17:52, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Recreational mathematics vs. mathematical games

message: Ahh! As a Martin Gardner fan, I am disappointed at the incomprehensiveness of the field of recreational mathematics is on Wikipedia. I'll be fixing this category up in the following days.Leon math 22:26, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Intent to edit

message: He was known better by his pen-name, however forged a successful career as a logiciana/mathematician and academic under his true name. I therefore believe it to be more appropriate to list him in the article as Charles Dodgeson (Lewis Carroll). Thoughts?Rayman60 (talk) 23:14, 27 June 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lewis Carroll or Charles Dodgeson? 

message: Someone should think hard who should be included in this section.  I already removed a couple of people who are definitely not "prominent" in the field.   Clearly the first six names in the list belong here.  But who else should really be listed as the exemplars of the field?  Should Raymond Smullyan be included?  How about A.K. Dewdney?  Shouldn't the section have a more descriptive name?--Foobarnix (talk) 14:21, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  People section 
Talk:July 5

message: Does anyone know whether Newton's Principia was published on July 5, July 6, or some other day of 1687? Vicki Rosenzweig
:Correct pub date is Jul 5 1687 (Reference: R.S.Westfall, Never at Rest p.468 ) Ancheta Wis 18:22, 13 Mar 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Questions

message: Please verify that the correct year of birth for Joseph King is 1989.  It seems a little off to me as his page on Wiki states that he went to Stanford and there formed the band Canvas in 1999, making him a college student when he was 10. Missjessica254 15:45, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Joseph King
Talk:Cytochrome

message: Cytochrome as fas as I know is not an enzyme. I think the article needs some refernces. Some IP address user on November 7th added that it is an oxidase/reductase. I am going to change it since I thing it is completelt wrong. Cytochrome oxidases/reducatses are the enzymes. --Kupirijo 20:59, 7 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Definition of Cytohrome/References needed

message: It has been shown that Mimivirus does also encode for a Cytochrome. Therefore the overview passage should be changed accordingly. Source: http://jvi.asm.org/cgi/content/abstract/JVI.00289-09v1?etoc Interferon-lambda (talk) 09:22, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Cytochromes in viruses

message: And:  "which interconverts between Fe2+ (oxidized) and Fe3+ (reduced) states (electron-transfer processes) or between Fe2+ (oxidized) and Fe3+ (formal, reduced)"...
Fe2+ oxidized and becoming more negative and vice versa...  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rgek (talk • contribs) 22:07, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Redox 
Talk:Dengue

message: :Yep, you are right Larry. It is almost always referred to as dengue fever in English speaking countries. I am going to move the text of the article there and then redirect Dengue to Dengue fever. maveric149
::This isn't correct. It is sometimes shortned to dengue especially tropical countries such as Malaysia. For example, do a Google for dengue at thestar.com.my. Even the WHO page calls it dengue in some cases  as does MedlinePlus . Indeed from a Google I'm finding many article talking about dengue . I suspect one of the reasons is because dengue fever appears to primarily refer to the benign form whereas dengue is used as an all inclusive term to include any forms of the disease associated with dengue. Nil Einne 22:46, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: I removed the disambig page and redirected to the disease. I feel the band is not well know enough to merit a disambig. Also, I would assume most people looking for the band would call it Dengue Fever not Dengue. As mentioned above, dengue is in fact used to refer to the disease. Nil Einne 22:46, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Redirect
Talk:Figure skating

message: A discussion is taking place as to whether :Portal:Figure skating is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The page will be discussed at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Figure skating until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the page during the discussion, including to improve the page to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the deletion notice from the top of the page. North America1000 13:13, 17 May 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nomination of [[:Portal:Figure skating]] for deletion 

message: I believe there can be more additions to the section about health and injuries, for the physical injuries there are examples of skaters who suffered them, but for mental injuries, there is only a single sentence about eating disorders.  I would suggest giving an example such as Gracie Gold to add to the impact of mental stress in the sport.  Daniel Thompson326 (talk) 15:35, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: In popular culture sections can become a bit trivial and should be trimmed to a minimum of notable items. Show us what you've got and we'll see what's relevant. Remember that anything you add must be accompanied by a reliable source – please see WP:POPCULTURE. Rodney Baggins (talk) 17:40, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thank you for that link User talk:Rodney Baggins I was basing the format and content of it off other sport pages that had similar sections referring to them in pop culture.  You can find a list of the things I added in my sandbox named figure skating. Daniel Thompson326 (talk) 15:33, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

text: Also may want to reference why the rule changed due to Katarina Witt and her outfit at the 1988 Winter Olympics (Daniel Thompson326 (talk) 16:02, 28 April 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rewrite and request for page improvements (2)
Talk:Orders, decorations, and medals of the United Kingdom

message: Accepted DBE in New Year Honours 2022, so update needed. I would do it myself but it needs a proper citation. Mdrb55 (talk) 11:32, 1 January 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Refusal: Vanessa Redgrave 

message: I've removed a very odd little note in the article about honours to Irish citizens.  The constitution is very clear about this:  "No title of nobility or of honour may be accepted by any citizen except with the prior approval of the Government."  Unless the editor was simply making a "the UK could ignore Irish law if it wanted to, we have nukes and such!" point (which isn't especially helpful to anyone), the claim as written was flat-out false.  109.255.211.6 (talk) 09:43, 8 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Irish government has no power" note
Talk:Duchy of Anjou

message: Does anybody think this news story 15 July 2012 should be mentioned? Iph (talk) 15:31, 15 July 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Don't think so. The original is here. And associated Facebook fluff. Not much coverage in reliable French secondary sources. Bit of a gift to the Daily Mail (& Telegraph now) though - an appreciation of Gallic humour not being a strong point of theirs. Mcewan (talk) 17:00, 15 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  French demand Crown Jewels from the Queen to compensate for 1499 murder of Edward Plantagenet 

message: Earliest edit was Mr Parker's, establishing British English. Kindly maintain it pending a new consensus to the contrary. — LlywelynII 15:10, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: ENGVAR

message: Can we mention the D'Anjou pear in this article? 173.88.246.138 (talk) 22:10, 14 December 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: [[D'Anjou]] pear
Talk:Edmund of Abingdon

message: I think that category has to go. --evrik 22:25, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Monied classes

message: I'm not sure why the article is called Edmund Rich, as he is universally known as Edmund of Abingdon, and even the article itself says "Rich" was never applied to him and his siblings.  Don't we name according to the most commonly used non-ambiguous name? Lindsay 13:50, 25 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Title

message: Archbishops of Canterbury are all of some degree of importance to the Anglican project, be they from the middle ages, the Reformation, or beyond. -- Secisek (talk) 21:31, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Project

message: I have queried the change from cross patonce to cross fleury at Talk:St_Edmund_Hall,_Oxford#St_Edmund_Hall_Coat_of_Arms. Please post there if you have information on the subject. TSventon (talk) 12:31, 27 February 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: I have reversed the edit as no evidence has been provided so far. TSventon (talk) 12:24, 5 March 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edmund of Abingdon Coat of arms
Talk:Poincaré conjecture/Archive 1

message: I would remove this subsection, it is bit misleading and does not add much to the article. Tosha
Yes, it would be better on the Thurston conjecture page. Charles Matthews 18:59, 9 Sep 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Applications 

message: see the lastest link in the introduction page.
 
Is it obvious from Thurston's geometrization conjecture to Poincaré conjecture or there really still need a 300-pages proof? just want know the importance of the china scientist work.—Preceding unsigned comment added by mathematic (talk • contribs) 
:The paper isn't about going from geometrization to Poincare: that, as you suspect, is trivial and requires at most a short paragraph (see elliptization conjecture for short explanation).  I haven't looked at the article, but I read the abstract.  It sounds like they have basically a complete write up of Perelman's work, with probably details that he didn't fully explain, and probably cast and reformulated somewhat differently.  The Xinhua article is very poorly written, and probably the headline and focus of the story gives a misleading impression of what the two mathematicians did.  --C S (Talk) 08:59, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  what does the final step mean? 

message: I found a very interesting link related to the Poincare's conjecture: . However I don't know if it is a hoax or not. Can someone verify their proof? --Matikkapoika 19:59, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This is the same thing I responded to in the previous section.  No hoax.  Just, well, a very interesting point of view that I think would not be universally agreed to.  It's an even worse article than the previous one mentioned...the quotes are kind of misleading, and I wonder if the journalist did a very selective job of quoting.  Both articles do not do a good job of explaining the different contributions (and kind of contributions).  One particularly bad thing is that this article's emphasis on Cao and Zhu's contributions comes at the expense of  lessening Perelman's contributions; however, it is clear that is is really Perelman's work that is significant, not theirs.  Of course, they have done something important here, which is to clarify Perelman's work...but other groups of people have and are doing this.  This team was apparently just one of the first to complete the task.  Perelman will probably win a Fields medal for what he did.  --C S (Talk) 22:19, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Interesting link
Talk:July 6

message: u should add that, the 6 July is celebrated worldwide as the "day of kissing" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.183.247.30 (talk • contribs) 18:05, 29 April 2007
:should be deleted.  "unofficial".  --142.163.195.90 (talk) 22:16, 5 July 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: agreed--142.163.195.12 (talk) 15:17, 29 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[International Kissing Day]] 

message: 1799 - Ranjit Singh's 25,000 men start their march towards Lahore. 
Please see the year of birth of Ranjit singh is 1780..--sunil 00:27, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ranjit Singh 

message: Why is there a birth entry under the name Dalai Lama, this is a title like The Pope or The Archbishop of Canterbury. The entry should be under the man's name, unfortunately not supported by an article named Tensin Gyatso, only a mysterious redirect. Pope works much better as a model. Richard Avery (talk) 06:34, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dalai lama 

message: Right, I’ve removed the reference to Congress approving the dollar: as Wikipedia’s own article says this was on 8th August … !  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cuddy2977 (talk • contribs) 13:34, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dollar 

message: Continuing the ongoing effort to reduce the size of the Births and Deaths sections to make them manageable, I've removed some celebrities with few or no articles in other wikipedias, moving the entries to the appropriate Year in Topic article if they were not already present. This is in accordance with the guidelines. Deb (talk) 15:09, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Birth and death entries

message: Is this a standard entry format?  --Stuartkau (talk) 12:06, 6 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  1940 – Jeannie Seely, Legendary Grammy Award winning Country Music singer-songwriter and Grand Ole Opry member 

message: industrial promotion.  should be deleted. --142.163.195.90 (talk) 22:17, 5 July 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks, done. Deb (talk) 08:37, 6 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  "National Fried Chicken Day" 

message: OK: this articles tells us its Constitution Day in the Caymans Islands.
However, the article Public holidays in the Cayman Islands tells us the holiday is marked on 2nd July.
Is it possible an editor could correct this, please?
I’ve tried similar revisions, myself, only to see them reverted.
Cuddy2977 (talk) 19:20, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cayman Islands
Talk:Exoplanet

message: These bodies cannot be “planets outside the solar system”. We can call them exoplanets, but to refer to them as “planets outside the solar system” makes as much sense as referring to cats as “quadrupedal carnivorous humans that meow and purr”.
It’s just a lain fact that there are no planets outside of the solar system. There cannot be by definition.
Taking this in reverse order:
* We do not know if any of these bodies have “cleared their neighbourhoods”. We just don’t. We can’t even begin to see their neighbourhoods. In some cases, though, it’s actually unlikely. Regardless, if we can’t show they have, then they haven’t.
* We don’t actually know what shape they are. I mean sure, it’s very likely that they’re within the boundaries of the IAU’s oh so scientific definition of “pretty round, eh”. But we don’t KNOW. We cannot prove it. One of these exoplanets might be a big cube like Htrae, the Bizarro World. Is it likely? Certainly not. Is it physically possible? We don’t know. So yeah, they probably mostly fit this description, but we don’t know. But even guessing, some of them orbit so close to their stars that they’re probably more egg-shaped. 
* Finally, the stopper that covers all other exceptions: Nothing outside the solar system orbits the sun. Else it would be IN the solar system. 
Therefore not a one of these things is a planet. 
71.236.206.225 (talk) 14:28, 7 January 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: The IAU itself defines exoplanets as planets beyond the solar system, see here. The definition you saw is only for objects within the solar system. It is meant to distinguish planets from smaller things, not things in and out the solar system. Cambalachero (talk) 15:12, 7 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Doesn’t meet the definitions. 

message: There are eleven entries in the "External links". Three seems to be an acceptable number and of course, everyone has their favorite to add for four. The problem is that none is needed for article promotion. 
*ELpoints #3) states: 
*LINKFARM states: 
*WP:ELMIN: . Trim per above. -- Otr500 (talk) 17:30, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links 

message: Life prefers CHZ exoplanets around low metallicity stars?
Added cited Text - Reverted by ip.
QUESTION: - Is the following cited Text a worthy addition to the Exoplanet article - or Not? - Comments Welcome.
in any case - Stay Safe and Healthy !! - Drbogdan (talk) 12:15, 4 May 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I've readded it to the article but I've edited it, moved it to the HZ section and added an explanation about UV rays as to why low metallicity stars are better.Fdfexoex (talk) 13:56, 4 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Life prefers [[Circumstellar habitable zone|CHZ]] exoplanets around [[Metallicity|low metallicity stars]]?