lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Volcan Army

message: I can't work out what might be meant by 'sobiliated' or 'acretaliated'. Anyone?
Wiktionary is V useful sometimes!
"sobiliated" from "sobillare" (transitive)
   1. To stir up or incite
acretaliated from ..... dunno the spelling doesn't seem to be close enough to anything for Wiktionary to work out. and the context is unclear.
i suggest that the current paragraph...
"These suspicions erupted in the summer of 1978 when the Volcan forces attacked, sobilliated by Qaddafi, the FAP's positions at Faya-Largeau, but were easily repelled. Since the Volcan Army had become by the first months of the year the group most heavily supported by Libya, Goukouni readily understood that the Libyans were behind the acretaliated by breaking all ties with Qaddafi."
be rephrased something like...
"These suspicions erupted in the summer of 1978 when the Volcan forces attacked, supported by Qaddafi, the FAP's positions at Faya-Largeau, but were easily repelled. Since the Volcan Army had become by the first months of the year the group most heavily supported by Libya, Goukouni readily understood that the Libyans were behind the attacks and responded by breaking all ties with Qaddafi."
but i don't know the history and so didn't want to just edit the article. perhaps someone with a better knowledge of the events could do a total re-write as th article is flawed in many ways.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Teknotiss (talk • contribs) 20:08, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  English needing work
Talk:Theme music

message: Why on earth does "signature tune" redirect here? They're different things entirely.Whotookthatguy 14:56, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Redirect

message: The article says that the Batman theme tune was notable:
“some theme music uses orchestra scores or original music set mood for the show. One of the most notable of these is the Batman: The Animated Series theme song, which was drawn from the theme for the 1989 Batman film created by Danny Elfman.”
Why is it notable? The article doesn’t say what is special about it. I suspect it’s merely the case that the author really likes the tune. I have no objection to examples being given of good tunes, but I don’t think it should call the tune “notable” without explaining why.
Grand Dizzy (talk) 22:28, 6 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Why is Batman “notable”?

message: It claims that Final Fantasy is notable but does not source it. This article does not source anything.--Tech-Chef (talk) 19:38, 2 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Heh, I just added the section. Keep it there, I'll see if I can dig up some sources. I have no idea about the rest of the article, but I'll be glad to try and find sources for the section I added. If nothing turns up, it will be removed. thanks, JguyTalkDone 04:31, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: References added! JguyTalkDone 04:42, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  January 2011 Citation Needed 

message: Why does Love Theme redirect here? And why is it done without explanation? At least if it explained somewhere what a love theme is I'd understand but now it just seems to me like vandalism or trolling. Utils (talk) 05:57, 12 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Love Theme 

message: *Examples of this association [signature tune] include: the President of the United States with "Hail to the Chief"; Bob Hope with "Thanks for the Memory"; Billy Joel with "Piano Man"; Frank Sinatra with "Autumn in New York" and "My Way"; Liberace with "I'll Be Seeing You"; Alice Faye with "You'll Never Know"; Jack Benny with "Love in Bloom"; and Judy Garland with "Over the Rainbow".
I removed the above as uncited since August 2009. Hyacinth (talk) 06:23, 12 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Removed

message: I used to know that Mission Impossible! was the first show with a theme song, or maybe the first one with a song written specifically for it.  I don't have a WP:RS for that, though. Gah4 (talk) 03:10, 18 May 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mission Impossible!
Talk:Historical archaeology

message: 'post medieval archaeology' applies to England mainly, and not at all to North America. There was no medieval era in North America. I corrected this. Discuss?
blastfromthepast
:please sign using four tildes ~~~~ to give full contact details, dating etc. Also I have reversed the change as it was more incorrect than before. If you think about the original comment it refers to the fact that "Historical" archaeology only really starts in North America after the "European" Medieval period ends. What you changed it to mean was that "Historical" archaeology in United Kingdom only start after the Medieval period. The Historical period in the United Kingdom goes back at least to Anglo-Saxon times (pre Medieval) and possibly to Roman Britain so this would be a most strange situation if true. Agreed that the original statement was too Euro-centric but wording should be carefully considered I think. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page) 16:07, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: 'post medieval archaeology

message: The quote attributed to Deetz is actually a statement widely attributed to the historian Peter Sawyer, although I have no date or place for it.  Deetz paraphrased it in a few places, as have many others. It ought to be corrected or deleted. In any event, it is not Deetz's view.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kevincof (talk • contribs) 23:22, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Quote on History vs Archaeology 

message: I just a removed a section on notable historical archaeology sites. Here's the edit for reference. As it was written, there was no indication to the reader what made these sites notable and they were entirely from the US while if there are to be examples they should comyfrom a much wider geography. In principle, a list of important sites might be worth including but it would be helpful to consider the inclusion criteria first. Richard Nevell (talk) 07:39, 2 October 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Notable sites
Talk:Bhokal

message: It has been suggested that page be merged with Bhokal (comics), please discuss. --Basique 03:47, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge 
Talk:Urban archaeology

message: the method part of this article lacks detailBoris 22:30, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: I just looked over the article and found some sections/aspects that could be improved upon to enhance the overall quality.
My suggestions for improvement:
 
→ Some minor sentence changes to improve flow, especially in the lead where there are a lot of short sentences that could be combined
→ Add in-text citations on information not cited (barely any information in the article is cited besides the famous archaeologists section)
→ Add images if any seem appropriate
→ Additional information on archaeologists listed - provide their most notable contribution to the field
Not trying to be critical of the article - it looks great so far but still needs a fair amount of work to fall into a higher rank on the Wiki quality scale. 
Hope some of these suggestions help!
Devonvietri (talk) 20:42, 24 July 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Suggestions for improvement 

message: — Assignment last updated by Saturnbars (talk) 20:18, 18 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: Communication Research
Talk:Zooarchaeology

message: The sentence While these disputes may seem trivial, they reflect differences in the approach and perception of the same material is unsatisfactorily inconclusive. It should open some discussion of the variously-weighted approaches in zooarchaeology, which would provide the meat of this article.--Wetman (talk) 19:21, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Naming

message: The definition is too broad: This is more like a definition of paleozoology. Zooarchaeology/archaeozoology deals with animals in relationship to human cultures of the past as studied by archaeologists.  One might also say that the definition is too narrow [!], since it seems to focus on just the remains, whereas the field considers their impact etc.  
The list of what is looked at is too restricted  Representations of animals and coprolites are also studied. Kdammers (talk) 10:46, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Definition is too broad. 

message: The article is very thin on the field's history, with no mention of Theodore E. White, for example.  Also, there is not mention of MNI (minimum number of individuals), a key concept in the field. Kdammers (talk) 20:44, 25 April 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  missing
Talk:Assyriology

message: Hi,
I want to point out that in section Assyriologists is a wrong link with Claus Wilcke. The link leads to the article Claus Wilcke. But that article deals with another Claus Wilcke, with the German actor Claus Wilcke. There should be a disambiguation. But here in this article the emeritus professor and former head of the Altorientalisches Institut of the Leipzig University Prof. Dr. Claus Wilcke is meant, see this page in German. Regards, --Michalwiki (talk) 15:46, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wrong link 

message: This section is a little confusing: we're told Niebuhr labeled "three trilingual inscriptions" from Persepolis as Class I, Class II, and Class III. In following paragraphs these are explained to be respectively Old Persian, Akkadian language and (unexplicitly) Sumerian language. The accounts I remember though speak of the Behistun Inscription as being crucial to Grotefend, the three languages being Old Persian, Elamite cuneiform, and Babylonian language. The Carsten Niebuhr article moreover says "He seems also to have visited the Behistun Inscription", though the latter article asserts that he published a transcription. Isn't there a main decipherment article somewhere? Sparafucil (talk) 04:13, 18 November 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Decipherment of cuneiform 

message: I opened a thread here. Pequod76 (talk-ita.esp.eng) 12:52, 27 December 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Persepolitan classes
Talk:Alternative Egyptology

message: I've added a copyedit tag to this article again.  Currently, no less than 8 sentences start with the words "Alternative Egyptology", making the article seem clumsy and repetitive. Robotman1974 20:18, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Copyedit

message: this is obviously fringecruft. If there is genuine academioc debate, it's a bona fide part of Egyptology proper (Glasgow Chronology). If there isn't, it's just kookery. This seems to be a lame attempt to boost the "credibility" of fringe literature (or crackpot webpages, as the case may be). dab (𒁳) 18:15, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Redirected some time ago. -- Secisek (talk) 03:53, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: delete or redirect
Talk:Feminist archaeology

message: This is quite possibly the single worst article I have ever seen. It isn't even an article at all, actually, it is purely a personal essay.  Completely un-wikified and filled with POV and unencyclopedic language. A complete rewrite is needed here. Zazaban (talk) 20:27, 22 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Essay 

message: I have re-written the entire article. While discussing some very important early studies in feminist archaeology, the article did not explore the contributions made to the overall discipline by feminist archaeology since the mid-1990s, which is crucial in any summary of this body of work. I have retained two of the studies discussed in the og article, those on man the hunter and stone tool-making. I have attempted to move from an essay format into that of an encyclopedia, but as I am much more familiar with the former style of writing than the latter, it still might come off as too much of an essay. Edits/comments dealing with improving this language are much appreciated. I feel it is important to stress the point made by Cnilep about not deleting this essay. Feminist archaeology has been imperative towards the evolution of the discipline as a whole, and it is important to make this information accessible to the public. Stella stars (talk) 22:28, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Completely reworked article 

message: If what is stated in the section "Feminist and gender archaeologies" is true, then it may be better to rename the article and have "Feminist archeology" redirect to it. What do you think? 
(Note: I don't know how to do that yet.)
Denispir (talk)  —Preceding undated comment added 15:08, 30 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rename to "Gender archeology" 

message: .. so that the reader can realize at once the ideologycal biass and nobody will be missleaded.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.36.30.174 (talk) 11:40, 7 June 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Please keep the "Feminist" label 

message: That section, starting with "First discovered in the 1940s by Adelaide" has two paragraphs that talk about someone's biography. I don't think this should be included in this article, especially in such detail. Yardanico (talk) 18:47, 23 August 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Historical Archaeology section has an unnecessary biography 

message: — Assignment last updated by Cuttera24 (talk) 15:45, 24 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: ARCN 211 Material Histories of Labor
Template talk:Criminal defenses

message: The template is being bulked up with a number of duplicate items "in English law", examples are: Duress/Duress in English law & Necessity/Necessity in English law. Does this imply the first item is "general" or "in U.S. law"? What about other traditions of law? Customary law of indigenous peoples, or Chinese law. My preference would be to reference a general article and reference US/UK and notable exceptions from there. -- Paul foord 15:14, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The reason why I forked was because, as I was adding the 2005/6 cases, the quantity of material in the separate English law elements became disproportionate. I therefore created separate pages to allow for further growth. I have removed all reference to English law from the the CrimDef template. David91 16:10, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks - I agree with your creation of separate articles to handle the volume of material, but this will keep the CrimDef template to a less bulky general purpose design. Cheers! bd2412 T 16:26, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

text: Good to have the "kid" back on the block again, keeping us old 'uns in line. How many thousand edits a day are you managing now? Only joking. :) As I work through all the new cases over the last twelve months, page length is getting to be a real problem. This is not the place to discuss the problem of dynamic growth, but I will flag the issue here and we can take it to the LawProject area. David91 17:02, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Duplication of items

message: Any reason why alibi links to the wiktionary entry? OrangeDog 19:29, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wiktionary 

message: I've removed "mistake of law" and "mistake of fact", which are actually "mistake of template".  The proper term of legal art for the criminal defense is simply "mistake".  The terms "mistake of law" and "mistake of fact" are principles of civil law, primarily used in contract and tort law (e.g., in claims for restitution). ... Kenosis 15:22, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Mistake

message: It contains many things that are not defences as such, but rather challenges such as lack of mens rea (alibi) or actus reus (false confession). Its purpose is better fulfilled by simply including Template:Criminal law on the relevant pages rather than this one.
Unless there is any objection within a week I'mma go ahead with these changes and request deletion of this template. --Matthew Proctor (talk) 09:39, 19 May 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: This template is rubbish

message: Clicking self defence lead to self-defence instead of Right of self-defense as in the legal concept. I have corrected this. Kylesenior (talk) 04:36, 30 March 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Corrected self-defence
Talk:Volcanic crater

message: As far as I can tell, Footnote [1] leads no place that supports the claim it is supposed to document. There
is neither an entry for "crater" nor an entry for "volanic crater" in the glossary it leads to. 
Metrodorus (talk) 17:30, 19 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I see an entry for crater there. The definition given is: "Circular depression in the ground surface created by volcanic activity or asteroid impact." --Avenue (talk) 22:10, 19 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Footnote [1]
Talk:Gender archaeology

message: Hello, I am editing and adding to the theory and history sections of the Gender Archeology page. I am new to editing in Wikipedia, so this is my first addition.Dallas Rose (talk) 19:30, 19 March 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: The sentence is "Gender archaeology itself is based on the ideas that even though nearly all individuals are naturally born to a biological sex (usually either male or female, although also intersex)."
"Even though..." what? Schazjmd (talk) 21:37, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: It would be a sentence if "even though" was removed, so I'll delete those words. If it changes the meaning that was intended, someone can rewrite it. Schazjmd (talk) 15:29, 14 May 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Second sentence is incomplete
Talk:Landscape archaeology

message: Seems little point in merging the two as landscape archaeology could be one of the methods used to create a landscape history (others could be documentary research, palynology, geomorphology) therefore it is not landscape history which is a field of research.
Iain Stuart (talk) 05:52, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Proposed merge with landscape history

message: (and anyone else familar with the topic): Archaeogeography and Landscape archaeology sound like the same field by different names. Can they be merged with a paragraph to explain the different terminology? If one is considered a subdiscipline of the other, there's so much overlap perhaps a merge and a short explanation of the subfield would be better for readers. -- Beland (talk) 17:38, 23 April 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: See Talk:Archaeogeography#Do we need a standalone article for this? – Joe (talk) 05:31, 24 April 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Proposed merge from Archaeogeography
Talk:Lycopodium

message: I found Lycopodium listed as an ingredient in a pill for jet lag and would be interested in the addition of any background on its homeopathic or medicinal purposes. This is a link to the product description which includes the medicinal purposes: http://www.nojetlag.com/jetlag7.html 38.99.151.36 19:01, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

message: No time to deal with it myself, but this article would benefit from at least a mention of older treatments that included pretty much all species of Lycopodiaceae in the genus Lycopodium. Many of these species can still be found under Lycopodium in field guides and other relatively recent references. And as usual, the article needs to be very explicit as to whose classification scheme it is following, as this has been a very contentious subject through the years and there is still not a clear consensus. MrDarwin 14:30, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Lycopodium s.l.

message: 950 species of Licopodium seem too!
Unless you are including other species (from genera Huperzia??), but it should be clarified. --Mario1952 (talk) 18:09, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  # Species 

message: Taxonomic consensus seems to be moving fairly strongly towards the recognition of a yet-more-tightly circumscribed Lycopodium, with the sections as currently described on this page recognized at generic level. This is consistent with treatments in recent US regional floras (Haines, Flora Novae Angliae, 2011 and Weakley's drafts of Flora of the Southern and Mid-Atlantic States) and I now see that Øllgaard in Rodriguésia has endorsed the division as well. He recognizes 16 genera, which I take to be Austrolycopodium, Dendrolycopodium, Diphasiastrum, Diphasium, Huperzia, Lateristachys, Lycopodiastrum, Lycopodiella, Lycopodium, Palhinhaea, Phlegmariurus, Phylloglossum, Pseudodiphasium, Pseudolycopodiella, Pseudolycopodium, and Spinulum. Does anyone object to our adopting this more narrow circumscription? Choess (talk) 05:32, 16 November 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, maybe this was premature. The Flora of China draft doesn't recognize a lot of these segregates (Dendrolycopodium and Spinulum I can understand, but not recognizing Diphasiastrum?) and while I think it's still a good idea to create pages for the 16 genera, there's no point in clearing them out of Lycopodium until combinations are published for the new genera. Choess (talk) 15:49, 16 November 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recognition of sections at generic level
Talk:Near Eastern archaeology

message: Why are we capping Near Eastern Archaeology off at 612CE?  I think there are plenty of good reasons to include post-612 periods in this definition.  For example, professional journals dedicated to publishing Near Eastern research (e.g. Levant, Palestine Exploration Fund, Near Eastern Archaeology Magazine, etc.) do not discriminate.  Any thoughts?  If not, I will change in a few days. Bporter615 23:42, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Chronology
Talk:Ethnoarchaeology

message: So I added in the edits about the importance of analogy in ethnoarchaeology and rearranged some of the content already present into some of the categories. There could definitely be further elaboration on the topics already made as well as more headings added. More contributions under the formal and relational analogies sections are more than welcome! Same with the section about issues, though I personally think it would be a good idea to include how the issues are being dealt with. Any thoughts? GallivantingFox (talk) 23:11, 28 September 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: [Untitled]
Talk:Judge Hershey

message: Is there a reason this article doesn't mention her appearance in the Judge Dredd film? -- nae'blis 14:51, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Nothing beyond someone not yet adding it in (Emperor 15:30, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Judge Dredd film 

message: Does anyone know if Hershey was named after Barbara Hershey the actress? Daibhid C 21:30, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: When did that happen ? It was some time after she first appeared, wasn't it ? -- Beardo (talk) 21:49, 18 February 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: It was just before The Harlequin's Dance in 1993. Richard75 (talk) 01:11, 19 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Origin of name