lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Douglas A2D Skyshark

message: The data given in Baugher's book disagrees in many minor points with that in Heinemann's book.
As Heinemann was the the man responsible for overseeing not only the design and development of the A2D, but the AD and A4D, I tend to credit his information.
I did not change any of the information.Mark Lincoln 15:44, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Contradicting data 

message: The text seems to be trying to assure the reader that the A2D is not in fact in any way directly related to the SKyraider, but the list of differences it quotes to "prove" this just makes it seem that the A2D is in fact a Skyraider converted to turboprop. 
  "While it resembled the AD Skyraider, the A2D was different in a number of unseen ways. The 5,100-equivalent shaft horsepower (3,800 kW) Allison XT-40-A2 had more than double the horsepower of the Skyraider's R-3350. The XT40 installation on the Skyshark used contra-rotating propellers to harness all the available power. Wing root thickness decreased, from 17% to 12%, while both the height of the tail and its area grew."
  
So it had a turboprop engine, twice the horsepower, a taller tail and a thicker wing: if those are the only differences, then it is basically a turboprop Skyraider. If so, perhaps it would be a relevant fact to mention in the article? I mean, the intent seems to be to prove to the reader that the planes are totally different, but the phrasing "wing root thickness decreased" and "height of the tail...grew" suggests they started out as normal Skyraider parts. Also not clear how the turboprop engine and taller tail count as "unseen ways". And since it would appear that the engine is now in the rear fuselage and the power shafted to the gearbox (yet another thing the article doesn't mention at all), that would be a pretty significant difference as well.
So all in all, it's not clear if this article is just taking it for granted that any fool can see that the A2D is based on the Skyraider, and not bothering to clearly state as much, or if it is attempting to convince mistaken readers that the A2D is NOT based on the AD, in spite of appearances,but doing a very bad job f it.
Idumea47b (talk) 07:27, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: We base our articles on what reliable sources say, not what "any fool  can see" - because, as in this case "any fool" would be wrong - the reliable sources are clear that, while it was originally hoped to build a simple turboprop-powered version of the AD, the changes needed to fully exploit more than twice the power meant that the A2D was largely a new aircraft.Nigel Ish (talk) 09:50, 6 March 2021 (UTC)

text: just remember that the Bell AH-1 Cobra is based off of the Bell UH-1 Iroquois (Huey), and they look nothing alike, so the A2D could absolutely be based off of the AD-1 Taffy boeing b 17 (talk) 16:45, 20 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Based on Skyraider?
Talk:ADI Bumble Bee

message: Ref to Hollomann should be Hollmann
Tikker2 Tikker2 (talk) 18:25, 18 November 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: , thanks for pointing it out, looks like it was a simple spelling error. - Ahunt (talk) 23:03, 18 November 2012 (UTC)
Talk:Great Fire of Toronto (1904)

message: "The exact cause of the fire is still not known": what does "still" mean here?  It seems to imply that it's likely to be discovered in the future.
—Preceding unsigned comment added by Pbevin (talk • contribs) 15:24, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cause of the fire 

message: It's kind of trivial, but the Baltimore fire, just 2 months before the Toronto fire, had fairly similar characteristics in terms of location and magnitude. It would only take a couple days at most by 1904 to pass the news about the Baltimore fire back then, so it's a bit surprising that a second fire of similar scale occured just 2 months later, even though Toronto was smaller than Baltimore back then.
—Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.140.139.156 (talk) 19:11, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Failure to learn lesson from Baltimore fire? 

message: Poorly constructed, it states that there were 2 fires on the same date. Thanks Gimelgort 03:30, 12 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Please fix the opening sentence! 

message: There are several paragraphs without references. —howcheng  {chat} 03:51, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  this article needs more references
Talk:AEA Silver Dart

message: Please note that the coordinates in this article need fixing as:
*
The coordinates in the article point to Toronto International Airport, Toronto, Ontario.  I have no information for the location actually indicated in the article.  It's supposed to be somewhere on the Bras d'Ore Lake, located in Nova Scotia.
Removed coordinates from article, as the article is about an aircraft, not a location. BrainMarble (talk) 19:25, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Coordinates 

message: I have changed to statement that the silver dart was a U.S plane to canadian/u.s. to be nice. It was a Canadian team. See the make up of the ASA. The link is provided in the article. Bell being Scotish born is claimed by both Canada & the US as the inventor of the telephone. Bell is buried in Cape Breton Canada. He went to Boston for economic reasons.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.158.42.216 (talk) 03:10, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: If it was designed and built in the United States, it is an American aircraft, regardless of the nationality of its designer. FWiW Bzuk (talk) 23:37, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: it looks like a Wright Flyer with wheels.  What about it is Canadian other than that it flew there?96.241.177.111 (talk) 06:20, 23 February 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  edit 

message: Incorporating different date styles is inconsistent and if the d-m-y is already prevalent, changing to ISO dating is problematic with any viewer/reader who does not have preferences set. FWiW Bzuk (talk) 23:10, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Revisions

message: "1909 – The Silver Dart (pictured) was flown off the ice of Bras d'Or Lake on Cape Breton Island, making it the first controlled powered flight in Canada and the British Empire."
:: I have doubts about the British Empire claim. Canada, sure, but even without the possibilities of Richard Pearse in New Zealand, there's the Cody plane British_Army_Aeroplane_No_1 from 1907/8 in Great Britain, which is surely part of the Empire.Nickpheas (talk) 10:35, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: On This Day
Talk:Polyphosphate

message: Is this suitable for article inclusion? - Leonard G. 05:43, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Image found on commons

message: Polypyrophosphate is just another name for polyphosphate- the article is an orphaned stub- the polypyro name name is popular in the areas of dental health amongst others - merge and create a redirect.Axiosaurus (talk) 10:36, 1 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge in polypyrophosphate 

message: To add to this article: mention of the use of polyphosphates in the processing of fish fillets. 173.88.246.138 (talk) 05:33, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: To add to article
Talk:Aero A.100

message: I have removed this:
  A number were also supplied to Nationalist Spanish forces during the Spanish Civil War. 
I think the author got confused with the A.101, but if anybody has some evidence for use of the A.100 in the Spanish Civil War!!Petebutt (talk) 01:16, 30 November 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: It wouldn't have been the first time an aircraft was misidentified as having been involved in that war (even amongst otherwise reliable references). I can find nothing that suggests it was and the only external way of telling the two apart is the cabane struts so the confusion isn't surprising. I'd say leave it off until someone can prove it belongs.NiD.29 (talk) 03:22, 30 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Spanish Civil War
Talk:Justus Jonas

message: - Leonard G. 05:45, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Image found on commons

message: Interesting note: According to the Schaff-Herzog Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge at , some time after Luther's death during tumultuous times, a Spanish officer hired to assassinate Jonas revealed his intent after being thoroughly impressed by Jonas' piety, integrity and kindness. Keesiewonder 00:10, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Character

message: Just noticed that this is a FA on the German WP ... Keesiewonder 02:49, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: FA on German Wikipedia
Talk:FastTrack Schedule

message: This article contains promotional language and uncited claims, for example that the software is "award winning", and support is "robust and highly praised"
Article should be re-written from a neutral point of view or be considered for deletion --GreatMarkO 00:23, 26 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Flagged as Promotional

message: I added this page just so the link I added from the list of project management software would go somewhere.  I'm trying FastTrack schedule because I need something that works on a Mac, but I don't know much about Project Management Software (and I have no connection to AEC).  It was recommended by a colleague.  --JimHu 05:46, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/The Blackwell Legacy

message: I would argue that the notability of the project comes from the fact that it is the next game from the studio that made The Shivah, which was well recieved when presented at the Independent Game Developers Association's Demo Night 4 (relavant article).
   Wogoat 20:54, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Notability
Talk:Lake Wendouree

message: shouldn't there be something about it being dried up? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.176.169.54 (talk • contribs) 
: I just added a category regarding the drought including a poor quality photo I took with my Mobile Phone. It would be good if someone could improve my text (doesn't sound encyclopedic to me). AussieNickuss 08:38, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Current status 

message: Does the article about Lake Wendouree being dry still need to be here? As it is slowly getting water back into it with the onset of good rain falls these past few months. I added a little note at the bottom of the artice about this --MattyC3350 04:27, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  It's Filling up now! 

message: :Despite warnings by the local council and news publications, local enthusiasts have been combing below the surface of the dry lake bed for artifacts...
What are these warnings for?  It's not obvious from the article.  Although if the lake is filling up again, this should probably be removed altogether.  But I was just curious. --ozzmosis (talk) 11:06, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  "warnings"? 
Talk:Aeronca L-3

message: Anybody know what Aeronca L-3 has to do with the hatnote to French Rugby? MilborneOne (talk) 20:10, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: It was added here. Apparently it refers to LNR, which is the abreviation for the rugby league,a nd the USN LNR-1. - BilCat (talk) 20:42, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

text: As there is a LNR DAB page (created in Jan 2009), I'd say we can lose the hatnote now. - BilCat (talk) 20:44, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Removed, thanks for the help BilCat. MilborneOne (talk) 20:56, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: French Rugby
Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Brahma Kumaris Info

message: *Why I created it....I recently started this article Brahma Kumaris Info once all information about ExBKs was removed  from the Brahma Kumaris article (the current article is in a mess)and I frankly was not allowed to edit by avyak7 AKA Riveros11 et Al (and the IT Team of which Bksimonb is the Official Representative and feeling that the Admins did not see that avyakt7 was merely intimidating/harassing me despite having offered the citations with the edits.  Since the new article has been set for deletion and Admin ≈ jossi ≈ states I am part of this arbitration  I will be submitting a statement within a day.  The reason I feel that this information is of value is because this represents an apostasy group which the Brahma Kumaris have suppressed along with others for decades. The Brahma Kumaris are engaged in asserting influence in governmental bodies, the UN and others when their true doctrines are kept secret. As this apostate group comes to light more organizations are giving it recognition as per the links provided. No I am not an ExBK, I am but one editor up against an IT Team, taking my time and money (buying books) to bring this out in the open as I see suppression of information as causing a great societal harm. PEACETalkAbout 00:13, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
Talk:Convair XC-99

message: Is it 23 November 1949, as stated in the text, or 26 May 1949, as stated in B-36 in Action, p. 41? ("The XC-99 was officially delivered to Carswell AFB on May 26, 1949, and in September, 1950 transferred to Kelly AFB".Dirk P Broer 08:50, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Transfer to USAAF

message: The XC-99 was not an 'X-plane'.  X-planes are research vehicles and have the type designation 'X', like the X-1 or X-15.  (See X-plane.  In the case of the XC-99, the 'X' was a prefix (indicating a prototype) to it's type designation of 'C' (indicating a cargo aircraft).  24.16.181.1 (talk) 05:38, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Dont think we mention that it was an X plane or have I missed it in the text somewhere? Sorry missed your edit you are right MilborneOne (talk) 11:33, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Not an 'X-plane'
Talk:Curtiss XA-14

message: This article needs to be moved back to Curtiss XA-14. The four sources in the article agree that the service test version was the Y1A-18. If a source can be found I'll be happy to leave it, since there are a lot of links to this page. Awaiting comments. --Colputt 00:29, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It only says XA-14 in the articel, so I made the move. Never mind the links to YA-14. That's what redirects are for.--ospalh (talk) 12:53, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Request for Comments 

message: The lead asserts that the aircraft was the first multi-engine attack aircraft ordered by the Air Corps and that it was as fast as contemporary pursuit aircraft.  Neither of these statements is in the narrative, so they need to be supported with citations, preferably also adding them to the narrative.  --Lineagegeek (talk) 11:50, 3 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lead and citations
Talk:Western Stone

message: What about the Thunder Stone?  That article states that the Thunder Stone, the base of the Bronze Horseman statue in St. Petersburg weighs about 1500 tons, which is much larger than the Western Stone. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.171.64.176 (talk) 03:19, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Thunder Stone comparison? 

message: The lack of information regarding the composition of the stone (rock type, mineralogy, etc) and discussion of possible provenance is problematic in this article. Likewise there is no mention of the geology of the Temple Mount. Could this stone have been carved in situ? Regardless of the depth of the stone it is a large "object", but maybe it was not moved at all or significantly.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.254.202.238 (talk) 15:43, 10 March 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Composition & provenance
Talk:Harbor Drive

message: Here's a 1950s map that shows it (either not as a freeway or badly-drawn):  It also shows Interstate Avenue as a freeway from the Steel Bridge to Tillamook Street; part of the Broadway Bridge interchange remains.
A 1954 USGS topo also shows that it is not a freeway; median breaks are at Clay, Columbia (US 26 east), Jefferson (US 26 west), and Pine. In 1946 its north end was at Front and Vine.
Dates on the remaining bridges are as follows:
*1934-35: improvements to Barbur Boulevard
*1946-49: Ross Island Bridge interchange, including Barbur Boulevard and Arthur Street
*1958: Hawthorne Bridge west end interchange
*1958: new Morrison Bridge including west end interchange (old one is shown on the maps)
*1950: south end of Steel Bridge
*1952: north end of Steel Bridge
*1949-50: Broadway Bridge east end interchange
So it looks like Harbor Drive was not a full freeway until about 1958? --NE2 15:59, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Full freeway might be a stretch.  It turned, jogged, and dipped every few blocks.  There were buildings with near-zero clearance alongside.  The lanes were narrow and the divider seemed to droop into the inner lane.  The buildings were uninspired plain concrete slabs, butted against each other.  It kinda felt like a semi-tunnel, or trench since you couldn't see the river, at least not from a car.  Traffic moved along, like 35-45 mph, unlike the grid streets.  Even in the day, I remember it being pretty busy.  —EncMstr 18:42, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Was there any cross traffic, or was everything handled by on- and off-ramps? --NE2 10:02, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The southern half of Harbor Drive (about a mile) still exists, but has been renamed.  It has an expressway feel to it.  The portion of Harbor Drive which was removed is a different story.  It ran along the west bank of the Willamette River (so no streets to the east).  My recollection was it had intersections nearly every block (or at least every fourth block). Any ramps would have been for the various bridges.  Posted speed was around 40 mph.  It was nearly identical to the adjacent and parallel Front Avenue.  I never thought of Harbor Drive as a freeway, nor ever heard anyone refer to it as such.  The “freeway” was always I-5.  The suggestion that this downtown city street was a freeway is an exaggeration.  -- Rainy Day (talk) 21:50, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: History
Talk:Kamov Ka-22

message: The FAI files http://www.fai.org/fai-record-file/?recordId=13221 to 24 and 26 to 28 (25 does not exist) all state that they have been superseded. Article says "have not since been broken". TGCP (talk) 22:44, 28 November 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Without knowing for sure, it appears that it is the Category (E-2, rotodynes) that has been superseded rather than the record as such. I tried searching for E-2 records and there were no search results for any that I tried. YSSYguy (talk) 23:27, 28 November 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: FAI search is mediocre at best. After fiddling with it, I agree that E-2 is gone. The speed, 1ton lift and Altitude without payload is still held by the Bell XV-15 in Cat E-2-e (Rotodyne), maybe those categories are similar, although no other aircraft turns up in E-2-e, where the Ka-22 heavy lifting should be. I can't think of a compound helicopter (rotodyne) capable of lifting more than the Ka-22. TGCP (talk) 20:26, 29 November 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Records?
Talk:List of active United Kingdom military aircraft

message: Can someone please add the protector drone to the list of RAF aircraft. The template is confusing and I don't know how to do it. https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/first-new-british-protector-drone-arrives-on-uk-soil RAFRegtRockApe (talk) 03:44, 20 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Protector drone 

message: Currently the lists of aircraft on this page are generally muddled together regardless of things like their role and purpose. Wouldn't it look more tidy and make aircraft easier to find if aircraft are split in their own sections on the list, like combat aircraft, trainers, transport/tanker aircraft, helicopters etc. For example if you view the history of the list layout from say back in 2010 the aircaft listed are in their own respective categorised sections. Twistyoak (talk) 17:53, 28 June 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: I dont think what is already a number of small lists needs to be split further. If you are that intersted in roles then you can easily sort by the role coloumn. MilborneOne (talk) 18:18, 28 June 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  More organised and easy to find list of aircraft  

message: https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/pictures-uks-second-f-35b-squadron-arrives-at-marh-459722/
This news - ukdefencejounral is a blog site - article says 17 not 18 so far as of July 2019.
BlueD954 (talk) 08:35, 18 July 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  F-35B numbers 

message: Why were the pictures that used to accompany the list removed? For example on the older revisions from roughly 5+ years ago there was a picture of the aircraft alongside the name, type, quantity etc for example. If there is no reason why not wouldn't it be better to expand the page more with pictures and make it look less blank and basic with pictures of the aircraft instead of just a muddled list. Twistyoak (talk) 01:56, 3 August 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pictures? 

message: an order of 154 new aircraft has been placed by RAF command as of the 8th march 2023, these will be obtained to meet the delays in the tempest programme and to facilitate the need for maritime security and nato joint operational status.
I can see/find no substantial supporting evidence of this.  If the RAF were ordering such a big new quantity of Typhoons (more than doubling the current inventory), it would be all over the news, and would be being spoken about by govt ministers.
Please remove the erroneous entry, or provide substantial support/evidence that it is indeed happening. 86.16.220.71 (talk) 10:36, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  154 new aircraft order
Template talk:Spam-notice

message: I removed the header that is automatically placed when placing the message on a user's talk page; all other db templates should comply with this, so the message can be used as a new comment started with the '+' button. Cheers, Yuser31415 06:17, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

message: See debate at Template talk:Spam-warn - thanks Lethaniol 20:25, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge to Spam-warn
Talk:Sellwood Bridge

message: See Tappan Zee Bridge (1955–2017) and Tappan Zee Bridge (2017–present) for an example of having separate articles about different bridges at the same site. Should we do something similar for Sellwood Bridge? ---Another Believer (Talk) 19:28, 27 February 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Split article?
Talk:Lyulka AL-7

message: I thought that designing engines for supersonic airflow was a problem that still hadn't been solved, and tht all jet engines required subsonic airflow, hence one major need for complex inlet systems to slow the intake air down. Maybe I am thinking of overall supersonic flow, but this seems weird to me. I thought supersonic air was the enemy of all jet engines.
64.223.159.140 (talk) 13:16, 22 April 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Supersonic airflow?
Talk:Richard Woodhams

message: To specify: I mean Elaine Douvas and John Delancie, Sr.  See [] for what I mean by "many Wikipedia articles on oboists."  Note also that Woodhams' student, Katherine Needleman, has an entry. --AMHoboe 06:25, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Why did you place a  tag on an article that was never proposed for speedy deletion? Resolute 06:44, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Oregon Route 8

message: Should it be mentioned that the road splits into eastbound and westbound lanes that are routed onto different streets (I'm sure there is some sort of technical name for this) in downtown Hillsboro, Cornelius, and Forest Grove? So in downtown Hillsboro it is both Baseline and Oak streets. Aboutmovies (talk) 22:41, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The technical term is one-way pair or one-way couplet. --NE2 18:25, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Splitting
Talk:Mount Hood Freeway

message: Is there anyone with enough knowledge of the Mount Hood Freeway that could create a map showing its planned path? Possibly a free version of this map.[]jr98664 01:58, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Map 

message: There is the base of a support column that would have been used by the 1-5 southbound to the Mt. Hood Freeway (with the steel mesh exposed!) that stands at the split of the east side of the Hawthorn Bridge's viaducts. It looks like a sculpture in some ways. Is this significant enough to add? --RossO (talk) 23:57, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Well do we know that a connection to the Mt. Hood Freeway is what it was supposed to be used for?  But I've noticed that thing. Jason McHuff (talk) 23:39, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Other Remnants 