lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Bejan Daruwalla

message: The responses added under the section of references against some of the amusing predictions cited in the main article do not follow the wiki-policy of keeping out any discussions or adding rejoinders in any of the wiki-articles. On the other hand, the responses themselves are not so much to the point as well. The first response is regarding the "flying trains and cars" prediction which is explained away in the form of Chinese Maglev trains when the technology itself isn't anything new and was already being used in Germany and Japan in 1980s and even before. There were no breakthroughs made by International Space Station in or before 2007 which can possibly make up for "the secrets of space" being discovered as such. Last but not the least, the response to aliens visiting us (India) on 26th January, 2008 is equally amusing. Traditionally, the heads of some foreign country are invited over to grace the event, then what is so special about the French first couple which warrants labeling them as "aliens." If aliens are considered in the sense of "people from another land," then, as explained earlier, every year "aliens" are invited as chief guest for our Republic Day celebrations. However, if one reads the article containing original prediction (which can be viewed by clicking on the reference), one can see that the astrologer was speaking about aliens coming from space, i.e., extraterrestrials. Taking all of the abovecited reasons into consideration, the responses are being removed from the page altogether. --MazeOfThoughts (talk) 11:47, 27 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: If you want to add reliable information to the article, do not mix it with puffery. Adding things like "great" and "revered" is unencyclopedic and reduces the credibility of the other stuff you are adding at the same time. So, please learn how to do it right. WP:BETTER may be a good place to start. --Hob Gadling (talk) 06:56, 8 June 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Edit war
Category talk:Pioneers of photography

message: This category needs to have some sort of definition about what a "pioneer" is. There are a few 20th century photographers in the list, and they don't seem to fit. I'd propose that the definition be "photographers who completed most of their work by 1880" but that's just one possibility. Thoughts?
Lexaxis7 (talk) 23:28, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: The 1880 limit seems a bit far off. Photography wasn't that new by then. It makes more sense to set the time back further to 1860, which still contains a lot of people. Cesias7 (talk) 11:52, 3 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pioneers?
Talk:Universe at War: Earth Assault Original Soundtrack

message: Nice to see the artice up, not so long but im quite happy. Alltso thx 2 SkyWalker for make so much. --Overcow's talky page. ^^ (talk) 15:33, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Good job to you too. I was writing the article when i was about to submit i got edit conflict. So i was wondering was created article first so i saw you. Anyways no problem about that. You did a good job. Now the article is completely over. :P. Regarding your second question. The picture you see is Mirabel. She is one of heroes and playable character in UAW:EA. So if you get the game. You will have fun with the game. :). More about mirabel can be read here http://universeatwar.wikia.com/wiki/Mirabel_and_Viktor.--SkyWalker (talk) 15:47, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Nice

message: Shouldn't there be a mention of the G.A.N.G. award nomination? More info at . --ReCover (talk) 00:03, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mention of G.A.N.G. award nomination?
Template talk:Ursula K. Le Guin

message: Okay, I've been trying to get this template into some form of order, and I'd appreciate input, if anybody is still watching this. Essentially, I'm uncertain about which collections should be a part of this, and which short stories need to be mentioned individually. Any thoughts would be welcome. Vanamonde (talk) 14:53, 10 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Contents
Talk:MHE

message: "MHE" is Adam Douglas Manella and Michael Raymond Russell. In 2005 they worked with Heliocentrics drummer Malcolm Catto at Mike Burnham's Tardis Studio in Australia. All of their releases have been on sound in color.
see: http://controller7.com/forum/viewforum.php?f=1         search "mhe"
see:http://www.ninjatune.net/forum/threads.php?offset=75&by=5&1200668835       search "mhe"
see:http://www.accesshiphop.com/store/?itemid=8401  for "mhe description"
see:http://www.stonesthrow.com/nowagain/      search "mhe"  
my definition of mhe was exact. mhe was a band, "machines have emotions" but is now mrr-adm on now and again record. previosly on sound in color... mrr-adm is adam manella and mike russell.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by GEARY EMBLEM (talk • contribs) 16:00, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I looked at all the links you provided. Two are forums, which are not considered reliable sources. One is a page selling the album, which tells nothing about why it's notable, just that there is some web page that sells it. And the last one doesn't even seem to mention MHE. If you can find any actual reliable sources that show it's notable, by all means add them to the article; however, the ones you linked to above do not seem to provide that. Pyrospirit (talk · contribs) 16:05, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

text: Not a problem, we were all new at some point. I strongly recommend you read Wikipedia:Notability (music), a page that gives a lot of useful information on what is notable enough for inclusion on Wikipedia. Remember, some topics just aren't notable enough, and the article may be deleted anyway. Still, if you can find good sources, that will help a lot. Pyrospirit (talk · contribs) 16:15, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

text: No, those still don't seem to show notability. The first one is just a listing of their works, which is very different from independent coverage that establishes notability. The second one seems to just be their own site or a related site, which is not an independent, reliable source for information establishing their notability. Pyrospirit (talk · contribs) 16:22, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

text: You aren't proving that "mhe is mhe"; you need to show that MHE is notable enough of a topic to be included in Wikipedia. Just showing a list of their tracks isn't enough. Pyrospirit (talk · contribs) 16:34, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:English, August

message: Since there are only two things called English, August, I thought it redundant to have a disambiguation page to distinguish between them. Instead, I recommend we move English, August (novel) to English, August, with a dablink from there to English, August (film). If you disagree, everything is as it was - just revert English, August to a disambig page. If you agree, either delete English, August (novel), or move it on top of English, August. Gaurav (talk) 12:34, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Can't see that is makes a whole lot of difference - just more work. However not against it. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 12:52, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Move to English, August? 

message: The entire plot introduction bit seemed to be the main problem with the article, I have removed it.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.79.77.165 (talk) 19:00, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit
Talk:Kingdom of Sorrow

message: I have edited a few of the links .. Cautionary note here folks, there is more than one Matthew Brunson.  The straight forward Matthew Brunson link takes you to a charming baseball player but sadly talented as he is, he ain't the bass player for KoS  Elastic2303 (talk) 15:45, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Links Tweeks
Talk:GNOME Foundation

message: Is it worth to include this in the article? Here you can see more info about it here. Comment? Physicsmathftw (talk) 07:57, 24 November 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  GNOME Foundation defends its trademark from Groupon. 
Template talk:Long Island class escort carrier

message: Just to explain I have added this template to :category:United Kingdom military ship templates due to its inclusion of the Royal Navy ship HMS Archer (D78). Other templates where ships classes have served in navies other than the original generally follow this approach, but if anyone objects I am happy to discuss further.  Dunarc (talk) 19:31, 20 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Categories addition explanation
Talk:Wenceslaus III Adam, Duke of Cieszyn

message: Wenceslas Adam can not be part of Cathegory:Polish Lutherans. He was not duke in the Polish kingdom. Nationality of silesian nobility in the XVI century can not be described by modern terms. --Qasinka (talk) 17:47, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Tak samo jak narodowość ludzi z ziym czeskich, kierzi tu sóm pod kategoriami "Czech", co je termin kiery se pojawił w 19. wieku. Ocenióm Twojóm ponownóm starość o SC, jednak nie wiym, czy aby na pewno je to jyny starość o klarowność albo za tym je jaki anty-polski sentyment. Jak załatwisz, że wszystkich "czeskich" średnowiecznych np. świyntych usunóm z kategorii "Czech" a ostatnich polskich średnowiecznych z kategorii "Polish" tak se zgodzym aji na tych dwóch chłopców. --Darwinek (talk) 17:54, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Załączenie tych ludzi do grupy "czeski" lub "polski" opiera się na tym, że żyli na terenie królestwa Czech lub Polski.  Jakiż polski wątek znajdziesz u Wacława Adama? Żaden - za wyjątkiem dawnego pochodzeia dynastycznego - ale w myśl takiego rozumowania musiała by Elżbieta II należeń do kategorii "Niemcy", bo wywodzi się z niemieckiej dynastii Saxo-Coburg-Gotha. --Qasinka (talk) 18:00, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  To potym krolestwo Czech je "Kingdom of Bohemia", a ni "Czech", termin kiery oznaczo nowoczesnom czeskom narodowosc. W tym je problem. Albo kategoryzujymy pod kategoriami narodowymi wszystkich (stan obecny, mrkni na tych swiyntych) albo zodnego. Chodzi jyny o konzystencyj. Mie je jasne, ze Waclaw III Adam by o sobie nie rzyk ze je Polok. Rzyk by "jo je ksionze cieszynski", to ni ma zodno tajemnica. -- Darwinek (talk) 18:05, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

text: Ale to nic nnie mjyni na tym, że nie widzym żodyn polski wótek u Waclawa Adama. Jo myślym, że beje lepi dać precz przymiotnik "polski", bo je bezpodstawowy. Swjynci sie niekategoryz'om podle narodowosci, ale podle ziymje, kaj zyli. --Qasinka (talk) 18:13, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: So, should I delete Category Polish Lutherans or add Cathegory Czech Lutherans and German Lutherans? --Qasinka (talk) 18:35, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

text: Dej tam jyny Lutherans, to beje najlepsze. - Darwinek (talk) 07:26, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Inapropriate cathegory
Talk:Love and Freindship

message: The title is misspelled.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.185.60.250 (talk) 03:12, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It is supposed to be- Austin herself misspelled it.  However, many modern day printings, including the one in the Norton Anthology of English Literature, correct the misspelling.  Also, the very fact that this (unsigned) user was confused shows that this topic should be better addressed and explained in the article.  Rudy Breteler (talk) 05:46, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Did Austen misspell it on purpose, as a joke of some kind (or a misspelling by her characters), or was it a legitimate error? Equinox ◑ 18:31, 3 January 2019 (UTC)

message: I'm removing the section "Film adaptations", since it deals only with an adaptation of Lady Susan .  The fact that that projected film happens (at the moment) to be called "Love and Friendship" isn't enough to give it any relevance to this article.  See also Love and Friendship (film). --Antiquary (talk) 11:10, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Film adaptations
Talk:Green market

message: This page was created by a new editor, and has some useful information, so instead of deleting it, why not merge it with the main article green marketing.Λua∫Wise (talk) 16:31, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: because marketing and a market are not the same things. however, I think this article is not quite correct. In lit, the green market refers to the ecologically correct market, and it seems the original author has mixed this up with the grey market. I'm tempted to delete the whole thing and make it a redirect. pschemp | talk 16:25, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I am not a big expert on the subject but I believe a green market and a grey market are 2 different things, where the former refers to a market where environmentally safe product are sold. I am of course always ready to be correct! Anyway, the merger with green marketing is simply because the 2, although discussing different terms, they have the same ideas and main body, so similar that we can merge them.Λua∫Wise (talk) 20:20, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay, perhaps I should remove the tag now. Λua∫Wise (talk) 17:46, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Merging
Talk:Rumble Fish (novel)

message: Is there a reason why a character list appears at the beginning of the article?  Might need some work. 66.191.19.68 (talk) 22:23, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Character list? 

message: I think that "Rumble Fish" was an excelent story with a great message. There was one phrase "The pet shop gave me the creeps, with all those little animals waiting around to belong to somebody." I think that this line is a great summery for this story. They all wanted to fit in and belong to someone. In the story they went around beating eachother up and killing for no reason at all. 
I would definately reccomend this book for anyone over about age 11. 
***** Five stars all the way.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.219.212.99 (talk) 21:47, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  

message: The plot summary gives almost no synopsis of the book.  Also, Rusty-James did not run his own gang during the book; it specifically says that the time of gangs was over.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.71.22.130 (talk) 04:24, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: This entire article reads like a school paper.  The character list offers almost no useful information, and the Themes and Symbols sections contain some questionable interpretations, especially with nothing being sourced.  I haven't read the book in years and don't remember much of it, and I don't really have the time to read it at the present time.  Maybe someone more familiar with the book could help flesh this out? TransOceanic (talk) 19:16, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Plot summary insufficient 

message: Where did all those themes come from with no source? They could easily just be someones opinion or something gotten from a high school English class. Should they be removed until a source is given? AdventurousSquirrel (talk) 23:34, 2 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Themes
Category talk:Political organizations by issue

message: Thinking about how to handle organization category names when there are a variety of organizations working with different activities in the same sphere -- e.g., advocacy (pro, anti), research, regulation, education, etc. Seems like the formulation "topic-related activities" would clearly delineate an umbrella category under which various subcategories could go.  Seem reasonable? --Lquilter (talk) 16:39, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: category names
Talk:Imidazolidinyl urea

message: * http://scholar.google.com/scholar?as_q=cosmetic+accident&num=10&btnG=Search+Scholar&as_epq=&as_oq=&as_eq=&as_occt=title&as_sauthors=&as_publication=&as_ylo=&as_yhi=&as_sdt=1.&as_sdtp=on&as_sdts=5&hl=en
--124.78.210.114 (talk) 09:33, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why is the compendial status necessary
Talk:Magnesium citrate (3:2)

message: "...not very soluble in water and has a bitter taste."
According to my experience it is normally soluble especially in warm water. And a bitter taste is just not present, if any then only a very light rather subtile one. May be its also depending on the chemical quality from world regions with different production standards and possible contaminations with other undesirable substances? I did always use European resp. German quality. --Dankedaniel (talk) 22:38, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Properties
Talk:Ministry of Aliyah and Integration

message: The article One Million Plan was proposed to be merged into Aliyah Bet, please discuss it at talk:Aliyah Bet#Merger.GreyShark (dibra) 16:43, 14 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Relevant RFM proposal

message: * The current English website calls itself "Ministry of Aliyah and Integration".
* The current Hebrew website calls itself , Misrad HaAliyah VeHaKlitah, "Ministry of Aliyah and ?".
* At , it has four different names over history:
** "Minister of Immigration" through 1951;
** "Minister of Immigrant Absorption" through 2016;
** "Minister of Aliyah and Integration" through 18 Nov 2018;
** "Minister of Immigration and Absorption" currently
* The Knesset minister history I cited shows only two titles:
** "Minister of Immigration" through 1951;
** "Minister of Immigration and Absorption" currently
* At , it claims the Ministry was renamed (when?) to .
Is this just an issue of translation "immigration" vs. Aliyah and "integration" vs. "absorption" vs. klitah/klitat)? Are the English names official and, if so, correct? (I'm a total novice at Hebrew)
BTW, is there a good reason for the differing date formats in the history table? dd mmmm yyyy seems to be the preferred format in government and newspapers. —[AlanM1(talk)]— 15:49, 12 April 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: , I can't help, but you could try asking one of the wikipedians in these categories. Fiamh (talk, contribs) 23:21, 1 November 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Name confusion
Talk:Trading strategy

message: A section or page about the 'high-speed trading' or 'flash trading' strategy?
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/25/business/25trading.html
http://www.dailyfinance.com/2009/08/01/wall-street-ripoff-2-0-high-speed-trading-and-deep-dark-pools/
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124940289965505053.html  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.24.123.104 (talk) 17:24, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  High-speed trading 

message: Recently, the text  was reinserted into the article. The sources that are cited (at least the ones I have access to; I don't have F, catholique) do not seem to support these allegations, and I question whether they would be reliable sources for these claims. For example, the edubourse source has no byline, so we cannot identify who wrote it. I also don't see any editorial influence on this site. As for the Catholic Encyclopedia, it may be a reliable source (although it is a tertiary source, which I believe we try to avoid relying on), but the linked entry deals with speculation in general, not "trading strategies", and it certainly does not say anything about criticism by economists or wide opposition by investors. (I would add that the inserted text also contains some weasel words.) The thrust of the CE entry may be that some forms of speculation are considered immoral by the author, but there's no indication that the author is referring to "trading strategies" in particular. 
As such, I've removed the text from the article. I welcome feedback from other editors on the matter. /wiae /tlk 11:57, 12 July 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Let me add that I have no particular objection to a "Criticism of trading strategies" section, but only if it can be properly sourced to reliable sources on economics that discuss the subject in appropriate detail. Thanks, /wiae /tlk 12:00, 12 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recent additions to the article 

message: The page offers nothing useful, and is confusing. Defining short trading (presumably not to be confused with shorting), and then defining long trading as the opposite. I was rapidly put off, and learned nothing from the page. For instance, what does this "The difference between short trading and long-term investing is in the opposite approach and principles" mean?
Later on the article talks about there being 2 types of algorithm, then had a list of techniques, without explaining which category each belongs to. 
What does "In the moral context speculative activities are considered negatively and to be avoided by each individual. Who conversely should maintain a long-term horizon avoiding any types of short term speculation." mean?[Special:Contributions/2A00:23C8:A20:1E01:1A1C:F3AA:A97E:8DDF|2A00:23C8:A20:1E01:1A1C:F3AA:A97E:8DDF]] (talk) 07:33, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unreadable
Talk:Fleet Science Center

message: The Fleet Science Center was re-branded in December 2016. It no longer carries the "Reuben H." portion. How can the title and page name be changed?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.164.101.2 (talk) 21:17, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Change page title" 

message: Re "The STS was used for many years but has been replaced by a more modern projector": what projector  would that be? I tried to find some information on their website, but did't (and lost patience with the navigation). Jim (talk) 17:06, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  "More modern projector" 

message: You know, with all that information on the center's history, perhaps there should be a citation as to where that information comes from. I'd like to be able to use this all for a report, for example, but I'm unable to as Wiki citations aren't allowed.
Perhaps we should label this article as needing citations? Roybertito (talk) 19:05, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Citations? 

message: Nevermind, I went ahead and marked it as needing citations anyway. Hell, I marked it as unreferenced, there's no reliable source listed for any of this info. Roybertito (talk) 18:57, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I've added some citations and removed the "unreferenced" tag, but it would still be good to find sources for all the detailed information about the projection system. --MelanieN (talk) 15:40, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Update
File talk:Gibbous-Crescent-half-ellipse-in-circle.svg

message: AnonyMoos link below seems to have a problem:
        This XML file does not appear to have any style information associated with it. The document tree is shown below. ...
The link below it seems fine, so I infer the problem is not with my browser.
(71.126.128.173 (talk) 17:08, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: That's the message you get when you try to view an SVG file in an application that knows XML, but doesn't know anything about SVG specifically... AnonMoos (talk) 06:58, 12 June 2008 (UTC)