lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Counting

message: How can theologically-entangled beliefs held by Bible scholars (about the timing of this event in the "Gospel" accounts) authentically inform us about Jewish methods of counting?
Lyobovnik (talk) 00:37, 12 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requesting removal or edit of Jesus reference 

message: "Counting is the action of finding the number of elements of a finite set of objects."  So does that include estimating? Burchman (talk) 13:04, 13 July 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: IM( far from entirely unsophisticated )O, counting has two stages, of development and of use, for the manipulation of the cardinal numbers; I have not been formally taught philosophy of math, and do not officially hold a degree in (even non-philosophical) math. Officially, my BA (the college, at least then, granted only undergrad liberal-arts-and-sciences degrees: I.e., Bachelor of Arts degrees, whether with concentration in a technical or humanistic field of study. I was given to understand that there’d been very serious schemes for where they’d have built additional buildings to accommodate the additional faculty members and original research that such broadening would require, given their stated commitment to liberal arts educations, would not be consistent with maintaining an acceptably high level of scholarly and pedagogical rigor. JerzyA (talk) 22:38, 3 January 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Definition 

message: Re the comment: "In contrast, the English word 'fortnight' itself derives from 'a fourteen-night', as the archaic 'sennight' does from 'a seven-night'; the English words are not examples of inclusive counting." I disagree with this opinion i.e. "the English words are not examples of inclusive counting" They reference the 14th night and 7th night respectively hence they are archaic examples of inclusive counting among the Celts as this link supports re "sennight" for example http://www.infoplease.com/dictionary/brewers/sennight.html. So I think that error should be corrected.--Immutable888 (talk) 03:02, 10 August 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Disagreement re comment on fortnight and sennight
Talk:Shakespeare's late romances

message: This line: "Much ado about Nothing can also be related to the late romances"  was added to the bottom of this page. I fixed up the two typos in it, but it should be mixed into the body of the article, right? I'd do it myself, but I have no idea if the comment is true or not. JayDee 06:06, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  New Line 

message: At least C-class now. -- Ssilvers (talk) 22:26, 9 December 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Assessment
Talk:The Castle of Otranto

message: The entire section under  "The Castle of Otranto and Shakespeare" reads like someone's 10th grade homework essay. Not sure if this kind of subject literary analysis is in scope for Wikipedia articles on books.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.166.158.3 (talk) 20:07, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Someone's homework? 

message: I have turned this into a microstub. The book itself is important because it is one of the earliest examples of the Gothic novel. Danny 22:30, 10 Apr 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Discusssion

message: Uh, allow me to discreetly put the box controversy apart for a second. I think the Spoiler warning here is unnecessary: the plot summary does not reveal anything that is not in the first ten pages of the novel, so... 
Which doesn't mean you've got to take the warning out. I would rather suggest that someone should expand the summary. Because i am reading the novel right now, i don't understand sh*t, i came here for some guidance notes and here i am, all disappointed.  :(
:N.b. the resident 18th c. novel experts have not worked on this article, so far as I am aware, and I'm all for getting rid of the spoiler warning altogether in all regards.  Speaking as one of the 18th c. people, all I can say is that I've always regarded the novel as a nothing and never allow my students to read more than the few pages excerpted in anthologies.  I'd rather they read something with meat in it, like Caleb Williams or even stupid old Hermsprong or weepy old The Man of Feeling -- anything but Castle of Otranto.  Geogre 02:24, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Spoiler?

message: At over 4,000 words, the "plot summary" wasn't so much a summary as a blow-by-blow account of the plot.  I've replaced it with a much briefer summary from an older revision summary. --Tony Sidaway 02:00, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Good idea.  I watched as the article grew a full summary, but it was gradual, and I'm not very involved here.  One might break down section by section of a work, but only if the sections are hard to understand and what you're doing is encyclopedic (contextualizing, amplifying).  A novel article with "chapter 1, 2, 3, 4" is not so hot.  Geogre (talk) 11:18, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Plot summary

message: I'd like to start working this article up to FA status. This weekend, I will suggest a working bibliography here for sources of criticism. If anyone watching this article knows of good sources off the top of your heads, feel free to add them here. --Laser brain (talk) 22:58, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Working bibliography
Talk:Adam Carolla

message: Per WP:PRIMARYCARE, birth certificates are primary sources. California Birth Index is a database providing only abstracts of state birth information, making this a WP:SECONDARY source. Note that per WP:BLP we cannot make personal-life claims, including purported birth dates, without WP:RS citing. --Tenebrae (talk) 19:21, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: California Birth Index

message: Adam Carolla responded to a tweet about religion Bering useful to society and insisting that this was an uncontroversial position by tweeting “I agree and I am an atheist.”  The article does not mention that he is an atheist.  Does anyone else think it should be mentioned? ~~  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.169.78.170 (talk) 14:42, 16 January 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Religion

message: In Wikipedia, we usually prefer not to note the names of someone's minor children, unless the children are themselves notable.  Should we do the same for Carolla's children?  (OTOH, Carolla frequently talks about his children on his podcast, so their names are well-known.)  — Preceding unsigned comment added by PatricKiwi (talk • contribs) 11:35, 13 September 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Should we be naming his (minor) children?
Talk:Oxford–Cambridge rivalry

message: The entire content of this talk page has been merged with Talk:Oxbridge Bluap 12:02, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Please note that following an AfD nomination on Oxbridge the offending material there, which prompted that nomination, was aggressively trimmed as an outcome of consensus achieved during the debate. This content is more appropriate for this article here, Oxbridge rivalry provided it meets the content policies including WP:V, and is properly sourced. I'm about to read and tag the article but please note that until consensus changes the subject matter of this article should probably remain separate from that in Oxbridge. ColdmachineTalk 19:57, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Oxbridge]] and [[Oxford and Cambridge rivalry|Oxbridge rivalry]]

message: I have removed a paragraph which said that Cambridge, unlike Oxford, does not offer Joint Honours degrees, which it defined as "degrees that allow students to specialise in more than one subject". While Cambridge University does not use the expression "Joint Honours", it certainly does give degrees in which a combination of subjects are studied, in a number of ways. For example it is possible to take part of a tripos in one subject and part of one in another subject. Also, there are various triposes which allow students to take elements of other subjects: for example in the mathematics tripos it is possible to take an option "maths with physics". Thus the statement in the article, which gave the impression that it is not possible to study more than one subject, was misleading. JamesBWatson (talk) 17:44, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Joint honours 

message: Given that the philosophers Ludwig Wittgenstein and Bertrand Russell studied at Cambridge, Cambridge's F R leavis contributed to literary theory, and arguably more of the great Oxbridge poets studied at Cambridge (although arguably more of the great Oxbridge authors studied at Oxford), is it best to perpetuate the idea to a general reader that Oxford is necessarily the more important university of the two for philosophy and literature, which is debatable? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Picnico (talk • contribs) 21:54, 5 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Quote
Talk:Blood Simple

message: Dropped this short synopsis as the article now consists of a very long synopsis. 
:In the film, Julian Marty, a bar owner played by Dan Hedaya, hires a private detective, played by M. Emmett Walsh, to spy on his wife (played by Frances McDormand) to find out whom she is cheating on her husband with.  The detective returns with photos showing that Abby is cheating on her husband with Ray (played by John Getz), an employee at the bar that Marty owns.  Ray expects to have been fired, and when Marty doesn't fire him, he quits.  Marty still owes a few weeks' wages, but threatens to shoot Ray if he comes back to the bar.
OK, I am going to move some of this to the main article, under the spoiler warning.
Does anyone else think that the faux commentary (on the R1 DVD, anyway) is a spoof on Peter Cowie's commentaries for the Criterion Collection?
Ellsworth 16:48, 5 Sep 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: A note

message: Reference copied from Blood Simple to M. Emmet Walsh.  See former article's history for a list of contributors.  7&6=thirteen (☎) 00:46, 22 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title: Attribution
Wikipedia talk:Arbitration/Policy/Procedure for changing this policy/Old proposal

message: The proposal being put forth for amendments has its roots in part of the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Arbitration policy ratification vote.  It is intended as an effort to maintain ongoing participation in rules development while maintaining an active and reasonably stable policy that can be applied even as amendments are being discussed.  It reflects the idea that newcomers should have an opportunity to participate in decisions that were made before they joined, and that members should have the opportunity to change their votes as circumstances change.
Although this proposal is made in regards to the Arbitration Policy, it is conceivable that it could be generalized for other policies. Eclecticology 00:20, 2004 Apr 11 (UTC)
: Seems rather unnecessary and legalistic - the ratification vote stated "The Arbitration Policy may be tweaked as the Committee gains experience and learns better ways of doing things", and I think it's reasonable that the arbitration cabal does just that. People will naturally change their vote (and are encouraged to do so) in either direction, as and when. If folks think the AC is abusing this, they can vote us out soon enough, or kick up a fuss with Jimbo, or just talk to us about it.
: Regards applying it to policy in general - ick!! Wikipedia is not an experiment in participative democracy. Most policies are so uncontroversial that no discussion is even necessar. One worry is that our policy pages already frequently lag behind reality or leave important areas uncovered - a heavyweight vote for every change would make that worse, not better.
: Perhaps it would help if I understood your motive for making this proposal? Is it intended as an anti-cabal defence? Or something else? Martin 22:11, 23 May 2004 (UTC)
Talk:Cromulent

message: :Both embiggens and cromulnet were quickly used and adapted by Simpsons fans.
"Adapted"? Did they fashion axes out of them or something? --Camembert —Preceding undated comment added 02:35, 11 April 2004‎
*Looks like "cromulnet" was adapted by the dyslexic Simpson fans. Along with "embiggnes", one supposes. -- Nunh-huh 01:38, 11 Apr 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Would it make more sense for this to redirect straight to Lisa the Iconoclast since that's where the description and etymology are?
--Jmeden2000 14:11, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Redirect destination
Talk:The Fairly OddParents

message: here a messge for pther wikipeiaer to get imvold in a discuss about this and related pages about the Neutrality of these page here it is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Teahouse#Butch_Hartman_again
Fanoflionking Fanoflionking  14:05, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Can now be found at: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive_1072#Butch_Hartman_again --IJBall (contribs • talk) 02:27, 2 May 2023 (UTC)

text: I have removed the  tag – it seems the issue with the questionable YouTube Channel sourcing has been:  --IJBall (contribs • talk) 02:31, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Come in and get involved  

message: I keep deleting these, but people are re-adding them, so I won't delete them if they are real:
* Totally Sports Out
* Fairly Fairly Fairly Fairly Odd Parents on a Winner Cash —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.113.74.243 (talk • contribs)  03:21, 16 February 2009
: Nope. It's vandilism. --67.163.20.117 (talk) 18:37, 24 September 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Are These Fake TV Movie Eps? 

message: :The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. 
The result of the move request was: Not done.   Magical Golden Whip (talk) 01:49, 18 July 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: But the Fairly Odder page isn’t a stub. You don’t even elaborate on how it “makes sense” to merge them CreecregofLife (talk) 03:47, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

text: Oppose: The above statement is factually incorrect, and is an imposing of extra standards not placed on any other article. It stands on its own with notability. CreecregofLife (talk) 03:26, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

text: Strong Oppose:  Two very different shows and timelines.  Berry Jetson (talk) 16:36, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merger 

message: I'll just keep this brief: Wasn't the band KISS in the Wishology specials? I know the band was animated, but did they voice themselves? Triviatronic9000 (talk) 19:53, 30 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Other Guest Stars 

message: Enhancement of a Portal Bar. 2601 (talk) 22:31, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. --Ferien (talk) 22:42, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 19 April 2024
Talk:Archangel

message: In the intro it states that “Archangels are the highest rank of angel in the hierarchy of angels.”
This is then followed by the statement that “A common misconception is that archangels are the highest rank of angel.”
This two statements obviously contradict each other. 2A06:C701:40BF:9400:F808:CCE3:C587:53FC (talk) 18:56, 26 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Contradicting statements in the intro
Talk:Birago Diop

message: Just corrected death date and added source. Note French wikipedia has this correct already (as does German, and others). No idea where 10 November came from. If there's a competing source, let me know. This is the sort of thing Wikidata will make easier to resolve in the future. Isaaccurtis (talk) 17:58, 11 December 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Death date November 25, not November 10, 1989 

message: Ummm.. What did I do, somehow create this stub three times?  Sorry.. --Uyanga 02:08, 11 Apr 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Blue Valentine (album)

message: I started a discussion here of the genres on Tom Waits albums.  I encourage all interested editors to participate.  Thanks. ---RepublicanJacobiteTheFortyFive 15:48, 13 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Genres 
Talk:Urinary tract

message: This page taken from Merck manual of medical informaton, published by Pocket books, 1997 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.26.195.117 (talk) 23:56, April 10, 2004 (UTC)
:Isn't this a protected copyright then? -- EmperorBMA / ブライアン 03:58, 11 Apr 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copyright violation
Talk:Roger the Engineer

message: There is an expanded release available on streaming services.  Not sure how to include that here with the track listings.
https://www.amazon.com/music/player/albums/B019I0PP8O?_encoding=UTF8&qid=1694893570&sr=8-1 Lhammer610 (talk) 19:55, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Expanded Release? 

message: The section "Release History" makes the claim that the original US album "is mixed differently than the British editions."  This is the first I'm hearing of this.  The claim is not substantiated with sources or details. (It only mentions some mono vs stereo differences.)
It is well known that the mono and stereo mixes of the album are different, worldwide. But this claim would mean that a mono UK mix is different from a mono US mix, and stereo UK mix is different from a stereo US mix. OK, then... How?  And what are your sources? Have these unique US mixes ever been rereleased?
I'm not debating that the song sequences are different, but I think this mix claim may be in error.  The claim has gone unchallenged since it was added May 7, 2006.  Let's polish this.
Related but separate issue: The early 1980's US Epic LP release is a mix of mono, stereo and fake stereo mixes. It is my understanding that mono mixes were used for songs where Jeff Beck's solos or other elements were missing from the stereo mixes. (This version adds the "Happenings"/"Psycho Daisies" single to the song order.) I'll recheck, but I think this could be made clearer.
Sojambi Pinola (talk) 09:45, 14 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  US/UK versions "mixed differently"? I don't think so.
Talk:Verona (disambiguation)

message: I have discovered some sources (David Weber's fiction series Empire of Man, and also this [post] refer to the Venona Project as the Ve*r*ona project. Due to this, it was difficult for me to find more information on this subject. I have added a link to the wiki page of this Venona project, at the bottom of this page.Willuknight 12:07, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Venona Project

message: Verona is far better known internationally than any of the American Veronas. This page should contain the Italian city and the other be listed in a disambiguation page.
:I agree.  If you created an account, you'd gain the ability to move pages, as well as a personalized watchlist and other features.  It's quick, easy, and anonymous.  You ought to. Meelar 05:09, 11 Apr 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: The Important Verona

message: The language in much of this article is very disjointed, almost like it's been translated into english by a not-very-fluent english speaker.  Unless anyone beats me to it, I'm going to try to clean it up in the near future. Blufive 01:16, 28 Dec 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Today (Th. August 25th 2005), the article still seems disjointed. I'm following up on Blufive's suggestion to rewrite it. Further revision is welcome. Kander 16:12, 25 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Disjoint

message: I wish to post a question on the Verona (Italy)  talk page, but it keeps being redirected to the Talk:Verona (disambiguation) page, which is where i think my comment is being posted.
This is my question: In the demographics section, where did the info come from?
I would appreciate it if someone could sort both out as i am rather busy at the moment, and also do not how to sort the talk page problem out.
Thanks
Stwalkerster 18:47, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There were page moves in the past and the talk page got separated. Please respond to the question at Talk:Verona. older ≠ wiser 18:57, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  What's going on?
Talk:Comarques of Catalonia

message: Does anyone have a clue why the list refers to "Era Val d'Aran" rather than just "Val d'Aran"? Makes no sense to me. I'm probably going to change this if no one can explain. -- Jmabel 05:28, 11 Apr 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Era is the "la" article in aranese. As you can see in Viquipèdia, in Catalan (and seems that in Occitan too) there is a strong tendency to say the local names with an article. Is not very clear if the article must be part of the official name (and in the Catalan version, sometimes solve this doubt redirecting from one of the versions to the other), but what is sure is that is incorrect to write the name in the middle of a sentence, alone without the article  Llull 08:10, 11 Apr 2004 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thanks. My knowledge of Aranès is about zero; for an North American, I imagine I'm pretty exceptional just to be able to read Catalan. Usually in English usage we don't use those articles, and yes I know how it grates on a Romance Language ear (we don't even call the capital of Cuba "La Habana", just "Havana"). I'll drop the "era" from this article (but maybe we should be getting this grammatical usage stuff into the articles on the individual  comarques). -- Jmabel 17:38, 11 Apr 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: [Untitled]

message: The term comarca has entered the English language as meaning an administrative subdivision or traditional region in several Iberian and Latin American countries (see :wikt:comarca). In line with the norms of the English language, its plural is formed by simply adding an "s", regardless of how it is formed in other languages. Since this is the English Wikipedia, we should therefore refer to standard English "comarcas", rather than vary the plural according to the grammar of the local language of where the comarcas happen to be located. I therefore propose renaming this page to "Comarcas of Catalonia". Cheers. Rwxrwxrwx (talk) 14:44, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Plural
Talk:Third Eye Blind

message: * http://www.allmusic.com/blog/post/third-eye-blinds-stephan-jenkins Sergecross73 msg me 16:48, 7 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Source for future cleanup 

message: The article would benefit a lot from a cleanup of the never-far-apart usage of the word "band" (many times in one sentence), "and" and its staccato density of commas. One person only has the stamina for a certain amount of work. Arcsoda (talk) 20:51, 1 October 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Go for it. Sergecross73 msg me 23:17, 1 October 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Excessive amounts of commas & "and" 

message: * https://pitchfork.com/reviews/albums/third-eye-blind-third-eye-blind - Covers a lot of ground that the article already does, but I wrote this article with a lot of old sources. This could help replace them if they ever go offline. Sergecross73 msg me 15:19, 23 January 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  2022 source 

message: * https://www.gawker.com/culture/third-eye-blinds-stephan-jenkins-is-lying-about-something - Interesting article. The claim isnt made here, nor does it need to be, but I thought I'd list it in case it ever becomes a dispute in the future. Sergecross73 msg me 19:12, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Jenkins Valedictorian claim 

message: Tolerate the newbie question, please. Laurycial.timetraversing (talk) 16:24, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: It seems like Jenkins usually gives flimsy, different reasons in interviews, so I never bothered including it when I rewrote the article last year. Sergecross73 msg me 17:20, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Inspiration for band name 

message: * https://rockcellarmagazine.com/third-eye-blind-interview-stephan-jenkins-summer-gods-tour-2024-yellowcard/ Sergecross73 msg me 15:40, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  2024 source
Talk:Humour

message: An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect :Facetious and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at  until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.  An anonymous username, not my real name 06:49, 2 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Facetious" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]]