lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Rice–Poindexter case

message: There are quite a few run-on sentences, especially in the last four sections.  I fixed the majority of them but there are still a few awkward sentences that should probably be cleaned up. I am at a loss as to how to do that on these.  Any help??
Also, I noticed that there is just about no sources quoted, including for the two direct quotes I saw.  Can anyone find the sources? Fundamentaldan 22:20, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Run-on Sentences and Sources

message: A call was made to 9-1-1 reporting a probable rape at a vacant house near 28th and Ohio Street. Patrolmen Michael Lamson, and five other members of the Omaha Police Department
The call could have not been a 9-1-1 in 1970. It was not available in Omaha in 1970. Perhaps best stated to be a call to police.219.93.174.100 00:04, 28 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Last weeks omaha reader magazine refers to the 911 call.  However in the records of Stone v. Powell, it is refered to as a police call, not 9-1-1.  I don't know anything about the inavailability of 911, though.  do you have any sources?  I think the change works, though, and I have made the change. Smmurphy 00:37, 28 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: August 17

message: To explain my reversion of December 10, 2005 - The racial make-up of the jury is pertinent to the case, as is the fact that the black juror was not convinced of the duo's guilt, accepting the outcome of the trial only with assurance that the death penalty was not sought.  This was a highly charged case, and race mattered. Smmurphy(Talk) 07:06, 10 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Jury make-up 

message: The wording in some areas suggests a bias towards the innocence of the defendants. Take note of the last sentence of the first paragraph, and the "Controversy over evidence" section (the house "mysteriously" burned to the ground). 130.101.164.170 20:59, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. It seems whomever wrote this article was actively involved with these two. Equinox137 04:55, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

text: I agree there are NPOV issues. Also there is much material that needs sourcing. --Parkwells (talk) 02:58, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: NPOV

message: In reference the statement "After COINTELPRO became public (in 1977) and the Freedom of Information Act was passed (in 1978), Rice and Poindexter were able to access their FBI files. Each file was over a thousand pages long, though they only received small portions upon request" - how do we know their FBI files were "thousands" of pages long?  There's absolutely no sourcing for this. . . Equinox137 04:55, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: COINTELPRO

message: It would be useful to have more facts for perspective - who is on the state parole board, how many people?  How do the people who recommended parole differ from the Board of Pardons who won't consider it?--Parkwells (talk) 02:27, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: More data on Parole issues
Talk:Optical burst switching

message: Not much to wikify here; the article is unfortunately very self-contained. Tom 00:04, 28 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: wikify

message: How do you define the "Switching time" for the Optical Cross Connects. The switching time of the order of milli-seconds appears very High. --Pushkal (talk) 04:14, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: switching time

message: The entry with the name "Optical burst swicthing" should be discarded, since it is an almost exact copy of the entry with the name "Optical Burst Switching", and the latter is more accurate.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ngarcia (talk • contribs) 21:03, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: merge

message: This article provides virtually no context or frame work for its material. It reads like it is copy-pasted out of the middle of some text. It should provide some background of optical networking, dynamic circuit networks, and OBS networking before diving into optical cross connects etc. I think a complete discard and rewrite is in order. Kbrose (talk) 15:44, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Context

message: On further examination, the article contains sections that are copied verbatim from published papers, see OBS FOR GENNEXT OPTICAL NETWORKS. All such material must be deleted. Kbrose (talk) 15:55, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Copyright violations

message: Added section on advantage of OBS over OPS and OCS on Jan 8, 2011. Would appreciate if those who are still actively researching OBS would add some sections on specific areas such as aggregation, contention resolution. Many people use Wikipedia as a starting point in their research, this is a great way to inform people about OBS.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Meshraj (talk • contribs) 19:55, 8 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Advantages of OBS over OPS and OCS
Talk:Jerome Sacca Kina Guezere

message: This man is dead.
:Add that to the article? siafu 00:12, 28 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:DTN (company)

message: September 28, 2005: 
Requesting that this page be renamed to the expanded "Data Transmission Network" to disambiguate from the TLA "DTN" which has other uses, for example, Delay Tolerant Networking.
----
:Add *Support or *Oppose followed by an optional one sentence explanation, then sign your vote with ~~~~
===Discussion===
:Add any additional comments
Move Done - Trevor MacInnis (Talk | Contribs) 16:16, 20 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Requested move

message: :Add any additional comments
Move Done - Trevor MacInnis (Talk | Contribs) 16:16, 20 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Discussion
Talk:Woodchopping

message: The article should say which countries this takes place in. CalJW 00:21, 28 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Partially done. More information about regions within these countries would be welcome. --Erri4a -  Say what? 13:35, 24 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Untitled 

message: I've added some more info about the Basque version of this event - and thumbnailed the picture which was sitting across the page ; ) But does anyone have any info on this strange reference to Arsichofa? I can't find a reference either to the place or the two people mentioned anywhere on the web which is odd. Akerbeltz (talk) 01:57, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Arsichofa

message: The pic of "chopped oak wood" is almost completely of sawn small rounds - with a handful of split rounds at the base. 121.75.136.111 (talk) 21:46, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: suma rongi

message: "Wood chopping" is a colloquial expression for time wasting or distraction, a theatrical term from the 19th century when pastoral romances were common, and a few extras would come on and do some rustic tasks as a filler activity while the scene was changed (or the speaking parts drank beer)  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.137.63.170 (talk) 09:05, 13 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Colloquialism 
Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/September 29, 2005

message: The "recently featured" line for this article (and the next couple, too) is missing Miles Davis. BrainyBroad 00:30, 28 September 2005 (UTC)

message: Admin, please replace Image:Panzer1 ausf A.jpeg on the second line of the page with Image:PanzerV Panther D.jpg.  The former image was deleted and the latter image is a reasonable substitute.
Additionally, can you tell me why these old pages are still protected?  They haven't received any edits or discussion in a long time.  Thanks.  --Tim4christ17 talk 01:25, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Admin, please edit

message: Tried and failed to find free image of German WWII tanks in action during Blitzkrieg. Please remove dead link to deleted image. Thanks. Carcharoth 00:24, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. Cheers. --MZMcBride 01:06, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dead link removal request
Talk:Charles Richter

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. (non-admin closure) Dantus21 (talk) 04:18, 18 January 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Charles Francis Richter →  – Charles Richter already redirects here, so there is no reason to disambiguate using his middle name. Therefore, WP:MIDDLENAME needs to be satisfied. Per the ngram and the number of Google Results (with Francis, 29,000 results; with F., 72,600 results; without either, 113,000 results), it seems "Charles Richter" is most commonly used. That, combined with WP:CONCISION, seems to make simply "Charles Richter" the best article title. Cerebral726 (talk) 15:46, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

text: Note: WikiProject United States has been notified of this discussion. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 21:14, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

text: Note: WikiProject Biography has been notified of this discussion. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 21:15, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

text: Note: WikiProject Physics has been notified of this discussion. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 21:17, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 11 January 2024
Talk:Niger State

message: Is Niger a "Sharia State" as the BBC correspondent Linda Pressly seems to think (see http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/4220038.stm) ?—iFaqeer (Talk to me!) 00:49, 28 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Should we have a category for the states in Nigeria that have "Sharia" as state law?—iFaqeer (Talk to me!) 00:58, 28 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Personally, I think categories with 3 or more properties, such as "American blind jazz pianists", don't really serve the purpose of a category anymore (to be able to find something when you have forgotten its exact name). "Nigerian Shariah States" would be such a category. In such cases, a list is more convenient, in my opinion. Riki 17:01, 28 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  "[[Shariah]] States"
Talk:New Orleans VooDoo

message: The stuff under the "Resurrection" section really doesn't belong here.  This is an encyclopedia article, not a game-by-game message board or place for play-by-play.  The sort of material contained there belongs in 2012 New Orleans VooDoo season if it belongs at all, not here in the main article.  75.201.123.178 (talk) 22:22, 19 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Resurrection 
Talk:Money-back guarantee

message: I typed in "Refund", expecting to find out about tax refunds.  Instead, I was redirected to "Money back guarantee".  I later discovered that what I was really looking for was under "Tax refund".  Now I wonder:  Should "Refund" be a simple re-direct to "Money back guarantee" or should it be a disambiguation page that directs to either "Money back guarantee" or to "Tax refund".  I vote for the latter.  Joe 01:12, 28 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Redirect or disambiguation? 

message: Why clientele can take people's money from their bank account without a cardholders concerned? 105.252.212.111 (talk) 19:46, 23 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why clientele can take people's money from thier bank account without a cardholders concerned?
Talk:Refund

message: I typed in "Refund", expecting to find out about tax refunds.  Instead, I was redirected to "Money back guarantee".  I later discovered that what I was really looking for was under "Tax refund".  Now I wonder:  Should "Refund" be a simple re-direct to "Money back guarantee" or should it be a disambiguation page that directs to either "Money back guarantee" or to "Tax refund".  I vote for the latter.  Joe 01:12, 28 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed and have turned the redirect into a disambiguation page. Sargdub (talk) 00:15, 16 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Redirect or disambiguation?
Talk:To the Inhabitants of America

message: Does anyone have the wording of the actual letter that they can post here? I clicked on this link from the Benedict Arnold article expecting to read it. It would be helpful if someone can post it. Thanks! Maltmomma (chat)  01:16, 28 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Er... look a little closer. :) Dmcdevit·t 01:59, 28 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Oops! Wasn't looking over there at Wikisource. Thanks for opening my eyes! ;o) Maltmomma (chat)  02:18, 28 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Letter

message: This article says that Arnold published an open letter dated October 7, 1780 that was published October 11, 1780 in New York by the Royal Gazette.  And the article cites the same letter, except it describes the citation as having been from the London Chronicle, 14 November 1780.  What is the deal?  Was it published in New York in October then republished in London in November?  If so, then it seems like the citation should be of the original publication.  Also, if it wasn't published in New York by the Royal Gazette until the 11th of October, then why was it dated October 7?  Is that when it was written? - Shaheenjim (talk) 17:20, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Date
Talk:Charlack, Missouri

message: St. Ann Now Patrols Charlack. New Chief.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.88.201.196 (talk) 20:58, 30 April 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Police Department
Talk:Basmala/Archive 1

message: The discussion above seems to have run its course, and served whatever purpose it was capable of.  What I have said basically boils down to the single sentence "Basmala is not an 'alternative pronunciation' of Bismillah, nor was it ever intended as such, but is rather the NAME of the WHOLE PHRASE whose first word is Bismillah".  Delete the above or move it to talk archive page? AnonMoos 02:19, 21 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines suggests either archiving or refactoring, not deleting. Something for the principals in the discussion to decide among themselves? –Hajor 02:56, 21 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Archive, please. Thanks. TheProphetess 19:06, 24 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Delete the above or move it to archive?
Talk:Shapurji Saklatvala

message: This is a very short page, as i've only just started it!
I'm going to sift through a biography written by his daughter and condense the important information into a relatively small profile, while using CPB sources also.
px
Was the British Battalion the "Saklavatla" or "Saklatvala"  or "Saklatava" Battalion?--Streona (talk) 09:11, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Category talk:Roman generals

message: The category as it stands causes problems because it contains both Byzantine and Roman generals, but is listed under Militaryof ancient Rome - Byzantine was not ancient Rome. I will:
*create new :Category:Ancient Roman generals category - DONE
*Make :Category:Ancient Roman generals a subcat of Roman generals - DONE
*Make :Category:Ancient Roman generals a subcat of :Category:Military of ancient Rome - DONE
*Remove :Category:Roman generals from subcat of  :Category:Military of ancient Rome - DONE
*Populate :Category:Ancient Roman generals and :Category:Byzantine generals with articles from :Category:Roman generals
- PocklingtonDan 19:49, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Going to split category Roman generals
Talk:ECRUSH

message: The site was completely deactivated by Hearst on August 1, 2011.  All old eCRUSH/eSPIN links now redirect to Seventeen.com.  Someone might therefore want to update this page.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.120.204.241 (talk) 06:48, 5 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  eCRUSH Is Now Defunct 
Talk:Poza Rica

message: hey i need to know adout this place--67.77.77.196 01:51, 28 September 2005 (UTC)
Talk:US Airways Group

message: For discussions on the merger with the US Airways Group, check the talk page for US Airways, where discussion on what to do about the merger is occurring. Airline 01:53, 28 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Merger Discussion
Talk:Gemstone File

message: I stumbled upon this article while researching the alleged "assassin" Thane Cesar, and find that it reads far too much like an advertisement simply delineating and espousing this theory as fact, whereas it should make abundantly clear that this is a narrow conspiracy theory that should not be treated as valid. 
I agree that this is a compelling article that presents a technically possible scenario, but the author failed to adequately present it for what it is: a far-fetched theory. I do not consider myself an "expert" in this field (whatever an expert might be I do not precisely know). I would recommend a complete overhaul and revision, with concise explanation of the conspiracy allegations. If a reader is so interested, they can find more in external links and books on this subject of questionable importance. Juvo415 (talk) 14:14, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Barter

message: This site suffers from previous editors not realizing that different fields of science use sometimes different definitions for the same term (in this case barter). This site mixes the definitions of barter used in economics and anthropology (or economic anthropology) together. This results in text that is often inconsistent. 
Generally speaking in economics, especially microeconomics, barter always defined broadly as (Mankiw 2018, Principles of Economics 8th pp 605.): "the exchange of one good or service for another—to obtain the things they [people] need."
However, anthropology has different definition of barter. In anthropology, people talk about barter only if it is exchange of goods without any significant social ties.
For example, anthropologist Gregory (1982) in his book 'Gift and Commodities' offered this dichotomy:
"Commodity exchange [barter] is an exchange of alienable objects between people who are in a state of reciprocal independence that establishes a quantitative relationship between the objects exchanged ... Gift exchange is an exchange of inalienable objects between people who are in a state of reciprocal dependence that establishes a qualitative relationship between the transactors."
There are similar arguments in Mauss The Gift. In any case it is crystal clear the two definitions above are fundamentally different since economists simply apply barter as a label for both barter and gift exchange whereas anthropology has need for more narrower definition of barter. 
This apparently must have confused whoever originally written this page. 
I have attempted to reduce the confusion by some small edits. However, they are still not sufficient. I propose that whoever reads this and has sufficient time creates another subsection called 'barter in anthropology' (there is already subsection called economic theory). I propose that the summary is kept short just explaining the origin of term of a barter. Next subsections of this site should be devoted to further discussion of barter from economic and anthropological perspective. 1muflon1 (talk) 21:47, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I disagree here. In economics barter is viewed as a spot transaction arranged on a principle of exchange of a fixed quantity of goods (or to stretch it, future goods). That is the same definition as anthropologists use. It does exist, but mostly in situations of long distance trade between strangers, rather than as the basis of a system.Boynamedsue (talk) 08:43, 15 August 2023 (UTC)

text: The difference in the definitions is "qualitative", gift exchange does not create a fixed price for exchange, it is more like the creation of a social obligation. This is not how economists think of barter, the notion of two rational individuals attempting to negotiate the price of a cow in chickens.Boynamedsue (talk) 09:42, 15 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Page mixes together different definitions of barter.
Talk:Daniel Finch, 2nd Earl of Nottingham

message: If Daniel Finch died in 1730, how could he have had a son born, John, in 1745? And what happened to that son? --Anonymous
:There is something very wrong with the dates of birth given for his children.  I am not sure if this is vandalism or what.  The date of birth of his son William Finch was given as 1731, but his second son William Finch (article just created) became an ambassador in 1720.  I have therefore deleted this date.  William's parents were married in 1685, so that children would be likely to be born in the 1690s.  The error may come from  and .  Peterkingiron (talk) 16:33, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: William Finch's birth was 18 Jan 1691: see .  Peterkingiron (talk) 16:49, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: dates

message: Recently the files below were uploaded and they appear to be relevant to this article and not currently used by it. If you're interested and think they would be a useful addition, please feel free to include any of them.
File:Daniel Finch, 2nd Earl of Nottingham and 7th Earl of Winchilsea by Jonathan Richardson.jpg
File:Daniel Finch, 2nd Earl of Nottingham and 7th Earl of Winchilsea by Sir Godfrey Kneller, Bt.jpg
I think the first one may make a superior lead image. Dcoetzee 02:21, 4 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  New files
Talk:Israeli-occupied territories

message: Is there a reason Israel isn't listed in the "Claimed by" list for East Jersualem? Lebanon and Syria are doubled-up in "Claimed by" and "Currently administered by". I didn't want to add in case there was a specific reason, but shouldn't Israel be there too because it claims East Jersualem as part of Israel? Yr Enw (talk) 21:16, 25 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  East Jerusalem in the Overview table 

message: The lead says the military governorate was dissolved in 1981, the cited source doesnt seem appropriate (would need a secondary source rather than a UN report).
Also, Sara Roy describes the formation of the civil administration in 1981:  DMH223344 (talk) 00:19, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dissolution of Military governorate
Talk:Sony Cyber-shot DSC-P32

message: The Sony DSC-P32 is what I've been using as a digital camera for a little over two years.  It is my camera that is shown in the pictures in the main article.  And I've been pretty happy with it since that time.  I know 3.2 megapixels isn't state of the art anymore, but for my needs it makes nice pictures, even 8x10s.  And if you look at just about all of the pictures I've taken and submitted to Wikipedia, most of them were taken by this camera.
JesseG 02:40, 28 September 2005 (UTC)
Talk:Listing

message: OK to put in Wiktionary if linking to "Type-in program" is preserved.
Removing the "WikiProject Business & Economics" template and putting it on the talk page of Listing (finance), since this is now a disambiguation page and Listing (finance) seems to be the article for which it was intended.  Bassington 20:24, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: I wonder whether we would need an entry for listings of television programme listings? In the United Kingdom, it is quite common to refer to lists of television programmes, as in the Radio Times, as listings? ACEOREVIVED (talk) 19:54, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Listings of television programmes
Talk:Basic calculus equations and formulas

message: This page is still a work in progress
:*Alright, that's fine. Just be sure to follow the Wikipedia standard. And make sure you sign your name after things like this. Kushboy 02:57, 28 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: This page duplicates from Table of derivatives.--MarSch 15:05, 31 October 2005 (UTC)

message: Might you add a section of the fundemental theorem of calculus?  Or is there a better place for that? 
--Karm Locke 01:52, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fundemental Theorem 

message: As MarSch says, this is already treated in Table of derivatives and the pages linked of Lists of integrals. I intend to check whether this page contains anything in addition and it into a redirect. Anyone have a problem with that? -- Jitse Niesen (talk) 00:16, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No protests, so I did it. -- Jitse Niesen (talk) 00:52, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Duplication