lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Stephen II of Hungary

message: According to Zsoldos' archontology (p. 41.), Stephen ruled Slavonia at the end of the reign of his father, King Coloman (presumably in 1114). Borsoka, do you know any detailed data about this information? --Norden1990 (talk) 11:45, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Jé, tényleg. Köszönet. It is interesting. Zsoldos always sticks to the facts. I think this fact should be mentioned. I will cheque Zsoldos's reference (Diplomata Hungariae antiquissima....). Borsoka (talk) 14:12, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I guess that Zsoldos refers to the same document which is mentioned in the article, but in the article it is dated to 1105. I am not sure, but for the time being it is the only logical approach (for me :) ). Borsoka (talk) 14:17, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Ruler of Slavonia?

message: I read in László Markó's work (2006 edition, I know it's not exactly the best source for that), Stephen II married the daughter of Robert I of Capua, however her first name is unknown. So, the name Cristiana might be a fiction (unreferenced article). And what about Stephen's alleged second wife? Is she really a hoax? --Norden1990 (talk) 11:45, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that her name is only an invention. I am sure that the second wife is only a hoax (Hungarian chronicles emphasize that Stephen did not want to marry), but this is my own view. Borsoka (talk) 14:15, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi.  I reverted the edit by Borsoka regarding the wife being named Cristiana, solely on the basis that the edit included the link to Cristiana's wikipage.  Either we know the name was Cristiana, in which case the current verbiage should stand, or we don't, in which case her name (and the link to the wikipage) should both be removed.  Onel5969 (talk) 12:31, 5 May 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I opted for deleting the wikilink, since the article Cristiana of Capua is obviously OR. Her name is unknown. Borsoka (talk) 14:02, 5 May 2014 (UTC)

text: , the only source of Stephen's marriage, the Illuminated Chronicle, identifies his wife as a daughter of Robert Guiscard of Apulia. Modern historians say that the author of the chronicle was wrong, because her father was an other Norman ruler of South Italy, Robert of Capua. Why does Dworzaczek think that Stephen's wife was not a Southern Italian princess, but a German lady? In works dedicated especially to Stephen II or his age, there is no reference to this alternative view. Why do you think that it represents a significant POV? Borsoka (talk) 12:13, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
replies: text:  I will answered in few days. Kmicic (talk) 20:56, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Wives
Talk:SC Internacional

message: A discussion is taking place to address the redirect :Sport Club Internacional (women). The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 June 27#Sport Club Internacional (women) until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.  Seany91 (talk) 07:30, 27 June 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Sport Club Internacional (women)" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]] 

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: moved to SC Internacional. (closed by non-admin page mover) — mw (talk) (contribs) 21:23, 24 December 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Sport Club Internacional →  – In tandem with the discussion on city rivals Gremio. For some reason, nearly all pages about Brazilian football clubs are written in full, while in any other country, prefixes and suffixes such as "Football Club" and "Sport Club" are in initials. Compare with non-Brazilian clubs: FC Barcelona, FC Bayern Munich, Liverpool F.C., SSC Napoli. As the club's logo clearly says "S.C. Internacional", we do not need the subsequent debate on whether there are dots between the initials. Ironically, Wikipedia has a page on an obscure defunct club from Sao Paulo called SC Internacional (SP), though that team's logo has the name written in full... Unknown Temptation (talk) 19:43, 17 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 17 December 2023
Talk:Philippine Open (golf)

message: If there are any errors, pls feel free to correct, I am not 100% sure about the list of winners, since my only source was the NGAP web site. --Noypi380 13:14, 3 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: The multiple winners list is based on the list of the official winners from the NGAP web site. If there any errors pls correct. :) thanks --Noypi380 15:35, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
Talk:Formula of Concord

message: More work on this article would be appreciated. drboisclair 12:52, 3 November 2005 (UTC)

message: Please leave this link on this page. I am preparing a translation of it, and it contains material not in the regular article. Respectfully reverted by drboisclair 21:02, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Heeding your advice on the translation, I have incorporated the material from it into the main article.--Drboisclair 19:59, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Link to German article 

message: The concord cemented the split with the Calvinists. This should go into the article. --Pjacobi 12:15, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: yes, more historical context, without which neither the motives driving its formulation or the doctrinal statements therein make much sense.  the split with calvinism was already more or less complete. it was drafted more to forestall what the hardline Lutheran confessionalists saw as the inroads of calvinism through philippism concerning the doctrine of "real presence," etc. was also drafted at a time when many Lutheran Princes in Germany were beginning the drift towards the Calvinist 'Second Reformation'.
also maybe a section on the later history of the formula of concord: e.g. which lutheran churches regard it as "canonical," and which look more the Augsburg Confession alone. later united (reformed/lutheran) churches stumbled on the issue of concord (i.e. in Prussia), with orthodox Lutherans refusing to abandon it.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mwd321 (talk • contribs) 18:17, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Missing aspect
Talk:Hickey (band)

message: No big deal, but of course an encyclopedia article isn't supposed to praise the group as a music reviewer would do, but rather explain who the band was in a neutral fashion. -- IslandGyrl 12:52, 3 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Nuclear explosive

message: I'm not so sure about this. The Nuclear Explosion page is much more detailed (although a bit messy still). Shouldn't the merger be the other way round?
Thom2002 12:53, 3 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, it is significantly different. I remember creating the nuclear explosive page a while back specifically because there was a bunch of information about 'nuclear-type things that go bang' that weren't weapons. All sorts of test explosions, project ploughshare, Orion drives, asteroid deflection, proposals for fusion reactors, that sort of thing.  None of those is a nuclear weapon, and unless the distinction is carefully preserved I would oppose a merge at this point. The stuff in this article doesn't talk about the blast effects in detail, and the stuff in nuclear explosion doesn't talk about the devices or what they're used for, so I don't really see a pressing need to merge in any event. Bryan 19:07, 6 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: To clarify, I'm opposed to the merge right now. I can't see how these two articles would be spliced together in such a way that the result wouldn't look like two different articles spliced together. They're on two different subjects. Bryan 19:13, 6 November 2005 (UTC)

text: Thom, Ff, that's the way I wanted it to go. Mixed up the tags (a temporary attack of stupidity I guess). DV8 2XL 19:43, 6 November 2005 (UTC)

text:  Thanks DV8. Bryan: It seems that the nuclear explosive page is all about non-military nuclear explosions. Would it make sense to have some of this content in the the main nuclear explosion pages, and move the rest to a new page specifically about non-military applications of nuclear explosions? That would seems a bit less confusing than the current situation. Thom2002 15:26, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: 2 cents:I also think this page should be merged into nuclear explosion; the title does not make the content clear, and a reader might reasonably expect this type of information to be found in an article titled "nuclear explosion".--ragesoss 04:49, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Merging [[Nuclear explosion]] into [[nuclear explosive]]
Talk:The Futures Academy

message: Permission for material from the Futures Academy website has been confirmed: see User talk:Ekrawczyk. Tearlach 13:16, 3 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: That explains everything, including the promotional tone. The entry needs to describe what the institution does rather than its stated aims.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.189.103.145 (talk) 09:45, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Copyright permission
Talk:Island of Ireland Peace Park

message: Fair play to whoever did this, its an article that was way past time to have written. And I bet the author was'nt even Irish (wager, anyone?). It could be filled out some more, and the main photo could be replaced with another perhaps, but all in all a very decent start. Cheers! Fergananim 13:19, 3 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: (Bows). Thanks muchly! Apologies about the main photo - it was the best of 4 I took whilst there, which tells you too much about my camera skills, I fear :) And you're right, I'm Welsh, though I have asked an Irish editor to give the article the once over! Thanks again for the nice comments! ➨ ❝REDVERS❞ 13:57, 3 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Well Done

message: I really enjoyed it and it was well written
Could you change "First Minister of Ireland Bertie Ahern" to "Taoiseach of Ireland Bertie Ahern" as this would have been the official title at the time
.JG  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 168.140.181.4 (talk) 23:52, 21 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Good Article

message: Why the picture :File:Irish_Peace_Park,_Messines_1917_Battle_plaque.jpg reads 19th Batallion but it's not mentioned? Is it a mistake for 16th? (Photo of the three pillars reads 10th!). ※ Sobreira ◣◥ (parlez) 14:22, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  10th or 19th
Talk:Chris Isaak (album)

message: So was this album released in '86, or '87? ~ Strathmeyer 08:15, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
Talk:Shane Black

message: Is this blurry monstrosity really the best picture we could get of Shane Black? 207.161.215.147 (talk) 21:58, 5 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Photo

message: Umm, no, I'm wuite sure LBS was released long before the year 2002 AD.--Peter Knutsen 07:51, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Last Boy Scout 2002? 

message: At the top of the page it says - "As of 2018, his film Iron Man 3 ranks as the thirteenth-highest-grossing film worldwide.[4]"
Bottom of page under directing - "2013's Iron Man 3, which ranks as the twelfth-highest-grossing film of all time worldwide.[4]"
And the link for both says it's the 14th
This is the problem with ever changing facts like this --TheMightyAllBlacks (talk) 01:44, 30 April 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Iron Man 3: 12th, 13th or 14th highest grossing movie
Talk:Vagueness

message: Consider Lewis' example of a cloud Is this supposed to be David Lewis? His paper is merely referred to as "(1988)"; shouldn't this be in the References section (likewise for Evans's paper)? Best, Andrei Schtoltz 13:29, 3 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  == == Headline text == == 

message: It would be good to have a section on the history of the problem.  E.g. if memory serves, Aristotle discussed the problem of vagueness, giving the example of a sea anemone as a vague case for the distinction between animal and plant since it has (acc. to Aristotle) some of the properties of animals (sense perception) but not others (motility).  I would think there are plenty of other authors who made contributions between then and the contemporary (or nearly so) authors discussed in the current article.Crust 17:35, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: History

message: This article is rather well written, but it does not read like an encyclopedia entry. I suggest that the entry be re-worded and avoid the use of first-person pronouns. ---eniarrol- 16:25, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: On Language

message: I redlinked precisification, which was reverted, and I've just restored. Here's my rationale. Clearly, its surface definition is simply "making more precise", but I think there's clearly more meaning to it as a philosophical/logical term: see ,  and . I don't know enough about these topics to start writing an article on them, but the term is certainly article-worthy. -- The Anome (talk) 11:47, 7 August 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok, I see. There is already an article Precising definition - you might check if your redlink can be redirected to it, and/or whether your references can help to improve it. - Jochen Burghardt (talk) 12:06, 7 August 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rationale for [[precisification]] redlink
Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Horace Mann Elementary School (Oak Park, Illinois)

message: We keep unless there is consensus to delete.  23 to 9 is a wildly, fantastically strong keep by any standards. --Tony SidawayTalk 13:31, 3 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Tony, be fair...  There was that one discounted sock puppet.  Now, if the debate had resulted in 24 to 9 favoring keep, only then would it have been wild and fantastic.  —RaD Man (talk) 15:37, 3 November 2005 (UTC)

text: Um, don't you consider a "consensus" something around 80% or more? Here we have 71% in favor of keeping (which I would consider a consensus), which seems to fall short in your book. While the article certainly is kept (due to lack of consensus or consensus to keep) for you to call it a consensus is slightly hypocritical. -R. fiend 16:05, 3 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Borderline?
Talk:Nirmal Verma

message: *A useful link Nirmal Verma- --Bhadani 13:43, 3 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Verma's affiliation to the "nayi kahani movement" is given some stress in the article and it transpires that it seems to be a movement of some importance. But what are the guidelines or characteristics of that movement? Perhaps someone might want to add a brief explanation (espescially since there is no separate entry on wikipedia from which we could learn more).
Panghuang (talk) 15:12, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  nayi kahani movement 
Talk:Thomas Ralph Merton

message: I did some wikification of the article but didn't edit the content. I was surprised that it speaks of his receiving a BSc and DSc from Oxford. I was not aware that Oxford ever awarded either of those degrees. Incidentally, I studied Physics at Oxford myself and received a BA and an MA. Had I gone on to take a doctorate, I would have got a DPhil. Can anyone shed any light on the accuracy of his qualifications? Bluewave 14:12, 3 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Merton's qualifications
Talk:Frang Bardhi

message: How come from "Blancus" became "Bardhi"? Did he call himshelf "Bardhi"?   Kentavros (talk) 22:14, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Bardhë means white in Albanian. Blancus means white in Latin I believe. He probably never called himself Bardhi in his works since Albanian while having been written, was not a literary language of the time. He was undoubtedly Albanian since he wrote a Albanian-Latin dictionary and also wrote about the customs of the Zadrima region which still survive today as part of the Albanian cultural heritage. Interesting link. --Gaius Claudius Nero (talk) 21:49, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: 'Frang Bardhi. . .(1606–1643). . .' – DOB 1606.
'In 1606 he studied theology. . .' – in other words, he started his studies during the 1st year of his life!!
:Good point IP editor 24.228.116.221. I removed 1606.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 19:33, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  A possible inconsistency.  
Talk:Kapustin Yar

message: While some info in the internet suggested Kapustin Yar as the launch site for Sputnik 1, Baikonur was the launch site according to NASA  Ekem 14:46, 3 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: NASA rulez in this case --jno 11:43, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Sputnik

message: I just watched an interesting show on the History channel about the history of UFOs in relation to this base. If anyone can find information relating to the existence of the so called "Znamensk" secret facility under the base, I think it would be an interesting addition. Viperphantom 02:20, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Znamensk

message: :Regarding the template  used on this page, please join the discussion at Template talk:Spaceport#Shorter names.
:(sdsds - talk) 23:20, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Shorter names in Spaceport template 
Talk:Gamliel II

message: The article was just created yesterday. I know it's currently empty, but we're working on that. Besides - what's the point of deleting no content anyway? Gamliel was one of the rabbis who helpes write the gemara, an is certainly worthy of an article. He was also the nasi (leader of the rabinic assembly), and was later deposed in a coup, and then reinstated. There's plenty to work with, we just haven't gotten around to writing good copy yet. A quick glance at the hebrew page (even if you don't know Hebrew - just look at the length), should convince you that he's certainly worthy of an article. --Bachrach44
:This was tagged as speedy deletion candidate because it originally contained nothing but an interwiki link. To avoid this (correct but maybe misleading to new users) tagging in future, please write at least one full sentence that mentions why the subject matter is of any merit to be included in encyclopedia. I have now removed the speedy tag since this looks legit substub to me. jni 15:20, 3 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks - I'm a little knew here so I'm still learning the protocol. I was planning on writing more, I just hadn't had a chance to yet. (Also there are 6 people named Gamliel so I had to get them straight in my head first :) Next time I'll know better. --Bachrach44 15:48, 3 November 2005 (UTC)
Talk:Kraton (Indonesia)

message: : Trying to keep 'Kraton' clean by creating a Disambig, as the polymer link and see also at the head of the article would be better served by disambig than mix the two!User:SatuSuro 15:00, 3 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Sounds good to me.  I generally don't create a disambiguation page until there are more than 2 possible targets, but that's just my way of doing things, and why I put in the "see also" rather than going to the effort to create the disambiguation page.  scot 16:24, 3 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Why did someone remove the polymer link? Phr 20:52, 31 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: earlier comments
Talk:AC Ancona

message: I do not believe that there is anything that is called the Vatican's bishops conference. Most likely this refers to the Italian bishops conference - since the Vatican does not have a number of ordinaries(bishops) by which to form a national or regional bishops conference.
208.76.138.251 00:18, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vatican's bishops conference 

message: Maurizio Nassi now is a Brescia Calcio player!  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.97.102.198 (talk) 16:29, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Upate needed! 
Talk:Baghavat

message: This page should be merged, with requisite changes, to Bhagwan because Bhagwan is simply the nominative singular form of Bhagavat.
Cygnus_hansa 15:35, 3 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Wilhelm Knechtel

message: Not sure about the following bit. The botanical garden of the National University (the only one around Mexico City at the time) did not open until 1950. Keeping here for the record:
Of his designs, the botanical garden at the university of that city still exists today.
-- Rune Welsh | ταλκ | Esperanza 15:50, 3 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Comment by Rune Welsh
Talk:Bersirc

message: Is this a rumor? There's no "official" sign of a continued version... Would anyone mind citing some references? (I love the 1.4 version, I just need some bugs to be fixed...) // Gargaj 15:51, 3 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bersirc 1.5? 

message: At the afd  it was suggested by one editor to have a merge, which in this cases means replacing the article with a redirect.  Nothing would be merged, it just a redirect.  If this software was seen as not notable enough to have its own article, it would most likely then be removed from that comparison list.  So whether you call it a merge or not, its just a delete by stages, and the AFD closed as no consensus to delete, so please, just let it be.  Dream Focus 12:16, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Against any merge/redirect 
Category talk:Commodity exchanges

message: I just saw where this category was approved for renaming to "Category:Futures exchanges". Although I understand why the change was suggested, I think this would be a mistake for an encyclopedia. A Futures exchange is a paper/electronic invention evolving from  Commodity exchanges which have existed long before the term "Futures" (contracts) existed. The label "Futures" is also a bit of a misnomer because it infers the Exchange deals in Futures only when in reality Commodity Exchanges also deal in "options." In their earliest days, Commodity exchanges actually had a warehouse full of whatever commodity was being traded, they settled disputes between customers over quality etc. (until lawyers got into the act), published books on the commodity etc. The New Orleans Cotton Exchange cannot be categorized as a Futures Exchange but in fact, the New York Cotton Exchange still uses the "Commodity" terminiology, as does Chicago etc. Most industry people still use the terminology because laymen understand what a "Commodity Exchange" is whereas only a limited few have any clue what a "Futures Exchange" is. As such, Wikipedia should stay with Commodity Exchanges and having two categories would make no sense, either. - Ted Wilkes 16:00, 3 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  [untitled]
Talk:Bors

message: who is Sir Bors (Bohort) parents?
As it says in the first paragraph, Sir Bors is the son of King Bors. His mother is Evaine. King Bors' father was named Lancelot the Elder, but I think adding that would just cause confusion.--Cuchullain 07:45, 4 November 2005 (UTC)

message: Dear contributors : I'm currently considering translating this article for Wikipédia in french. Do any of you have objections ?
yours.
Archibald Tuttle 11:37, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: He is not killed when he is struck down by God.--Cuchullain 19:02, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

text: You can't, he's a fictional character.--Cuchullain 03:13, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

text: The demon ladies appear in the Quest du Sant Graal section of the Lancelot-Grail cycle, as well as in Thomas Malory's Le Morte d'Arthur.--Cúchullain t/c 17:54, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Translation

message: What are the sources for Bors's encounter with the demon ladies? CacoDaimon 11:14, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The demon ladies appear in the Quest du Sant Graal section of the Lancelot-Grail cycle, as well as in Thomas Malory's Le Morte d'Arthur.--Cúchullain t/c 17:54, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Demon ladies

message: Any source for this? "Lancelot's men arrive to put down the remainder of the rebellion led by Mordred's sons Melehan and Melou; Lionel is killed by Melehan, and Bors avenges his death."
Melou is, as far as I can tell, an alternative form of the name Melehan. Also, neither Melehan nor Melou are named in Thomas Malory's Morte d'Arthur that I can find. Sgallison (talk) 02:16, 2 November 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Melehan and Melou