lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Loch Ness Monster in popular culture

message: I fixed the Other section because it really sucked dik-dik --71.101.144.25 (talk) 22:28, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Other section

message: I have removed the reference to Sam from Rayman 2 as the game makes very clear Sam is a snake, and no-one to my knowledge has ever proposed Nessie could be a snake. He even talks with the cartoon stereotypical extended "ssss" pronunciation for s's in words, such as "Ssssensational!".  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.167.100.93 (talk) 17:34, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Sam from Rayman 2

message: Hello to anyone watching this page.  I recently made a lot of changes, most of which should be obvious to all as improvements.  However, I did remove a lot of content, on the grounds that it was barely, if at all, related to the Loch Ness Monster. If anyone would like to discuss any of this, please feel free to do so here. Regards, ClovisPt (talk) 03:53, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Recent changes

message: Based on the idea that this article is not intended to be a dumping ground for all trivial references to the Loch Ness Monster, I have been reverting recent additions of content.  For example, I feel that this article doesn't need to list every time a single episode of a TV show deals in some way with Nessie, nor does it need original research relating to minor instances of pop culture taking inspiration from stories of the Loch Ness Monster.  However, I understand that I don't own the article, and I don't really feel like being the sole editor who edits with this understanding.  Therefore, I would appreciate everyone throwing their two cents in on what they feel the limits of this article should be.  Regards, ClovisPt (talk) 00:03, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: You're spot-on, as far as I'm concerned. carl bunderson (talk) (contributions) 23:08, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Ditto. And don't forget people that anything you write in Wikipedia can be deleted if it's not verifiable from reliable sources - you need to provide references for everything. FlagSteward (talk) 00:00, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Discussion needed 

message: There was an episode of Lupin III with a plot about hunting plesiosaurs basically identical to that of the Gargoyles episode mentioned, though it was written decades earlier.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.207.23.59 (talk) 21:06, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lupin III 

message: http://zootycoon.wikia.com/wiki/Loch_Ness_Monster surely zoo tycoon's nessie should be in the games section, it's referenced by name  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:306:CC28:8E90:E83D:6807:54F1:B8CC (talk) 21:27, 23 December 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  zoo tycoon - dino digs
Talk:Sikorski–Mayski agreement

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 section. 
----
:Sikorski–Mayski agreement →  – Standard capitalisation. Move over redirect. Colonies Chris (talk) 19:25, 14 December 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: This is a contested technical request (permalink). Vaticidalprophet 04:37, 16 December 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 16 December 2021
Talk:The Avenues (shopping mall)

message: Have removed the section "Renovation". It is copy/pasted in its entirety from the referenced source, which is a copyright web site.
The other sections have no references, so may be taken from copyright material, but, being a list of stores, would probably be the same regardless of source, so I have left these in.
The section "External Links" has been removed, as it contained only a link to the Mall's web site, which is purely advertising. - KoolerStill (talk) 12:20, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  COPYVIOS
Talk:Barry Clark (EastEnders)

message: Ref for him and Colin at RAIN*the*ONE BAM 03:33, 23 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ref 
Talk:Light-weight process

message: In Solaris, at least, the LWP and kernal thread are different entities (albelt sharing a 1-1 relationship).  In early versions of Unix, the 1-1 mapping does not even hold.  Should this be reflected in the article?
What would be the difference between a thread and a LWP in Solaris?
Giatorta 13:11, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

message: There is another meaning of lightweight processes that's not mentioned here. Essentially, these are user-space threads that don't share memory. See Erlang. 
Bartosz (talk) 22:41, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: LWP's in user space
Talk:United States of America Mathematical Talent Search

message: I removed the prod.  This is definitely notable in the field of mathematics education.    
The NSA sponsorship alone would make it notable, but this is one of the few national initiatives to deal with talented high-school math students in an intelligent fashion.--OinkOink 17:53, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Who the heck prodded this? If they think they are able to tell what's notable in the math arena, they're confused.
Seriously though, let's work on this sometime.
--Heero Kirashami (talk) 22:44, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Prod
Talk:Soviet–Japanese Joint Declaration of 1956

message: Removed the following:
===Two paper knives' episode===
October 18, 1956, Ichirō Kōno (:ja:河野一郎), Minister of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries, watched out Khrushchev's paper knife. It was big, beautiful and sharp with Lenin's picture. Kōno asked Khrushchev to give it to him. Khrushchev generously gave it to him. After the negotiation, Kōno gave it to PM Ichirō Hatoyama, as he said to Hatoyama, "I got Khrushchev's dangerous paper knife,  so I give it to you, Prime Minister, instead of the Islands". On Hatoyama's dialy too, "Got paper knife from"鳩山薫 (Kaoru Hatoyama, Ichirō's wife), 鳩山一郎 (Ichirō Hatoyama) "鳩山一郎・薫日記 下巻 鳩山薫篇 (Hatoyama Ichirō - Kaoru Nikki vol.2 Hatoyama Kaoru Hen)" Chūōkōron-Shinsha 2005 (Japanese) . The next day's negotiation, Kōno asked one more paper knife to himself. Khrushchev took one out of too many paper knives' cabinet. Khrushchev got Kōno to think "Touché".:ja:豊田穣 (Jō Toyoda) "英才の家系 鳩山一郎と鳩山家の人々 (Eisaino Kakei - Hatoyama Ichirō To Hatoyamakeno Hitobito)" Kōdansha 1996 (Japanese) 
Regards, -- 李博杰  | —Talk contribs email 11:05, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Relevant?

message: October 18, 1956, Ichirō Kōno (:ja:河野一郎), Minister of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries, watched out Khrushchev's paper knife. It was big, beautiful and sharp with Lenin's picture. Kōno asked Khrushchev to give it to him. Khrushchev generously gave it to him. After the negotiation, Kōno gave it to PM Ichirō Hatoyama, as he said to Hatoyama, "I got Khrushchev's dangerous paper knife,  so I give it to you, Prime Minister, instead of the Islands". On Hatoyama's dialy too, "Got paper knife from"鳩山薫 (Kaoru Hatoyama, Ichirō's wife), 鳩山一郎 (Ichirō Hatoyama) "鳩山一郎・薫日記 下巻 鳩山薫篇 (Hatoyama Ichirō - Kaoru Nikki vol.2 Hatoyama Kaoru Hen)" Chūōkōron-Shinsha 2005 (Japanese) . The next day's negotiation, Kōno asked one more paper knife to himself. Khrushchev took one out of too many paper knives' cabinet. Khrushchev got Kōno to think "Touché".:ja:豊田穣 (Jō Toyoda) "英才の家系 鳩山一郎と鳩山家の人々 (Eisaino Kakei - Hatoyama Ichirō To Hatoyamakeno Hitobito)" Kōdansha 1996 (Japanese) 
Regards, -- 李博杰  | —Talk contribs email 11:05, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Two paper knives' episode

message: Considering USSR is long gone. Russia is successor of RSFSR, not USSR. My guess is the 1956 joint declaration is no longer valid. --208.72.125.2 (talk) 20:50, 15 January 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: WP:NOTAFORUM We don't care what the IP's guess is. Meters (talk) 20:31, 21 January 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is the 1956 joint declaration still valid?
Talk:A23 road

message: The article needs updating to reflect this (I drove along it yesterday, hurrah) but this needs the attention of a person more knowledgeable than I am about this scheme. Any takers please? 82.45.248.177 17:56, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Coulsdon relief road now open 

message: With reference to this statement in the article:
:The A23 road, in its original form, was a major road running between London to Brighton, United Kingdom, originally starting in Fulham on the road now known as A3220. 
It just seems odd that it is here stated the road to Brighton originally started at Fulham, whereas the rest of the article suggests the much more logical starting place of Westminster Bridge Road. I'm puzzled.....cos as far as I'm aware the Brighton Road has always, since the 18th century, and the time of George IV, started at Westminster Bridge, rather than a suburb of west London on the wrong side of the Thames.... Colin4C 21:14, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is this true? 

message: I've deleted false info that the A23 follows the course of the Roman Road from London to Chichester (i.e. Stane Street) for any considerable extent. It only does so for a hundred yards or less in a chicane along a minute part of Kennington Park Road (which IS part of the route of Stane Street) between the south end of Kennington Road and the north end of Brixton Road. Look at any map....(Note: Stane Street equals A3 plus A24 in the London sector). Colin4C 21:40, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Roman Roads 

message: I have removed the assertion that main roads from the centre of London are deemed to start from Charing Cross. The author of that must have been confusing the road numbering scheme with the fact that Charing Cross is reckoned as the centre of London for distance measuring purposes. The A23 couldn't start at Charing Cross anyway because the "2" zone of the road numbering scheme is all south of the Thames. Lonegroover (talk) 21:39, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Start of the A23 

message: Hello. I would like to let you know that I have reduced the amount of major junctions on this article from 31 to 10. Roads4117 (talk) 11:24, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Major junctions
Talk:Laisterdyke Leadership Academy

message: If the school has been the subject of articles in newspapers or magazines, please add those newspaper or magazine articles as references in order to demonstrate that the school is notable. --Eastmain 04:58, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: References

message: In this wiki it is stated in the faculty area that miss Lisa Corrigan is principal on a full time basis this is wholly inaccurate as she left the school after 5 weeks due to personal reasons i will provide evidence for this i hope this gets changed as it is wrong. The evidence is a news report from the t and a showing she left if you dont believe me contact the school or ask one of the 1000 pupils! 82.40.156.145 (talk) 19:52, 28 December 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: as you have not cited reliable sources to back up your request. If you have a reliable source, please include it in your request. Kosack (talk) 22:22, 28 December 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: I fully agree with your decision, but I also note that the section in question is about living people nad has no sources, so I have removed it entirely per WP:BLP. Beeblebrox (talk) 03:08, 29 December 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed, the infobox also lists one of the older names mentioned in the faculty section as the current prinicipal so I've removed that for consistency. Kosack (talk) 08:35, 29 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 28 December 2016 
Talk:Wigner–Weyl transform

message: ------------------------------------------------------------
I believe the original - sign in the definition of the * product  was
superfluous, and did not agree with that of the single PB; 
and so needed to be deleted, together with the sign of the 
n-th power PB kernel, so as to agree with standard
conventions, and with the article on the Moyal product.
Cuzkatzimhut 15:57, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

message: Well, the point is that nobody in his right mind thinks of "Weyl quantization" to actually be Weyl's original 1927 proposal, anymore, after Groenewold's and Kubo's insights (the ħ-dependence of the phase-space kernel functions).  And most understand it as, really, well, the Wigner-Weyl transform. It would be a source of confusion to have a meaningful split:  my best recommendation is to completely  lift this and merge it with the Wigner-Weyl transform article, reserving a short dismissive/reassuring  section on Weyl's dream like the couple of sentences in the introduction of this.
Then, have the remaining included arguably reduplicative info, like the star-product and deformation quantization (which provides the connection to the systematic correction of Weyl's vision) , stay in there, as the heart of the W-W transform is its application to the phase space formulation—beyond the important formal connection to the reps of the Heisenberg group, of course.  
But unless the merge were done thoughtfully, the end result might well look incoherent. This article itself is a flotsam of similar tweaks and merges.  I hope the proposer of the split should highjack the whole article and merge it with the Wigner-Weyl transform one, and the tastefully pare out the reduplicative parts  and uniformize the conventions... Another "cheaper" alternative is to rename this one into  Wigner-Weyl transform, something that should have been done a while ago, so the aliases and links are inherited,  and rearrange the intro, etc... merging the few items of the developing Wigner-Weyl transform article into this!  Lots of work, though, and it is not for me to proffer "unfunded mandates"! Cuzkatzimhut (talk) 14:55, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Split proposal

message: Shouldn't the operation be "-" again instead of "x"?
129.49.88.221 (talk) 19:39, 8 October 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: No. "Again" is unsound. Check for n=1, and then n=3.    Cuzkatzimhut (talk) 20:22, 8 October 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  nth poisson bracket 

message: Would it be worth making explicit the way the Wigner map corresponds to projecting operators onto a particular basis of operators (phase-space point operators)? When I was first trying to learn this subject, the boxed definitions did not seem very motivated, and I think mentioning that these transforms may be derived by finding a basis of operators that makes the wigner map have desired properties may make this article more accessible. Rjones122 (talk) 22:01, 8 May 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Add information about point operators?
Talk:List of ambassadors of the United Kingdom to Russia

message: I have tagged William Fawkener's entry in the list as dubious, because the ODNB biography of Charles Whitworth, 1st Earl Whitworth clearly indicates that he was ambassador until 1800.  Fawkener does not have a biography in it, but googling indicates that he did exist and may have been in Russia at the embassy at the time in question.  This suggests that he may have been secretary to the legation (or such like) and charge d'affaires when Whitworth left.  This matter needs to be resolved.  Peterkingiron (talk) 17:47, 4 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I have removed this tag.  It looks to me as if Fawkener was sent on a short term (perhaps secret) mission, making him a special envoy, not an ambaasador.  He appears to have been a clerk to the Privy Council until at least 1797, but occasionally employed on diplomatic missions.  Peterkingiron (talk) 23:48, 4 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[William Augustus Fawkener]] 

message: An editor who has not had the courtesy to log in so that the rest of can identify him/her has gone through this article changing the style of ambassadors etc to the final title that they held, which will frequently have been awarded AFTER they were ambassador, etc.  This is TOTALLY inappropriate.  The article should use the title by which the person was known while ambassador.  This is the consistent practice with articles such as this.  Though it will be a retrograde step, I will revert the recent changes wholesale unless the article is changed back so that the appropriate titles are used, not later ones.  However, I would appreciate commetns before I do so.  Peterkingiron (talk) 22:49, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recent changes: WARNING
Talk:Call (band)

message: Whats the deal?? Rabidphage 22:25, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Poetic Text?

message: THis whole section was biased, unsourced and inaccurate. i've removed it all and i request whoever wrote it, to go write it again, source it and double check info. Limaj daas 11:10, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: The 2 member sacking section

message: Call (band) was listed as mid importance, and I changed it to low importance.  While a four box ranking table is a bit severe, it does seem that the immediate need for a suitably well-written article on the band Call is low.  This is based in part upon the relatively few mentions in published materials. While Call, as a band with two studio albums, is certainly more important than many other bands that are also ranked "low", it doesn't seem to be of the same importance as the :Arabian Sea article or the article on the town of :Dera Ghazi Khan which are ranked in the "mid" range. --Bejnar (talk) 22:30, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Project importance
Talk:Armadale, West Lothian

message: Here's a thought for any other editors of this page.  If we can find it, how about a mad of Armadale?  Or some pics of the Main Street perhaps?  I may have some I've taken, if not I can take some.  Would this be appropriate or should I wait until the article is a bit bigger? 82.41.207.56 17:23, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Photo

message: I've added a lot of information and a couple pics but I feel the page could probably do with a cleanup.  Anyone got any ideas?  Otherwise I'll just add sections and move stuff around as needed. Admiralross2400 14:13, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Cleanup

message: I'm considering adding a sort paragraph to mention the statistical studies that were done on health in the town as a result of the local industries, since the 80s.  Does anyone have any further information about this? Please contact me if you have any futher details. 4letheia (talk) 23:11, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Health

message: Armadale is nowhere near where it placed on the map on this "article". It's misplaced by 80-100 miles. 
What total garbage wikipedia most often is.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.42.129.146 (talk) 13:23, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The longitude was wrong in the infobox, hence why the map was wrong - the map is autogenerated from the lat/long co-ords.  I have removed the nonsense placement of tags on the article - there is no need for that.  Offending content should just be removed (as I have done) rather than wasting time tagging it then coming here to moan about it. SFC9394 (talk) 21:17, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  MAP IS VERY WRONG!
Talk:The Advancement of Sound Science Coalition

message: I tagged this article because it seemed like something in the tone is "off".  I'm trying to better describe what it is that seems off, but if others disagree, please remove the tag.  The middle part of the article almost seems like it needs to be split into a second article about industry front groups. Justin 18:22, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, I think the merge is a good idea and probably overdue. Unfortunately, there's just not that much interest in these two pages - they've been tagged for awhile. MastCell 16:36, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Inappropriate Tone Tag 

message: A good friend of mine compiled this information before it went missing from the internet several years ago. It discusses the early members of TASSC when Milloy was acting more as a press agent. I also wanted to add that the silicone and cell phone industry have also anted into the "junk science" public relations funding pool long ago. [http ://www.HumanticsFoundation.com/tassc.htm JUNK SCIENCE and TASSC].Junk, like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder. Shalom. Ilena 18:27, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Early Junk Science ... TASSC
Talk:Miss Minoes

message: So why is this actually called Undercover Kitty? The article itself says that it was released as Miss Minoes in English. CodeCat (talk) 23:52, 20 February 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Moved article. NE Ent 18:53, 25 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article title
Talk:Godfrey the Bearded

message: The following statement is confusing:
:In 1056 and 1059, by the treaties of Andernach, Baldwin received the march of Ename in the shire of Brabant, probably in exchange for giving up the march of Valenciennes, which was confiscated by emperor Henry III in 1045.
It originally read:
:In 1059, by the treaty of Andernach, Baldwin received the march of Ename in the landgraviate of Brabant, probably in exchange for giving up the march of Valenciennes, which he had confiscated in 1045.
The confusion rests not in the date or number of treaties nor in the relation of Brabant to Ename, but in the nature of the confiscation of Valenciennes. It originally sounded like Baldwin confiscated Valenciennes in 1045 and later exchanged it for the march of Ename. The new version seems to say that the emperor took Valenciennes (from Baldwin) in 1045 and later made the confiscation legitimate by giving Baldwin Ename. Which version is correct? Srnec 18:27, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Confusion

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) 21:20, 29 June 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: *Do you mean titles such as Godfrey the Bearded, Duke of Lower Lorraine and Godfrey the Hunchback, Duke of Lorraine? To me they appear to be unnecessarily long (as in Barack Obama, President of the United States). The bynames seem to be enough to identify them. While our article on Godfrey I of Louvain claims that he too is called "the Bearded", I could not find evidence for that. All Google Books search results for "Godfrey the Bearded" refer to the father of Godfrey the Hunchback. At the very least that would indicate that he is the primary topic. Surtsicna (talk) 14:00, 22 June 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: *You are probably right. I don't have a really strong opinion either way at this stage.--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 15:31, 22 June 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 22 June 2021
Talk:The Spring River Flows East

message: I added a story section, but having never seen the film, I really am not the one to do it.Tryptofeng 22:05, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Hello, I saw this film many years ago and of course its plot is unforgettable (even if there were no subtitles), but as I recall it ended a bit differently.  In the version I saw, Suzhen encounters her husband at the party, and drops the tray, and then runs out to the river, chased by the others, and jumps in and drowns.  (I think that's a more powerful and more credible ending by the way.)  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.36.152.43 (talk) 19:51, 7 November 2011 (UTC)
Talk:Sad Eyes (Robert John song)

message: What sort of vocals did everyone else do besides Robert John? 2601:643:4000:1B70:9D48:4F25:EBCC:432A (talk) 00:02, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  What sort of vocals?
Talk:Alexander Kurakin

message: I removed the sentence "In Tolstoy's War and Peace, his name is rendered as Kuragin" because it is incorrect. There is a Prince Kurakin in the book, with a K. Anyone object? -- User:PSv255  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.166.119.234 (talk) 23:47, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Allusion to War and Peace