lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:German military technology during World War II

message: could somebody look over the article? I feel that it sounds amateurish. Mr. Killigan 11:41, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This needs some work indeed. I would suggest to start drafting a structure. Something like:
# Introduction
# Context of German mil tech development (this should link in with the WWI conditions)
# Pro's and con's. For example of a con: the many different versions of the newly developed weapons made in field maintenance a nightmare. Or, the amount of resources spent in developing V1, V2 which may have better been invested in mass producing other weapons.
Then a series of applications, but I think it can be much expanded
# Small arms. Don't forget handgrenades and anti tank weapons (Panzerfaust)
# Artillery (if any, because I thought that has not been a major development in WWII)
# Cavalry. Tanks; halftracks. I think this is an important issue, although the Germans made cxonsiderable mistakes here. E.g. the Kingtiger was very strong, but also suffered from mechanical failure often. Interesting the Germans failed to develop an all purpose vehicle for their commanders such as the Jeep (an important innovation of the allies)
# Navy. The pocketbattleships like Bismarck were built to overcome WWI treaties. The many submarines and wolfpacks should be here
# Military intelligence. The Enigma coding machine should be in, as well as some other things
# V weapons. V1 and V2 were revolutionary mil-tech. Basically V1 was un unmanned plane, early cruise missile and V2 was the first balistic missile (and became the blue print of early US space craft).
# Nuclear-weapons. Although never finished the Germans spent a substantial amount of effort in their Peenemunde labs to investigate the A-bomb. This has been the justification for the unlimited resources available for the Manhatten project in the US.
Does this help??  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Arnoutf (talk • contribs) 10:39, August 26, 2007 (UTC) 
Suggest merging this topic with the general technology in WWII article. Most of the above developments are listed in this article. Conqerer2 (talk) 00:04, 24 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  help please
Wikipedia talk:Days of the year

message: I've started a discussion at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Days_of_the_year/Template#Subsections about a possible change to the structure of these articles and the template.  Please participate.  Toddst1 (talk) 00:33, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Change to structure of DOY pages 

message: who is not a regular member of the DOY project had a remarkable response when I made him/her aware of WP:DOYCITE.   Take a look at this thread.
Suffusion of Yellow has created edit filter  to try to prevent new unsourced entries.  We'll see if it works, but wow - what a great attitude and a huge asset to the community.    Bravo!
Toddst1 (talk) 23:39, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, it looks promising and would be a great help if it can be developed to full potential. Well done,  and thanks. No Great Shaker (talk) 08:00, 7 March 2021 (UTC)

text: Mmm, nice. Deb (talk) 09:59, 7 March 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Shout out to Suffusion of Yellow 

message: Please see an open RfC on DOY article lead lengths here:  voorts (talk/contributions) 23:25, 18 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  RfC on Day of the Year lead lengths
Talk:Keelmen

message: The Keelmen's Hospital in Newcastle is no longer used as student accommodation, it seems - I was in that area last week and the building is now empty and covered with metal shutters. 217.155.20.163 (talk) 14:56, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Keelmen's Hospital 

message: "Each keel was manned by a skipper, two crewmen and a boy, known as a ‘pee dee’. The meaning of this title is unknown."
The Orcadian word peedie describes small things, the equivalent to Scots "wee" or English "little" - an Orcadian influence perhaps??  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 139.153.143.95 (talk) 14:39, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pee dee 

message: Is "Keelmen" the most appropriate? I ask because I was trying to do something about keel (unit), which is a bare reference to a generally unreliable source (Cardarelli: my comments, but in this particular case his figures agree with SOED), and in fact the paragraph in this article is a much better summary of what a "keel" was, as a measure of coal. However, it is difficult to argue for redirecting (for example) an article on a unit to an article on a group of people. Could this be renamed as "Keel (.....)", to refer to the boats, their use for carrying coal, and the keelmen who worked them? Suggestions appreciated. Imaginatorium (talk) 18:31, 2 June 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: I can't think of any way to change the title apart from "Keelmen". This is the name of the group and has been for centuries. "Keel" would need disambiguation from all its other uses. The Keelmen's Hospital, their most visible legacy, is reason enough to keep it. Andy Dingley (talk) 18:46, 2 June 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article title
Talk:Security sector governance and reform

message: I have added a 'see also' section to this article, so that relevant links may be added as appropriate. Timschocker (talk) 16:08, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Links 

message: Merged Security sector governance here. Justification: the two concepts are so overlapping that they do not warrant two pages. "Wikipedia is not a dictionary; there does not need to be a separate entry for every concept", see WP:OVERLAP. In essence, security sector reform is a process to get to security sector governance. Shadowdasher (talk) 16:12, 25 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  SSG merger 
Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Novels/Guestbook

message: birthdays
I just read the page and under screenplays someone left out Lifeboat. Steinbeck wrote the screenplay for the movie Lifeboat. 24.7.144.33 (talk) 16:28, 28 February 2015 (UTC)

message: This Is My First Time On This Page...
umm this wikiproject Novels thing i really dont understand it can someone help me understand it
my username is Martinez 13  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Martinez 13 (talk • contribs) 15:45, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Discussion
Talk:Province of Gorizia

message: The sources are either irrelevant or not working. One reference links to the start page of Udine University and the other to the start page of Universitat Oberta de Catalunya. The link in the text gives a 404 error. 89.212.10.250 (talk) 12:17, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Sources
Talk:Lee Valley Lions

message: I worked at Lee Valley Ice Centre in the 80s and always knew the rink size to be 56m x 26m, the smaller, NHL size of rink as opposed to the Olympic standard of 60m x 30m. Unless it got rebuilt in the past four years since I last visited, it remains 56x26! ByteofKnowledge (talk) 16:15, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Rink size
Talk:Timeline of British history (1800–1899)

message: This timeline is inconsistent with those for previous centuries (e.g., 1700-1799).  Those timelines are more useful, relatively short lists of key events.  This page is just a bunch of links to individual years.  It's hardly useful at all.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Magtag (talk • contribs) 04:30, 20 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: [Untitled]
Talk:Olalla, Washington

message: I visited the Olalla, Washington page on Wikipedia, and I noticed that there was information on the new roof put onto the community club. I dug into the date of 2006 a little bit, mostly because I'm sure I was older when it was replaced, and according to their Facebook page, I know not a valid source technically, the roof was tagged on multiple photos and an album marked as New Roof 2007. So I wonder if there is any way to look into this further and find the correct time of the roof being replaced. 
TA  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Misstheelves (talk • contribs) 20:05, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Olalla Community Club
Talk:Faceboy

message: There have been significant additions to this article, but they were not written into the narrative.  I rearranged the article to keep the narative together, but I did not significantly edit to make it read better. Some of it is redundant.  Also, many links were added, but they were not consistant with the format on the page.  I've formatted some of them, but I did not complete.  I'll be away from the computer until next week, so I might not get back to it for some time.  Someone who is a more experienced Wikian may want to make sure we are in the proper format as well.  I hope that the extensive documentation that has been added to this article helps establish "noteriety."  Please excuse the format until it can be worked through. Digit LeBoid 13:42, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Try to make the article format look more like David Zancai. -- Jreferee (Talk) 06:41, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Editing and Format
Talk:Suncadia, Washington

message: I believe Suncadia and Suncadia, Washington are essentially the same article, so i think they should be merged as there is no need for 2 articles on the same thing, if anyone has any reason there should be different articles, post them here, or else i will go ahead and merge them in a few days.--Kip Kip 19:42, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Merger_proposal
Talk:Doberdò del Lago

message: Doberdob does not mean 'good oak' etymologically. It is derived from dobri dol 'good valley' (see: Snoj, Etimološki slovar slovenskih zemljepisnih imen, 2009, p. 110). Doremo (talk) 15:15, 26 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Good oak" 

message: the lake area and Pietrarossa is a reserve  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.161.123.221 (talk) 17:39, 12 July 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: national park
Talk:Redondo, Des Moines, Washington

message: I thought Redondo was part of Federal Way. Is it part of Des Moines or Federal Way? I know for a fact that the houses and mansions in the Mar Cheri neighborhood/community in Redondo all have Federal Way addresses as relatives live there. This has confused me and may confuse others. Redondo Beach might be in a seperate city from Redondo Heights so I will look further into this later.  Oh my it's getting late, I'm logging off now Azemocram (talk) 07:09, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Redondo used to be unincorporated King County. Des Moines annexed much of Redondo sometimes in the 1990s. Federal Way may annexed a portion as well. I will have to look at my old map. The Des Moines page mentions Redondo. I think that it is fine to keep Federal Way in this article even if part of Redondo is a very small part of the city.47.137.183.192 (talk) 19:04, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Exact Location 

message: I was born in Redondo, Washington. My family owned and developed a good portion of the area. I have never, ever heard it referred to as anything but Redondo, Washington.  Further example is here.  They have their own Zip Code:  98054.  Hope this helps.   ~Geaugagrrl talk 05:32, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Redondo, Washington
Talk:Boston Harbor, Washington

message: Hey all, I'm the WikiProject Cities assessor of this article. If feedback is what you want and need, come to my talk page and give me a holler! --Starstriker7(Dime algoor see my works) 03:06, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: The coordinates need the following fixes:
* Write here
Bolter 252 (talk) 11:02, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Fixed. Deor (talk) 02:37, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Coordinate error 
Talk:Western Air Defense Sector

message: Wondering why there is no mention of the RCAF section at WADS? 174.24.194.49 (talk) 09:50, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  RCAF at WADS 

message: Needs a separate Northwest ADS article to include Almaden AFS and others. Incomplete history.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:646:8C01:2E70:2C46:4F1B:1C71:BB8F (talk) 16:49, 14 July 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Almaden AFS
Wikipedia talk:Wikipedia Signpost/2007-07-02/Wrestler death

message: He added, "Like I said it was just a major coincidence, and I will never vandalize anything on wikipedia or post wrongful information."
:Thirteen minutes later, he replaced the article George W. Bush with "POOP LOL OMG" — BRIAN0918 • 2007-07-03 13:59Z
::An hour later, George Bush pooped, laughed, and prayed. Fox News carried an exclusive article on the clairvoyant IP.-Wafulz 14:30, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: LOL Tree Kittens 02:49, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Shopping Centers/Anchors and tenants

message: This essay emerged from prior discussions at: Tenant listing, Anchor and Tenant Lists, and Anchors and tenants.  Skeezix1000 14:11, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Prior discussions

message: I don't know how you got here, but it is great! It prevents gratuitous commercialism and spam in articles of this type. I wish the editors who came up with this would now address themselves to Wikipedia:WikiProject Business and Economics and Wikipedia:WikiProject Ski. Promotion, spam and commercialism are the order of the day there. Student7 (talk) 12:36, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Plaudit

message: Malls have changed dramatically since this consensus has been reached, it makes sense to me that a clear indicator of a malls vibrancy would be to include more than just anchor retailers but a up to several additional name brand tenants in a separate sentence. Thoughts? Stupidcupid6 (talk) 00:09, 24 September 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Such laundry lists of tenants never appear to add anything to the article, nor can I see how such a list would demonstrate the "vibrancy" of a mall, even with sourcing that goes beyond a mall directory. Alansohn (talk) 12:51, 24 September 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I beg to differ a malls vibrancy is almost entirely determined by the inline tenants they house. A mall can still have anchors but be a "dead mall" without inline stores which is pretty significant to note. Stupidcupid6 (talk) 16:57, 24 September 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: If it's a dead mall and that claim can be backed up with reliable and verifiable sources, I agree that those details should be included. Alansohn (talk) 11:43, 26 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  In line tenants
Category talk:Insects of Australia

message: Given the size, it might be a good idea to split off a subcat or two, e.g. beetles. Richard001 (talk) 04:38, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Beetles has been created and I've added :category:hemiptera of Australia, though I've only populated it with a couple of species. One for Diptera would round out the big five. Richard001 (talk) 08:52, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Size
Talk:Stemonitis

message: i think the slime mould page is now a better page than the myxomycota page.  and since the taxonomy, the levels and the names of the clades is a hornet's nest of flux, i think it might not be so bad to use the common name.  
notice from protista the taxobox leads you to mycetozoa leads you to slime mould, and puts stemonitis in myxogastria
eukaryote taxoboxe also sends you to amoebozoa to  mycetozoa leads you to slime mould.
myxomycota is now old hat.  What would you like to do?Wikiskimmer 14:21, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Can I ask the point of listing all the species names with links that in most cases that are redirected back to this page? This is irritating to use. --Joe Fogey (talk) 21:55, 27 October 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: if you look at one of the redirects, such as  you will see why.  These use .  Generally people do not update all the incoming links, so it's best to keep them up ahead of time.  You can also use something like User:Anomie/linkclassifier to see these links better. --Nessie (talk) 16:48, 30 October 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled 2
Talk:Madonna of the Book

message: Hello! This is a note to let the editors of this article know that :File:Sandro Botticelli - The Virgin and Child (The Madonna of the Book) - Google Art Project.jpg will be appearing as picture of the day on August 2, 2017. You can view and edit the POTD blurb at Template:POTD/2017-08-02. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 02:06, 24 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[:File:Sandro Botticelli - The Virgin and Child (The Madonna of the Book) - Google Art Project.jpg]] to appear as POTD soon
Category talk:American people of Scots-Irish descent

message: Copying and pasting my note from Talk:Chester A. Arthur
Scots Irish
Many Americans are unaware the word "Scotch" is a pejorative for a Scotsman. We just had guests from Scotland who confirmed that notion. "Scotch," said they, "is whisky, never people." (Actually, what they said was, "Scawch is whisky, neigh-vaihrr peeep'l.") Here it is online:
USAGE NOTE Scottish is the full, original form of the adjective. Scots is an old Scottish variant. Scotch is an English contraction of Scottish that came into use in Scotland as well for a time (as in Burns's "O thou, my Muse! guid auld Scotch drink!") but subsequently fell into disfavor there. In the interest of civility, forms involving Scotch are best avoided in reference to people; designations formed with Scots are most common (Scot, Scotsman, or Scotswoman), but those involving the full form Scottish are sometimes found in more formal contexts. Scotch-Irish is the most commonly used term for the descendants of Scots who migrated to North America, but lately Scots-Irish has begun to gain currency among those who know that Scotch is considered offensive in Scotland. There is, however, no sure rule for referring to things, since the history of variation in the use of these words has left many expressions in which the choice is fixed, such as Scotch broth, Scotch whisky, Scottish rite, and Scots Guards.
http://www.answers.com/topic/scottish
Now, I can't actually find this line in the article.  :O But I offer this explanation for my reversion. Yopienso (talk) 06:44, 4 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I clicked through here as I have similar concerns, being Scots-English myself. Is there any motion yet to have this renamed as "Scots-Irish Descent"? --Sinnyo (talk) 21:56, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Having been personally corrected by those of Scottish descent, I am surprised that this was not corrected long ago.  Is an RfC necessary to develop a consensus?  I realise many Americans are unconcerned with sentiments across the pond, but this is, after all, not the American Wikipedia, but the English Wikipedia, and we should take care not to offend, when issues are as plain as this.  Just my 2¢.  rags (talk) 03:37, 27 November 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: I have made reference to this topic on the Scittish Project talkpage: maybe that will stir the pot a bit.  These 'cat_talk' pages are not patrolled, I am informed, but the contraction 'Scots' is in use across the project.  Curious that this oversight should persist for so long.  Maybe Chester A. Arthur wasn't such a bad place for this discussion, after all.  rags (talk) 04:20, 27 November 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pejorative
Talk:Meridian Charter Township, Michigan

message: The introductory paragraph includes the census data from 2010 to state the population, whereas the Demographics section of the article clearly includes the census data from 2020 as it relates to the population. I believe it should either be changed, or barring any objections, I would gladly volunteer to do so myself. 2601:405:4000:1F50:985D:80A5:FD96:E336 (talk) 01:09, 30 January 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. One of these days, I'll get around to updating the Demographics section. But someone else may want to do it before me. In which case, be advised that the 2020 Census subsection will be smaller since they only did the racial/ethnic demographics and housing unit count as compared to the more detailed info collected in the previous two censuses. So it will be smaller. Anything additionally info like households, age distribution, etc. would have to be its own annually (or every five-year period) updated "Estimates" subsection in the Demographics section. Criticalthinker (talk) 07:41, 30 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Introductory paragraph?
Talk:The Penal Colony: Stories and Short Pieces

message: Was this specific collection of works originally published in German? The sentence "The Schocken Books edition is translated by Willa and Edwin Muir." implies that there was a previous untranslated edition (or an English edition with different translators). On the other hand, "First published in 1948" implies that there was no edition before the 1948 Shocken Books volume. EALacey (talk) 19:50, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I hope it's clearer now AshcroftIleum (talk) 20:42, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Much clearer. Thanks. EALacey (talk) 21:10, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unclarity over history of edition
Talk:List of mountain peaks of the Rocky Mountains

message: I agree with the change from E+P to E*P. That's one way I often rank peaks for myself. -- Spireguy 17:38, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The Pikes Peak massif and the Longs Peak massif are considered part of the greater Front Range.  The Mount Elbert massif and the Mount Massive massif are considered part of the Sawatch Range.  The Blanca massif is considered part of the Sangre de Cristo Mountains.  Yours aye, Buaidh (talk) 14:53, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Eminent peaks

message: New Entry "Fremont Peak (Wyoming)" - If possible, Please check & adjust new entry => #32 "Fremont Peak (Wyoming)" => 13,751 ft 4,191 m high - if interested, my trip to the peak is pictured at the page top here => "User talk:Drbogdan" - and below - in any case - Thanks - Drbogdan (talk) 15:48, 13 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  New Entry "[[Fremont Peak (Wyoming)]]" - Please check & adjust
Talk:Thyella-class destroyer

message: I'm interested in the end of the Yarrow yards in London. The Wikipedia articles about the Thyella class ships all say they were built by Yarrow 'at Scotstoun' but I'm not sure if the Scotstoun bit is assumption or documented. 
The individual articles (eg Greek destroyer Lonchi) say the ships were 'laid down in 1905' and launced variously in 1907 or 1908. The article on Alfred Yarrow says of the yard's move:
(1906–1908) Yarrow gradually moving his yard northwards to Scotstoun on the banks of the River Clyde on the west coast of Scotland, closing the London shipyard in 1908.
This rather implies that the Greek ships might have been built in London, with the yard closing when they were completed. Can anyone shed light on this? Pterre 18:20, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The source for the information in this article is here. That doesn't mean that the ships weren't actually built in London... but absent any better information, I guess we stick with it? Argos'Dad 19:28, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  I remain extremely sceptical. The same source claims that around 18 other ships were built by Yarrow at Scotstoun between 1893 and 1906 including the Ikazuchi class destroyers and the River class destroyers. But If we believe our own Yarrow Shipbuilders article (and I've found no suggestion that this is wrong), the move to Scotstoun did not begin until 1906 and the London yard did not close until 1908. Pterre (talk) 15:58, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Which yard? 

message: Dear wikipedians, this article can be expanded with content from the similar ones in other languages. I'm working on it, and looking for bibliographic sources to add. any help will be greatly appreciated. Regards, DPdH (talk) 19:43, 14 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article expansion