lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Hôtel Lambert

message: There are clearer floor plans available (see the images in the Wiki entry). Go here for better:
http://www.learn.columbia.edu/dbcourses/publicportfolio.cgi?view=1901#
Also the floor plan shown on Wiki is of ONE floor; there are two floor plans available.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.237.136.2 (talk) 14:53, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Replace art 

message: This article is currently at start/C class, but could be improved to B-class if it had more (inline) citations. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk to me 03:51, 5 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: B-class review
Talk:Grand Mosque of Paris

message: This page is lacking a lot of crucial information about the Grand Mosque of Paris. In comparing this page to the French page there is a clear lack of important and basic information that is readily available on line. I have tried to add some information that I was able to find and source online, but someone with better translation abilities than me could provide  much needed additions to this page.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thankunext417 (talk • contribs) 17:36, 14 December 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Wikipedia talk:Requests for adminship/Persian Poet Gal

message: Persian_Poet_Gal's edit stats using wannabe Kate tool as of 00:11, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

message: Below is a discussion moved from the main page, kept here just for reference.
#Oppose User has been disruptive, and has also been soliciting for meatpuppets on off-site forums to get attention in AfD debates. Is homophobic too. --Revaure Jeltuggs.bs 22:27, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Can we just vote to revert this as vandalism/personal attacks?--Húsönd 22:37, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: At least move it to talk until either validated (unlikely) or disputed. Otherwise it could be another free-for-all for wounded "victims". Strange they should talk about sockpuppets... Bubba hotep 22:53, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

text: Especially now... Bubba hotep 22:53, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

text: Here we go again, no edits outside this. ~ Arjun 22:55, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

text: P
That is all I have to say.¤~Persian Poet Gal (talk) 23:33, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

text: Good on you, Persian Poet Gal. Acalamari 23:40, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, I think we could safely delete all this nonsense and have a nice cup of tea then, eh? :D Bubba hotep 23:44, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

text: AND, all has come to nowt because in the time since the SockMuppet Show, PPG has gained five more supports to get to 100! Bubba hotep 23:47, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Sockpuppet vandalism/personal attacks

message: Why can't I edit the page?? --Galbeggs 22:56, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Why would you want to with your first edit? 〈REDVEЯS〉 22:58, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

text: WP:RFA states that "any user in good standing is welcome to participate in discussions on candidates". This is definitely not the case.--Húsönd 23:04, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vote
Talk:Quiteria

message: two questions.  First, why is her name given in all those languages? I suppose the text would support Spanish, Portuguese, and French.  Occitan and Catalan would have to be proven to be relevant. And Tamil just looks like someone showing off.
Second, why do "Such origins of the name suggest to some that Saint Quiteria is fictional"?  Reference or source for this statement, please. --Richardson mcphillips (talk) 15:28, 22 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  name
Talk:Château d'Amboise

message: That tank in the picture gallery is in Clos Lucet, another Chateau in Amboise.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.81.130.214 (talk) 16:36, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tank 

message: Slight problem with numbers of kings - in the 1490s this should be Charles VIII, not C7.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.195.166.145 (talk) 19:27, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Fixed - I hope I caught all of what you were referring too.  This is a wiki - you can fix it yourself :-) --Golden Wattle  talk 23:34, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Charles 8 in 1492 

message: In parentheses, some information is cited to a brochure from the chateau. I believe this should be cited as citations are usually formatted, with the superscript note, but I'm not good at formatting and I wanted to confirm this possible mis-formatting.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zacky30 (talk • contribs) 02:49, 26 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Royal Residence" citing 
Talk:Château de Montsoreau

message: directly built in the Loire-riverbed. 
:Who tells this nonsense? --Les Meloures (talk) 17:32, 7 April 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Nonsense

message: An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Chateau (montsoreau). Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so.  signed, Rosguill talk 23:53, 2 May 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Chateau (montsoreau) listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]] 

message: An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Chateau (monsoreau). Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so.  signed, Rosguill talk 23:53, 2 May 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Chateau (monsoreau) listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]] 

message: An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Castle (monsoreau). Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so.  signed, Rosguill talk 23:54, 2 May 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Castle (monsoreau) listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]]
Talk:Andrzej Gawroński

message: This stub is a slightly modified translation of the intro to a much longer text in Polish Wikipedia. Fon 00:19, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Château d'Anet

message: Hello all, there is clearly a problem with the images on this page. Thanks to @Le Passant for helping with that, but obviously the problem hasn't been fixed and it wasn't the solution. 
Photos are useful, but there are too many on this article and too big. The text isn't easily readable and doesn't meet the Wikipedia:Manual of Style. 
Maybe we should create a gallery on Commons and link to it. What do you think about that? L'Oiseau Lybre (talk) 20:28, 29 September 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Images
Talk:Adam4Adam

message: adam4adam recently changed its format and has a new logoCholga 00:41, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  logo 

message: The website itself touts itself as being for a "hot hookup" the hookup websites category thus obviously appliesHemanetwork (talk) 06:19, 20 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hookup 

message: While most of its clientele are from the US, what evidence is there that Adam4Adam is "an American online dating website"? Its WhoIs listing is privatized/proxied. Additionally, they clearly have problems with English use per both the banner ads which they manage, and their blog/blogger. 
71.229.4.173 (talk) 02:24, 28 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nationality 
Talk:Radio in New Zealand

message: There was a generation of news readers before Dougal Stevenson eg: Bill Toft,Peter Fry,Philip Sherry(who appeared later as first TV3 frontman).
These newsreaders all appeared under the NZBC banner in mid to late 60s.
134.159.110.197 00:24, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: In my opinion, the article isn't far off good article status. Items to work on:
* Some paragraphs are unreferenced.
* Manual of Style issues for percentages and numbers.
* Some bare URLs.
Once done, I'd submit it for GA assessment. Good work! Schwede66 09:34, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Assessment
Talk:Château de Ferrières

message: The Château in the "Relic Hunter" Episode (visual sources):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1mIKRLheLF0&t=3m16s
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1mIKRLheLF0&t=4m28s  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.59.198.232 (talk) 00:57, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
Talk:Château de Puilaurens

message: The text of this article, as created 10 April 2006, is very similar to, but a shortened version of,  that of this website which claims copyright 2010-2016. (And which was an External Link in that first version though it disappeared in the meantime till I added it again just now). I don't know which way the copying went. A copyright expert might be able to work it out - pinging . PamD 21:33, 26 April 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Reviewing the article creation back in 2006 shows the website was at that time http://www.languedoc-france.info/120717_puilaurens.htm (note this redirects to the current url http://www.catharcastles.info/puilaurens.php?key=puilaurens). The old url was archived several times by the Wayback Machine so we have proof: much of the content is copyvio from that site. But there's enough left to rescue a stub. I will fix it now. Thanks for the report. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 21:52, 26 April 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copyvio or mirror site? 

message: Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: here. Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.)
For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, and, if allowed under fair use, may copy sentences and phrases, provided they are included in quotation marks and referenced properly. The material may also be rewritten, providing it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Therefore, such paraphrased portions must provide their 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, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you.  — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 21:52, 26 April 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copyright problem removed
Talk:Château de Landskron

message: The French Ministry of Culture refers to this castle as Château de Landskron , not 'du' as in the original page that I have moved here. I have altered all references to 'de' in this article, apart from the links to the French and Swedish Wikis - I will leave it to their users to make the changes.  It is interesting that the website of the Association which now owns the castle calls it Château du Landskron ; however, I believe we should stick with the Min of Culture's name. Emeraude 11:28, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That is certainly the case, the bureaucrats in Paris live far away. I live there, and it is indeed quite consistently called "Château du Landskron". And it is not by chance that the French Wikipedia article uses "du". The title should be changed back (in spite of the influence that, meanwhile, this article might have had on the internet ). --Momotaro (talk) 12:51, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Château de Morimont

message: This article is misnamed: the du should be de and this could be solved by doing a Move.  Unfortunately, it is not clear from the article which of two similarly named castles is actually being described.  According to the French Ministry of Culture website (see here), in the commune of Oberlarg there are two castles:
::a) Château fort de Morimont
::b) Ruines du château de Morimont
At first glance they appear to be separate items.  I will research further and edit this article, then move it, as necessary.  Emeraude 22:58, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Serge Lifar

message: I understand the enthusiasm for him, but the article lack the necessary neutral point of view, and references. To me, it is full of hearsay and rumours - the biography on the ABT page seems more balanced than this one. Is anybody up to the task of making the necessary changes? Gioland71 (talk) 01:31, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: * Which calendar?  The bald date "2 April" appears most everywhere, as if there were only 1 calendar in the equation.  But there were 2 – the Julian was still in use in Russia, and the Gregorian was operating in most other places.  So, which calendar does this “2 April” come from? The German WP article says it's Julian, and the Gregorian date was 15 April.  
* Which year: 1904 or 1905?  The stamp we proudly display says 1904, as do the Russian, German and Spanish articles.  The English, Polish, French, Italian, Finnish, Swedish and, perhaps most significantly, Ukrainian articles say it happened in 1905. Who’s right, and how do we know?  --  Jack of Oz  ... speak! ...  09:21, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
replies: text:  OK.  Now the Ukrainian article is also saying 2 April was a Julian date, the Gregorian date being 15 April.  I've added that in.  Also added a new Biography section, referring to the year discrepancy, but it's just the very start.  It needs a lot of extra material to explain his history and achievements, and why he's so highly regarded by balletomanes.  --  Jack of Oz [your turn] 22:23, 27 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Birthdate issues
Talk:Château de Guermantes

message: Some of which are outdated.--Revery (talk) 08:48, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: No photo in the links
Talk:Leash Law

message: I believe that the band Leash Law is notable according to Wikipedia's music notability standards, specifically:
As per criteria 5, the band contains multiple members who were in other notable bands, namely Wade Black, a member in several notable bands, and Richard Christy, also in many notable bands.  I have updated the article to directly reference particular bands for these members.
If this update is not enough, I believe I could find other references with a bit more digging.
MGlosenger 01:04, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Speedy deletion
Talk:Alexander Galich (writer)

message: :File:Galich lebedev.jpg is in use in this article, and an editor objected. But at :File:Galich lebedev.jpg it says that use of the image:
#To illustrate the subject in question
#Where no free equivalent is available or could be created that would adequately give the same information
#On the English-language Wikipedia, hosted on servers in the United States by the non-profit Wikimedia Foundation
is permitted. As to #1, I believe that the image does illustrate the subject (this is assuming that it's not a picture of someone else rather than Alexander Galich, and if that is the objection, then it needs to be stated more clearly). As to #3, this is the English-language Wikipedia unless I've been sadly misinformed, and is hosted on servers in the United States by the non-profit Wikimedia Foundation, again unless there's been a major change that I haven't been informed of.
As to #2, well, the man is dead, so any future pictures of him are going to look pretty unpleasant, I would say. So the question is, is there a free version photo of him taken when he was still alive knocking around somewhere? I don't know, but if there is, I haven't seen it, and the editor would be better advised to provide one rather than just deleting the image that we have here, and if he doesn't have one, maybe consider leaving well enough alone.
I certainly can't see any situation where :File:Galich lebedev.jpg is permitted to exist if it's not to be used in this article, as I can't imagine any other article where it would be more appropriate to use than this one. So if the editor doesn't like the image in the article, nominating :File:Galich lebedev.jpg for deletion would be the way to go, I would think. Herostratus (talk) 18:51, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Um, just reverting to your desired state with no proper explanation is not exactly what I was hoping for... Herostratus (talk) 03:06, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Just a heads up, do not re-add content that violates our WP:NFC policy until the issues have been fixed. In this case you fixed the issue after the second removal. When writing non-free rationales please ensure that you clearly state the article for which you are writing the rationale. ΔT The only constant 03:18, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Just a heads up, do not edit war, and you know what? You could have added the the template yourself, OK? Glad I was able to jump through the hoops to your satisfaction and add redundant information that was already there in the format that you find pleasing. Hope we can get together again sometime... let me see... (checking calendar)... how about never? does never work for you? Herostratus (talk) 19:23, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: You might want to take you own advice, enforcing the WP:NFCC is exempt from 3RR. A simple solution would be to fix the problems with files before adding them back into articles. ΔT The only constant 19:27, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Image
Template talk:Comarques of Catalonia

message: User:Toniher is constantly reverting my contributions and accusing me of Vandalism... Maybe this morning the south of France and part of Aragonhas suddenly become part of Catalonia and I'm unaware of that fact. Meanwhile THEY ARE NOT PART OF CATALONIA and this template should say it so. Nobody is going to include in a template with the "comarques of Catalonia" french or aragonese territory.
You still haven't prove yourself adding official documents from France and Aragon confirming these territories to be part of Catalonia in present day.
I will not... I repeat, I will not tolerate this pro-catalan acting towards my home countries!!!
This said, I would like to kindly ask all the contributors which feel the "urgent need" to fool and fill the Wikipedia world with Pan-Catalanism, Catalan Countries wannabe, Catalan nationalism and just plain false pseudo-Catalan History to restraint themselves from doing it. Not all the surrounding lands to Catalonia feel the need to become part of it, and the english Wikipedia will not become a highway to "export" their history "a la carte". Giving for right the fact that we should not generalize, I often wonders if these people suffer from the well-known "Catalan Small Penis Syndrome" (Are we allowed to say "penis"?)
WIKIPEDIA IS NOT A PRO-CATALAN POLITICAL PAMPHLET Maurice27 00:33, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vandalism by [[User:Toniher]] 

message: Maurice27, Toniher, a difference of opinion as to what this template should include is not vandalism. I have protected the template for one week to stop the repeated reversions of edits which has been going on. A Request for Comment has been opened below to sollicite opinions from other members of the Wikipedia community, and you are both more than welcome to add your points of view, but please do so in a constructive manner which respects the opinions of others. You might also like to read the page Wikipedia:Dispute resolution. Physchim62 (talk) 13:21, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Protection 

message: As external reference, see a map edited by the Conseil Général du Pyrénées-Orientales where the comarcas and the name in Catalan are being used: http://www.cg66.fr/culture/catalanite/carta.pdf. The Conseil Général is the local french government for every Department. I think this no need more additional comments that comarcas are being used as cultural and historical reference of the villages, towns and cities of Northern Catalonia. There's no "Pays du Roussillon" but "le Pays Catalan". --Joanot Martorell ✉ 17:41, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That map is in Catalan, not even the title is in english so that's not a proof for the correct use of "Rosselló" in english. Maurice27 21:40, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Official external reference.
Talk:Alexandre-Émile Béguyer de Chancourtois

message: Hmm, you beat me to adding the slash to the reference thingy - so my edit just added a space between the French icon and the bracket. Just in case anybody was wondering about the edit summary. Picaroon 00:34, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Heh I was wondering how I got edit conflicted when I was expanding the article. Nishkid64 01:03, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Monroe, Connecticut

message: Saint Jude School (Monroe, Connecticut) is an unsourced stub about a grade school (which is usually not considered notable) and has mostly the same text as Monroe, Connecticut#Private school, and an infobox that is partially in error (mistaking its school board and district for a public school's). Closeapple (talk) 11:47, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed merge with [[Saint Jude School (Monroe, Connecticut)]] 
Talk:Château de Monte-Cristo

message: The photo in this article should be of the Chateau de Monte Cristo itself - considering that's what the article is about, not some out-house that the writer used for creative purposes.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.101.23.153 (talk) 09:09, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  picture is not the most accurate 
Talk:Château de Gisors

message: According to the Oxford Dictionary of National Biography entry for Robert de Bellême, "In 1097–8 Bellême served with William Rufus's forces in the Vexin and was responsible for the design of the first castle at Gisors."  William M. Aird in Robert Curthose, Duke of Normandy: c. 1050–1134 states "In the late summer or early autumn of 1089, Robert carried the fight against Rufus' supporters. The duke enlisted the support of his lord the king of France, following his father's example when facing similar difficulties in the duchy. Philip I and Robert besieged Gerard de Gournay's castle of La Ferté-en-Bray. In return for his help, Robert granted Philip the castle of Gisors on the River Epte."
I'm not sure how to reconcile these two statements. The River Epte is some 30km southwest of Gisors, so perhaps there is another Château de Gisors? Or it may be that Robert granted Philip the castle after 1098 for the assistance nearly a decade earlier. Until I can work this out I'm putting some text I recently added on the 11th0century history of the castle here. Nev1 (talk) 20:41, 9 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Who founded the castle?
Talk:National Alliance of Russian Solidarists

message: Can anybody place the images in Commons to be used in other projects? Сергей Олегович (talk) 07:42, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: article is ridiculously biased and has poor use of sources.
For example "NTS supporters believe the organization always defended democratic participation in government (even in the case of a monarch), championed individual liberties, supported individualism, and rejected chauvinism." This undocumented statement follows the only text part classifying them as fascists. and it is a documented citation, with an opinion.
They where/ are fascistic and nazi collabos and this should be clear by this article and not just through the linked pages.
Please set a marker that this page has to be improved.--Hybay (talk) 11:54, 31 May 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  extenuation
Talk:STA-21

message: The article doesn't have the tone expected of an encyclopedia article because it was copied from the Navy's site which, I believe, is in the public domain since it was created by a United States government employee. Wodup 00:39, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Tone

message: Made minor style change to one sentence.76.89.244.34 (talk) 06:35, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Style
Talk:Château de Grégy

message: I have classified this article as a stub due to its length and added an appropriate tag. Capitalistroadster 02:08, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Stub Classification