lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Mary-Claire King

message: This article needs a section about the UPCOMING RELEASE of this semi-biographical movie on Dr. King's work. Particularly this article needs to differentiate between real-world facts and any fiction the movie may introduce into her life history (ex: The theatrical promo for this movie use the phrase "the almost discovery of a cure for cancer". Did King "almost find" such a cure?). 
One might argue that such clarification is the responsibility of the article on the movie however anyone seriously researching the good doctor will not go there first but rather here. The movie article is about fiction. This article is about facts and as such should include debunking of false data. 207.233.90.1 (talk) 21:38, 1 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  fact and fiction -- Decoding Annie Parker 

message: So, an editor (User:Bbbogden) just put in these cited lines (diff), which I removed: 
: King was not on the team that discovered BRCA1. http://www.sciencemag.org/content/266/5182/66  There is an inaccurate statement in Time magazine calling King "the woman who discovered BRCA cancer gene".http://time.com/2802156/lessons-from-the-woman-who-discovered-the-brca-cancer-gene/  King was not on the team that discovered BRCA2. http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v378/n6559/abs/378789a0.html
The difficulty is that the references do not actually support the statements without an intermediate conclusion, and that is not supported here. The first cite about BRCA1 cites to a 1994 Science paper without King; however, King's earlier work identified that a gene was in operation. So this becomes one of those questions that's harder to say: Who "discovered" something, when the "discovery" was multiple steps?  The same point applies to the BRCA2 sentence, which cites to a 1995 Nature paper. The reference to Time magazine is unfortunately "original research", since it claims that the Time magazine article was in error.  (See WP:NOR for more info about the "no original research" policy.)  That description of "error" is itself the factual assertion that needs to be supported here.  
I'm pinging the editor who made these good faith changes, . The problem here is that in each instance, the assertion you're making is an assertion about discoveries and the significance of them.  Those assertions are the sorts of facts / conclusions which need to be supported. The cites you've included in good faith are cites to the underlying documents (the Science & Nature papers, & the Time article) but you're making assertions about those documents.  (Specifically: That the Science & Nature papers are the ones to credit with the "discovery" of BRCA1/2; and that Time is wrong.) I hope this distinction is clear.  What you need at this point is an article about BRCA1/2 that explains the discovery and attribution history, and then we can cite it to make clear what King's relationship to these discoveries is. --Lquilter (talk) 18:54, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  BRCA1 and BRCA2 credit
Talk:Traitor (comics)

message: This article assert no notability. I created this article a long time ago when I first came to Wikipedia (and did not understand the rules), and it has since lingered (I stopped watching it shortly after I created it) with no real world coverage or reliable sources. I'm tagging the article with the notability tag (frankly, because I'm tired of Pixelface constantly trying to rub my face with this article when I oppose the existence of others. Well, Pixel now I'm taking care of it. If notability cannot be established for this article, then we should probably merge its content into one of the GL character lists, or something similar.   BIGNOLE   (Contact me) 13:35, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Notability
Talk:Physics/wip/Archive,forDefinition,2

message: Ok, this is what I have quickly come up with... Krea 01:12, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Krea's lead proposal, 01:12, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

message: Physics is the science concerned with describing nature at the fundamental level, the level of matter and energy. There appear to be stable and universal rules that determine the behaviour of these base constituents, and thereby the behaviour of all systems composed of them. Through observation and mathematical theorization, physicists develop models to characterize and predict this behaviour. Physics has presented many accurate and practical models and theories, but there are still unknown dephts to be explored.
With the advent of the scientific method, physics emerged from natural philosophy as one of the natural sciences. [Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit. Nulla aliquam tempor velit. Nulla arcu turpis, faucibus eu, accumsan non, tempus et, felis. Morbi imperdiet vehicula quam. Sed dolor ligula, pharetra lacinia, lacinia in, vestibulum quis, justo. Quisque lectus nunc, ullamcorper a, venenatis ut, pellentesque ac, turpis.]
Physics is traditionally divided into two major categories. Classical physics includes the fields of mechanics, optics, electricity, magnetism, acoustics and heat, as well as the more recent general and special relativity. Modern physics covers fields which rely on quantum theory, including quantum mechanics, atomic physics, nuclear physics, particle physics, and condensed matter physics. This distinction is fading, as quantum effects are now understood to be of importance even in fields previously considered purely classical.
----
200~ words. The first paragraph might stand on its own, but major historic points and a listing of major subfields (and hence coverage) are surely worth including. The thumb I'd like to use would be bubble chamber tracks. They're very precise, but also lively, almost artistic. The problem is finding a properly licensed image, since we can't claim fair use. Some points:
* "Unknown depths" is too metaphoric for my taste, but another way to say "we have no idea how much more work needs to be done" is lacking. It also implies that problems at the current depth are solved, which is false. Perhaps "but much is still unknown about..."
* The second paragraph should be properly expanded with major historic points.
* Perhaps "...including quantum mechanics, and atomic, nuclear, particle, and condensed matter physics." in the third paragraph, removing the repetition of "physics"?
–MT 22:17, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: [[User:M|M]]'s lead proposal

message: :While not added by Joshua Davis himself, Ancheta Wis has recognized the following proposal and it is re-copied here. Content and comment are seperated. –MT 09:36, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: [[User:Joshua Davis|Joshua Davis]]' contribution 18:29, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
Talk:Gazi University

message: I want to study international relations doctoral in this university . but i dont live in turkey do you have on line course in this university?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.38.12.139 (talk) 04:08, 2 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  study ib this university 
Talk:Pyramid Management Group

message: The Pyramid Company → The Pyramid Companies — See official name on official website. Also how media refers to them. -newkai t-c 03:00, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Add  * Support  or  * Oppose  on a new line followed by a brief explanation, then sign your opinion using ~~~~.
*Support - official name per website. TerriersFan 03:07, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

text: Add any additional comments:
This page is not impartial. "Even with all of these obstacles, the company has come to expand or rejuvenate most of its properties and will no doubt have great success in its DestinyUSA venture." This under the "Expansion projects" section. It reads like something straight off of Pyramid's website. This is, at best, hopeful speculation, and in a more probable reality, it is just wrong, given the number of leases the new expansion to Carousel Mall currently has.  12/16/10.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Monoman38 (talk • contribs) 14:58, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 

message: :Add  * Support  or  * Oppose  on a new line followed by a brief explanation, then sign your opinion using ~~~~.
*Support - official name per website. TerriersFan 03:07, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Survey

message: :Add any additional comments:
This page is not impartial. "Even with all of these obstacles, the company has come to expand or rejuvenate most of its properties and will no doubt have great success in its DestinyUSA venture." This under the "Expansion projects" section. It reads like something straight off of Pyramid's website. This is, at best, hopeful speculation, and in a more probable reality, it is just wrong, given the number of leases the new expansion to Carousel Mall currently has.  12/16/10.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Monoman38 (talk • contribs) 14:58, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Discussion
Talk:Liu Huan

message: wasn't the official theme song of the 1990 Asian Games, which was actually 《燃烧吧，火炬》. It's infinitely popular than the latter though.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.149.159.247 (talk) 21:52, 15 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  亚洲雄风 

message: Could someone reword the "An Inborn Singer" section (or merge it into another section) as clearly has a point of view? 
Liu Huan’s skilled vocals give a deep impression to people. He never received any systematic training in singing, but that did not stop him from singing or composing. He is self-taught. His classmates recall Liu Huan sitting on the stairs of his dorm and playing his guitar singing songs every night until midnight.[1] When he was a student, he always traveled to France. When Liu Huan was in France, contrary to his classmates who spent most time of their time shopping and sightseeing, he always stayed in a bar in search of some inspiration.[2]
Thanks! The Giant Purple Platypus (talk) 23:41, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  NPOV 

message: RuthLiv 23:53, 11 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copy Edit 

message: Well, I believe that there are some grammar mistakes in this article but I am not sure about how to improve it. Could someone who is good at grammar help to improve it?--Tiffa966 (talk) 02:44, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Grammar
Talk:Chaska Township, Carver County, Minnesota

message: Hello... I've found an offensive phrase in the "motto" of this town. Must be vandalism. Unfortunately, I don't know how to fix it...  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.34.113.248 (talk) 03:21, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Motto vandalized 
Talk:Black Rose (BDSM organization)

message: Maybe it was a sign of the times, but in the early 1990s I went to five or six meet-ups and I found many of them to be paranoid and newbie-unfriendly. Admittedly being a single 22 year old with dominant tendencies sucks and single males are the bottom of the food chain at live events.67.142.130.12 (talk) 02:28, 30 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nice to see they're still active 
Talk:Cherry Grove Township, Goodhue County, Minnesota

message: There are at least two places in Southeast Minnesota called Cherry Grove. One is a township in Goodhue County near U.S. Highway 52 northwest of Rochester. The other is a town in Fillmore County southeast of Rochester near U.S. 63. It appears this article has conflated them for a long time, but they are more than an hour's drive apart. Jonathunder (talk) 02:57, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Richer Sounds

message: I can confirm that the citation for "greatest sales per unit area" for the Richer Sounds' London bridge store definitely appears on page 81 in the print edition of Guinness World Records 2000. The company's own website states that this record still stands. I'll be adding the print reference to the main article. --Archstanton (talk) 13:40, 27 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Guinness World Records citation 

message: Whatever happened to their stores in Ireland and the Netherlands ? 192.65.220.75 (talk) 13:34, 30 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Overseas
Talk:Ontario Highway 4

message: *Highway 4A assigned, completely separated by hundreds of kilometres, between Walkerton and Durham on June 22, 1927.
*Highway 4 assigned Elginfield to Clinton on September 14, 1927.
*Clinton to Durham on March 12, 1930
*Port Stanley to Talbotville Royale on May 11, 1930.
*Durham to Flesherton in 1934.
*Flesherton to Singhampton after 1974 but by 1978.
*South of Talbotville Royale and north of Clinton downloaded on January 1, 1998.
-- ʄɭoʏɗiaɲ τ ¢ 02:51, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Refs for later 

message: The route depiction, if intended to represent the current routing, needs revision in the London area.  It no longer follows Richmond's eastward veer, south through the core, west on Stanley, south and west on Wharncliffe to Colonel Talbot Road.  It now turns west at Sunningdale, south on Wonderland to the 401, then currently with 401 to Colonel Talbot where it rejoins the previously designated route. GBC (talk) 18:09, 25 November 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Route depiction needs update
Talk:List of Calcutta metro stations

message: All information on this page is already there with Kolkata Metro. It is suggested that this page can either be merged with it or even deleted. -- P.K.Niyogi 03:12, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge or delete

message: This page presents no new information than available in the Kolkata Metro page. It is terefore requested that it be deleted.
Dvidby0 16:50, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Request for deletion
Talk:Lucius Junius Gallio Annaeanus

message: If Gallio was born c. 5 BC and died 65 AD, his age cannot have been 64, he must have been 68 or 69 years old. John.St (talk) 18:57, 29 October 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gallio's age 
Talk:Collegeville Township, Stearns County, Minnesota

message: I was trying to find a reliable reference for Celestine Kapsner's relationship to Collegeville Township. per his Wikopedia article, he was stationed at St. John's Abbey at Collegeville in the early 1960's. There is no reference for that information in his Wikopedia article and I was not able to find that. Please add if you have the information available. Thank you--BuzyBody (talk) 22:42, 16 October 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Notable people section 
Talk:Milonia Caesonia

message: Oh for crying out loud!!  Attacking your mother's killer is necessarily indicative of a tendency to viciousness?  Wouldn't you?
38.117.238.82 03:54, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The text is a citation obviously. The Roman historians wrote that way. We're lucky having better quality historians today, but sometimes it can be very funny adding up all preposterous statements from the Roman historians just for the humourous effect of the sheer illogics. ... said: Rursus (bork²) 10:05, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: "Young Drusilla, who apparently inherited her doting father's tendency to viciousness, attacked her mother's killer screaming and biting," 

message: (PIR2 M 590) (6-41) I took this out. It is an abbreviation of a ref to a section of a German encyclopedia. It seems to have been put in there by BOT. Abbreviations from classics works out of context are a secret classics code not understood even by classicists. We don't want it. If you can't understand it don't put it in! If someone wants to read the German article and use it as a fully specified ref, go ahead, but it would go in a footnote. Thanks.Dave (talk) 19:16, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Refs

message: Wrong tone. The incredulity of the editor is inserted like a sore thumb and his repetition of "claims" questions the sources in an inappropriate manner. Maybe you are shocked and in disbelief, editor. What you think about it should not be in the article, which is not about your disbelief, but is about Caesonia. So, I'm going to fix the tone. Now, you can't express your own disbelief, but you can express the published disbelief of someone credible in the field. Have you got a ref there? Anyone question the author? If so, do put it in. Thanks.Dave (talk) 19:24, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Tone
Talk:Julia Livilla

message: Wrong link for Gaius Octavius, should be: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaius_Octavius  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.189.188.218 (talk) 01:24, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: I've edited the birth and death dates' formatting as per MOS:DATEUNIFY and MOS:CIRCA. The main body of the article uses "CE" so I decided to defer to that, but the main objective is uniformity. Matuko (talk) 14:01, 3 October 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Date format
Talk:Tumor hypoxia

message: As far as I can tell there is really no reason that hypoxia's effects on glycolysis needs to make up the bulk of this article, or even be in the front section after the lead. May come back and fix this, but if I don't, please feel free to deal with this. Gilded Snail (talk) 22:54, 4 May 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Glycolytic pathway
Talk:Emperor Ming of Han

message: "In this article, it was menitoned about the dream of Emperor Ming of a golden man, etc.  It was mentioned in "Buddhism in China" (another article in Wikipedia) that the story was from Hou Hanshu (後汉书).  In which section of Hou Hanshu is this story to be found, 本纪(ben-ji), 志(zhi),列传(lie-zhuan) or what?
I would be very thankful if someone is able to help. Suminxue (talk) 23:04, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Please Help Me with This Problem 
Talk:Claudia Antonia

message: The present text reads as follows: "Cassius Dio states that Empress Valeria Messalina (out of her fear, of Pompeius being a rival to Britannicus) ordered his execution, so that Antonia could marry Messalina's half-brother to strengthen the Julian blood-line." This makes no sense. For Antonia to marry Messalina's half-brother would strengthen the Claudian blood-line, not the Julian one. In any case, Messalina would have had no interest in strengthening the Julian blood line - but she might have wanted to strengthen the Claudian line, to ensure her own son's succession, as opposed to Nero, whom some people might have considered a better candidate.
In any case, Messalina's aims are pure speculation. The text in Cassius Dio (Book LXI, 30, 6a) simply states that after the death of [Pompeius]Magnus, Claudius gave her in marriage to Cornelius Faustus Sulla, Messalina's brother.
I have removed the phrase about strengthening the Julian blood-line, which as far as I can see has no basis either in the sources or in fact. Anna Lowenstein (talk) 11:06, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Claudia's husband
Talk:Critical Care: The making of an ICU nurse

message: I'm going to remove the deletion tag on this one.
* It is notable: A quick web search shows this series has been heavily discussed in the medical industry.
* Bad style is not a good reason to delete something.  However, this article does need serious attention (which I'm willing to give it).
* I suggest a rename is in order.  How about Critical care: The making of an ICU nurse? Chovain 03:34, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Proposed deletion

message: I am suggesting that this be merged with Critical care nursing. What we presently have is an article about an article. I think this would fit nicely as part of the Critical care nursing article and would provide certain needed support to that page. I'm happy to do the work, just checking for consensus JodyB talk 15:48, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Done JodyB talk 01:38, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Proposed merger
Talk:Toxicodendron vernix

message: "According to some botanists, poison sumac is the most toxic plant species in the United States (Frankel, 1991)." I think this is wrong.  I've just read the book referred to, and though there's oddly no page number given in the reference above, I think whoever wrote that is mixed up. What's actually written is Asa Gray writing, "He stated that Poison Ivy... 'is the most dangerous species, even the effluvium may affect many people.'" (page 65.)
This error was introduced on 12 October 2006 by an anonymous user 168.223.11.242 https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Toxicodendron_vernix&oldid=81071214 Randal Oulton (talk) 17:35, 29 July 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mistaken reference 

message: "In the U.S., it can grow as far west as Wisconsin, where it is found only in the southern part of the state."
It grows in Texas, west of Wisconsin.
I say you guys should burn it! BURN IT ALL!!!!
Mzanime 08:07, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Missleading statement 

message: Does anybody have a access to the Frankel (1991) reference so that the statement in this article--According to some botanists, poison sumac is the most toxic plant species in the United States--can be verified?  That statement does not strike me as plausible considering lethally toxic, indigenous plants like water hemlock.  Perhaps it is an issue of mode of contact--with ingestion being typical in most cases of positioning involving plants versus simple contact with poison sumac.  I could see where ingestion of poison sumac could be lethal.  If so, some clarification of the statement would be helpful.  Pinethicket (talk) 00:15, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Toxicity

message: So is it Rhus or is it Toxicodendron?  The toxicodendron article says that the family is sumac but the genus is toxicodendron, whereas the sumac page says that sumacs are various species of "rhus and related genera".  That seems to an ignorant layperson (i.e. me) to violate the taxonomic ranks on the taxonomy page.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.255.170.233 (talk) 05:00, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Genus?!? 

message: Article should contrast similar species that are not toxic, with suitable field markings to distinguish.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.49.81.207 (talk) 16:10, 7 September 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes that would be a good idea. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 21:31, 7 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Add related non-toxic species 

message: This parenthetical comment unfortunately reinforces a naive misunderstanding of chemical (compounds). How about "...is a mixture of organic compounds..." (see Wikipedia: Urushiol)? 2001:9E8:AE8:4E00:FD1C:DBDF:FF05:C0C5 (talk) 10:11, 29 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Urushiol is the same chemical (though it happens to be natural)..."