lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Indian Ford Bridge

message: So what happened to it - why was it destroyed ?
The main article says that five - not four, as here, have been demolished. -- Beardo 23:29, 9 February 2007 
:So which is it? Four or five bridges? --Ragemanchoo (talk) 13:35, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Mahmud Hotak

message: *"Mahmud Hotaki" -Llc 7
*"Mahmud Ghilzai" -Llc 33
-- Takabeg (talk) 03:26, 10 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Name
Talk:Ashraf Hotak

message: Since when two cousins who one killed theo other by the way can call themslevs a Dynasty? Having killed Iranians doe not make them a dynasty/. These Hotaki Ghilzais were killing other Pashtuns in their native Kandahar all the time without being called a Dynnasty. And when he has defeated Ottomans? There are plenty of evidencs that Ottomans supported Afghans with munitions in  order to kill Shiite Iranians. Ashraf has divided Iran between him and Ottomansd when he could not claim the whole former Safavid empire. And Hotaki is the successor of Durranis? Come on Nader Shah favored Abdalis= Durranis because they were enemies with Ghilzais. Pashtun nationalists are writing here a totally biased version of history, and I wonder were is Folantin now? Folantin who is alwyas ther to point a finger to Iranians for nationalis edition, takes it easy with regard to such blatant distortion of history?--Babakexorramdin (talk) 16:26, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Such a biased article? 

message: *"Ashraf Hotaki" -Llc 2
*"Ashraf Ghilzai" -Llc 11
*"Shah Ashraf" -Llc 128, but this result includes other Shah Ashrafs.
*Safavid + "Shah Ashraf" -Llc 19
*1730 "Ashraf Khan" -Llc 17
-- Takabeg (talk) 13:00, 10 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Name
Talk:Habibullah (Bagram detainee)

message: This is against WP:NPOV . V7-sport (talk) 01:27, 19 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Thundermaker (talk) 20:51, 21 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  torture victim in the title again.  

message: I think I found the sources for the challenged statements.   calls him "Mullah Habibullah", but it does not clarify whether Mullah is a first name or a title indicating he is clergy.  
 states that seven MPs at Abu Ghraib were charged.  But it does not list their victims, and since Habibullah was held at Bagram rather than Abu Ghraib, it is unlikely that he is one of them.  
I'm going to remove these statements, since it's reasonably clear that they are mistakes.  Thundermaker (talk) 17:44, 21 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Mullah is an honorific -- like Reverend.  It is never part of an individual's name.  Geo Swan (talk) 03:59, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  "clergy" and "seven soldiers charged" 
Talk:Shabir Ahmed

message: Replaced transcluded image with inline image -  tag as per dispute on Template talk:Combatant Status Review Tribunal trailer image and caption.  Geo Swan 15:22, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Replaced transcluded image with inline image - {{tl|npov}} tag as per dispute on [[Template talk:Combatant Status Review Tribunal trailer image and caption]] 

message: I think default sort is a mistake for individuals with Arabic names.
People with Arabic names don't inherit a surname, like people with an European do.
Traditionally the closest thing they have to a "last name" is their father's first name.
And it is absolutely clear to me that it is a mistake to use default sort for the Guantanamo captives -- because the US Department of Defense can't consistently figure out what their names are. 
Therefore I just reverted an edit where a well-meaning contributor imposed default sort on this individual.
Please don't impose default sort on these guys without discussing it first. 
Cheers!  Geo Swan (talk) 05:41, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  I think default sort is a mistake for Arabic names
Talk:Esmhatulla

message: Replaced transcluded image with inline image -  tag as per dispute on Template talk:Combatant Status Review Tribunal trailer image and caption.  Geo Swan 14:21, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Replaced transcluded image with inline image - {{tl|npov}} tag as per dispute on [[Template talk:Combatant Status Review Tribunal trailer image and caption]] 

message: Afghans are not Arabs.  But they follow the form of Arabic naming -- no inherited lastname-surnames.  Geo Swan (talk) 01:14, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  explanation 

message: I am concerned -- I don't think this massive excission is justified by the link provided in the edit summary -- Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard/Archive_84#Reliability_of_US_military_summary_reports.
The contributor who made this edit made many other massive excisions offering 
as the justification.  Geo Swan (talk) 18:16, 26 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  I am concerned...
Talk:Mohammad Fazl

message: Replaced transcluded image with inline image -  tag as per dispute on Template talk:Combatant Status Review Tribunal trailer image and caption. Geo Swan 12:56, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Replaced transcluded image with inline image - {{tl|npov}} tag as per dispute on [[Template talk:Combatant Status Review Tribunal trailer image and caption]] 

message: A wiki-id which has subsequently been permanently blocked from contributing to the wikipedia due to edit warring made an enormous informationectomy to this article, and over one hundred similar articles.
I am going to restore some of that excised material, as I believe the block contributor's justification was not policy based. Geo Swan (talk) 15:20, 12 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  large informationectomy and referencectomy
Talk:Shahzada (Guantanamo Bay detainee 952)

message: Replaced transcluded image with inline image -  tag as per dispute on Template talk:Combatant Status Review Tribunal trailer image and caption.  Geo Swan 12:58, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Replaced transcluded image with inline image - {{tl|npov}} tag as per dispute on [[Template talk:Combatant Status Review Tribunal trailer image and caption]] 

message: I asked for clarification of the placement of an  tag on this article on the talk page of the wikipedian who placed it.
Cheers!  Geo Swan (talk) 13:26, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I have answered your post on my talk page. What I meant was that the section is filled with statements that take a particular point of view but are not footnoted so the reader does not know where to look to verify whether these statements are true or not, per WP:V and WP:RS. Also, you need unbiased multiple sources for controversial statements. An encyclopedia should not depend on one source for information in an article. I changed the template to, hopefully, more correctly reflect my concerns.  Regards, Mattisse 15:03, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  clarification please? 

message: I suggest to move the article to Haji Shahzada. Following the secondary sources (, ) and others. Haji is unlikely a honorific in the case of this individual. There are no sources or references that say it is an honorific and even if it would be it should be included into name as all sources that i know refers to this individual as Haji Shahzada so that we have to include it according to our policies. IQinn (talk) 13:10, 6 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: move
Talk:Muhebullah (Guantanamo detainee 974)

message: Replaced transcluded image with inline image -  tag as per dispute on Template talk:Combatant Status Review Tribunal trailer image and caption.  Geo Swan 12:24, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Replaced transcluded image with inline image - {{tl|npov}} tag as per dispute on [[Template talk:Combatant Status Review Tribunal trailer image and caption]] 

message: What is the source for the name that is used now? After carefully evaluating the sources in the article and multiple secondary sources from search results. I plan to move the article to Mohi Bullar. Any objection? IQinn (talk) 07:26, 29 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  move 

message: The target of the attack in which 30 Americans were killed in a CH-47 Chinook crash (the worst incident of the war) in August 2011 was "Mullah Muhibullah"  I don't know if it's the same person but this article is what popped up when I searched for him. http://www.miamiherald.com/2011/08/10/2353095/insurgent-who-downed-seals-helicopter.html   Americasroof (talk) 15:20, 10 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: A further google says a Mullah Muhibullah who was killed in his cell in Afghanistan in October 2010. http://www.globalpost.com/dispatches/afghanistan/us-soldier-custody-after-taliban-leader-killed-prison Americasroof (talk) 15:35, 10 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I do not think that they are the same. Your first link could be war propaganda. There is no independent conformation. I would also expect that ISAF would have pointed it out if their killed "Mullah Muhibullah" would have been to Guantanamo. The same for the second one i think someone would have mentioned if their "Mullah Muhibullah" had been to Guantanamo. What is not the case. Mullah Muhibullah seems to be a common name. Anyway, thanks for sharing. IQinn (talk) 19:44, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

text: Here is another Taliban commander "Mullah Muhibullah". IQinn (talk) 20:38, 10 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Mullah Muhibullah
Talk:Mohammed Naim Rahim

message: ===Allegation mismatch===
The Combatant Status Review Tribunals took place between August 2004 and January 2005.  The first Administrative Review Board hearings took place between December 2004 and December 2005.  So, why the enormous mismatch between the 3 allegations he faced during his Tribunal and the 27 factors he faced during his ARB?  His ARB convened in early September 2005.  That is less than a year apart.  
All the 58 captives for whom we have the full unclassified dossiers, courtesy of the Associated Press, say that the unclassified evidence was insufficient to reach a conclusion as to whether the captive was an enemy combatant, so they had to rely on classified evidence.  
How could he possibly refute the 24 allegations that were kept secret from him?  Geo Swan 21:48, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  questions 

message: The Combatant Status Review Tribunals took place between August 2004 and January 2005.  The first Administrative Review Board hearings took place between December 2004 and December 2005.  So, why the enormous mismatch between the 3 allegations he faced during his Tribunal and the 27 factors he faced during his ARB?  His ARB convened in early September 2005.  That is less than a year apart.  
All the 58 captives for whom we have the full unclassified dossiers, courtesy of the Associated Press, say that the unclassified evidence was insufficient to reach a conclusion as to whether the captive was an enemy combatant, so they had to rely on classified evidence.  
How could he possibly refute the 24 allegations that were kept secret from him?  Geo Swan 21:48, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Allegation mismatch

message: Mohamed Rahim told his Tribunal he was uneducated.  I assumed that meant that, like most Afghans, he was illiterate.
But, if he illiterate, or merely uneducated, how useful would "documents" be to him?  Would an uneducated person soak up enough simple arithmetic that an invoice would still be meaningful to them?  Geo Swan 21:48, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Liteacy

message: *It would be desirable to find a source that verified that the intelligence analysts took steps to verify that Mohamed Rahim's boss Mohammed Ibrahim, in addition to a senior management position in the co-op department store, was also serving as the Taliban head of intelligence.  Almost half of the factors hinge on the captive working for the Mohammed Ibrahim who was the Deputy head of Intelligence.  
*Several of the factors Mohamed faces implicate him with the Afghan Islamic Movement.  Is this the same as the Islamic Movement of Afghanistan?  Because the Islamic Movement of Afghanistan is one of the factions in the Northern Alliance.  
*Is Qari Ahmedallah the same person as Ahmaddullah?  Why the two spellings?
*One of the allegations says that Mullah Omar was the Deputy Chief of Intelligence.  Clearly an error.
*How likely is it that Al Qaida Intelligence officers get to appoint Deputy Chiefs of Taliban Intelligence?  Geo Swan 21:48, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Possible errors on the part of the Guantanamo intelligence analysts
Talk:John Wood (record producer)

message: While the article is fine as far as it goes, I find it odd that the emphasis is on Nick Drake's recordings, which while important only constitute a small part of JW's work. He is best known by far for his work on many, many 1970s electric folk albums, including most of Fairport Convention's output and a series of groundbreaking ultra traditional electric albums with Ashley Hutchings starting with Morris On. It would help balance the article if somebody with a suitably encyclopedic knowledge of this stuff could expand the article accordingly. --80.176.142.11 (talk) 20:59, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Electric folk stuff
Talk:Zams

message: Hi, I´m Brill24. I created this new article "Zams". I´m trying to help you expanding this article. My only problem is that my English grammar is not perfect (I´m Austrian, so my Englisch sounds a little bit like Arnold Schwarzeneggers). So my suggestion is: I´ll give you further information of the Austrian municipality of Zams and you help me with the correct grammar. Is that a deal? ;-))   Kind regards --Brill24 22:21, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: zams is zero age main sequence  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.183.62.100 (talk) 13:30, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: ZAMS

message: I've corrected but they will not be shown. Regards -- Drahdiwaberling (talk) 16:26, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  WRONG POPULATION DATES
Talk:Isogonal figure

message: No mention of Archimedean solids? --ReyHahn (talk) 11:52, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Archimedean 

message: I think it is time to reconsider a change from isogonal to vertex-transitive. The term isogonal is basically absent from research literature, in contrast to vertex-transitive (check arXiv search). The term vertex-transitive is (to a degree) self-explanatory or at least quickly understood and immediately relates to edge-transitive, face-transitive etc (by the way, I also suggest to rename isotoxal and isohedral).
As suggested by Tom Ruen, we create a separate page for vertex-transitive polytopes (I plan to write a lot more about them).
I then suggest to rename this page to vertex-transitive tilings as the term figure seems to have no clear meaning in contemporary research and has no definition on Wikipedia either. I suggest to create a page titled vertex-transitive that gives a more general definition of what this term means and then links to the different objects that can be vertex-transitive: polytopes, tilings, graphs, complexes, etc. Note that I am new here and have no idea (yet) how to execute this in detail, but think it would be the right thing to move towards. Any thoughts? MWinter4 (talk) 19:36, 31 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Poll: split off polytopes and rename to vertex-transitive tilings
Talk:Muhibullah (Guantanamo captive 546)

message: Replaced transcluded image with inline image -  tag as per dispute on Template talk:Combatant Status Review Tribunal trailer image and caption.  Geo Swan 06:53, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  disputed picture 

message: The discussion takes place here
as a few more articles have the same problem. Iqinn (talk) 08:40, 26 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Pentagon claim he had..." (Disputed-section) 

message: Moheb Ullah Borekzai is the same person as Muhibullah (Guantanamo captive 546)
I will merge these articles in a few days if there is no objection. IQinn (talk) 08:12, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: merge
Talk:Isotoxal figure

message: Edge-transitive is a standard term for polytopes. Edge-uniform was an incorrect term derived from uniform polytopes which are vertex-transitive.
* Yes - Tom Ruen 22:26, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Poll to move to edge-transitive 

message: The rule of a single marked node, gives an isotoxal figure, applies even to the star-figures.  
In practice, the star groups like V53, 5V5, 53V, V5V, 3V5, and 33V (V=5/2), leads to no case of coincidence, since the faces are invariantly different.
In the remaining cases, where nodes are identical, such as x5o5/2o5x, x5/2o5o5/2x, and o5/2x5x5/2o, these lead to a double-cover, such that the faces coincide in pairs.  None the same, the single cover is valid.  
The case of o5x5/2x5o leads to a sixwise cover of the 533, but there is a figure o5x5/3x5o, which leads to a double cover of 240 alt-truncated (5/2,5) [verf = 10/3, 10/3, 5] these fall by pairs into 120 of the same face. --Wendy.krieger (talk) 08:38, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Isotoxal stars in four dimensions 

message: I think this is a complete list of regular convex and uniform 4-polytopes/honeycombs that are isotoxal. (And a subset of nonconvex forms from the nonconvex regulars)
Moved list to User:Tomruen/List of isotoxal polychora and honeycombs until I can get some references... Tom Ruen (talk) 07:28, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Isotoxal 4-polytopes/honeycombs 

message: An edge-transitive tiling is not necessarily vertex- or face-transitive!
Consider an irregular spherical dihedron, made of a small rhombus in the Northern hemisphere, and a large rhombus on the rest of the sphere, including the Equator and the Southern hemisphere. The dihedron's symmetries are : two perpendicular reflections (across the rhombus' diagonals), the resulting 180deg rotation (around the rhombus' center), and the identity. These four symmetries map any edge to any other, so it is edge-transitive. But a vertex only gets mapped to itself and the opposite vertex, not the adjacent two, so it is not vertex-transitive. And, of course, the two rhombi have different areas, so the dihedron is not face-transitive either.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mr e man2017 (talk • contribs) 00:09, 18 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Counter-example 

message: I have written "concave (isotoxal) polyhedra" in the Isotoxal figure article & in the List of isotoxal polyhedra and tilings article, & i wonder if concave is the most appropriate notion to uniform polyhedra & to dual uniform polyhedra:
concave, or non-convex, or star polyhedra? Are there different cases?
In advance, thank you for your answer! :-)
RavBol (talk) 14:28, 4 September 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  What is the most appropriate notion?
Talk:2005 Afghan parliamentary election

message: per Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2007 July 27#Afghan people--Cruizi (talk) 07:09, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Requested move
Talk:Bristol South East (UK Parliament constituency)

message: The change figures for the February 1974 United Kingdom general election changes seem to be calculated exactly on the difference from the 1970 election result. However there were boundary changes between the two contests and at the time this was thought to make the seat more marginal, with there being speculation that Tony Benn might struggle to hold the seat. Thus the change figures present a misleading picture as they do not compare like for like.  Dunarc (talk) 22:34, 21 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  February 1974 change figures
Talk:Hormizd II

message: I think the lede is kinda short; it should incorporate some more material from the body of the article (i.e. a short summary). - LouisAragon (talk) 16:56, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah I kinda slacked a bit on that part, will def expand it soon, thanks! --HistoryofIran (talk) 19:49, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lede
Talk:Hormizd IV

message: This article says surprisingly little about Hormizd IV, and instead goes into great detail of the wars during his lifetime. If no one objects, I'm going to clean it up a bit, and remove a lot of the unnecessary information. Spectheintro 20:09, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article Quality 

message: I think there has been a misunderstanding of the Pourshariati source. On the listed pages it is suggested that the unnamed Ispahbudhan wife is the daughter of Shapur (son of Bawi) and thus granddaughter and not daughter of Bawi. Garbon (talk) 16:50, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, yes - she was the daughter of Shapur, which seems pretty correct. --HistoryofIran (talk) 17:03, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
replies: text:  Sorry to clarify, I was referring to the line 'Two of Hormizd's wives are known, one of them being an Ispahbudhan noblewoman, who was the daughter of Bawi' which should say granddaughter not daughter. Garbon (talk) 08:34, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh yes, I've fixed it now - thanks! --HistoryofIran (talk) 12:58, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wives of Hormizd IV
Talk:Yazdegerd II

message: , first, my apologies to you, as I did, inadvertently, misplace the reference in the previous edit, but have since corrected it and placed it in its proper place. For your information, Sherira Gaon wrote at invaluable chronology of the Babylonian Jewish leaders, both before, during and after Yazdegerd II. He also names Yazdegeed II by name, and writes of him: "Rabbi Nachman bar Rabbi Huna then ruled [as head of the Babylonian Talmudic Academies], and he died in the year 766 [of the Seleucid era; 455 of our Common Era] in a time of persecution, when Yazdegerd (II) decreed the abolition of the Sabbath day observations." END QUOTE. This important secondary source was written in the 10th-century. The editor of this important work goes on to explain the event and to discuss the Sassanian king under question. This second source which we hope to bring down here, along with your earlier source, will help put everything in context. Please wait, and I'll format it to please you; giving a short citation and the longer reference in the Reference Source. Shalom.Davidbena (talk) 18:09, 22 August 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: No need to apologize, it happens. But quite the interesting source - I changed it a bit further so it looks like the rest of the citations and sources. --HistoryofIran (talk) 19:33, 22 August 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks, very much, my friend. If I should have any questions about the meaning of Persian words, I now know whom I can turn to. Thanks, again.Davidbena (talk) 20:20, 22 August 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Ye sure thing, I'll gladly help. --HistoryofIran (talk) 20:21, 22 August 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Jewish Persecution under Yazdegerd II 

message: Article about Shahrestan Yazdegerd - LouisAragon (talk) 11:53, 29 January 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  ''Shahrestan Yazdegerd''
Talk:Hoch wie nie

message: This article was abviously done by a German speaker. I attempted to fix some of the language, but was hoping someone could double check it to make sure it is accurate. --DanielCD 22:32, 3 February 2007 (UTC)