lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Guard dog

message: The difference is merely semantical. The two articles should be merged.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.34.68.186 (talk) 04:58, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge: Attack Dogs vs. Guard Dogs 

message: If not perhapse I should remove the animal racism sentence...Mymazdatribute 01:59, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is breed specific legislation paragraph objective enought? 

message: Sorry for the delay. Article is generally well constructed, and the references section is definitely welcome. However, I would perhaps change the "References" heading to something else and/or create a different "Bibliography" section to mention all the details about the books referred to. Badbilltucker 18:27, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Start class. New information is certainly welcome, but still falls a bit short of B article. Also, the word "interesting" might not be the best choice, as it could be taken as being a bit POV. Badbilltucker 17:35, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Assessment 

message: I think two seperate articles should be devoted to the two seperate concepts. Watchdogs (dogs that simply bark or "alert") and guard dogs differ in their roles, characteristics, breeds and so on. Why not have a different article for each of them?
A little about the Watchdog vs. Gurad Dog debate can be found here: http://www.homesecurityguru.com/recommended-watchdog-breeds
Dvirgassner 07:11, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It's a sematical diffrence.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.34.68.186 (talk) 05:08, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Watchdog vs. Gurad Dog 

message: Someone has proposed a merge with Attack dog. There is some discussion in the Dogs wikiproject. --Enric Naval (talk) 19:00, 23 February 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: That discussion about the merge has been archived, but the consensus seemed to be against a merge, in part due to the poor state of both articles. I have removed the merge tags on both articles. In my opinion, the merge proposal has been rejected. If you disagree, please speak up. -- Kjkolb (talk) 23:02, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed merge with Attack Dog 

message: Is there a way in which we can in the introduction of the page make it clear that this is referring to a distinctly different concept than a Livestock guardian dog? We could include a disambiguation via hatnote in the beginning of the page (not ideal, considering how cluttered the top of the article already is, but maybe there is a more specific term than guard dog we could use for this specific role (property guard dog)? Wcconey (talk) 12:26, 4 February 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Clearer Differentiation from Livestock guardian dog? 
Talk:Adposition/Archive postposition

message: I certainly see the logic to calling "ago" a postposition, but something should probably be said about how not everyone labels it as such. Webster's calls it an "adjective or adverb", while the OED lists "participial adjective" and "adverb". (At least according to the OED, "ago" is only an adverb in the case of "long ago".) Is this just one of those cases about which people are never going to agree? --Ryguasu 06:01 Mar 5, 2003 (UTC)
----
I'm removing the following, because I'm fairly certain the example given is not an example of the phenomenon described:
:in everyday speach, some prepositions are used as postpositions. Do you know what I'm getting at?
"At" here is not a postposition. The claim that it is one is apparently due to the fact that it comes at the end of the sentence. However, this is irrelevant to whether or not a word (even one that would otherwise be a preposition) is a postposition. What is relevant is  whether or not a word immediately follows and modifies a word or phrase. And "at" is not modifying any of the words or phrases immediately preceding it.
I think any mainstream linguist will tell you, in fact, that "at" in this sentence is a boring old preposition. It does serve as a modifier here, but what it is modifying is a silent word (or "trace") following the "at". For more information, look up "wh-movement" in an introductory linguistics text. (Wikipedia, unfortunately, seems not to have any relevant articles.)
--Ryguasu 13:25, 1 Sep 2003 (UTC)
replies: text: That's an interesting anecdote.  I've asked my Aussi girlfriend though, and she's never heard of it.  — Chameleon 12:03, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)

message: I think this article should be merged with adposition along with preposition. Currently, adposition is merely a stub, and even if we include the quite large corpus of text in preposition, it still wouldn't be too big to handle. Especially if we try limit the amount of examples. Adposition is the combined term and since placement is the only thing differing the various "-position", it doesn't seem all that useful to keep separate articles on them. At least not until it's grown too large to be housed in one article.
Please make replies at talk:preposition so we can keep the discussion together.
Peter Isotalo 16:53, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Adposition
Talk:Radner equilibrium

message: :I find the speedy deletion suggestion ("There is no way for anyone to understand this; it provides too little context. It is confusing and does not allow the reader to understand the topic.") vaguely amusing... Anyway, let's develop the article properly. :) Rd232 talk 11:30, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: * Yes, the speedy tag was completely offbase, particularly as it was placed four minutes after the editor started the article. -- JJay 11:54, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

text: This article needs to expanded so that it becomes more accurate and to the point. I will do so myself if no one else wants to since this is a key concept in financial theory. MartinDK 09:06, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

message: This page is an example of tagging gone mad.  It's been tagged speedy, technical, and cleanup-verify, all within the space of two days.  (To be fair, you'd be unlikely to encounter the concept outside of a   graduate economics course.)  I'm going remove the existing tags and tag as an econ stub (which it self-evidently is). -- Walt Pohl 16:57, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tagging gone mad
Talk:Interstate 49

message: I was suggested that the segment of I-49 that is planned to go through Texas should have its own article. I was wondering if this is Wikipedia:CRYSTAL or Wikipedia:Too soon.  Cwater1 (talk) 03:21, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Do you have any info about routing, history, future, etc.? I can't find anything, so unless there is, no. ChessEric 23:18, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: There are not much information about the Texas segment. There are barely anything about I-369 being extended upwards to I-49. The planning seems to be on hold at this time. I guess for now, not yet on creating separate article.  Cwater1 (talk) 01:52, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  I-49 Texas segment
Talk:Vinny Testaverde

message: The math on Vinny's total career TD's and INT's don't add up correctly... the real #'s are on pro-football-reference.com.  I'm honestly just too lazy to change it myself rgt now.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.169.30.211 (talk) 07:57, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bad Math... 

message: In the Preview part it says that Vinny "has twice appeared in an AFC Championship game. (1998 with the Jets, and 2006 with the Patriots)".Okay it's true but I just don't see why to mention the '06 AFC Championship if he didn't even throw a pass in the game, he was just a backup.I'm removing it because I don't think this information it's really relevant. Lucasfritas (talk) 11:21, 24 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: AFC Championship
Talk:Ursuline Academy of Dallas

message: Ursuline students: A few of us Jesuit students noticed that Ursuline didn't have a page on wikipedia so we went ahead and created it. Consider it a gift (ie you owe us). Now, build upon it (since we really have no idea what the hell goes on over there).
LuckyPanda and arteckx 05:28, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Place by inserting . Placing this userbox on a page adds that page to the Ursuline Academy of Dallas Students category. LuckyPanda 06:54, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Userbox

message: Is this necessary??? "No cleaveage..." I don't think people want/need to know about the specifics of the UA dress code for graduation. Also unimportant/unencyclopedic is the mention of Kyle, the computer guy in The Cave. Dustimagic *\o/* (talk/contribs) *\o/* 03:54, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. It's good info, just needs to be tweaked. LuckyPanda 07:30, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dress code for graduation, other things 

message: Much like with the Jesuit College Preparatory School of Dallas page, copyrights have been violated in adding content to the Ursuline page. The History and Mission Statement sections were copy and pasted from the Our Heritage and Mission sections of the Ursuline Dallas website.
These copyvios seem unintentional as the user 67.64.106.184 probably did not believe they were doing anything wrong by copying and pasting information from the Ursuline Academy of Dallas website.
If anyone would like to use this content on the wikipedia page, authorization must be given by persons who own the copyright. I honestly have no idea how one would go about doing this or whom one would notify if authorization to use website content was given so good luck with that. LuckyPanda 07:08, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copyright Violations
Talk:Student unionism in Australia

message: Wow - pretty impressive to have the material on student unions' Australian history. El T 05:36, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

message: I know I've just paid complements, but can someone work out how to remove the decidedly red interpretation evident in the opening paragraph? In particular, the references to (petit) bourgeoisie reek of unreconstructed Leninism. El T 05:42, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes I agree with you; that paragraph seems to generalise without evidence. However, I don't know enough to fix it; for all we know, those claims could be true. In general, this article needs proper researching and referencing. enochlau (talk) 06:17, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: No objections from me. I think this whole section could do with a good rewrite based on good, cited, sources. Ambi 06:32, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Can we remove the communist POV?

message: I've removed an old neutrality tag from this page that appears to have no active discussion per the instructions at Template:POV:
::This template is not meant to be a permanent resident on any article. Remove this template whenever:
::#There is consensus on the talkpage or the NPOV Noticeboard that the issue has been resolved
::#It is not clear what the neutrality issue is, and no satisfactory explanation has been given
::#In the absence of any discussion, or if the discussion has become dormant.
Since there's no evidence of ongoing discussion, I'm removing the tag for now. If discussion is continuing and I've failed to see it, however, please feel free to restore the template and continue to address the issues. Thanks to everybody working on this one! -- Khazar2 (talk) 12:54, 14 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  removing POV tag with no active discussion per [[Template:POV]]
Talk:Pepperrell Air Force Base

message: What map? The article several times makes reference to a map but I cannot see any links that might point to one. Perhaps if the map is PD it could be included in the article as an image, or if not, a link given to it? The history shows an image was removed recently. Was that it? Thanks. ++Lar 05:37, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

message: I'm pretty sure that the agreement that lead to the establishment of the US bases in Newfoundland was the Destroyers for Bases deal not Lend Lease --Shimbo (talk) 10:25, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: OK as there are no objections, I've changed it.--Shimbo (talk) 13:46, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Lend Lease versus Destroyers for Bases Deal

message: The old Fort Peperall USAF Hospital which became the first childrens hospital is Newfoundland and Labrador was demolished in Oct/Nov 2008.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sailor Man 1973 (talk • contribs) 04:17, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fort Peperall Military Hospital / Dr. Charles A. Janeway Hospital 

message: I changed the class rating from B to Start today due to the lack of inline citations throughout the article.  PKT(alk) 18:18, 1 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Assessment
Talk:The Phoenix (pacifist journal)

message: I assigned this article to the category "Political journals."  If this is incorrect, it belongs in Category:Journals.  Gilliamjf 05:52, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
Talk:Alexandra Lydon

message: I have tried to clean up the article best I can.  I have not, however, been able to source her DOB information.  If anyone could do so it would be of great benefit to the article.  I also seem to have mucked up the footnotes, so I would appreciate it if someone could clear those up.
Palaeologus 05:52, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Date of birth; Footnotes
Talk:Justin Pogge

message: We should add a picture of Justin Pogge in action during the Juniors. I'll try to find one that fits into the article paat 23:56, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Found a nice Team Canada photo on Flickr for the info box.  Leafschik1967 (talk) 19:09, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Team Canada in action Picture 

message: I took the stats from the External link, and edited them into the article, but  FlocciNonFacio has showed that they might not be correct. I deleeted the link for now, until we can give a valid link with valid stats paat 02:27, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It looks like you took the save percentage stats from the "Svs" column; the External Link has save percentage (Sv%) in the "Pct" column. The stats seem to be correct, as they match the ones given by the WHL.  FlocciNonFacio 20:03, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: sorry, thanks for the heads up paat 19:08, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  External link 

message: I have a few pictures of Pogge in action during the juniors, but I don't know how to post them. so if you what them msg me or something. arg this thing is confusing. 
- Leafs penz
:: Yeah! plz i would like them . could you send them to me at shock_x_trooper@hotmail.com? Ill try also to msn u thru wikipedia. Ive been trying ot get a picture of Pogge in action while playing for Team Canada.
::BTW, does anyone know if u can buy a poster of Pogge?
paat 18:57, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Team Canada in action Picture 
Talk:Ryan O'Marra

message: Who keeps deleting the part of him attending Lorne Park Secondary School in Mississauga, Ontario??? I went to school with him and he DID go to this school. So why do you keep deleting that information??
Yes but it isn't necessarily notable for an encyclopedia. Croat Canuck 23:16, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lorne Park Secondary School 

message: How can a person who is a canadian citizen and born to canadian citizens, moving to canada when he was 1 year old be a 'japanese hockey player'?
He happens to be born in japan while his parent(s) where working there, it makes him born in japan, not japanese.
He's Japanese by birthplace: That's actually enough to call him Japanese. His background is Irish Canadian. 74.12.12.15 00:38, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: He shouldn't be considered Japanese as he would never have had citizenship.Correctron (talk) 02:28, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: That is why he is now listed as Japanese-born. The comment you are replying to is 9 years old. -DJSasso (talk) 13:29, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: It's is not needed. It is misleading. Japanese-born still implies that he has had citizenship. He's just a Canadian who was born in Japan.Correctron (talk) 23:19, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Japanese 
Talk:Sacred Hearts Academy

message: What's the name of that Hawaii book of pictures that has Sacred Hearts Academy on the cover, or as a prominent photo?
I saw it once, seemed very interested, but for some odd reason, I never picked it up. Siyavash 06:02, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
Talk:Klaus Fesser

message: Is this not a vanity page? -- Duey Finster 06:02, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Demographics of Hong Kong

message: If you travel down the chart and compare each bar on the left (males) to the corresponding bar on the right (females), you'll see that each bar is almost an exact mirror image of the other (leaving off the "male surplus" and "female surplus" portions). In any given population of sufficient size, this is not only extremely improbable, and very likely impossible, in the real world. The only explanation I can think of is that either the numbers of males of each age, or the numbers of females of each age, or both, were calculated using a ratio from another set(s) of data. Which means the "surpluses" must have been calculated as well. There is a great deal left out of the extremely short explanation provided re. how Kaj Tallungs created this chart, and why he/she did it the way they did. And, at present, the value and trustworthiness of the "data" presented in this chart is extremely questionable. Thanks. 2600:6C67:817F:F9C1:D437:B6EF:3ED8:9AAC (talk) 02:38, 9 February 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I am not getting your comment here? Or maybe I am misunderstanding, The bars on the right and left for 'Males' and 'Females' will be the exact same population because they are not including any surplus population within them (of whatever gender), if you exclude the surplus section deliberately then ofcourse it won't make sense as to why they are all the same. The surpluses are calculated from deducting the Male and Female figures together either producing a male surplus or a female surplus, there are no uses of ratios. (?) We then input the lower figure (for my example the base female figure for 0) onto the corresponding figure which had the surplus (the male figure), here is an example; before, after, the final result for 2022, it is not overly complicated. Tweedle (talk) 12:06, 9 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Several odd things about Tallungs' 2021 "Population pyramid of Hong Kong in 2020" chart
Talk:Ultramafic intrusion

message: The nomenclature convention for igneous complexes is to capitalise all the words. Just FYI. Rolinator 06:09, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: stratigraphic nomenclature norms say you capitalise the words of, say, Giles Complex, because it is a _formal_ grouping of various intrusions recognised to be of a similar genetic link or igneous event, related to one another - often by differentiation, chronology, etc. Its similar to the Groups and Supergroups of sedimentary nomenclature; cf Bangemall Group and Collier Subgroup, etc etc. So the capitalisation stays, thanks. Rolinator
Moved hidden comment here. The Bushveld has an article w/out caps - don't lose the link - or else rename the article. And that would prob cause conflict with wiki conventions, but can be done if it's a critical point. Vsmith 16:43, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
Talk:N. Katherine Hayles

message: I think this article could be improved by including more information on some of the key concepts and questions that animate Hayles' work. To this end, I'd like to include some information on "embodied virtuality", "media-specific analysis (MSA)", reflexivity, electronic literature and on cyborgs/the post human. LD 18:30, 17 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Key Concepts

message: Hello wiki-verse. Myself and User:Akkakkak are going to be doing a little work on this page by adding a section within the "key concepts" area regarding the critical and scholarly reception of N. Katherine Hayles' work, specifically of her book, How We Became Posthuman. Feel free to provide feedback for us.Sev2109 (talk) 19:28, 8 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Critical/Scholarly Reception

message: This is a new discussion section for students in the ITP Core 1 Seminar who are going to be adding a few sentences to this page. --Theredproject (talk) 23:19, 20 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  CUNY Graduate Center Class discussion
Talk:Silesian Uprisings

message: most of this article is biased towards panslavism.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2003:45:490F:6FCD:8CA5:8BEE:9180:6F47 (talk) 19:48, 11 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  panslavic bias 

message: Hello,
Found very weird wording in the  paragraph (emphasis is mine):
Put next to each other, these sentences seem to indicate that most of the Catholic clergy was Protestant, which is... unlikely. Place Clichy (talk) 10:11, 26 August 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, there is no direct contradiction - it might have been that both Catholic and Protestant clergies in Silesia were mostly German, while Catholics still were a minority among local Germans - but it certainly is confusing. Also, all the statements about minority/majority are still messed up; it might be largely because the majority in the eastern part of Upper Silesia was minority in the Upper Silesia as a whole (or not, as comprehensive data has not been provided - a table of demography would be a feast) but it definitely needs to be clarified. --85.253.66.252 (talk) 09:47, 5 September 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Catholic clergy was Protestant 

message: Just because some Polish warriors occupied the region during the "Slavic Expansion" at the end of the medieval epoche, does not mean it makes sense to claim it a "property of the Polish Crown". --92.74.106.152 (talk) 15:16, 31 October 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: This is a Polish nationalists' fantasy page. There is no credible sources to support their ludicrous claims on just about everything. Surely you realise this? 2A00:23C4:B617:7D01:D065:1EA:6546:CE91 (talk) 14:53, 2 November 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Background: "Polish Crown" 

message: The terminology this aricle uses (Silesian Civil Wars) matches neither this article name (Silesian Uprisings), nor the Polish article name (Powstania śląskie, i.e. Silesian Uprisings), nor the German one (Aufstände in Oberschlesien, i.e. Uprisings in Upper Silesia).
Are there any reliable sources that support the "civil war" terminology?
— JWilk (talk) 13:31, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Civil war"?
Talk:Four-star restaurant

message: Unless it's changed within the last four years, AAA uses a 5 diamond rating scale -- it matches the 5 star scale used by Mobil guides. B.Wind 06:18, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

message: As the outcome of an AfD procedure for three-star restaurant, its content was put in a newly created restaurant rating article and it was redirected there. So, I'm doing the same with four-star restaurant, as the same logic applies... --Tsavage 02:08, 30 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Redirect to [[Restaurant rating]]
Talk:Carolyn Gage

message: The otherwise formless pattern of alternating a title with a brief phrase describing the work's thrust is foreign to WP bios i have noticed, and IMO indigestible.  A series of 'graphs each discussing a theme she is concerned with, and mentioning works where it is the primary theme or a major secondary one would probably work much better. Moving all of that info to the talk page, letting the list of works stand, and waiting for interested editors to reshape the info into stubs on the individual works would also work better.--Jerzy•t 06:28, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Done a bit of cleanup. Made the lists slightly more palatable tried to reshape the lead slightly. Perhaps a slight improvement but really needs someone who is actually interested in the subject to take a better look. I'm going to change the tag to expand rather than cleanup. - FrancisTyers 02:11, 30 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Cleanup

message: Since she's won a lot of Oregon awards, can someone who knows more about her add some information about her Oregon connection? From a quick Google I see that she lived in Ashland for a while. Katr67 01:56, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Oregon connection