lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:La Jamais Contente

message: The text mentions that the car's aerodynamics were spoiled by the exposed seating position of the driver. The photograph seems to support this - it looks comical - but on closer inspection the driver is actually sitting on the edge of the car, dangling his feet on the driver's seat. I assume that when the driver was seated properly, only his head and shoulders would be visible. Can someone who has seen the car confirm this? Is there a period photograph of the car being driven as it was intended? -Ashley Pomeroy (talk) 11:25, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: This photo is apparently of an exact replica, so it seems that most of the driver's torso is indeed exposed to the elements.Mr Larrington (talk) 12:56, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Exposed Driver 

message: The 68hp rating is only correct if each motor draws 124A, otherwise it is only 34hp. Ref doesn't say 2 * 124A. Added fact tag.
70.137.146.192 (talk) 00:48, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Amperes and horsepower

message: The car was made by the Compagnie générale belge des transports automobiles Jenatzy so it is a Belgian car. Funny the article only mentions the nationality of the driver...  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.129.43.205 (talk) 19:55, 4 June 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: If you can cite it, put it in.  TREKphiler any time you're ready, Uhura 22:56, 4 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Belgian car 
Talk:Zelmira

message: This synopsis bears very little resemblance to the one given in Grove. Would it be better to delete it until someone has the libretto and sufficient time to do a proper one? -- Kleinzach (talk) 09:05, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The Italian article's synop. is slightly shorter even than Grove's, but does note that the action is more complicated than the description.   It's not really that surprising that the actual regicides are also guilty of dissembling in the opening scene, is it?   Of course I'd welcome a 'proper one'; you could have a go yourself, the libretto being online (though unfortunately without the personaggi- baritone might well be an anachronistic term, but I might hesitate to cast a bass as Leucippo, and he is not a professional hit-man, as I ought to know ;-)).Sparafucil (talk) 10:47, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: What Italian article? We can't use a copy and paste job - potential copyright violation - or is a translation? In any case the synopsis doesn't make sense. If you can't rewrite it now it would be better to delete it until someone else can take it on. -- Kleinzach (talk) 14:37, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You can find the Italian article at the bottom of the left hand WP menu.   You seem confused; There is no question of copying or translation, or of offering a finished version either. I can only vouch that I have so far faithfully summarized scenes 1 & 3 and confirmed that scene 2 is omitted from the piano score at hand.   The nutshell version of Grove is handy enough but not sufficiently detailed for a discussion of musical highlights, imho.   A bold rewrite from someone interested enough to consult primary sources would be welcome though. Sparafucil (talk) 00:43, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It's true, I am frequently confused by your editing etc. So the 'Italian article' is the Italian Wikiedia article? And you have only provided a brief summary of part of the opera? If so I understand why it makes so little sense, and will now delete it. Paraphrasing the Grove summary without reference to the original work would obviously not be a good idea. IMO a synopsis should be based on the whole of the original libretti. -- Kleinzach (talk) 04:10, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

text: Thanks. That's good. Your synopsis goes considerably further than the brief one in Grove. -- Kleinzach (talk) 23:55, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Synopsis

message: *The New York Times on the 1989 revival by the Opera di Roma at the Rossini Festival.
* The Scotsman on the 2003 concert performance in Edinburgh.
*This University of Chicago page has what looks like a definitive role list from the critical edition by Greenwald and Hansell plus some musical analysis.
Voceditenore (talk) 15:28, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Hats off on the synopsis, Vdt.   Why not put these in the External links section? Sparafucil (talk) 20:59, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Possibly useful sources for modern productions etc.
Talk:BRP Gregorio Velasquez

message: Added and populated infobox, added text from two DANFS sites, added photo from DANFS, minor edits, improvements, added cat, see also, etc. -- Someone from the ship or institute should provide a narratie on experiments and undersea work in the appropriate section of the page.Wikited (talk) 21:00, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  upgraded and Wikified page 

message: Hey as I was familiar with the Melville, I do know she had cycloid propulsion. I assume that's what the author meant by hypoid. I'll fix it; feel free to revert if you know any different. 
:Kortoso  (talk) 10:07, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cycloid not hypoid
Talk:Subaru Tribeca

message: reminds me of a Chrysler while the back reminds me of a Hyundai. What's with that?! (DeathShot39 (talk) 00:28, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: The front of this car 

message: THIS ARTICLE IS A MESS AND I'M TRYING TO FIX IT. Information about this vehicle was duplicated in multiple sections, the grammar was in present tense about a past vehicle and despite the major physical changes, IFCAR insists on posting a photo that is incorrect for the 2008 version, because he likes it better, without reading the article. So FUCK THE PEOPLE WHO WROTE THIS ARTICLE
This article has also been restructured for future contributions, with a lead article. Subaru will eventually change this vehicle with a new generation and I'm trying to structure the article for future contributions. (Dddike (talk) 20:33, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Its just had facelift, when is the next generation coming....? its better with one box, it isnt so big job to add new infobox when new generation arrives, there is certain rules to those infoboxes....when it has two boxes it looks like it already has two generations. --— Typ932T | C  20:59, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: An image can't be "incorrect." There is no policy that the head image must or even should be the latest car, but quality is certainly an obvious concern. You aren't making the article better by putting a poor image at the top, so by your own advice, leave it alone. Stop reverting. IFCAR (talk) 21:03, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: You just don't get it, and I will not argue with a fool (Dddike (talk) 21:06, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: MAKE THE ARTICLE BETTER OR LEAVE IT ALONE
Talk:KS-1 Komet

message: https://www.history.navy.mil/content/history/nhhc/research/library/online-reading-room/title-list-alphabetically/n/new-look-cuban-missile-crisis.html
32.215.178.217 (talk) 00:40, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Updated link for note 8
Talk:Aristotle/Archives/2003

message: Added a bibliography with links to existing texts. Made a few other minor changes.
GS
:Unfortunately it looks like VT have had a reshuffle of their site:  a couple of the links I tried didn't work.  -- Nairobiny
:The VT links were to their "Project ERIS" -- which has been defunct for about six years or more, although you'll still find links to it all over the net. Fortunately, I saved the whole project years ago, and converted much to HTML, so I've been able to replace all the vt links with links to eBooks@Adelaide. Pamplemousse 06:38, 8 Nov 2003 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bibliography
Talk:Aristotle/Archives/2005

message: This article should be cleaned up to replace fancy quotes (”) with straight ones (") in accordance with WP:STYLE. Brighterorange 14:00, 12 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Typography 

message: this short (spurious) writing IS actually included in the Corpus Aristotelicum, and is published on p. 974a of Bekker's edition (right before the Metaphysics).
I don't know of any specific writing on Melissus.
--zuben 22:10, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  List of Works; "On Xenophanes Zeno and Gorgias" 

message: Possibly the most over-rated thinker ever to grace humanity:- a morally repugnant and simplistic man, whose nonsense padded greatest hits are valuable only in their virtue as mildly absorbent bog roll. Aristotle offers to the modern thinker what Vanilla Ice offered to the discerning music lover, a man whose greatest achievement is considered to be the dragging out of 1 simple phrase (everything in moderation) over several hundred pages. Perhaps more amazing than the fact he eluded public ridicule in his own time is that scholars around theworld are still content in massaging his swollen dead ego. The man who has contributed to the below is testament :---194.75.129
Thank you, 194.75.129. You have indeed informed the people of something.--JECompton 05:31, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  the people need to know 

message: The paragraphs that were removed by two users (see link), served the purpose to compare Aristotle with Plato and Socrates and I think that they should be restored. +MATIA  ☎ 10:21, 6 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  deleted paragraphs about Plato and Socrates
Talk:Danger UXB

message: Might be worth mentioning that after the episode with the highly volatile Butterfly Bombs a number of the viewing public reported having one in the house, not aware of what it was. In one case a bomb was found amongst the public display of a stately home. (79.190.69.142 (talk) 11:34, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Butterfly Bomb episode

message: Re-watched this the other night, and it's not actually clear who was responsible for the note in the fuse. I have therefore reworded the summary, amongst other changes. Nick Cooper (talk) 13:16, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Final episode 

message: The episode descriptions don't include the assignment of a conscientiousness objector to the section.  That objector later gives up his objections and becomes the "promising young officer" who dies at the pier.--Gaarmyvet (talk) 19:56, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Episode Summary
Template talk:GEOnet

message: This template has superflous whitespace at the end, which interferes with its use.  Therefore, I would like to request that this whitespace be removed.  This can be done by replacing the wikitext currently in the template by the wiktext at User:Spacepotato/geonet. Spacepotato (talk) 00:39, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Mr.Z-man 22:29, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Protected edit request

message: I added a Documentation /doc sub-page:
*Please add the  template to the  ...  section.
*Also, not sure why and what the differences are? but templates  and  functionality could probably be merged?
In contrast,  provides a different reference link functionality.  LeheckaG (talk) 18:44, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Done the doc part, the merge part I'll leave to someone more familiar with these templates. - Trevor MacInnis (Contribs) 19:12, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you (for adding Documentation). LeheckaG (talk) 19:22, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Closing my  request - I will look into the merging, what specifically would need to be done ... LeheckaG (talk) 19:27, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I had GEOnet2 and GEOnetdab flipped around in the request. LeheckaG (talk) 19:38, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

text: Done. Cheers. --MZMcBride (talk) 23:47, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Documentation sub-page and possible GEOnet2 template merge

message: has:
 at GEOnet Names Server
...
 has:
 at GEOnet Names Server
...
I propose or request that their functionality be merged together into  as:
 at GEOnet Names Server
...
then  should be deprecated/deleted. LeheckaG (talk) 19:38, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. Cheers. --MZMcBride (talk) 23:47, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Specific GEOnet/GEOnetdab merge request

message: These links don't seem to work any more.  (Unable to resolve host address.)  Is there an alternative?  Cheers, Bovlb (talk) 15:55, 1 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Website down
Talk:Nodaway, Missouri

message: The census data (based on FIPS and GID) added by capitalbot pointed to Nodaway Township in Nodaway County.  I can't find the township on the census site.  If you want the data from this write it was used on 
this version Americasroof (talk) 00:47, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Census Data Pointed to Nodaway Township in Nodaway County, Missouri
Talk:HMS Royal Sovereign (1891)

message: http://www.bbc.co.uk/arts/yourpaintings/paintings/hms-royal-sovereign-off-malta-25947
Artist died 1917--05:00, 7 July 2011 User:Geni
: I've uploaded it to Commons. Rod. ~~06:49, 7 July 2011 User:Rcbutcher
::The copyright on the painting may have expired - but you uploaded a photograph of the painting, and the copyright on that belongs to the National Museum of the Royal Navy Portsmouth (see ).  The photograph has been digitally watermarked to help the copyright owners enforce the copyright (see ).--Toddy1 (talk) 08:01, 7 July 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: See , which says "Images and data related to the images may be reproduced for non-commercial research and private study purposes. However, for ALL other uses, you need to actively obtain further consent from the contributing collection."--Toddy1 (talk) 08:04, 7 July 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: They can make whatever claims they like. Enforcing them though well Bridgeman Art Library v. Corel Corp..©Geni 16:04, 7 July 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Geni is correct. A simple photograph of a 2-dimensional object which is already in the public domain, cannot be copyrighted. Read the text of :commons:template:PD-Art.  Claims of non-existent copyright should be ignored as they are dishonest. Rcbutcher (talk) 01:36, 8 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Possible pic

message: And another few years after that broken up? Isn't that astonishing and should be explained in the article or was that kind of normal, back in the day? --84.190.201.130 (talk) 18:08, 20 October 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: She was functionally obsolete by the date of her refit, but the Admiralty was unwilling to acknowledge that until Admiral Jacky Fisher became 1st Sea Lord in 1905 and purged the RN of its obsolete ships to cut its costs.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 21:53, 20 October 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Very interesting, thank You very much! --84.190.201.130 (talk) 00:19, 21 October 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  A lengthy refit in 1903–1904 and one (1) year later reduced to reserve?
Talk:Mercury Eight

message: In hope of doing a resto on the deleted Hirohata Merc page, can anybody say, & source, if the '53 or '54 Merc windshield would've fit the '51? What was the grille bar from? Any info on the Merc would be appreciated.  TREKphiler any time you're ready, Uhura  06:53 & 07:22, 20 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Resto
Talk:Pedicularis groenlandica

message: Is there any point to changing the family of Pedicularis to Scrophulariaceae in just one species article? It is Orobanchaceae in the other articles. Mention is made of the change in Scrophulariaceae. I don't object to the change for all Pedicularis and a comment in Pedicularis and Orobanchaceae seems warranted, either way, but a reader may find the inconsistency troubling.  Walter Siegmund (talk) 16:50, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Scrophulariaceae 

message: In light of the major revision I have removed the stub status from the talk page. I am going to submit this for DYK as it currently stands, but I also plant to do more editing in the next two weeks. They should be less extreme, but I estimate I can add another 5,000 bytes and 9 good sources. Additional eyes and opinions welcome. 18:43, 3 October 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: This looks like a great start, thank you for substantially improving the article. It looks like it has most of the major sections per the plants taxon template so I can't think of anything additional that it's missing. I also don't think it's an issue to individually change the assessment of the article, as long as it's not being assigned anything higher than a B per WP:ASSESS. Eucalyptusmint (talk) 17:47, 11 October 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for the feedback @Eucalyptusmint. As good as I am getting at Wiki stuff I seem to learn something new about it every week. Another couple of years and I might actually stop feeling like an imposter. 🌿MtBotany (talk) 20:32, 11 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Major revision
Template talk:US-army-bio-stub

message: I'm afraid I don't understand why this template has been turned into an article.--69.118.143.107 (talk) 19:31, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I believe it was mistake, all fixed now and the user warned. Woody (talk) 19:50, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not sure their warning really fits. What they did was the opposite of a copy and paste move. They accidentally created the article in the wrong place. Rather than copy and paste it to the correct location they moved the entire template thus preserving the article history. Of course there really isn't a standardized templated warning for that.--69.118.143.107 (talk) 20:37, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Either way thanks for fixing it.--69.118.143.107 (talk) 20:37, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  odd
Talk:HMS York (D98)

message: In an effort to extend on this short article perhaps someone with a more encylopaedic knowledge & access to sources relevant could add a section regarding the SeaRAM trails on this vessel in 2001/2 (I can't recall which)  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.17.70.124 (talk) 08:47, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  SeaRAM trails? 
Talk:Henry Jacob

message: There is reason to believe Jacobopolis is Jamestown, that it was not founded by Jacob Henry, and even that Jacob Henry never lived in Virginia. More qualified historians should examine evidence and qualify entry. https://books.google.com/books?id=Eu48AAAAIAAJ&pg=PA320&lpg=PA320&dq=%27Jacobopolis%27&source=bl&ots=poK0VoqU4d&sig=6CxKKVp6BAojt9CO5wT1f7s9aA0&hl=en&sa=X&ei=snwZVeOsBYnBggTGpID4Bw&ved=0CEAQ6AEwCA#v=onepage&q='Jacobopolis'&f=false The Early Enlish Dissenters in Light of Recent Research, p 320  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Voodooengineer (talk • contribs) 16:49, 30 March 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Jacobopollis 

message: There are 34 references to STC, in the Bibliography section. 
What does STC stand for, here? I looked in STC and found a possible candidate - Short-title catalogue, but I couldn't follow that very well.
Could somebody explain, and is there (or should somebody add) a WP template for it?  
Thanks, Trafford09 (talk) 05:01, 20 April 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Meaning of STC 

message: Having rewritten the content to ensure no copyright infringement, I noted that this site https://id3428.securedata.net/exlibris/nonconform/engdis/jacobites.html has indexed a similar group of bibliographic citations. I have not adapted the citations listed under the article's bibliography but I have sourced some additional articles and content. Please take time to review and let me know if anything doesn't make sense. Tynewyrd (talk) 06:43, 17 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bibliography
Talk:Open Source Industry Australia

message: Should the link for "FOSS" be to FOSS or Free and open source software? It's set now to the latter, because that matches the expression immediately preceding it in the text.  Given that FOSS and Free and open source software direct to different articles, even though FOSS is the acronym for "Free and open source software", it really looks like the two articles should be merged.  However, that's a different issue.  -- JDX (talk) 01:08, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: FOSS now points to the current article. This was a mass-edit by the user who AfDed free and open source software, seemingly for the sake of orphaning it. Chris Cunningham (talk) 16:18, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Link to FOSS
Talk:HAARP (album)

message: I just realized that the title is missing a period after the P. This should probably be moved to "H.A.A.R.P. (album)" since H.A.A.R.P. is a redirect to the actual project. Leeferdude (talk) 05:59, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Almost every source, especially official ones, are omitting the final period, so I think it's reasonable to do likewise. It's pretty uncommon to intersperse such long abbreviations with periods normally, so I've redirected it to here; we have disambiguation links going in both directions anyway. BigBlueFish (talk) 19:31, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Title

message: Even though it says the release date is 17th march, I bought it today, 14 march, at my local CD store in the Netherlands, has the release date changed or something???  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Leroylafontaine (talk • contribs) 21:14, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: No... some shops have shipped it out early. It happens sometimes! Alinblack (talk) 22:45, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: release date

message: Are all those dots necessary? I don't see them on the actual cover... moving the article to HAARP over the current redirect makes sense to me. U-Mos (talk) 17:30, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article name 

message: The perferomances on the dvd are not all from the same night. Matt wears 2 very distinct outfits in different songs. I don't know which songs we're performed on which night, but the information might be misleading to visitors of the show wanting to review 'their' night.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 145.116.1.128 (talk) 14:19, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recording Dates 

message: I have requested that this page be moved to HAARP, as all occurences of the album title on the official site, plus all occurences on the physical album, spell it this way, omitting the periods. Please discuss your support or opposition for this move. Andre666 (talk) 21:25, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Moved to HAARP (album) instead; not to be confused with High Frequency Active Auroral Research Program. — Twas Now ( talk • contribs • e-mail ) 03:14, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Requested move

message: Are the two infoboxes necessary? Couldn't they just be merged into one? Keytar Shredder (talk) 07:04, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Infoboxes
Talk:List of German Navy ships

message: It is suggested to merge the contents of both lists in this article as they cover exactly the same information. The title of this page is correct while The title List of German Federal Navy ships is incorrect in two respects. Firstly the former name was Federal German Navy, not German Federal Navy, and secondly the actual name is just German Navy. --KuK (talk) 09:17, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merging the content of [[List of German Federal Navy ships]]
Talk:Steve Negus

message: The article was created by an editor with the name of Negus' record company hence the conflict of interest tag. The creator is advised not to created articles about subjects with which they have a close connection and to refrain from editing this article further (other than correcting spelling, typos, and the like). Regards. --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 01:49, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Conflict of interest

message: I'm pretty sure the GNP album was already out in 1988, not '89. -andy 77.190.1.155 (talk) 07:12, 1 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Safety Zone" album