lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Forever in Blue: The Fourth Summer of the Sisterhood

message: The layout of this article differs from that of the other books in the series. Which isn't necessarily a bad thing; I'm just making a point. Should we redo this article to match the others, or redo the other articles to match this one? Raven23 02:31, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This article is structured much better than the others.  If you wanted to take the lead and match the others to this one, that would probably be best. --badlydrawnjeff talk 02:34, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, I was thinking we could match the articles, then maybe make a separate page for all the characters. That sound good? Raven23 13:18, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not sure we need a separate page for the characters at this point, but I won't stand in your way if you think it's a good idea.  But a similar layout to this article for the four books is a good idea. --badlydrawnjeff talk 13:25, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, I thought that a separate character page would help people who wanted information on the characters themselves, and it saves us having to put random trivia in each book article. And while I'm on a slightly related subject, I was also thinking we could make a page for the series itself, then do a disambiguation page for the book and film. Raven23 13:34, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: a better route may be to have the page about the series itself, and do the basic character details there.  I worry that people will go after character pages if they exist on their own for now is all, and a blanket series page (Like with Gossip Girl and The Clique series) may be useful.  I may do that now... --badlydrawnjeff talk 13:38, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I see where you're coming from, but there might be too many characters to put them all on the main series page. Raven23 02:44, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Redo the article? 

message: I've been trying to add the links to the character pages for the other books but can't get them to go to the right page.  Anyone have any suggestions? Missjessica254 15:44, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Linking to the character pages

message: omg is this true??! :O:O:O  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.25.178.76 (talk) 15:37, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: ...No way. Where in the world did you get that idea? Raven23 02:42, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Does Carmen Really Get Killed By Julia??! 
Talk:Forging the Sword

message: Any thoughts on the article? Mlsguy0037 (talk) 20:53, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Article
Talk:Formulario mathematico

message: The comment on Peano's pedagogical failure is an interesting one.  I am not sure the link to oral tradition is the right one, though.  Some how this should connect with "didactic transformation" or "didactic transposition".  Tkuvho (talk) 05:39, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Have you noticed the same image used on both lecture and mathematics education. The classroom offerings of teachers continue to be mainstream education.Rgdboer (talk) 01:21, 26 November 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: But Peano also used to give oral classroom presentations.  The question is not whether or not to teach orally, but how to teach orally.  It seems to me that Peano thought that the foundations of mathematics are also the foundations of a young person's learning.  The same thinking was at the bottom of the new math.  The pedagogical failure of both shows the two foundations are not the same.  Didactic transformation is the recognition that mathematics as seen by researchers needs to be transformed before it can be taught effectively in such a way as to relate to the students' intuition and background.  Tkuvho (talk) 03:17, 26 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  oral tradition?
Talk:Cut (gems)

message: Article would be greatly improved with simple image examples of each cut so users don't have to delve into each of the limited number of separate pages. 122.57.12.95 (talk) 09:33, 15 May 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Image examples 

message: The "French Cut" under the "Type" section links to the term 'French Cut' in a Glossary of Cricket Terms and has nothing to do with gems. Is this an oversight or an intentionally bad link?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 47.215.132.126 (talk) 22:57, 20 November 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  French Cut Link
Talk:German Figure Skating Championships

message: To split this page into East and West does not make sense. The West-Germany championships were always called Germans. So Please leave this article as it is.
The East German championships are already scheduled to get an own page. Just be a bit patient. I have all the data, please give me some time. Thank you. Uwe Langer 20:14, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: There is now the page East German Figure Skating Championships. As described in the article German Figure Skating Championships, West Germany continued the German Figure Skating Championships. Uwe Langer 22:00, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: [Untitled]
Talk:Johan (band)

message: Since Johan has broken up, the use of the word current seems wrong to me. What would be a more correct phrasing? Most recent members perhaps? 
ziggyziggyziggy (talk) 08:52, 24 September 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Current members
Talk:Founding Brothers

message: It is odd to only cite "reviews" (if you can call them that) from newspaper type establishments. This is a scholarly book written by an actual historian, not a journalist pretending to have a PhD in history. Reviews should come from scholarly book reviews and not from sources such as the NY Times.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.252.182.148 (talk) 01:39, 25 April 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reviews:  
Talk:Four Arguments for the Elimination of Television

message: I'm all for the elimination of television.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.47.172.216 (talk) 16:23, 15 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Republic Aviation

message: If memory serves, the Republic Rainbow was NOT a turboprop.  It used 4 PW 4360s
Tsaman 04:28, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: I believe Seversky Aircraft Corporation started out in College Point, Queens, and moved to Farmingdale in 1935, taking over the former Sherman Fairchild flying field. DonPMitchell (talk) 01:39, 31 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Location 
Talk:Uttarpara

message: * Those who are interested in developing this page are requested to follow the norms laid down in Wikipedia:WikiProject India/Cities. Please provide a proper reference or source of whatever you add to this page, in order that others can verify the facts from that reference. 
-- P.K.Niyogi 04:29, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Guideline
Talk:Eudialyte

message: quartz can't be associated with eudialyte. Eudialyte forms in silica undersaturated (no quartz) alkaline rocks. Siim 21:30, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Quartz 

message: How is it pronounced? Is it like "dial" or like "deal"? 91.105.33.183 (talk) 16:50, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Quick question 
Talk:Crocodile tears

message: Hi, I am reverting the part about Hillary Clinton's tears for I don't think it is appropriate to mention a politician running in an election as pejoratively in an article that has nothing to do with the campaign. Note that I am not taking any cite in this election, and would do the same for any other candidate in any election. -- lucasbfr talk 13:42, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Surely the issue is whether or not Clinton exhibited this behaviour and whether that is verifiable? People get a free pass just because they are in an election? Skomorokh confer 13:50, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: We cannot verify whether her display of emotion was genuine or not. It's not about giving anyone a pass.--RLent (talk) 18:00, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hillary Clinton 

message: I wouldn't consider it for deletion as it does give encyclopedic context and examples, but it's obviously not a brilliant article.--h i s   s p a c e   r e s e a r c h 14:34, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  This is only just more than a dicdef 

message: The possibilty that the crocodile appears to cry after biting, may come from flushing its second [eye]lid. This seems logical. 
Thanks  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.155.243.76 (talk) 06:15, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Biology 

message: A discussion is taking place to address the redirect :Superficial sympathy. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 November 26#Superficial sympathy until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.  Marcocapelle (talk) 14:59, 26 November 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Superficial sympathy" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]]
Talk:The Go-Between (1971 film)

message: The article (and IMDb) give December 1970 for the UK premiere.  However, the EMI (UK) version has the copyright date MCMLXXI (1971) in its opening credits.  Also, this reference says that a royal premiere was held in Norwich in 1971. Are there any objections to changing the date to 1971? Cheers, Bjenks (talk) 10:35, 13 June 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Question on date of UK premiere 

message: Two things.
What does "very most successful" mean?
BAFTA is a big PR fest, but to call it a "competition" is cheap and ridiculous.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.44.40.176 (talk) 11:54, 8 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  One of the very most successful in the history of the competition
Talk:Timeline of the Hellenic Army

message: This is timeline is modeled on the Timeline_of_the_British_Army; unfortunately, the number of contributors to this Wikiproject is substantially smaller than the number devoted to British military history, and consequently it is developing much more slowly.  This is however a useful article with potential for improvement — and the solution prescribed by policy for such articles is expansion not deletion.  --Jpbrenna 04:36, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think 1.5 years is quite long enough to wait for an article to expand before deleting it - my experience is that most things either get to an usable state in a matter of weeks, before the first burst of enthusiasm runs out, or they languish forever in a non-useful state - I'm happy to be proved wrong on this one. Go for it! --Alvestrand 06:52, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
Talk:Freshwater pearl

message: "Freshadama" is a registered trademark of Jeremy Shepherd, the founder and owner of Pearl Paradise a small company in Los Angeles. Pearl Paradise uses it as the product name for their best freshwater pearls. It is absolutely not an industry accepted term for describing the quality of pearls.  None of the recognized pearl grading and description systems, such as the GIA's Pearl Description System, use this word.
This is advertising a product name in disguise. It is inaccurate and misleading.
Use of this term violates Wikipedia's core principles of NPOV and Verifiability.
Here is the trademark information from the US Patent and Trademark Office website www.uspto.gov:
Word Mark  	 FRESHADAMA
Goods and Services 	IC 014. US 002 027 028 050. G & S: Pearls. FIRST USE: 20060200. FIRST USE IN 
COMMERCE: 20060508
Standard Characters Claimed 	
Mark Drawing Code 	(4) STANDARD CHARACTER MARK
Serial Number 	78880694
Filing Date 	May 10, 2006
Current Filing Basis 	1A
Original Filing Basis 	1A
Published for Opposition 	January 9, 2007
Registration Number 	3222436
Registration Date 	March 27, 2007
Owner 	(REGISTRANT) Shepherd, Jeremiah Paul INDIVIDUAL UNITED STATES 
Attorney of Record 	Christopher J. Day
Type of Mark 	TRADEMARK
Register 	PRINCIPAL
Live/Dead Indicator 	LIVE
Pearlexpert 03:05, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Removed disputed section pending independant sources. Also removed spam links. Vsmith 00:05, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: NPOV dispute The Product

message: Freshwater pearls are not necessarily cultured pearls.
Scotland, Ireland, Austria, Germany and a number of other countries yield natural freshwater pearls, but not necessarily seawater ones. J.P.Lon 19:59, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Cultured?

message: "These smaller factories perform the treatments [2] that are nearly universal to all freshwater pearls. The pearls are pre-treated in a warm and cold chemical solution and then bleached. The pearls that exhibit strong coloration will only go through the treatment." What does this last sentence mean? It's rather ambiguous.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Shadowcrow (talk • contribs) 11:35, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: "...will only go through the treatment"

message: I don't think they can hybridize considering they are in different subfamilies.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ecoeric (talk • contribs) 21:48, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hybridize those two species?
Talk:From Beirut to Jerusalem

message: Seems like if there are two unrelated books, there should be two distinct articles, whether they are stubs or not. KConWiki (talk) 18:55, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Seeing as 3 1/2 yrs have passed since my previous comment on this topic, I am going to assume that no one objects to me splitting this article in two - I am going to leave Friedman's book here, and move Dr. Ang's ( http://www.mei.nus.edu.sg/blog/dr-ang-swee-chais-from-beirut-to-jerusalem ) to From Beirut to Jerusalem: A Woman Surgeon With the Palestinians.) KConWiki (talk) 06:55, 1 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Two books, two articles?
Talk:Thomas Fitch (politician)

message: This phrase occurs in the middle of the paragraph quoted as footnote 21:
but that was in another age than oars
Can someone confirm that the odd spelling of the word ours is inherent in the text and NOT a typo? OR, fix it?
Ed8r (talk) 19:10, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Duly corrected and link to ref provided. — btphelps (talk) (contribs) 00:22, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Defends Brigham Young and church leaders
Talk:Frost and Fire (short story)

message: Sorry I don't know how to tag things properly, but the plot summary needs improvement. This reads more like a blurb that is intentionally avoiding spoiling the plot, and leaves out pretty much the entire second half of the plot.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 144.198.18.10 (talk) 16:35, 20 July 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Plot Summary 

message: the day I was in a fire 41.13.72.184 (talk) 16:55, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  English
Talk:Gemology

message: : There are a lot of errors and omissions in the text that stand to be corrected. The approach to this page should be systematic, i.e., wikified like the pages dedicated to gemstones species. I am an editor for The Gemology Project which is a "wiki."  It can be accessed through http://www.GemologyOnline..com There are other gemologists here who probably don't know about this page yet. I will try to pass the word. Good work on a good start here! T.E. Goodwin 22:47, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Wikification

message: I added this today, since the article has been discussing magnification. This section should concern the use of loupes and microscopes in gem identification and the separation of laboratory-created gemstones from their natural counterparts. Also, a sub-section should address the use of magnification to determine color treatment by analysis of heat-altered inclusions. Go for it! T.E. Goodwin 00:02, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Identification by Magnification

message: The selective absorption and transmission of certain wavelengths of light through a material has little to do with refraction of white light within the material itself.  I find the article misleading on that point.  Does anyone else? Benjamander (talk) 22:20, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Identification by Spectroscopy

message: Everything that an enigma diamond does 116.251.134.104 (talk) 12:21, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Enigma diamond
Talk:Curtis Bros. & Co

message: The article was sourced from the document cited and personal conversations with the great-grandson of George M. Curtis. MikeJKearney 04:39, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: This article survived an Articles for Deletion debate. The discussion can be found here. -Docg 10:31, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Articles for Deletion debate

message: Should the Biography project banner really be here? The article looks like it's really about a company, rather than a person.  — AnnaKucsma   (Talk to me!) 15:16, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I have removed the bio template. Captain panda 23:42, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Biography?
Talk:Fuck You Heroes

message: It is suggested that this page be merged with the main page about Glen E Friedman, since this page is overwhelmingly citations that have to be removed according to Wikipedia's linkfarm policy anyway. It seems to me that this page doesn't contain enough information to stand alone.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hatoulah (talk • contribs) 14:30, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge

message: We read:
:the days when punk rock was just beginning to galvanize itself into a social movement
Oh really? A social movement for what? -- Hoary 15:25, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  A change in social attitudes away from consumerism and conservatism of the participating youth and society in general. Did you think punk rock was just a style of music or a fashion statement? -- SteadyDietofNothing  —Preceding comment was added at 12:32, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Say what?
Talk:Mark of the Devil (1970 film)

message: I think there were about 15 faux sequels to this film.  It would be nice to have a list. --Scottandrewhutchins (talk) 05:09, 24 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Faux sequels

message: This article is way too short and it needs to be expanded, there needs to be information on the film's controversial torture scene, also the plot needs to be expanded in more detail as well as information on the film's production and reception needs to be expanded as well.--Paleface Jack (talk) 22:56, 25 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article needs to be Expanded
Talk:Christy O'Connor Snr

message: I've tried to sort out an important wins section. The HoF list has 24 but includes a spurious Bowmaker Tournament win in 1970. Perhaps some confusion with the Sean Connery Pro-Am win noted in the second list. The lists here: http://briankeogh.squarespace.com/irish-tour-wins/ and http://www.independent.ie/sport/golf/success-story-irelands-list-of-international-champions-26603551.html also have 24 and correctly note a couple of ties. They don't have the Bowmaker but do have Gleneagles Hotel (1959). This is perhaps meant to be the Gleneagles Hotel Foursomes. This tournament was an end of season invitation event, knock-out matchplay with some useful amateurs. It was a handicap event.  O'Connor did play in 1959 but only won an 18-hole consolation event for those knocked-out early. O'Connor won the tournament in 1962 with Noel Fogarty and took the £350 first prize but I'm inclined to regard it as a minor event and have relegated it to the second list, as per the HoF list (which also incorrectly has 1959). Nigej (talk) 08:56, 11 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Important Wins list
Talk:Fugitive Days

message: Who is this book dedicated to?
Ann Coulter claimed on Hannity & Colmes, on October 30, 2008, that this book is dedicated to a number of "cop killers," criminals convicted of murdering police officers.
What is the story behind this?  Is this relevant and accurate? Jessemckay (talk) 04:22, 31 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Prairie Fire, Ayers first book published in 1974 while he was still on the lam, is dedicated to Sirhan Sirhan (RFK's killer), as well to various cop killers and assorted other criminals. Alinsky's book is dedicated to Lucifer, something Coulter wrote a column about. Kauffner (talk) 09:30, 31 October 2008 (UTC)
Talk:Funeral Sermon and Prayer

message: Could we have a version in modern Hungarian, perhaps from :hu:Halotti beszéd?
--84.20.17.84 16:40, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Modern Hungarian 

message: Please see Category talk:Earliest known manuscripts by language. Enaidmawr (talk) 01:04, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The Funeral Sermon and Player is the Earliest known text in Hungarian. That is, there are attested Hungarian written Hungarian words from earlier, but they are individual words embedded into Latin or Greek text. The FS&P is the first continuous text (and its also not a fragment, but is complete). Whether it's a manuscript or not, you can argue; one could say, it's a Medieval Church Latin manuscript with a longer passage of Hungarian text embedded (referring to your discussion at the Category page), but I think, that's too much of a detail. FS&P is not the first attested written Hungarian words, but it's the first attested text written in Hungarian.Szabi (talk) 14:28, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Correct category? 

message: I find it a little odd that it's been "in Budapest since 1813", when Budapest was not a city until 1867. Buda or Pest? Si Trew (talk) 20:31, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  In Budapest since 1813?
Talk:Funes the Memorious

message: I'd suggest that, with the exception of Shereshevskii, this is mere trivia. The two other individuals postdate composition and can tell us nothing useful about the genetics or meaning of the text. Wikipedia is not Funes and should not aim for this tenuous totality.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.106.39.230 (talk) 00:25, 14 April 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  'Actual Persons' 
Template talk:Star Alliance

message: Is the "former members" section necessary? It doesn't provide any information about the alliance's current operations, and a list of former members can be easily obtained from the alliance article. DB (talk) 04:48, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think it is necessary. Ansett 16:55, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  I do too. Jasenlee 01:47, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Former members

message: do we put notes? 24.152.144.132 (talk) 21:43, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  If SAS is leaving, then...
Talk:Information quality

message: It is wrong to define the quality of anything as "a measure of value". It is inconsistent in the next sentence to describe quality as necessarily subjective; there are many objective aspects to quality such as defect rates.
The Wang & Strong framework is not "generally accepted" - it is merely one out of at least twenty that have been proposed. (It is not even the most-cited by IQ researchers and there are significant theoretical problems with it.)
Maintaining separate data quality and information quality pages is confusing for readers and contributors. While the case can be made that they are different concepts, neither is so large or clearly delineated that two pages are warranted.
I propose that the content on this page be merged with the data quality page and a redirection put in place.
Thetan 04:49, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

message: I quite agree that the Wang & Strong framework is not the most generally accepted. It is even not concerned with information quality, but with data quality. That is something different in my opinion. Data quality is concerned with data integrity and factual correctness. Information Quality also has a branch that is concerned with things like 'understandability' and 'useability', which are far more context- and consumer-related. 
I propose that this section is to be replaced with the Naumann & Rolker framework. (Which is concerned with information quality) or the Stvilia framework (which isn't cited that much yet, since it is fairly new)  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Proborc (talk • contribs) 08:01, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merging?
Talk:G. B. Jones (book)

message: Lack of sources and insufficient content issue should necessitate merging this article with G. B. Jones. Mansheimer (talk) 06:41, 8 November 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Proposed merge