lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Paddington (UK Parliament constituency)

message: Please see here for discussion on this issue. Sam Blacketer (talk) 18:59, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why the abandoned proposals are worthy of note 

message: As there has been an ongoing edit-war, with no non-edit-war related edits, for the last 45 days (indeed, these are the only edits since January 1), with no sign of discussion taking place otherwise, I have reverted the article to the pre-EW state and full protected it for 10 days. Discussion should take place below on the disputed content until WP:CONSENSUS is reached for its inclusion or removal. - The Bushranger One ping only 19:01, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, but see above. DoktorB is right to the very limited extent that iff there is a general rule that the abandoned proposals in the Sixth Periodic Review ought not to be mentioned in individual constituency articles, then there is no good reason why this article should be an exception to the general rule. But I detect no consensus so far that there is any such general rule, and discussions on that ought to be in a central point where they are more likely to attract the attention of editors generally interested in constituency articles. So I think debate ought really to take place on the link given above. Sam Blacketer (talk) 19:10, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

text: I will not enter into a discussion with . doktorb wordsdeeds 07:40, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Discussion
Talk:Pembrokeshire (UK Parliament constituency)

message: His article is currently silent on when he 'left' the Liberal Party to join the National Liberal Party. For 1950 Craig describes him as 'National Liberal & Conservative' one of the variations of descriptions used at the time. GLG effectively 'joined' the National Liberal Party after the signing of the Woolton-Teviot agreement in 1947. Graemp (talk) 13:40, 18 February 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks I wasn't sure when Gwilym Lloyd George left the Liberals. I am not even sure he re-joined then as such in 1935 with the rest of the Lloyd George Independent Liberal group. I know in October 1939 he became a junior minister in the National Government and stayed there after the Liberals officially left the Churchill Coalition government in May 1945. So his official Liberal status is questionable in 1945. According to Roy Douglas's History of the Liberal Party, he was offered the chairmanship  of the Liberal and Liberal National groups but declined both. --Gepid (talk) 16:07, 18 February 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: It can be difficult to interpret these things if we simply talk in terms of joining as being a subscribing member of a political party. I don't think by 1950 party names had started appearing on ballot papers. Often what appears in a candidates election literature can be vague or misleading. I assume that in 1950 there was only one 'Liberal' organisation for Pembrokeshire and I assume that he was chosen as their candidate and that they probably chose to change their affiliation sometime between 1947-50 to reflect the actions of their MP. I think it is usually best in the case of MPs to talk in terms of which whip they took. Immediately after the 1935 elections all the 'Lloyd George' Liberals re-took the Liberal whip. GLG accepting office as early as October 1939 was an oddity which seems to have been treated by historians as insignificant.Graemp (talk) 17:32, 18 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Gwilym Lloyd George
Talk:Calico Hills, Humboldt County, Nevada

message: Should this page be Calico Mountains (Nevada), not Calico mountains (Nevada)? Cxbrx (talk) 03:44, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Capitalization

message: Thanks for adding the GNIS link.  There is probably some proper template somewhere for geographic features, I have not yet looked.  Ideally, there would be GNIS info in the template.  Also, I had a look at watersheds on the EPA site and it looks like the Black Rock Desert consists of a couple of watersheds, including the "Lower Quinn River".  This info might be of use somewhere.  I'm guessing geography wiki authors have looked into all of this.  Cxbrx (talk) 17:11, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: GNIS

message: This page should be moved from Calico Mountains (Nevada) to Calico Hills (Humboldt County, Nevada).
Note that there GNIS lists  Calico Hills in Humboldt, Mineral, Clarke and Nye counties, so this should be moved to Calico Hills (Humboldt County, Nevada) and not Calico Hills (Nevada).
The  GNIS entry for "Calico Mountains" is for a mountain range also in Humboldt County but about 110 miles north east of the Calico Hills near the Black Rock Desert.
Calico Mountains is a variant for the Calico Hills, see the GNIS entry for "Calico Hills".  However, as there is another Calico Mountains also in Humboldt County, this page should be moved.
Unfortunately, the BLM uses the phrase "Calico Mountains" to refer to the range near the Black Rock Desert, see Calico Mountains Complex Wild Horse Gather. 
I'll make this move eventually if there are no objections.  Cxbrx (talk) 20:28, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed move to Calico Hills (Humboldt County, Nevada)
Talk:Pontypridd (UK Parliament constituency)

message: I used to live in a very Welsh-speaking part of North Wales, and took an interest in Welsh. So, when I then moved to Pontypridd I assumed the place name was pronounced as in the article - . 
This was on the assumption that the place name was a contraction of "pont y pridd", in which the "y" is a sort of article, and pronounced  (a neutral sound, like "a in "a loaf of bread"). 
However, this was a mistake. The name is a contraction of "pont ty pridd", where "ty" means house, and is pronounced  - like tea in "a cup of tea". 
So I think the correct pronunciation for the placename (and forgive me if I get this wrong, my IPA and ability to produce it in Wikipedia is rusty) is  - or pont ee preeth (where the last sound, is a voiced labiodental fricative, like th in "the"). 
peter_english (talk) 13:47, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Incorrect pronunciation guide
Talk:Poplar South (UK Parliament constituency)

message: An unreferenced comment on politicalbetting.com says that the 1942 election, which was apparently held on a day when there was an air raid(!), recorded a turnout of 9.3%, the lowest ever in a UK by-election. This seems worth including if someone can find a good source. 86.132.140.207 (talk) 02:48, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Record low turnout?
Talk:Poplar and Limehouse (UK Parliament constituency)

message: Is is incorrect to say that the seat will be created in time for the 2009 or 2010 election as it could happen this year. Thus I have changed it to next general election. 88.111.97.229 (talk) 17:29, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Portsmouth (UK Parliament constituency)

message: According to :s:St. John, Oliver (1559-1630) (DNB00) it was Oliver St John, 1st Viscount Grandison from 1604 to 1607. Perhaps one of the two given 1604-1611 needs to be adjusted. Charles Matthews (talk) 21:00, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Manx Military and Aviation Museum

message: New name: Manx Aviation and Military Museum 
Whoever made this page got our museum's name mixed up. The museum's website may be used to confirm the correct version of the name: http://www.maps.iofm.net/museum.htm  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ivor Ramsden (talk • contribs) 12:06, 22 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move to Manx Aviation and Military Museum
Talk:Portsmouth Central (UK Parliament constituency)

message: User:Necrothesp recently changed 1924 Liberal candidate from F Gray to Francis James Gray. I do not believe that this is the same person. In Gray's article it talks of a 7 year ban in 1924 which I believe was served. This would have precluded him standing again until 1931. Graemp (talk) 14:42, 2 September 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: According to Gray's DNB entry it is indeed the same person. "He blamed the disappointing result on the effects of the Zinoviev letter." The DNB entry does not mention a ban; in fact, it states that "Gray himself escaped censure". -- Necrothesp (talk) 15:25, 2 September 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: ODNB agrees with you. Odd that and contradictory to his wiki article. Graemp (talk) 15:40, 2 September 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Without sourcing, I'd tend to go with the DNB! -- Necrothesp (talk) 16:29, 2 September 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Francis James Gray
Talk:Texas A&M Hillel

message: Considering that Texas A&M Hillel is the oldest Hillel organization of any university in the United States, it deserves its own article. Also, the article History of the Jews in Brazos County, Texas, representing this subject along with many other notable subjects, deserves its own article as well. Bhaktivinode (talk) 03:20, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Comment on merge proposal with [[History of the Jews in Brazos County, Texas]]

message: Hi the articles Texas Hillel and Texas A&M Hillel appear to be about the same organisation.Mccapra (talk) 19:01, 29 January 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree they are not the same (Texas Hillel identifies as University of Texas at Austin, which is not the same school). However, I nuked that article altogether as copyvio throughout its history. I can't find a simple claim of notability sufficient to write a stub that would survive . DMacks (talk) 07:51, 9 January 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Merger proposal
Talk:Portsmouth South (UK Parliament constituency)

message: Hi Mattythewhite,
I seen what you said about the election titles.  I feel because pretty much all the other constituencies are formatted "General election 2019" instead of "2019 General Election" that Portsmouth South should be in the same format in order to keep consistency between all of the constituencies.OrkneyLad1996 (talk) 15:44, 28 November 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: But they *shouldn't* be: see WP:NCELECT, which recommends that we use the format: "Date [adjectival form of country name] type election/referendum".  This is in line with how election articles are now titled, such as 2019 United Kingdom general election. Mattythewhite (talk) 15:52, 28 November 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Election title formatting
Talk:Potwalloper

message: Appears to have breached the property qualification implemented in the restoration in so far as having a hearth does not necessarily imply ownership of the property, which was otherwise the sole qualification for the franchise (apart from being male that is).
Any reason why these were almost entirely in the South?
Optymystic (talk) 11:26, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Putney (UK Parliament constituency)

message: Nest General Election has not been called, so it is presumptuous of the LibDems (and now Labour) (and now the Renew Party) (and now Labour again!) (and now the Greens who will definitely have seen the note about wikipedia policies when they edited)) to enter their candidate. They break Wikipedia policy (see UNDUE, CRYSTAL and NOTBLOG for starters). The Renew Party entry is even more egregious for stating that their candidate may not even stand. Refer to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Berwickshire,_Roxburgh_and_Selkirk_(UK_Parliament_constituency)  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.33.185.122 (talk) 07:31, 3 September 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Presumptuous
Talk:Regent's Park and Kensington North (UK Parliament constituency)

message: Where do these increase and decrease figures come from? It was a new seat, and the figures don’t correspond to 1992 results for either of the seats it was created from. Unless they’re based on notional results for the seat in 1992. TrottieTrue (talk) 11:04, 1 November 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vote share changes in 1997
Talk:Rhondda (UK Parliament constituency)

message: An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Virginia Crosbie. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so.  TryKid (talk) 02:01, 29 May 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Virginia Crosbie listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]]
Talk:Ribble Valley (UK Parliament constituency)

message: General election results are described with respect to the previous general election, rather than any intervening by-election. For this reason, I have changed the 1992 result to read "Hold" rather than "Gain" as the 1987 result (the most recent General Election) was a Conservative victory.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hypnoticmonkey (talk • contribs) 17:00, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  1992 Result Hold/Gain
Talk:Richmond and Barnes (UK Parliament constituency)

message: There's an interesting piece of ephemera from this constituency, for the 1979 election, at http://www.markpack.org.uk/35442/the-first-bar-chart-richmond-in-1979-possibly/ Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:46, 5 October 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  1979 Liberal election leaflet 
Talk:Romsey and Southampton North (UK Parliament constituency)

message: I wonder if it would be better to describe the 2010 result as a Conservative win rather than gain. I know Sandra Gidley narrowly won the old Romsey seat at the 2005 2005 election, but the boundaries were different and if I recall the result if it had been fought on the new boundaries was thought to be so close that it was difficult to tell which of the Conservatives or Lib Dems would have won. Some seats created for 1997 which almost certainly would have been Conservative in 1992, but won by Labour in 1997 are described as Labour win rather than gain - eg Chatham and Aylesford (UK Parliament constituency) - although others like Sittingbourne and Sheppey (UK Parliament constituency) are down as Labour gain so their is possibly a wider consistency issue here, but I think the uncertainty regarding who would have won in 2005 makes me think win is the best option in this case. Dunarc (talk) 21:45, 18 March 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: This is a perennial question. I think you're right that it is usual for new creations to be considered "wins". I wouldn't be mad at that edit being made. It is always difficult and fluid a topic because regular boundary changes at ward level as well as parliamentary level make like-for-like comparison quite tricky. Certainly for amateur and enthusiastic psephologists :) I say edit 2010 so it shows a "win". doktorb wordsdeeds 22:04, 18 March 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks doktorb - I have gone ahead and changed it. Dunarc (talk) 21:45, 19 March 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  2010 result - should it be called a gain or a win
Talk:Welcome to Kanagawa

message: I've twice removed a section headed "Exclusive Spoilers (may not be true)" for reasons that will be obvious to experienced Wikipedians familiar with our Verifiability policy.
For those who aren't familiar, I'll just give a summary introduction and you can go and check the policy yourself.
In short, we never put stuff that "may not be true" into an article.  We write only verifiable statements that are attributable to reliable sources.  We don't, therefore, carry spoilers and other speculative material about unbroadcast TV shows.  We're an encyclopedia, not a gossip site, and we can easily afford to wait a week or so for the episode to be broadcast. --Tony Sidaway 03:59, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you.  I tried that too and met the same resistance.  Hopefully people will learn to not put spoilers.  IrishLass (talk) 14:10, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Removal of "spoilers (may not be true)" section

message: How exactly does the Sondheim lyric relate to what happens in this episode? --Mathew5000 (talk) 07:56, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: My guess is that the lyrics refer to the consequences of the tornado: the inhabitants of the district of Kanagawa are quite unlucky, since they underwent a huge earthquake and, during the WW2, an American bombing, probably leaving the place just like Wisteria Lane is depicted in the episode. Transcendency (talk) 17:54, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks. --Mathew5000 (talk) 18:40, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  episode title 

message: Was the piece of poetry recited by Mrs McCluskey as she scattered the ashes, known, or to be attributed to the DH writers? 80.218.62.126 (talk) 23:02, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Eulogy poem 
Category talk:Parliamentary constituencies in the West Midlands (historic)

message: Precisely what should be in this category presents a difficulty.  Some one created a category for one county.  I have created categories for several other counties and added county categories, rather than changing the existing West Midland one (as I should have).  Some one else has corrected that mistake.  We are now left with subcategories for the shire counties and a mass of seats in the metropolitan county.  Subcategories have also been created for Birmigham and Coventry, which were hisotrically in Warwickshire, though parts of the presetn city have been taken from Staffordshire and Worcestershire.  My reaction is to distribute the pre-1974 Black Country seats to Staffordshire or Worcestershire (as appropriate) and to leave post-1974 seats in this category.  If so, the Coventry and Birmingham seats should perhaps appear only in their own categories, which should be subcategories both of Warwickshire and of this one.  What does every one else think?  Peterkingiron (talk) 23:24, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Content
Talk:Nancy Dow

message: Due to the death of this person, the BLP status of this article has changed. This does ‘’’not’’’ mean that unsourced material that would contravene the Biography of Living Persons rules can be added to her article. Capitalistroadster (talk) 03:13, 26 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: BLP status change

message: She died two days later not three  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.64.217.66 (talk) 13:15, 26 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Days arrived in hospital until her death 

message: For whom? Or what? Article should say, but I can't find out after a few minutes Googling. Can you? InedibleHulk (talk) 18:28, 28 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Model?
Talk:Curtiss CR

message: An exhibit at the US Army Museum of Hawaii (seen here ) indicates that the first inter-island flight in Hawaii was flown in a Curtiss R-6 in 1918. How can this be, if the plane wasn't developed until 1921? LordAmeth (talk) 05:22, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  First Inter-Island Flight in Hawaii
Talk:Gerald (given name)

message: Gerald and Gerald (given name) are essentially two pages for the exact same thing, the name Gerald. The information is just split over two pages. It is redundant and needlessly takes up two pages.
I believe it would be much better to have a singular page "Gerald" with all the information.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerald
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerald_(given_name)
--2A00:EE2:907:FF00:F112:CD38:43F8:6E59 (talk) 14:46, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Klbrain (talk) 10:03, 5 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merger proposal for Gerald and Gerald (given name)
Talk:Seaford (UK Parliament constituency)

message: This article has been revised as part of a large-scale clean-up project of multiple article copyright infringement.  Earlier text must not be restored, unless it can be verified to be free of infringement. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions must be deleted. Contributors may use sources as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 17:21, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copyright problem 
Talk:Psyché (play)

message: This information was originally found in the article Psyché.  At the time, the play and the opera were intermingled, and the text was confusing.  (For example, the play was written by Pierre Corneille and the libretto for the opera was written by his brother Thomas Corneille.)  For the history on the article before it's move, see the history of the other article. Portia1780 (talk) 04:07, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Moved from [[Psyché]]
Talk:Selby and Ainsty (UK Parliament constituency)

message: I've checked in to the only place I know of, to get the parliamentary constituency historical results for each election as I've been doing for the last, I dunno, ten or fifteen years  .... and wtf? where are they?? BringBackTheStats (talk) 12:43, 21 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Where Is The Parliamentary Election Results History For This Constituency?
Talk:Shaftesbury (UK Parliament constituency)

message: The two pronunciations disagreed with each other. I chose the respelling as more likely to be recognized by readers if wrong, but please correct if I got it wrong. (The respelling for /bɜri/ would be -bur-ee.) — kwami (talk) 21:34, 18 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  pronunciation 
Talk:Shrewsbury (UK Parliament constituency)

message: Irrelevant link - I have removed a link from name of Richard Mytton, MP in 1690s, because it connects him with a namesake who was MP in the 1550s!Cloptonson (talk) 13:22, 13 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: The name of the Unionist candidate who would have stood should read George Ambrose Lloyd, who had been adopted in 1914 to allow the unrelated George Butler Lloyd to not stand.  I have mentioned the circumstances in the Wikipedia article on the former, sourced to newspaper reports in Shrewsbury Chronicle. When the war which caused the election's postponement ended, G A Lloyd was unavailable to stand and G B Lloyd stood instead.Cloptonson (talk) 22:09, 11 December 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Unionist candidate at (aborted) 1915 general election
Talk:Shropshire (UK Parliament constituency)

message: Unfortunately there were lots of people with this name, both from Moreton Corbet and elsewhere. I recently created a page for the 16th century MP for Truro, who was actually a Shropshire man, and father of the famous Sir Andrew. The unfortunate result is that it has activated red links on this page. The MP of 1391 now has a decent entry at History of Parliament Online, so I'll create a Wikipedia page for him when I get the chance. Meanwhile, I've turned him back to a redlink by adding a death date to him. There was actually a contemporary of exactly the same name, an MP for both Shrewsbury and Shropshire, who isn't even on the list yet. Fortunately, we can forget about him until the time is right. The earlier Roger Corbet, MP in 1319, is more of a problem. Paliament Online doesn't cover the earlier period. Augusta Corbet's family history has a bit on him, starting from page 174, so he can be covered in time. I've added "of Caus" to his name to distinguish him. For centuries, the Moreton Corbet branch more or less alternated Roger and Robert as names for first-born sons, as did offshoots from the family, so they only have themselves to blame if we get a bit confused! Sjwells53 (talk) 09:29, 16 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Those annoying Roger Corbets
Category talk:Historic parliamentary constituencies in Scotland (Westminster)

message: As this category is rather big (and if and when the current boundary review process is completed is likeely to get bigger), I wonder if it would be worthwhile starting some subcategories? Specifically I wondered if grouping the historic Edinburgh and Glasgow seats into categories called  Historic parliamentary constituencies in Edinburgh (Westminster) and Historic parliamentary constituencies in Glasgow (Westminster) would be worthwhile? Dunarc (talk) 20:26, 26 December 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sub categories