lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:List of Rigvedic tribes

message: I have removed the sentence about the darker skinnded Dasa. It was written as if it was an undisputed fact, while not all scholars agree on the exact meaning of the text. (see Dasa) There is also a discussion of this at Dasa, so discussion of the meanings should be there. --Rayfield 01:34, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dasa 

message: There appear to be many errors which I hesitate to modify but some of them may be pointed out.
1. The term Gunguri along with Sinivali etc.occurs as goddess only once in RV 2.32.8. Griffith and Sayana both hold her as such. To cite Griffith "Her, Sinivali, her Gungu, herRaka, her Sarasvati, Indrani to myaid I call, and Varunani for my weal." This has been shown as the name of a tribe which is not valid. 
2.Likewise panca Janah or panc krsti are not tribes but collective names for all the people. They should not be listed among tribes.
3. Like wise listing nahushas and Ayus are disputable even though both have been used in plural as well but commentators interpret them as 'human beings' and 'living beings'. 
4. Once Matsya tribe was mentioned, Meena was not called for. The latter des not occur in RV and the former occurs only once in 7.18.6 besides once as the name of a seer Matsya Sammad. Semantically Meena tribe recalls the Vedic matsyas. That is all.   
5. Ikshvaku does not occur in RV.
6. Drbhika is a personal name but even if stretched to mean a tribe, it is a hostile non-Vedic one whom Indra kills. Only one occurence in singular.
7. Differences in point of view which are more serious can wait.
(GFDL)  —Preceding unsigned comment added by KUNELPURI (talk • contribs) 13:24, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Indo Aryan Tribes 

message: 1. Which Saraswatas are you referring to? The Punjabis or the migrants settled in the western part of india? The confusion arises here with your reference.
2.As per Sir Risley, the punjabi saraswats belong to Indo-Aryan tribe . on the other hand, the migrants from west coast India who claim to be saraswats, have Scytho-Dravidian or Indo-Scythian roots. 
Would you please clarify?
Nijgoykar (talk) 15:02, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Please be specific 

message: It is proposed that the article Arya (tribe) be merged here.  Arya is a self designation term, and it did not specify any particular tribe, but many tribes, as listed in this article.  Chaipau (talk) 18:27, 20 July 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I am withdrawing the merge proposal, and instead supporting the deletion of Arya (tribe): Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Arya_(tribe). Chaipau (talk) 14:05, 25 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merger proposal 

message: I propose to merge Druhyus into this article because that is merely a small paragraph. -- Pankaj Jain Capankajsmilyo (talk · contribs · count) 01:39, 7 November 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: And this page is a list. It is not supposed to contain any paragraphs. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 01:14, 15 April 2018 (UTC)

text: Klbrain (talk) 15:30, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge
Talk:List of colleges and universities in the Dallas–Fort Worth metroplex

message: Should the Denton schools be listed?  I'd like to remove them.  davidwr/(talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail) 06:00, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The title says "Dallas-Fort Worth area colleges and universities". Denton is very much in the DFW area (in fact, I'd say an integral part of it).XxTrillvillexX9 (talk) 07:00, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: That is a matter of opinion, which is why I raised the issue.  It boils down to the definition of "area" - some would say it's "Dallas, Fort Worth, and all communities in between them," others would say "those, plus adjacent communities," others would say "those, plus anyone who can get a majority of TV stations in the Dallas/Fort Worth TV market over the air," others would use the census bureau-defined areas, others would define it as all of North Central Texas from just north of Waco to the Red River and east to Arkansas and Louisiana.  davidwr/(talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail) 07:17, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Or not. Denton is in the DFW area. It's where the two I-35s come together. It's close to the Texas Motor Speedway. Many of Dallas-Fort Worth's best suburbs (Flower Mound, Southlake, Colleyville), are in Denton County. I would know....I lived in DFW for years. I suggest you come by this place and see for yourself. Development is continuous on I-35E from Downtown Dallas to Denton. XxTrillvillexX9 (talk) 21:55, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Does Denton count? 
Talk:Carl Pohlad

message: Someone ("Drapnir") completely rewrote the article on June 22nd and its been in need of a complete rewrite ever since. DavidRF 14:58, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Needs wikification after June 22 rewrite 

message: This article is worthless. 100% Pure Wikiality. No structure, no sources, irrational opinion and hearsay. Delete it.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.136.48.223 (talk) 21:45, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree it is bad.  Don't delete it, but really needs improvement!  Biased statements all over the place--for example, "in 2005, Pohlad broke even solely because of revenue sharing"--that's really unfair: revenue sharing from the league is just a portion of their total revenue.  You might as well say "solely because of ticket sales"--"solely" really doesn't fit.  Many other problems too. Locarno (talk) 03:02, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

text: WP:SOFIXIT Vodello (talk) 23:43, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Garbage

message: Is this the correct article to mention who takes over ownership?  I have a few sources stating that his sons will in fact keep the team for the forseeable future. -- TRTX T / C 15:06, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Future ownership 
File talk:Irvine Sat View.jpg

message: I'm not entirely clear on what you are saying...Does this mean that I can take a screenshot but I can't crop it to the specific part I want on the page?  Forgot to sign this one AlexKrolewski 01:43, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

message: I am going to remove it from the Irvine article since it is fuzzy, colorless and unreadable. The previous fair-use image with dubious copyright was at least useful. If a user wants a map or aerial image there easy enough get with the map links. --MarsRover 02:38, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  This photo really is bad
Talk:Kenmu Restoration

message: Re: explanatory spelling note in first paragraph, see discussion thread at Talk:Emperor Temmu#Tenmu versus Temmu. --Tenmei (talk) 19:22, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Kenmu versus Kemmu

message: Article states
: For various reasons, the Kamakura shogunate decided to allow two contending imperial lines — known as the Southern Court or junior line, and the Northern Court or senior line - to alternate on the throne
That's not possible, eg. the years given on either's Wiki entry state they were established years after the Kamakura shogunate. -- 188.192.222.231 (talk) 15:52, 20 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Kamakura shogunate didn't install the two contending imperial lines
Talk:New Economics Foundation

message: Any reason why 'nef' is not capitalized? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.141.193.248 (talk • contribs) 01:45, 23 July 2006.   
:As you can see on the official website, it's just their style.  Picaroon9288 01:49, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: My view would be that wikipedia should not emulate the (lack of) capitalisation of the name, any more than we should insist on using the same typeface they do in their logo. It's a proper name and should conventionally be capitalised. I'd be surprised if (for example) the BBC or a major newspaper was to refer to the NEF without using capitals. See e.g. . I won't change it for now in case anyone can persuade me not to! --Casper Gutman 13:18, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd tend to agree that it should be capitalised.  The lower-case stuff is a bit pretentious, in my opinion.  So I've changed it.Stewart Robertson 11:16, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Is this 'notable' enough to stick in the article somewhere?
http://onehundredmonths.org/  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Benbradley (talk • contribs) 18:27, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  New Website from New Economics Foundation: onehundredmonths.org 

message: With this link http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7988648.stm Recent info from one of their organizers. skip sievert (talk) 22:43, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: New section

message: Should there be a criticisms section? Or are they so obscure that they haven't even garnered a reaction from mainstream economics? I don't know much about their work but from what I've heard, the majority of professional economists would disagree with their conclusions and methodology. For one, this James Robertson fellow sounds much more like an activist than an academic economist. I really think this page should be tempered with some criticisms, lest people think that they represent mainstream economics. 121.98.84.152 (talk) 12:42, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: you can add one if you find criticism from reliable sources... its a bit difficult to find info about nef from reliable sources (and not self published).--SasiSasi (talk) 17:39, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Criticisms 

message: This article has been revised as part of a large-scale clean-up project of multiple article copyright infringement. (See the investigation subpage) Earlier text must not be restored, unless it can be verified to be free of infringement. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions must be deleted. Contributors may use sources 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. — Callitropsis🌲[talk · contribs] 18:39, 4 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Possible copyright problem
Talk:The Ring magazine Fighter of the Year

message: I believe the award for 1995 fighter of the year, was awarded to Oscar De La Hoya  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 27.252.203.71 (talk) 22:32, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  1995 - Fighter of the year 

message: Juan Manuel Marquez was named fighter of the year by the Ring.  Nonito Donaire won the fan poll conducted by the Ring but the actual award was given to Marquez.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bjermaine (talk • contribs) 19:47, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  2012 - Fighter of the Year 

message: Can you please, please stop putting GENNADY GOLOVKIN as the 2013 Fighter of the year??? ADONIS STEVENSON WON THAT AWARD  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.202.65.44 (talk) 08:35, 16 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  2013 - Fighter of the Year 

message: Whoever keeps changing the 2012 Fighter of the Year from Donaire to Marquez ... PLEASE STOP! Donaire won the fan poll; Marquez was the official RING Fighter of the Year. WIKI strives for accuracy; please stop inserting erroneous information. For the record: I'm Michael Rosenthal, Editor of THE RING Magazine.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.82.155.91 (talk) 17:42, 2 June 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  2012 - Fighter of the Year 
Talk:Candace Pert

message: copyright violation? Prose taken from http://shiftinaction.com/discover/luminaries/candace_pert ? or is it the other way around? --GangofOne 01:48, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Newfield High School

message: June 2009: This article has suffered a bout of vandalism recently (most especially in the last 12 hours), with sections of the page being deleted without explanation.  Thanks to all who intervened to revert and ban/warn the socks.  If anyone wants to have a real discussion of whether parts of the article need revision, please do so here!  Instead of vandalizing wikipedia, which is child's play, frankly, why not try to improve it?  --Neighborhoodpalmreader (talk) 13:24, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unexplained Content Deletion 
Talk:Kunsthalle

message: The present text does not meet the present state, nor the historical base. I have tried to fix it. --R.P.D. 01:53, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry, the article is definitely not correct. There is a serious difference between Kunsthalle and Kunstverein, which neets two articles. Please check the german article "Kunstverein". --Artmax (talk) 07:37, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

text: Absolutely right, this difference should be transparent (I would be happy with a separate entry, but as there are similar associations in other countries some checks are necessary be before acting). As far as the content is concerned, I think the present state is correct, especially if compared to previous versions. --rpd (talk) 19:50, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi RogoPD, I hope I used the correct english terms (I am a german as you noticed). --Artmax (talk) 10:02, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Re-definition
Talk:Junior varsity team

message: It might be useful to note in which regions this term is known to be used (and this applies to other related terms, like varsity, of course).  I am aware of it being used in at least some parts of the USA; I haven't heard it anywhere else. --Thedangerouskitchen 01:55, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Regional use 

message: Da Name.Thom.Single.Yes.Lik Girls.Not Rude.Respect Women.Hav Freinds.Go.Wagner.8th Grage.That's All.Period.(Oh Yeah If I Get Cut Or Dumb I Just Move Along.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Thomast12 (talk • contribs) 02:56, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Da Name.
Talk:Philosophy of war

message: There's nothing wrong with discussing Rosicrucian philosophy of war in this article, but right now there is no such discussion in the article itself. I don't think we should be including books under the "referrences" section which are not used as referrence in the article.
If the Rosicrucian philosophy of war is worth including in the article, then we should include a section in the article which discusses topics from the Max Heindel book and refers back to it. If it's not worth including a section on it, we should remove the book from the referrence section and either leave it out of the article entirely or possibly include it under the "external links" section. Wje 02:07, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry, it was my mistake, as I took it as section of reference literature, and not as references to the text in the article. As there are various publications, from ancient times till today, in the issue of Philosophy of War do you agree to create a "Reference literature" section in order to include this one and others that may be found, instead of just erasing it? Thank you. --Viriathus 02:13, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No prob. Honest mistake. The best bet would be a "For Further Reading" or "Additional Resources" section. Generally, a "Referrences" section lists the books that were actually used in the article, and any additional books or materials on the subject can be listed separately in a way that shows that they were not used in the article. Also, in order to avoid confusion or misrepresentation, since the book addresses specifically Rosicrucian philosophy, it should include a note saying that it is not a general article on the philosophy of war, but instead about a specific Rosicrucian philosophy of war. Wje 02:35, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Appreciate, thanks! I will do as you suggest, adding it to "For Further Reading" section. As soon I am able, and it may take a while, I would like to develop a section into it, as there are more philosophical issues brought by this author that must be taken into consideration and it will involve a much deeper study. Regards, --Viriathus 02:44, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

text: P.S.: You have already added it; thank you once more. --Viriathus 02:46, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Relevance of Rosicrucian book added to referrences section

message: I've added the essay tag to this article. 
It reads like an essay about "On War" right now.  It could use a more encyclopedic approach to the topic along with verifiable sources.
ComputerGeezer (talk) 00:11, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cleanup tag
Talk:Screen kiss

message: Here are several things which could be part of an eventual article:
1) The "kiss montage" at the end of the film, Cinema Paradiso, which is made up of all the "screen kisses" which the local priest made the projectionist cut out of the films about to be shown. The projectionist saved them, forming an archive of screen kisses which demonstrated how important they were!
2) During the American Occupation of Japan, censors decided that it was Japanese feudal values that led to Pearl Harbor, and that it was their mission to root out those values by teaching democracy. Since they shared a general assumption that romantic love and individualism were the roots of democracy, they for a time decreed that every film made in Japan should include a kiss.
cwh 02:15, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Ideas for article development
Talk:Kenny Easley

message: I am putting this article's Good Article nomination on hold for 7 days, due to the following issues (some minor and some not):
*Although it is not required, it would be nice to have at least one picture of Easley in the article.  Just make sure it is sourced and tagged appropriately, with proper fair use rationale.
*Inline citations need to be consistently and properly formatted.  See WP:FOOT for help.
*The lead states that Easley's career was cut short.  This is not neutral language, and not even necessarily correct.  The average NFL career is not very long at all.
*Did he have a kidney disease or a kidney condition?  Both phrases are used, and they mean different things.  And is it known exactly what the disease/condition was?
*In 1988, the Cardinals were known as the Phoenix Cardinals, not the Arizona Cardinals.
*Even though profootball reference.com doesn't have much in the way of stats on Easley, a link should still be included in the infobox.
*It would be better, when linking a specific year, to link to one of the 19XX NFL season articles rather than 19XX in sports.
*I would like to see more info on his early career.  For instance - he was a mult-sport star in high school, but in what sports?
*Is there any more info on what he is doing now (other than just "business entrepreneur")?  If so, that would be very good to include.
*The Bill Walsh quote is not sourced.
*Last, but not least, this article is in definite need of some copyediting - there are quite a few grammatical errors throughout.
Once these issues are addressed, the article should be fit for GA status.  --cholmes75 (chit chat) 15:55, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  GA issues 

message: The Good article nomination for  has failed
:*Numerous copyediting issues still need to be fixed.
:*Still very little information on early life and post-football endeavors.  The information may not be quick to find, but it must be out there, since he is a public figure.
:*Still no link to profootballreference.com in the infobox.  --cholmes75 (chit chat) 23:06, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Wikipedia:Good articles|Good Article]] [[Wikipedia:Good articles/Nominations|nomination]] has failed
Talk:Sea snail

message: This is FerRacimo, yesterday i created this page, but have just erased it. I realised an article on "snailfish" already existed and referred to the same subject as this one.
 HI  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.162.248.199 (talk) 21:31, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I reinstated the page as an article rather than a redirect. I placed a hatnote leading to the fish article snailfish, since that species of fish is also confusingly sometimes known as a "sea snail". Invertzoo (talk) 13:53, 8 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: A note

message: i am a 5th grader looking up some information on the sea snail and i would like to know were it lives, what it eats, what are its enimies, what it looks like, why is it important,why is it endangerd well if it even is endangerd, how it repruduces if it repruduces, why is it important to the coral reef, how it halps the coral reef, andsome more interesing facts.
thank you  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.239.26.99 (talk) 21:55, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The thing is that there are literally tens of thousands of different kinds of sea snails. Other than the fact that they all live in saltwater environments, they vary enormously in the details of their lives. Some live on rocks; other live buried in sand. They all eat different things: some are predators, some are scavengers, many are herbivorous, some are parasitic. Different species have different enemies; many look very different one from another; some species are endangered, but some are not; they all reproduce, but different groups have very different methods of reproduction; some that live on coral reefs are important to the reef; and so on, it is really impossible to generalize. Invertzoo (talk) 13:50, 8 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Another note
Talk:Tourettism

message: I'm scanning the Adv. Neur text for quotes that may help me avoid the original research problem.  This helps sort out my problem with terminology:
:"This review is organized according to tic mimickers (phenomenoloyg) and tics secondary to other causes (etiology), sometimes referred to as tourettism. " (Then, the article is divided in two:  Tic Mimickers, and Causes of Tics.) 
::Does that mean this entire article is listing two different things, or can the tic mimickers (dystonias, myoclonus, and chorea) be included in a tourettism article?  This is where my lack of medical background gets me into deep water.  I guess I need to delete the tic mimickers from the list, or describe them as tic mimickers in the text?
:Under Causes of Tics
::"Although TS is the most common cause of tics, there are many other etiologies of tics and TS-like features (tourettism).  To better understand the spectrum of causes of tourettism, ..."
::He also lists psychogenic tics in Causes:  should they be added?
:I can't find any wording that helps me avoid re-phrasing his statement about "most common cause", and still need to figure a way around engaging in original research.  Sandy 15:59, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: More quotes, to help resolve problem 

message: "Tardive tourettism or tardive akathesia is not the same as tardive dyskinesia"? Sorry, but I'm going to have to disagree with that - according to http://www.emedicine.com/NEURO/topic362.htm, "tardive dyskinesia" encompasses several speficic types, including 'tardive tics' and 'tardive tourettism'. At worst, these could be considered variants of TD, but there's no doubt anywhere I could find that they aren't very closely related. Perhaps the TD reference should be changed to just tardive tourettism, but why remove the entire comment? I've readded the TD reference, with a bit more detail and reworded - the 'often' there originally was misleading as it stood. - Pacula 12:46, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Antipsychotics as a cause for tourettism - why the TD reference should not be removed 

message: "Although Tourette syndrome is the most common cause of tic disorders,[1] other sporadic, genetic, and neurodegenerative disorders may also exhibit tics."
This sentence uses circular logic.  Tourette's is already just a catch all diagnoses for tic disorders that have no other diagnosable cause, so saying the syndrome causes tics doesn't make sense. Speaker4thadead (talk) 17:17, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Circular logic