lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Fernando Arrabal

message: I vote for removing all those editions leaving only the original ones and the English translations.
--Error 22:51, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Clean

message: The place of birth of the writer was Spain, and was not Spain morroc. I corrected, and if there are any questions, please tell me.
* --Fede95 (talk) 16:58, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  I think we should  correct one thing... 

message: I tried to clean up a little the way the titles of the works are written down, but it's all just filled with stuff lifted from a blog about Arrabal that seems like an unreliable source, with titles not being confirmed by any other source (most sources around the Internet just parrot the same list, down to the typos). Like, among the adapted plays, "El ladrón de sueños (directed by Arroyo)". Arroyo who? Eduardo Arroyo? He never directed any film. IMDb doesn't have a credit for such a film. Does it actually exist? Is it some obscure short film? A failed project? From which year? And so on.
This needs a massive clean up from someone who's more of an expert on Arrabal than I am. Kumagoro-42 07:23, 26 November 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah, that explains it. It reads like it was written by his greatest fan or his mother or something. I just gasped at (and deleted) 'probably the most performed living dramatist' but there are many other similarly far-fetched claims. It felt too mean to delete all such claims; I guess that's why they've survived - there's too many and they're just too ridiculous. But it should be done. How this page has survived so long like this I've no idea. Maybe no-one cares. 110.20.168.169 (talk) 22:55, 26 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  This is a mess! 
Talk:Papal primacy

message: I notice that throughout the article, there seems to be much confusion between Papal supremacy and Papal primacy. Much of the content in the article is actually concerned with and talking about supremacy, not primacy. For example, see the Orthodox view section, which describes objections to supremacy. I fear it may be necessary to move much of the content here to the supremacy article. Input, especially from those knowledgeable about the distinction, would be appreciated. Ergo Sum  20:41, 7 February 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Why is so much content devoted to Historical Development when there is an entire separate article devoted to that? I think that material should be seriously culled. No one wants to read it twice. Duplicate material should be removed, information not in the Main moved there. It would provide a better focus for this article, making it easier to read. Manannan67 (talk) 21:46, 10 February 2020 (UTC)
replies: text:     I tried to sort things out. Veverve (talk) 15:48, 18 February 2020 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thanks for your work. It still seems to me that the two sections concerning the Eastern Orthodox view are responsive to supremacy, not primacy. As far as I am aware, the Orthodox actually accept papal primacy, hence the primus inter pares doctrine. It would follow, then, that any reference to an Orthodox "objection" be moved to the papal supremacy article and there instead be a section in this article that fleshes out the primus inter pares view and links to that article. Ergo Sum  16:10, 18 February 2020 (UTC)
replies: text:  Is it better now? Veverve (talk) 16:17, 18 February 2020 (UTC)
replies: text:  Yes, much better. Thank you for your great work. Ergo Sum  16:24, 18 February 2020 (UTC)
replies: text:  what do we do with all of BoBoMisiu's feedback in this talk page? He has not come back since he has been blocked three years ago so I doubt we can ask him anything. Veverve (talk) 09:42, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

text: , perhaps the question is why there's a separate article for historical development, which probably should be a section of the main article instead.  Norm1979 (talk) 16:55, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Major confusion of terms 

message: There are 2 partially overlapping paragraphs, "Development of the doctrine" and "Historical development", both sending to the same main article, History of papal primacy. The distinction is legitimate in an academic, analytical sense, but currently the material is too intertwined. An editor-hero should step in and try to fix it. See also the "apparent contradiction" tag. Arminden (talk) 08:49, 19 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Overlapping paragraphs on history
Talk:List of Dukes of Modena

message: List of dukes of Modena is incorrect because the correct denomination of the Duchy is "Duchy of Modena and Reggio". So in my opinion it would be better to move the informations of this page to a new page "List of Dukes of Modena and Reggio" and make a redirect from "list of Dukes of Modena"
--Paolo da Reggio 22:46, 12 Jun 2004 (UTC)
Talk:Yoshi's Island

message: a boss in the second stage ist obviously inspired by Obelix, yet there ist nothing to be found about it. Any ideas? KhlavKhalash (talk) 11:13, 10 September 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: If no reliable sources point something out, it cannot be included in the article. Sergecross73 msg me 13:36, 10 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Obelix 

message: We should chage it to "Super Mario world 2: Yoshi's island Fall guys rules (talk) 01:09, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: See the discussion about this here. Sergecross73 msg me 01:17, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Change title?
Category talk:American musical groups

message: You don't alphabetize names starting with "The" under T! The definite article does not count! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 158.253.209.253 (talk • contribs) 23:54, 12 June 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: User:Marcus2 has removed links from this category because they are only duo, not groups. There is no duo category although one could be set up. I contend that a group of two is still a group. (This also occurred on Category:British musical groups) Rmhermen 18:19, Jul 1, 2004 (UTC)
I have no idea how to fix this, but this whole catagory setup is messed up.  There needs to be a better way of organizing this.  For example, american punk bands is organized as a sub-catagory, but Aus-Rotten, which is an American punk band, is organized as a sub catagory of pitsburg music which is a sub catagory of this catagory.  There doesn't seem to be any rhyme or reason as to how this is organized.  I'm still too new at this to know how to fix it.  Reverend Distopia--Reverend Distopia 21:16, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Duo

message: Every article that was directly categorised as American musical groups is now under a more specific category. This took bloody ages. Hopefully this category will be kept a bit tidier now... Nouse4aname (talk) 14:30, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Clean
Category talk:Andrology

message: Most diseases on this page are treated wordwide by urology specialists, while andrology is a novel and slightly underdeveloped specialty. I would suggest moving most articles to a new urology category, and leaving in andrology only the articles to do with fertility and sexuality. Prostate carcinoma is no food for andrologists. On the other hand, hydrocele can cause infertility and is the terrain of both. Discuss, please. JFW | T@lk 00:13, 13 Jun 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: weirdness from 2004 and 2005
Talk:Eliza Lynch

message: Whoever wrote that the war led to the death of more than one millions Paraguayan have issues, there were not so many people in the country even at the start of the conflict... JidGom 00:48, 13 Jun 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Casualties 

message: I erased a part on the Paraguay section which recounted how she buried López and their son. It read "in a tatterd dress in the rain (the lovely queen who thought she deserved the world came to a humiliating end)". Again, this seems highly romantized and hardly encyclopedic material, even more so when the article itself mentions towards the end the great liberties taken by authors who based books on her life. If I find any real historic documentation on the events I'll add them. Veritiel (talk) 12:05, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cerro Cora 

message: This site: [Guardian] has an article about this woman.Agre22 (talk) 11:59, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: The Guardian's article about Eliza Lynch

message: This section reads a bit like a mini article on Lillis. I think it should be edited in way that it doesn't lose its focus on Lynch by maybe removing some of the info on Lillis bio and focusing a bit more on the book itself. Veritiel (talk) 11:36, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Biographical Section

message: Much has been said about Elisa Lynch marital status. Until 1992, the Roman Catholic religion had official status in Paraguay, therefore divorce was forbidden and any woman who attempted to marry or, for instance, cohabited with a second man was considered an adulteress, a legal figure. If Madame Lynch's french marriage was not annulled by the Roman Catholic Church before the time she came to Paraguay with F.S. López, then her situation would have been the aforementioned. If she came from Europe with a clean marital record, then by her cohabition with López without marriage she would have committed fornication, a lesser offense. There is an urban legend that says that she is interred separate from López, who is at the National Heroe's Pantheon in Asunción, which is also a Roman Catholic temple consacrated to Our Lady of the Assumption, because the Church bans any adulteress to rest in such a holy place. Aldo L (talk) 17:11, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Adulteress? 
Talk:Apologeticus

message: At the time of writing, the second paragraph of this article is taken nearly in its entirety from the Catholic Encyclopedia article about Carthage. I shouldn't think this calls for a message, however, as it is but one paragraph (out of three, it should be noted) taken from an article dealing with a different subject altogether. -- Itai 01:00, 13 Jun 2004 (UTC)

message: While reading Apologeticus the connection between Tertullian's phrase and Diego Rivera's mural depicting Mexican revolutionaries (La sangre de los martires revolucionarios fertilizando la tierra) struck me. I have made a note of this in the article under Reference #4. I have a suspicion the note may be deemed unnecessary and consequently removed, but, nonetheless, I think the connection should be pointed out, if for no other reason than that Rivera's mural can give the interested Apologeticus reader a modern portrait of martyrs serving as seed. Eleazar 15:09, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Diego Rivera's "The Blood of the Revolutionary Martyrs Fertilizing the Earth" 

message: Was Apologeticus a satirical piece? Pgan002 (talk) 00:12, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Satire?
Talk:Darius Rucker

message: After having heard last minute of that song, I discovered recording on YouTube by this artist (Darius Rucker).  So could someone create an article in this entry and/or as its own entry?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.63.16.82 (talk) 17:54, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Candy Cane Christmas 

message: Are The Return of Mongo Slade and Back to Then the same album?  This article seems to say they are the same ("In 2001, he made his solo R&B debut album, The Return of Mongo Slade, for Atlantic Records. Because of contractual changes, it was never released by the label.  Hidden Beach Recordings, an independent label, acquired the masters from Atlantic and released the album as Back to Then in July 2002.") whereas the Back to Then article reads as if they are different ("In 2001, he recorded his first solo album, The Return of Mongo Slade, for Atlantic Records. However due to contractual changes, it was never released. Rucker then signed with Hidden Beach Recordings and released Back to Then in July 2002.")  Can anyone clarify?  TSP (talk) 11:39, 22 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Return of Mongo Slade = Back to Then? 

message: It ends with his 2nd country album from 2010 but ignores the four other country albums he has released since then implying he hasn't done much since 2010 (if you only read the lead). Something should be added about the albums he has released in the last 10 years to the lead.--Notcharliechaplin (talk) 21:54, 21 June 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: I went ahead and added names and chart info of his more recent Country albums (post 2010) to the lead but others can improve it as they see fit.--Notcharliechaplin (talk) 22:40, 21 June 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Intro/lead needs updating
Talk:Carlos Enrique Díaz de León

message: Carlos Enrique Díaz was a friend and successor of Guatemalan president Jacobo Arbenz Guzmán. At the direction of the CIA and US Ambassador John Peurifoy, Díaz convinced Arbenz to resign the presidency.
Later the CIA decided that Díaz was too indulgent of Communists and he was replaced by Elfegio Monzón, an officer in the national army who had opposed Arbenz.
----
pre-cleanup. Secretlondon 01:29, 13 Jun 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Chute (gravity)

message: The story on this page about the hamlet of Goust using a gravity chute to transport coffins is extremely dubious. I've added a CN tag, and followed up with the editor who added it, but if it's still unsourced in a few days from now I'd recommend deleting it. 185.37.136.73 (talk) 19:59, 22 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Goust story probably not true
Talk:Chiniquodon

message: The genus Probelesodon was synonymised with Chiniquodon by Abdala & Giannini (2002), and later papers such as Martínez et al. (2013), Martinelli et al. (2017) and Mocke et al. (2019) have generally accepted this synonymy. A few days ago, I merged the two articles, but this was reverted with no explanation. Do you think they should be merged? —Trilletrollet [ Talk | Contribs ] 21:28, 3 November 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: do you have input? --awkwafaba (📥) 12:24, 4 November 2021 (UTC)
replies: text:  Id like to keep them as separate genera.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Magnatyrannus (talk • contribs) 21:06, 4 November 2021 (UTC)
replies: text:   But the scientific consensus is to treat them as synonyms. "Id like to keep them as separate genera" is not a valid argument; you must provide sources for your viewpoint. —Trilletrollet [ Talk | Contribs ] 23:54, 5 November 2021 (UTC)

text: Magnatyrannus is frankly an incompetent editor. I suggest ignoring his opinion and just merging. You have my approval. Hemiauchenia (talk) 22:57, 10 November 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge proposal: ''Probelesodon''
Talk:Dai-Tōkyō Binbō Seikatsu Manual

message: Is there anyone who actually knows anything about this manga? I imagine it was originally published in some manga weekly, or elsewhere, but I can't find that information. Most of what I've found out is from Mangajin's 'Basic Japanese Through Comics', which isn't too much. --AsianAstronaut 02:57, 13 Jun 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: First header
Category talk:Berkshire County, Massachusetts

message: Do we really need categories for individual COUNTIES?  The only article in the category is Berkshire County, Massachusetts.  So the category is pretty redundant.
:I would say yes, they are needed.  Articles or categories relating to each of the cities in Berkshire County should be added, as well as historical, artistic, and travel-related articles having to do with the region. --Beland 04:14, 13 Jun 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Boston Beer Company

message: This article is short on history and long on promotion. UNDUE weight seems to be giving to more promotional stuff. I'm going to make some edits, but this could really use some work. EvergreenFir (talk) Please  01:43, 10 July 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rather promotional 

message: I removed Harry Rubin and Lorenzo Lamadrid from the founders value in the infobox and the Early history section because from what I'm reading they went to Harvard with Koch (founder) and were initial investors but didn't really play a role or have any controlling stake in the company.  News Team Assemble![talk?] 14:17, 3 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Founders edits 

message: The lead section (as of 13 November 2016) stated that “Founder Jim Koch inherited his father's brewery on King Street (modern day State Street) to produce the first batches of Samuel Adams beer”, which is an incorrect statement. That statement is an edit of an earlier version from 3 March 2016 that stated “Adams inherited his father's brewery on King Street (modern day State Street)”, which is most likely also incorrect. Samuel Adams’ father was a brewer and while his brewery would have been inherited by his son, there’s no reference I could find via Google to indicate the brewery was on King Street (King Street’s importance to Samuel Adams is that is where the Boston Massacre occurred).
I also reworded the lead section regarding the reason Mr. Koch named his beer from “to honor” to just noting that the first beer was named after Sam Adams (according to the Sam Adams beer website, the name was chosen because of Mr. Koch and Mr. Adams shared a similar spirit).
RichKorea (talk) 12:24, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removed statement that Mr. Koch inherited his father’s brewery 

message: Article says company was founded in 1984, yet there's an unexplained graphic of the Boston Beer Company factory circa 1880.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Abonet (talk • contribs) 00:16, 10 September 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Founded in 1984 vs 1880
Talk:West Indies Federation

message: This historical chart forgot one phase.  The Windward Islands went on to form the West Indies Associated States bloc after Federation. 
THE WEST INDIES ASSOCIATED STATES: SOME ASPECTS OF THE CONSTITUTIONAL ARRANGEMENTS
CaribDigita (talk) 03:02, 12 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  This historical chart forgot one phase 

message: Well researched, well written, and balanced.  I know you don't see many comments like this on the "talk" pages but it is deserved.  47.20.163.109 (talk) 19:19, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  This really is an excellent article on an overlooked topic 
Talk:Ex parte Endo

message: Fleshed out a bit and given some context. Me Ningless 05:04, Jun 13, 2004 (UTC)
Surely the appellant's surname "Endo" should be capitalized, and the article should reside at "Ex parte Endo"? - Nunh-huh 05:09, 13 Jun 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Comments

message: The holding needs to be fleshed out some more. The way it stands now is not true. The government detains plenty of loyal Americans who break the law.--Cdogsimmons (talk) 13:58, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Holding

message: Should there be a separate page for Mitsuye Endo?Vousc (talk) 04:40, 27 February 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Perhaps, but there apparently isn't much biographical information to go on.  This link summarizes what is known. — Myasuda (talk) 14:32, 27 February 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mitsuye Endo
Talk:1946 in music

message: Following recent comments that the Frankie laine records listed under top hits were not, in fact, hits in the sense of making the charts, I have listed only charted records in the top hits category and moved the others to a new section.  
I have included some records which entered the charts in December 1945 because other versions did not chart until 1946 and it would be misleading to omit the earlier and better selling records.
Dodger Rogers
13 June 2004— Preceding unsigned comment added by 211.28.78.159 (talk) 06:32, 13 June 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Top hit records
Talk:Bodywork (alternative medicine)

message: I belive there should be a differentiation between bodywork and massage therapy. All massage therapy is bodywork, but not all bodywork is massage therapy (e.g. Breema). Perklund 03:05, Nov 5, 2004 (UTC)
I agree. Bodywork is a very general term and can refer to Pilates, Yoga, and personal training to name a few. --Kirien 19:20, 20 Nov 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Bodywork and Massage Therapy 

message: How is Bodywork different from Manual therapy. I've added a See also tag at the top of this article. Perhaps anyone has another idea on how the two concepts are related and how we should handle the pages on Wikipedia. makeswell (talk) 08:16, 7 July 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: It seems almost like manual therapy is a subcategory of bodywork in that manual therapy deals with physical manipulation of the body while bodywork includes this category of treatment as well as energy-based methods. Perhaps we should just make manual therapy a subcategory of this page. What do you guys think? makeswell (talk) 08:19, 7 July 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Both are related, but manual therapy is purely structural and more a form of Physiotherapy (this had been moved to Physical therapy, which was not quite correct). The Manual therapy page has its own category and is more representative of the method than this one. Bodywork may, but not always, include manual therapy and can also include Psychotherapy, but Manual therapy does not. Personal development and Physical education are also aspects of Bodywork but not generally of Manual therapy. Unlike Manual therapy, Bodywork can be practised without touch. Some methods listed under Manual therapy are recognised by the medical profession, not so in the case of Bodywork. Its page here needs expansion to be more representative of Bodywork and to be better understood. The tags on the top of Manual therapy apply equally to this page. Osioni (talk) 18:35, 7 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  What is the difference between Bodywork and [[Manual therapy]]?