lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:People's Democratic Republic of Yemen

message: Why is there a special section on human rights? Very few country articles have such sections, was human rights abuse in the PDRY exceptional? From reading the Amnesty International reports, it does not seem exceptional compared to other 3rd world countries, including the former YAR.--128.139.226.36 08:22, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Human rights 

message: Was universal sufferage actually proscribed by the constitution?  That seems very odd.  The country claimed to be democratic --Descendall 05:14, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Voting 

message: The problem with PDRY's page is that todays Internet people are young and have no reliable information of PDRY's times. I mean the official information issued by the PDRY's (PRSY's) officials themselves and respected as such all over the world. 
For instance, there never was such term as "Marxist" or "Communist" State in PDRY's official documents, but there was a "scientific socialism" clamed as an official ideology of the State by Constitution.
There never was such a State as "South Yemen" - it was only a commonly used in speach reduced first official name of this State - the People's Republic of the South Yemen. In fact, the geographic name Yemen was used befor 1967 only for the Northern part of the country - not for 24 little separated States and regions under the British supervision - each one with its own historical name. The common name for all of them was South Arabia (so it was on its currency units of South Arabia Currency Authorithy dated 1964). In the same time the idea of a Yemeni Unity was promoted by Yemeni young revolutionaries from both the North and the South from 1930s-1940s when they were forming the united movement against the Imam in the North and the colonial administration in the South. They clamed that Yemen should be re-united, the struggle for Yemeni Unifiqation became their slogan: "li-nuna:Dil min 'agl taHqi:q 'al-waHdah 'al-yemeniyya!"
The Government posts of Ministers for the Unification accured first in the YAR, then in the PRSU/PDRY, too.
The right Arabic name of PDRY began with adeni-prononced word "Gumhiriyya" = the Republic not "Jumhuriyya" (G not J)as in the North. The word South = "Ganub/Ganubi" is also with "G" not "J" because it is was a literated norm.
In general, this article need some serious corrections without any dependency of ideologically determined or little informed motivations. Mutargim (talk) 01:19, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Common but uncorrect
Talk:Tualatin High School

message: The athletics section of this article seems more like an almanac entry rather than an encyclopedia entry. I would recommend cutting the list down to only the most notable accolades and leaving the rest out or simply summarized. Not to discredit the students involved, but only one has seen any notoriety since his days at TuHS; must they all be mentioned? -- Zytron 21:18, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: The overabundance of praise for the various programs could probably also stand to be toned down a bit.  It's not a funding drive, guys. --Mattmcc 08:55, 1 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Cleanup please

message: I retagged this as noncompliant instead of informal tone b/c this article goes way beyond just informal tone. Also I deleted ASB Tech Directorship b/c apparently it's just the student body group that makes PowerPoints for school assemblies, making that section totally inaccurate. I also toned down the ASB section. -memodude 00:53, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tagging and Tech Directorship 

message: I deleted the sports award lists b/c they don't belong on Wikipedia, discuss if you contest this -memodude 02:16, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Are not the achievements of a particular institution valid to put into an encyclopedia article? --LeighVan 06:23, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sports award list deletion
Talk:List of Bangladesh national cricket captains

message: Bangladeshi national cricket captains===
Still a Featured list
Promoted ages ago. This is not a featured list for these reasons: Of the links, one third are red, which is too many; at least one section with prose needs a copyedit; what is included in the list implies the non-existence of other possible teams; it appears not to have been updated. Nominate for demotion. Miss Madeline | Talk to Madeline 22:21, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I just checked and some of the missing articles were created last week as stubs. Thanks for bringing this up. -- Rune Welsh | ταλκ 18:01, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Here is the old Featured List Removal Candidates page

message: There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:List of English national cricket captains which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you.  —RM bot 00:30, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Move discussion in progress

message: How many match won by mashrafe (last updated needed) Abu Kamran Rahul (talk) 17:15, 21 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  About Mashrafe
Talk:How to Be Good

message: Perhaps a reference or two for this page may be in order ? Thanks Manik Raina 03:55, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've cleaned up the article and added a couple external links, but as of now there are no statements that require references.  María (habla conmigo) 15:35, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Opening heading
Talk:Heteronomous language

message: For a June 2005 deletion debate over this page see Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Heteronomous language.
Here is the important info from that discussion:
Does not appear to be attested anywhere outside Wikipedia mirrors and forks.  Single line definition does not make much sense. --Tabor 20:31, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)

message: I just got rid of the redirect for heteronomy to this page, and started a page for the concept of heteronomy, the antithesis of autonomy. EPM (talk) 13:43, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Heteronomy now has its own page
Talk:Paris (Jon English musical)

message: It is right to call this a 2003 musical? At best a bit misleading since it was actually written in 1990, or at least the vast majority of it. The rule is generally when it was written or first performed, but this is a bit of a special case since there was such a long time before the first production (and even then a non-notable amateur one). I think Paris (1990 musical) would be better. Boneymau (talk) 06:33, 5 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  2003 musical in ititle 
Talk:List of Japanese military equipment of World War II

message: This article was originally titled "List of Japanese Weapons of WW2," but the list contains many items (such as trucks) which are not weapons in and of themselves. As such, I've re-titled the page. It still needs quite a bit of wikification and a verification of authenticity. Fernando Rizo 18 June
: There are multiple similar pages for Britain/United Kingdom & Soviet Union, etc. which need help merging:
* List_of_Soviet_Union_military_equipment_of_World_War_II
* List of British military equipment of World War II 
: WinterSpw (talk) 13:15, 15 August 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: List of Japanese Weapons of WW2

message: According to the page on the Thompson Sub Machine Gun they were captured by the Japanese in enough numbers that they became limited standard, I'm going to try to add it. Yolo McSwagginz93 (talk) 05:04, 4 September 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Do you have a reference source? WinterSpw (talk) 05:54, 4 September 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Thompson Sub Machine Gun 
Talk:Town Destroyer

message: Are we certain "Town Destroyer" is an accurate translation? Richard Norton Smith's Washington bio American Patriarch (pg. 55-56) has the more modest "towntaker." Could they both accurate? JimServo (talk) 22:34, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Accurate Translation

message: "Town Destroyer" is simply a nickname for George Washington. Shouldn't this be a subsection of his article? --68.227.217.101 (talk) 04:24, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: No, everything of interest related to George Washington cannot be in the main article—there's just too much stuff. One of these days, someone will come along and write an article called something like George Washington and Native Americans. When that happens, this article will be redundant and should become subsection of that article. —Kevin Myers 13:04, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Bullshit. This has its own article because agenda-oriented people want it that way. Jersey John (talk) 17:36, 20 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Separate article?

message: The last edit removed this line: "Following a massacre when five chiefs who had come out to negotiate under a flag of truce were murdered by colonists" with a devious edit summary, which should invite further discussion, and also changed every instance of "Native American" to "Indians", but I remind you this wikipedia is for Natives too, not for everyone except for only just not for Natives, so please leave the whitewashing and the dated language at the door. Robert the Broof (talk) 18:39, 17 November 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm trying to understand why the only changes you made were the ones I described; and the website you linked is more recent than, and evidently based on, the wikipedia article, considering the wording in the section was added gradually over time by multiple editors over the course of eleven years, and thus could not be plagiarised. Robert the Broof (talk) 19:37, 17 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reverting last edit
Talk:Monolingual learner's dictionary

message: There are "learner's" and "learners'" dictionaries - which term is the more standard one? I see this article is named one way and Oxford's dictionary is named the other way. (131.130.121.106 20:54, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: As far as I've checked, There are "Oxford Advanced Learner's Dictionary" or "Cambridge Advanced Learner's Dictionary" that has "Learner's" in their names. Other dictionaries are titled like "Collins Cobuild English Dictionary for Advanced Learners" or "Macmillan English Dictionary for Advanced Learners of American English" etc. So I guess it's more proper to say "Learner's Dictionary" David M.926 12:24, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
Talk:List of United States Presidential libraries

message: Most list of US president or list of presidential related stuff  starts out with Washington and works it way to current. For this reason I reverted this back to chronolgy order. Starting with Lincoln and working it way down to ClintonSmith03 20:54, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Garfield and McKinley, and I'm sure some others have libraries not part of the official list, but linked to their historic site. Perhaps we should add another list for these right above the see also section. NoSeptember 20:58, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Presidential historic sites with afiliated libraries

message: There are a few presidential library articles on wiki whose title is incorrect. Can anyone tell me how to change them - or does a new article have to be created, and then redirected? Truman's library article title is incorrect, and so is Nixon's; someone redirected the Library & Birthplace to the new federal facility but incorrectly named the article. Thanks. Info999 03:35, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: There is a "move" tab between "history" and "watch" at the top of the page that you can use to rename pages that have been named incorrectly.  Be sure to achieve consensus on the talk page of the article you intend to move! ~ PaulC/T+ 05:15, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Changing titles of articles
Talk:Scottish Renaissance

message: Why not "Scottish Literary Renaissance"? Firstly, this is not how it is generally referred to. Secondly, the "renaissance" also had big effects on visual arts, politics and music, so I think it is unfair to exclude them. Perhaps something about the non-literary effects should be written. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.176.147.202 (talk) 21:59, 18 June 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Article name

message: I wonder which Brit came up with this one. There were a number of women in the movement. There is no evidence it was any more misogynist than any other movement of the time and Helen Cruickshank is often seen as a pivotal figure within it.--SpringsteenSessions (talk) 17:27, 25 March 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Anti-Women
Talk:Ancud

message: This article has been renamed as the result of a move request. – Ancúd > Ancud. –Hajor 15:48, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)

message: The Chiloé railway Ancud-Castro (600 mm gauge) operated from July 27th 1912, to May 21st 1960. There was also a branch line from Ancud to Lechagua muelle. Source: http://www.railwaysofthefarsouth.co.uk/06aintroduction.html Riggenbach (talk) 15:55, 31 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Chiloé railway
Talk:Football in the United Kingdom

message: This article is anglocentric in the extreme.
:Is it? At every stage it covers England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland (in that order, which is fair enough as it goes by size). England tends to dominate the history, but then England had a greater role in the early development of football than the rest of the UK. Could you point to any examples of extreme anglocentricism? - Green Tentacle 18:55, 24 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: True, it's not deliberately anglocentric. Still, it's pretty crushing to look at the Northern Ireland club's performances. Crusaders 0-7...oh my gawd, we suck! Leemorrison 19:27, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Comment 

message: but a player is generally eligible for whichever nation he, his parents or grandparents were born
This means one grandparent is enough, right? It isn't completely clear. Also, a source would be nice - I've looked in the Welsh FA regulations (but not the others) and couldn't find anything. --Dtcdthingy 22:11, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Eligbility 

message: "The matches were either played over two legs or in groups where teams play each other twice, the aggregate scores counting both matches in each pairing are listed below." That's a bit odd; why show aggregate scores for league results where an aggregate score was not used? --John (talk) 17:51, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why? 

message: With NI facing Wales at the Euro 2016 knockouts, I have noticed Scotland v Wales games (such as world cups 1978, 1986 and 2014 qualifying), Wales v NI and NI v Scotland games aren't mentioned, even though they should be as nowhere in this article says that there should only be England results.
86.155.0.226 (talk) 08:46, 23 June 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Work in progress :) Kivo (talk) 09:29, 23 June 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Need to add Results between Scotland, Wales, NI 

message: Full page protection for two weeks because of an edit war - isn't that a bit, and by a bit I mean very, excessive? Why not block the edit warriors instead if there's apparently no other solution? Also, where was this decision taken? I can't find anything at WP:RFPP or anywhere else, but maybe I'm missing something. Lennart97 (talk) 17:56, 2 February 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: It was flagged at WT:FOOTY. I thought it might take a while for consensus to emerge on the matter and this is not a terribly frequently edited article. However, seeing as the fuss seems to have died down (largely because the main culprit has stopped editing), I've unprotected it now though. Number 57 18:13, 2 February 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks! :) Lennart97 (talk) 18:15, 2 February 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Protection
Talk:Undergraduate Ambassadors Scheme

message: This is a reply to a message from Cryptic regarding potential copyright infringement in respect of my posting of this page.
First an apology: I thought I was logged in but evidently was not hence my contribution came up with the author listed as an IP address instead of me.
Second: I should clarify that the text I entered was edited from the website to which the article linked, but that's OK as I am a trustee and one of the co-founders of the Undergraduate Ambassadors Scheme and therefore can confirm that the text on the website is in the public domain. If there's a procedure to avoid this confusion in future I'd happily follow it if someone can point me towards it - user Infilms
:See WP:DCP for the process to donate copyrighted material to Wikipedia.  If the material is actually in the public domain as you state, then having that statement on the website would also be acceptable.  However, the material as it stands is still problematic as Wikipedia is not a web host and the article text copied from your website isn't really an encyclopedia article, and needs to adhere to a neutral point of view. -- Whpq (talk) 21:00, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Note that I've tagged the article as a copyright violation.  This can be resolved by following the donation procedure as outlined above. -- Whpq (talk) 21:02, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I suggest the copyright issue's now resolved because both this article and the website from which copy was originally sourced have been significantly edited since the article was written. Hugh Mason (talk • contribs 16:17, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
Talk:La Prensa (Managua)

message: In the larger world, when one says La Prensa, is it not the Buenos Aires newspaper that the hearer expects? La Prensa should be a redirect to La Prensa (disambiguation), and this newpaper should take its expected place among all the other La Prensa as La Prensa (Managua). --Wetman 06:30, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. And a nasty little stub created for La Prensa (Buenos Aires), too. If there are any sysops reading, perhaps La Prensa (disambiguation) can be moved to La Prensa. Bolivian Unicyclist 20:38, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: ''La Prensa''

message: Virtually all the citations come from one study by Freedom House. Surely, given the controversial nature of this subject one can find other sources? Freedom House is hardly an NPOV source. The US was very much an actor in Nicaragua in those years. The article reflects the sourcing bias. Early days are reasonably ok, but the "Sandinistas" section is seriously biased. Here are a few which are glaring:
a) The split between La Prensa and El Nuevo Diario  surely must be more important than a rather dismissive last line entry in the "Sandinista" section. Considering that in this split, the editor (brother of the editor murdered earlier) and 80% of the staff left (this is mentioned in the El Nuevo Diario page), it's quite an open question as to which is the real successor of La Prensa.
b) 'Contras' gets one word mention. So does the CIA, prefixed with the rather meaningless "accused of funding". Was it funded by the CIA or not? Considering that the paper identified with the Contras, which was a major sticking point between the US and Nicaragua, one would've thought this theme should've been developed.
c) The whole framework is misleading. The article gives the hostility of the Sandinistas towards La Prensa in a vacuum, with no discussion of contras and so on. For instance, a few days after US Congress voted 100 million dollars in aid to the Contras, La Prensa was suspended. This wasn't an arbitrary decision (whether one agrees with it or not), but a reaction to the US.
I've tried some rather minimal changes, but it requires much more work.
Kingsindian (talk) 20:29, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Isn't there any other source than Freedom House?
Talk:Mesalazine

message: "Methaeoglobinaemia" is listed as a side effect. Should this be "Methaemoglobinaemia" (with an "m"), which redirects to Methemoglobinemia? Songdog 15:13, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Methaeoglobinaemia

message: Content moved from mesalamine to mesalazine to reflect the International Nonproprietary Name rather than the United States Approved Name PeteThePill 22:55, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Mesalamine 

message: The section describing Lialda sounds a little bit like a sales pitch for the drug.  The other formulations are not really mentioned much, and it seems to be emphasizing benefits of Lialda that don't seem proven yet.  I'm just a layperson when it comes to this stuff, so please take my comment with a grain of salt.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.135.207.129 (talk) 16:19, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lialda 

message: How does the drug work?  If this is not known, it should be said that such information is unavailable.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.238.142.12 (talk) 22:21, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mode of action? 

message: This page supposedly on a generic drug reads like an advert for Apriso
— Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.176.105.132 (talk) 17:12, 23 May 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I removed some of the Apriso stuff and reorganized some of the content.  -- Ed (Edgar181) 20:32, 24 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Advert?

message: An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect PENTASA. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so.  Whywhenwhohow (talk) 02:22, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  "PENTASA" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]]
Talk:Pancrase

message: Note: the page contains material from the Pancrase website and thus should not be considered neutral!
Merged in Pan Class hopefully that should help the neutral thing too --- Paulley 10:19, 27 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Noticed the tag, but there was no information on the talk page. What exactly would you guys like to see expanded on? I will try my best and flesh the article out more, but not sure exaclty where the need is at. Aika 19:03, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Expansion?

message: Everything in this article suggests all the fights were legit.  However, I've seen reputable claims that at least a few were not.  There needs to be some mention of this issue.  Senor Vergara (talk) 03:54, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Shoot/Work
Talk:List of animals that explode

message: If so, why? It did not meet any of the speedy deletion criterion. Furthermore, categories such as 'Exploding Animals' exist, so why not this page? It is a fascinating phenomenon, one that interests many people. I submit that the removal of this article was purely POV. 80.229.14.246 23:29, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Was this page deleted?
Talk:California State Route 41

message: Someone needs to take that rock slide photo out. I haven't heard or seen any rock slide that have closed the highway recently. Besides, that rock side looks awfully familiar like the one that closed California State Route 140 a few years back.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.104.64.129 (talk) 18:26, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rock Slide Photo
Talk:California State Route 46

message: There needs to be something about the road's expansion from I-5 up to the Kern County line. 
This source refers to the project and the road closing, but it appears it might still be underway, so the source would have to include the start dates for the project. It'll be opened sooner or later, so hopefully those sources will have the whole history of the recent construction. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk)  20:02, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  To do