lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Clobetasol propionate

message: In accordance with Wikipedia:WikiProject_Drugs naming policy, I propose we move this page to the INN clobetasol. If you have any concern with this proposal, please discuss it on this page. Matt 23:56, 21 Dec 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I have no problem with the move.--AAAAA 01:11, 24 Dec 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: INN

message: Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: Physicians Desk Reference 2006. Infringing 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, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, 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.  Moonriddengirl (talk) 14:16, 24 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copyright problem removed 

message: Is C.S. really a likely side-effect from topical use of a steroidal ointment? DavidFarmbrough (talk) 05:08, 22 June 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cushing's Syndrome? Really?
Talk:Cry Freedom

message: I'm going to expand this, especially the plot section. When I've done that, I'll add some actor info. --Quentin Smith 12:45, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Expand this

message: I'm removing the bit about Peter Gabriel's song, "Biko."  While it's certainly important to the Stephen Biko and Peter Gabriel pages, it has nothing to do with this film.  PacificBoy 19:00, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: donald woods two books were published in england and donald and wendy woods themselves were chief advisors on the film so it is all true fact--Charlieh7337 (talk) 05:43, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Trivia 

message: Shouldn't there be a section on the movie's historical accuracy? Not because I think it is particularly accurate or inaccurate, but because it seems that the movie is based on a true story, shouldn't there be a section per FILMHIST?--— Mr. Guye (talk) (My aftermath) 15:18, 8 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  No 'Historical accuracy' section? 
Talk:Teton Range

message: ==Untitled==
Most of the Teton Range is NOT in GTNP. Only the east slope of the northern part. Much of it is in the Targhee National Forest.
Most of the Teton Range is NOT made up of granite. Most of the supposed "granite" is really metamorphic rock. The west slope and much of the northern part are made up of sedimentary rocks. Much of this is carbonate rock, either limestone or dolomite. Taking the range as a whole, including the west slope, it is likely that more of the exposed rock is limestone than anything else. Senor Cuete (talk) 22:12, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Nobody argued with this for three years so I edited the article.  Senor Cuete (talk) 16:28, 8 October 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: mis-information

message: Most of the Teton Range is NOT in GTNP. Only the east slope of the northern part. Much of it is in the Targhee National Forest.
Most of the Teton Range is NOT made up of granite. Most of the supposed "granite" is really metamorphic rock. The west slope and much of the northern part are made up of sedimentary rocks. Much of this is carbonate rock, either limestone or dolomite. Taking the range as a whole, including the west slope, it is likely that more of the exposed rock is limestone than anything else. Senor Cuete (talk) 22:12, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Nobody argued with this for three years so I edited the article.  Senor Cuete (talk) 16:28, 8 October 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Pseudomorph

message: Is the phenomenon described in the "Substitution pseudomorph" section the same as (or, similar to) the phenomenon that is responsible for creating "petrified" evidence, of certain erstwhile forms?  (such as, a petrified clam?)  
(I have a petrified clam in my house.  It is a rock, but its shape is the shape of a clam.)  
Just curious!  
PS:  If the answer is yes, then would this be a good candidate for being mentioned in that section of the article?  Thanks, --Mike Schwartz (talk) 20:13, 23 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is the "Substitution pseudomorph" phenomenon anything like [becoming] "petrified"?
Talk:Archostemata

message: I'd be grateful if someone could explain this reference in the classification box and maybe add a note to the Kolbe disambiguation page. Thanks. <KF> 21:30, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay, I just found his full name at List of zoologists by author abbreviation. Shouldn't his name be disambiguated (Kolbe)? <KF> 21:41, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: "Kolbe, 1908"

message: Currently, this page claims Archostemata is the smallest suborder of beetles, while the page for Myxophaga claims it is. I realize there are different possible meaning of "smallest", so perhaps this could be made more specific? Cheers, Justinleif 22:41, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Smallest suborder?
Talk:History of South India

message: The main page talks of Pallavapuri in AP being the capital of the Pallavas. Someone verified that fact? History talks of Kanceepuram/Kanchipuram as the capital of the Pallavas, which places it squarely in Tamil Nadu. Can the original author correct the fact, or can I go ahead and do it myself?
And, as far as I know, Pulekesin's Vatapi (now known as Badami) is in Northern Karnataka. Badami, Bijapur and Sholapur still have many monuments of the Chaulukyas.
The page needs a lot of improvement - some photographs too. A good place to start for photographs is Ruins of India, at Flickr
--Chandrachoodan Gopalakrishnan 16:32, 18 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Pallavas

message: Please add a References section and list all the relevant sources.
cheers Parthi (Venu62)gggggg7yggyhghghgghghg 23:08, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  This article needs References 

message: I have made some additions and rearrangements to the various ancient dynasties. They were not listed in any particular order. I've made them chronological. I have also removed some weasle words and POV text. - Parthi 04:53, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reorder 
Talk:Galaxy morphological classification

message: The article Disc galaxy is just a one sentence definition that I think gets better context in this general article about galaxy classification. I don't see how Disc galaxy could be expanded beyond a definition without duplicating other related articles; we already have an article for the disc component of the galaxy: Disc (galaxy). Since Wikipedia is not a dictionary, I think there's a clear case to merge into this article. Forbes72 (talk) 21:01, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: The discussion on Disc galaxy seemed to indicate consensus was against merging "Disc (galaxy)" and "Disc galaxy". The editors there agreed that "disc" was a morphological classification of some type, as opposed to a feature.(but it's unclear to me which system of classification is being referred to) Disc as morphological type also shows up in the Galaxy template. Is "disc" just an ad-hoc classification? There's no sources for "Disc galaxy". Forbes72 (talk) 20:30, 3 August 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Proposed merge from Disc galaxy

message: The article doesn't mention the Van Den Bergh luminosity class and I don't see it mentioned elsewhere on Wikipedia. Could that be covered? Praemonitus (talk) 00:43, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Van Den Bergh Luminosity Class 

message: Susu 2405:205:C8E3:96BC:182A:DC0F:AF0C:55B7 (talk) 11:21, 11 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Black hole
Talk:Coat of arms of Estonia

message: What is the purpose of these vague descriptions?  And I'm sure that there is no mention in the blazon that the leopards are "slim".  Why not just provide the blazon, and, if necessary, explain to the layman what it means?  --Daniel C. Boyer (talk) 20:42, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Blazon 

message: This part needs more information!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
: I redid all the history of the page and took off description, and rewrote one and placed it at top. TDS  (talk • contribs)  23:45, 29 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Need More 

message: I changed the word "leopards" into lions. Most sources, including the internet link in this article, seem to agree that they are lions. Could someone tell me where the "leopard theory" comes from?
in heraldry, if lions look like that, they're called leopards
So are the "lions" in the Danish coat of arms also "leopards"? They are always referred to as lions. What is the difference between these Estonian felines and heraldic "Lion Passant Guardant"?128.214.205.4 17:05, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Denmark has the same problem. If the "creature" faces the viewer, it is a "leopard" in heraldic terms. If it looks forward, it is a "lion". The Coat of arms of Denmark originally showed three "leopards" facing the viewer (see e.g. the coat of arms of Eric of Pomerania (:Image:Erikafpommernsdanskeunionssegl.jpg). This was deliberately changed in 1819 to the current situation where the lions face forward to ensure that the creatures everybody referred to as lions were in fact lions. See also: Leopard (heraldry) and Lion (heraldry). Valentinian (talk) / (contribs) 23:28, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

text: They can be called leopards, see Leopard (heraldry). As far as I know, there was a time when all big cats were called leopards, including lions, hence Leo the Lion Leo (astrology). I'm not sure if the direction the cat is facing makes any difference. Danrok (talk) 02:12, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lions or leopards? 
Talk:Conejo Valley

message: Juan Rodríguez Cabrillo wasn't Spanish, but Portuguese.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.58.235.62 (talk) 15:25, 15 July 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Cabrillo's nationality is disputed by historians - see the article. Also, thanks to editor Howcheng for adding a citation to the claim that Cabrillo was first in Conejo Valley. If true, that would be big news to all the Cabrillo biographers. WCCasey (talk) 06:33, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: To be clear, if Cabrillo really wasn't here, then that's fine with me. The web site of Thousand Oaks claims that Cabrillo visited the area, but perhaps "area" here means a much wider swath than just the Conejo Valley. Meanwhile, Westlake Village's site gives credit to Gaspar de Portola, which would have been a few years earlier than De Anza. One of these days I should get myself over to the Stagecoach Inn in Newbury Park and see if they have better info. —howcheng  {chat} 22:12, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll try to find a more authoritative source with more detail on the explorers' routes. From what I've read, Cabrillo landed on Catalina Island and briefly at San Pedro, but didn't go inland. Portola traveled by land but also stayed on the coast (today's PCH through Malibu). De Anza established the inland portions of El Camino Real (approximately today's Hwy 101 except Hwy 1 through Lompoc) from Mission San Gabriel to San Francisco. WCCasey (talk) 22:46, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Follow-up: removing the citation <>, because it does not support the claim that Cabrillo visited Conejo Valley. WCCasey (talk) 22:02, 21 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Juan Rodríguez Cabrillo  
Talk:Sayed Ahmad Khan

message: Sir Syed is linked to from a lot of Islamism-related topics. I am undoing that--he had nothing to do with them except being alternatively decried and co-opted by them.—iFaqeer (Talk to me!) 00:22, Dec 22, 2004 (UTC)
I say go ahead with the merge. Beetle B. 23:58, 28 July 2005 (UTC)
Talk:Idiot

message: A discussion is taking place to address the redirect :Dunderhead. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 September 28#Dunderhead until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.  Soumya-8974 talk contribs subpages 14:55, 28 September 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Dunderhead" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]] 

message: A discussion is taking place to address the redirect :Addlehead. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 September 28#Addlehead until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.  Soumya-8974 talk contribs subpages 14:56, 28 September 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Addlehead" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]] 

message: A discussion is taking place to address the redirect :Idoit. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 February 3#Idoit until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.  Un assiolo (talk) 21:40, 3 February 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Idoit" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]]
Talk:Philip Don Estridge

message: As we know Philip Donald led development of the original IBM PC.he made history then so cherish his memory. 2603:9001:1B00:1018:A137:FD2E:17B5:958F (talk) 15:52, 26 March 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Father of IBM PC is Philip Donald Estridge. 

message: how did Philip Don Estridge got famous? 120.29.79.160 (talk) 12:50, 13 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Computer 7
Talk:Centaurea diffusa

message: This article needs major wikification, cutting and photos.  I'll get to these when I can.
--Jprice 01:21, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree it will be a lot of work.  I'm presently wikifying allelopathy that I suspect was added by the same contributor.  However, as the information appears to be very detailed,  current, and well documented, I think we would be making a mistake to just delete it - Marshman 03:38, 11 August 2005 (UTC)

message: :Taken from the old Cleanup entry…Archived by HopeSeekr of xMule (Talk) 15:35, 9 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Old Cleanup Archive 

message: Hi guys,
I removed the warnings on this page, reorganized some paragraphs and did some mild wikification and cleanup (style alteration and added internal links).
Please contact me on my User talk:Splintax if you disagree with these alterations.. thanks!
splintax 14:19, 4 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removed warnings 
Talk:Mallam Aminu Kano International Airport

message: I take issue with the phrase "Until they indefinitely suspended services in June 2012, KLM was the only European airline serving Kano". I am sure Kano was served by Sabena for a long while. Probably by more European airlines, too. Anyone care to follow up? Jan olieslagers (talk) 06:13, 26 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Only KLM?
Talk:Penn Singers

message: The only collegiate group in America to have performed all but one Gilbert and Sullivan show? Can this be independently verified somehow? It sounds unlikely.  AJD 01:36, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: No, it is not true.  I know of several.  UMGASS (the oldest collegiate G&S Society in the US, which has performed all the G&S shows) is certainly more notable than Penn Singers, and it does not have a Wiki article.  I do not believe that college theatre groups should have a Wiki page separate from their universities' page.  Otherwise every college theatre group would have a Wiki page.  They just aren't notable.  See WP:ORG and WP:MUS.  Ssilvers 17:11, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Not the only one

message: IMO, the accomplishments of this group should be added to the discussion of various groups who contribute to the cultural life of U. of P. on the U. of P. entry. -- Ssilvers 23:25, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge

message: I restored the Prod tag.  If you want to remove the tag on the grounds that an AfD is better, start the AfD before removing the tag.  -- Ssilvers (talk) 18:10, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: What? That's not how proposed deletion works. Anyone is allowed to contest a proposed deletion for any reason, without any obligation to start an AfD. Furthermore, this article has already been nominated for deletion, so isn't eligible for a prod. Jfire (talk) 18:24, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: This article could be put up again for deletion via AFD, or it could be proposed for merger withtharticle on the university, but it is absolutely not eligible for PROD since it has previously been through AFD and survived as "No consensus." There is no need to start an AFD before removing the PROD tag. My response to the AFD was "Weak keep" since there were several references from campus papers and the like, but I wanted to see one or more off-campus independent and reliable sources with substantial coverage. Edison (talk) 19:07, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

text: A year has gone by, and no such refs have been offered.  I was merely noting that the reason given for removal of the tag was that the remover said the article should be put up for AfD instead.  -- Ssilvers (talk) 20:24, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Prod tag
Talk:Hawza

message: If anyone cares, the "Hawza subjects" section is a pile of copyvio from http://www.al-islam.org/index.php?t=258&cat=258#s1 William M. Connolley (talk) 08:35, 19 September 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: This has now been removed. -- Diannaa (talk) 23:10, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copyvio 

message: This article has been revised as part of a large-scale clean-up project of multiple article copyright infringement. (See the investigation subpage) Earlier text must not be restored, unless it can be verified to be free of infringement. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions must be deleted. Contributors may use sources as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously. Diannaa (talk) 23:10, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Possible copyright problem 

message: .... advanced levels of the Hawza including Muqad'dim'maat, Sotooh, Sotooh 'Ulya, 'Uloom ukhra and Bahath Kharij.
Which means what? Zezen (talk) 20:03, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Too much farsi
Talk:Grammar school/Archive 1

message: :(content of Talk:Grammar schools in the United Kingdom when that page was merged into Grammar school in October 2008)
---------------------------------------------------
I've cleared the talk page since the article has been rewritten to cover all aspects of grammar school education, not only that since 1944, and to do so in more detail. If someone knowledgeable could include something more on Victorian grammar schools, they would be doing wikipedia (and indeed the entire internet, since there is literally nothing on them out there) a great service.--Evil Capitalist 19:06, 27 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Historic Grammar Schools in Scotland? Brendandh 00:38, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

text: The Admissions to secondary school 2008 booklet has a map (on page 4) showing comprehensive areas in the south and northwest of the county, as well as the Isle of Sheppey. Kanguole (talk) 22:33, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Only Sheppy and the Hoo peninsular are comprehensive areas (rural/isolated areas, one comp in each). the rest of kent uses the 11+ with roughly 25% going to Grammars and the rest going to "high schools". Now some of these "high schools" style themselves as comps. There are also several catholic schools that style themselves as comps, plus private schools. 84.70.62.228 (talk) 20:55, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

message: I turned to Wiki to understand the difference between grammar schools, secondary modern schools, and comprehensive schools. I'm sorry to say that this article helps almost not at all. How could an article given over to English grammar schools fail to make this distinction clear? Perhaps it is only Brits who work on it, and who carry their assumptions and background with them? I went to university in England for a year; I didn't understand the distinction then (1954-1955) and I'm afraid I still don't understand it! Get back to work, lightfoot lads and rose-lipt maidens!  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.19.34.89 (talk) 10:38, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Do you find the Tripartite System article more useful in this regard? Kanguole (talk) 12:11, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: I still don't understand!
Talk:Abstract polytope

message: This article could be HUGELY improved if it provided a clear definition of its subject.
Instead, it mentions various properties that an abstract polytope ought to have without ever committing to one single clear definition. That is a very bad thing for a mathematics article.216.161.117.162 (talk) 19:07, 5 September 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: A formal definition is given, but I agree that it should come sooner, presumably immediately after the article lead. — Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 20:09, 5 September 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Huge improvement is possible
Talk:Limnology

message: Totally agree with Dr.kjf! Might be good to link to Clean Water Rule.  Jst4 (talk) 13:55, 15 December 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Human impacts

message: Just a note for future editing efforts that it would be great to build in more details in the physical/chemical/biological sections. Biological text that enables us to link to zooplankton and phytoplankton pages, etc. would be a great start! I think we could all collectively also build in more details on anthropogenic impacts on inland waters... look forward to helping keep move this forward! dr.kjf (talk) 20:47, 30 November 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Sections for future improvement

message: I am deleting the merge template (with Freshwater biology), both because as the person noted above, that Limnology is not just about freshwater, but also because limnology is not just about biology, but is also about biological, physical, chemical, and hydrological aspects. BlankVerse ∅ 10:23, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed. When the textbooks all change their names, then we can consider merging. :-) Stan 13:26, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge

message: I'm a hydrologist. I have also worked with limnologists. I am very confident that none of the hydrologists and limnologists I know would consider limnology to be a division of hydrology. If it needs to be compartmentalised (which is debatable), it would be far more accurate to place it within ecology. While the environment is certainly a wet one, the subjects of interest tend to be organisms and biogeochemical cycling (ecology), not the amount and movement of water per se (hydrology). [NB. Biogeochemistry doesn't really include H2O as much as N, P, S, etc.] It would probably be more accurate to say hydrology and limnology are allied fields, and that limnology is generally the purview of ecologists. FYI. Daniel Collins (talk) 10:41, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Division of hydrology?!

message: - I made some updates today in an effort to resolve our page's maintenance template for excessive/inappropriate use of external links. If someone has time to give the updated page a look and see if they agree that we would be justified to remove the maintenance template (and submit that change??), that would be great! Thanks! dr.kjf (talk) 16:31, 2 May 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links  

message: — Assignment last updated by Stans068 (talk) 18:48, 12 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: Ecology