lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Glowlight danio

message: The currently valid name of the species seems to be Danio choprae rather than Danio choprai. The current version of the article suggests that it is the other way around, and states that D. choprai is the valid taxon, with D. choprae being a synonym. However, the two sources (FishBase and California Academy of Sciences) given to establish this also point out D. choprae to be the valid name. Hence I suggest using Danio choprae rather than Danio choprai. I might of course be bold and fix the rename myself, but feel that perhaps it should be discussed here first. Any one having more sources regarding this? –Tommy Kronkvist (talk) 12:47, 22 June 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Species name ''choprae'' rater than ''choprai''
Talk:Leopard Danio

message: I propose this article be merged into zebrafish. Thoughts? MidgleyDJ 06:18, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: MERGE - as a colour/fin variant of the standard Zebra fish. Simple change under common-usage (sold under) name and characteristics OR it's own lil' section. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Tactik (talk • contribs) 09:29, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

text: Merge Topic too small to have its own page... better to have one comprehensive article at zebrafish. –Adrian J. Hunter 09:38, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge proposal
Talk:Malabar danio

message: I think the image currently being used for this article is incorrect: it shows a Giant Danio (Devario aequipinnatus). The main visual difference between the two species is in that a Giant Danio has an unbroken horizontal stripe up to the point where it reaches the vertical stripe near the pectoral fin while in the Malabar Danio, the line becomes broke up towards the front of the fish so that it resembles a line of dashes by the time it reaches the vertical stripes. Because of this, I am replacing the photo with one showing a true Malabar Danio.  Kat (talk) 18:28, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Incorrect photo
Talk:Rasbora

message: The common name in the text is different to the picture caption.
:It is now fixed. -- Lerdsuwa 16:06, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Rasbora borapetensis

message: Would this article be better served by moving it to Rasborinae, the subfamily name for many of the species called "Rasbora"? I can understand the common naming convention, but if you're looking for a taxonomic treatment, which is the bulk of the article cobbled together from several genera across two subfamilies and one unclassified genus. I would then make Rasbora about the genus Rasbora with a link to the disambig page, Rasbora (disambiguation), at the top. The disambig page would contain links to the subfamily, Rasbora, Boraras, Microrasbora, and Trigonostigma. Seems a much better arrangement than this. Alternatively, Rasbora could be an article describing the common name and the species in the aquarium trade while Rasbora (genus) would be the taxonomic treatment of the genus. That's the way we do it with cultivated plants at WP:PLANTS (see example: Coffee and Coffea arabica). Thoughts? --Rkitko (talk) 08:17, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Article title
Talk:Dog (zodiac)

message: I thought the Chinese symbol for 'Year of the Dog' was 戌, as apposed to 狗, which just means 'Dog'.  I could be wrong though.  Could somebody please verify which is correct.  Sadako No Deshi 18:52, 18 July 2006 (BST)
* I believe yours is correct. Although taking into consideration that there's two different kinds of scriptures (simple and traditional), I wouldn't be surprised if both are correct. RAM 00:45, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No, it's not correct. 狗 is what we use for year of the Dog. If you do google image search you will see 狗 on all artwork. Pleas leave this symbol alone. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 74.128.234.186 (talk) 21:52, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, 戌 is the correct character, as per the corresponding wiki pages in chinese and japanese. Changing to match the consensus of the other language wiki. Ice-Wolf 04:09, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Chinese Character

message: Hrmpf. In the very minute I finally got the Dog article finished, the new categories were put up into the Deletion candidates. Go here for details, and please tell if you want the categories kept, deleted, or if you got another suggestion entirely. I've stopped editing for now. Teshik 14:50, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Split contested, candidate for deletion

message: Do not reply here; go to centralized discussion at Talk:Rat (zodiac)#Let's remove all the celebrities lists. — coelacan — 18:18, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  remove list of people 

message: Howcome there's no writing about the qualities of this sign, like all the others?--Tainted Drifter 11:22, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  ??? 

message: I have factual links that tell you the meaning of the Chinese zodiac Dog, etc.
They are not advertising anything personal. I feel they may help the site.
If you do not believe so. They were previously posted on two articles.
I want to combine them and post them on each horoscope, Including this one. Ariyen (talk) 13:16, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links 

message: Please chime in at Talk:Rat_(zodiac)#Celebrity_lists,_again regarding removing the list of people from all Chinese zodiac articles. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 18:27, 14 March 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Remove list of people, again
Talk:Wolverine (Ultimate Marvel character)

message: As per the discussion on Talk:Wolverine (comics), this has now been merged into that article. --Mrph 23:24, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge

message: See Talk:Ultimate Nick Fury#Requested move 18 January 2018.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 18:57, 18 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 17 January 2018 
Talk:London Mithraeum

message: I don't know how to flag a page as possibly plagiarized, but my plagiarism alarms went off when reading sentences like this:
"a finely-detailed bearded head of Serapis, Jupiter-like in his features but securely recognizable by the grain-basket, the modius, upon his head, a token of resurrection."
"Jupiter-like in his features"?  "Securely recognizable"?  Who in the 21st century writes like that?  This sort of stuff sounds to me like it was lifted directly from a book, probably one of the ones that appears in the bibliography below.  Even if it's original, very little in this article is NPOV:  what does and does not count as a "token of resurrection," and where "the Mithraic epiphany" took place if it happened at all, are very much under debate by scholars.  --Hapax 15:15, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: ...find any orbs? >_>
-G  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.51.110.223 (talk) 08:57, 10 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: =Did they...
Talk:Van Hiele model

message: Can I quote so much material as this? Or would a summary be better? --Math Teacher 15:21, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't know. Was the material you put all quoted? In any case, I have added much more without quoting anybody. I think this article should now be renamed the "van Hiele theory" or "van Hiele model" with the historical part at the beginning. The five levels are the most well known part of the theory, but there is more to it than that.
--seberle (talk) 17:29, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Here's this article's first paragraph:
: 
: The Van Hiele model or theory originated in 1957 in the doctoral dissertations of Dina van Hiele-Geldof and Pierre van Hiele at Utrecht University, in the Netherlands. The Soviets did research on the theory in the 1960s and integrated their findings into their curricula. American researchers did several large studies on the van Hiele theory in the 1980s and Pierre van Hiele published Structure and Insight in 1986, further describing his theory.
: 
After reading all the way through that, I don't know whether the Van Hiele model is: 
* A mathematical model used in earthquake prediction; or
* A mathematical model of the stock market; or
* A proposed way of organizing courts of law; or
* A military strategy; or
* A system of forest management; or
* something else?
That should be in the first sentence! Michael Hardy (talk) 13:27, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for your helpful pointers. The article should be more acceptable now. --seberle (talk) 05:09, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  What is this about? 

message: The 5th section does not make sense, see bellow:
1. Fixed sequence: the levels are hierarchical. Students cannot "skip" a level.[5] The van Hieles claim that much of the difficulty experienced by geometry students is due to being taught at the Deduction level when they have not yet achieved the Abstraction level.
Deduction level and abstraction level should be refered to as they are in the section preceding. also, fixed sequence should probably not be numbered.
:I'm not sure I understand either of these problems. What precisely does not make sense? In what way are the Deduction and Abstraction levels not being referred to as they were in the preceding section? Why should Fixed Sequence not be numbered? Could you clarify your concerns further? Also, why do you refer to this section as the "5th section"? --seberle (talk) 12:52, 25 May 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Comment
Talk:Howard DGA-15

message: Alot of the information is duplicated elsewhere. For example there is no need to talk about Mr Mulligan here as there is a Mr Mulligan section. Same with the DGA-11.  Moving relevant text to right articles.--Abaddon 15:30, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

message: Point one: If you feel there is conflict of interest, so be it - but Howard owners do not need to "sell" their airplanes. Time after time, I have heard of the planes selling themselves!
Point two: It is useless to speak of any of the production Howards without pointing out their racing heritage; If you think eliminating verbage and replacing it with a lot of cross-references "improves" wikipedia, -- yeah, right...  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nuance 4 (talk • contribs) 19:45, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  conflict & duplication 

message: I have tried to remove the hyperbolae and slanging matches from this article whilst stillretaining the pertinent bits. I believe the tags can be removed now, so I shall do that. If any body objects, open a discussion or revert it (re-instating the tags)Petebutt (talk) 02:30, 26 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  conflict resolution
Talk:2006 UEFA Intertoto Cup

message: I've started a discussion concerning flags displayed for the Serbian and Montenegrin teams at Talk:UEFA Champions League 2006-07#Serbia and Montenegro. Conscious 15:39, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Serbia and Montenegro

message: Any source to this claim? Odense BK on uefa.com is noted down has the Cup noted down as in their "honour"-section, in exactly the same way Newcastle has /AB-me (chit-chat) 21:58, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: A single overall winner?
Talk:Terrorism Acts

message: Which parts of this page are not neutral? It looks OK to me now. Francis Irving 07:32, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Neutrality 

message: Which parts are original research? It looks reasonably well referenced, with each section either linking to a Wikipedia article, or to the text of the act. Francis Irving 07:32, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Original research 

message: This is intended as an overview page, folks.  The detailed sources and citations are to be found on the pages for the specific Acts.  They all build on one another and are part of the same thread as Prevention of Terrorism Act (Northern Ireland), and can be seen as one body of law that just so happens to have been brought in in different stages. Goatchurch 15:41, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It runs in my mind that the Terrorism Act 2000 was actually intended as a permanent replacement of those powers in the previous Prevention of Terrorism (Temporary Provisions) Act which were considered appropriate by a review. David | Talk 21:36, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

text: What about the change to the jurisdiction of the British Transport Police under the Anti Terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001.  I think that far more people will encounter the BTP operating off the railway estate then the MOD Police off the defence estate.
I'm unsure how to respond to the requests for many of the citations in this article, since many of the paragraphs are very short summaries of elements of other wikipedia pages they refer to.  I agree we need to get statements from the Prime Minister confirming that these Acts are part of the War on Terror.  62.188.50.246 10:09, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Older talk 
Talk:Carol White

message: This article seems to focus on her failures and says almost nothing about her successes.  She may have had problems but she gave a few wonderful performances.  More about her work is needed, not just an account of her sad decline.  Rodparkes 08:39, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Unbalanced article

message: Can't see why this is classified as a biography of a living person, when Carol died in 1991. 81.158.42.208 (talk) 17:45, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Living Person?

message: If she was married, this ought to be logged, as normal. 81.132.60.29 (talk) 16:24, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: 'She had two sons from her first marriage.' So there was more than one marriage. Details would be appropriate. Valetude (talk) 00:22, 29 November 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Was she married?
Talk:Film memorabilia collecting community

message: How does this sound like an "advert?"  And, what exactly is being advertised?User:phishman  26 June 2006
Again - someone places an Advert Tag with NO DISCUSSION.  Please REMOVE this Tag or explain whay you think it reads like an Advert.
User:phishman  28 June 2006
:There's no rule that says you have to discuss anything to place an advert tag. Ideally you should say why the tag was placed on the talk page or in an edit summary, but there's no rule. No one needs to discuss anything to place an advert tag, just like no one needs to discuss anything to create an article here. --Jtalledo (talk) 15:07, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
Talk:Fixture unit

message: I don't believe that 1 fixture unit is 1 cubic foot per minute.
one cubic foot is 7.48 gallons.  if a fixture unit were one cubic foot per minute then it would also be 7.48 gallons per minute.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.172.153.197 (talk) 23:21, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
Talk:Therapeutic HIV vaccine

message: Whilst the orignal text that was in this ariticle was borderline
for speedy, I've edited the article to resolve this.
The topic of an 'HIV vaccine' is in an important one,
hence this topic needs expansion, or if the topic exists
already re-direction.
Thanks
ShakespeareFan00 15:55, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Not speedy,,,
Talk:Summertime (George Gershwin song)

message: Some covers listed would help find this easier. It took a very long time to find this song, several years in fact.  If a few more versions, possibly alternative lyrics were added, I wouldn't have thought it was first performed by Ella Fitzgerald sometime before 1968.  (Personally, I first heard it sung by Topanga on Boy Meets World, and couldn't find any references to it because of the very specific spelling choices of it's lyricist.) 108.224.106.197 (talk) 09:24, 30 March 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Your point is not at all clear.  are listed.  They pass WP:SONGCOVER. What are you trying to say other than you don't know much about music and had trouble finding this article?  Toddst1 (talk) 03:23, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: Difficult to find
Talk:Glacier cave

message: Have reverted back to the original References layout, as the external links were also used as references for the article. Ian mckenzie 16:08, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: References layout

message: The glacier caves website reference appears to have become invalid.
* Glacier Caves website
204.191.89.147 (talk) 16:32, 14 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Invalid reference
Talk:Wright's stain

message: Maybe somebody could add how it works?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.218.229.41 (talk) 16:48, 7 June 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: In the bottle, it looks purple; it stains the various parts of white blood cells purple, blue, or pinkish/orange (see the pictures of the stained  cells in white blood cell). - Nunh-huh 06:25, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: How it works?
Talk:Bernard Parmegiani

message: I don't know enough about this subject to clean this article up to standards. אמר Steve Caruso (poll) 16:26, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Cleanup
Talk:Molesey F.C.

message: Added Molesey FC club history. Elfking ++ 16:32, 27 June 2006 
:You seem to have copied and pasted it from http://www.moleseyfc.com/club.html though, which violates their copyright. If you do have permission to repost this material on Wikipedia, under the terms of the GFDL, then say so and it can be restored. — sjorford++ 13:51, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Club history

message: The information on this club's article is very limited, and so it is one of the only team articles linked to from Football in London that doesn't feature the standard football club table. Anyone out there with the relevant knowledge? Grunners 15:30, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll be expanding this article up to "non stub" standard in the next day or two as part of my ongoing "de-stubbing drive" :-) ChrisTheDude 11:34, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Table

message: I notice (and agree with) the decision to semi-protect the page in light of recent events, surrounding the arrest of the club secretary. Given that the club's website and social media has all been removed, I'm personally inclined to think this incident is significant enough to warrant a mention in the History section, albeit in a sensitive and measured manner. There are now articles in well respected sources which mention Mr Sweeney and his ties to the club (such as  (archive: )) and it is currently the top result when you search for Molesey FC on Wikipedia. However, given the controversy, I wanted to say something on the Talk page and see if there was consensus on this, rather than just adding it immediately. Bjornhattan (talk) 13:54, 16 November 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think it is appropriate to mention as the individual who was not acting in relation to his position at the club at the time. If it had happened at a Molesey game, it might be different. However, at the moment, this is WP:NOTNEWS IMO. Number 57 14:58, 16 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  2023 Secretary Controversy
Talk:Michael Lau

message: This material may be the germ of a bio on Jason Siu:
: Also see Jason Siu who produces similar work (vinyl toy figurines) that are becoming increasingly popular in youth culture, Particularly London,Tokyo and New York.
but presuambly the only connection between the two people would be via an article like vinyl toy figurines, which might have a section listing their designers, and/or one comparing and contrasting styles & other parameters. --Jerzy•t 16:34, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Jason Siu

message: Please see the Designer toys article. The search term "Urban vinyl" redirects there. Comme le Lapin 22:00, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Urban vinyl
Talk:Mara Reyes

message: I found a couple references. I also proofread the article, fixing spelling, grammar and spacing issues. I didn't do enough to remove any of the tags. Article needs a good prose re-write, so that it doesn't look like a resumé.  Scottyoak2 (talk) 09:07, 1 October 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  October 2013 improvements
Template talk:Tekken series

message: Alright, I don't think there's any more use for the Major/Minor characters links. I've made a template to go along with the Soul Series template, character-wise. Sharpevil 21:58, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Characters

message: How is Tekken 5:DR or Tekken 6:BR a spin-off to Tekken? They're part of the main series. SuperSonicTH (talk) 12:12, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  We call updates "spin-offs" now? 

message: Tekken Arena, a mobile card version of Tekken is not appearing. https://tekken.fandom.com/wiki/Tekken_Arena#:~:text=Tekken%20Arena%20is%20a%20free,Android%20on%20October%2029%2C%202013. D0kkaebi (talk) 02:42, 29 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Missing Tekken Arena
Wikipedia talk:Wikipedia Signpost/2006-06-26/News and notes

message: This article claims that the Venetian Wikipedia was the latest to reach 1,000 articles, but it has 3,509 articles, and the Wikipedia with the fewest articles but still over 1,000 is Northern Sami? -- Mithent 17:01, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Maybe it simply has to do with the pacing curves of each project.  Denelson83  03:00, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
Talk:Magnetostatics

message: I think the Electromagnetism template is too long.  I created the alternative version shown in this article; see a more extended explanation at Talk:Electrostatics#Template:Electromagnetism_vs_Template:Electromagnetism2.  Comments welcome!--DJIndica 04:45, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Template:Electromagnetism]]_vs_[[Template:Electromagnetism2]] 

message: Article states it is the study of Magnetism "where the currents are steady.". I think this falsely implies non zero. The case of moving charges without current such as non moving permanent magnets should be included. 
I feel saying "Where the currents are steady, or zero." is better.
Do you agree? Bill field pulse (talk) 21:28, 15 January 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: A zero current is a steady current.  No need to clutter the intro. Constant314 (talk) 21:33, 15 January 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Only 6 letters and two spaces are needed in a rather long article.  Bill field pulse (talk) 22:19, 15 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Magnetostatics Definition
Talk:Nicholas Lash

message: My mother was half Scottish and half Irish, and it was her Scottish mother who was a Roman Catholic. My father was brought up as an Anglican, but became a Roman Catholic long before I was born. Nicholas Lash — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nll1000 (talk • contribs) 17:10, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: I’m being told he has just passed away. Awaiting some sort of public announcement.   — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:2C7:980:51CB:BCFF:9098:7C:E35B (talk) 17:21, 11 July 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: As soon as there's a reliable source reporting it, the article can be updated, thanks. Schazjmd (talk) 18:34, 11 July 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Death
Talk:Submersible bridge

message: Well done, Leonard & Klaus!!  Very informative, excellent pix. Mdotley 17:36, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Bravo!

message: Additionally, the lack of an above-deck structure is considered aesthetically pleasing, a similarity shared with the Chicago-style bascule bridge.
Perhaps this criticism is of the bascule bridge article more than of the mention here, but I see no explanation of this style of bridge, beyond a link at the bottom to the general index of a bridge-related site. Perhaps more clarification is in order, either in this article or in the other. --IntrigueBlue 18:04, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reference to [[bascule bridge]]s