lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Draft talk:Herrerasauria

message: This webpage should have cites added. Also as usual, Ezcurra (2006) recovered Eoraptor as a basal theropod, more primitive than Neotheropoda, in his cladistic analysis of Eucoelophysis. Alwalkeria is also a basal theropod, based on the similarities to Eoraptor cited by Max Langer in The Dinosauria (2nd edition). Mortimer (2006, online) recovered Agnosphitys, Chindesaurus (incl. Caseosaurus), and Guaibasaurus as basal theropods more derived than Eoraptor. Based on the data listed here, the Herrasauridae page should be updated.
Ezcurra, M.D. (2006). A review of the systematic position of the dinosauriform archosaur Eucoelophysis baldwini Sullivan & Lucas, 1999 from the Upper Triassic of New Mexico, USA." Geodiversitas, 28(4):649-684.
Mortimer, Mickey, 2006. Phylogeny of Taxa. http://staff.washington.edu/eoraptor/Phylogeny%20of%20Taxa.html 72.194.116.63 23:56, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Revision of the Herrerasauridae 

message: Herrerasauridae (Benedetto, 1973) has priority over Herrerasauria (Galton, 1985) since both clades basically have the same definition
Herrerasauridae definition is = Da most inclusive clade containing Herrerasaurus but not Liliensternus and Plateosaurus
Herrerasauria definition is = The most inclusive clade containing Herrerasaurus but not Passer domesticus
Both clade basically mean the same thing, due to obvious reasons ^^
Because of this i renamed the page "herrerasauridae": on top of that, Nesbitt (2009) doesnt even include Herrerasauria but Herrerasauridae in its formal phylogenetic analisy in Tawa hallae pdf :), and he found herrerasaurids to be the most basal clade of theropods, even more basal than Eoraptor  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Brisio (talk • contribs) 22:22, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Synonimizing Herrerasauria with Herrerasauridae
Talk:Iguanodontia

message: The tree isn't really capturing the complexity of iguanodontians well, and is missing such recent luminaries as Dakotadon, Dollodon, and Theiophytalia.  Yes, I know I cover this stuff.  Any objections to an overhaul? J. Spencer (talk) 02:30, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: You mean the Norman cladogram? If there are any recent cladograms incorporating a wider range of genera, I'd be all for it. As for the Taxonomy... I personally think it's a little problematic to include a taxonomy for a group that is only used as a clade nowadays. See Maniraptora for an example of this--only a Phylo section, no Taxo. Maybe we could use the cladogram from Ornithopoda, which I guess is from Mikko's site? It's still a synthesis, but at least it's not or synthesis ;) Dinoguy2 (talk) 03:05, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, the cladogram is only supposed to be general; however, it's more accurate than the listing alongside it.  I don't know if anyone who's active in the field takes Camptosauridae or Iguanodontidae very seriously anymore, except in the same context as Hypsilophodontidae. Maybe an arrangement comparable to that on Hypsilophodont, with a clade framework from the Dinosauria II article and a simple listing of genera (which should be less prone to original research, and would allow the recent work of Carpenter and Paul to be pulled in)? J. Spencer (talk) 03:41, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok, that sounds like a good way to go. Iguanodontidae and Hypsilophodontidae seem like analogous situations to me. The other bit of confusion is the articles title--"Iguanodont" is a little vague. Should be an article for Iguanodontia, then maybe a Hypsie-style article for Iguanodont(idae). Dinoguy2 (talk) 04:29, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Revise phylogeny?

message: This sentence in general seems really off: "Derived iguanodontians (such as Muttaburrasaurus and many ankylopollexians) were generally large animals...". Beyond derived being an arbitrary term in and of itself, why is Muttaburrasarus the example? Large size? That has nothing to do with being derived. By all means, would it not be considered a basal iguanodont? "Many" ankylloplexians? Are only some derived? Is it only styracosternans that are derived there? Why not say that? The examples make little sense, and the entire point doesn't really matter much, in my opinion. Lusotitan (talk) 02:01, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Derived Iguanodonts"? 

message: It just redirects to Iguanodontia, with no further mention, and the species belonging to Elasmaria seem to have been eliminated from the immediate lists.
If this is to reflect some new consensus, I doubt this means that all these species have simply vanished from science...  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.88.114.161 (talk) 21:07, 5 December 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Elasmaria has been excluded from Iguanodontia in more recent studies; the problem is nobody has yet created a page, so it's awkwardly left leading here with its contents off the map. Lusotitan (Talk | Contributions) 02:33, 6 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Where did Elasmaria go?
Talk:Macronaria

message: The start of the article states that macronarians have been found in North America, South America, Europe, Asia and Africa. Surely, because of this, this and this (I may have missed some out), it should also say Australia? I'm going to change this, if no one objects.--DiplodocoidsruleMacronariansdrool (talk) 02:05, 3 November 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Distribution
Talk:Maniraptora

message: This article has only 3 references, while the article on Dromaeosauridae, a subset of this group with far fewer member genera, has more than 43. Some whole paragraphs have no references at all. Statements like "The 'killer claw', which characterizes dromaeosaurs may also be a primitive trait for the group, though if this is the case several maniraptor lineages lost it secondarily." are compleetly unsourced.
Does anyone agree with me that we could use some attribution of these opinions? For my part, I will begin immediately to do so.Jbrougham (talk) 16:27, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

message: The position of these guys in the Maniraptora might upset some definitions of the latter clade. Needs to be checked. Dysmorodrepanis (talk) 18:57, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Not sure I follow what you mean. I don't know of any definitions of Maniraptora that use alvarezsaurids as specifiers. Whether or not they're closer to birds or to ornithomimids is still contentions, though apparently new specimens are in the pipeline that will settle this. Dinoguy2 (talk) 21:00, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Alvarezsauridae

message: Pennaraptora is a node-based clade, which is of limited value as an independent article.  Pennaraptora is also a stub, likely because there is very little in the literature that treats them as a group as opposed to maniraptorans as a whole.  "Maniraptora" gives over 1600 hits on Google scholar vs a mere 152 for "Pennaraptora", which is an entire order of magnitude.  Discussion of Pennaraptora is purely systematic, and would therefore warrant discussion in the relevant section of the article for Maniraptora, but does not necessitate its own article. A Cynical Idealist (talk) 03:17, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge proposal for [[Pennaraptora]]
Talk:Marginocephalia

message: there was an article a little while a go that suggested that there is such a diverse range of this branch of dinosaurs that they may be the same species at different times in their life span. that the older and larger they are the more developed the ridges become. is it worth noting this here or has there been more in regards to this debunked or otherwise?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.120.90.59 (talk) 17:51, 7 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Marginocephalia same species different ages?
Talk:Giger's Alien

message: It seems just as other widespread icons have multiple names, so should the Alien.  Gandalf, Santa Claus, Bruce Lee, they are but a few examples of characters and historical figures who had alias.  It may just prove useful to different groups of people, as many average movie goers are unlikely to call the creature "Alien" or "Xenomorph," as the former will possibly remind them of Greys and the latter will only confuse them.  It also seems like one of the reasons presented for keeping the name of the article AS IS is to avoid tedious relinking from other pages on wikipedia.  So it would seem that depending on the context, just as with Santa Claus or Father Christmas, knowledge of a different name may be helpful.  I will leave it up to others for now to make the edit, but soon I may compile a more complete list along with the origins and context for each.  
:*Starbeast (name in original script, virtually unknown)
:*Alien (as the title of the first movie, though considered too ambiguous)
:*Giger's Alien (as it is called in the book of the same name and among artists)
:*Xenomorph (coined in the second movie, a more "technical" usage, though unpopular to some and unknown to many others)
:*Bug (from the second movie, slang usage, though many spinoff creatures since have used the same word)
:*Dragon (from the third movie, not as popular as the ambiguity is just as confusing as "Alien" itself)
:*Internecivus raptus
:*Linguafoeda acheronsis
--Trakon 00:17, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: From the Xenomorph discussion page

message: This was recently added to the list.  I am not able to find it when I search google.  Someone either needs to cite the source or make sure the spelling is correct.  --Trakon 09:40, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Kaindae Ameda

message: Just as a side note, I've been reading around and found that the original title for the movie "Alien" may have in fact been "Memory" and not "Starbeast."  --Trakon 11:19, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Memory 

message: The Alien was based on Giger's Necronom works.  It would be interesting to know if he refers to the creature as another one of the Necronoms, just as the "Alien," or as something else.  --Trakon 11:22, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Necronom
Talk:Mount Shaw

message: User (now registered as NHguardian, previously referred to as Anonymous user (IPs 47.234.0.59 and 71.181.51.206)) continues to remove external link. No other contributors to this article have objected to inclusion of link, which provides relevant hiking data and photos. Jrclark (talk) 00:43, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Wikipedia talk:Requests for adminship/CyberSkull

message: Username	CyberSkull
Total edits	37631
Distinct pages edited	20331
Average edits/page	1.851
First edit	01:54, 26 October 2004
	
(main)	21198
Talk	2299
User	417
User talk	390
Image	5481
Image talk	36
Template	3052
Template talk	614
Category	2043
Category talk	37
Wikipedia	1509
Wikipedia talk	404
Portal	135
Portal talk	16
CyberSkull's editcount summary stats as of 00:21, October 14 2006, using Interiot's tool. (aeropagitica) 00:22, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
Talk:Darcy Regier

message: TERRIBLE  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.77.50.142 (talk) 16:55, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Should be fired 
Category talk:Czech Jews

message: In order to define the parameters of the category as needed, it must be renamed :Category:Jews born in what is now the Czech Republic. Until that is done, people who were not both Czech and Jewish cannot be in this category. 141.211.251.69 00:33, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: If you feel that this is necessary, please refer the category to WP:CfD.--Newport 16:09, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't want the category deleted, I want it renamed. Did you read what I wrote? Yes, there is a Categories for Renaming but I do not know how this beaucratic process works, and isn't it just easier to come to a consensus with the category developers and contributors? Is it just admins who can move categories?? If so, then I suppose a Categories for Renaming is the only move unless an admin can do this per request. 141.211.251.69 22:20, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: CfD is Categories for Discussion, not deletion; it is the correct place to discuss renames.--Newport 21:51, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

text: So if someone was born in France and their parents were, we still can't call them French unless a source so describes them?  That would be a gross abuse of WP:NOR.--Newport 21:51, 15 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Discussion
Talk:Eivind Aarset

message: Why is this list of gear significant?  Moved to talk for discussion. RJFJR (talk) 18:09, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gear 

message: The infobox isn't the proper one for a musician, and should be changed. --Leahtwosaints (talk) 09:28, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Musician infobox 
Talk:Sequence motif

message: In my browser, in plain text, square brackets show up as square brackets inside code tags([X]), while bolded square brackets show up as curly brackets ([X]).  This means that bolding the bracket in the definition "This pattern may be written as N{P}[ST]{P} where N=Asn, P=Pro, S=Ser, T=Thr; {X} means any amino acid except X; and [XY] means either X or Y" makes things confusing.
It's also a little confusing that square brackets with one element means "not" while square brackets with more than one element means "or".
I am not a bioinformatics person, so I don't know if the brackets are supposed to be square or curly; I just know that it's confusing as is.
Ducky 00:37, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Brackets 

message: This article does not distinguish two fundamental types of sequence motif uses/algorithms.  Sometimes one wishes to find, de novo, both an overrepresented pattern (e.g., as described by a position weight matrix) and its instances within a (DNA) database.  At other times, one already knows the pattern and wants to scan for its instances within a (DNA) database.  Shouldn't this distinction be described in the article?  Shouldn't the software applications be divided into categories based upon which problem they solve?  —Quantling (talk | contribs) 13:31, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  ''de novo'' searches vs. ''scans'' with known patterns 

message: — Assignment last updated by DreamcatcherDog (talk) 05:16, 9 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: Bioinformatics
Talk:Configuration state function

message: I don't see any reason that 69.207.35.198 should have deleted the text that he/she chose to delete. Is there some sort of reason or should that text be restored?
65.78.17.194 00:41, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled 

message: It also might help if somebody wiki-linked the two operators mentioned in the current article to another wikipedia article so I (or any reader) could figure out what the operators were.
65.78.17.194 00:47, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  wikilinking 

message: does a CSF really have to be an eigenfunction of the angular momentum operator?
you have CSFs also in molecules, where in general the Hamiltonian does not have common eigenfunctions with the angular momentum operator.FelixP (talk) 20:09, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  angular momentum
Talk:Ralph Benatzky

message: =====New Grove.=====
:[Benatzky definitely Jewish] [lists Benatzky as among the Jew who fled the Nazis]
:This recent source obviously uses up-to-date information.--Habashia (talk) 12:19, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Jewish

message: :[Benatzky definitely Jewish] [lists Benatzky as among the Jew who fled the Nazis]
:This recent source obviously uses up-to-date information.--Habashia (talk) 12:19, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: New Grove.
Talk:Tire lever

message: Am I mistaken in thinking that tire irons and tire levers are the same?  Seems to me tire lever should redir to tire iron, and the "Bicycle tire levers" section should be placed below the discussion of automobile tire irons.  Anyone object--or feel like doing it for me? :) -- Severinus 00:55, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Seems to make sense to me...  Dismas|(talk) 02:29, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge?
Talk:Gerty Cori

message: Needs proof of Czech as opposed to Bohemian relations. 141.211.251.69 01:02, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Proof of Czech heritage

message: The version 22:57, 3 June 2009 of this article is translated into Chinese Wikipedia.--Wing (talk) 14:53, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Translation into Chinese Wikipedia 

message: I am the program coordinator of the ACS-National Historic Chemical Landmarks program. I have updated the references to ACS-NHCL web content, as those pages are being replaced. I have also added the Landmark designation to the "Awards" category, and corrected the name of the ACS-NHCL program. KLindblom (talk) 21:16, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Update External Link and add Award listing

message: "Gerty was not a nickname: she was named after an Austrian warship." This seems incorrect, the German version states that she was born as "Gertrude", not Gerty. The ship "Gerty" of the Austria-Americana (which is the only Gerty I was able to find) was built after she was born, and was a passenger ship. I recommend removing this sentence. 71.14.74.19 (talk) 02:02, 17 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nickname Gerty
Talk:Biréli Lagrène

message: the first album by the Bireli Lagrene Ensemble, "Routes To Django - live At The Krokdil", was released as a single LP in 1980 on the German label jazzpoint records (jazzpoint 1003 - GEMA LC 7223)  -- it was re-released on the US label Antilles in 1982 (AN 1002)  -- it was re-reissued as part of a CD on jazzpoint in 1998 - "This beautifully packaged two-disc German set reissues the first of Lagrene's solo albums, the live Routes To Django (1980, with one previously unreleased bonus track), and the similar studio recording, Bireli Swing '81 (1981)."  -- i've amended the article accordingly -- Oniscoid (talk) 21:07, 17 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Biography / Discography - first album 

message: I would rather put acoustic guitar instead...  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.207.12.88 (talk) 06:56, 30 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Classical guitar?
Talk:Beaker (drinkware)

message: I looked this up because Hyacinth Bucket's neighbor Elizabeth is constantly saying she'd rather have a beaker than a tea cup or mug so that she needn't fear dropping one of Hyacinth's valuable dinnerware items. With no illustration, it's still hard for me to imagine how one would drink hot liquids from a handle-less container, especially one that might be plastic. We need pics for this article. Lawikitejana 01:08, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Desperately need illustrations
Talk:Personnel Armor System for Ground Troops

message: I recently toured Panmunjeom and saw the KPA guards wearing a PASGT-type helmet instead of the usual peaked hat.  Presumably this is a derivative design of Chinese make.  Could someone investigate this and update the article to include details of KPA use? 118.42.167.69 (talk) 03:48, 17 July 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I wouldn't count knock-offs to be actual PASGT. – Illegitimate Barrister (talk • contribs), 16:50, 14 December 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Use by Korean People's Army? 

message: What is the threat level of the PASGT Vest?
I believe it is IIIA
Hell no.  PASGT vests are more along the lines of IIA if that.  Modern stuff like the IBA is IIIA. Kensai Max 21:34, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  threat level of vest 

message: --Abramsgavin 07:48, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  I fixed it bye going to ask and geting all kinda info 

message: I have reviewed your latest edits and grew suspicion of some the language use.  To no surprise to me, it seems that some text (at least the part I investigated) came from  this page.  Edits and improvements are always encouraged but plagarism and copyright violations is not tolerated on wikipedia.  I have reverted the article to my last version.--Kevin586 17:43, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: No, you did not

message: German socalled authors of the german pasgt-article keep on insisting, that the PASGT-helmet is a derivate of the german helmet M35 of WWII. Though I do know, that there are no similarities (beside of the ear-protection), I have no sources on how the inventors got to their shape of the PASGT. Does anyone know? 84.138.42.99 (talk) 22:59, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The existing ballistic helmet, the Personnel Armor System Ground Troops (PASGT) (U.S. Pat. No. Des. 242,088 issued on Nov. 2, 1976) was a copy of the World War II Nazi helmet, freshpatents.com. 84.139.210.79 (talk) 08:34, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you! 84.138.47.242 (talk) 20:52, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reminiscence to the german M35 WWII helmet 

message: Is not saying it resembles Stahlhelm is non-neutral? --Anuclanus (talk) 02:56, 18 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Resemblance of sthlhelm 

message: I deleted the reliability section because it was redundant to information already stated in the article. The article states that the helmet is rated as level IIIA. None of the rounds listed (4.6x30mm, 7.62x25 tokarev, 5.56x45mm NATO and 7.62x39mm) would be stopped by level IIIA armor that the helmet is rated as. It's a bit like saying it's a bad helmet because it can't stop bunker-busting JDAMs, it wasn't designed to stop the mentioned rounds, thus, saying it can't is redundant.98.253.128.68 (talk) 04:33, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reliability 

message: I believe that some of the pictures can be removed as it is quite a bit excessive. Most of the pictures are useful although a majority are really just taking up space.
Tschau, Dwightol102 (talk) 04:32, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Excessive Photos
Talk:Daibutsu

message: I wrote my post from an information brochure I recieved when i visited the site. How should I reference this? Antleredtuna (talk) 02:40, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I recommend reading through the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources first, but simply adding something along the lines of "Name of brochure" immediately after your text (i.e. in place of the "Fact" tag) should be sufficient. An online source would enable other editors to verify the details, but I think quoting details from a paper guide is acceptable on Wikipedia. Give us a shout if you are still unsure. --DAJF (talk) 04:34, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for the quick reply Antleredtuna (talk) 13:19, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Citing sources
Talk:USS Pensacola (1859)

message: This image appears to be of the wrong ship, as the vessel has two stacks, the Pensacola had but one. I have an image of this vessel with yards manned which can be used to replace the current one. Any objections? Tentontunic (talk) 19:13, 15 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  USS Pensacola at Alexandria, Virginia, in 1886.
Talk:Asam Sahitya Sabha

message: *Use the name that Assam literary society itself uses - this is the official name.
*Multiple names are created by irresponsible Ahom people with Ahom ethnocentrism and Ahom supremicy behavioural-commonalities, for Ahom see ().
Kurmaa (talk) 22:07, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Use Official Name