lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Ministry of Education (Soviet Union)

message: Why are they called Russian, and not Soviet?
Moldavia had its own minister?
Varlaam (talk) 22:39, 6 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Russian Ministers of Enlightenment 

message: There's a lot of shared text between this article and the article People's Commissariat for Education. Was one copy/pasted from the other? And to resolve it, should they be: 1) merged; or 2) better differentiated? --Delirium (talk) 17:26, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: They need to be better differentiated.Leutha (talk) 03:58, 19 July 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Overlapping articles 
Talk:Scudda Hoo! Scudda Hay!

message: Since I have not seen the film, I am wondering about the movie's title.  What is the significance or explanation of the movie's title?  L. Thomas W. (talk) 15:57, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Title
Talk:Atlantis: The Lost Continent Revealed

message: I deleted a box on Paranormality. I feel that the person who put it here may have placed it mistaking this book for another book on Atlantis. This book seems even less paranormal than the writings of Plato where the idea of Atlantis originated. DanielDemaret 14:31, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
Talk:Making History: The Calm & The Storm

message: This article is written like an ad, due to 71.243.118.195, which, I suspect, is a computer from within the developer's studio. Each time they edit the article, it looks more like an ad and less like a wikipedia article. --dotDarkCloud (talk) 20:13, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Written like an Ad

message: I reverted this article back to Cydebot's inclusion because the article was word-for-word lifted right out from Manifesto Games website http://www.manifestogames.com/Makinghistory which may or may not be copy written.  In any event, if the game is this good, they/he should use his own writing to be more convincing.  The article was blatant advertising. Dinkytown (talk) 03:53, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Revert (3/3/2008)
Talk:Leticia, Amazonas

message: This article appears to be written in a manner as to promote tourist travel to this area.  For example:"FARC activity is limited in the deep south of Colombia"  This should be removed as there is nothing anywhere to substantiate this statement and it implies that visiting this area is safe.  I have friends and family who live in Colombia who assert that it is absolutely NOT safe to travel to this area and that the southern area of Colombia does in fact have FARC activity.  Anyone contemplating travel to this area (for whatever reason) should do additional research as to the safety risks involved in doing so.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.54.223.46 (talk) 05:44, 25 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Travel Safety to Leticia 

message: A lot of the information in the article seems made up and I can't find a source saying the same thing anywhere else. For example I cannot find a person named "Manuel Charon" nor any information about the idea of the town supposedly being named after "Leticia Smith".Arkansore (talk) 16:59, 29 January 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: These same claims appear to be repeated in the Spanish-language Wikipedia. What sources did you consult? Were you able to conduct Spanish-language resources? In any event, if those are the only issues, I don't think two potentially untrue claims warrant a  tag on the whole article; I think it should be removed and  tags added to individual claims instead. voorts (talk/contributions) 20:45, 7 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Hoax
Talk:Those Being the Words of Marcus Tullius Cicero

message: If the HBO site is anything to be believed it's actually called "These being the words..." Twospoonfuls 20:41, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

message: Seems alot like a baptism ne? 124.82.12.53 17:45, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Brutus' "rebirth" 

message: Curious. No accusations of 'original research', no links to HBO's own synops, no deletion of other people's hard work on a whim.
Very, very curious. 24.227.251.199 03:42, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Synopsis
Talk:Arthur Kennedy

message: Why only partial? Should make an effort to include ALL his films. I doubt that he was in so many as to make this impossible...TheBlinkster (talk) 13:12, 10 November 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: "Partial" filmography?

message: "...best known for his performances on the New York Stage, but most known for his Western films."
Someone who knows what that sentence is supposed to mean should revise it so that the ordinary reader can understand it.  I suspect that it tries to split too fine a hair with language that is far too blunt.  Arcanicus (talk) 06:18, 6 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Revision Needed
Talk:Jeff Irwin

message: i started this page, and did not know that pages connot be a WIP. i intend to work on it a great deal over the next 2 days. hopefully then, as i learn more about wiki, it will be up to snuff.
:It's nothing wrong with working on an article over time, but you must be very careful when creating an article on yourself. You may find this guide helpful. Ufretin 16:31, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Irmã Dulce

message: Folks,
This's the first wikipedia article I've written, so, please, bear with me.
I've one problem with that page. There isn't much content on 'Irmã Dulce', so I can reference to. Could I use links in portuguese to back up the claims in the article?
ORSBrasil 20:47, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I hope its not too late. But sure you can. --Jayarathina (talk) 19:13, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Wrestling ring

message: A boxing ring and a wrestling ring are 99.99% the same thing. Certainly same enough that they could easily both be described in different sections of one article. 
The only major difference between a boxing ring and a wrestling ring is what goes on inside it. Tromboneguy0186 (talk) 15:25, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: And what's more, with the two articles being as bare as they are, there's not really a compelling reason to keep them separate if there's anything even approaching consensus to merge. Tromboneguy0186 (talk) 15:25, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

text: Disagree - The two share a common ancestry and shape, but everything from the ropes, corners, under-support, and type of materials used to build them is different these days.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by HooperBandP (talk • contribs) 16:45, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merger 

message: How about a section detailing the origins and evolution of wrestling rings?  The earliest evidence we have is from the 1880s when matches like William Muldoon vs Thiebaud Bauer from 1880 were held on a roped elevated stage, with two ropes, posts halfways along each side and a gap in the ropes for the steps up to the platform.  Also at many early venues up to the early 1900s, matches would be wrestled without a ring on a mat on a theatre stage - sometimes with a set of ring ropes around the mat, sometimes not.2.24.71.188 (talk) 14:46, 14 April 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: I would suspect that the origins of a wrestling ring are entirely tied up in the origins of a boxing ring, as the two were identical (and the same rings used for both) as late as the 1960s. I recently saw some footage of a 1920 world heavyweight title match at the second Madison Square Garden and the ring is identical to one used for a boxing match that same year.oknazevad (talk) 17:06, 14 April 2018 (UTC)
replies: text:  There were only two ropes a side on the ring used for Hack/Gotch in 1908 (although the turnbuckles looked very WCW/JCP) and, like I sai, back in the 1880s there was a gap in the ropes from the steps and extra posts halfway down each side.  Not sure if any of these were the case with boxing rings. 62.190.148.115 (talk) 12:22, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Origins/History?
Talk:John Lanchester

message: I have commenced a tidy-up of the Bibliography section using cite templates. Capitalization and punctuation follow standard cataloguing rules in AACR2 and RDA, as much as Wikipedia templates allow it. ISBNs and other persistent identifiers, where available, are commented out, but still available for reference. Feel free to continue. Sunwin1960 (talk) 22:15, 19 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bibliography
Talk:Dadiah

message: dadih got many flavour too.--60.52.16.1 20:58, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Many flavours 
Talk:Lawrence Quincy Mumford

message: "... Public Law 480 was established and helped bring about international cataloging standards."
PL 480 is the Food for Peace law; the wiki article for Food for Peace doesn't mention anything about libraries or cataloging standards; is a different law meant to be referred to here? a quick Google search didn't turn up anything useful--FeanorStar7 02:04, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Query
Talk:Searching for Monica

message: Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources.  Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.)
For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, and, if allowed under fair use, may copy sentences and phrases, provided they are included in quotation marks and referenced properly. The material may also be rewritten, providing it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Therefore, such paraphrased portions must provide their source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you.  Hut 8.5 22:33, 21 January 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copyright problem removed
Talk:Debbie Arnold

message: The article currently lists 1957 as her birth year.  But her biographic sketch from her company Looking Gorgeous Limited lists her as being born in 1955. --Bejnar (talk) 22:40, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Birth Year

message: She is frequently listed as a vegetarian, but I found no direct quotes from her on the subject in published sources. --Bejnar (talk) 22:40, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Vegetarian

message: or something lifted from the subject's website. Can someone with more time than me verify and rewrite? DavidFarmbrough (talk) 03:34, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  This reads a bit like an agent's puff
Talk:Annabel Port

message: Why deletion? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Fairlie2 (talk • contribs) 22:32, January 30, 2007 (UTC)
The Geoff Show rules  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.209.255.128 (talk) 18:02, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Deletion

message: I was watching some of those "recap" videos on BSkyB's Lost microsite , made by "Koink". It says that Annabel Port is the producer. I haven't been able to confirm via Google whether or not this is the same woman. If so, then she's not too bad at it (got a few decent laughs from me, although most of it is the usual rehashed Lost trivia of course -- but that's not her fault). Trojjer (talk) 05:13, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It's the same person. 84.9.58.150 (talk) 05:19, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Annabel Port credited as TV producer? 
Talk:Institute of Divine Metaphysical Research

message: This is one of the worst articles I've ever read.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.214.105.144 (talk) 20:22, 11 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Wow, I laughed and cried while going through the history here. unencyclopedic color commentary on a cut&paste copyright violation, and of course this.
I'm restoring a version from June 2009. That version isn't great either, but it's a better starting point, assuming the sources are valid (I didn't check them.)
Good luck. Kilopi (talk) 22:30, 2 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  reverted to June 2009 

message: It is common for any teaching, especially of a religious nature, deemed controversial to be attacked by those opposed, in manners often downright vicious and slanderous. Wars have been fought and Inquisitions conducted for this same reason.
At the same time, any neutral presentation of this teaching is very difficult, since it calls on the receiver to accept the possibility or at least a statement that they have been wrong about commonly accepted doctrines, such as that the Resurrection of our Savior was in a physical body, not as a life-giving spirit. And since Wikipedia is so easily edited, the controversy will certainly continue until Wikipedia simply eliminates the page entirely.
"Don't ask my neighbor". Go to the website, IDMR.net, then attend a class; it is free. Then judge for yourself.
Geraldpkent (talk) 18:43, 6 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Neutrality 

message: This article is so short, it says nothing. I suggest it be deleted. Pete unseth (talk) 22:15, 13 January 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is this article worth keeping?
Talk:Hosaena

message: Which woreda is it in? Badagnani (talk) 04:35, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Woreda

message: What is the distance from Arba Minch and Sodo? Badagnani (talk) 04:35, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Distance

message: Is it near Lake Chamo or Lake Abaya? If so, what is its proximity? Badagnani (talk) 04:57, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Proximity to lakes
Talk:U.S. Route 50 in Utah

message: Dabby, why did you remove that portion of the route description? I think it should be kept as it really describes the desolate stretch of the state it crosses. CL — 20:50, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Because it's not organized. That info should be integrated to the above paragraphs. Dabby (talk) 21:23, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: If that is your reasoning why didn't you organize it? That is a flimsy argument for deleting it.Dave (talk) 21:56, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I tried organizing it... Not sure I did my best, but I tried. Cheers - CL — 23:22, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Looks Good, Thanks. Wow this article has been a war zone today. Good thing it's still in the GAC queue. The reviewer probably would have quick failed it had the review started on stability grounds. Hopefully everybody is happy now.Dave (talk) 23:29, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Portion of route description
Talk:QRS complex

message: I removed the "related waves" as they don't belong in an article specific to the QRS complex. Added link to electrocardiogram. Added image showing correct nomenclature for QRS labeling. Re-added stub tag. MoodyGroove 21:30, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: That's my opinion. MoodyGroove 17:00, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Article should be deleted and QRS complex should redirect to [[electrocardiogram]]

message: If anybody has some literature that references normal and abnormal Voltages for the qrs complex please feel free add them.  If you don't feel comfortable editing the page, leave the details in the discussion with a link and i'll take care of iteximo (talk) 16:21, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Information request

message: The article "Spatial QRS-T angle" reads sort of like a how-to or medical advice, is confusing, and is not linked to; I think it could be merged into "QRS complex" (probably as a new section). —Ignatzmicetalkcontribs 21:22, 13 April 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Support better covered in one place rather than two small articles. --Tom (LT) (talk) 01:17, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

text: Merge elsewhere. This is a subspecialist topic which isn't really appropriate for the broader audience that might follow the text on the QRS complex. I suggest a merge to Vectorcardiography, as Spatial QRS-T angle is a parameter used only in the context of this measurement technique. Klbrain (talk) 16:49, 14 September 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: I've now merged Spatial QRS-T angle to Vectorcardiography. Klbrain (talk) 14:18, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed merge with [[Spatial QRS-T angle]] 

message: Could we add a section on the S wave? I believe it is the depolarisation of the medial wall of the right ventricle but some texts disagree with this... 217.155.236.238 (talk) 21:30, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  S Wave 
Talk:Studio Deen

message: i see no mention of a anime called Luger Code 1951 as one of there works but studio deen did make a 1 episode ona i never did anything on wikipedia but i often go to it to see all the anime i watched from studios so i thought i create a account to make it known something that was missed so if someone can list it i would appreciate it im terrible sorry for not doing it myself but i dont know the first about doing thing on this sight  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tacaloking (talk • contribs) 02:17, 20 June 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Luger Code 1951 

message: Episode 23.5 transcript 2603:8001:4002:936F:E9B7:9119:6836:1173 (talk) 05:38, 17 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hetalia Axis Powers
Talk:Saskatchewan Highway 60

message: There was a speculative statement regarding a "town" called Hawker that appears on some maps. It's not a town, but rather a legal name given either to a rail siding or a post office, or a rural area. There's never been an actual "town" of Hawker and I've been going to Pike Lake since the 1970s, so contrary to what was initially added to the article, there was nothing to tear down. 23skidoo 21:32, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Hawker
Talk:BUF Compagnie

message: Started this page but I know it needs a more work. Just wanted to get the ball rolling. Thanks. Straterp 21:44, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

message: The current page reads like a press release-caliber history and summary, and is filled with biased and flattering language. Is this preferable to a short stub? (I'm genuinely asking, I don't know the answer.) ERobson 18:51, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think the stub would be better.  The article as it stands is not helpful to anyone. I think it is best however to hack the article rather than reverting.  Here goes (your turn next)! PeterGrecian 13:08, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

text: I took a stab at removing the fluff, since I have no domain expertise it could use proofreading by someone who is familiar with the subject.  Vrac (talk) 19:15, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Flattering summary? 

message: Deleted because it is not fair use in this context. PeterGrecian 13:22, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Matrix image
Talk:Mathland

message: I removed the statement that the Department of Defense uses Mathland because I cannot see why a military organization would use a mathematics textbook for little children, particularly one that is considered almost universally by the mathematical community to be one of the worst math books in the civilized world. NikolaiLobachevsky 21:33:03 1/25/2007 (UTC)
:I believe the statement originally was that it was used in the DoD's educational wing; e.g. they used it to teach the children of servicemen worldwide.  As to why they used it?  People can be really stupid sometimes. 129.2.106.74 03:49, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: This article has so little positive things to say about its subject that I'm proposing a POV check. This is not to say that I disagree with it in any way. I have never heard of "Mathland". —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Njaard (talk • contribs) 01:59, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree; the points may be valid but only speak for one side. I'm upgrading the POV tag. toll_booth 13:15, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, I have to agree with this.  I am firmly convinced that Mathland is a terrible program that does much more harm than good, but the proponents should be allowed to have a say.  Unfortunately I cannot remotely come close to writing it because it completely ruined several of my siblings prospects of ever being competent in basic algebra. 129.2.106.74 03:46, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Neutrality
Talk:Ballot measure

message: Ballot measure should direct to Initiative rather than Referendum. The intro on the Initiative page explains why; Referenda are specifically measures that are referred to voters by the legislature. -Pete 21:35, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Oops. Above comment was in error. Here's a better explanation.
There are 3 types of ballot measures/propositions:
* initiatives, which are put on the ballot by popular petition;
* referenda, which repeal an act of the legislature; and
* legislative referrals, which the legislature votes to place on the ballot.
So this page should not be a redirect to any of the types, but should link to all three. -Pete 01:50, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

text: ...or to direct democracy.  The trouble with redirecting there though, is that it eliminates a simple, concise explanation of easily confused concepts and buries it with details.  There's a place for both, and I think there's merit in keeping this article as some form of disambiguation or broad-concept article. Perhaps it shouldn't grow beyond a stub, if the details are all in direct democracy. – Wbm1058 (talk) 03:59, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

text: Initiative and referendum was a similar disambiguation, before it was redirected () to direct democracy. Wbm1058 (talk) 04:10, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Redirect? 