lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Casey Jones (band)

message: This article was deleted once- deletion was proposed because the article presented no indication that this band meets WP:MUSIC guidelines for inclusion.  I had replaced the article with the deleted page template, but a did a bit of poking.  AMG did review their first record here.  I don't have much opinion yet on whether they meet the guideline but the appear to be in the right ballpark, so I undid the "deletedpage" template.  There's some writing here that probably needs fixed, but it at least looks like having an article on this band is not unreasonable.  Friday (talk) 19:44, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Hyper-encryption

message: I have now completely rewritten this article: it now needs expert review. -- Karada 20:03, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Complete rewrite 

message: I am not familiar with the referenced paper, so I may be missing something, but the "plaintext" description of this "cryptosystem" sounds a lot like an OTP to me. Can anyone explain why this is NOT an OTP with another name?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.28.214.112 (talk) 19:29, 6 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: It definitively is not snake oil. Snake oil would mean that the authors make unfounded claims. This is not the case here. The papers use well defined assumptions and prove their results. The assumptions used in those papers are quite unconventional. E.g. the bounded-storage model assumes that there is a commonly accessible data stream that produces more bits than anyone can store. Such assumptions may make the resulting cryptosystem unpractical for most/all real-world applications, but that does not mean it snake oil. 81.62.29.213 (talk) 16:31, 7 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sounds Snake Oily To Me. 

message: The Article describes a (rather clever) way to have "one time pads". Now, if anybody acts upon some information gained from secret communication, they'd communicate ("make public") the information that they had this information. So the point is kind of moot. That is, up to bullshit.
--Bastiaan Zapf (talk) 17:04, 30 January 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sketchy at best
Talk:Ray Houghton

message: Under Ray Houghton entry
In August 2006, he made a very true comment about Ashley Cole, calling him a liar. Ashley Cole is a liar and all Arsenal fans are pleased to see the back of that lying scumbag.
84.70.68.84 16:49, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Libellous? Slanderous? Defamatory? 

message: Ray Houghton's father was born in Donegal. Millbanks (talk) 22:56, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Irish Roots

message: Ray is a talented golfer and is Talksport's best golf expert next to Bob Bubka .  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.30.108.84 (talk) 17:32, 18 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Golfing .  
Talk:The Howards of Virginia

message: Both the book and the film mention that the Peytons came from Elm Hill.  Like the fictional mansion in the story, the real Elm Hill is now gone, too. 
http://sovahomefront.org/_site_elmhill.php 
rumjal 04:47, 20 November 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: link
Talk:Comparative linguistics

message: Is based on premises widely accepted in cultural anthropology (that there is core vocabulary and that observed language change occurs less quickly in core terms).  It is not, therefore, a strictly linguistic method, but relies on observing speech acts in the field (participant-observation, usually), an area that has to take into account the cultural settings in which language is used.  High church language, for example, in many religions changes way less than the surrounding language of common speech, when institutions provide rigid training for priests, monks and nuns. If these facts are known, they are applicable to the study of language over time.  But they are not strictly linguistic facts (e.g. the facts of the institution of a priesthood or a genealogical or placename chanting society), they are cultural facts.  Thus, the method straddles two disciplines and as such, get criticism from both.  Nevertheless, folks like Greenberg and Ruhlen have been uncannily able to anticipate work like that of Cavalli-Sforza, who goes out of his way to show how glottochronology aligns with research about gene markers.Levalley (talk) 18:38, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Glottochronology  

message: Is that last line in the Pseudoscience section genuine, about Jean-Pierre Brisset's claim that humans descended from frogs, based on the similarity betwen "Frog language" and French?  Either it's a joke (based on the use of "Frogs" as a slur from the French), or it's the most brilliantly lunatic crackpot theory ever.  (The Jean-Pierre Brisset article mentions it too, but the language is a bit strange and informal ("dead serious"), and I cannot access the sole source). Iapetus (talk) 12:32, 28 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Frog language
Wikipedia talk:Requests for feedback/Introduction

message: I suggest moving the Instructions section down below the two "For other..." sections. My rationale is that we want people who are at the wrong page to be directed away as soon as possible, while people who know they're at the right page will read past those two and will come to the instructions quickly enough. This kind of layout is used at Wikipedia:Help desk. — Saxifrage ✎ 19:58, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sounds like a good idea, I've implemented your suggestion. -- Tangotango 04:58, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

message: Hildanknight's original introduction (currently visible on the WP:RFF page) mentions the  template and the New user log as possible venues for asking questions. I removed the two because I thought the intro would become too long. What do other people think? -- Tangotango 14:16, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think we need the bit about introductions for the same reason you give. The second is less clear. I would argue against including it because it is mentioned in most of the  template variations and is probably mentioned sooner at some more relevant pages. Further, anyone looking for general help will be shunted off to more appropriate pages and will likely find answers there, or failing that will find the  convention there. — Saxifrage ✎ 00:53, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think I agree with you. We already have three page-based resources that newcomers can use (the help desk, newcomer's page and the village pump), and they are (at present) much easier to find than RFF. Why don't we put the current proposal version (without the two bullets) up on the main RFF page, and see if people confuse it for a help page? We can decide then what to do. -- Tangotango 08:35, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  {{tl|helpme}} and New user log
Talk:Christopher Winship

message: Bizarre: Google search for "Christopher Winship" -wikipedia gives 12,600 results, while searching for just "Christopher Winship" gives 12,400 results.  Mangojuice 19:59, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Water dimer

message: Arguably, the bond energy shown in kcal should be shown in J or a derivative, since J is SI and kcal is not.
--82.11.45.213 20:04, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Some SI, please

message: If the dissociation energy is as low as 3.4 kJ/mol, what acounts for the high heat of vaporization of 40 kJ/mol? Dan Gluck 17:29, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dissociation energy too low? 

message: The ab initio binding energy between the two water molecules is estimated to be 5-6 kcal/mol, although values between 3 and 8 have been obtained depending on the method. The experimentally measured dissociation energy (including nuclear quantum effects) of (H2O)2 and (D2O)2 are 3.16 ± 0.03 kcal/mol (13.22 ± 0.12 kJ/mol)[5] and 3.56 ± 0.03 kcal/mol (14.88 ± 0.12 kJ/mol), respectively. The values are in excellent agreement with calculations.
Is the "ab initio binding value" in the first sentence the same as the value obtained by "calculations" in the third sentence? If so, does that mean that I should consider 3.16 and 3.56 to be in excellent agreement with 5-6, for this kind of calculation?
Is the "binding energy" the same as the "dissociation energy"?
Why do nuclear effects play a role, other than the mass of the nucleus (I realize this last question is beyond the scope of the article)?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.38.108.161 (talk) 18:37, 12 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Can't understand
Talk:Key Largo

message: move. Andrewa 00:43, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

message: I don't believe a layperson will understand "cancellation" to mean the stamp that indicates origin of a piece of mail.
Also, a cancellation does not necessarily indicate origin and can be as simple as an X. A postmark can be used as a cancellation however. 
See page 10 of: https://about.usps.com/publications/pub186.pdf MM962 (talk) 20:20, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Changing "cancellation" to "postmark" 

message: I added one article (History of Key Largo) as a reference and one to "Further reading". They might both be used to improve the article.MrBill3 (talk) 09:00, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Added a couple of articles
Talk:List of The Dukes of Hazzard episodes

message: The redirect One Armed Bandits(Dukes) has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at  until a consensus is reached.  Gonnym (talk) 07:53, 30 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  "[[:One Armed Bandits(Dukes)]]" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]]
Talk:Ridgewood, New Jersey

message: Yes, yes... I'm living in Ridgewood now as well and would love to see this article built up. Here's a couple things that could help, but what else do you think? I might check out some other good 'town' articles and see what they do.
* More Depth (something beyond census data)
* Couple of good photos
-DjD- 01:51, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Additions 

message: I am not sure how to edit it myself, so I thought I'd leave it here. Under the notable people section, it lists Frankie Muniz as being from Ridgewood. He is from Wood Ridge. Also, it lists Joe Harasmyak as being the coach of Maine, but he is now the defensive coordinator for Rutgers.  Rutgersone (talk) 14:57, 14 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Couple changes to notable people needed 

message: The section on notables is excessively long for this article. That is why I split that part and created a list. My edit has been reverted, so I ask editors to chime in here to achieve consensus. -- Melchior2006 (talk) 12:44, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: No one is harassing you, as I have said before. You do wonderful work for Wikipedia. However, you do try to own articles. Slowly, you are beginning to harass me. So please stop. If you feel harassed in any way, please seek help. I invite other editors' input on the harassment question and on a few other things about Alansohn's Wiki-comportment. I won't, however, stop editing articles because of his scare tactics. Now, to get to the matter at hand: are there any substantial reasons for reverting the Ridgewood split? -- Melchior2006 (talk) 14:48, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

text: In this case the list is obviously much too large for the parent article. If you find someone else to support your opinions, then we can look for other solutions, but right now you are clearly the only voice for merging, which would swamp the parent. -- Melchior2006 (talk) 14:42, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Propose split for notable people from Ridgewood
Talk:Gypsy Sun Experience

message: Nothing stated in this article is in any way verified.  There is external evidence these people played a couple of shows as Gypsy Sun Experience, but nothing to suggest it is an actual band that has done anything other than a couple of small gigs.  No real contention of meeting WP:MUSIC.  Tagged for verification.--Isotope23 20:38, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: It seems verifiability issues are prompting this.  That's not an issue, it's notable on its own and I oppose any merging. --badlydrawnjeff talk 16:49, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: sure. Eusebeus 18:07, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Possible merge

message: Ok, someone removed the merge tag, but the fact remains that this article has gone unverified and unsubstantiated for well over a year. A lengthy AfD discussion has brought no evidence to light that they actually existed (see my comments above) and so this fails Wikipedia's policy of verifiability. I am restoring my original redirect and would suggest that any restoration be accompanied by something that can satisfy the serious WP:V concerns that are outstanding. Thanks. Eusebeus 14:12, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Redirect
Talk:Tracy Yardley

message: There  is currently not much information, except for a long (unverified) quote by Yardley himself. --Austrian 20:41, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Cleanup
Template talk:User ar-5

message: There is a long discussion in Wikipedia talk:Babel that the templates for xx-5 should be up for deletion. There is en-5 and fr-5. The template de-5 is deleted. I can see no use to make an ar-5 template, since there are not so many professionals. Whatever, I'll fix the text to make more like the other ar templates. Anything else is not up to me.  --Sibahitalk 20:47, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: lol,, ya rajal was3 9adrk :P --muhaidib-- (Talk | #info |  ) 22:10, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why is this Userbox here for ?
Talk:United Kingdom police

message: Removed the Bureau du Connétable image, as 
*Jersey constables are not police officers, but elected parish representatives / administrators 
*Jersey is not in the United Kingdom
-- Picapica 20:49, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bureau du Connétable 

message: This page needs to be merged into the main article = Policing in the United Kingdom. --mervyn 15:14, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge needed
Talk:Little Child

message: It caught my attention that the instrumentation encountered here is similar to that found in a couple of hits for April Stevens & Nino Tempo: Deep Purple and Whispering.  I made a little album using the Spotify utility and referred to on Facebook, and featuring those 3 songs for that reason.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 167.102.56.186 (talk) 00:14, 11 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  instrumentation 
Talk:Independent animation

message: I tried to find an article for Mel Brook's "The Critic" (1963) to re-direct that link, but it either doesn't exist, or it's very well hidden.  Anyhow, that link should be removed, since it incorrectly points to the 1994 TV show by the same name. Lurlock 20:56, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Wrong Critic

message: You know something is wrong when there's an article on independent animation that doesn't even mention some of the most important independent animation features in history. Fritz the Cat was the first independent animated film to gross over $100 million in the US. Ralph Bakshi made more successful and important independent animated films than any of the contemporary directors on this list. Matt Stone and Trey Parker don't even acknowledge their own works as real animation. They use cheap-looking animation as an easy form for adolescent jokes - and say so themselves. Why would you mention a pair of non-animators, but not one of the industry's most important figures? (Sugar Bear (talk) 02:57, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Independent animation history 

message: Just a question  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.100.186.169 (talk) 23:50, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Do anime count as independent animation 

message: We got LGBT, but no Black, Asian, Indigenous or even disabled ones as well? Espngeek (talk) 20:10, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: More representations
Talk:Dany Verissimo

message: Shouldn't this article be moved to Dany Verissimo ? Hektor 20:59, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Move ?

message: In the movie Gradiva (C'est Gradiva qui vous appelle) her breasts are huge.  I saw a few pictures of her online from porn movies, and there her breasts were quite small.  So they're not natural any more. 193.71.152.5 (talk) 12:28, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: That doesn't matter. The "natural breasts" part is in the porn star template, and is only relevant to her appearances in porn. She had natural breast the entire time she was in porn, so the description there is accurate. Iamcuriousblue (talk) 14:23, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: You have got to be kidding me.  You have academic rules about tracking breast implants?  Seriously?  --Lockley (talk) 00:57, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It also seems like a bad idea for an encyclopedia to have a policy which systematically misleads people using it, even on trivial matters. Most people are going to assume that information provided is as up-to-date as possible. 71.154.215.50 (talk) 01:20, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Seriously is this even an issue? who cares, she is a good actress and a beautiful woman, and yes she has breasts. it comes with the nature of being a woman. The "plasticity" of her breasts is of little importance and quite frankly who cares? besides breasts do grow naturally and you are far from a finished work of art at the age of 18-19. her breasts may very well have grown on their own accord. *face palm*  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.185.28.150 (talk) 18:33, 4 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Natural breasts?
Talk:Devil in His Heart

message: Two points about the Carolyn Crawford song:  1)  It was actually the B side to her debut single, "Forget About Me" and 2) much more importantly, it's a completely different song, written by Robert Gordy (Berry's younger brother).  It's available on The Complete Motown Singles Volume 3: 1963.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.234.103.87 (talk) 02:58, 26 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Same Title, Different Songs 

message: from ALL songs in the album that their genre's "rock n roll" as wikipedia says, this is the last song to be rock.Pilmccartney (talk) 08:16, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  the genre should be beat not rock 
Talk:Haemophilus

message: The links that Factor X and Factor V follow are misleading. Factor X is hemin and Factor V is nicatinamide adenine dinucleatide. These are not the same factors as in the coagulation cascade.
Haemophilus actually grows better on Chocalate agar and not at all on Blood agar (unless it is satelliting a beta hemolytic colony) The 2 factors Haemophilus needs are within the RBC but it lyse the RBC to get it out.  That is why Chocalate Agar is better because it is made with lysed RBC that have all the factor X and V released.  Limited speciation can also be done with Haemophilus quad-plates.  The external link "Baron's Medical Microbiology" listed in the article discusses Haemophilus's inability to grow on BA. 69.150.225.130 (talk) 22:07, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
Talk:Not a Second Time

message: Neither Paul or George played in this song. John sang all the vocals part and play acoustic guitar, Ringo played drums and Martin piano. McDonald is wrong again, he is always wrong.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 196.40.0.34 (talk) 21:09, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: MacDonald may well be wrong in this case, but that's not the point. We are recording evidence, not facts. Facts are slippery things that have a way of changing, but evidence does not change. If you are so certain that MacDonald is wrong, then it should be easy for you to find evidence to the contrary from a reliable source. You can't cite yourself, and you can't cite fan sites that are nothing more than unschooled opinions from fans, but there are various published sources and if you find one that doesn't agree with MacDonald, add it to the article. MacDonald's info should stay because despite your opinion that "he is always wrong", he's regarded as an expert. He listened to master tapes, etc., and that combined with multiple published works gives him validity. John Cardinal (talk) 02:38, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Mark Lewisohn and Walter Everett are the more accurate sources to date. Both claim Harriosn didn´t play. Lewisohn states Paul didn´t play, and Everett says his bass is barley audible.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.122.146.28 (talk) 22:15, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Personally I find it highly unlikely that at that stage in their career they would have a session at which two of the band members weren't even present (and if they were there, why on earth didn't they play?). But my opinion, and yours, do not matter - what matters are reliable sources. It's up to you to add them to the article.--Pawnkingthree (talk) 11:27, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Paul and George 
Talk:Boys (The Shirelles song)

message: I have expanded the page a little with a relevent quote from McCartney discussing the song in a Rolling Stone interview from October 2005.---- Ally, 9th June , 2006
Could someone add the appropriate inline citation to the Rolling Stone interview? LuciferMorgan 18:52, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

message: OK, there's an infobox for The Beatles' version of the song, but we still need an infobox for The Shirelles version (it's in the name of the article, after all). Democraticmacguitarist (talk) 19:15, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Needs another infobox

message: i think it should be noted that this song is also on the beatles only real live concert album, live at the hollywood bowl.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.44.230.184 (talk) 19:25, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  live version 

message: As this is both a Shirelles song and a Beatles song, (and I'm trying to track down who sang the French version wrongly credited to Sandie Shaw), shouldn't it be called Boys (Dixon/Farell)? Totnesmartin (talk) 18:04, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Per the music naming conventions at WP:SONG#Naming, songs (and albums) are typically disambiguated by performer, usually by the original performer. Indeed, though, there should be, and is, the redirect Boys (Beatles song). Regards--ShelfSkewed Talk 18:28, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Title
Talk:Shoot (professional wrestling)

message: A "legit" match is not necessarily the same thing as a shoot.  Espeically in the past, there have been actual pro wrestling matches which were not totally scripted and which were, one degree or another, "legitimate".  A "shoot" implies blowing off the storyline and "going into business for yourself", or, really messing it up by not selling it or other ways such as getting really injured and unable to follow it.  I suggest no to merge.  Rlquall 21:08, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Also voting no. --Liface 16:26, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Legit match vs. shoot

message: There have been more and more recent worked shoots in the WWE recently. On RAW ast week, Mr. Kennedy brought out a fake Marty Jennety, Razor Ramon, and Diesel to talk about Shawn Michaels.  When the Razor Ramon guy came out, Mr. Kennedy quickly said to him "Thanks for showing up by the way," an obvious reference to Scott Hall's no show at TNA Turning Point the night before.
And Triple H is constantly making obvious referneces to his marriage to Stephanie McMahon including saying he would take out his father-in-law for a shot at the title and and telling Stephanie he would "see her at home...opps, I mean your brother's a gnome."  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.110.211.161 (talk) 01:18, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Recent WWE shoots

message: There's no point in having this article and Shoot (professional wrestling), when this entire article would fit nicely into a small subsection in Shoot (professional wrestling). This would be like having an article for professional wrestling and another for professional wrestler. ♥Nici♥Vampire♥Heart♥ 15:21, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge request 