lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Headley Court

message: Refer to Wikipedia:Five_pillars John 14:50, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, I've tempered that.  Architecture and setting were thinly described.  Treatment was adjective-rich. And indeed somewhat put something about youths being twats in which was obvious but hardly encyclopedic.- Adam37 Talk 15:43, 19 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Does not conform to basic Wiki standards eg NPOV. 

message: Why 'per year'? Why not 'Number of rehabilitation staff averages around 200'?
Regards to all
Notreallydavid (talk) 09:32, 14 May 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: I think it better for context to give a time frame. It doesn't necessarily follow they were ALL working from one end of the year to the next; some staff could be on short term contracts and those who are Service personnel would move in or out of the establishment at intervals in the nature of the Forces' posting system.Cloptonson (talk) 17:35, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  'Rehabilitation staff average around 200 per year...'
Talk:Édouard Goubert

message: "Violent, sans scrupules, écrasant tous ceux, adversaires ou amis, qui retardaient sa marche au pouvoir, se servant à tour de rôle de la France puis de l'Inde, régnant par la compromission, la corruption et la terreur, il laissé dans toute l'Inde française le souvenir d'un gangster doublé d'un gauleiter." GALLEAN Georges, "La pitoyable fin des comptoirs de l'Inde", Le Monde, 19 août 1954 (quoted in: Balveer Arora, "Les établissements français de l'Inde", Revue française de science politique, Année 1968, Volume 18, Numéro 2, pp. 362-375) --Minorities observer (talk) 20:54, 31 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Should this description be part of the article ? Worthy enough to be translated ? 
Talk:River Yarrow (Lancashire)

message: This is a good beginning for this article but this is nowhere near being comprehensive. Compare this to the FA Larrys Creek. This article includes an entire sections on the Watershed, History, Name, Geology and Recreation. This article currently includes either little or no information on those subjects. My suggestion for a layout of this article would be thus:
*Intro that summarizes the entire article.
*Synonymy - information on the name of the river as well as other names if it has any.
*Course - describe the course of the Yarrow. Much of the information in the current intro would come here. You might also place the list of tributaries here.
*Watershed - information on the area that the Yarrow drains. Plus information on pollution and ecology.
*Wildlife - break this down by Flora and Fauna - both native and alien species.
*History - describe the people who have inhabited the Yarrow's banks throughout time, any uses of the river by these people, etc.
*Current recreational uses.
Additionally, you need more sources. The article currently has one source, but it needs many more. Cheers! *Exeunt* Ganymead | Dialogue? 15:26, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Reasons for Failed GA

message: Following the move of River Yarrow, Scottish Borders to Yarrow Water, I propose that it would make sense to move this page to River Yarrow (which is now a straight Redirect here, formerly a DAB). 
However, this requires an Admin's edit. --Mais oui! (talk) 07:54, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: This seems entirely sensible, and I'd guess it's unlikely to be controversial.  I don't understand why an admin's attention is needed, but if it is a short post on WP:AN should do the trick. Jakew (talk) 10:43, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Is this the page that Admin's forgot? --Mais oui! (talk) 09:23, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed move 

message: I doubt vrey much that the River Yarrow runs through an area once called Abyssinia - this needs to be substantiated.
--Cosmicsqueaker (talk) 07:37, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Abyssinia??
Talk:Holbeach Air Weapons Range

message: *  has requested a move back to RAF Holbeach;  pinged me. Discussion is at the WP:RM/Tech but I have added a note to this page for information. Nightsturm said that RAF Station was the official name of the place and that is what the gate sign still said.
*My answer: "My impression was that the official name was Defence Infrastructure Organisation Holbeach Air Weapons Range (a mouthful!!) since transfer to the DIO in 2006-07. It does not appear to be under the control of the RAF, rather DIO. I would not have moved the page had I believed the official title was still RAF Holbeach. I think we need to have a reliable sources-for-the-site-name compilation, including some sort of photo for the main gate sign!! My guess is that nobody's changed the gate sign, DIO simply isn't worried about what the gate sign says, and colloquially of course everybody in the locality still calls it an RAF station."
*If that is the case we face a WP:COMMONNAME issue: what the people in the locality call it? or what the organisation charts in Sutton Coldfield designate it? Buckshot06 (talk) 04:13, 13 March 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  RAF station or DIO Holbeach AWR? 

message: Dear  this is not an official MOD document, site, or page. We do not maintain "Miscellaneous" notes that have little or nothing to do with this particular site on this site's page. Like the Royal Air Force or Ministry of Defence Wikipedia maintains a hierarchical order of organisational data. Other Air Weapons Ranges are (a) no longer under the control of the Royal Air Force; (b) not intrinsically WP:NOTABLE as regards this particular area of land on the Lincolnshire coast. I removed the listing of other current AWRs and added the data to Bombing range; Defence Training Estate; and Defence Infrastructure Organisation; if I had uncovered reliable sources I would have also added it to RAF Strike Command, which seemingly previously controlled the ranges before DTE. Those are the hierarchical superiors-in-command to the Holbeach site. 
I am about to remove, again, the irrelevant listing of other AWRs from this page. Should you attempt to readd the irrelevant data again, I will raise this with an administrator. This page should be for the history of RAF Holbeach and Holbeach AWR, not for details about other sites hundreds of miles away. Buckshot06 (talk) 07:08, 13 March 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Other air weapons ranges
Talk:RAF Hornchurch

message: RAF Hornchurch did not have a life span of 47 years from 1915, it closed for 10 years after the end of World War 1.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.107.0.10 (talk) 17:18, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Life span

message: *The airship attributed to Lt. William Leefe-Robinson was actually not a Zeppelin but a Schutte-Lanz SL.11. It was also not the first airship destroyed. See Zeppelin for reference. I have updated the text accordingly. Snapper five (talk) 11:21, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  WW1 

message: This is a great article. Well Done to those responsible! Best wishes DBaK (talk) 18:55, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Great article 
Talk:RAF Leeming

message: RAF Leeming is the home of JFACTSU or the Joint Forward Air Control Training and Standards Unit.  Just thought someone might like to add that salient fact!  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.109.66.148 (talk) 11:48, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: JFACTSU

message: Afternoon , I hope you don't think I'm stalking you! Your amendment to the lede of this pages sparked a memory that there's actually a memorial to a downed RCAF Halifax Crew, which flew out of Leeming, at Romanby Golf Course. It's not mentioned in this article or the 427 Special Operations Aviation Squadron one. Perhaps it's worth adding it in to one (or both), I'm just not sure where it would best fit? 
Refs: 
*Memorial tribute to Halifax bomber crew unveiled at RAF Leeming
*LEEMING MEMORIAL - ROMANBY GOLF COURSE - HALIFAX LV836
*Air Crew Fallen Remembered at Memorial Unveiling
-LÒÓkingYourBest(Talk|Edits) 11:45, 25 August 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah-ha! No, I don't think you are stalking me. I'd say input into both articles - the Leeming one could be an incidents/accidents section as there are more to go in there, I just have to source them. Regards!The joy of all things (talk) 12:18, 25 August 2017 (UTC)
replies: text:  I have started the section, feel free to input. Good idea to put these in though! Regards. The joy of all things (talk) 12:18, 25 August 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Happy days! Done! -LÒÓkingYourBest(Talk|Edits) 13:27, 25 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  RCAF Halifax Bomber Memorial 

message: I have modified the Jefford, C.G reference from 2001 to 1988 to match the year specified in the ref & the short refs. But there is a short ref to 2001 - should this be 1988 or is there a reference missing to Jefford, C.G 2001? Keith D (talk) 18:02, 6 July 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi - Thanks for that: it should be to the second edition of Jefford's book which was published in 2001. Best wishes. Dormskirk (talk) 18:32, 6 July 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Jefford, C.G reference

message: Updated article description to reflect official Royal Air Force installation type designation: "Air combat support station." 24.183.93.81 (talk) 03:41, 21 July 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Updated Article Description
Talk:Leuchars Station

message: —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.97.227.153 (talk) 14:42, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Current event status? 

message: I propose that this article be split into two pages, one covering the stations time as RAF Leuchars and one covering the current use as Leuchars station. Both aspects of the Leuchar's history are noteable and I think deserve their own page. Other pages cover RAF stations which have been transferred to the Army have two pages e.g. RAF Kinloss and Kinloss Barracks, RAF Abingdon and Dalton Barracks and RAF Cottesmore and Kendrew Barracks. Thoughts welcome. Thx811 (talk) 18:39, 2 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article split?
Talk:QUT Business School

message: I have removed the marketing copy from this entry. Marketing copy is, by definition not NPOV. Also, in this case, the marketing guff was copied directly from the BGSB website. --Shannonr 01:58, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removal of marketing 
Talk:RAF Little Rissington

message: Can we clear up one mis-statement in this article, namely "It is generally accepted that tunnels were dug for the Royal Observer Corps". The Royal Observer Corps were an above ground aircraft spotting organisation during World War II and never had a need for an underground facility or any connection with RAF Little Rissington. However, there were several highly secret outfits in the UK at the time and to allay suspicions and to divert attention away from their activities the personnel were dressed in ROC uniforms as a cover. Whatever was under Rissington was almost certainly for one of these secret 'electronic warrior' units, but until full disclosure, of the highest classified wartime documents in the year 2045, their identity or purpose will not be known. Whatever, they were definitely NOT Royal Observer Corps personnel. 21stCenturyGreenstuff (talk) 15:06, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I've edited the section to reflect this. However, when trying to add a reference;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_Observer_Corps#Ghosts_in_ROC_uniforms, it points back to the RAF Little Risington page. I've tried the "Cite", "" & "<Reference />" approaches, without the link appearing in the "==References==" section, or anywhere else on the page. Help? What am I doing wrong?Archolman User talk:Archolman 20:02, 23 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Tunnels under Rissington
Talk:RAF Marham

message: The article contains no reference to RAF Marham's role in the immediate post-WWII years, e.g. 1945-1950. Can anyone provide this information? --TraceyR 16:52, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: RAF Marham immediately after WWII?

message: There are problems with this section.  RAF Marham and RAF Narborough both existed at the end of the war, with each actually "bombing" the other at the end of hostilities.  They are not the same airfield. RedCoat (talk) 22:31, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: True different airfields RNAS/RFC Narborough should really have its own article. Problem is that the history can get confusing as Marham uses Narborough's history as its own. It looks like Narborough got to big and the field (now Marham) was used as an overflow. Needs a bit more research and reliable sources. MilborneOne (talk) 22:55, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Looking at maps I get the impression that there may now be overlap, with modern Marham running onto the old Narborough site.  This probably accounts for the confusion! DiverScout (talk) 12:46, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: WW1 History

message: I updated the OC and role of the base. Any questions please feel free to get in touch  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bisonheed (talk • contribs) 00:01, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Little Changes
Talk:Ed Pease

message: Removed the following paragraph from article:
Several of Pease's key staff have continued in public service including Brian D. Kerns who served in the United States Congress from 2001-2003, Greg Goode who served as University Administrator for Indiana State University before entering the Congressional Race in the 8th District, David Clark who has served with the U.S. Department of Transportation and the Office of the President, and Alan Wildman who served as City Administrator for Elroy, WI and presently serves as Village Administrator of Prairie du Sac, WI.
--Jdurbach (talk) 15:37, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Key Staff Section
Talk:Point Me at the Sky

message: --194.217.0.3 (talk) 15:05, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Follow up in ten years 

message: in the "Other Releases" section, the first paragraph says "It was first released in the United States in 1978 on ... "A Harvest Sampler" ..., in an otherwise unavailable stereo mix."
Second paragraph says "There has never been a stereo mix version." Which is right?
92.6.119.251 (talk) 21:19, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Stereo?
Talk:Edward Bishop, Baron Bishopston

message: Becasue: Article redirects from perfectly reasonable name and use of this name is blocking use for American Historical figure of controversial nature
I've been trying to clean up some of the Salem witcraft trials stuff, and Edward Bishop is the name of at least three residents of Salem at least some of whom were related to Bridget Bishop. Some info about them is key to understanding her involvement, and some of this info might be better handled in an article or articles titled with their own names. For the present time I don't quite have the skill to remove the redirect tag and put up a new article, and perhaps it would be better if somebody with a higher degree of ability and authority did this, I think there is no need to take up 2 names for this article, and maybe the more specific name is better for such an important political figure John5Russell3Finley 02:41, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Cleanup
Talk:RAF North Pickenham

message: Despite the claim that no buildings survive, on 3rd November 2014 there was a fire here in what was stated to be one of the former hangars.  DiverScout (talk) 07:11, 5 November 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Looking using satellite imagery it appears there is a T2 hangar left on the southeastern side on the former technical site. Do you have an online link regarding the fire? Gavbadger (talk) 10:47, 5 November 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: No buildings?
Talk:Edward Boyle, Baron Boyle of Handsworth

message: This reminisce identifies Boyle as having worked at codebreaking station Bletchley Park during World War II. The line about being a "temporary administration officer at the Foreign Office" between 1942 and 1945 fits the standard cover story used. Anyone know any more about it? — Matt Crypto 16:10, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Found another source for it; added to the article. — Matt Crypto 16:15, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Bletchley Park?
Talk:Poltergeist III

message: I changed the bit about O'Rourke's death from "you never see" to "is never seen". I feel an encyclopedia needs to be less "personal". Dskzero (talk)  —Preceding undated comment was added at 19:53, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: What was the reaction to the movie from the owners or tenants of the John Hancock Building as it was used as the location for a horror movie? Mic Sap (talk) 22:20, 11 June 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  John Hancock Building
Talk:Edward FitzRoy

message: "It is spelt this way in both Who's Who and the London Gazette." No, it's not, it's sometimes spelt that way in the London Gazette, and usually not. The examples of "FitzRoy" in the LG (                ) outnumber the examples of "Fitzroy" (           ), and as the latter are generally early on in his career or in more informal parts of the LG they can easily be dismissed as typographical errors. The LG, throughout its life, has often ignored mid-surname capitals, and I could find you dozens of examples from any family that consistently uses or used them (FitzRoy, FitzClarence, FitzGerald, FitzMaurice, etc.) where the LG has neglected to do so. Crucially, the vast majority of instances in the LG where FitzRoy's own statements, as Speaker, were quoted, he was named as, and signed as, "FitzRoy" rather than "Fitzroy". His surname is, after all, what he considered it to be, and no amount of typological inexactitudes can change that. He is no different in the fact that he's often referred to as "Fitzroy" to any other member of his family, and I'm going to remove the alternative spelling and note for that reason. Proteus (Talk) 09:14, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If an alternative spelling was used commonly in any source (and Who's Who is a major source) then we should list it, whether it is incorrect or not, since it may be seen. It is ridiculous to allow pedantry to cancel out information. And as to the alternative spellings in the LG being "generally early on in his career or in more informal parts of the LG", the announcement of his appointment to the Privy Council uses the Fitzroy spelling! Hardly either early in his career or informal. -- Necrothesp 10:14, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Untitled
Talk:RAF Swinderby

message: In the first section it mentions that recruit training ceased and moved to RAF Halton in 1993, yet all the citations that follow it are from either 1988 (with no page listed) or 1981. That's not logical. I will try to find an RS to cover this. The joy of all things (talk) 21:12, 31 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Closure in 1993

message: It states that female recruits started at Swinderby in 1976 I believe this is inaccurate as I was at Swinderby in Oct 1982 when the first Female Recruit intake arrived  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:C7F:509B:9E00:48B2:75D1:3C8E:82A0 (talk) 21:43, 10 March 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  WRAF at Swinderby
Talk:RAF Tangmere

message: The article Tangmere includes a couple of sections on RAF Tangmere. These go into great detail about the air station, probably too much detail for what is essentially an article about the village and parish. We also have this article, specifically about the RAF station, which is still classified as a stub. I propose moving the fine details from Tangmere to RAF Tangmere.
Unfortunately, all the information in the Tangmere article is uncited, so it will need someone with access to relevant information to properly perform a merge.   MortimerCat (talk) 20:02, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge from Tangmere

message: It is hard to understand what this section is intended to mean. Although I think I get the drift, I do not understand well enough to re-write, especially as there is no reference to the date of 'there is one that is still in main line order' SovalValtos (talk) 11:36, 13 May 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I have reworded the paragraph somewhat, and included a link to the relevant Wikipedia article. --David Biddulph (talk) 12:30, 13 May 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Good re-write. Even the link does not show it to be in current operation. SovalValtos (talk) 19:18, 15 May 2014 (UTC)
replies: text:  The link shows the status as: "Mainline running, Home base at Southall; C, Operational".  As a matter of course, list articles often contain few (if any) references, but if you want confirmation that she is in regular operational use you could try this. --David Biddulph (talk) 20:29, 15 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  34067 

message: For a time in the early 1960s the school (renamed the Joint Services School for Linguists) was based at RAF Tangmere near Chichester in Sussex, where Mandarin, Polish and Czech in addition to Russian were taught.
The above is taken from the article entitled "Joint Services School for Linguists".
I don't have time to do anything about this now but perhaps one of the regular contributors to the Tangmere article might take it up.
Mikeo1938 (talk) 19:46, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Russian Language Courses at RAF Tangmere
Talk:RAF Topcliffe

message: Article states it is the base for one of the air ambulances. The Yorkshire Air Ambulance article indicates it operates from Bagby Airport, with a BBC ref which says Bagby Airfield. Is RAF Topcliffe now called Bagby Airfield/Bagby Airport? Keith D (talk) 00:42, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: According to the official air ambulance website is says the second helicopter is based at RAF Topcliffe near Thirsk, but I have no idea when it was updated last though. Gavbadger (talk) 01:29, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

text: I have found a better link from 9 july 2012 from the official website: http://www.yorkshireairambulance.org.uk/news/news.php?item=169 saying it is now at Topcliffe. Gavbadger (talk) 01:42, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks. Looks like the Air Ambulance article needs an update and the link adding as a reference here. Keith D (talk) 02:07, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Air Ambulance
Talk:Selma Lagerlöf

message: Can someone provide a reference that indicates the "love relationship" between Lagerlof and Elkan? -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 18:33, 27 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Found one :) -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 17:42, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: And where's the reference or even the metioning of anything justifying the LGB label? Str1977 (talk) 19:19, 2 January 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  LGBT? 
Talk:RAF Valley

message: I am scratching my head as to why the two articles presently exist. RAF Valley is the site and it remains RAF operated, with a £1.5M terminal built on it to provide civilian facilities. The two articles also contain much the same information, with only the civilian debate around why the service to Cardiff should exist. Rgds, --Trident13 12:49, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah, that's better. I can agree with two entries for different aspects, each referring to the other.Pete 13:52, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

text: Nice suggestion HandbrakeTurns - I can agree with that. Rgds, --Trident13 19:15, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Merger proposal - Anglesey Airport into RAF Valley

message: Very short, and unsourced article; it's not clear whether it ever had any separate existence, and RAF Valley seems to be the most logical target for a merge. Rodhullandemu 02:25, 7 November 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Not sure about a merger - I will try and find some sources for Holyhead, not sure of the connection, have we any evidence that Holyhead was parented by Valley. Not really sure if the Marine Craft Units were parented or directly controlled at a higher level. It may be better to have an article on the various MCUs around the country. MilborneOne (talk) 10:23, 7 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge of [[:RAF Holyhead]] 

message: Updated article description to reflect official Royal Air Force installation type designation: "Training station." 24.183.93.81 (talk) 04:25, 21 July 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Do you have a citation for this designation? Busabalc (talk) 12:48, 21 July 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Updated Article Description