lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Lorum (piercing)

message: I have found the information, including this picture very useful. I am having my partner pierced. This is something he is doing as a gift for me. We have been together for many years and are not young and foolish. However we needed to know the name of the piercing we wanted, heaven forbid we got him pierced in the wrong place, and the picture has assured us that we have got the name of this particular piercing right. 
Wikipedia continues to educate and inform once again. 
GROSS! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.245.44.96 (talk • contribs) 2006-10-18T14:12:36
I whole-heartedly agree. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.9.56.44 (talk • contribs) 2006-11-12T21:43:42
DISTURBING!
I removed the picture of the Lorum piercing cause it made several people feel sick. It is unneccessary to have these pictures on wikipedia —Preceding unsigned comment added by Brian Welch (talk • contribs) 2006-12-05T21:14
It's not unneccessary [sic] to have the photo here.  Just because you find something distasteful or "gross" isn't cause for removing it.It is what it is and photos of the human body shouldn't make any adult feel sick. It's no different than any other piercing... just a different location.  Do pictures of pierced ears make you sick? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.18.185.189 (talk • contribs) 2006-12-09T02:53:34
No, but this is a picture of a man's genitals with a piercing; you don't walk around with your dick hanging out, do you? It's not appropriate, Wikipedia should be accessible for all ages. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.103.124.47 (talk • contribs) 2006-12-09T14:26:49
:You are in the wrong, please read WP:CENSOR. Thanks. Mathmo Talk 12:20, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
Talk:The Argus (Brighton)

message: "The newspaper is still regarded as a 'go to' for Sport and The Arts within the Arts capital of South England" - this sentence just doesn't make sense: is it intending to suggest that Brighton is the arts capital of the South? If so, it's a somewhat oblique way of putting it (although I'm not disputing that Brighton is indeed a culturally rich city). At any rate, the whole sentence is pretty weaselly and not particularly well constructed Dom Kaos (talk) 14:12, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: No comments from anyone so I've deleted the statement  Dom Kaos (talk) 19:17, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Coverage of sport and the arts
Talk:Complicity (film)

message: Is that really the right Jason Hetherington that is linked to? --Alf melmac 14:21, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
Talk:Henderson Gleaner

message: We definitely don't need two articles on this. Which is the official name of the paper? Acdixon 14:28, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merger with [[The Gleaner newspaper (Henderson, Kentucky)]] 
Talk:Flag of Jordan

message: How sure are you about 1920 as the flag adoption? Cf. http://www.crwflags.com/fotw/flags/jo_his.html where the same flag as the current one is date 1921, but the star was added only, or so they say, in 1928.
The source quoted for 1920 may be correct, but for the star-less flag variant...
Sorry, can't help you with further details.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.138.218.132 (talk) 22:32, 6 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  1920? 

message: CRW flags has the star as being precisely 7/3. The image at Wikipedia has a larger inner radius, so a less spiky star. If the star is specified, at least one must be wrong. JDAWiseman (talk) 12:58, 2 July 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Can’t find an official specification, but images are consistent with CRW being wrong (which doesn’t yet show that Wikipedia is correct). JDAWiseman (talk) 13:37, 2 July 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Construction of the star
Talk:2004 Chinese Super League

message: Wikified as part of the Wikification wikiproject! JubalHarshaw 14:25, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
Talk:Flag of Kuwait

message: http://www.moe.edu.kw/pages/misc/history/kwFlag.htm only gives me the CMYK colors, but as my personal experience, the CMYK colors do not look good when used online. There are more specific details at https://www.pai.gov.kw/sas/sas/ApaiEvents.jsp but the ministry's email is dead. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 06:07, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Flag colors
Talk:Flag of Kyrgyzstan

message: Correct flag of Kyrgyz Republic by link https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Post-148035-1309881687.png
The prove is scheme by link https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a4/%D0%96%D0%B5%D0%BB%D0%B5%D0%BA%D1%82%D0%B8%D0%BD_%D1%82%D2%AF%D0%B7%D2%AF%D0%BB%D2%AF%D1%88_%D1%81%D1%85%D0%B5%D0%BC%D0%B0%D1%81%D1%8B.png  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.143.197.47 (talk) 17:01, 21 October 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: [[:File:Post-148035-1309881687.png]].

message: Duplication Detector link shows that a large number of sentences were copied word for word, hence the copyvio removal on 19 March 2017. —Bloom6132 (talk) 22:03, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removal of [[WP:COPYVIO|copyright violation]] 

message: I think there should be one or two sentences that discusses this, because it is a notable meme. But other than that, nothing else! :-) 2601:14D:4200:E0:224B:ED6E:23B1:7DC9 (talk) 03:38, 31 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Flag looks similar to xbox logo 

message: Kyrgyzstan seems to change the flag soon, for an amendment suggesting a changehttps://www.rferl.org/a/kyrgyzstan-president-change-flag-outcry/32711880.html passed this December. I guess the page needs an update due  to this. 176.36.187.17 (talk) 00:40, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  New version of flag 

message: As Kyrgyzstan has changed the flag, the description should be changed. Currently is "Adopted in 1992, just over seven months after the country's independence was declared, to replace the flag of the Kirghiz Soviet Socialist Republic (SSR), it has been the flag of the Kyrgyz Republic since that year." But it doesn't seem right anymore.
Info: On December 26th 2023, The Kyrgyz Parliament had a debate if they straighten the sun rays, but decided to straighten them to make the sun connected with Kyrgyz culture and avoid confusion with the sunflower. 223.16.207.24 (talk) 11:49, 1 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  New description due to new flag 

message: was doing some tracing of the flag for some personnal project and saw that the middle circle with the "shanyrak" the yurt keystone isnt perfect. I have not found any precise construction sheet for the new flag and found that the circle is not perfect like 52 by 51 is this normal? Nicolas.gaspard (talk) 13:56, 14 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  circle not perfect?
Talk:Hercules (Handel)

message: I just cut this sentence out from the Performance section
:This was staged.
I'd love to hear more, but as is, this seemed unnecessary. Carptrash 14:32, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Comment

message: as per my project to unify the naming convention among articles about Handel Oratorios, I'm going to move this article to "Hercules (Handel)" early next week.  Any objections? Fred 16:15, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  moving to Hercules (handel) 
Talk:Brighton Bears (1973-2006)

message: What's the story behind adding "Genesis" before their name? Are they a sponsor? Recury 02:52, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
Talk:Wachusett Mountain (ski area)

message: I have created this page to disambiguate between the geological feature Mount Wachusett and the Mount Wachusett Ski Area, and made it a part of WikiProject Ski. -- Ubergenius 14:37, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

message: Ralph Crowley is a redlink; the article should at least mention that it's (AFAIK) the same Crowley family as own Polar Beverages.  2603:400A:0:7EC:0:0:801E:1C14 (talk) 00:13, 17 January 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Crowley family
Talk:Pantheon (religion)

message: Why is Buddhism listed? I didn't think it had any gods.
It was added by 81.155.97.114 on Dec., 2006.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/God_in_Buddhism
Chuck 18:41, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, in Mahayana, Buddha is God. If one god suffices for a pantheon, then maybe... Rursus dixit. (mbork3!) 17:38, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Buddhism has a Pantheon? 

message: I disagree with the proposed merge with "polytheism". A pantheon is a distinct concept - a group of Gods within the context of a specific culture or fictional setting. Polytheism is really not about fictional sets of Gods (which this article discusses, and could address in much greater depth). Cheers! bd2412 T 06:59, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No gods are fictional to those who believe in them, and all are fictional to those who don't, so that isn't a valid distinction. However, monotheistic religions also have pantheons; after all, that is basically what the saints and angels of Christianity are. There are other monotheistic religions, such as Vodun, where the word 'pantheon' is commonly used. Perhaps, though, that is simply a matter of dealing with unfamiliar religions. kwami (talk) 18:33, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I should also mention that this article was made initially to create a target for the many links to "pantheon" that were previously directed to the disambiguation page on that word. There are "pantheons" of gods which are fictional in the sense that some author made them up for a story, and no one has ever believed in them. This use of the term should not be discussed in an article on the actual practice of polytheism. Also, there is the less formal social sense of the "pantheon of rock gods" and such, addressed in this article, which would also not be appropriate for the polytheism article (some people think "Clapton is God", but nobody thinks Clapton is God. Cheers! bd2412 T 18:41, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed merge. 

message: I was wondering where the list of Fictional Pantheons would be - meaning created specifically for works of fiction, like fantasy universes, and not any real-world religion (past or present).  For instance, the Pantheons for Middle Earth (if there is one), Dragonlance, Star Trek cultures, and so on.  If there is such a list on wikipedia (I'm off to hunt for it shortly) would it not make sense to have at least a link to it here?
Medleystudios72 (talk) 16:33, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: A few of them can be found in :Category:Lists of fictional deities. Cheers! bd2412 T 17:33, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fiction? 

message: You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 October 1 § Pantheon (structure).  Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 08:38, 1 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: Discussion at [[:Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 October 1#Pantheon (structure)|Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 October 1 §&nbsp;Pantheon (structure)]]
Talk:Intacto

message: They are unsourced and are of dubious value.--Mr. Erik 06:57, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removing Production Notes 
Talk:Nico and Dani

message: while there is no USA rating since it has never been released here, (Canada and England/Australia likely the same) this definitely would have at least an "R" rating due to themes, Language and nudity
is there a way to classify it as a "Coming of Age" movie on Wikipedia? it obviously fits the movie, in fact. as mentioned in passing currently, it is coming of age movie for both hetero and homo communities. Qazwiz (talk) 00:27, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: It did receive a formal rating in Spain (12 rating). VictCoca (talk) 15:45, 31 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  not rated?
Talk:Miracle of Marcelino

message: Is this film an Italian co-production? IMDb suggests that it is and that it was also produced by Falco but was uncredited on the Spanish version. Italian Wikipedia suggests it is a co-production. This website suggests it is an Italian production https://movieplayer.it/articoli/i-50-film-piu-visti-al-cinema-in-italia-dal-1950-ad-oggi_15414.  English Wikipedia gives an Italian release date indicating that Italy may be relevant. Does anyone know for certain to update this article?Sudiani (talk) 08:52, 4 October 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Italian co-production

message: I saw a version of this in 1953 at the latest.  That suggests there were some pre-release versions in circulation in religious circles (maybe for feedback?) 38.140.143.234 (talk) 16:15, 3 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  The dates puzzle me.
Talk:Kamran Khan (journalist)

message: Wikified as part of the Wikification wikiproject! JubalHarshaw 14:42, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: wikiproject

message: I am surprised at the tussle between Pakistan and Kamran Khan. Off late, his shows are subject of criticism from the government. Kamran Khan, to me, used to be a spokesperson of the Pakistan Government and particularly President Pervez Musharraf. If you study his interview to PBS
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/search/interviews/khan.html
you will notice his calculated answers are like the speeches we often here from the President himself. Off late, Kamran Khan has changed gears and the contents of his shows are turning out to be bias against the current government. I am perplexed at the change in his journalism. What has changed in him? What has lead to this? Has GEO Television put their editorial decisions on him? I am just curious. Junaidullah 20:04, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Change in journalism 

message: I think it's self-evident what I mean. Enigmamsg 03:58, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Article issues

message: From his whole career only 1 incident is reported in article, posing him as a hinderance creator.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Syedasim66 (talk • contribs) 16:29, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Biased Article

message: mushkal ma Bol network ko chor gea  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Syedabdulhaseebshah (talk • contribs) 17:03, 5 June 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gandooo Hy Sala
Talk:Common Vulnerability Scoring System

message: I did a rewrite on the temp page.  I removed a lot of details (it was long anyways), it still has a list of the metrics (rewritten) but whether the list would be copyrightable is gray.  I added some commentary and retained the external links. RJFJR 22:27, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Rewrite for CV

message: I suggest the following article for reference:
The Common Vulnerability Scoring System - Magic Numbers or Snake Oil?
http://www.heise-security.co.uk/articles/89049
Note that I am a Heise editor and therfor will not add this myself because it is against our policy to spam. 
Please inform me, if you think that this kind of proposal violates the wikipedia policy.
193.99.145.162 08:16, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The deadlink above is now at http://www.h-online.com/security/features/The-Common-Vulnerability-Scoring-System-Magic-Numbers-or-Snake-Oil-747205.html Widefox; talk 07:34, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposal for external link 

message: For what I could read around in the web, the team that discovers a vulnerability, goes through the CVSS and set a score accordingly, but the issue - unless egregious - is not really peer reviewed. There are even CVEs that are disputed but the score doesn't change.
Is there a peer review or, due to the volume of CVEs, the original team decides and thus the score is not really "tested" ? (again, beside egregious problems).
Picking CVEs at random (all over 7 out of 10 in score) I couldn't find any peer review discussion about the score and the CVE in itself. Pier4r (talk) 09:45, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Do CVSS scores get peer reviewed?
Talk:Welcome Mr. Marshall!

message: Who actually tought that the capirotes was a representation of the KKK?   —Preceding unsigned comment added by EDomingos (talk • contribs) 01:42, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
Talk:List of Hasmonean rulers

message: Was there a reason for the revert?  There wasn't one given.  The revert resulted in a blue-link being turned back into a red-link.  That doesn't make immediate sense to me.  Please an explanation would be suitable.  --SFDan 14:48, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Since the person who reverted my editing didn't offer an explanation in a timely manner I have fixed the red-link caused by the unexplained reversion. --SFDan 05:27, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Revert that delinked an existing article

message: This page needs to be fixed up a bit, I cleaned up the most egregious errors.  It does not account for the era of the five synods or the shifting borders very well (e.g., Herod the Great's election in 40 bce, but ascension to the throne only in 37 ce).  This probably needs to be organized in a different manner. Any suggestions? Zeichman (talk) 13:36, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Fix-up needed

message: This list is overlapping two dynasty articles and in my opinion should be converted into a list or disambig page.GreyShark (dibra) 07:42, 12 September 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: And essentially overlaps with Kings of Israel and Judah. Should be merged there if no objections.GreyShark (dibra) 07:21, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Note - we also have Kings of Judah article...GreyShark (dibra) 07:25, 13 September 2018 (UTC)

text: Still it entirely overlaps with Hasmonean dynasty and Herodian dynasty articles. Maybe the best would be just making it a disambig page to those articles. It looks that other wikipedia language articles are specifically about the Kings of iron-age Judah, which should be of course relinked to Kings of Judah.GreyShark (dibra) 07:13, 14 September 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Article overlaps with [[Hasmonean dynasty]] and [[Herodian dynasty]] articles

message: Propose to merge the contents into Hasmonean dynasty and Herodian dynasty accordingly. Doesn't seem a notable article on its own right.GreyShark (dibra) 10:37, 16 September 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: .GreyShark (dibra) 12:15, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge
Talk:Ken'ichi Enomoto

message: I want to talk to Ken. We were the best of friends in the 1970’s, in middle school 2600:8806:3200:2E:F90C:B577:6326:CA13 (talk) 03:56, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ken
Talk:Kikko Matsuoka

message: I beleive this shold be tagged for notability, since it is not clear why on earth someone who was a minor celebrity in Japan many years ago should have article on them. If notable, then prove it in the article. JoshuSasori (talk) 23:45, 15 August 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: The article as it stands doesn't show how she is notable. It mentions a few things which are extremely minor and dated. Thus the tag. If you have proof she is notable, you shold put in the article, not argue about it here. JoshuSasori (talk) 02:39, 16 August 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: The article shows how she is notable and it was my rewrite that was considered satisfactory at the AfD. I not only provided multiple articles on her in major publications (itself a condition of WP:GNG), but noted her prominent roles in major television shows, including a 10 year stint on 11PM, a landmark news show (another condition of WP:NACTOR). You are free to add to it if you want, but the article has by consensus been deemed sufficient as is. Michitaro (talk) 03:41, 16 August 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: It's extremely surprising to me that you think that "Arguably her most memorable work on television was as a weekly regular for over ten years on the late night news show 11PM, [1][4][5] which itself lasted for over twenty years." is a sufficient to establish notability. The sentence does not even mention what her role was in this weekly late night news show, or why it was memorable. I don't see articles on other people who appear as weekly guests on Japanese nightly news shows. There was a consensus not to delete the article because it was possible to establish notability, not because the article clearly does that. JoshuSasori (talk) 04:53, 16 August 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Please read the AfD as well as the notability guidelines. The closing admin noted the article has been cleaned up and those voting after I cleaned it up declared that notability had been established in the article. WP:GNG does not demand that you show why a person or topic is memorable--that is often subjective--but rather that there is "significant coverage" in "reliable" and "independent" sources. That itself is notability, not the subjective standard of "memorable." And that has already been established. WP:NACTOR does have a criterion about "significant" roles, so if you did not find the term "regular" sufficient (even though it is a standard term for a co-star in Japanese TV), I have adjusted the language. Michitaro (talk) 09:24, 16 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tag for notability
Talk:Kapitan Sowa na tropie

message: I found :Image:7064986.3.jpg and noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. Someone will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If it was obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.
As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the  tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as  or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.
If there are other files on this page, consider checking that they have specified their source and are tagged properly, too. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 04:23, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Unspecified source for [[:Image:7064986.3.jpg]]

message: :Image:7064986.3.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.
If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.Betacommand (talk • contribs • Bot) 04:23, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:7064986.3.jpg