lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Finley Quaye

message: Was the Tricky's uncle allegation ever cleared up? I don't believe it was.
--
And the article contradicts itself on this point.
:That's not even mentioned now. -- Beardo (talk) 22:51, 18 March 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: According to this https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/pop-everythings-fine-with-finley-1143697.html, his "much older half- brother, Caleb Quaye, is also Tricky's mother's half-brother." Kelvingreen (talk) 11:32, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Tricky

message: I'm thinking he's not the brother of the caleb linked in the article... However, there is no page set up for the caleb that's supposed to be referenced.--86.135.12.189 20:10, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Caleb? 

message: Quaye was convicted a few years ago for pushing his ex girlfriend and kicking her friend in the chest in front of a small child. I believe he was sentenced to anger management and community service as well as paying compensation. A couple of years ago he was charged for allegedly biting a tour manager, but it was thrown out after a procedural error by prosecution. This year he's been charged after apparently attacking a woman in the street. I'll add something if i can find some decent sources, i don't know how reliable some of these are:
http://www.camdennewjournal.co.uk/archive/n050603_6.htm
http://www.contactmusic.com/news/quaye-escapes-conviction-after-judge-throws-out-assault-case_1139190
http://www.scotsman.com/edinburgh-evening-news/edinburgh/pop-star-finley-quaye-charged-with-slapping-woman-in-street-1-2034622
Azkm (talk) 18:05, 26 March 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I understand what he was accused of, I read the sources before I reworded that paragraph. In my opinion, after working with a few hundred BLPs so far, is that we tend to be very querulous when we cite things like these. There's no need to spell out in detail what the person did, whether he kicked or punched or spat on or where, etc. That's what the given references are for, so people can click on that and examine the details. On the other hand, we cannot censor ourselves. So I thought that was an acceptable compromise. As for abusing the minor edit flag, not sure what you mean. I re-worded an existing paragraph, not deleted a half page of material. §FreeRangeFrogcroak 18:56, 9 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  No mention of criminal charges or convictions for assault? 

message: "Quaye's mother had long term relationships with musician Pete King who hosted and performed at Ronnie Scott's club in Frith Street, London, as well as Dodi Fayed who was a film producer who produced Breaking Glass with Hazel O'Connor" - two things. There's no source of any of this, and assuming this is the Dodi Fayed, that's an oddly selective description. 146.199.71.211 (talk) 19:03, 13 July 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dodi
Talk:Public records

message: I removed the following, per Wikipedia policy to avoid self-reference. This seems like the sort of thing that belongs in Wikipedia name space. Skittle 20:06, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Self-Reference 

message: I thought that this article deserved a section about public records in the US (particularly about the differences in accessibility by state), so I added one. Any thoughts from others? Phyrne22 20:30, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Public Records in the US 

message: The concept of public records is a key concept to democracy and the rule of law.  The article in its current form does injustice to the subject.
As only one example:
It can be argued that absent court records as public records, the Habeas Corpus right, deemed by the late Justice Brennan as "the cornerstone" of the American Constitution, could not be practiced.
It would be worthwhile to cover the origins of the concept and its evolutions as the "common law right to access court records - to inspect and to copy", and the significance of the distinct two rights - to inspect and to copy.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.108.104.7 (talk) 09:23, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Historic Perspective 

message: The definition currently given at the top of the article is way too narrow to be accurate, and I feel has been made worse by recent edits.
This makes sense as a starting point:
:The California Government Code defines public records as, “…any writing containing information relating to the conduct of the public’s business prepared, owned, used or retained by any state or local agency regardless of physical form or characteristic.”  For example, public records can include, but are not limited to, papers, books, maps, charts, photographs, audiotapes, videotapes, and information stored on a computer. Source.
Agreed?--Elvey (talk) 06:12, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  The definition 

message: Neutrality of controversy sections seems questionable.  Author seems to be arguing that data mining is beneficial.
90.157.234.124 (talk) 13:32, 5 November 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Controversy 
Talk:Testimony of the Evangelists

message: Moved from article to talk page:
:===Note:===
:I will continue to update this article with better information and to polish it so that it will be of higher quality. I consider this a "stub" which I will continue to edit, but have placed it on wikipedia so that the information is available.-infinitelink''
I moved this to the talk page so the article would look more formal.  Hope you don't mind! By the way, I agree with the person who suggested that this article be moved to Wikisource.  delldot | talk 01:16, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: [Untitled]

message: I understand your concerns about the(un)reliable source. Packham is not published by a third party of reliability, i.e. academic source. However Clifford's published material interacts with Packham's arguments, thus establishing the need for reference (See Clifford's work). Further reference is made through links to Packham's material. Consider revising and editing instead of removing whole sections, so as not to violate the NPOV policy. Even when you leave just Clifford's comments the reference to Packham nonetheless remains. The Packham material seems to be adequately balanced by the contributing lawyer's NPOV comments. Thanks, Michael Jones 17:58, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  ==Recent Removal== 

message: Some of the material in the "critical analysis" section appears to be original content, or at least uncited content. I am concerned that someone is using this as a forum to refute Packham from the Packham-Montgomery debate.John196920022001 (talk)
This is very much the case. The author of the 'critical analysis' is not only nakedly using it as a forum to deal with Packham's article and promote Legal Apologetics, they're doing it very poorly. They apparently didn't even take the time to read and understand Packham's article, as they claim he says the ancient documents rule only applies to express legal instruments, such as wills, when in fact Packham was referring to the parol evidence rule. In that respect, Packham is absolutely correct according to this encyclopedia. I don't know how to flag something for deletion, but that segment needs flagged for deletion.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.57.165.104 (talk) 21:32, 29 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Original Content
Talk:Dragon Quest & Final Fantasy in Itadaki Street Special

message: *If this game was released in 2004, then how are there characters from Final Fantasy XII, which was not released until late 2006? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 72.200.91.161 (talk • contribs).
:Agreed to a point, those games are likely to have used characters from this one. However, it is also possible FFXII had already been designed. -- ReyBrujo 00:37, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Final Fantasy XII was released early on 2006 (which isn't saying much, since it was still after ItaSt Special was released). Characters from Dragon Quest VIII were also included, even though the game was still in development. Those are all unlockable, so they are a view of the upcoming games. Icecypher 17:09, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: FFXII
Talk:Exokernel

message: The image needs to be improved.  It does not illustrate anything specific to exokernels; it could apply just as well to a monolithic kernel.  It is also notionally upside-down, putting "low-level" code at the top of the diagram. -- Beland 20:29, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Image cleanup 

message: I'm trying to figure out why AmigaOS wouldn't fall into the exokernel category, and not finding any good reasons. It used libraries for pretty much everything (including the kernel itself, actually). It allows user-space programs to hit hardware directly. Even if it doesn't fit the definition, I think it deserve a mention as something similar.
Anyone have any thoughts? Booch (talk) 16:26, 12 September 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  AmigaOS 
Talk:Blog fiction

message: Needs breaking down into an introduction and sections. Way too many external links, many of them inline and unnecessary. GraemeL 01:25, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cleanup 

message: Tychoish wrote: "I recognize that it would be improper for anyone to 'pimp' their blogs here, I do think that examples would be appropriate, particularly at the end..."
I agree that it would be helpful to have some examples. But as you say it would also be improper for bloggers to just spam the page with links to their blogs so we need some sort of impartial source to justify what blog fictions to include in the list.
There's a dissertation/thesis on blog fiction online - Betsy's Phony Bologna. Perhaps we could mention this thesis and place a list of some of the fiction blogs mentioned in the thesis at the foot of the article. Does that sound reasonable? Would that count as a verifiable/reliable source?  Hubbleshuff 21:13, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Could we vet a list through the talk page? Keep the total number posted limited to 10-15 examples, and draw from a pool of possibilities so that theirs a diverse set of links that captures the genre in total (blog fiction is a more wide genre than, say tumble logs, where projectionist and arachnia serve as pretty good exmplars of the entire field.) tycho garen (talk) 15:43, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

text: Any examples referenced here should be independently notable - that is, they should probably have Wikipedia articles of their own. External links should not be here per WP:ELNO. - MrOllie (talk) 20:05, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Examples of blog fiction 

message: Why does this article read like a sophomore in college wrote it? To top it off, there's no citations at all in the entire piece. There are a lot of claims here that definitely need proof to support. I added the appropriate tags where this article needed improvement. ldvhl (talk) 11:29, 30 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Citations/style
Talk:The Chronic Argonauts

message: Is there no decent publishing of this novel? The only cover-art I have discovered is just plain black on white text. Also, this book does not seem to have gotten very many reviews (I only recently discovered it). I plan to expand on this article after reading the story, but would be glad for the help of other Wellsian critics. user:Warofwrath — Preceding unsigned comment added by Warofwrath (talk • contribs) 06:28, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: The reason you can't find it is, that despite the box above, it's a short story not a novel (I read it in about half an hour). I've edited the article text to reflect this. ae7flux — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ae7flux (talk • contribs) 15:24, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Slovak–Hungarian War

message: The text has 2 "preludes". Juro 01:00, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: I figured I would let you know that I have usurped the redirect from Little War to create an article about another war, for which Little War is also a translation. I think I may unilaterally set up some disambiguation pages or something to resolve the issue, but figured it was best to give you a heads up. -Oreo Priest 19:39, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Little War]] 

message: "which was within the view of the current Slovak border." I'm not sure whether the article is needed, but I've added it for the time being.--Adûnâi (talk) 16:11, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Current" vs "the current"
Talk:Whole grain

message: The European Commission (updated 2023)  have stated that "consumption of whole grains is associated with a reduction in the risk of developing non-communicable diseases", they list a table of this evidence . The evidence they list includes reports from the Scientific Advisory Committee on Nutrition in 2015.
I am not sure how this fits in with what the European Food Safety Authority have said about whole grains in their report in 2010  as this is now outdated. I guess we will have to wait until they publish an update. Psychologist Guy (talk) 12:41, 25 October 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: This article (now deleted) from the European Food Information Council published in 2009 seems to be incorrectly used on the Wikipedia article . It is sourced to content which is not found on the article. Here is a modern link from the European Food Information Council on whole grains (updated 2015) . Wikipedia does not have an article on European Food Information Council it is probably worth creating. In regard to Health Canada I have cited their 2012 assessment  hopefully there are no objections to citing this. Psychologist Guy (talk) 12:59, 25 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[European Commission]] and [[Health Canada]]
Template talk:Insertion sort core implementations

message: For some reason, people have an overwhelming urge to add implementations of sorting algorithms in every conceivable language. Insertion sort once contained many implementations in various programming languages, most of them simple translations with no additional benefit. To deal with this, most of these implementations were moved out to insertion sort implementations, a comprehensive list of insertion sort implementations, leaving only a few representative ones in the original article. However, because we also want those few representative ones in insertion sort implementations, this created a fork where the two articles diverged. This template is placed in now placed in both articles to prevent this divergence. It has the nice side effect of making it harder to edit the core implementations than the "additional" implementations, since people are continuing to add too many core implementations. Deco 00:22, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Purpose of this template
Talk:Kokugaku

message: Someone in 2006 inserted a section on Mitogaku. Mitogaku was a separate phenomenon from kokugaku, although it converged with kokugaku in the 19th century to produce a virulent strain of Japanese nationalism and racial superiority that helped discredit the kokugaku tradition. 
I've deleted the material on Mitogaku. If someone thinks it's important, go ahead and create a new article on Mitogaku. Don't put the information here -- it's blatant ideologising.
The article on kokugaku really needs to be filled out with more information. As it stands, it takes the later Hirata Atsutane reworking of kokugaku as the standard view. Kokugaku may have been eventually hijacked by the likes of Hirata and eventually become as extreme in its thinking as Mitogaku, but the modern view of kokugaku as "xenophobia personified" fails to do justice to the school and its history. Motoori Norinaga may have planted the seeds of xenophobic kokugaku, but it's a moot question (and totally unprovable) whether he would have supported the Hirata version of kokugaku.
Bathrobe 06:13, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Mitogaku

message: I am sorry, I don’t really know how to use the Wikipedia edit functions, but I’d like to point out something:
At the moment, The Chinese term guoxue redirects to the Japanese kokugaku. Though they are written with the same characters (Traditional: 國學/ Simplified: 国学), they have different meanings. The article on kokugaku describes a Japanese academic movement from the Tokugawa period (17th to 19th century), that tried to shift away from the Chinese tradition. Guoxue, however, is a nationalistic / academic movement originating in Republican China, with a focus on Chinese tradition and its classics. Therefore, guoxue should not redirect to kokugaku. Instead, an article about guoxue should be created. At least, the redirection should be removed.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wush1 (talk • contribs) 09:13, 10 June 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Guoxue and Kokugaku
Talk:Power cord

message: I added this text back in today:
Unfortunately sometimes an incorrect power cord will be shipped with a product. This happens frequently with inexpensive items imported by small trading companies from China. The result is very dangerous and possibly deadly Ref Example.
Someone who works for the company that it references had deleted the link.  I cited him for vandalism but would like confirmation from other writers that this text is valid and should not be removed. --Stredler (talk) 17:43, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I've removed the EL but maintained the prose. Contributing nothing to WP but ELs to one site is characteristic of spammers, which is why I have treated you as such. Carl.bunderson (talk) 19:45, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: This really needs a Reliable Source to back it up.  Jpp42 (talk) 09:54, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

text: No Spaghettij, the socket on a power cord is correctly termed a connector, it is one part of an appliance coupler, the other part being the appliance inlet which is mounted on the appliance.  The socket on a power cord is most definitely not a female plug!  174.58.32.78 (talk) 01:02, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
replies: text:  	"plug connector :-  the part of the interconnection coupler integral with or intended to be attached to the flexible cable " [] Its a (female) plug connector, the plug being the male end which fits into the socket outletSpaghettij (talk) 13:27, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Please discuss this part which I feel is valid and should not be removed 

message: I've added a section to the power cord article discussing power cord standards.  I've only referenced US DoD and UL standards, so this is perhaps a little US-centric.  Please feel free to add additional references to power cord standards from other countries. Bosef1 (talk) 16:23, 22 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Power cord standard
Talk:Rocket Ismail

message: While the article isn't exactly clear, I am copying comment which was placed into the article:
"He couldn’t possibly have converted to Christianity in his early teens, because a sports illustrated article from 1989 shows him at Notre Dame still practising Islam. Here’s the link to that article. https://www.si.com/.amp/vault/1989/09/25/the-light-and-the-lightning-notre-dame-sophomore-raghib-ismail-has-brilliant-speed-on-the-football-field-but-he-is-if-anything-more-dazzling-off-it
Now I know you’ll delete this fact and put the propaganda lies back up there again. Whatever. Fix this."  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.118.206.19 (talk) 21:30, 25 January 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Conversion to Christianity 

message: The article may be improved by following the WikiProject Biography 11 easy steps to producing at least a B article. -- -- Thesocialistesq/M.Lesocialiste 00:19, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Then I was wrong, and I ask that you fix it. Lord Bob 04:37, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject_Biography/Assessment#Class_parameter|Biography assessment rating]] comment 

message: "Ismail was removed from the zoo that had surrounded him"
Whats that supposed to mean? --Yodakii 03:44, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: It's a figure of speech suggesting that it was a wild and unpleasant place to be, because of the pressure that had been heaped upon him. Lord Bob 04:37, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  zoo? 

message: The content sourced to the article (Article on Raghib Ismail: Rocket shows strong path) doesn't seem to be a reliable source.
It contains sentences like, 
*"...Whatever God put on his soul, the former Notre Dame football standout..."
*"Christ said there is always going to be trouble..." 
The article seems to be biased a bit. Can someone find a better source?Bless sins 17:33, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Reliable source?
Talk:Nanaimo City

message: I did it that way because the boundaries for them are very different; the older one was about five ridings today, and the name dropped off the map for a while.  This particular area of Vancouver Island has been subject to lots of boundary-fiddling over the years; the area presents of mix of retired people, union voters, conservative post-imperial colonists, First Nations people and is fairly volatile politically - so the boundaries get shifted around to try to move the lines on the chessboard a bit.  I've done the same double-listing elsewhere; although both links resolve to the same page: NanaimoSkookum1 02:10, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Why two separate Nanaimo ridings
Talk:Reusability

message: I agree
I disagree. Reusability can occur on various levels and various types of objects not just code. Object can be designed for reuse and reusability can occur through deployment, compononet reuse (close to code reuse) as well as indivudual interactions with learning or content objects. In the learning technologies domain, this concept is integral and is not necessariy localized to that of softward engineering.
 it is to reus some thing and to help the enviroment.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.189.224.180 (talk) 07:52, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: http://www.onstrategies.com/blog/2008/03/05/soa-benefits-too-much-reuse-of-reuse/
* “What if you built a service-oriented architecture and nothing got reused? Is it still of value to the business, or is it a flop?”
* "As Brooks pointed out in his _The Mythical Man-Month_ (yes, book more than a little old, still relevant) is that making components reusable is more than abstracting out the functions a bit. You need good release engineering and even worse, good documentation. Most programmers can’t write documentation to save their lives."
* Hurdles to re-usability:
# Cultural limits: using somebody else's work is not creative, clever, or "macho".
# Competition limits: 
#* "We eventually realized that entity relationships did not adequately address business logic, so we eventually went to objects, followed by coarser grained components, with the idea that if we built that galactic enterprise repository in the sky, that software functionality could be harvested like low hanging fruit."
#* "Then we realized the futility of grand enterprise modeling schemes, because the pace of change in modern economies meant that any enterprise model would become obsolete the moment it was created. And so we pursued SOA, with the idea that we could compose and dynamically orchestrate our way to agility."  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.138.64.110 (talk) 21:19, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Criticisms of reusability 

message: Right now Reusability is defined by "In computer science and software engineering, reusability is the use of existing assets in some form within the software product development process," and Code Reuse is defined by Code reuse, also called software reuse, is the use of existing software, or software knowledge, to build new software,[1] following the reusability principles." I'm not quite sure I understand the difference between the two. Perhaps this difference just needs to made more clear in the introductions. Otherwise, perhaps these two pages would be good for merging. Skiingxmoose (talk) 19:29, 27 December 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Difference between Code Reuse and Reusability?