lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Rail integration system

message: Shouldn't we have someone upload a picture for the article?
Preferably showing different RIS systems on different guns.Halofanatic333 (talk) 15:13, 3 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pictures 

message: Anything on Soviet equivalents? Andy Dingley (talk) 20:50, 12 July 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Warpac? 

message: With https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rail_system_(firearms) as mentioned on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Rail_system_%28firearms%29
Compare that stub on https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Rail_system_%28firearms%29&oldid=766279707 from  08:51, 19 February 2017‎ to the massive edits to https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Rail_system_(firearms)&oldid=803731463 of October 4th 2017
That Stub has been built up and out and Rail Integration System needs the same detail and love. Especially with the standardization of rail integrated power systems to feed optics and other accessories soldiers and/or civilians may need and use. This article has plenty of potential and a lot more coming in the near future. 2602:306:CE27:DC90:3DFA:E65B:704A:4C7E (talk) 08:46, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: avoid merging

message: Is the proper capitalization "rail integration system" or is it "Rail Integration System"? The title uses the latter, but the body of the article uses the former. One or the other should be used for both. Also, why is the first term used "rail interface system" when the article title uses "integration"? If neither is more strictly correct than the other, the first usage should be "integration". WP Ludicer (talk) 04:05, 1 August 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Since it is a very general term I would say it is correct to use sentence case. I therefore moved the article to reflect that. Sauer202 (talk) 20:26, 6 December 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Capitalization
Talk:Snakes & Arrows Tour

message: Do we really need an article for every Rush tour? esp since this is the ONLY tour that has any infomation. I'm really thinking of submitting this as a article for deletionharlock_jds 20:01, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: There is more then just a track listing to be entered here.  What I would like to see is a section that details the video clips that appeared in the concert and what was spoken in those clips.  I only saw the concert once and the clips were funny, but I can only remember some of what was said because of ambient crowd cheering.--216.101.11.66 20:09, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Do we need this?

message: Set listings seem dubious to me, but I think we can accept the 2007 list as it's published in sleeve notes.
The 2008 listing: what is the source?  It looks like somebody's blog to me. --Anticipation of a New Lover's Arrival, The 11:04, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I've decided to remove all statements sourced solely from fan blogs.  We need reliable sources. --Anticipation of a New Lover's Arrival, The 12:06, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Set listings

message: There is no reason to continue to add Rush's television appearance to the set-list for this tour. While it can be viewed as somewhat promotional for Snakes and Arrows, it is not listed as a venue anywhere, especially here. Wisdom89 (T / C) 05:19, 18 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Colbert Report appearance
Talk:Dusky eagle-owl

message: There is a move discussion in progress which affects this page. Please participate at Talk:Eurasian Eagle-owl - Requested move and not in this talk page section. Thank you.  —RM bot 15:30, 12 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Move discussion in progress

message: There is a move discussion in progress which affects this page. Please participate at Talk:Eurasian Eagle-Owl - Requested move and not in this talk page section. Thank you.  —RM bot 13:30, 20 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Move discussion in progress
Talk:Akun eagle-owl

message: No photos found at the time of writing. Richard001 (talk) 03:23, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Flickr

message: There is a move discussion in progress which affects this page. Please participate at Talk:Eurasian Eagle-owl - Requested move and not in this talk page section. Thank you.  —RM bot 15:30, 12 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Move discussion in progress

message: There is a move discussion in progress which affects this page. Please participate at Talk:Eurasian Eagle-Owl - Requested move and not in this talk page section. Thank you.  —RM bot 13:30, 20 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Move discussion in progress
Talk:Fraser's eagle-owl

message: There is a move discussion in progress which affects this page. Please participate at Talk:Eurasian Eagle-owl - Requested move and not in this talk page section. Thank you.  —RM bot 15:30, 12 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Move discussion in progress

message: There is a move discussion in progress which affects this page. Please participate at Talk:Eurasian Eagle-Owl - Requested move and not in this talk page section. Thank you.  —RM bot 13:30, 20 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Move discussion in progress
Talk:Shelley's eagle-owl

message: There is a move discussion in progress which affects this page. Please participate at Talk:Eurasian Eagle-owl - Requested move and not in this talk page section. Thank you.  —RM bot 15:30, 12 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Move discussion in progress

message: There is a move discussion in progress which affects this page. Please participate at Talk:Eurasian Eagle-Owl - Requested move and not in this talk page section. Thank you.  —RM bot 13:30, 20 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Move discussion in progress
Talk:Barred eagle-owl

message: There is a move discussion in progress which affects this page. Please participate at Talk:Eurasian Eagle-owl - Requested move and not in this talk page section. Thank you.  —RM bot 15:30, 12 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Move discussion in progress

message: There is a move discussion in progress which affects this page. Please participate at Talk:Eurasian Eagle-Owl - Requested move and not in this talk page section. Thank you.  —RM bot 13:30, 20 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Move discussion in progress
Talk:Brian Copeland

message: I'll do some cleanup of the article, after reviewing the references included within the article and reviewing Brian's web site.  I listen to him on KGO (AM) from time to time, and have also mailed him for permission to post a publicity still.  Note that I don't know him, so there's no conflict of interest.  I listen to KGO often, so often update pages related to their on-air talent.  -FeralDruid 20:06, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Hmm.  According to the upload wizard, the image would have to be released to the public domain and made available for derivative works.  What a pain.  Not bothering with the image for now.  -FeralDruid 23:11, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Cleanup
File talk:National Geographic - King Tut face.jpg

message: *I added fair use rationales for the only pages where the image was truly relevant.  I removed the image from the pages where it was not necessary or really had nothing to do with the article and it's discussion.  I also removed the "speedy deletion" caption from the three pages where the image remains.  Hopefully the new rationales are sufficient enough.--Gth0824 20:06, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
Talk:Cloud-forest pygmy owl

message: According to the article, "There are only an estimated 2,500-9,999 birds left." This range is bizarrely precise. Presumably a reference reported something like "less than 10,000." Converting this to "up to 9,999" is awkward and misleading. If there's a source for the number remaining, please cite it, along with the date. Pburka (talk) 03:34, 19 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  9,999?
Talk:Message Signaled Interrupts

message: This should have more detail. For example it should show the format of the information written and should explain how the appropriate interrupt handlers are identified and how the LAPIC/processor routes execution to the interrupt handlers. It should give an example of multiple interrupts for a single device.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.71.194.228 (talk) 14:28, 5 March 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Hello!  Some might argue that adding such kind of information would turn an article into a manual, but I agree that adding such infomation would actually benefit this article.  I might come back to your suggestion at some point in time. — Dsimic (talk | contribs) 23:08, 11 March 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Detail
Talk:Ketupa

message: :The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. 
The result of the move request was: Moved. (closed by non-admin page mover)  Silikonz💬 00:14, 13 February 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Fish owl →  – IOC 13.1 moved 9 species from Bubo to this genus. Of the 12 species now placed here, 8 have "eagle-owl" in their common name and none of these normally eat fish. I propose that this article is moved to the genus name Ketupa. Aa77zz (talk) 15:55, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

text: Support, though the redirect and explanation will be needed. SilverTiger12 (talk) 14:11, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

text: Support Jimfbleak - talk to me? 14:57, 10 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 6 February 2023
Talk:Buffy fish owl

message: Attention, the wikilink bubo brings the voice of the swelling of the lymph nodes and not to the voice of the genre. --KrovatarGERO (talk) 09:28, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wikilink Bubo 

message: in relation to your revert, the current modern assessment is that Ketupa is not a genus separate from Bubo. This is based on DNA analysis. As a result, several later sources call this owl (and other fish owls) Bubo ketupu, see: , , or . Eostrix (talk) 12:18, 12 November 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Both BirdLife International in the 2016 Red List assessment AND authors in the Handbook of the Birds of the World recognise Ketupa ketupu as valid Latin name for the species, see https://www.hbw.com/species/buffy-fish-owl-ketupa-ketupu !! -- BhagyaMani (talk) 13:30, 12 November 2019 (UTC)
replies: text:  I'm saying Bubo ketupu and Ketupa ketupu are both valid - some sources have Bubo (e.g. ones I listed above), so have Ketupa, and some have both. Eostrix (talk) 14:34, 12 November 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: In taxonomy, only ONE name is valid, and other published names are synonyms. -- BhagyaMani (talk) 16:04, 12 November 2019 (UTC)
replies: text:  In this particular case, Ketupa was previously the single valid accepted name. However, more recent DNA analysis shows that Ketupa is invalid, see:  - "species formerly placed in genus Ketupa", or : "Until recently, fish owls were grouped under the genus Ketupa. However, recent DNA research has shown that for reasons of paraphyly it is better to include  this  genus  together  with Scotopelia  and Nyctea  in Bubo.  Former Ketupa  species,  Brown Fish  Owl, Tawny  Fish  Owl B flavipes  and  Buffy Fish  Owl  B  ketupu  cluster  as  close  relatives  of Asian Bubo  species  like  Spot-bellied  Eagle-Owl B   nipalensis and Barred Eagle-Owl B   sumatranu". Eostrix (talk) 17:47, 12 November 2019 (UTC)

text: It often happens that people see what they want to see. The publication by Omote et al. (2013) clearly place Buffy Fish Owl in the Ketupa clade. Since the IUCN Red List assessors in 2016, i.e. 3 years later, kept on recognising this genus as the valid one for the species, we cannot state in this page that both genera are valid. -- BhagyaMani (talk) 18:37, 12 November 2019 (UTC)
replies: text:  No, I am sorry, but in this case we have some sources placing this bird in Bubo and others placing it in Ketupa. The correct thing is for us to reflect both. Eostrix (talk) 08:43, 13 November 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ketupa ketupu vs. Bubo ketupu
Talk:American football on Thanksgiving

message: With respect to college football, this article currently states: (emphasis mine)
:Other prominent college football rivalries that take place over Thanksgiving weekend include:
Games on the Friday or Saturday shouldn't count as "football on Thanksgiving", just as the Sunday NFL games aren't listed.
This content should be moved to Rivalry week (college football) and linked to from this article's college football section.
PK-WIKI (talk) 05:32, 28 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Thanksgiving vs. Thanksgiving weekend
Talk:Tears to Tiara: Earth's Wreath

message: I was under the impression that remakes should be considered separate games, and this is clearly a remake when you look at the jump from the original's remedial 2D ( http://youtube.com/watch?v=WYkW892s-wQ ) to this version's next-gen 3D ( http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/9/90/Tears_to_Tiara_%28Battle%29.jpg ) -GR 20:14, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Category:PlayStation_3-only_games is clear on the subject. It has a clear answer as to what belongs there. 
Video games in this category have been or will be released exlusively on the PlayStation 3, and are not available for purchase or download on other video game consoles or personal computers. The only exception to this rule is when a game has been ported from the arcade directly to the PlayStation 3.
Notice how "extra bells, whistles, and ribbons" are't an exception? New graphics are nice. It doesn't make it a new game however. More to the point one of the references refers to the game as a port. You have yet to provide a credible source of any kind labeling it as a "remake."Sima Yi 22:20, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Should this be marked PlayStation 3-only?
Talk:Fullen Gaels GAA

message: What county is  Fullen Gaels in Warwickshire GAA or Lancashire GAA(Gnevin 20:35, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: County
Talk:The New York Times Company

message: I would like to see some imput on the views taken by the NYTC's newspapers on the Mideast Conflict. 67.68.65.192 (talk) 10:30, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Mideast Conflict

message: Spammer User:David J Johnson refuses to provide a source that indicates minority shareholder is the controller of the New York Times and is stepping near violation of 3 revert rule as well as conflict of interest. Ferociouslettuce (talk) 22:49, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: This is the wrong place to make this request and please do not make accusations of "Spammer", or conflict of interest. I have reverted your edits with a proper explanation that your edit of Chairman was incorrect and re-inserted the correct Chairman. The article mentions the majority shareholder, who is not a key executive of the company. Thank you, David J Johnson (talk) 22:54, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Page Protect Request

message: Meredith Kopit Levien will succeed Mark Thompson as president and chief executive officer, effective Sept. 8. She will join The Times Company's board and Mr. Thompson will step down as an officer and director of The Times Company (source). Can an editor please update these pages appropriately?
I should note, I am submitting this request on behalf of The New York Times Company as part of my work at Beutler Ink. I've submitted similar requests at Talk:Meredith Kopit Levien and Talk:Mark Thompson (media executive), and I've disclosed my COI on all talk pages.
Thanks! Inkian Jason (talk) 14:54, 22 July 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: –MJL ‐Talk‐☖ 08:31, 9 September 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  President and CEO 

message: Concern is the compromised vitaè on sources of information that have become valueless under Wikipedia. Therefore, I’ve had to go elsewhere for reliability 66.74.145.39 (talk) 19:00, 22 December 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi! Could you clarify your concern?   Atomic putty? Rien!  17:43, 12 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Donate 2021 

message: The history section jumps from the founding in 1851 to some minor acquisitions over 100 years later in the 90s. Where's all the history? I'm not an expert but NYT has been a highly influential news outlet for longer than just the last 30 years. 2607:FEA8:8600:34F:C0D4:264D:BD81:B571 (talk) 16:40, 27 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gaping hole in the history section.
Talk:Selective logging

message: Its a simple redirect page for those of us who refer to this term and have learnt this term as "Selective logging." When I search for that term, wikipedia does not immediately show that I should instead be looking for "Selective cutting", instead it prevelantly lists "forestry" and "logging" articles.
There should not be a problem with maintaining a redirect article page.
Please do not delete this page.
Sincerely,
Avkrules 20:19, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Do Not Delete: Argument

message: In the New jersey educational system, this term is analagous to High Grading, which is a term unmentioned here. Is it possible to link this article specifically to: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Selection_cutting#High-Grading
Avkrules 20:48, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Real definition for redirect
Talk:Long-tufted screech owl

message: This section reads like original research. While it is well referenced, the references support the facts presented, not the arguments. Are there reliable sources discussing this topic, or is this an original essay? Pburka (talk) 23:03, 14 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Conflicting name section 

message: The previous "Scientific name and conflicting name" section of this article had been sitting with a "possible original research" template since June 2014 and had no substantial changes since then. Its author used a University of Arizona IP address, lending credence to the "original research" idea; perhaps it was written for a zoology class? No other edits have been made from that IP since January 12, 2010 when that section was written. I have distilled the section into three short paragraphs. However, I have retained the original but hidden it in case anyone wants to add back any of its excruciating detail. It's after the end of article. Craigthebirder (talk) 15:00, 11 March 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Major revision of March 11, 2022
Talk:Mubahala

message: The explanation of the Christian-Muslim relation/argument at the Incident of Mubahala is very confusing here, I cannot understand what is written. Boleslaw (talk) 12:00, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

message: Hello.I am going to improve this article so that it won't have the problems labeled at the top of the article. I would provided it with some sources and so I will have to delete some parts for which there is not valid source. I hope it is OK with you. I would be happy to use your advice too.  Hadi.anani (talk) 13:00, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: the article is poorly referenced. You can help by fixing the current references and by finding new ones. Mhhossein (talk) 13:20, 14 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Improving The article
Talk:The Religious Institute on Sexual Morality, Justice, and Healing

message: This organization has a new logo: https://scontent-lga3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/21432723_10155711133647628_118964744837354635_n.png?oh=8e2f0de80e339c7d14bc27ea8531856e&oe=5A74D540 and updated information on their website: www.religiousinstitute.org
ReligiousInstitute (talk) 16:33, 27 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Comments
Talk:Aimpoint

message: I do not think that the Aimpoint article should contain a listing of Aimpoint products. Consider the similar pages: EOTech, Trijicon, ELCAN - none of these include product listings. I would like to work toward some sort of consensus on this issue, as I have now removed the product listing twice and do not want to create an edit war. I am not an experienced Wikipedia editor, so do not know which policies to reference, but I recall instructions that product and company pages should avoid sounding like an advertisement, and I think that such a comprehensive enumeration of products verges into that territory. Onionize-the-workers (talk) 23:14, 4 April 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree. Since it was re-added without comment I have reverted the edit per WP:NOTCATALOG and WP:BRD. It is excessive and not encyclopedic per the guideline. Fountains of Bryn Mawr (talk) 02:03, 5 April 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Product listing in article 

message: :The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. 
The result of the move request was: moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) Lennart97 (talk) 20:52, 20 June 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Aimpoint AB →  – "AB" is similar to Inc (U.S.) or Limited (UK), and is usually only included in article titles as disambiguation when the common name would be confusing (e.g. Apple Inc. to differentiate from Apple. However, there is nothing which sounds like "Aimpoint", the closest thing being aiming point which is sufficiently different to not cause confusion. Elshad (talk) 14:13, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 13 June 2021
Talk:ITL MARS

message: Whats the point of an invisible laser on a sighting device? --24.23.178.162 (talk) 05:04, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Infrared is clearly seen with night vision devices based on starlight scope technology. Various night vision goggles for example. That would be the point. Radioactive Grandpa (talk) 03:32, 19 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Infrared?
Talk:Philippine hawk-owl

message: Can anyone expand on the use of the word Kuwago? Best I can find is that it's the Filipino word for owl. Does it have any specific reference to this group of owls?
grungaloo (talk) 23:47, 10 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Use of Kuwago 

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. MER-C 19:36, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: The removed content was merged in from Philippine Hawk Owl. MER-C 19:36, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Possible copyright problem