lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Dean of the United States Senate

message: Can someone add some information or a comparison on the position of the Dean vs. the President Pro Tem? Thanks! --Daysleeper47 16:10, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dean vs. President Pro Tem. 

message: I follow Senate/House procedure pretty closely and have detailed resources at my disposal concerning these matters. I've never ever seen "Dean of the Senate" referenced at all. Of course, the Dean of the House actually has a role but....can someone point to where "Dean of the Senate" is referenced/listed/etc? Essentially, while the article makes sense, how do I know someone just didn't make this up?  JasonCNJ 15:43, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This is indeed an issue.  john k (talk) 21:11, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Huh? 

message: The Congressional Biographical Directory suggests that Uriah Tracy began his service in the Senate before his colleague James Hillhouse who, while elected in May 1796, remained in the House for sometime after this, and did not begin to serve in the Senate until December of 1796, whereas Tracy's service began in October 1796.  So shouldn't it be Tracy from 1805-1807, then Hillhouse 1807-1810? john k (talk) 21:10, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hillhouse and Tracy 

message: In this period, Ben Wade appears to be missing entirely, although he too started in 1851.  But it also ignores individual dates.  Foot and Bayard began service on March 4, 1851, Wade on March 15, and Sumner not until April.  Thus, Foot and Bayard should be jointly it until Bayard leaves in 1864 (unless we consider Foot's house service to give him seniority over Bayard); then Foot alone until his retirement in 1866; then Wade alone until 1869; then Sumner alone until 1874.  All this gives the impression that this list was compiled by someone using not particularly detailed lists, and that this may, indeed, be something made up by wikipedia.  I would fix the list, but all the multiple rows makes it confusing. john k (talk) 21:15, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  1862-1869
Talk:This Never Happened Before

message: Why is this linked to?  It's a page featuring a cover of the song by some band, and not only is it not very good, but the site is all en français.  I don't see how this adds to the article at all.  I'd delete it myself, but I don't believe I have the "authority" to do that... by which I mean it doesn't look good if someone who barely contributes to Wikipedia goes around deleting parts of articles.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by NobleArc (talk • contribs) 01:57, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  External Link: "Sucrepop" 
Talk:High-explosive incendiary/armor-piercing ammunition

message: Re-added the paragraph explicitely stating that it is a poor antipersonnel weapon (barring explosion after going through the victim's body)David Latapie (✒ | @) 12:26, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: that would be dependent on calibre size - 0.5 inch would deliver a rather substantial wound if it hit. GraemeLeggett 12:43, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Going through

message: I have an idea that the SAPHEI designation is more widely used than HEIAP, if that is the case the page should be moved. Roger (talk) 14:02, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Common name?
Talk:XCOPY

message: xcopy was also a GUI based disk duplication program for the earlier Amiga Systems. It allowed the copy of non standard amiga formatted disks and got around a lot of copy protection people put on their games.
i have found something about it in Amiga support and maintenance software if thats any help but i do remember x-copy  being a amiga program that also had a virus checker on it for the nasty amiga virues that where out 82.24.174.20 (talk) 00:49, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Another xcopy 

message: How about XCOPY installation? Should that go here, or in Visual Studio, or what? --Uncle Ed 17:42, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Visual Studio

message: The "copyit.bat" appears to have been copied from this microsoft web site, I am removing it:
http://www.microsoft.com/resources/documentation/windows/xp/all/proddocs/en-us/xcopy.mspx?mfr=true
Concavelenz 18:52, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Copyit.bat

message: :Unix/*nix programs (Also sometimes used in Windows versions)
*cp -- copy files; can concatenate files
*cpio -- copy an entire directory structure from one place to another
*cat -- concatenate and display files
*dd -- copy streams, files, or devices in whole or part
*head -- display/copy the first part of a file
*tail -- display/copy the last part of a file
:DOS/Windows programs (Seldom used in *nix versions)
*COPY -- copy files or sets of files, binary or text mode, can concatenate files
*XCOPY -- eXtended version of COPY, for copying file structures
*XXCOPY -- further extended commercial program
*ROBOCOPY -- further extended version, included in Vista
Other specialized programs are used to split large files into pieces and then put the pieces back together.
There are no good standard programs to extract an arbitrary piece of a file into another file.  dd can be used, but requires setting blocksize to 1, which is very inefficient.  In Windows, the obscure program CPART can be used.
grep and awk are powerful *nix programs for looking for patterns in a file.
-69.87.200.198 00:36, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  copy commands 

message: This article has no footnotes and is not expansive enough to exist as standalone, but might work as a subtopic of XCOPY Ethanpet113 (talk) 02:37, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Klbrain (talk) 11:10, 18 January 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed merge with [[XCOPY deployment]]
Talk:DSEI

message: In discussions on user talk pages between myself and User:213.38.179.130 a few issues about this article have come up:
*The description of DSEi as an "arms fair" (s/he said "DSEi is not an 'arms fair'. How can it be, when weapons and related systems make up less than 4% of the show? It is like calling the London Boat Show a windsurfing exhibition, or calling the Motor Show a gearbox show.")  While they may have a point, I don't think it's unreasonable to use "arms" as shorthand for "military equipment", and it is the term that the BBC uses in its coverage of DSEi.
*The human rights issues - 213.38 says "I appreciate the need to document the controversy and protests involved with the show for Wiki readers, but the stuff about regimes with immoral human rights records is wildly inaccurate, as is always the way with DSEi reporting - not sure we're ever going to change that though!!"  I definitely disagree with the last point, we should always be trying to ensure Wikipedia's coverage is NPOV.  I don't think what we currently say is "wildly inaccurate" - it is my understanding that regimes with poor human rights records have been invited to attend DSEi, although we should have sources for this.  Which leads me on to...
*Something that I have noticed, the distinct lack of sources or references in the article, which we really should do something about - I'll try to find some later today.
213.38 has also mentioned the lack of images other than of the protests, which is definitely a problem - I have explained to him/her what they need to do if they have images to upload. -- AJR | Talk 12:39, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:One World

message: One World (disambiguation) → One World … Rationale: There are quite a number of different "One World" articles. The One World article used to be about the book by Wendell Willkie, and One World (disambiguation) had the other possibilities. But this seemed clearly inappropriate, since the other uses of "One World" were just as popular as the book, and in fact most of the links to One World were actually references to the TV series or one of the other possibilities. Also, people kept editing the book article to add information about the One World project, even though it already has its own article. So I moved the book's article to One World (book), and fixed the incoming links to point to the right places; now One World is just a redirect to One World (disambiguation). The next logical step would be to move One World (disambiguation) to One World, but I can't do that since the target already exists. Kickaha Ota 12:39, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Add *Support or *Oppose followed by an optional one-sentence explanation, then sign your opinion with ~~~~
*Support per Wikipedia:Disambiguation#Generic topic. --Usgnus 17:10, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Requested move

message: :Add *Support or *Oppose followed by an optional one-sentence explanation, then sign your opinion with ~~~~
*Support per Wikipedia:Disambiguation#Generic topic. --Usgnus 17:10, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Survey

message: *Comment, it is already correctly named and the redirect is common. I don't see the point in moving it to One World - which is incorrectly named anyway (as it is a normal page so should be One world with no second capital).  --Errant Tmorton166(Talk)(Review me) 12:44, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Discussion

message: *Oppose. I disagree with merging Oneworld (disambiguation) with this page. I think that a significant number of the readers who, upon arrival at either page will remember whether the term they're trying to find was a single word or not, and having separate pages will make the search easier for them. For the readers who have no idea, it's not much more work to click on the "See also" and scan both pages. Finally, those that do know whether it's "One World" or "Oneworld" won't have to deal with the other term. --Usgnus 14:07, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge discussion
Talk:U.S. Route 17 in Georgia

message: The 1970 Official Highway Map of Georgia shows the following alignment in Savannah:
*SR 26 Connector along 52nd Street, Exchange Street, and Montgomery Street to Victory Drive, carrying US 17 northbound
*SR 25 along Ogeechee Road and Victory Drive, carrying US 17 southbound
*SR 25/SR 26/US 17/US 80 on a one-way pair on Montgomery Street and Broad Street (MLK), then west on Bay Street to the split between SR 25/US 17, SR 26/US 80, and SR 21
*SR 25 Alternate/US 17 Alternate along Stiles Avenue, Gwinnett Street, and Boundary Street to the toll bridge
Also see this 1931 map. --NE2 12:44, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Map Errors 

message: The following branches exist:
;State Route 25 Alternate
*Former State Route 25 Alternate (Savannah, Georgia) (old undated county map shows it - and US 17 Alternate - using current SR 25 Connector but then turning onto the old bridge approach from Oglethorpe Avenue and going over the bridge; the ramps to and from the new approach are 25 Connector)
;State Route 25 Connector
*State Route 25 Connector (Brunswick, Georgia)
*State Route 25 Connector (Savannah, Georgia)
;State Route 25 Spur
*State Route 25 Spur (Woodbine, Georgia)
*State Route 25 Spur (Brunswick, Georgia)
*Former State Route 25 Spur (Darien, Georgia) (Fort King George Drive)
*Former State Route 25 Spur (Savannah, Georgia) (West Lathrop Avenue)
;Others
*State Route 25SE - State Route 25SE (Brunswick, Georgia) (Torras Causeway - on the 2005 county map and 2005 448 report but not the 2002 444 report or 1995 county map)
*State Route 25EC - State Route 25EC (Savannah, Georgia) (where? 0.56 mi - on the 2002 444 report and 2005 448 report but not the 2005 county map - possibly an eastbound roadway of SR 25 Connector)
--NE2 13:10, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Georgia State Route 25 and all it's supplemental routes should be split off onto a separate article. ---------User:DanTD (talk)  15:18, 8 March 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Could the same thing be done to Georgia State Route 4, and take all of it's special routes and other routes and split then off of U.S. Route 1 in Georgia onto an actual article, too? Morriswa (Charlotte Allison) (talk) 19:00, 8 March 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: It seems doable. I was worried we may have to have some major expansion of both US 1 and GA 4. As for the so-called "special routes" I'm a bit worried we might have to just repeat the same sections, with appropriate rewrites. ---------User:DanTD (talk)  21:19, 9 March 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Special Routes
Talk:Opalescence

message: Is this the effect that causes cigarette smoke to look blueish, but the shadow it casts to look more like yellow-brown? --Abdull 12:45, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That would be Rayleigh scattering, it is mentioned in one of the captions Qwyxivi (talk) 02:14, 28 September 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Cigarette smoke
Talk:Operation Adler

message: Please note that this is not a "list of articles associated with the same title", therefore it is not a disambiguation page.  Instead, it is an actual article about the three meanings of Operation Adler.  There is no need for this page to be a disambiguation page unless there is enough information about one or more of these operations to separate the three rather than treating them on the same page.  I am removing the disambiguation category and reapplying the previous categories. --M4701 12:48, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Disambiguation Page?

message: And what about Operation Adler to kidnap Winston Churchill in 1943 as described in The Eagle Has Landed?--RedSolution (talk) 22:25, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Churchill?
Talk:Xenocrates

message: It is impossible to tell from reading this article whether any or all of the texts ascribed to Xenocrates are extant. Please consider updating this to include this crucial information.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.81.203.45 (talk) 23:11, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: I'm marking this article as a stub despite its length - the only reliable source cited is cited solely for Xenocrates date of birth, meaning this article does not even meet the criteria for a start class article.
All citations of ancient sources should be supported by modern 20th century sources, not based on 19th century ones that cite ancient sources uncritically, or worse, original interpretations.  - car chasm (talk) 18:10, 18 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  marking stub
Talk:Anabasis (Xenophon)

message: The map shows the Persian Empire in the borders as of 490 BC (as indicated in the map). This is quite confusing, since the borders are quite different from those in 401 BC (year of the anabasis). Egypt and Eastern Thrace were not a part of Persia in 401. Perhaps someone could draw the anabasis route into a more appropriate map? --78.54.20.62 (talk) 19:37, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Map 

message: "Socrates makes a cameo appearance when Xenophon asks whether he ought to accompany the expedition." Technically, Xenophon asks "how he might best perform the journey?" ratehr than whether he should go or stay.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.113.147.53 (talk) 04:09, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Delphi 

message: This does contain the phrase "Thalatta! thalatta!" the sea! the sea!", but only in one of the English translations (the line was inserted by the translator, along with a reference to Euclid, a bit of casual racism and some creationism). So it says in the note at the start:   Card Zero  (talk) 02:28, 30 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Journey to the Center of the Earth 

message: Does his race-war novel, The March Up Country qualify? Jim.henderson (talk) 17:42, 9 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Harold Covington]] 

message: What time period does the Anabasis cover? OK 401 BCE, but when did the survivors get home?
100.15.127.199 (talk) 16:54, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  when? 

message: — Assignment last updated by Cpowers20 (talk) 03:01, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: Ancient Greece

message: — Assignment last updated by Johnstoncl (talk) 00:17, 2 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: History of Ancient Greece

message: Hello fellow classicists, historians, and enthusiasts! For my class I will be editing and improving upon this page. Are there any areas you folks who have been around awhile would like to see bolstered? I may be able to get my hands on sources not otherwise easily accessible. Thank you! --Geisslp (talk) 19:22, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Areas of Improvement?
Talk:Hellenica

message: Another editor proposed splitting out a section on "lost works" called Hellenica, but then neglected to start a discussion.  At this point, splitting seems premature.  The "other works" section includes two works that aren't lost, and they occupy the main paragraph of the section—most of it is about just one of them, and it's underdeveloped, with dubiously-placed criticism of the author's motives or judgment, since it doesn't actually develop this idea; the other is barely mentioned.  This paragraph is followed by two brief mentions of other works, now lost, that are or might have been called Hellenica, with virtually no details.
If there's enough material on either of those works to support an article, then nothing stops anyone from writing it (or them) without splitting anything off from this one.  But as this article purports to cover all of the major or known works under the title, they would still be properly mentioned here.  A split would be appropriate if there were more material here than could conveniently fit in this article; but two brief, one-sentence mentions don't begin to present such a situation.  P Aculeius (talk) 12:17, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed split
Talk:Oeconomicus

message: Are there many works named Oeconomicus? As you can see, the simple article redirects here. II | (t - c) 09:30, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Author in title necessary? 

message: the article ends by saying "As for being informative historical sources about Socrates, Xenophon's Oeconomicus and his Symposium are regarded by most scholars today as practically worthless" 
-- just wondering -- are all the other dialogues we find in ancient Greek texts regarded as informative historical sources? Plato had perfect memory, and recorded all of Socrates' words exactly? What is this statement being measured against?
Would a person read Oeconomicus for historical details, or for attitudes? Is it worthless as a source of attitudes? As a source of Socratic attitudes? Is "Socratic irony" an attitude or a historical detail?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.235.157.211 (talk) 00:31, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Socrates by Plato is basically Plato, not Socrates. Socrates by Xenophon is basically Xenophon. Thus statements made with a straight face such as "practically" worthless are intellectual snobbery, and uncited as to source or qualified as opinion, are little better than classical POV as far as an encyclopedia is concerned. Xenophon was not precise history by today's measurement, and he was blatantly partial in praising what he liked and ignoring what he didn't, but he had the enormous advantage of having actually been there to witness the events, and a gift of being extremely readable.--Reedmalloy (talk) 05:02, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Most importantly, the sentence is written currently so that it just says there is this controversy, and WP is not taking a side. I do think the wording could be improved though. That there are people who still find Xenophon worthless needs to be mentioned, but there is no need to use the most extreme wording we can find is there?--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 12:09, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  historical reliability of Socratic attitudes
Talk:Memorabilia (Xenophon)

message: I just replaced the following unsourced sentence in the article with an explanation of the differences which is more accurate.
The lengthiest and most famous of Xenophon's Socratic writings, the Memorabilia is a more conventional apologia (defense) of Socrates than either Xenophon's Apology or Plato's Apology, as both of those works illustrate Socrates' defiance at his trial, rather than making the case for his defense.
That sentence seems plainly false, considering the fact that at least Plato's Socrates certainly claims to be making a case for his defense!  (See especially Plato's Apology 18a-e.)  Isokrates (talk) 14:17, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Differences between Memorabilia and Xenophon's & Plato's ''Apologies''
Talk:National Federation of Independent Business

message: Reference: a large portion of this information was contained in the Nashville Scene for July 27, 2006.  Someone who feels ambitious could link all of this,  I've been up most of the night and am going to bed.  Rlquall 12:53, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: While the subject is notable, this article needs work.
Text should not be taken verbatim from other sources, including the organization's website, except for limited quotes which are specifically attributed (i.e. According to [source], [insert text], with quote marks or other clear indication that it is a quote, and with footnote[s] to that source). For other assertions, the language should be neutral, and cited to sources independent of the organization.  Kablammo (talk) 15:46, 12 November 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Work needed
Talk:Parallel Lives

message: While being thoroughly impressed by the amount of very substantial, important writing and tabulation contributed by earlier writer/editors, I feel compelled to call attention to the referencing (after going to the single source given in this text).  The Enc Americana contains only a small part of the actual information given in the article, yet it is the only citation.  It is imperative that the sources of the remaining information be cited. LeProf  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.223.9.222 (talk) 13:19, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Calling attention to need for attribution, citation, etc. 

message: Although supposedly edited by Clough, there is another Gutenberg translation available for download that is definitely the Dryden translation. I compared a few paragraphs because I know the Dryden is top notch. Link: http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/674.
I say this because these links can quickly become redundant and the most useful links should survive.
AwesomeFresh (talk) 17:39, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Lives" on Gutenberg is also the Dryden translation 

message: Alan Bullock's "Hitler and Stalin: Parallel Lives" (1991) is presumably crafted as a sort of homage to Plutarch. I dare say there have been other imitators. Might be worth a mention.Paulturtle (talk) 21:45, 24 July 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: You can make a section "influence" or "legacy", but it would be better to have at least two examples. I've included a reference to Plutarch here: Hitler and Stalin: Parallel Lives. T8612 (talk) 22:23, 24 July 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Alan Bullock 

message: Apparently from the very beginning of this article, we've been spreading the 'information' that the actual title of the work is Lives of the Noble Greeks and Romans and that Parallel Lives is just its nickname. That seems to be patent nonsense. Absolutely all Greek references to the work seem to use some version of Lives, Parallel, Parallels, Parallel Lives, or Comparative Lives and absolutely no multilingual lists of the works' various translations, editions, and titles at (eg) the French National Library include any form of any Greek title that could possibly be misconstrued as Lives of the Noble Greeks and Romans.
Seems to be legacy nonsense from starting the article off talking about Dryden's version. If not, we probably need a #Name section to detail how the 'real' name came to be almost entirely lost from the rest of the internet. — LlywelynII 16:01, 9 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title: The what now?