lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Crime fiction

message: Hi, I am working to encourage implementation of the goals of the Wikipedia:Verifiability policy. Part of that is to make sure articles cite their sources. This is particularly important for featured articles, since they are a prominent part of Wikipedia. Further reading is not the same thing as proper references. Further reading could list works about the topic that were not ever consulted by the page authors. If some of the works listed in the further reading section were used to add or check material in the article, please list them in a references section instead. The Fact and Reference Check Project has more information. Thank you, and please leave me a message when you have added a few references to the article. - Taxman 19:58, Apr 21, 2005 (UTC)
ok  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.217.249.86 (talk) 17:16, 8 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Request for references

message: I noticed the German wiki page Krimi links here, but this does not link to it.  Should it? Шизомби 01:58, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: [[:de:Krimi]]

message: See that article? All 'original research. You have "Further Reading", but no references. Which makes this original research. Please see WP:CITE. Highway Rainbow Sneakers 14:27, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Ga!  Being uncited doesn't make something original research.  It makes something uncited.  Being original research means it can't be cited, because the stuff was made up.  Something can very easily be uncited and yet not constitute original research.  This is strongly worth remembering. john k 23:11, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  GA Failing 

message: hi guys i ont really understand thei please can some one put it in note form or rephrase it.
Thank you for the person who will do it for me.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.217.249.86 (talk) 17:19, 8 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Murder mustery 

message: "In Italy people commonly call a story about detectives or crimes giallo (English: yellow), because books of crime fiction have usually had a yellow cover since the 1930s." I removed this from the lead section as it seemed very out of place there, but was not sure where exactly in the article this sentence would fit better. Some feedback would be appreciated, thank you!. WNYY98 (talk) 02:32, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Giallo 

message: — Assignment last updated by Wordnerd104 (talk) 14:26, 10 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: ENG 21011 Research Writing
Talk:Callisthenes

message: The Greek characters as they appear in this article are illegible to me running mozilla on linux, but I have no trouble reading ΑΒΓΔ, etc., with mozilla (although netscape can't handle them).  -- Mike Hardy
They don't look right to me, either, using IE 6.  -- Zoe
They look definitely wrong. But I don't know greek enough to tell what they should be. FvdP
They are scanos: an OCR program's attempts to try to recognise squiggles in the Greek alphabet as squiggles and punctuation in the Latin alphabet. There are lots of these in the 1911 entries. The Anome
Are there OCR programs that are literate in Greek?  -- Mike Hardy
Yes there are OCR programs with Greek language support. I think most of them have greek support but perhaps it should be specified within the installation program.
Can anyone explain to me what great nephew means?MATIA 09:21, 12 July 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: A great nephew is the son of your nephew. Krateros1 09:38, 13 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: — Assignment last updated by Coolguy500 (talk) 20:28, 17 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: History of Ancient Greece
Talk:Fallopian tube

message: The Fallopian tube in female mammals is also known as an oviduct (citation 8 on the main page specifically mentions it as such); the description that an oviduct refers specifically to nonmammalian vertebrates is incorrect. DeemDeem52 (talk) 19:05, 3 October 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll alert WP:Anatomy to your merge proposal. I only somewhat oppose because, again, the term Fallopian tube is human-centric. And because of this, it may be best for readers to have the oviduct material in a separate article. That stated, the Oviduct article is small and could be merged into this article as an "Other animals" section...in a comparative anatomy way. Flyer22 Frozen (talk) 04:19, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed merge of [[Oviduct]] into [[:Fallopian tube]] 

message: Suggest using fallopian rather than Fallopian throughout - having evolved a common status - most refs looked at use the lower case Iztwoz (talk) 06:41, 15 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Use of name
Talk:1945 in music

message: In 1945, BB ran weekly best-selling, radio plays, jukebox plays, album, country and R&B charts. That's 6. The circulating chart (Whitburn) combines the first 3, taking the best result of each week, which results in 52-80 #1s for the year, which I don't like. The numerous ties are left as is, which is also no good. If you have a tie for #1, then the next position is #3, not #2. When I am done tabulating the numbers, I will post them in here first. I already did the Folk-Hillbilly chart. The popular chart I posted is a Whitburn temp, to get rid of the short chart that used RYM (a polling site), and other info we do not allow. I wish I had room to fit the songwriters. My goal is to post a decent page with semi-confirmed information and citations, so interested young people can get an idea of the year's music. All the artists and songs google and link to our other pages, which is a great reference to have. The information these pages are based on is far from perfect, which I will write about more. 
Tillywilly17 (talk) 08:15, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Billboard charts
Talk:United States v. The Amistad

message: Lead says "In 1842 the thirty-five who wanted to return to Africa, together with American Christian missionaries, were transported by ship to Sierra Leone." Aftermath and significance section says "Along with several missionaries, in 1842 the surviving 39 Africans sailed to Sierra Leone." (bold added for easy viewing) Is it 35 or 39? If 35, what happened to the other 4? MartinezMD (talk) 02:12, 13 June 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: I found a ref for 35 and changed it. The others had died in the interim. Mojoworker (talk) 22:08, 14 June 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Conflicting numbers 

message: The article currently says, "... the British had entered into a treaty with Spain prohibiting the slave trade south of the equator ...." How did that relate to this case? The Africans were from what is now Sierra Leone, which is north of the equator, and were taken captive and brought to Cuba, which is further north of the equator. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 22:52, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  "South of the equator"?
Talk:United Airlines Flight 93

message: I think it would be important to note in the Aftermath section that numerous individuals, particularly federal investigators, that participated in the response and subsequent investigation into Flight 93 have died from 9/11-related illnesses, particularly due to inhalation of carcinogens at the crash site.
These individuals are as follows:
- Special Agent Laurie Fournier, Federal Bureau of Investigation (December 26, 2009)
- Special Agent William Daniel Craig, Federal Bureau of Investigation (April 9, 2012)
:Much better and specific attribution concerning O’Connor and Walker will be needed. Acroterion (talk) 04:14, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Added additional individual. Removing individuals lacking credible sources. Brandondsantos (talk) 19:45, 1 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Toxin-related deaths 

message: There is a repeating sentence in the introduction.
I am requesting a change from:
"The hijackers planned to crash the plane into a federal government building in the national capital of Washington, D.C. The hijackers planned to crash the plane into a federal government building in Washington, D.C., the U.S. capital."
To:
"The hijackers planned to crash the plane into a federal government building in the city of Washington, D.C., the U.S. capital."
Or:
"The hijackers planned to crash the plane into a federal government building in the national capital of Washington, D.C." Omerhijazi404 (talk) 23:00, 2 September 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 17:43, 3 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 3 September 2023 

message: I believe the following sentence in the Hijacking > Cockpit transmissions and recordings section makes more sense with the word "time" removed: "Officials believe that at around 09:28, the hijackers killed Mark Rothenberg,[47] assaulted the cockpit, and moved the remaining passengers and crew to the rear of the plane time to minimize any chance that either the crew or the passengers would interfere with the attack". Mcneda (talk) 19:41, 25 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit request: A small typo (I think) on 25 September 2023 

message: Picture box in "Hijackers" section is missing a photo of Ahmed al-Haznawi. So it describes 4 people in the caption, but only has photos for 3 of them. Violarulez (talk) 18:06, 9 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  slight error 

message: At Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/I Missed Flight 93 I noted that there is no summary style paragraph of the various movie or TV dramatizations originating from this event. I would consider a comprehensive article to need at least some mention, in the body rather than hatnotes and "see also"s, of these derivative media. But I don't work in FA land much... am I wrong? Jclemens (talk) 06:36, 2 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Currently fails criterion 1.b.
Talk:Avro Lancaster

message: While the British seem under the delusion that the Lancaster was seriously considered for use in dropping the atomic bomb, that was never really the case.  It was a merely a brief suggestion to use the Lancaster, and that suggestion was quickly rejected. The previous stated that the Lancaster was considered for dropping the atomic bomb before the Silverplate program was introduced, which was not true.  When developmental issues arose, it was suggested to use Lancaster, but the idea was rejected for several reasons - the Lancaster lacked the range to fly from the base where the atomic bombs were to be staged, and the US would not have staged the atomic bombs at Okinawa, as being too risky, there possibly being Japanese defenders still hiding out.  Also, the Lancaster did not allow for bombs to be armed in flight, and arming the atomic bombs on the ground would have been rejected as too risky.  Finally, the Lancaster was 70 mph slower than the B-29, and likely would not have escaped the atomic bomb blast, making using the Lancster a suicide mission, something completely unacceptable to the US  The previous version of the article made it seem like it was only American national vanity that prevented using the Lancaster, which was untrue and rather insulting implication. 198.111.162.10 (talk) 00:52, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: I've reverted your changes as they were not reliably sourced - The Youtube video given was not a reliable source. As far as I remember, consideration of the Lancaster as a platform for the atomic bomb was only as a fallback if both the B-29 and B-32 (which shared a common engine) failed - other US (and British) aircraft simply didn't have a big enough bomb-bay to carry the atmomic bomb. Of course this will require sources.Nigel Ish (talk) 14:44, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Assessment - use of the Lancaster for the atomic bomb
Talk:Matthias, Holy Roman Emperor

message: is this mathias II? Vera Cruz
He was Holy Roman Emperor Matthias or Matthias II of Hungary. Just a small issue of enumeration. User:kt2
Can one of the administrators please do something about the correct heading of Matthias, Holy Roman Emperor? his name was written with a double "tt", not one "t". Throughout Wikipedia he is listed as "Matthias". if anyone wishes to keep him with only one "t", then we should redirect that to Matthias, Holy Roman Emperor, and not the other way around...? thanks.
User:antares911
Would his name be translated into english as "Matthew"?
-Alex 12.220.157.93 09:30, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Matthias and Matthew were different persons. (Matthias was selected as an Apostle after Judas Iscariot left the group.)--StanZegel   (talk) 16:07, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: The table at the bottom of the article needs to be corrected, but as I am not quite sure how to do it I hope someone more able than me will. The point is that Matthias was succeeded in the Archduchy of Austria by his younger surviving brother Archduke Albert (VII), who passed the archduchy on to Emperor Ferdinand II in November 1620. It is only from that moment on that all the Hereditary Lands are reunited (and even then briefly). Richardot (talk) 15:34, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: We have an article about Albert VII, Archduke of Austria. Some people claimed that Albert did not reign as Archduke of Austria while others claimed that he did. I can change the succession box but do you have any sources that say he succeeded to the Archduchy? I guess he wouldn't be called Albert VII if he hadn't but having a source to settle the matter once for all would be very helpful. Surtsicna (talk) 20:49, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Succession to the Archduchy of Austria

message: Matthias of Austria better known as Matthias of Austria
Am i missing something here? All the best Wikirictor 01:46, 4 February 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  ?
Talk:Attention

message: There seems to be a discrepancy in the definition of multitasking between the two sections. 
The Multitasking and divided section states that it can be defined as attempting to simultaneously perform two or more tasks. In contrast, the Simultaneous attention section defines simultaneous attention similarly, while instead defining multitasking as the alternating of attention between tasks or the halting of an activity before proceeding to the next. 
The Multitasking section discusses much information that is consistent with the definition it gives. The term simultaneous attention appears to me as redundant as it’s defined almost exactly the same as multitasking. 
To conclude, I propose the information in the Simultaneous section be merged into the Multitasking and divided section and the concept to be given a single and consistent name and definition. 2601:600:987F:1BD0:8507:C545:6179:AC4D (talk) 08:41, 25 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Simultaneous vs multitasking 

message: — Assignment last updated by Sebas0419 (talk) 04:10, 12 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: Human Cognition SP23

message: in the section on Multitasking and dividing, a specific modality model is mentioned, developed by Navon and Gopher. Should there not a citation to a work in which this model is mentioned? Niels.Scholten (talk) 15:08, 2 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Source for the Navon Gopher Theory
Talk:Rebel

message: Hi.  I notice that most of the synonyms for rebel and rebellion have pages of their own, which makes for a bit of mess.  See Insurgent, Freedom fighter, Asymmetric warfare, etc 
.  I put a little paragraph on my talk page with my thoughts on how it's nearly impossible to find what you want if you are looking for something related to irregular warfare.  I've taken it on myself to do some cleanup, and would like to start by melding participant-event articles into the event article.  I am therefore planning on merging and redirecting this article into rebellion unless I hear an objection.  Cheers, BanyanTree 06:35, 12 Dec 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge and redirect notice

message: The redirect Rebel(film) has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at  until a consensus is reached.  Utopes (talk / cont) 05:20, 4 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  "[[:Rebel(film)]]" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]]
Talk:SMPTE timecode

message: This meant that an "hour of timecode" at a nominal frame rate of 29.97 frame/s was longer than an hour of wall-clock time by 3.59 seconds ...
1 hour at 30 fps equals 108,000 farmes; 1 hour at 29.97 fps equals 107892 frames - the difference is 108 frames. 108 frames at 29,77 fps take 3.60... seconds - so I am puzzled about the 3.59 seconds value.  31.18.215.19 (talk) 21:51, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: The math is 3600-3600/1.001 = 3.596403596403200712527678... So it should be reported as 3.6, 3.60 or 3.596... The article currently says 3.6 so we're good. ~Kvng (talk) 20:02, 23 August 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: You used some kind of very bad calculator, without infinite precision arithmetic :( . It is actually just 3. https://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=3600-3600%2F1.001 As for the other value, if you were to use 108000/29.97 it will give you 3. seconds and 108000/30*1.001 will give you perfect 3.6. Valery Zapolodov (talk) 20:58, 18 September 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: , I used Python. I thought that was a good calculator. ~Kvng (talk) 12:34, 21 September 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, it is not, though you can use pyGMP. https://stackoverflow.com/a/11523077/11173412 Though better to outright use GMP in C. Or even better this or Wolfram Alpha: https://github.com/lcn2/calc/blob/a86d62998263a8d7fa76cd89c59314b9aaf4b72e/cal/factorial2.cal#L630  Valery Zapolodov (talk) 13:20, 21 September 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wrong number? 

message: The history statement is incorrect in the HISTORY section of the SMPTE Timecode page. How do I correct it? Cbaudio (talk) 04:45, 30 July 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: The History section is currently unsourced. The first thing to do is find some reliable sources that can be used to support corrections. ~Kvng (talk) 14:05, 4 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wrong history
Talk:The Adventures of Baron Munchausen

message: This quote, which I removed from the budget subsection, has to be sourced:
:Schühly of course is a Munchausen character if there ever was one. The making of the movie is described in details in a book called Losing the Light by Andrew Yule. Schühly comes across as a hopeless buffoon, with little or no knowledge of the movie business, a conjurer of past triumphs that never existed or have been discredited by the real miracle workers, a credit-stealer par excellence when it suits him, a name dropper extraordinaire, more interested in his own publicity than in anything else. The stunts he pulled, the incompetence he displayed, according to the people interviewed, left one either visibly shaken or furious or rolling their eyes. 
Is this a direct quote from someone?  If so, who?  Where is the quote taken from?  If this is a paraphrase, it needs more work, because this is a description of a living person, and could be construed as libellous. ---RepublicanJacobiteTheFortyFive 03:30, 8 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Quote in budget 

message: In the final sentence of the Plot summary there is the oxymoron, As the Baron and Bucephalus are bathed in the light of the sun parting through the clouds, they apparently disappear. 
Would I be justified in rewording this?
Nuttyskin (talk) 13:33, 8 May 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Sure. I'm not sure I like "[sunlight] parting through the clouds" much either... --Fru1tbat (talk) 14:01, 8 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Apparent disappearance 

message: The BFI source that was added to the film in the last day or so lists this film as a British/American/West German co-production.  The sources I have found, though, list two British production companies and one Italian company.  Is there one reliable source that can sort this out?  Beyond distribution, was Columbia involved in the production?  If not, in what way is this an American film?  I can't find any German companies involved in the production. ---The Old JacobiteThe '45 13:00, 15 May 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, there's this. DonIago (talk) 17:07, 15 May 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: That would be more helpful if it listed the production companies.  There's no mention there of Italy. ---The Old JacobiteThe '45 17:21, 15 May 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry, best I could come up with while trying to deal with a few other things. DonIago (talk) 17:22, 15 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nationality of the film? 

message: I think it is time to remove the citation needed template. There are plenty of wikilinks and citations to support the article's content. Jackfork (talk) 05:28, 18 March 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Background, Accolades and Home media aren't especially well-sourced. DonIago (talk) 00:16, 19 March 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removing the Additional Citations template
Talk:Fluoxetine

message: can someone add a disovery section? 
heres an abstract section if an article: https://www.nature.com/articles/nrd1821
In the early 1970s, evidence of the role of serotonin (5-hydroxytryptamine or 5-HT) in depression began to emerge and the hypothesis that enhancing 5-HT neurotransmission would be a viable mechanism to mediate antidepressant response was put forward. On the basis of this hypothesis, efforts to develop agents that inhibit the uptake of 5-HT from the synaptic cleft were initiated. These studies led to the discovery and development of the selective serotonin-reuptake inhibitor fluoxetine hydrochloride (Prozac; Eli Lilly), which was approved for the treatment of depression by the US FDA in 1987. Here, we summarize this research and discuss the many challenges that we encountered during the development of fluoxetine hydrochloride, which has now been widely acknowledged as a breakthrough drug for depression. AnarchistAndrew (talk) 02:12, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  discovery 

message: what does it mean here? does it mean for example x 10 (meaning TIMES in multiplication?) 85.24.186.196 (talk) 19:12, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: It probably meant either "standard deviation" or "standard error". However, this is an encyclopedia entry, not a scientific article, so was not necessary. I deleted these symbols and cleaned up the table a bit. One could even argue that a table of binding affinities is too much in the weeds for an encyclopedia article. But I like it, so will not be advocating for its deletion. Jaredroach (talk) 22:47, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  what does the ± mean here?
Talk:Value-added reseller

message: end of first paragraph has a sentence fragment, as if it was partially edited and forgotten. Nastajus (talk) 18:31, 12 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  sentence fragment 

message: * Is the "VAR" an SI unit? Or is it a unit at all? -- S.
: It's a unit, but not an SI unit.  Heron
: It is listed on the VAR disambiguation page --nezZario (talk) 20:06, 12 April 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  As a SI unit 

message: When I looked at this page, there were a bunch of inline citations that just said "compuBase".  No link and no further explanation.  I removed this and instead put  tags.  I don't know if this was a poor attempt to spam, or what.
Additionally the current "References" were marked as external links.  I changed them for references as they look fairly reputable as a general source. --nezZario (talk) 20:06, 12 April 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ambiguous references removed