lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Buyer decision process

message: Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: https://snov.io/glossary/buyer-behavior/?fbclid=IwAR3riw_23Eqb-EHXXukC-_F0d9Su1dzztU7lcdHKdN__shLTjTXW97fERhU. 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.  Amadeus22 🙋 🔔 23:01, 8 May 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copyright problem removed 

message: Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: https://snov.io/glossary/buyer-behavior/?fbclid=IwAR1D5xTJI_bHITaFvmrGm2t2Exu9. 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.  /wiae /tlk 11:43, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copyright problem removed
Talk:Vitex agnus-castus

message: The reference number 10 is wrong. If I go to the link I do not find the research mentioned in the article.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Reachsearcher (talk • contribs) 15:11, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

message: I made extensive changes to 
*add references
*remove the link to a web site selling Vitex (conflict of interest)
*make the article respect more the WP:NPOV
I think the changes bring the article to a B-class plant article. --DoSiDo 01:00, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You've definitely improved the medical material substantially.  As for the article as a whole, it seems to be missing information on: a description (flowers/fruit/height/bark/leaves/etc, beyond the very brief information now there), range (including introduced populations), ecology, probably more on cultivation/plantings, pests/diseases, wood, and history.  So I think I'd probably fail it on the "usually a majority of the material needed for a comprehensive article" part of B-class, and make it Start.  But don't let me discourage you: it is very nice to have the medical section on sounder ground, and even a Start article needs to have a "meaningful amount of good content" which this article does have. Article assessment is a fairly approximate process anyway. Kingdon 02:09, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree.  I am more familiar with chemistry/biology stuff than botany.  I will try to improve the article in the following weeks. --DoSiDo 15:57, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  General update on 2007-11-11 

message: While chaste tree berry is commonly included as an ingredient in menopause-directed dietary supplements, there are no clinical trials for this ingredient for this indication. Best reference is: van Die MD, Burger HG, Teede HJ, Bone KM. Vitex agnus-castus (Chaste-Tree/Berry) in the treatment of menopause-related complaints. J Altern Complement Med. 2009;15(8):853-862. It cites multi-ingredient trials, but no chaste tree berry only trial. A PubMed search did not find any subsequent trials. Ditto a search at clinicaltrials.gov for ongoing work.David notMD (talk) 10:24, 27 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why not menopause? 

message: To add to this article: isn't it also used as a spice in French and Moroccan cuisine? 173.88.246.138 (talk) 06:55, 24 July 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: To add to article

message: Should be merged with Vitex 2601:2C7:580:133F:65BF:8294:9E:C18B (talk) 14:43, 7 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge req 

message: I have uploaded a botanical scan of the flower, currently it is at the bottom of the page.
I think it will better as the main picture (currently showing a long shot of the bush).
Should i swap the pictures?
Agvania~commonswiki (talk) 15:46, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Picture update
Talk:Will it play in Peoria?

message: There are a lot of claims here, but a notable lack of specificity.  The fact is that, while Peoria was a butt of jokes on the vaudeville circuit, there is no documented use of "will it play in Peoria?" before Ehrlichman's use in 1969.  It was not in fact used in A Night at the Opera, and the literal references to Peoria in Horatio Alger's Five Hundred Dollars have nothing to do with the phrase.  If you believe there was a pre-1969 use, I would love to be proved wrong.  John M Baker (talk) 19:14, 19 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article is weakly supported
Talk:New Dream

message: Currently, this article is mess of mostly advertising and relies entirely on primary sources. As for trying to find non-primary sources for New Dream and The Center for a New American Dream, all I could find was two revenue overviews with very little information other than how much money they made.
In order to improve this article to comply with WP:NOTADVERT, and as this article is mostly advertising and barely notable, I suggest it to be significantly reduced by removing the puffery and leaving only objective, verifiable facts, such as this version of New Dream.
 Sketchsynth (talk) 18:34, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  This article needs to be rewritten
Talk:Consumer capitalism

message: I've reverted the edits of user Mjleknick4 on March 7, 2011.  With good humor and everything, some of that addition was a redundant restatement of existing material, some of it was an evident copyvio of material on this wikipedia-blacklisted page (http://www."ehow".com/about_6589518_consumer-capitalism-definition.html), some of it confused the theoretical condition of "consumer capitalism" with the factual condition of having a Consumer economy, and none of it was referenced.  --Lockley (talk) 21:21, 7 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay, this material was reinserted without explanation.  In good humor, I've asked for another set of eyes to visit, to avoid any edit war and promote the best possible article as an outcome.  --Lockley (talk) 05:15, 8 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Reverted edit of March 7 2011

message: In my reading, the final section has little to do with “consumer capitalism today”.
It is very poorly written; it assumes specific shared knowledge (generous interpretation as there are no references) about “the economic hardships of today” - whatever that might mean.. Then also (without references) mentions “radical income inequality” in the USA, and “perhaps a strong dependence on oil” as the economic preconditions that have caused consumer capitalism to resort to credit to maintain consumer expenditure.
Definitely not an outrageous idea but this is supposed to be an encyclopaedia, not a buzzword blurb.
Subsequently goes on to cite one example, described as an “extremely peripheral example”, being government subsidies for eco-products, like electric cars etc.., a very tenuous link to consumer capitalism (in that people buy these things.. don’t understand why relevant on this page at all) followed by criticism of environmental action/spending aimed at influencing consumer choices, with one reference which I assume is the entire point of this section.
Happy to be told I’m wrong, but I’m thinking I’ll delete this section in a few days unless anyone cares Dwardyboy (talk) 13:00, 29 March 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Consumer capitalism today
Talk:Organic Trade Association

message: I've reverted all the way back to the last version before most of the marketing stuff was added. The article can definitely expanded, but it needs to be done so in a way that complies with WP:V, WP:NPOV, and WP:RS. TNXMan 15:49, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm sorry, but the material you added was promotional. Wikipedia articles must only contain information that is independently sourced and neutrally written. Furthermore, because you appear to have conflict of interest, you are highly discouraged from editing the article at all. TNXMan 16:02, 11 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Spam Removal
Talk:BS 25999

message: Certification is now availiable from BSI in the UK. There is a big que forming (100+).  Julian  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.201.150.120 (talk) 11:12, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  BSI Certification 

message: I have tidied and archived the link discussion as discussed. 
One final comment: addition of links and references is a sensitive area. Addition for commercial self interest or by proxy is contrary to the integrity and ethos of Wikipedia. Hopefully though, 
the natural evolution of this section can continue in due course.  66.84.37.52 (talk) 10:22, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Links 

message: Just noticed a few words in the document and it seems to be a pattern.  Since this is a British document, does that mean the the following misspellings are actually ok?
Organisation
Standardisation
Programme  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.22.30.2 (talk) 18:52, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  English or Engrish 

message: Is there any info on the future for this standard that can be added? Will it become an ISO standard? Anyone? 80.225.153.78 (talk) 14:33, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Future 

message: I removed the link to a standards purchase site, standardsdirect.org. See Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Spam#StandardsDirect.org for more about this site. As I see it, Wikipedia is not a directory and we're not here to help people sell things. Most of these standardsdirect.org links have been added by single purpose accounts who likely have a conflict of interest. See:
*Conflict of Interest Guideline
*What Wikipedia is Not Policy
*External Links Guideline
*Spam Guideline
If an established, high-volume editor wants to add it back to the article, by all means go ahead. Otherwise, it stays out pending resolution at the spam discussion link above. --A. B. (talk •  contribs)  00:41, 23 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: StandardsDirect.org
Talk:Recovery point objective

message: It appears that the author has chosen to apply an additional factor in the definition of RPO by stating that a backup cycle of one complete backup every 24 hours results in an RPO of at least 48 hours (apparently because of an assumption that, in addition to a disaster occurring at 23.9 hrs, the most recent completed offsite backup may have an error. While that is a laudable concern it is not part of the accepted definition of RPO, and the author's assumption of one bad tape backup is no more or less defendable than an assumption of 0 or 2 bad backups. The standard to be imposed on the reliability of the backups is a separate issue and is not part of the definition of RPO.  
I suggest that the author move the impact of backup system errors into a separate paragraph, as it is a useful factor to consider as part of the broader picture. Similarly, the mention of the risk of a single error affecting more bytes of data as media densities increase should be in such a separate section, perhaps titled Additional Factors Impacting Recovery.
There is also a smattering of grammatical errors.
Techguy95 (talk)   — Preceding undated comment added 01:19, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Stachys affinis

message: Googling "coby covered" finds only this article. Is "coby" an extra-word typo? If not, what does it mean? It's not in the OED. Kga42 (talk) 13:06, 22 November 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Appears to have been a typo or transcription error.  Thank you for the catch.--Mr Fink (talk) 15:19, 22 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is "coby" a typo?
Talk:Mentha suaveolens

message: I have cleaned up this article, removed unneccesary text and changed the language to better reflect a formal encyclopedia entry. Mickthefish 10:57, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

message: Currently at Kentucky colonel (disambiguation): 
:"Kentucky Colonel mint, a crossbreed of spearmint and applemint ... "
It's uncited; I've never heard this before. Anyone got a ref for that? And ref at Spearmint says its hybrid with suaveolens is "Large Apple Mint". -- B.S. Lawrence (talk) 12:21, 7 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Link from Kentucky Colonel 
Talk:Eurest Support Services

message: When was this scandal? No dates are mentioned. 193.185.53.37 16:18, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
Talk:Polly Peck

message: I have asssessed this article as being of high importance, as the company's collapse and subsequent collapse was an important milestone in the development of UK accounting standards, by increasing the importance which investors subsequently placed on cash flow statements. --Gavin Collins 15:35, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: WikiProject Business & Economics Assessment

message: The following sentence would appear to be demonstrably wrong, but i don't know the truth, so looking for help in working it out: By 1990 five firms had emerged as the dominant actors in fresh fruits and vegetables in western Europe and North America, these were the ex-banana giants: Chiquita, Dole, and Del Monte Tropical and the two new upstarts: Polly Peck International and Albert Fisher.  The issues are that Fyffes isn't mentioned, and it was clearly one of the five dominant actors, and Polly Peck seems to appear twice, as PPI and as Del Monte, which it bought in the late '80s.  Anyone know just what is actually intended in this snip, which has been here for at least two years? As a minor point, i'm not exactly sure what is meant by ex-banana giants either. Cheers, LindsayHi 06:40, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Dole and Chiquita were (and are) certainly not "ex" giants - they remain banana and fruit giants. We need some better sourcing generally for this article and you are right, this bit is innacurate. We can look for sources. Jamesinderbyshire (talk) 07:31, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Ditto Fyffes, which is where my shop gets them half the time.  & d'you see what i mean about Del Monte and PPI being the same? Thanks, James. Cheers, LindsayHi 16:36, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fruit
Talk:Monarda

message: Horse mint is the common name of Mentha sylvestris (syn. Mentha longifolia). While these are both within the same taxonomic family, horse mint used for Monarda is an alternate common name instead of the standard common name. I would like to redirect the search for Horse Mint to Mentha sylvestris, or perhaps offer a disambiguation page, or perhaps both. Is there a current maintainer of the Monarda page who I can discuss this with? Feel free to leave me a comment directly on my talk page if you know. Jeremywosborne 18:37, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Redirection of horse mint 

message: I'm not sure if the following text is notable enough to be included in the article:
:In 2010, due to its similarities with the cannabis plant, a few Corpus Christi, Texas police officers spent hours pulling 400 of the plants from a city park.  After a few chemical tests it was eventually discovered that the plant was Horse Mint.
I try not to delete fully referenced, accurate material, so I thought I'd place it here until someone else makes a decision.
--TDogg310 (talk) 17:15, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is this notable? 

message: To add to this article: at least one photograph that actually clearly shows the leaves. 173.88.246.138 (talk) 14:21, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: To add to article

message: Just a plant researcher stopping by to say that the taxonomy section is beautiful. Too many pages have just a list of scientific names with little other information, but this article also includes the native range for each species which is super helpful. I cannot explain how much I appreciate the native range information, I wish that was standard for all species taxonomy sections.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anonkiwi (talk • contribs) 20:58, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Great Taxonomy Section
Talk:Million Programme

message: Kortedala and Biskopsgården were built in the fifties and are not Million programme.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.248.230.231 (talk) 22:35, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Removed Biskopsgården (Kortedala was already removed), and also Sävja (building started in early 80s) and Stenhagen (built early 90s and later). --83.255.57.204 (talk) 15:42, 23 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Not part of Million Program 

message: Article could use some external links. 2601:8C:4102:1210:85AE:9673:B321:853C (talk) 23:38, 20 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links 
Talk:Winter savory

message: The Medicinal uses section needs more sourcing to scientific and medical research journals in order to meet wikipedia standards. Right now the section reads a little too much like advertising copy for the grower's board for the herb to meet the standards.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.57.34.55 (talk) 22:41, 12 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Medicinal Uses Section needs further updating 

message: This article calls it native to Africa, however the various sources disagree on this. Plants For a Future makes it native to Africa, but the more reliable GRIN lists it native only in Eurasia. ~ 2601:441:4400:1740:F175:F068:A9F2:9B56 (talk) 17:48, 2 October 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Native distribution needs better sources
Talk:Mentha aquatica

message: There's spearmint and peppermint (which is a hybrid of spearmint and water mint) but no water mint gum.  Anyone know why not? KenFehling (talk) 23:00, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Why is there no water mint gum?

message: I found this after looking at the back of a bottle of lynx 'deep sea enriched mint and glacier water' shower gel. Possibly there should be a mention of it's use? Abergabe (talk) 07:21, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Use in Produce
Talk:Summer savory

message: I know for a fact that Romanians, Italians and Hungarians use it too. :D  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.97.4.81 (talk) 19:21, 15 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Obviously it's not used only in Bulgarian cuisine. You guys realize how Wikipedia works, right? A Bulgarian Wikipedia editor simply came by and overemphasized the Bulgarian usage, not realizing about the other cultures or not caring or whatever. I have since fixed the article a bit. There are some indications that Bulgarians use it more than other cultures, see this link.A from L.A. (talk) 17:09, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Just Bulgarian cuisine?

message: This article is telling people how to grow savory.  Advice or How-to sections are discouraged.  It should be removed, or rewritten.72.78.10.97 (talk) 08:44, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Particularly as the advice is aimed at a specific climatic zone (without mentioning the fact), and the named months are only correct for the Northern hemisphere. -- 203.20.101.203 (talk) 01:57, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  There's a lot more here than advice on how to grow this herb.  It does need the author to come back and cite the sources within the article, rather than just providing a bibliography at the end.  I know how to grow and do grow this herb, but I came here to learn more about it.  And I did.  So, good information aside from the growing instructions.  Zlama (talk) 23:01, 11 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Advice

message: Article's overview written as though summer savoury doesn't exist anymore for some reason. 142.177.56.197 (talk) 19:18, 15 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Past tense?
Talk:Jan Bach

message: The message, "An editor has expressed a concern that the subject of the article does not satisfy the notability guideline or one of the following guidelines for inclusion on Wikipedia: Biographies, Books, Companies, Fiction, Music, Neologisms, Numbers, Web content, or several proposals for new guidelines", currently appears at the beginning of this article. I'm not sure how to counter this. Articles about Jan Bach have appeared in Newsweek and Time magazine, excerpts of his works appear in Alfred Blatter's Orchestration, and so on, but I don't know where and how I'm supposed to make these sorts of things known. I'm not inclined to include them in the article proper. TheScotch
:I put the nn tag on an earlier version which didn't establish notability. Items have been added to the article which may have corrected this. I am uncertain why you are not inclined to include the Time and Newsweek articles as this would establish notability. If you have the publication dates and volume nos. you should put them in. I'd have no objection with having the nn tag removed. Freshacconci 15:18, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Establishing "notability"

message: Well, I found the articles bound in print without having to resort to microfilm or microfiche. I sidestepped the "sources" problem by creating a category called "Bibliography". I was wrong about "volumes": Both news magazines do use this designation. One spells out the word and uses Roman numerals, and the other abbreviates the word and uses Arabic numerals. Should I try to make these consistent with each other here or should I continue to retain the formats favored by the magazines--or is the question just ridiculously pedantic? TheScotch 21:24, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Volume number format

message: Jan Bach is primarily known as a composer, and I think the inordinate emphasis the article originally gave to his activities as a teacher and an instrumentalist may have deceived certain editors as to the extent of his national--and international--significance. I have tried to correct this (just now), not by removing information, but by putting existing information into clearer perspective. TheScotch 17:21, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Teaching and performing

message: Any relation to Johann Sebastian & family?  His website bio doesn't address the issue.
: Antediluvian67 (talk) 16:57, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: There have been numerous published newspaper and journal articles, as I recall, that insist (in passing), he is not related to J.S. Bach. Ultimately we're all related, of course. TheScotch (talk) 08:54, 16 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  The obvious question