lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Eudokia Makrembolitissa

message: An edit made to Romanos IV Diogenes at 05:39, 1 November 2010. On 18:14, 1 January 2013 text was copied from that article into Eudokia Makrembolitissa. This is how it is known that the short citations
Norwich, is matched by the long citation:
* 
The citation "Dzielska 1995 p. 67" and the sentence it supports was copied by user:Andreas Kaganov at 13:13, 3 October 2011 from the article Hypatia (see Revision as of 08:53, 18 October 2010). The long citation that supports the short citation "Dzielska 1995 p. 67" in the article Hypatia is
* 
However that was already in the article Hypatia in October 2010, and the isbn number given is for the 1995 publication date. So I am adding it to this article with the date corrected.
-- PBS (talk) 22:32, 1 April 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: @user:Pasicles Does this explain the "strange edit"?  -- PBS (talk) 16:17, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

text: Hi yes sorry, I think I made the correction on mobile, so I was a bit fingers-and-thumbs. The Dorandi book which I cited back in 2014 was from his 2013 edition of Diogenes Laertius. I noticed the other day that the reference somehow got switched to his 1999 article for the Cambridge History of Hellenistic Philosophy which has nothing to say about Eudokia Makrembolitissa. Pasicles (talk) 20:15, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[WP:Copying within Wikipedia]]
Talk:Constantine X Doukas

message: Unless my scholarship is out of date, the Barberini psalter dates from the Komnenian era, and most likely depicts Alexios I Komnenos, Eirene Doukaina, and John II Komnenos. I do not find it likely that the picture provided here depicts Constantine X Doukas, especially since the domed crown, as far as I am aware, did not become commonplace until the middle Komnenian era. Looking at Constantine's coins, and later depictions of him, such as the one in the Modena Zonaras manuscript, the flat crown of the Macedonian era is used. I would request a more definitive coin image be used instead. Ambarenya13 (talk) 06:04, 21 November 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Regarding the current sidebar image from the Barberini psalter
Talk:The Monolith Monsters

message: Lucerne Valley, CA, USA (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lucerne_Valley,_California)
Morris Dam, Azusa, CA, USA (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morris_Dam)
Universal Studios, Courthouse Square, Hollywood, CA, USA (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Courthouse_Square)
2600:1700:71D0:64E0:6028:7144:D15F:6664 (talk) 22:23, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Filming Locations
Talk:Naphegy

message: User:Tamas Szabo started on January 21. 2007 
original, Hungarian version  http://hu.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naphegy
Hungarian version started from January 2. 2007 - still expanding: http://hu.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Szabo_Tamas
Please help to translate from hungarian and expand this page with your pictures and texts about a historic part of Budapest  Tamas Szabo 04:36, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

message: About 10-20 km to south/west from exact position
18:42, 7 April 2007 The Anomebot2 (Talk | contribs) (Adding geodata: )
Tamas Szabo 07:40, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Geodata are wrong, malfunction 

message: The template below is not good. The picture is too huge and no need of Street names. Kapeter77 (talk) 12:04, 28 November 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Picture
Talk:Five cents John Kennedy

message: I cleaned up this article; should we remove the tag?  Discussion anyone?  ProfessorPaul 04:42, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I cheekily went through, rewrote a bunch, and declared it no longer in need of cleanup. Could use a few additions (such as price to collectors - $0 :-) ), maybe something about the first day. Stan 17:01, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: So, remove the tag?
Talk:Reverse (American football)

message: Some people call this play the end-around.  I assume the "end" is for "Split-end," another name for a reciever.--BigMac1212 03:45, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Another name?

message: I made a substantial rewrite and reorganization to this article, explaining the traditional reverse and its variations.  I removed unnecessary references to specific players and events.  I removed the mention that Bobby Bowden invented the reverse; in fact, historical references to the play go back nearly 100 years.  Finally, I broke off the issue of the controversy between what's an "end-around" and what's a "reverse" to a separate section, where I present the (choose one) classic/pedantic definition and the incorrect/colloquial usage.  Based on these changes, I removed the wikify nag tag.
In the process, it's interesting (and probably significant) to note that I found exactly zero definitive sources that state categorically that a reverse requires two handoffs and a double reverse requires three.  (Gregg Easterbrook's long-running crusade on ESPN.com doesn't nearly qualify as authoritative.)  The NCAA and NFL terminology guidebooks make no mention of a required number of handoffs; they merely refer to the number of times the lateral flow of the play is changed.  Another source, a "coaches handbook" web site, asserts that the difference between an end around and a reverse has to do with the change of flow: if a quarterback takes a snap, rolls right, and hands off to a receiver running left, that's a reverse; if he merely stands in the pocket and hands off, it's an end-around.  This seems reasonable to me, but I'm not an authoritative source either.  The only thing that seems crystal clear is that, colloquially, the "imprecise" usage is now used virtually to the exclusion of the "classic" definition in news articles - so much so that I am having second thoughts about describing the plays in the body of the article using the "classic" terms.  For now, I'll leave what I have and await other opinions.  Dpiranha 03:07, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: With no comments for almost two months, and with further Internet research still turning up no definitive sources (at least, none having no direct tie-in back to Easterbrook) that a reverse requires two handoffs, I'm going to modify the article slightly to skirt the #-Of-Handoffs issue entirely.  If anyone can produce an encyclopedic source to the contrary, let's discuss it.  Dpiranha (talk) 04:51, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Oct. 2007 rewrite
Talk:Quarterback sneak

message: Where is Center Sneak (related play)?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.42.82.54 (talk) 05:30, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

message: Standout QB Graham Winklebaum probably didn't exist. According to the Professional Football Researchers Forum thread at http://www.pfraforum.org/index.php?showtopic=1688 , post at 21 June 2011 - 03:50 PM, "College FB researchers determined yesterday that there was no Winklebaum in that particular Yale-Harvard game, and in fact nobody could confirm a Winklebaum played for Yale at all. One of the prominent places displaying this information is Wikipedia, where it appears without a source."
And in the 20 June 2011 - 06:02 PM post: "Yale's quarterback in 1912 was Nate Wheeler."
They don't seem at all convinced that the game cited was the first occurrence of the sneak, either.
Best move for the historical bit of this article would be a precis of what the pro researchers did find. But I don't feel qualified to summarize it well, since I'm not at all into football, let alone football history.
GeorgeTSLC (talk) 20:48, 4 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:   No such Winklebaum!
Talk:Carlton W. Kent

message: Greetings
in reading the biography of Sgt Major Kent provided in this article, I see no mention of combat action.  And yet, he is credited with having earned a combat action ribbon and is pictured wearing the same.  Could you please update his biography to reflect his combat duty?  Of all his assignments he should be properly credited for this, his most dangerous.
Best Regards
Robert Cook  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rdcook2006 (talk • contribs) 00:53, 4 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: There is a reliable source for his awards. If you can cite a reference regarding what he earned the CAR for, then please add it. bahamut0013wordsdeeds 23:21, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

text: Uh, yeah, the references; not to mention numerous photos and the fact that the article clearly mentions his tenure as SgtMaj of I MEF between 2004 and 2007 (when it made multiple deployments to Iraq). bahamut0013wordsdeeds 12:48, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Awards for Sgt Maj Kent 
Talk:Mor Mattai Monastery

message: What is the status of this monastery and the refugees ( http://america.aljazeera.com/watch/shows/america-tonight/articles/2014/6/17/iraqi-christiansfindrefugeinancientmonastery.html )who have sought safety there now that the region has been taken by the ISIL? (  http://www.aljazeera.com/news/middleeast/2014/06/reports-rebels-seize-control-iraq-mosul-2014610812970659.html )  69.246.217.44 (talk) 21:46, 17 June 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I have seen on various sites that it is occupied by IS, and the monks have been driven out. See http://www.aina.org/aol/syriac.htm  which states that it was most recently looked after by the Syriac Catholic Church, not the Syriac Orthodox Church.--Richardson mcphillips (talk) 20:15, 26 August 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: That site you provided states that the monastery is currently cared for by the Chaldean Church, not the Syriac Catholic Church. However   mentions that it became Syriac Catholic from 1839. Yet, not only do all the other Wikipedia articles regarding the monastery states that it is still Jacobite,  says it had possession of it when the maphrian was abolished in 1860. Mugsalot (talk) 20:53, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

text: The monastery you're looking at is the  Dair Mar Bihnam not  Dair Mar Mattai. Mugsalot (talk) 18:55, 27 August 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  ISIL Invasion 

message: The article asserts without a source the early history of the monastery. Can anyone provide some sources for the story? Ender's Shadow Snr (talk) 15:08, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reference for the history please 

message: This article mentions Kurds and how they attacked the monastery 800 years ago, but not recent history of how it was the peshmerga (the Kurdish army) that protected the monastery and ensured its safety from ISIS, so that it would not see the same fate as many other historical sites in Iraq. The article has clearly been written with discrimination against the Kurdish, as it only mentions ancient history and not recent history where the nation protected this monastery and to this day allows for Christian orthodox churches to exist within its country and are protected - unlike in Iraq! 87.55.134.148 (talk) 21:26, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Invasion of ISIS
Talk:Screen pass

message: Any reason to include the Joe Tiller reference here?  It seems pretty unsubstantiated.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.236.13.242 (talk) 04:22, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

message: Why does "shovel pass" redirect here?  They are not the same kind of play, as the article points out. Vidor (talk) 00:12, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Shovel pass

message: Wouldn't another potential downside of a screen pass be that the quarterback is left vulnerable on a blitz? WAVY 10 Fan (talk) 18:22, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Risks from a screen pass 

message: The "Types" and "Types of Plays" sections cover the same material and should be combined.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by ALittleSlow (talk • contribs) 01:35, 23 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Redundant Sections
Talk:Squib kick

message: Can someone explain why squib kicks are considered so hard to return?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.48.2.217 (talk) 21:20, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

message: The history section begins with this line: "The first recognized use of this by design in modern play was by the San Francisco 49ers during the 1981 season." I wonder if that is correct? When I was in high school in the early 1970's,  playing flag football in gym class, trying a squib kick was sometimes tried following a discussion. I'm sure my fellow classmates were not innovators; they probably had seen deliberate squib kicks before. Now another question: When was the beginning of "modern play"? Were the early 1970's prior to the beginning of "modern play" ? 206.9.240.81 (talk) 03:13, 15 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Date of first use? 

message: I guess we are calling a botched kick a squib kick now? No team in the history of ever has been down 21-0 and started a half with a squib kick.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.35.156.114 (talk) 15:33, 29 November 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sarah Fuller
Talk:Sweep (American football)

message: For some reason, the images demonstrating types of sweep plays are labeled in Romanian, with a parenthetical translation of "Culoar" into "Alley". This is inappropriate for the English language Wikipedia, and the diagrams should be modified to either only contain "Alley" or simply not have any writing on them at all. Can someone do this?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 104.13.247.118 (talk) 06:00, 25 December 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pictures on page
Talk:Touchback

message: Are points awarded for a touchback?  More generally -- if a touchback is called, what are the consequences? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.57.118.15 (talk) 16:53, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Points? 

message: Notice "it is a safety because the impetus would then be charged to the receiving team". This actually happened on Jan. 1, 2012, in a play noted in the article about safety (American football score), because a return man didn't realize the ball had completely left the end zone (in bounds), and pulled it back to himself and knelt down for what he thought was a touchback.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.63.16.82 (talk) 20:32, 5 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  There was a safety in this situation. 

message: In the NFL, the rules used to call for a touchback when a forward pass on fourth down fell incomplete in the end zone.  I think that this was changed some time in the 1960s.  (I have no idea why the rule used to be so.) WHPratt (talk) 21:16, 18 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Obsolete Rule 

message: I removed two paragraphs both of which said "This new rule was to be re-evaluated" and gave a date 18 months in the past. These were test rules, and if they are current then the article should say so, without speaking of the test year, e.g. "Starting with the 2017 season the NFL changed the rule to place the ball on the 25-yard line for a touchback on a kickoff." And similarly for the NCAA. Or else, if the new rule was not imlemented after the test, then the paragraph about it is needless, or should say "After testing a rule change for one season the NFL rule remains unchanged." Nick Beeson (talk) 13:33, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Out of date
Talk:Sunway Group

message: I do not know much about the Sunway Group, however there has been an addition to the article following: "Sunway College Sdn Bhd
Sunway Group is the parent company of Sunway College Sdn Bhd. This is a feeder college which partners with overseas universities to provide university degrees to Malaysians."  with the sentence "Which Is Now Call Sunway University College".  This is not written in the correct style, and should be scrapped.
Either I can do some research into Sunway College/Sunway University College or someone who is already familiar with the subject can check the accuracy for me.  Whether the content is correct or not, the phrasing needs to be improved.  I think perhaps that "Sunway University College" should replace "Sunway College Sdn Bhd", with an acknowledgement following this regarding that the institution has been renamed. Tinkstar1985 04:58, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled 2007

message: There is a significant amount of conflict of interest editing going on. See contributions, Special:Contributions/175.143.107.237 and Special:Contributions/Sunwayecomm. This prevents the article from being WP:NPOV. Some of the sources are also not independent. The whole article needs to be examined thoroughly. --Lemongirl942 (talk) 07:33, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Conflict of interest editing 

message: Hi recently I got an offer from sunway group.I paid the guy from careernetplacementservices 9100 for embassy verification certificate .Now he was asking got another 32000 for the job when I denied he started abusing me .His email is Mishraatcareernetplacementservice Durgeshj79 (talk) 09:52, 4 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fraud Company
Talk:Zone run

message: Isn't this page redundant with the zone blocking article?  Would it be better to eliminate this page, and instead redirect there?  Moishe Rosenbaum 16:17, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Perhaps the comment is referring to the use of zone blocking in the passing game specifically, or in conjunction with both pass and run blocking in a single scheme? This statement seems false on its surface, especially when coupled with the following claim about zone blocking in the NFL game. Brianh8241 (talk) 15:37, 10 August 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: Comment
Talk:Tumblong, New South Wales

message: Mattinbgn makes the valid point on an edit requesting citation re: Tumblong Tavern being one of only two hotels on the Hume Highway - indicating that he recalls that there are at least two hotels in Holbrook.  The request for citation is still important (and I have adjusted the article to (I think) get past that point - but having had a few beers in both pubs at Holbrook (as it sounds like Mattinbgn may have also) I claim a technicality (at least in terms of those two Holbrook pubs) that they, (1) the Holbrook Hotel  and (2) the Riverina Hotel  are actually on Albury Street (144 Albury and 131 Albury respectively) which joins the north and south end of the Hume Highway, in and out of town, together.  Of course the same situation would occur in Albury itself (as there are plenty of hotels on the main streets which join the Hume Highway at both the north and south end).  Anyway that doesn't mean a reference wasn't required but it is, I hope you agree, for us travelling pub goers, of some interest.--VS talk...images 06:31, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I have bought takeaways from the Holbrook Hotel but haven't actually had a beer at the bar!  I think the reword is probably sufficient. The Albury pubs will be bypassed shortly so I don't think we need to count them. I also recalled another hotel on the Hume, at Kalkallo, Victoria, on the outskirts of Melbourne (of course technically it is on the Hume Freeway.--Mattinbgn 21:20, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
Talk:End (gridiron football)

message: Technically, an "end" is any player who lines up on the line of scrimmage at either end.  Rules state that seven players must be on the line of scrimmage...in a typical pro set there are five linemen and the ends are the split end (commonly one of the wide receivers) and the tight end.  "Wide receiver" is a generic term that encompasses split ends and flankers.  The split end is the receiver who looks to the official to make sure he has a foot on the line of scrimmage...if not, there will be an illegal formation penalty.
Although the term "tight end" is the only one to survive to the modern parlance, they are not the only ends on offense.
In addition, the information about the defensive end is questionable.  There are no rule-defined positions on defense, and as such outside linebackers and defensive ends share many of the same duties.  KyuzoGator 14:43, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Problem with the definition 
Talk:Hyperion (poem)

message: The following unsourced statement: "In Hyperion, the quality of Keats' blank verse reached new heights.." may well be true, but the illustration that follows:
:Deep in the shady sadness of a vale,
:Far sunken from the healthy breath of morn,
:Far from the fiery noon, and eve's one star,
:Sat gray-hair'd Saturn, quiet as a stone,
:Still as the silence round about his lair.
...is quite unconvincing. Not only is there no enjambment, but these lines are largely recycled from his earlier Fall of Hyperion, so logically cannot constitute new heights. I've removed this analysis. Phil wink (talk) 17:03, 17 January 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Questionnable analysis
Talk:Wuikinuxv

message: There are other refs than the http://www.wuikinuxv.net one I just provided google including the UBC Museum of Anthrpology and the BC Aboriginal Relations and Reconciliation branch of the BC government.  For anyone thinking of invoking "COMMONNAME" or "ENGLISH" to change this to Owekeeno people or Rivers Inlet people based on historical usage or continued usage in the ethnolinguistic community, CANENGL applies and the Wuikinuxv version gets over over 8,000 hits while "Owekeeno people" gets under 500.  Rivers Inlet people does get around 11,000 hits though some of those are for "Rivers Inlet" + "people" in the general sense.Skookum1 (talk) 04:53, 11 May 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: So, this is the "discussion".  If you do a Google Book search, and do not skew the results by appending "people" to one and not the other, "Oowekeeno" is more common, even after manually verifying each hit to exclude false positives.  — kwami (talk) 17:58, 25 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  quick google 

message: Which won't be pronounced like the supposed IPA given here for "Oowekeeno".....this is in teh phonebook, and on fnbc.com and more......if this version of the name is used at all, it should be at least what is the listed usage in Canada, not something off someone's linguistics bookshelf...it should be moved back to Wuikinuxv but there's so many "FOO people" changes that the thought of an RM is tiresome now, and shouldn't be needed because these were all speedied by "someone with an agenda", an agenda based on a strange notion of COMMONNAME being only sourced from archaic usages, which may predominate in google but are not in use today....needless to say the IPA given for "Oowekeeno" is obviously not suitable for this other spelling....the tribal council name also shows up as "Ooowekeeno (Wuikinuxv)".  I may get to the bulk RM soon, taking notes and looking up names......and all these pages and categories should be "locked down" to prevent more scr3wing around.Skookum1 (talk) 11:52, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I would have at least moved this title to match the tribal council usage, but both Oowekeeno people and Oowekeeno are already redirects so *I* can't.Skookum1 (talk) 11:53, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: tribal council usage is "Oweekeno"
Talk:Inverse distance weighting

message: If I'm not mistaken, Shepard's method is a subset of the inverse distance weighting methods?+mwtoews 05:14, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge to [[Inverse distance weighting]]

message: Not an expert by any means, by I would like to see a reference to support the use of d-2 as the "most common" smoothing parameter. From my own experiments, the proper value to use is a function of the density of samples, the degree of smoothing desired and the size of the weighting kernels. So I will edit to match.131.243.35.178 (talk) 01:24, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Value of the denominator exponent 

message: I pulled the section. The appropriate bit of the paper is "The proposed weighting coefficients (w = l/(p^3)) for each equation were inversely related to the distance of the corresponding node from the point P and also to the error due to truncating the Taylor series (2)." Needs a much more careful reading however, as this is not all he appears to be doing. User A1 (talk) 11:55, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lizka 

message: Shouldn't it be the other way around? Exponents >1 (or <-1, if the norm is in the denominator) create less sharp spikes around data points. This is confirmed by the image in the article too. --163.1.81.71 (talk) 14:31, 7 May 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: You are right. Page updated. Han-Kwang (t) 20:14, 7 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Exponent vs. Sharpness
Talk:Gunner (American football)

message: When I played high school football, back in New Jersey during the mid-1980s, we called this position the "ball hawk" or just the hawk. Daniel Case (talk) 19:18, 17 November 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Another name? 