lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Battle of Abritus

message: Don't we have information about the strength of these armies? At least there should be a approximate data about it. With respect, Deliogul 09:53, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No, we don't have the slightest idea from the primary sources. Unfortunately, everything in the written history of 3rd century is too vague after Cassius Dio, Marius Maximus and Herodian.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dipa1965 (talk • contribs) 19:31, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Don't we have? 

message: hi ..in here, the calendar.. [] ..it says 1st of july ..but in the article here it all says 1st of june .. what is right ? --82.178.92.252 (talk) 16:46, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  the date of the battle 

message: See  --Andrew Lancaster (talk) 07:13, 13 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  New articles about Dexippus fragments online
Talk:Battle of Abensberg

message: The numbers in the box and the text do not agree. Piccadilly 13:34, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Inconsistency

message: The initial paragraph of this article speaks of a Franco-German force and a Franco-German victory over Austrian forces. For this period of history, it is ahistoric to oppose "German" and "Austrian". In this period, Bavaria and Württemberg were simply two out of twenty-something German states following their particular interests as French auxiliaries against another German state, that one being Austria. -- 138.231.121.127 (talk) 09:24, 20 April 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Franco-"German" victory
Talk:Action of 3 October 1624

message: Are we sure that Diego Pimentel was not this fellow who was deposed as governor of New Spain in 1624? Diego Carrillo de Mendoza, 1st Marquess of Gelves. Full name is Diego Carrillo Mendoza y Pimentel. I know it does not quite fit the date or the fact of Diego's death shortly after the battle. Perhaps Diego Pimentel was a cousin or in-law. Djmaschek (talk) 02:38, 10 October 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: No, it's about Diego Pimentel y Zúñiga. I have not found much information, but his father was Juan Alonso Pimentel de Herrera. I don't know if he has any family ties to the person you mention. --Muwatallis II (talk) 06:02, 10 October 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: In my opinion, you should use his full name from your sources. If the source mentions his father, that should be mentioned too. Good one. B class. Djmaschek (talk) 02:17, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: It would be ideal, but the sources I have used his full name does not appear. Really, only in informal sources could I find his full name and father. --Muwatallis II (talk) 15:33, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Diego Pimentel
Talk:Battle of Almonacid

message: I'd do it but I have no idea what this:
"This victory was somewhat pyrrhic; the three Polish regiments that constituted the division lost 47 officers and high-ranking officials, supported its right in a great picture that advanced by the level one on the foot of that one hill, carrying out a bypassing on the extreme left, without [could prevent it a load of the riders of Fernando VII and Granada, directed by colonel D. Antonio Zea and commander D. Nicholas Chacón (died in this load captain D. Francisco Grove). 1ª division, to be able to do in front of the Germans, had to back down somewhat and to be placed oblique to the rear suffering itself some time, but as then the center and the right backed down already as well, undertaken by the remaining enemy forces, supported by the reserve, that with Dessolles and Jose Bonaparte finished arriving at the battlefield, it was itself also forced to take refuge in the hill of the Castle."
is even supposed to mean.Volunteer Marek (talk) 21:33, 21 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Translation improved drawing on Spanish Wiki.  Neutrality, style and sources remain to be dealt with.  
--Noyster (talk) 13:05, 6 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Could someone fix machine translation? 

message: This article still needs references will add the references tag.TheHappiestCritic (talk) 04:52, 24 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: References
Talk:Battle of Almansa

message: So what's up with Almansa v. Almanza? 85.8.12.78 (talk) 09:28, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The name should be changed; but that's a minor detail. The article is appalling, it is afterall the decisive victory in Spain and should be much better. And where do these numbers come from? 12,000 allied prisoners?  There are plucked out of the ether, that's where.Rebel Redcoat (talk) 15:43, 31 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Name

message: This is a misquotation. The  English proverb holds that "It's an ill wind that blows nobody any good, " which has precisely the opposite meaning to that of the Spanish,  wherein all are affected negatively.
JF42 (talk) 14:58, 25 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  "It's an ill wind that blows no good" 

message: I can't find the supposed logistic difficulties of campaigning in Spain [as opposed to in Italy or Flanders] in the source and pages given (Child's The Nine Years' War and the British Army, pp. 32-33).
Could someone pinpoint the source? Mmasalleras (talk) 21:11, 2 July 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Logistics
Talk:Battle of Alarcos

message: How in the hell did the "Turkish cavalry archers" end up in Spain in 1195??? There must be a mistake, Turkish chronicles dont give an account of Turks in Spain in 1195.
:The Agzaz were Turkish mercenary archers from the Asian Steppes who worked for the various Middle East nations at that time. In the late 12th century the caliph of Egypt sent an Agzaz army to the Almohad held Tunis but they were defeated and captured. Then, the Almohads gave them the election to serve them as mercenaries, or be executed. Obviously, the Turks chose to serve the Almohads, and they were sent to the Iberian Peninsula in order to cut them from any possible contact with Egyptian agents in the eastern Maghreb. Many of this Agzaz were killed later at the Battle of Las Navas de Tolosa (1212). My source is Batallas decisivas de la Historia de España, Juan Carlos Losada, 2005.--Menah the Great 12:10, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Hidden character

message: Question -- do boss characters in fighting games, who are not initially playable and must be unlocked, count as "secret characters"? I can see how it might go either way ... on the one hand, they aren't really "secret" if you've fought and beaten them, and on the other hand, they sort of fit the definition given otherwise. --Yar Kramer 05:02, 10 September 2005 (UTC)

message: Is this even worth mentioning? I mean, it doesn't clarify what a "fake secret character" is in the article, for one thing, and its content sounds more like something a vandal would throw into the list of "real" secret characters before getting removed. --Yar Kramer 15:01, 20 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Fake secret characters" 

message: Does a secret character have to be in the main game itself, or can it be a minigame within the game?  If it has to be in the main game, then HUNK should be removed since he is only available within the "4th Survivor" and "Mercenaries" mini games in Resident Evil 2 and PResident Evil 4 respectively. Crisco 1492 00:51, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I was wondering if Xan Kriegor, in the original Unreal Tournament only, counted a secret character. His identity remains secret until the player fights him, and upon defeating him the player may use his model and/or voice set. Makron1n 21:30, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Definition

message: I was wondering if the list should be made into a sortable chart with something like "game, series, year, character" to be easier to look at and navigate, especially since some secret characters are in more than one game/series, and some games/series have more than one secret character it's hard to follow in a list of text. I may attempt it myself if I have time, what are users' thoughts? Carlwev (talk) 20:57, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Chart

message: Funny you say that Niemti, I was considering proposing a category "secret characters". On one hand I think it would be a good idea and may work. On the other I think it may be confusing as (if we use this current article to start it) the list of secret characters contains real musicians, and Greek gods which we would have to presumably not put in. Some are player characters or bosses from a well known series that appear as secret characters in other, non canon, party games; would it seem odd to categorize Sonic, Mario, Luigi, Cloud Strife, Link, Ganandorf and Solid Snake as secret characters, they are listed, would we leave these out too? Comic characters, in or out? Many don't have their own article and probably shouldn't have, as they are of low notability, and it's all currently unsourced as you said. But article, list or category, all have an equal need to ideally be verafiable and sourced surely. Users thoughts on these issues? Carlwev (talk) 23:39, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Category?
Talk:Stratford High School (Houston)

message: Italic text I want to know who or what was Stratford High 
School named for ? Was it for the first Principal it had. I know who the first Pricipal was. I think he is retired and lives near Glen Rose, Texas.
* This being a Spring Branch ISD school, it probably fit into some "nature" scheme or another, or possibly an administrator who liked William Shakespeare and used a reference to his hometown of Stratford-upon-Avon. Other than Landrum Middle School, I don't know of any actual Spring Branch schools that are directly named after someone. Souperman 08:59, 19 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: How come in the notable people sections there is not a mention of Shaun Stauffer? She was a model and marraied to Astros player Craig Biggio. She graduated in 1985.
Ann Amlochridge 13:40, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Shaun Stauffer 

message: I'll just paste this here - it apparently got deleted because it didn't have any references (couldn't they just add one of those tags for references needed though? sheesh). So I guess re-add them if you can find references. 72.179.58.183 (talk) 04:50, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Notable Alumni 

message: Change/Update current principal to Raymorris Barnes.  Source: https://ssh.springbranchisd.com/ Nealscrivener (talk) 02:18, 5 October 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: I have simply removed this information entirely. It's not something that goes in an encyclopedia, since it is routine and involves a non-notable person; and is not the kind of information which should go in an infobox per WP:INFOBOX RandomCanadian (talk / contribs)  03:31, 5 October 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 5 October 2021 

message: Change Principal from Isaiah Agson to Raymorris Barnes Whit56749 (talk) 02:03, 25 August 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. M.Bitton (talk) 23:06, 25 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 25 August 2023
Talk:Battle of Baton Rouge (1779)

message: There are a lot of pages that link here thinking this is the Battle of Baton Rouge from the American Civil War.  Could somebody write a page on that, or at least fix some of the links?
:Done. You can start the Civil War battle article at Battle of Baton Rouge (1862). Albrecht 19:45, 4 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Re-assessed article as a Start class due to its history getting expanded.--Oldwildbill 12:28, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Article

message: There is a memorial in Baton Rouge that makes this claim, but it was put there in the 1940s and is incorrect.  The Battle of Mobile (1780) and the Battle of Pensacola (1781) were battles outside the original 13 colonies.Lila Guzman 17:47, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Baton Rouge 1779 was not the only battle
Talk:Battle of Azukizaka (1542)

message: For what it's worth, I think these articles should not be merged; just because they happen to have occurred at the same place doesn't mean there's really any connection between the two. The two battles are separated by more than 20 years, and feature different combatants on both sides. They are not even part of the same war or campaign, unless one counts the entire 150-year Sengoku period, which involved tens if not hundreds of separate powers fighting all over the archipelago, as being a single conflict. I regret that I don't have the sources to expand on either of these articles, but that doesn't mean that someone else can't expand upon them. Even left as stubs, they are on what is to my mind sufficiently separate, unrelated, topics so as to warrant remaining as separate articles. LordAmeth (talk) 02:17, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I misread the Japanese article ja:小豆坂の戦い. It refers to two battles, but it was talking specifically about a continuation of the 1542 battle in 1548. I got it confused with the two battles on English wikipedia. There's no need to merge them. Douggers (talk) 05:44, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah, okay. Thanks a lot. LordAmeth (talk) 08:27, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merger proposal
Talk:Battle of Averasborough

message: Relatively minor issue, but the numbers are inconsistent. The text says "Each side suffered just under 700 casualties", but the battle box mentions 682 and 865.  mentions 182 and 865, but that's probably a typo since  says estimated total casualties were 1419 (which is still 128 short of our total). I think it's probably best to just change the text a bit, but in case anyone has definitive numbers I'll leave it like this for now. --Hirudo 22:28, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Casualty numbers
Talk:Battle of Athens (1864)

message: The Confederate Regiment engaged at Athens, Alabama, on 26 Jan 1864 was the 53rd Alabama Cavalry (Partisan Rangers), commanded by Moses Wright Hannon. Lt. Col. Hannon was the commander of the 1st Alabama Cavalry from 01 Dec 1861 to 16 May 1862, when he resigned that commission after receiving permission from the Confederate Congress to raise a new regiment under the Partisan Ranger Act of 21 April 1862, that regiment being officially organized as the 53rd Alabama Cavalry at Montgomery on Wednesday, 05 November 1862.
As a side-note:
At the time of the engagement in Limestone County, Alabama, Col. Hannon was in command of "Hannon's Brigade", comprised of the 53rd Alabama Cavalry (Partisan Rangers), the 24th Alabama Cavalry Battalion, and the 11th, 4th, and 29th Georgia Battalions. While still in command of the Army of Tennessee, General John Bell Hood of Texas verbally promoted Col. Hannon to Brigadier General, but no paperwork regarding this commission was received by the Confederate Congress in Richmond. On 21 Jan 1865, Maj.Gen. A.H. Iverson wrote a letter to Major General Wheeler, commander of the Cavalry Corps in which Hannon's Brigade served, recommending Col. Hannon's promotion, and on 24 March 1865 Brig.Gen. B.D. Fry sent a letter to the Adjutant & Inspector General, Gen. S. Cooper, urging this promotion, pointing out that Col. Hannon had been commanding a Brigade for over a year. 
After the War, Gen. Wheeler stated that the promotion to brigadier general had been made "toward the end of the war", but that the commission had never been received. The January 1908 issue of CONFEDERATE VETERAN magazine identifies Hannon as a brigadier general in a list of "General Officers of the Regular C.S. Army", with the Date of Rank given as 1865, but no specific date noted. Whether the Confederate Congress ever received the promotion appointments from General Hood and/or Bell is not yet known, nor it is known if any commissions were ever sent for Hannon from Richmond; the surviving records of the Confederate Congress from that period, so near the end of the War, give no indications either way. Hannon was referred to in the post-War years as "General", in correspondence and other papers, and the marker on his grave in Oakwood, Texas, identifies him as "Gen. MOSES WRIGHT HANNON". 
Primary Reference: Robert G. McLendon, Jr, HISTORY OF THE 53RD REGIMENT ALABAMA VOLUNTEER CAVALRY AND M.W. HANNON'S CAVALRY BRIGADE, ARMY OF TENNESSEE, C.S.A., published 2007 by BLACKHORSE PUBLISHING, Troy, Alabama. ISBN:9780980017502 LOC#2007907501
Correspondence alluded to above and all other details are also contained in the OFFICIAL RECORDS OF THE WAR OF THE REBELLION (O.R.s)
complied and published by the US Government Printing Office from 1870 to 1901.
submitted 15 July 2011
by JD "Doc" Darlin, Tom Green County, Texas
204.117.51.67 (talk) 13:18, 15 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Incorrect Confederate Regiment
Talk:Battle of Athens (1946)

message: :Template:American conflicts (i.e.  ) is missing from this article. As it is protected, I cannot add it at this time. -- 155.95.90.241 (talk) 19:15, 6 February 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Done Good idea IP! You should think about creating an account so you can help add to articles. Happy editing!-- Captain Eek Edits Ho Cap'n! 19:52, 6 February 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not sure this template is appropriate as no actual US military forces were apparently involved, only law enforcement and veterans.--Mox La Push (talk) 08:28, 13 February 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Hmmmm you have a valid point there. I had just added it as it was already listed in the template, but now I realize the template is likely in error. Feel free to remove the template from the page, or even remove Battle of Athens from the template. Captain Eek Edits Ho Cap'n! 08:39, 13 February 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit request 

message: In the phrase "...by allowing illegible people to vote..." in the second paragraph of the Background section, "illegible" should presumably be "ineligible". 2601:1C0:8601:CCE0:C30A:6E7C:C4CE:A6B3 (talk) 17:15, 23 June 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Done CaptainEek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 17:20, 23 June 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 23 June 2021 

message: In the Battle Section, "GLS" is used twice, which presumably is a typo for "GIs". Snoopyluver (talk) 22:30, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Typo
Talk:Battle of Aspromonte

message: Gagan singh"suv"{A.K.A.#AsliSUV OR Gagan singh was born in Delhi 14 August 1995. he is a R&B/Soul Singer,a great songwritter & shayari-writter .he have done few shows as an host or rapper and completed his Schooling from Dev Samaj Modern School,Sukhdev vihar,New Delhi.
his aim was never to become a singer as he was a medical science student, but in 2010-2011 his heart was broken by his beloved which sent me into a state of depression or lonliness. A few months later he decided to combat it and started expressing himself through songs/Music.
With no professional training he started his music career by recording his songs simply on laptop and created his own style of unique & impresive music...
he showed the people who criticised him and didn't believe in him that he is more than what they could ever be..according to him he design his own path of life with music.
currently he is working as a single artist & also composing music for hindi & punjabi short-films OR advertisements in search of a big break!!!!  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gagan1995 (talk • contribs) 20:46, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gagan singh "suv"
Talk:Battle of Arcis-sur-Aube

message: Battle of Arcis sur Aube should be merged with Battle of Arcis-sur-Aube, sources indicate that Arcis-sur-Aube (this article) is the correct name.--Bryson 20:24, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merging Articles 

message: Although I don't know much about this battle, I'm not so sure this should be classified a tactical French victory, considering Napoleon retreated. Guard Chasseur (talk) 09:06, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Results 

message: The following mistakenly cited sentence is removed. "On one occasion the Emperor, protected only by a single company of the Polish 1st Light Cavalry Regiment of the Imperial Guard barely avoided being taken prisoner." This passage is not at Chandler 1966, p.997, as cited. I own a copy of this book and I've checked. However, the howitzer shell incident is found in Chandler and it will be incorporated into the article instead. Djmaschek (talk) 23:13, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Remove cited passage 

message: One user tried to change the result to Indecisive or Inconclusive, claiming that this information came from David G. Chandler's Campaigns of Napoleon. In fact, I checked this and Chandler made no such statement either there or in Dictionary of the Napoleonic Wars. Another editor (not me) reverted the edit so that result remains Coalition victory. Djmaschek (talk) 02:13, 27 August 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Inconclusive
Talk:Battle of Antioch (218)

message: The link has nothing to do with this event. It belongs to the first crusade.213.71.6.130 (talk) 06:10, 8 June 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wrong Reference 

message: did a major overhaul of the entire article, added all the information related to the event that I found. If you make any major changes, or revert the edit, please keep me notified. Provide reasoning if you can, so that I'm not wondering; what happened? Mr rnddude (talk) 10:27, 6 November 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Update 

message: For the review, check the link below. Since my changes are only registered on the other talk page. Thanks Mr rnddude (talk) 02:55, 6 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Note 

message: " One such dispatch detailed a prophecy, perhaps fabricated, from the oracle at Delphi suggesting that Macrinus was destined to kill Caracalla and succeed him as emperor " - Potter and Gibbon are almost certainly referring to a ficticious account from the 'H.A.' - and this should be noted along with a statement that it is almost completely unreliable. 50.111.18.219 (talk) 08:10, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Cassius Dio makes mention of a prophecy from a seer in Africa: . It's possible that the HA has amended this to reference the oracle at Delphi. I'm not sure what Herodian of Antioch says about the matter and don't have his work at hand. Mr rnddude (talk) 08:38, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  from 'The Historia Augusta'?
Talk:Battle of Anholt

message: Some new primary sources have come to light, hence some small edits to the Anholt article. If there are factual errors that my post is deemed to have made, please substantiate these changes by quoting source material. I was surprised that Captain Torrens of the Royal Marines was not mentioned in the article. Keith H99 (talk) 23:14, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

message: As read from the new (2011) memorial on Anholt - see reference to photos under consequences - 32 named officers and men were recorded as killed or who died of their wounds due to the Battle of Anholt 1811, as recorded by the Danish Authorities, and buried on Anholt.
This compares with the contemporary British report of "between thirty and forty buried" plus twentythree severely wounded of which three have since died of their wounds". Viking1808 (talk) 16:04, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  The consequences section is rife with UK bias and on the whole the article favours the British sources of the day (which were certainly partial to the Empire, just as we are to some of our social and political structures today). Victors may have had a monopoly on history in the times of the papyrus and the printing press, but I don't see why we should let that be the case with today's knowledge and technology. RhoDaZZ (talk) 16:11, 1 June 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Casualty Numbers 