lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Hello! Morning

message: Unless I'm missing something here, I don't quite understand the times for the shows listed (ie. "from 24:58 until 25:58 every Friday (12 days later)")...  shouldn't this read as "from 00:58 until 01:58 every Saturday"? --CherryMay 3 July 2005 20:39 (UTC)
: I realize this has been asked well over a year ago, but whatever. I'm not sure why they do it that way, but in Japan they seem to announce the time like that. Probably because the midnight hours are only a little bit into the next day, which may confuse some people. Tydus Arandor 07:30, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Show times 

message: What about Ayaka's Surprise English Lessons?  How do they fit in to the Hello! project and Hello! Morning?74.131.108.119 00:44, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: To my (very limited) knowledge, Ayaka's Surprise English Lessons were never broadcasted on Hello! Morning. They were part of a Hello! Project TV show named Bishoujo Kyouiku (2001) and later Bishoujo Kyouiku II (2002). There's more information on it here. Hope I helped. Tydus Arandor 07:30, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ayaka's Surprise English Lessons 

message: I propose merging Mini Moni Chiccha into Hello! Morning. Based on this article, it seems like Mini Moni Chiccha is a segment on this show, and not a TV show itself.--Cattus talk 17:14, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for the comment. I have merged the article.--Cattus talk 21:41, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merging proposal
Talk:Hilda Murrell

message: Does anyone know what Andrew George's motive was? Is he going to appeal the conviction? What happened to the MI5 operative who, it was alleged, killed Murrell? -- james, 03 July 2005.
George's motive is on the record: burglary gone wrong). There has been no M15 operative named (to my knowledge), just vague accusations of government involvement.Mukogodo (talk) 19:21, 17 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Perhaps I'm overzealous but descriptors such as "characteristic thoroughness" "brilliantly executed" and "her financial flair" do not seem to me to be terribly neutral or encyclopedic. I'll be cutting out those phrases that I see as biased and am leaving this here as record. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Addisnog (talk • contribs) 18:46, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Possible POV slant 
Talk:Saraswat Brahmin

message: The Saraswat Brahmins originating in Balochistan were called sindhur and were considered a low caste. They have a legend of origin related to Lord Ramachandra (not the same as Parashurama), who could not find a priest in Balochistan and applied a Tilaka on the head of some Mleccha. Jürgen Schaflechner cites the historian Rowe who states that such "low ranking Brahmins" formed a symbiotic relationship with Vaishya castes such as Khatris, Lohanas, etc. who were trying to raise their varna status - which in turn would benefit the Saraswats as well. For this purpose, certain religious texts were written during the British Raj era.
Relevant editor please try to address my concerns regarding the above statements if possible,
1.Is this applicable to all the saraswats?(If not why it is there in main introduction?)
2.Is this generally accepted origin of saraswats?(Most accepted one is SaraswatI river basin migration then what's the importance of this?)
3.Is there any historical document for this?(If yes please share the relevant materials)
4.Do saraswats were present in Balochistan in any historical documents?(If yes please share the historical document related to that)
5.The RAMA story seems like primary source without even base of Ramayana.Did Rama every visited Balochistan?Do they used word mleccha in tretayuga?
Even if you are feeling the same ambiguity please proceed towards neutral source or deletion.
Regards,
Acchuta Sharma (talk) 10:31, 20 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Clarify 

message: Dear Editors,
I have added clarification tag for some statements specified in specific scenario (Different Context) which has been portrayed in general context to this page (This community) as a whole. So being Wikipedian I have executed my rights to ask for clarification. Expecting some support from your end in this process. Please don't revert the edits, all the tags will be deleted after discussion with the respective editors.
Regards, Acchuta Sharma (talk) 07:05, 22 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Expecting Clarification for the source with different context 

message: "Saraswat merchant families during the Portuguese rule of Goa also were involved in trade with Portuguese colonies around the globe including in the African slave trade. In the 19th century also, French slave merchants came to Goa and contacted the Portuguese and Saraswat Brahmins who sold them African slaves."
Seems like this is racial against one country and ethnicity. Ethically we should think of deleting it. Dear Editors I am Expecting your inputs. Acchuta Sharma (talk) 07:24, 22 January 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Please note that Wikipedia is not censored! Still, in case you have objection, please wait for other editors' response/views. Placing a 'Clarify' tag is not a solution, as explained in my edit summary. Read WP:REMOVAL & WP:CONSENSUS! You need to achieve consensus for the same! Thanks. Ekdalian (talk) 08:46, 22 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Review the below Racial statement
Talk:Joan of Navarre, Queen of England

message: This article, short & sweet, notes in the section dealing with Joan of Navarre's marriage to Henry IV of England that this couple had no issue. 
The corresponding section of the Henry IV article [] "Marriage and Issue", para 2 (after list of issue) line 2 states "she and Henry had only one son Edmund, called Labourde, who was born and died in 1401".
Please can someone with the appropriate knowledge resolve these conflicting statements?
Thanks
Sammysamak (talk) 10:31, 15 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Inconsistency with other articles 

message: Edited on 25/03/2020 by author Gemma Hollman to add some information from her book about Joan.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by GLHollman (talk • contribs) 10:04, 26 March 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: The extra information certainly improves the article, thank you for sharing! Richard Nevell (talk) 13:29, 26 March 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edits
Talk:Effects of climate change

message: Write about causes, effects and solutions of Climate change Also add the impact of Wildfire on the ecosystem. 2409:40E4:49:C05B:C5BE:3DCE:847B:7424 (talk) 06:26, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: See Causes of climate change, Effects of climate change, Climate change mitigation and Climate change adaptation. —RCraig09 (talk) 17:33, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Geological
Talk:Gregory Cochran

message: Cochran is bluntly described here as a racist: "a proponent of human biodiversity, a contemporary branch of scientific racism." One of the sources given for this accusation is the Southern Poverty Law Center, a highly partisan group that sometimes unfairly labels its political opponents as hate mongers (ex: Ayaan Hirsi Ali and Maajid Nawaz, etc). If you are going to make a serious charge of racism, you had better be able to back it up with a lot more evidence than this.
: Note that the first two references do not mention Cochran. GC and the 10000 year explosion have received a good deal of coverage in RSs -much of it positive. calling him a proponent of scienfici racism in wikipedia's voice would need to be sourcing (better than the splc) that actually does that. NPalgan2 (talk) 13:31, 23 April 2018 (UTC)
replies: text:  I’ve attempted to address this by stating that he is associated with the ‘human biodiversity’ milieu, and note that critics have described it as scientific racism; both these statements are much more easily supported, including with sources friendly to Cochran (in the Taki’s article, Steve Sailer even asserts that his HBD mailing list is how Cochran and his 10000-year leap coauthor/West Hunter collaborator Harpending met). 23.115.162.60 (talk) 05:24, 26 July 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Scientific Racism 

message: Unfortunately, many of the article’s sources for the subject’s controversial ongoing work in "human biodiversity" (see also discussion above) came from his own or his admirers’ writings in otherwise deprecated sources. I made a couple of attempts to note this in edit comments, citing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Deprecated_sources#Acceptable_uses_of_deprecated_sources, but the bot obviously can’t understand that.
23.115.162.60 (talk) 04:57, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, editors should try to use reliable secondary sources. I don't think self-published and unreliable sources are appropriate. Citing Cochran's own self-published blog is probably not allowed. Sxologist (talk) 23:39, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Deprecated sources and exceptions
Talk:Mendips (disambiguation)

message: The only links here that are actually called "Mendips" are the Mendip Hills, which are very well known and usually referred to as "the Mendips", and the house at 251 Menlove Avenue. which may be notable, but is nowhere near as widely known. My proposal, therefore, is that:
* "Mendips", as the primary topic, redirects to the Mendip Hills.
* "Mendips (disambiguation)" is created for all "Mendips" links.
* "Mendip (disambiguation)" is created for all "Mendip" links.
* The usual "See also" links are created at the dab pages.--Bermicourt (talk) 18:12, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Move proposal
Talk:Lene Lovich

message: The second section implies that Lene made no American tours until 1989, but I am sure that I saw her at the Mabuhay in San Francisco ca. 1981. A detailed tour list would be a great addition to this article, which I think is already very good.
A fuller description of her Eastern European connections would also be important (for example, her artistic connection to Nina Hagen), as this was a tempestuous period in European politics, in which Eastern and Central Europe played a key role.Radagast44 (talk) 08:02, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Tours

message: Why is there an Italian article in the English Wikipedia. I believe it should either be translated for clarity, or removed.
: Either way, its presence is a copyvio, so I cut it out completely as part of the clean up of this article. 23skidoo 19:39, 31 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Italian article

message: Sorry, have we lost the head here? 92.96.165.209 (talk) 17:25, 10 May 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  The lead figure of the new wave music scene.
Talk:Protein ontology

message: How is the Protein Ontology different from the Gene Ontology?
Most importantly: where is the definition of this Protein Ontology?
This article does not contain any reference and the external link is presently dead.
I propose to delete this entry, or to redirect to Gene Ontology.
Miguel Andrade 22:42, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Proposing to delete this entry

message: This name should be refered to the Protein Ontology (PRO) released by the Protein Information Resource. Larry.europe (talk) 14:31, 4 December 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: According to the page's protection level you should be able to edit the page yourself. If you seem to be unable to, please reopen the request with further details. Terra (talk) 06:19, 5 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Protected edit request on 4 December 2017 

message: Hi
I think this page should redirect to the Protein Information Resource page instead of the Gene Ontology page, because PIR provides the official Protein Ontology (PRO) database.
Thanks,
--Larry.europe (talk) 22:09, 22 October 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Done and unprotected — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 07:33, 23 October 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Protected edit request on 22 October 2018
Talk:Frankie

message: There is an incomplete disambiguation at [Frankie (film)]. I've propsed it be merged here. Boleyn (talk) 18:11, 11 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Frankie (film)

message: Should this disambiguation page note that "the Frankies" was a short name for the pop group Frankie Goes to Hollywood?Vorbee (talk) 18:16, 9 November 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Frankie Goes to Hollywood
Talk:Against a Dark Background

message: I'd like to split off the Lazy Gun stuff back into its own article. It's fascinating, but I feel too detailed for a book article. Guinnog 00:27, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Is there any hidden connection to the Culture as there is with Inversions? (I could not spot one with either but there apparently is with the latter.)--Lucifer 15:41, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Erm, I don't think there is one (but am all-ears in case there is!).  As I recall, AaDB is set far outside a galaxy, hence the civilisation's isolation.  I'm pretty sure the galaxy isn't specifically identified as our's (unlike in Culture stories).  A Google search should turn something up.  Just need to avoid fancruft.  Cheers, --Plumbago 16:18, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks, Lucifer 11:33, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Connection to Culture

message: Since the Lazy Gun is a fictional object, and exists only within this single story, I agree that its article should be merged with this one, as a sub-section.  Efalk (talk) 13:48, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Merging with "Lazy Gun"

message: I can't find the pages linked to any of the footnotes. I'll see if I can find suitable replacements if/when I get a Round Tuit. 
Isambardcat (talk) 12:58, 23 November 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Broken links 

message: There is a major give-away in the first paragraph: the meaning of the novel's title. It has no place in a synopsis. I am removing it. 
Yunuswesley (talk) 01:07, 13 September 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Major spoiler
Talk:Liebermann

message: Why is this page in German? I'm pretty sure i'm on the English wikipedia. Looks like an edit is long overdue here :)
*Article: :de:Liebermann
*Corresponding English-language article: Liebermann
*Worth doing because:  :-)
*Originally Requested by: --Sheynhertz-Unbayg 30 June 2005 11:37 (UTC)
*Status: done -Tydaj 21:43, 14 July 2005 (UTC)

message: I'm against a split.  There is nothing to be gained by splitting out this disambiguation page.  —Cliffb 05:50, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: is there any reason to have Liebermann redirect here? Subst:nsd 16:08, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  split 

message: An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect David Lieberman. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so.  Zerach (talk) 06:08, 7 July 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  David Lieberman listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]]
Talk:Lithotomy position

message: "Few birth centres or labour wards in Western countries use the lithotomy postion for active labour."
Should that be eastern or western european or maybe until recently???--Gbleem 06:46, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Cited "source" is a message board. This article is unsubstantiated and tremendously POV-- even midwives don't go so far as to posit that lithotomy position is harmful and outdated, only that women should have babies however is most comfortable. Perhaps we should be citing a professional position statement instead? --207.181.215.78 (talk) 14:31, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  removed 

message: I have taken a look at the first cited paper (Johanson, et al., "Has the medicalisation of childbirth gone too far?", Brit. Med. J. 324: 892-895, 2002), and it supports none of the cited claims in the article. Specifically:
:* there is no discussion of blood flow or its relation to morbidity and mortality of mother or infant;
:* the article does not distinguish between "passive" vs. "active" birthing;
:* there is no discussion of the lithotomy position at all (the word "lithotomy" appears only once in the entire article and is used as a casual description of the most common position for giving birth);
:* the article does not single out the United States for use of the lithotomy position, nor does it cite any "solid scientific evidence" against giving birth in the lithotomy position; and
:* there is no discussion of use of the lithotomy position as a trend towards medicalization of birth.
I have tagged the statements that it does not support because the cited article simply is not appropriate support for these claims. If they cannot be substantiated by a credible source, these statements will be removed. --chodges (talk) 06:13, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I removed this section since it appears that nobody disputes my conclusions above. --chodges (talk) 23:33, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I’ve read your conclusions. Szagg (talk) 13:23, 22 April 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: 14 years later Szagg (talk) 13:24, 22 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Factual accuracy and improper citation 
Talk:Büdingen

message: As mentioned in the edit page, there still is a lot of stuff commented out. I'd translate, but I don't think this city is notable enough to warrant that kind of work - or even an article that in-depth. Somebody just copied the German article (which deserves to be more in-depth) to the English wiki... --80.139.211.173 3 July 2005 21:53 (UTC)
* You're absolutely right here; I'll leave it on my watchlist, and have a look at it later Lectonar 4 July 2005 08:41 (UTC)
Needs a cleanup-translation (originally German/Deutsch) --Hagrid 3 July 2005 13:28 (UTC)
There is a lot of German text to be translated in this article that was commened out.--Fenice 3 July 2005 20:50 (UTC)
* I've started today, and left messages on its talk page and on Hagrids talk page Lectonar 4 July 2005 14:03 (UTC)
* I've finished up the translation but it could still use a looking-over by someone more familiar with the historical technical terms. --Angr/ 10:03, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
Talk:Battle of Britain Memorial Flight

message: Would information regarding the schemes worn on BBMF aircraft be notable enough for inclusion?
For example "During 1992, the Lancaster wore a scheme of WS-J of No. 9 Squadron RAF". Would this be encyclopedic enough for inclusion? 
Gavbadger (talk) 18:58, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Would information regarding the schemes worn on BBMF aircraft be notable enough for inclusion 

message: The article says "" and lists 6 Spitfires. This needs to be adjusted? Martinevans123 (talk) 11:55, 27 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Loss of MK356
Template talk:Audio-nohelp

message: This template adds a space after the displayed text. When used in-line it is often followed by a comma or period. The added space creates a violation with almost any style guide and may lead to wrapping the single punctuation mark to the next line. See examples on pitch (music). Can someone break through the protection and remove the blank? P.S. I do not see the (info) tag shown in the description here.−Woodstone (talk) 14:42, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wrapping problems with in-line use 

message: Please apply ; then apply the hAudio microformat, by changing [ redacted ]. No visual changes will occur. The category is hidden. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 20:08, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 09:02, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thank you. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 20:49, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  EditProtected: Documentation + hAudio 

message: Hi, I came across this template at Concert pitch, and I am a bit confused by the "info" link, which seems to point to pages where one can listen to the item (or could if one had the required software). Why is the link called "info" rather than, say, "listen"? It does not seem to be the right word. 86.128.3.46 (talk) 03:03, 1 September 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, the link goes to the file page where there is important information such as the creator, source, and licencing of the file. SpinningSpark 10:17, 13 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  "info"?
Template talk:Merge/Archive 1

message: The current tempalte includes the square brackets, so one need only enter as the parameter the name of the article involved, not a complete link. However, this can cause a problem when, in a gorup merge, one wants to enter multiple article links in the parameter. i just propsoed a merge and used mergefrom at Aubrey-Maturin series. I had to leave off the opening brackets on the inital link, and the closing brackets on the final link in the template call. this looks rather odd in teh wiki code. Maybe I should have used subst again, but I didn't -- in part because Lifeisunfair had changed the template after my previous comments on a group merge, and suggested that it would now work as it stood in such cases. Mind you i am not suggesting that the templae be changed just to accomdate this case, i am merely noting the current situation for those who might make a  similar use of mergefrom in future. DES 15:55, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: You handled the situation correctly (just as I did in my example).  —Lifeisunfair 16:18, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Fine. But it should probably be mentioned in the template documentation, if we are to endorse this template for group merges. DES 19:43, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed.  Would you like to do the honors, or should I?  —Lifeisunfair 19:46, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Where is the usage documentation page for these templates, anyway. Each of their discussuon tabs seems to link to this page -- i didn't know you could do that. And this page doesn't have any usage documentation on it, except as contained in the various debates. DES 19:59, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: The documentation is located at Wikipedia:Template messages/Merging and splitting.  —Lifeisunfair 21:00, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks. Changes made. DES 21:23, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Effect of current template structure
Talk:Charibert II

message: The birth date has recently been amended. This date should be vetted. --Wetman 17:52, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Birth date

message: Here's a personal photograph of a coin of Charibert II. Feel free to insert it into the article. Cheers PHG (talk) 07:38, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Coin
Talk:Stephen R. Marquardt

message: While I casually agree with it, I just removed a large chunk of criticism from the article. On Wikipedia, we don't inject our personal opinions as criticism into articles, we find reliable sources where that criticism is expressed and incorporate that into the article, with proper citations. Since there was no source cited, it looked like a random opinion, violating our no original research policy. This is basic policy and should never be violated. Studerby 23:20, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Original research

message: 2 of my Antivirus detect a virus on the beauty website link at page bottom  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.67.20.43 (talk) 04:46, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  2 of my Antivirus detect a virus on the beauty website link at page bottom
Talk:Ziyad ibn Abihi

message: His well known name is Ziyad ibn Abeeh both the Arabic and Farsi page name him as such there is nothing to support the current article's name I hope someone will edit it.
Thanks,  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 176.44.102.111 (talk) 14:15, 30 January 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 23:31, 8 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Title of the article should be changed 