lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Trash and Vaudeville

message: My Chemical Romance was not from the 70s or 80s. Something needs to be changed in that statement.
* I agree... I'll go ahead and just take that out for lack of a better idea. Remember to sign your posts! Wobblies 01:39, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

message: I don't see why Hoobastank is important enough to include on this page. There are many other notable bands who are more relevant to Trash who have not been included for the sake of being concise.
Additonally, I am updating the information about Trash's location since it is moving from St Marks to Avenue A. This is notable information in both East Village history and punk rock history....Please take a look and edit what seems too biased. Wendigo.zlato (talk) 00:36, 29 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Relevant info 

message: The description is out of date. Also, I can't find a reliable source to confirm the clothing described. We could instead describe the subcultures who shop at the store? I don't know. It's late. This is good enough for now...Wendigo.zlato (talk) 01:37, 29 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Description 

message: The article currently states: "They are the largest retail store stocked with Tripp NYC clothing, a brand which mirrors the DIY modifications of 80's underground musicians."  Uhmmm this obviously needs to be expanded / elaborated on.  As far as I know, I thought Tripp NYC clothing was by the same folks that ran/run T&V. Centerone (talk) 19:55, 2 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  TRIPP?
Talk:Philippine, Netherlands

message: the dance is also know as frotagunix means life of the creation of dance god in cult  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.87.203.130 (talk) 11:44, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

message: Also, Philip the Handsome doesn't exist.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Not-a-person-hehe (talk • contribs) 11:18, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: *Hi , thanks for noticing. Removed some incorrect parts and fixed a few typos. I'm not really familiar with this subject so maybe an expert here would be needed.   Sub |HMU  11:57, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  There is a lot of vandalism on this page. I'm not dutch, but I think no town would make their motto reeeeee.
Talk:Miss Selfridge

message: It is mentioned in the article that Miss Selfridge had concessions with John Lewis stores in the 1960's would it not be more likely that these would have been in the Lewis's chain of department stores instead as Lewis's and Selfridges were both part of the Clore or Sears retail empire Penrithguy (talk) 16:18, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lewis's or John Lewis
Talk:Stria vascularis of cochlear duct

message: Shouldn't we mention that it is a layer of epithelium? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.107.139.130 (talk • contribs) 15:26, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi ! The current article mentions that it is both a capillary loop and a "somewhat stratified" epithelium, although there are still no references for this (apologies for the lack of references). Thanks! Bibeyjj (talk) 23:40, 11 November 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tissue 

message: Would someone who has a definite answer and is not just guessing please clarify whether the pericyte, melanocyte, and endothelial cells mentioned are the same as the marginal, intermediate, and basal cells that are also mentioned? Thanks. James. 2600:8801:B011:300:8829:B91B:6D9F:B67E (talk) 23:33, 16 February 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi James! The current references clarify that these are different cell populations. The way I have sectioned the article content hopefully makes this even clearer. Thanks! Bibeyjj (talk) 23:40, 11 November 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Clarification needed
Talk:Matt Freeman (Power of Five)

message: ==Untitled==
Please, before you delete this page consider the fact that it is unfinished. I was in the process of checking verifiable sources for valid encyclopeiac content. How about, instead of speedy deleting you give me a hand finishing the article?TheFastestmanalive 14:27, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, I removed the tag but I'm afraid I can't assist with the article. WWGB 14:37, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Deletion =

message: Please, before you delete this page consider the fact that it is unfinished. I was in the process of checking verifiable sources for valid encyclopeiac content. How about, instead of speedy deleting you give me a hand finishing the article?TheFastestmanalive 14:27, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, I removed the tag but I'm afraid I can't assist with the article. WWGB 14:37, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: He's almost never referred to as Matthew. Keep the surname but change the title to Matt Freeman.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 218.215.197.87 (talk) 10:03, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  New title 
Talk:Symphony in F minor (Bruckner)

message: I do not not agree with the content of the phrase "(basically just a tuba short of the scoring for symphonies 0 - 6)".The score of the symphonies included a tuba from 1876, i.e, from the 1878 version of Symphony No. 4 and Symphony No. 5. The score of first version of Symphony No. 4 (1874) and the first concepts of Symphony No. 5 (1876) did not yet include a tuba. The score of the Symphonic prelude (1876) incudes a tuba.Moreover, from the first version of Symphony No. 3 (1873) a 3rd trumpet was added. Consequently I propose to remove this phrase. --Réginald alias Meneerke bloem (To reply) 09:59, 20 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tuba in Bruckner's orchestral works
Talk:Husvik

message: I just made a few corrections - there was another cinema (at Grytviken) and Grytviken is not in Stromness Bay - Stromness is. Also added a bit more info, but don't want to get too verbose as I don't really do enough on Wikipeia to know where to draw the line between interesting and useful facts, and irrelevant trivia.PatLurcock 14:35, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
Talk:Symphony No. 6 (Bruckner)

message: "cover of the Klemperer/New Philahrmonia 2003 recording of Bruckner's Sixth Symphony"
But of course! S.Camus (talk) 19:15, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

message: "Shortest of the symphonies".  Is it really shorter than the ninth?  I imagine it would depend upon the particular performance.  Grover cleveland (talk) 19:00, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Even if the three completed movements of the ninth are dispatched of quicker than the entire sixth, Bruckner  intended the ninth to be longer. For a more apples-to-apples comparison, take the slowest performance of the sixth against the fastest performance of the ninth with the shortest completion of the finale. James470 (talk) 20:36, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Length

message: The following section in the article mentions the Sixth Symphony. Although the reference to the article in footnote 46b is correct, the original citation in D. Hussey's article in the Musical Times, vol. 98 (1957) page 140 refers to the Fifth Symphony, not the Sixth. I guess the citation should be removed here, in this discussion of the Sixth.
"Dyneley Hussey critiqued the Sixth Symphony in a 1957 Musical Times review and reached the same conclusions half a century later writing:
His [Bruckner's] most tiresome habit is his way of pulling up dead at frequent intervals, and then starting the argument all over again...One has the impression...that we are traversing a town with innumerable traffic lights, all of which turn red as we approach them.[46]"
Jahoule (talk) 18:02, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Critical Reception 

message: Following a recent change to musical score syntax, this article has a Score error.  Please can anyone help?  Thanks, Certes (talk) 16:10, 30 August 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Score error
Talk:Symphony No. 7 (Bruckner)

message: Article says:
# Eisler
# Stein
# Eisler & Rankl
# blank
Who arranged the finale? Also, did Eisler do the scherzo and Rankl the trio, or viceversa? James470 (talk) 04:18, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Clarification needed: who arranged the fourth movement? 

message: Just wondering for what silly reason there is no mention of the Te Deum on this page. James470 (talk) 00:36, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Te Deum connection
Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/EUO

message: EUO page deserves to stay. It is a great source for knowledge of the game!
EUO is a online rpg game. If this page is deleted than all pages for all online games should be deleted. - rethinker
:Perhaps you'd like to share your thoughts on the project page, rather than talk page? Marasmusine 15:45, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
Talk:Symphony No. 1 (Beethoven)

message: This symphony was the only one not included in the Australian Broadcasting Corporation's 100 Symphonies of 2009, chosen by popular vote.
:The "only one" what? Yes, that certainly seems trivial. I hope you're not suggesting the above should go into the article. TheScotch (talk) 07:25, 14 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Trivia 

message: This section currently reads as if its author is not a native speaker of English. It needs extensive revision. The trick is navigating between the scylla and charybdis of plagiarism and original research, but if there's anyone with analytical source material reluctant himself to rewrite, I'd appreciate his leaving it--or links or citations--here. Thanks. TheScotch (talk) 07:33, 14 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Description and analysis" 

message: An anon just added an uncited statement that the theme to finale is the same as that of the finale of Haydn 88.  The themes are (with the Haydn transposed to C major):
:Beethoven: g'8 g'8 e'4 c'8 c'8 d'8 d'8 e'16 d'16 c'16 d'16 e'4
:Haydn: g'8 g'8 e'8 e'8 d'16 c'16 b16 c'16 g8 g8 c'8 c'8 d'8 d'8 a'16 g'16 f'16 g'16 e'8
So there are similarities, but its also just a lot of notes from the I chord to establish the tonality.  Is it enough of a similarity to include without a reference?  Does someone have a reference?DavidRF (talk) 00:41, 14 November 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Even just looking at the given notes here there doesn't seem to be any huge corrilation. Beethoven was inspired by Haydn in general sure (ya know, being his student and all) but they are hardly the same at all. ♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ (talk) 01:11, 14 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Haydn 88 connection? 

message: Does anyone have a citation for the Francis II quote? It seems a bit to much like being clever-after-the-fact anecdotal unless there's a good source for it. Hochithecreator (talk) 16:35, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Francis II quote
Talk:Symphony No. 2 (Brahms)

message: I've added a general editing tag, mainly because the descriptions of the seperate movements of the symphony are really quite bad. Apart from the poor grammar (words missing etc.), references to non-existent examples are incorporated in the text. Also, the content is full of subjective statements and is sometimes plain wrong (to name one thing, the first movement is nothing like a waltz and it's certainly not uncommon for symphonic movements to be written in a ¾ time signature).
Jorispet (talk) 11:18, 4 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Indeed. The majority of the offending text, including the references to the non-existing examples, was added in  by 70.65.155.135 on 14 April 2009. The first description  by Arthur Oon on 16 October 2006. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 17:18, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I cleanup the text in terms of grammar, and removed the second-person pronouns and "example" sentences. But because of the way things are written, I am concerned that a large portion of the article may have been copied out of a textbook. Someone who has access to the Walter Frisch book cited in the Bibliography should check that there isn't plagiarism. I checked the other sources and they are fine. --Tea with toast (talk) 20:56, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I made a substantial effort at a cleanup the other day, and looking it over again now, I think it is much more readable, at least. But there is still a good deal of editing needed. I'm going to see if there's anything else that I can do towards that now, though the only source have on hand at the moment is the Dover edition of the Complete Symphonies. -- Mahlerlover1 (talk) 19:13, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

text: Update 21:22, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Editing needed 

message: I don't know about the rules for editing this type of article, so I will just add my comment here and see what happens.
I think it is interesting (and worth including in the article) that the motif for Brahms' Lullaby can be heard throughout the first movement of this symphony.  I think it is most clearly heard around minute mark 15:30.
TheMightyOrb (talk) 19:30, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: This was mentioned in an earlier version of this article until it was revised in July 2011. I've restored that section. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 05:47, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

text: I've been listening to this lately, and I'm noticing there appears to be a reference to Stephen Foster's "Beautiful Dreamer" written circa 1862 (15 years before Brahms wrote his 2nd symphony). It can be heard in the first movement interspersed with the main lullaby theme, but I don't know if it's notable enough to mention in the main article. --Icesword2 (talk) 14:58, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lullaby motif
Talk:Symphony No. 3 (Brahms)

message: Articles such as these usually list for what instruments the symphony is scored.DavidRF (talk) 23:00, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Found it on the IMSLP link. --Blehfu (talk) 03:04, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Request: Instrumentation
Talk:Symphony No. 1 (Mozart)

message: "pales in comparison to his later works"
This is pure opinion.  To use myself as an example, I certainly do not agree with it. Smyslov (talk) 18:01, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I deleted this section for that reason. Yuan Lin (talk) 16:30, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
Talk:Symphony No. 5 (Mozart)

message: Brown says its Op. 6 No. 1.  Sadie says its Op. 1 No 6.  Listening to recordings to verify, it sounds to me like Op. 1 No. 4 (G major).  So, I left out the catalogue number in the article and I'm documenting the descrepancy here.DavidRF (talk) 03:49, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Quoted JCBach concerto
Talk:Symphony No. 29 (Mozart)

message: Looking at the music, the horns have a whole lot of tied whole notes. Nothing fast or ambitious as far as I know- unless the notes are in a particularly high range for a natural horn perhaps? Could this be clarified please by someone more knowledgeable than I at un-valved brass instruments? the infamous rmx (talk) 20:07, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Ambitious horn passages?"
Talk:Symphony No. 32 (Mozart)

message: "Francesco Bianchi´s opera La villanella rapita".  This opera composer did exist  but he does not appear to be in wikipedia.  Noting the reference here in case someone wants to add an opera article at some point. DavidRF (talk) 16:05, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bianchi opera 

message: I'd just like to thank who ever is writing these Mozart symphony pages for the attention to analyzing the sonata forms - especially the first movements - while brief, the analyses have been right on the money and have saved me a lot of time. I would dearly love for all of the classical music pages to include analyses of form. There's a vast number of first movements that confusingly depart from the way sonata form is commonly taught and these pages are very useful for students.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kevintimba (talk • contribs) 00:25, 24 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Kudos - more like this
Talk:Symphony No. 1 (Tchaikovsky)

message: ... namely, he was simply too successful a melodist, and melodies are extremely unamenable to symphonic development.
On the face of it, this seems to be completely untrue.  --  JackofOz (talk) 07:21, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Odd statement

message: I think that we should add more musical analysis to this article. --  Dadaszehon  —Preceding undated comment added 14:03, 12 February 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: The finale really shows some of the reasons why Sibelius, decades later, admitted to feeling a special kinship with the older Russian master. Both the propulsive use of sequences and the writing for brass and strings here come amazingly close to signature techniques of Sibelius, e.g. in Finlandia and in his early symphonies. 188.150.64.57 (talk) 19:44, 29 January 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: Content

message: The statement that this movement is monothematic seems odd. The oboe theme starting in measure 24 is at least a major variation on the opening theme. I might argue that it's unrelated. Beowulf (talk) 18:04, 11 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Form: Adagio Cantabile
Talk:Symphony No. 5 (Tchaikovsky)

message: What exactly does this mean?:
" As well, Tchaikovsky's Fifth Symphony finished before 1891 often the Pathetique Composed before death in 1893. The Significant of Nobility when Tchaikovsky remaining from the Providence to the Providence that only First and Finale Movement is in E Minor and E Major."
The grammar is not good and the meaning is obscure.
Regards Jan 212.118.232.48 (talk) 13:07, 29 April 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Given that it, like many other four-movement symphonies, follows the fast-slow-waltz-fast pattern, I doubt that this was the case. You could say the same for many other symphonies. --jftsang 16:21, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

message: This section is not sourced and is too technical for the scope of Wikipedia. 184.56.207.146 (talk) 06:33, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I would refer to the article on the Goldberg Variations as a possible amount of depth of analysis. --Blehfu (talk) 06:42, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I've started cleaning up the formatting to make the structure more apparent. I'm also tying in references to the more technical terms in the analysis. I think both these things make the section much more understandable and I do not believe that it is too technical. ZoneAlarm5 (talk) 19:35, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Analysis 

message: Music score examples generated with the ... tags in this article are currently discussed at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Classical music#New editor adding loads of gigantic musical notation to articles. Please contribute to that discussion there (not here). Tx. --Francis Schonken (talk) 10:52, 15 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Music score examples 

message: Consistent with many other articles about symphonies on Wikipedia, the "Instrumentation" section should not be last. It should at least come before "Uses of the symphony"; however, I believe it would best be between "Place of the 5th Symphony among Tchaikovsky's later symphonies" and "Description of the work". The section should be moved. --125 Beethoven (talk) 16:57, 4 January 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Order of sections
Talk:Port of Haydarpaşa

message: There has been some confusion as regards Istanbul's ports but this is the main container port AKA as Port of Istanbul on the Asian shore while Galataport is the new cruise ship terminal on the European shore. So I have completely rewritten the Galataport page and removed all the content from the Port of Istanbul page which is actually about the Port of Haydarpaşa but used to have content about Galataport instead. Very confusing, I know, and perhaps the Port of Istanbul page should be deleted altogether - over the port the name is given as Port of Haydarpaşa. But looks as if the port at Ambarlı is also important and yet doesn't have a page. Don't feel able to create it myself as I don't know anything about ships.  Ealinggirl1954 (talk) 20:47, 10 August 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Port of Haydarpaşa
Talk:National Register of Historic Places listings in Coconino County, Arizona

message: Nyttend, please see Winona Site for the NPS name for this site.
For Big Springs vs. Jacob Lake, it doesn't seem helpful to refer the reader to the "town" of Big Springs, which consists of the old Forest Service facilities which are the Historic sites in question. There aren't many inhabited places on the Arizona Strip. Best, Pete Tillman (talk) 03:56, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: As far as Big Springs — GNIS says that it's a populated place, not a locale (i.e. human activity but no population) or "historical" (i.e. former).  As for Winona (Site) — the NHL name is "Winona Site", but the NRHP name is "Winona".  Go to http://www.nr.nps.gov/nrname1.htm and after clicking on the obvious link, put in "Winona" and you'll get "Winona" but not "Winona Site".  It would definitely be more helpful if the NRHP and NHL listing names were always the same, but it's apparently not. Nyttend (talk) 04:29, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Big Springs Ranger Station is part of the North Rim ZCTA, 1400 sq mi, pop 32 (2000 census) Map & data   here and here. Do you really think it's helpful to tell readers that "Big Springs Ranger Station" is located in "Big Springs Ranger Station", population (at a guess) 3? The inhabitants (and post office, such as it is) of the ZCTA are in Phantom Ranch, at the bottom of the Grand Canyon. Which still gets mail by mule train. --Pete Tillman (talk) 06:06, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Many ghost towns are given as being located at themselves; it's not like this is a nonexistent locality that doesn't appear anywhere.  I don't follow your reasoning: these location fields have nothing to do with ZIP Codes or mailing addresses.  If we say that it's Jacob Lake, meanwhile, we have the problem of it being way too vague — isn't this location at least fifteen miles away from Jacob Lake?  Nyttend (talk) 11:45, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: You're right -- Big Springs it is. Sorry --Pete Tillman (talk) 20:56, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry for what?  I wasn't trying to get you to think that you were wrong!  Nyttend (talk) 03:51, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Winona Site & Big Springs
Talk:Dustin Browder

message: There's an external link pointing to a youtube movie titled "Dustin Browder Fan Club". The movie is of poor quality, and does not contain any information about the man, except for the fact that he has at least 1 fan. I'd suggest that the link be removed.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.0.160.110 (talk) 15:34, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Youtube external link? 

message: There are no rocks to be found anywhere in this article. Clearly no text about Dustin Browder can be considered complete without rocks.
Dustin would disapprove. 83.248.248.186 (talk) 00:28, 5 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rocks 
Template talk:FARC-EP

message: Hi.  I just created the page List of FARC Political Hostages.  It is still being written but all the name are in... I think.  Please help out filling out the empty spaces though or making any formatting changes.  Ideally, we could add this page to the template once its completed.  Thanks, Colombiano21 (talk) 03:54, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  New Page 

message: According to the Killed in action page, the term is used to describe the deaths of their own forces by other hostile forces, or by "friendly fire" during combat.  In fact, those declared KIA need not have fired their weapons but have been killed due to hostile attack.  Alas, the "in action" might be misleading after all, but the definition applies.  Colombiano21 (talk) 21:57, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Definition for Killed in Action 

message: The link for Karina on this template is piped to Eldaneyis Mosquera. However, it seems to be far from certain that Karina is Eldaneyis Mosquera. Many reports indicate that Karina is Nelly Ávila Moreno. Simply googling these names will reveal the confusion. Given that this woman tunred herself in, I would think that it would be pretty easy to establish her identity. Does anyone know what it is? --Visitweak (talk) 18:01, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree, seems like you're right.  I'll change it.  Colombiano21 (talk) 01:43, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Karina