lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Juan d'Anyelica

message: I talked last week (Oct06) to the percussionist who plays with Juan d'Anyelica's group Flamenco Fusion.  Juan is difficult to chat with since he speaks almost no English and seems introverted with his audience.  The group plays more weekends than not at The Roots, a couple nights a week without the violinist at the Gran Melia in Cancun.  Juan was born and raised in Spain, not far from Madrid.  He credits Paco De Lucia as his teacher.  He has two DVDs for sale currently, Flamenco Fusion (the group) and Salud (mostly solo).  Apparently he is in the process of scoring the music for a third one.  Listening to Juan d'Anyelica is spell-binding.  Not only is he technically great on the classical guitar, his interpretation of various pieces shows a unique style.  The pieces come out not only melodic with intricate rhythms, but also rapid fire with intriguing variations on the theme(anonymous user)
Juan's band 'Flamenco Fusion' can be viewed on their web site www.Flamenco-Fusion.com  - Photo's, video clips & audio segments from their live concert can be seen and heard on that site. ResortBands.com the largest entertainment company in Cancun can provide information about current concerts, bookings and their new CD recordings by sending email to them from either web site.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.149.106.69 (talk) 23:47, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:James C. Terrell

message: There is no mention of slave-owning in the article, and I feel that this category has been slipped-in, here and elsewhere, as a rubber-stamp smear, like 'Holocaust Perpetrator'. I suggest that this category should be restricted to people whose slave-owning history was notable in itself. Valetude (talk) 14:05, 12 April 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Category:American slave owner
Talk:John W. A. Sanford

message: No mention of slave-owning whatever in the article. I feel that this category should be restricted to people whose slave-owning history was notable in itself. Valetude (talk) 16:12, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: I added mention. FloridaArmy (talk) 15:54, 13 December 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Category:American slave owners
Talk:Cushing Dolbeare

message: The extract is too, too long. The article cannot be concise with an extract of that length. Rintrah 10:21, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that "as is" the letter does not make a good encyclopedia article, but if you were to take time to "wikify" and edit the letter, it would.  Therefore, as an interim step, I moved the letter to a footnote to preserve this original content. Castellanet 20:40, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry, I don't understand. If I edited it, it would no longer be the original source. I don't think wikipedia is supposed to quote original sources beyond a certain length. Could not the letter be preserved in a link instead, for the interested reader, or quoted in smaller extracts selected by relevance? Rintrah 14:08, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Right, it would be best to quote this information somewhere else on the internet, with a link, but in the case it doesn't exist anywhere else.  Here we have unique, original biographical information that should be used to make the article.  I think you have a good idea to break up the letter into sections selected by relevance. Castellanet 03:26, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry, I didn't mean to sound nasty. You could publish the letter on wikisource—I think this is the right name—or another wikiproject, and then provide a link in the article. The Main Page has links to the wikiprojects. Rintrah 11:56, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No offense taken, I agree there is a problem here, I just want to use the info instead of lose it.  Wikisource is a good idea, I checked it out, but sources such as this don't seem to be common there either.  More work remains to fix this one. Castellanet 02:47, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I removed the letter since the whole inclusion almost surely violates copyright. You can always access it through the article history if you wish to use it. BuddingJournalist 07:41, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Family letter 
Talk:San Francisco Sheriff's Office

message: I think the assessment still applies just for now. The reference section needs to be fixed as per MoS, I don't think an article that doesn't have enough footnotes to be flagged for a WP:DYK should make B class quite yet. Also, did a user definitely take that picture of the sherif himself? That needs checking, doesn't quite look like it. SGGH speak! 09:08, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah now, I see what the uploader has done. But the reference comments still applies, there are a number of uncited statements. SGGH speak! 09:10, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Assessment

message: Can somebody post an image(picture) of the old SFSD patch(which, if I remember correctly showed the Golden Gate Bridge w/ a sunset in the western background, all inside the seven-point star)?...Michaela92399 02:11, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  SFSD shoulder patches:old and new... 

message: I note press reports that the sheriff has plead guilty to domestic violence charges. He is trying to stay in the job. Notable? Paul, in Saudi (talk) 04:05, 13 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Sheriff pleads guilty
Talk:Suez Canal Bridge

message: Being largely ignorant of maritime and civil engineering technology, could somebody clarify whether the following two statements are in fact contradictory:
"It has a 70 meter clearance over the canal " - found in the first paragraph of the introduction.  
"The clearance under the bridge is 68 meters" - found in the fourth paragraph of the introduction.
I know the clearance will presumably vary dependent on the water level in the canal, but is there another more technical reason why these two values do not match, or is one of them simply incorrect? ColourSarge (talk) 17:22, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I've looked at the linked-to suezmax article, which also claims .  It could be a matter of tolerances.  That is, they might have declared that a  gap is necessary for safety. - Denimadept (talk) 22:54, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Maximum clearance 

message: The two statements made in the article are in fact correct from two different angles, the bridge has a overall clearance from water level within the canal (tidal movement is very small in this area) of 70 meters, the maximum height (Air Draft) of any vessel transiting the canal is set at 68 meters by the Suez Canal Authority. This maximum allows a 2 meter safety margin, the Bridge of the Americas over the Panama Canal has the same safety factor built in.
90.52.6.140 (talk) 12:51, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I've looked at the linked-to suezmax article, which also claims .  It could be a matter of tolerances.  That is, they might have declared that a  gap is necessary for safety. - Denimadept (talk) 22:54, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Maritime Limits

message: What heights are the US aircraft carriers when in transit in the canal? I would expect the island would be close to the maximum limits? Jcw69 (talk) 12:49, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Aircraft carriers

message: It's a "peace bridge" but both images we've got have military hardware in the foreground.  Perhaps it'd be a Good Idea to crop that bit out? - Denimadept (talk) 22:57, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Peace bridge, but 

message: The link to the Kajima website no longer brings up that article. Dgndenver (talk) 04:48, 13 March 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Kajima link
Talk:James Archibald Meriwether

message: Either there is an error in his dates of service as a judge, or the wrong person is being labeled as a judge, since I really doubt he was a judge at age 5 as the dates given in the article claim. Carolina wren (talk) 02:36, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  A judge at age 5? 

message: No mention of slave-owning. I feel that this category should be restricted to people whose slave-owning history was notable in itself. Valetude (talk) 17:09, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Category:American slave owners
Talk:Antoine Brumel

message: The usually reliable "Golberg" says that Brumel died after 1520.
http://www.goldbergweb.com/en/news/espana/2004/01/17502.php
Ogg 10:27, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I wish they'd say where they got that date from; I've never seen it anywhere else.  The most recent Grove entry has 1512-1513; the 1980 Grove says "approximately 1515."  Nothing certain is known about his life or activity after about 1512, unless something has been discovered in the last few months.  Antandrus  (talk) 16:05, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: When he died

message: I've reviewed this article as part of the Composers project review of its B-class articles.  This article is B-class; it needs at least a complete works list, but would also benefit from an image and more inline citations.  My full review is on the comments page; questions and comments should be left here or on my talk page. Magic♪piano 16:59, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Composer project review

message: I propose that Missa pro defunctis (Brumel) be merged into Antoine Brumel. I think that the content in the Missa pro defunctis (Brumel) article can easily be explained in the context of Antoine Brumel (most of it already is) and the Antoine Brumel article is of a reasonable size that the merging of Missa pro defunctis (Brumel)  will not cause any problems as far as article size or undue weight is concerned. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 17:48, 21 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merger proposal
Talk:Kiwi FM

message: But,later in 2006. Channel z was opened through lennox media brockers from Greymouth. It was latter changed to Xfm(possibly traded from the american version). It has the same playlist as Channel z.But qiute alot of hip-hop,rap, dance etc.And less rock. It then became a hit radio station like zm(for example)and couldn't buy a Christchurch frequency. Making it all rock and having some old Channel z games and shows and the old Channel z name if they can(eg.circle of sound,Friday Ryder),local concert and band suppoart and suppoart for artists and other radio plus a Christchurch/canturbery frequency will raise it's appeal
:Needs a big citation needed! Mysterywikipedian (talk) 00:19, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Channel z rebirth
Talk:Saint Mark's Coptic Orthodox Cathedral

message: Description on Coptic Pope's Seat is in dispute within en-Wikipedia. And English statement is not equivalent with ths 
Arabic Wikipedia. We cannot know the location of this church on Google map, bacause the 'district' is nonexistent on the map. With tha aid of ar-Wikipedia, we can find not the St Mark Church but St Maria Church. The previous contributers must solve this kind of controversy.--Ymatsui4 (talk) 12:08, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

message: During a funeral the cathedral was attacked, news from 2013. http://english.ahram.org.eg/NewsContent/1/64/68656/Egypt/Politics-/Updated-Clashes-outside-Coptic-cathedral-after-att.aspx "It was the first time in the history of the church, that its seat was attacked in that fashion!" from Book: History of the Coptic Orthodox People and the Church of Egypt, Author: Robert Morgan  Date: September 23, 2016 Publisher: FriesenPress, Level C (talk) 06:00, 20 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Church was attacked in April, 2013 

message: I edited the caption of the current picture in the Architecture section to correctly identify the walkway as alongside rather than within the cathedral. I found a couple of pictures of the actual interior here: http://www.orthodoxartsjournal.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/Mideast-Egypt_Horo-7.jpg and here: http://www.brownpoliticsmemo.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/Leber-st.-marks-2.jpg but could not find a public use image. Patrickwooldridge (talk) 17:16, 11 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  View inside cathedral
Talk:Walter T. Colquitt

message: Colquitt could not have married Lane's daughter in 1823 because Lane was born in 1801 and could not have had a daughter old enough to be maried in 1823.
See link:
http://politicalgraveyard.com/families/10335.html  — Preceding unsigned comment added by NCDane (talk • contribs) 22:50, 7 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Colquitt not Lane's son in law
Talk:Khedivial Opera House

message: Needs Arabic name. Badagnani (talk) 23:48, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Arabic name needed
Talk:Ramses Station

message: That was a decade ago. Can we get an update?173.60.95.232 (talk)  —Preceding undated comment added 17:14, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  As of January 2001 it was undergoing a major modernisation. 
Talk:Unknown Soldier Memorial (Egypt)

message: Why is the principal picture of the Unknown Soldier Memorial in sideways?  Otherwise, it is an excellent picture.  I don't know how to correct this, but some Wikipedia editor must know.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.239.152.174 (talk) 19:12, 27 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: This article is about one single notable memorial in Cairo. Anything that is not in Cairo, or is not the one being discussed, needs to be removed. The fact that a war memorial exists somewhere is not notable. TooManyFingers (talk) 02:56, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: If I have misunderstood, and this article is intended to be a list of many or all of Egypt's war memorials, then the article's title should be changed to reflect that - but again I seriously question whether every war memorial in every country is actually notable to a worldwide audience. TooManyFingers (talk) 14:18, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
replies: text:  It should be changed to List of Unknown Soldier Memorials in Egypt. --The Eloquent Peasant (talk) 14:58, 3 June 2022 (UTC)

text: There's this article as well: Tomb of the Unknown Soldier ... --The Eloquent Peasant (talk) 15:01, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
replies: text:  In that case, it's a stunningly incomplete list. There must be many thousands of war memorials around the world. IMO it's ridiculous to assume that they are all worth listing, because so many of them are non-notable. So I don't really support the title change you proposed - I think the majority of them should be removed from Wikipedia.  TooManyFingers (talk) 20:19, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
replies: text:  I don't see anything wrong with this article as is. --The Eloquent Peasant (talk) 13:26, 4 June 2022 (UTC)

text: Egypt has been in a lot of wars.  Just last month about 15 Egyptian soldiers were killed. Since just a few years back, 3700 Egyptian soldiers have been killed and about 10,000 injured Egyptian soldiers. These are approximate  recent numbers in one of Egypt's wars (against ISIS and insurgents).. I don't think we should be eliminating any information in this article. --The Eloquent Peasant (talk) 00:44, 5 June 2022 (UTC)

text:  The fact that countries have wars, even very recent wars, even wars in which many people died, has nothing to do with whether certain monuments belong in the encyclopedia. There are millions of monuments around the world, but not many monuments belong in the encyclopedia. And trying to make Wikipedia itself serve as a war memorial is a mistake. Most soldiers are not heroes. If an individual is a hero, create a page about that person. If a monument is a notable piece of art, so that people who didn't know about the war are still travelling to see the monument, create a new article about it. TooManyFingers (talk) 18:37, 23 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removing coat-rack material
Talk:Al-Hakim Mosque

message: With hope that someone would be interested: the article needs some clean-up for style and content. Like several other Fatimid-related pages, it seems to have been written mainly from a Dawoodi Bohra perspective, which is okay and a good start, but the emphasis is on this one modern restoration rather than on the full rich history of the mosque. Moreover, the tone of the article is unclear and maybe not encyclopedic at times; e.g. at point it speaks of a "miracle" without clarifying what this means. The page also needs inline citations so that we know where each piece of information comes from. </br>
(I would do some of this myself but am working on many other pages. In addition to the already listed references, some very easy English-language sources to consult are Bernard O'Kane's "Mosques of Egypt" and Caroline Williams' "Islamic Monuments in Cairo: The Practical Guide", maybe even Michael Brett's "The Fatimid Empire".)
Casual Builder (talk) 19:36, 3 November 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Issues with the article

message: I had another look at the article and it's still a mess, so I've done a major overhaul by reorganizing the sections and revising the text. I've left some remaining issues tagged. In particular, the article had a lot of unsourced information as well as original research, some of which was followed by citations to sources that did not support it in any substantial way (or in some cases didn't speak to the topic at all). In particular, see some major deletions and/or rewriting in these edits: , , . With this revision, I think the most urgent issues have been addressed, so I will remove the maintenance tags at the top of the article. 
This will be obvious to experienced editors, but for everyone else: in the future, please do not add your own original research  to the article and do not add non-trivial information without citing reliable sources. Please also ensure you maintain Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and an encyclopedic tone; this means you should not be using the article to give your opinion of the mosque (or of its controversial restoration, for example), but merely reporting what reliable sources have to say about it. If you're unsure about your edits (or if they were reverted and you want to better understand why), you can ask about it on this talk page. Thanks, R Prazeres (talk) 21:56, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: June 2022
Talk:Robert Grier Stephens Jr.

message: As Stephens already had a law degree when he entered the Army, it is likely that he was commissioned.  If true/verified, the correct category should be US Army officers.  As we don't have verification, I've catted him as US Army personnel.--S. Rich (talk) 21:43, 19 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Army service -- officer or enlisted?
Talk:List of Pucca episodes

message: I make my new rule nobdy can make any page on this list redirected to back fotr this page. Lucaspet 18:36, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Lucaspet, Wikipedia works by consensus, not by you making new rules. Please read WP:EPISODE and WP:Notability, as you've been asked to do multiple times, and then tell us why you think the individual episode articles meet those guidelines. --Fabrictramp | talk to me 19:04, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  One good rule 

message: Excuse me, but is there an episode called Cowboy Years? Should you put the date on that?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Puccafan920 (talk • contribs) 15:26, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cowboy Years discussion 

message: after 3 years of episodes, they stopped airing :(  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.244.146.15 (talk) 12:23, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Oh No... :( 

message: Some of the descriptions of a few of these episodes are wrong. Could someone please fix that? 2603:6011:54F0:9680:A4BC:7B21:45A8:7D2F (talk) 19:12, 9 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Info problems
Talk:Pledge drive

message: If any editors are looking to add to this article, they may wish to mention that Wikipedia currently have an online pledge drive ongoing, in the form of "dontate to us!" boxes on every page.
Anthonycfc (talk • email • tools) 11:00, Thursday December 28 2006 (UTC) 
:Self-references (i.e. talking about a subject in terms of Wikipedia) is generally not considered an appropriate way to illustrate an article.  If you think users might come to the article because they want to find out about the pledge drive a disambiguation sentence at the top would be OK, though I think the big banner asking user to donate is probably obvious enough.  -- Siobhan Hansa 12:24, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Wikipedia pledge drive
Talk:Tunnel of love (ride)

message: I wish this article was better. 212.1.153.90 11:07, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you for your suggestion. When you feel an article needs improvement, please feel free to make those changes.  Wikipedia is a wiki, so anyone can edit almost any article by simply following the Edit this page link at the top. The Wikipedia community encourages you to be bold in updating pages. Don't worry too much about making honest mistakes — they're likely to be found and corrected quickly. If you're not sure how editing works, check out how to edit a page, or use the sandbox to try out your editing skills.  New contributors are always welcome. You don't even need to log in (although there are many reasons why you might want to).   194.151.6.70 15:10, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
Talk:Journeyman (sports)

message: If this article "relates specifically to sports", why is wrasselin' mentioned? Zenmiester 11:17, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wrasselin' 

message: The section on the American English usage dedicates a lot of space to snooker, cricket, and (association) football. This can either be taken as proof that there's no real trans-Atlantic distinction, or it needs to be cleaned up. Meesher (talk) 12:08, 16 December 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd vote for "no real trans-Atlantic distinction".  There's barely a "sports" and "non-sports" distinction, beyond frequency of deployment of the cliché.  The OED online gives the definition "A worker or sports player who is reliable but not outstanding"... for UK and US English.  The "American football" subsection is almost entirely concerned with analysing usage in what the article's just called the "British English" sense ("who had played for four or more teams").  The idea of a distinction is very weakly sourced, with the same two sources used across both journeyman and journeyman (sports) -- the twice-used "BrEng" source being...  a La Gazzetta dello Sport article.  Can't say for certain if the original was in Italian, as the link is also broken.  Needs more sources, needs better sources, needs to try to make less of a distinction that it very clearly can't sustain.  109.255.211.6 (talk) 20:48, 24 November 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: American/British English

message: The description of a journeyman in boxing seems quite out of date. It would probably have been accurate 50 years ago, but today the term is usually used to describe boxers who take fights with no intention of winning them - they just want to get through the rounds without being stopped or getting injured so that they can be out again the next weekend. These were historically referred to as 'opponent fighters'. I'll dig out some sources when I can. --Michig (talk) 17:32, 5 November 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Needs update re. boxing