lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Ponce, Puerto Rico

message: I have removed a disturbing number of commercial and other non-notable external links clearly not meeting WP:RS as references, and I'm sure there are plenty more in this and other related articles that won't withstand scrutiny. Flowanda | Talk 05:51, 23 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reference cleanup 

message: "A country is a geographical region considered to be the physical territory of a sovereign state, or of a smaller, or former, political division within a geographical region. Usually, but not always, a country coincides with a sovereign territory and is associated with a state, nation or government. Puerto Rico is a country. Puerto Rico has its own olympic team, culture and national identity."
Added to new section by QuAzGaA 23:11, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Comment by [[User talk:76.228.44.108]]

message: Ponce doesn't have a climate box, so I assume no weather reporting station.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.162.42.75 (talk) 00:53, 17 February 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi there. I was able to find a weather reporting station for Ponce. It is located at Ponce 4 E, which has records extending back to 1898. I have added the climate data for that station. Ssbbplayer (talk) 16:42, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  No weather station? 
Talk:Susan Lindquist

message: That's a long extract. Are we sure that this falls within "fair use"? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.158.106.77 (talk) 5 December 2002 (UTC)
:Actually, it's not THAT long of an excerpt... I would say it's within the limits. --Dante Alighieri 12:37 Dec 5, 2002 (UTC)
:P.S. Hey, why not make yourself a user page? It's easy and quick and then we know what to call you! ;)
::I'm the one who put in the allegedly "long" quote, and I really think it shows some of Lindquist's personality, and only represents a tiny fraction of the intro of the lecture.  Plus, it's referenced. Sara Parks Ricker
:::Hey, I agree with you. No problem here. Talk to the anonymous guy above. :) --Dante Alighieri 22:08 Dec 6, 2002 (UTC)
: I think it's totally fine. --LQ 14:43, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Lindquist quote

message: I am a new editor, seeking to contribute to this page as part of the Wikipedia Fellows program to improve pages of women scientists. I think it could make sense to break "Research and Career" into individual "Research" and "Career" sections to expand on Lindquist's notable career accomplishments. I will make smaller edits before breaking up the sections, but wanted to see if there are major objections. TinyAtoms (talk) 17:28, 7 August 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Break up Career and Research section?
Talk:Saint Nicholas

message: I have no idea why only Russians and Serbians are mentioned about having faith in St Nicholas. This is very similar to when everyone in Australia says it's Greek Easter when it's Orthodox Easter. I would like to clarify to all those people who don't know worldwide there is over 220 million Orthodox people and I can tell you right now they don't all consist of Russians, Serbians and Greeks. Considering this is Wikipedia it wouldn't be very hard to Google that and find out how many other nationalities also follow the same religion as the above-mentioned. 211.27.126.106 (talk) 10:19, 24 November 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Remember that russians arent really christians they are catholic too 347kkk (talk) 02:47, 13 October 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: The Russian Orthodox and other Orthodox are not Catholics, they are Orthodox Christians. 2601:194:300:1D0:95DC:3D2C:1873:B963 (talk) 19:54, 6 December 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Eastern Orthodox religion 

message: The article says "Furthermore, all written records were kept on papyrus or parchment, which were less durable than modern paper". This startled me as I thought that both papyrus and parchment was MORE durable than modern paper. There are the illuminated manuscripts for example, and I know that papyrus has survived. But I'm not an expert on this, so didn't want to make a change. There's a reference but it's a book, so I can't check what it says. Does anyone else know? I know this is a very minor matter and not relevant to St Nicolas particularly, but it niggles at me!  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Joedkins (talk • contribs) 12:11, 6 December 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Seconded. That statement seems like uninformed "but it's modern so it has to be better" nonsense. 2A02:AA1:1609:3E28:9D7A:A7B2:C42D:3B7B (talk) 18:42, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: The relevant page can be seen here. The cited source doesn't explicitly say that paper is more durable, but does seem to imply it. Nevertheless, we shouldn't simply copy statements uncritically. As the statement in its general form does appear to be false, and it's in any event not particularly relevant to the subject matter, I'm going to remove it. MichaelMaggs (talk) 18:57, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Durability of paper 

message: Back in 2017, there were many news reports from WP:RS that the tomb of St. Nicholas has been discovered, which unfortunately confirms his death. Should the discovery of the tomb be added to the article? Félix An (talk) 02:51, 23 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tomb of St. Nicholas
Talk:Lucius Verus

message: Assessed at C.  If inline citations were added to section on Early Life and Career, would be a B.  Monstrelet (talk) 14:49, 21 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  MILHIST assessment 

message: The section on the Parthian War seems excessively detailed, with much of the content having little to do with Lucius Verus. I suggest this be edited down considerably.-J. Conti 108.20.74.240 (talk) 05:51, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: . Don't just "edit down" good treatments. If it's an  amount for this article, just move it elsewhere and link from here. — LlywelynII 23:55, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

text: Lucius Verus was running the Parthian War, or at least in nominal control of it. He was not a military man, indeed more of a lady's man and loved to party & hangout with actors. But he did apparently accompany the Roman armies on the campaign to Parthia and did some of the administrative work that only Roman Emperors can do. Marcus Aurelius stayed in Rome during this war. Neither he nor Lucius had any military experience, which must be partly the fault of the previous Emperor, Antoninus Pius, since Marcus was Pius' "junior Emperor" or "vice-Emperor" during most of Pius' reign. He spent much of the time studying rhetoric and philosophy, and acting as judge in legal cases, but once Pius died, The two co-emperors Lucius Verus and Marcus Aurelius (this was the first co-emperorship that was ever tried), spent most of their time fighting wars. Lucius died in late 168 or early 169 while traveling from Germany back to Rome with Marcus. He apparently died suddenly, although there was a plague raging at the time. But the usual rumors of Lucius being poisoned circulated in the histories. The supposed perpetrators are either Marcus himself, Marcus' wife Faustina, because of an affair with Lucius, or even Lucius' wife Lucilla (Marcus'daughter). Co-emperorships were tried again later in Roman history, usually with disastrous results. 47.232.145.208 (talk) 14:29, 4 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Parthian War section too long? 

message: Given that Bede claims "King Lucius" ruled in 156 during the principate of "Aurelius Commodus" and "his brother" "Marcus Antoninus Verus" and during the pontificate of Eleutherius, a thoroughly muddled state of affairs, has any scholar simply proposed that Bede (or the original L. Pontificalis author) simply garbled Lucius's first name into a new king? — LlywelynII 23:55, 13 February 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lucius of Britain 
Talk:Reference desk

message: All previous content on this page was totally unrelated to the article about reference desks in libraries, so I've blanked it: this page isn't for questions about Swiss history or child custody disputes.  Nyttend (talk) 02:24, 28 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Blanking

message: The second paragraph in History here is... odd. Obscure and written in pseudo-high register, with little meaning when pulled apart. What's an "insidious yet drastic paradigm-shift" and would that even mean anything if sourced? Temerarius (talk) 18:30, 28 May 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: No idea indeed. The same concept could be conveyed with at least two thirds less words. The "resources" section is also misguided, for instance "index cards" and "drawers with folders" were already outdated by the 1990s and should be replaced with more generic terms which can encompass current technologies too. Nemo 19:48, 13 May 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  History section needs edit 

message: Ro 42.110.148.249 (talk) 19:44, 27 January 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  1212 

message: How may Assertiveness influence unequal power relationships? 41.116.113.139 (talk) 01:48, 7 March 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Life Orientation 

message: Hi there! I am busy translating the above two articles on the Afrikaans Wikipedia. Both claimed to be the 21st manned space flight... Impossible. Can you help please. Regards. Oesjaar (talk) 12:25, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Gemini 6A]] vs [[Gemini 7]] 

message: — Assignment last updated by MCL7675 (talk) 21:45, 24 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: Literacy and Inclusion

message: Hello! I have added a paragraph (and probably more edits to come) in the History section to bring the history reference desk up to present-day. It was copied and pasted from my sandbox. User:MCL7675/sandbox MCL7675 (talk) 15:51, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edits to history section
Talk:The Conquest of Bread

message: Hi Sam,
While I love this book and think everyone should read it, I disagree with the idea of having book summaries on Wikipedia (the extreme example being the god-awful Atlas Shrugged mess). We're not the Boston Review of Books, and we're not a bookstore... sure, "all human knowledge", and all that, but I think chapter-by-chapter summaries is stretching it... Graft
no- keep the summary up- it saves me being arsed to getting around to reading it- I like getting it in instalments as well ;-) quercus robur
I'll write you a summary and email it to you myself if you like, but why does it have to be on Wikipedia? Ah, whatever... I withdraw my half-hearted objection. Graft
What about what I did at Homage to Catalonia? --Sam 18:25 Mar 27, 2003 (UTC)
I also think the idea of having short chapter reviews is excellent and represents a very useful tool. So Sam, I'm looking forward to the completion of this particular one! Dear Graft, of course there may be cases in which the result is messy, but this is also true for other types of entries. --Nailu 
----
The photo used is of a 1985 reprint cover. As a result I would assume it to be copyrighted and not usable here. Kricxjo 23:34, 3 Nov 2003 (UTC)
replies: text: I think it is useable under fair use since this article is a dedicated discussion of the work. --Sam 20:21, 23 Dec 2003 (UTC)
thread_title: Comments

message: The passage says that the English language version of "The Conquest of Bread " was published in London in 1907. It was published in London: Chapman and Hall, Ltd. 1906. I have a copy of 1906 book. Do you wish a picture of the book cover? Kohlerrl1965 (talk) 00:38, 25 December 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you. I fixed that, with a citation of https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/The_Conquest_of_Bread ★NealMcB★ (talk) 00:57, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Request Change on information from Footnote (2)
Talk:Third Dynasty of Egypt/Archive 1

message: I think the naming scheme should be kept as is, e.g. "Third dynasty of Egypt".  There's no need to capitalize "dynasty" in this context, I believe. -- April
:Thanks, I'm also happy with it like this (although a web search may suggest it's often capitalised.)
----
Moved from Wikipedia:Request for immediate removal of copyright violation
I'm listing this here because I can't figure out anywhere else to put this.
Third dynasty of Egypt was little more than an account of the reign of pharaoh Djoser, & I've been preparing to move the contents of the first article to the second, when today, in the process of researching more information for the rewrite, I saw that Third dynasty of Egypt began as a cut-n-paste of the material at http://www.ancient-egypt.org/kings/0301_netjerikhet/history.html.
Now Ancient-Egypt is a very good web site, full of information, & I really don't wouldn't want to offend the person behind it & cause him to pull it off the Internet. And since I was planning on rewriting the article as it stood . . . that is why I deleted it.
If there's a better place for this notice, please move it there. -- llywrch 03:42, 2 Jul 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I think this should have gone through the normal Wikipedia:Copyright problems page. Wikipedia:Request for immediate removal of copyright violation is a page for the copyright holder to request deletion. Angela. 14:17, 13 Jul 2004 (UTC)
Talk:Northern Kentucky

message: What WP:RS identifies Northern Kentucky as an identifiable political, geographic or geologic area?? I propose that this article be merged into one of the articles on Greater Louisville or outer Bluegrass areas. I live in Kentucky, northern Kentucky to be exact and I do not know of this.  Nuf' said. Sbalfour (talk) 04:48, 18 May 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: It is an identifiable region to anyone who has lived here since birth, which I have. It has nothing to do with Greater Louisville or outer Bluegrass areas. CarolynWWM (talk) 14:58, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Northern Kentucky?? 

message: Article list Northern Kentucky as a Region in Antarctica which is so very wrong! CarolynWWM (talk) 15:01, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Northern Kentucky Region is Wrong
Talk:The 120 Days of Sodom

message: Hello all
I have replaced the Assessments section with two sections: Reception, and Themes and analysis. I have focussed more on published critical analysis of the actual novel rather than general analysis on Sade.
Happy to discuss Aemilius Adolphin (talk) 04:27, 19 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reception and Themes and Analysis 

message: Hello all
I have combined the Plot and Chronology sections because in this novel the chronology is pretty much the plot. I have corrected some errors and have summarised some overly detailed information. I have removed unsourced editorial comment and added some information with sources.
Happy to discuss Aemilius Adolphin (talk) 05:17, 19 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Plot and Chronology 

message: Hello all
I have corrected some errors, summarised some excessive detail and removed some unsourced editorial comment.
Happy to discuss Aemilius Adolphin (talk) 05:24, 19 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Characters 

message: Hello all
I have changed the title from History to "Manuscript History" because it is the history of the manuscript rather than the novel per se. I have removed some repeated information and written the rest more concisely. I have added some detail to make the story more comprehensible.
Happy to discuss Aemilius Adolphin (talk) 06:33, 19 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Manuscript history 

message: Hello all
I have re-written the lead to reflect the new information in the article. I have corrected some information and removed some unsourced information. I have also removed multiple references to information which isn't controversial and is fully referenced in the article.
Happy to discuss. Aemilius Adolphin (talk) 10:41, 19 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lead
Talk:Eid al-Fitr

message: The 'Recent dates of Eid al-Fitr in Saudi Arabia" table in the "In the Gregorian calendar' section need to updated as this years eid has passed (1444 or 2023). Eid ul-fitr was announced on the 21st of April by High Judiciary Council of
Saudi Arabia on twitter and other platforms. source:https://www.newarab.com/news/saudi-arabia-declares-friday-eid-al-fitr Xavonf (talk) 23:08, 11 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 11 May 2023 

message: Eid literally means a “festival” or “feast” in Arabic. There are two major eids in the Islamic calendar per year – Eid al-Fitr earlier in the year and Eid al-Adha later.
Why is Eid celebrated?
Eid al-Fitr is one of two major holidays celebrated byan, in which Muslims fast daily from before dawn until sunset. It is commemorated by a large, community-wide prayer service in the morning, followed by meals and conversation with friends and family.@Kate 2601:406:4402:5840:B0E4:246E:C58:2D5 (talk) 20:10, 15 June 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  What is Eid al- fitr 

message: Is this picture represent  the Muslim culture? Is this just mistake or intention? 120.17.82.239 (talk) 20:14, 15 March 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: The three infobox pictures represent various parts of Eid festivities. Amyipdev (talk) 15:38, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Picture 

message: Surely this field in the info box is for countries with state recognition of Eid, else it could technically be every single country as I doubt any are without a single Muslim. While it is true that millions of people in France celebrate Eid, the French state most certainly does not. Unknown Temptation (talk) 18:30, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: I beg to differ with regards to France, as their government has (in various forms) acknowledged that Eid exists (see page 33 of https://at.media.france.fr/sites/default/files/document/press_kit/Mayotte%20-%20Presskit%20Cruises%20-%202015%20%28EN%29.pdf, for instance). Amyipdev (talk) 15:40, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Observed by... 

message: ramadan is where muslims fast until eid 89.105.2.62 (talk) 10:03, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Is there a specific part of the article you wish to correct? Amyipdev (talk) 15:36, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  ramadan
Talk:Permian–Triassic extinction event

message: The page top says ""Great Dying" redirects here. For the disease epidemics in the Americas brought by Europeans, see Native American disease and epidemics#European contact. There's a huge problem with that. If you go to the article Native American disease and epidemics#European contact it says nothing about the term "Great Dying." Zip! There should never be a redirect for a term that is not important enough to be mentioned several time in the article you are redirecting towards. It is very misleading to our readers. As it stands right now this redirect to European epidemics should be removed. Fyunck(click) (talk) 09:46, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree and have deleted it. Dudley Miles (talk) 12:17, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: We'll see if it sticks. I removed it 2 days ago and was scolded by editor Hemiauchenia with them saying "You have obviously done no reading on this topic at all." Fyunck(click) (talk) 02:06, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Great Dying as a redirect? 

message: The lead says that the precise cause is unknown, but according to this article from earth.stanford.edu, it "". The rest of the article goes into details about it. Mathglot (talk) 21:43, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cause not 'unknown' according to Stanford site
Talk:Gospel

message: The lede states as fact that Mark was written first followed by Matthew and Luke, and that Matthew and Luke used mark along with the Q source, however, this is just one hypothesis that cannot be known for certain at this point. It also states that Luke and Matthew used sources unique to them, which verges on veering into the less accepted four source hypothesis. My edit clarifying this was reverted, but I think this is an important clarification. The lede can also state that the two source hypothesis is widely accepted, perhaps this is a good middle ground? Wasianpower (talk) 22:59, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: No, the lead does not state as fact that Mark was written first followed by Matthew and Luke etc; it states this as the most common hypothesis adopted by biblical scholars. Wikipedia's task is not to make arguments but to present the majority scholarly opinion. Yes, there are significant minority opinions, but this is a general overview article, and the more specific articles go into those details. You're referencing the lead, but the lead is a summary of the main section, which does make the kind of distinctions you're talking about. By all means make an edit to this effect if you think it's needed, but don't go into too much detail: I repeat, the lead is a summary of this article which is itself a summary.Achar Sva (talk) 08:37, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Synoptic problem answers in the lede. 

message: See User:Tgeorgescu/sandbox3. tgeorgescu (talk)  07:28, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Anonymous NT gospels 

message: @IP: You're dumbing down the article. tgeorgescu (talk)  06:05, 27 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Revert
Talk:Netball

message: The article includes a short section on "Injuries," the presence of which implies that netball injuries are in some way unusual or notable. The section doesn't include any evidence that they are. It mentions two injuries in international netball from the last 20 years, neither of which is particularly notable. And its source for which injuries are more common than others is from 1995, which is 28 years ago, and long predates modern training & physio practices.
There is no comparable "Injuries" section (or even links to such) for comparable sports such as basketball, soccer/association football, or Australian rules football, despite these arguably featuring more significant injury concerns.
I therefore propose removing this section. -- Violetine (talk) 03:54, 31 July 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Removal makes sense to me. HiLo48 (talk) 04:41, 31 July 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: (after edit conflict ... it took me a while to compose this reply): :Sounds reasonable to me, but I don't know much about the subject. It was added to the article by Doc James in a merge from , an article written by Rachm97. a Veeeery quick search coughed up this more recent systematic review, which might be useful but also indicates that data just doesn't seem to be that good on this subject. I'd be OK with an unmerge and update, too. I think we should give it a few days or so. Graham87 05:06, 31 July 2023 (UTC)
replies: text:  I think the reason is that the sport was initially designed to be less physically demanding, but the way that it is currently played that isn't the case. But sure. The section seems of little value.  Hawkeye7 (discuss) 07:00, 31 July 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Since the text has been removed, I've nominated the redirect for deletion (or perhaps moving). Graham87 04:32, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

text: There is: Volleyball injuries, Common injuries in cricket, and Tennis injuries, however. :3 F4U (they/it) 05:42, 4 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Injuries