lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:River Lavant, West Sussex

message: I'm from memory, which can be faulty, and not cited sources.  I believe it was an overtopping rather than a bursting.  I have on hearsay, some young urchins explored the culverts during the dry summer and they were fully of junk that would have impeded the flow rate.  Now the River Lavant is fed from the chalk South Downs which usually abosrb the rainfall like a sponge until the sponge is full ... from which point the rain comes straight off the hills and into the Rivers Lavant, Arun ... etc.  I tink in 1994 that hadn't happend for a few years and developments east of Chichester may have blocked some natural overflow points.  From about the Hornet/St. Pancras the Lavant enters culverts, (possibly diverted by recent developments).  In all events the river flowrate exceeded culvert capacity and overtopping and much flooding resulted, Green Godesses to the rescue, having a higher pump rate than the regular fire appliance; much water being pumped to the canal basin.  The observer would surely have this.  thankyou, Djm-leighpark (talk) 14:20, 7 September 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Also from memory, the article is fairly accurate, but there should be more news sources. I'll have a look. Tony Holkham (Talk) 19:46, 7 September 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Looking the (Observer newsroom, 2019) the claim the bursting of the banks flooding Midhurst is a little far fetched.  There's a complexity of water systems, not to mention disused gravel pits etc, that copes (or not) with water off of the South Downs.  The River Lavant is but one part of that story.  Hmm ... needs research rather than memories and hearsay and original. Djm-leighpark (talk) 06:19, 9 September 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: While the article seems to say the Lavant was responsible for flooding in Midhurst, it was actually the rainfall that was responsible. The Lavant doesn't go through Midhurst, the Rother does. Tony Holkham (Talk) 08:50, 9 September 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  The 1994 ?bursting? of the banks 

message: I'm planning to filtch a later edition of the Newbury book to beef up this article better.  Can do from some online resources but better to get Newbury ... maybe from library or maybe a buy.  For a view of chi's finest premier tour guides giving an overview of (one of) the long Chichester R. Lavant Culverts do a "Through Chichester Tunnels" site:youtube.com" google. (Warning: elements of inappropriate language).  Thankyou. Djm-leighpark (talk) 10:47, 9 September 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Possilbe expansion
Talk:Gilbert, Duke of Lorraine

message: Would Lotharingia not be a less ambiguous name for this man's jurisdiction?--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 07:31, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: No objection, but we should also then move Otto, Duke of Lorraine and Conrad, Duke of Lorraine. Srnec (talk) 20:13, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, and no doubt there are more. I think many more articles on related topics already have Lotharingia also.--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 22:51, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: These are the only dukes of Lotharingia so named. Srnec (talk) 22:49, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: I was just referring to any articles which mention Lotharingia in any way. I think it is the normal term used in this period in English, at least by recent historians, but we do have Lorraine here and there. I've not done any big survey though. In French they also seem to avoid the modern French term.--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 09:29, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: , like Waleran, Duke of Lower Lorraine.--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 06:58, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: I have posted a few similar notes on some of these articles. Not sure if discussion needs to be centralized or anything. Probably this is not really a big controversial issue.--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 07:11, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: But why move Waleran? Your "less ambiguous" rationale wouldn't apply there. I was assuming you were referring to the ambiguity between Lorraine=Lotharingia and Lorraine=Upper Lotharingia. Srnec (talk) 18:54, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Seems worth discussing. Maybe it is indeed a less concerning case where there is a "Lower" because it is less ambiguous, but in those cases I would still suggest we are probably not using the most common term in 21st century historiography, and the words "Lower Lorraine" still logically imply a part of the French region (which is also much smaller than Upper Lotharingia) if the reader is not already well-informed before they start reading. Lorraine is a common English and French term for a part of France. It does not normally mean Lotharingia (or Upper Lotharingia) anymore, even if it evolved from it. Historians who use the term Lorraine to mean Lotharingia can at least be internally consistent, but I think overall our writers and editors have to be getting confused when you look at articles like "Duchy of Lorraine", which has a section on Duchy of Upper Lorraine, but also says that Lotharingia was the name of Lorraine's predecessor. Possibly Upper Lorraine is more confusing than Lower Lorraine, because Lower Lorraine can't mean many different things. The normal dictionary "Lorraine" being something smaller than Upper Lorraine (which included Luxembourg, and a big chunk of modern Germany) is confusing IMHO.--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 08:49, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  article name
Talk:Under-19 Men's Cricket World Cup

message: Since there is an article on the U-19 competition, how about an article for the U-15 competition?
So far there have been 3 U-15 cricket world cups:
* 1996 Lombard U-15 Cricket World Cup held in England with India beating Pakistan in the final and Australia, England, South Africa, Sri Lanka, West Indies, Zimbabwe, Canada and the Netherlands also participating.
*2000 Costcutter U-15 Cricket World Championships also held in England with West Indies beating Pakistan in the final and England, India, Sri Lanka, Zimbabwe, Netherlands and South Africa also participating. 
*2008 CLICO U-15 Cricket World Championships held in the West Indies with Pakistan beating WI in the knockout final and WI beating Pakistan in the league trophy final. Bangladesh, the Netherlands, Ireland, Kenya, Malaysia (who replaced Zimbabwe when that team couldn't make it) and an ICC Americas Development XI team (with players coming from the Bahamas, Bermuda, Canada and the Cayman Islands)also participated.72.27.2.128 (talk) 20:51, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Under-15 World Cup/Championships? 

message: Our two other articles on cricket world cups (Cricket World Cup and Women's Cricket World Cup) don't seem to require ICC in their titles, and WP:COMMONNAME suggests this one doesn't either. I'm going to move this and related articles accordingly. IgnorantArmies (talk) 14:48, 9 November 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  No need for "ICC"
Talk:Rabia Basri

message: I am confused with the notion of "Muslim Saint" in this article. The mainstream Islam does not recognize anyone as Saint, see saint. I suggest to remove the word saint from the article. Taha bahadori (talk) 21:21, 15 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Seems to be used here: Wali. -Jooojay (talk) 17:49, 18 September 2018 (UTC)

text: Sufism refers to saints. What is "mainstream Islam"? Sunni or Shia? Islam maybe isn't as fractured as Christianity but it has more than one "stream." Pascalulu88 (talk) 21:15, 19 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Saint? 

message: The last anecdote says:
Rabia said, "You traversed it in ritual prayer (Salat) but with personal supplication."
I can't find the source of this story, but should the "with" possibly be "without"?  It
does not make much sense to me as it stands.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mkkuhner (talk • contribs) 22:27, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  error in last anecdote? 

message: I have added substantial reference citations to the article. Please check if the 'additional citations' claim should still be here.
Pixarh (talk) 16:18, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Citations added 

message: — Assignment last updated by Dwlehm1 (talk) 00:31, 24 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: The Middle Ages

message: I study women in Islam. There are a number of factual issues in this article. It cannot be known from her name whether she is Arab or not. This is a debate. 
Faridudin Attar essentially just made things up about Rabia and is not a reliable source. He was writing spiritual stories, not a scholarly endeavor. Rabia could not have known Hasan al-Basri because she was far younger than him. The earliest sources (like al-Sulami) do not have her as an associate to Hasan al-Basra. Margaret Smith made a number of errors because she did not have access to al-Sulami's work on Sufi women or al-Jawzi's Sifat al-Safwa. 
Zaynab1418 (talk) 02:42, 16 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Factual issues in article 

message: — Assignment last updated by Anatrev18 (talk) 00:20, 11 November 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: History of the Medieval Middle East in 100 Objects Fall 2022

message: Rābiʿa al-ʿAdawiyya al-Qaysiyya (Arabic: رابعة العدوية القيسية) (714/717/718 — 801 CE)[1] was an Arab Muslim saint and Sufi mystic.[2] She is known in some parts of the world as Hazrat Rabia Basri, Rabia Al Basri or simply Rabia Basri.[3] 2405:201:C00E:F1F8:A001:16E4:5107:3CE5 (talk) 14:14, 22 November 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rabi basri
Talk:Ranulf I of Aquitaine

message: I removed an uncited claim that he was the son of Gerard ", and Hildegard (or Matilda) [more likely Rotrude, see Gerard, Count of Auvergne and Louis the Pious], daughter of Louis the Pious and Ermengard."
I have no idea which of these is correct, but I am unaware of any evidence that Count Gerard married any of these women (his only known wife being a daughter of Pepin I of Aquitaine), and the French wiki agrees with me.Just a Rube (talk) 20:35, 15 April 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mother?
Talk:Abu Muhammad al-Hasan al-Hamdani

message: Surely he's not Arab because his surname is Hamdani (from Hamdan, Iran). Iranians are not Arabs...
You got it all wrong, Al-Hamdani is from Hamdan the tribe, a well known Yemeni Arab tribe, could somebody fix that  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.149.180.148 (talk) 17:58, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: I don't feel his birth year in the Arabic calendar fits on an English Wikipedia. We don't give early Romans the ab urbe condita-numbering for their birth year. KarstenO (talk) 03:36, 6 November 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Arabic calendar
Talk:Herbert II, Count of Vermandois

message: The article states that Adele of Vermandois's mother is Herbert's second wife Hildebrandt, but Adele's article states that her mother was Herbert's first wife, Adela. Does anyone know which is correct?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cwelgo (talk • contribs) 15:39, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Adele of Vermandois' mother 

message: 99.48.208.82 (talk) 01:00, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Adele of Vermandois' mother
Talk:Secret Life of Toys

message: The last sentence of the read states that none of the characters were played by Jim Henson. But so what? Before that, there's no mention of Jim Henson at all, neither in the lead nor the infobox, nor any company with which he was associated.
While the sentence could stand, I think therefore it needs qualification here to suggest why it might have been. i.e. the fact that it wasn't (cos he was dead) is only relevant because he might otherwise have been. I don't think, as it's written, it stands on its own feet as an exception that proves the rule.
The current wording was introduced by this series of edits.
Comments? Si Trew (talk) 17:56, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lead 

message: I wish have have that robot named Bleep.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.90.226.122 (talk) 22:38, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  I wish I could have that robot named Bleep from the 1986 The Christmas Toy
Talk:Ismail Samani

message: This article doesn't mention about the Wall of Bukhara, which people called the Wall of Kanpirak. As recorded in history, The Nomadic Turks used to come to cities of Khurasan and plunder and raid them without any notice and used to take its citizens as captives. So, this wall was constructed. However, maintaining the wall was very expensive over the years. In the time of Ismail Samani, he told the people, that the walls would no longer be needed, and he would now be the wall of Bukhara. As long as he is the ruler, he would fight the Turks from raiding the cities and prevent them. And he did so, during this rule, he fought the Turks from raiding the cities.
Source: The history of Bukhara by Narshaki, Pg 47. --Theotherguy1 (talk) 12:07, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wall of Bukhara 

message: This statement - "Ismail is considered the father of the Tajik nation" is controversial. Tajiks trace their ancestors to the Sogdians, Bactrians and other Eastern Iranian Tribes. Could this statement be rephrased to something like.. "Ismail is considered as the father of 'modern' Tajik nations'.? --Theotherguy1 (talk) 03:39, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Father of Tajik Nation 
Talk:Shopian

message: An unregistered user User:117.198.225.232 changed all instances of "Shupiyan" on this page to "Shopian".  A quick check in similar articles and other wikipedia confirmed the original Shupiyan as the more popular spelling, so I reverted its changes.  I'm noting this here in case there is a genuine debate over the spelling that I have overlooked. - TB (talk) 10:50, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Shupiyan/Shopian 
Talk:Sico of Benevento

message: This is one of the worst written articles I have ever read. Where is Lombard? Whose else death but his own would stop him from ruling? What is a gastald amd where is Acerenza? What is a princely throne? A little context would be helpful. Gregsinclair (talk) 01:33, 7 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Sico of Salerno

message: Both Sico of Salerno and his father, Siconulf of Salerno, are described here on WP as "the first prince of Salerno". Logic dictates that it's likelier to be true of the father - anyone know for sure? Gonzonoir (talk) 16:02, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  First prince?
Talk:Jordan (bishop of Poland)

message: A bishop is always bishop of a region, not just a city. But a bishop's diocese/bishopric is always called after his seat/see, that is, the place where his actual seat (throne, chair, cathedra, cathedral) is located: in a city. The only source I have on the matter says definitively that Jordan had his seat at Poznan and calls him bp of Poznan. Undoubtedly he was the first bishop of Poland and that in its entirety comprised his see. And he was probably also a missionary bishop, but I can see no reason not to name him after his seat like all other bishops. Srnec 04:24, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Not always, usually. Jordan was most probably missionary bishop. That's why he had so specific title. There are some doubts. Tradition and most part of historians think that he had title "bishop of Poland" (Polish: biskup Polski) with seat in Poznań. Other group thinks that he was rather attached to court of Polish duke, who was "peregrine ruler" moving between main grody (Poznań, Gniezno, Giecz, Ostrów Lednicki). In this case only cathedral and curia were in Poznań. This situation, according to known facts, took place up to year 1000, and estabilishing metropolis in Gniezno and new dioeceses in Kraków, Wrocław and Kołobrzeg (in this year seat of bisops of Poland in Poznań was transformed to seat of bishops of Poznań, that kept for some time his authonomy from new metropolis) Radomil talk 10:13, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: There are exceptions for bishops without fixed sees, but the only source which has been verified refers to his fixed seat (cathedra) of Poznan. One could be a missionary bishops with a fixed see. I will do some more looking into this. Srnec 19:24, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

text: There is difference between Catholic church in 18th century in New World, and 10th century in Central Europe. Any try to find analogy is missleading... Radomil talk 15:31, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Poland or Poznan?
Talk:Svatopluk I of Moravia

message: As far as I know, Svatopluk is not mentioned in any of the primary sources as "prince" or "ruler" of Nitra. The only primary source which describes "Svatopluk's Moravia" is the De Administrando Imperio which locates his principality somewhere in the territories east of the river Tisza of Hungary and Romania. Does anybody know what is the source based on which it is assumed that he was ever a prince of Nitra? Borsoka (talk) 10:56, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Read for example Annales Fuldenses.--Yopie (talk) 09:50, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I have already read it. Annales Fuldenses does not mention that he was prince of Nitra, it only refers to his independent principality. The only source which describes Svatopluk's Moravia is the De Administrando Imperio (written some 50 years after his death) which clearly locates "his" Moravia somewhere to the territory bordered by the rivers Tisza, Mures, Somes, Timis. Nevertheless, if you could specially refer to the part of the Annals of Fulda which speaks of Svatopluk as prince of Nitra, I would be really grateful. Borsoka (talk) 09:59, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: In this case, if the source does not mention that form 'prince of Nitra' we should leave out that sentence and the article will be more accurate. Fakirbakir (talk) 17:33, 31 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Svatopluk, Prince of Nitra 

message: Svatoplug outlaw Method folowers. They exile into Bolgaria and set up the old slavonic church.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.149.11.94 (talk) 07:54, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Svatopluk dislike the sloven languange 

message: "Svatopluk dethroned Rastislav, who was a vassal of Louis the German and betrayed him to the Franks in 869 or 870, but in a year he was also imprisoned by them."
This sentence is highly ambiguous,  and probably requires another comma.  Who "betrayed" who ?Eregli bob (talk) 10:57, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unsatisfactory sentence 

message: I think, the quality of this article is much better than 'Start'. The sources seem as credible, usable, valid and reliable. --Norden1990 (talk) 12:26, 9 May 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Class

message: Sloven8,
please don't remove reliable sources, on the other hand that time the Slovak nation did not form yet.(KIENGIR (talk) 10:16, 11 January 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: KIENGIR, the fact that the Slovak nation had not formed yet in the 870 is not mentioned in the article. I think the idea of possible anachronism should be presented more clearly. For a outsider is not obvious why this is an inaccuracy. 82.78.61.12 (talk) 22:58, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Slovak historians agreed on the inaccurate presentation, it would be an anchronism by the erroneus assumption indeed, but we should first check the source for exact wordage.(KIENGIR (talk) 20:14, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recent edits
Talk:Theodulf of Orléans

message: Villa Reference
I'm just wondering if whoever wrote this entry could specify on their source for the oratory having been part of a Theodulf's villa?  I was not aware that he had a villa.  More information would be helpful!  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.1.209.132 (talk) 02:06, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

message: There is some confusion about his death date. The introduction says he died on December 18, 821, but the "Life" section says January 18, 821. Furthermore, the sources are contradictory. Catholic Encyclopedia backs up the December 18 date, but the citation to the Baunard (1860) book, which is used for the January 18 date, actually says  – he died on October 14, 821. Meanwhile, the French version of this article says he died December 18, but the year might be either 820 or 821. So if someone could investigate this and figure it out, that would be very helpful. —howcheng  {chat} 08:24, 16 December 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Death date
Talk:Thorgest

message: I propose a merger between this article and Turgesius, as they concern the same historical figure. The difference in spellig is due to one name being close to norse spelling, the other a latin version. I have no opinion as to which name should be preferred as articlename and which should be a redirect, both names are valid and used by different sources/texts. Finnrind 13:08, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I support the merger, and would favour Thorgest for the article name, as being closer to the original as far as we can determine it (Turgesius being the form used chiefly in texts written in Latin). In fact, since the proposal has stood for six months without any opposition, I shall probably go ahead and effect it myself very shortly..! -- Picapica (talk) 23:30, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposing merger with [[Turgesius]]
Talk:Ubba

message: There is a great deal of material in this article that is not demonstrably connected with Ubba. It makes the article much longer than necessary and contains lots of information (and speculation) that belongs elsewhere. Can we prune some of the paragraphs that don't relate to Ubba?--Mevagiss (talk) 13:08, 14 November 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Relevancy of content 

message: The list of sources and other notes is about four times as long as the actual text content in the article. JIP | Talk 23:56, 28 December 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article length 

message: Talk anout his religion 188.255.231.140 (talk) 12:13, 17 March 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: This is a little vague, any aspects of this in particular that should be mentioned in the article? TylerBurden (talk) 17:06, 17 March 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Religion
Talk:Unruoch III of Friuli

message: On the page Gisela (mother of Regelinda) it states that parentage is disputed, yet this page seems certain. Jwzh (talk) 20:06, 10 August 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gisela 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians!
The article states that Unruoch married Ava, by whom he had two sons, including "Berengar (born in 888)". Since it also states that Unruoch himself died in 874, something is clearly wrong here, unless Ava was pregnant for 14 years! I don't have access to the sources, but perhaps someone who has can clear this up? Nikolaj1905 (talk) 10:23, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  The birth year of his son Berengar is off
Talk:Višeslav of Croatia

message: The only reliable fact we can know about prince Višeslav is his name and title printed in Latin on the stone momument called "Višeslavova krstionica", which is the baptistery found in the 19th century in Venice. By its style we can presume that the baptistery was made in early 9th century. That is only we can know and say about Višeslav. No any serious historian will go further than that. Was it or not was Višeslav Croatian prince, it is doubtfull.
The controversy makes the fact that Serbian ruler in that period was also Višeslav (780 - 814) (see the disembiguation)!  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Josinj (talk • contribs) 14:52, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Facts and imagination
Talk:Marinus I of Naples

message: The Medieval Lands Project: Southern Italy (http://fmg.ac/Projects/MedLands/SOUTHERN%20ITALY,%20PRE-NORMAN.htm#_Toc145141784) is given as a source for this article, however, Medieval Lands shows Marinus I as Orania's brother, NOT her father.  
Medieval Lands shows her father as John II (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_II_of_Naples).  I hesitated repairing this article because I do not have access to Gay, Jules, L'Italie méridionale et l'empire Byzantin: Livre II, Burt Franklin: New York, 1904.
This problem needs to be addressed by the original writer of this stub, or by someone who has access to L'Italie méridionale et l'empire Byzantin: Livre II.  Medieval Lands uses Stasser (2008) pg. 256 as a source for the parentage of Orania, based on her husband's testament.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ninanta (talk • contribs) 20:18, 9 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Genealogy of Orania