lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Β-Cryptoxanthin

message: * As there may not be human research that tells Cryptoxanthin (and not other parts of fruit/vegetable containing cryptoxanthin) is beneficial, please mention some Animal studies in the article.
It seems isolated cryptoxanthin is beneficial, if you Google:
Cryptoxanthin rats OR mice.
If they isolated it well enough, not sure about that.
=== Pumpkin ===
* This is a very useful table. Cryto, Alfa-carotene and Beta-carotene:
http://ndb.nal.usda.gov/ndb/nutrients/report?nutsort=334&max=25&offset=0&nutrient1=322&nutrient2=334&nutrient3=321&measureby=g&fg=&subset=0&sort=c&totCount=5177
If you add this to article, please mention "Release 27", as "release 28",29... may have corrections.
- About this USDS table:
-- Is it really so that Pumpkin does not contain almost any Crypto? 
This page show a very different Table about Pumpkin, but they seem to have an old version of USDA database as only source:
http://lpi.oregonstate.edu/infocenter/phytochemicals/carotenoids/index.html#sources
-- Is there a big risk that if I buy some random persimmon (Non-Japanese, for example from Israel), random papaya and random small citrus fruits (that look and taste like mandarins but are not 100% the same fruit), that the crypto content may be significantly less than the average USDA tells?
ee1518 (talk) 18:43, 12 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Health Benefits. 

message: * This is a very useful table. Cryto, Alfa-carotene and Beta-carotene:
http://ndb.nal.usda.gov/ndb/nutrients/report?nutsort=334&max=25&offset=0&nutrient1=322&nutrient2=334&nutrient3=321&measureby=g&fg=&subset=0&sort=c&totCount=5177
If you add this to article, please mention "Release 27", as "release 28",29... may have corrections.
- About this USDS table:
-- Is it really so that Pumpkin does not contain almost any Crypto? 
This page show a very different Table about Pumpkin, but they seem to have an old version of USDA database as only source:
http://lpi.oregonstate.edu/infocenter/phytochemicals/carotenoids/index.html#sources
-- Is there a big risk that if I buy some random persimmon (Non-Japanese, for example from Israel), random papaya and random small citrus fruits (that look and taste like mandarins but are not 100% the same fruit), that the crypto content may be significantly less than the average USDA tells?
ee1518 (talk) 18:43, 12 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pumpkin 

message: The xanthophyll entry indicates that there are at least 2 different cryptoxanthins, alpha and beta. There is no mention of this anywhere in this entry. What is the difference?
69.72.92.213 (talk) 06:37, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  different forms 

message: Synonyms should probably all redirect here, including "kryptoxanthin".
—DIV (115.64.145.215 (talk) 03:18, 13 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Redirects
Talk:James Taylor at Christmas

message: Would appear that the usual format for these kind of album titles is as the above. In ictu oculi (talk) 14:12, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: But even AllMusic calls it James Taylor At Christmas (see http://www.allmusic.com/album/james-taylor-at-christmas-mw0000548113 ) while the Sara Evans album is only known as At Christmas (see http://www.allmusic.com/album/at-christmas-mw0002792579 ). Same at Amazon: https://www.amazon.com/James-Taylor-Christmas-Bonus-Version/dp/B009SIE6AA vs https://www.amazon.com/At-Christmas/dp/B00OD4YO74/ , while Billboard only has an entry for the Taylor album: http://www.billboard.com/artist/304129/james-taylor/chart?f=325 . What sources support the title At Christmas for the Taylor recording? Walter Görlitz (talk) 14:29, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Sara Evans' album is titled At Christmas. James Taylor's album is titled James Taylor at Christmas. I support moving it back to the original page. Kellymoat (talk) 15:30, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

text: The usual format is what reliable sources say it is and, from what I can find, the album is referred to as James Taylor at Christmas. --StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 17:28, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay, as I said no problem, as long as both albums are clearly titled the reader is served. Thanks. In ictu oculi (talk) 20:06, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: [[At Christmas (Sara Evans album)]]
Talk:Dicamba

message: ...For example: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2,4-Dichlorophenoxyacetic_acid#Mechanism_of_herbicide_action
Is it a systemic, or contact defoliant?  etc...?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.133.254.173 (talk) 10:01, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  How does it kill weeds?  

message: I've noticed that many of the pesticidal compounds listed on Wikipedia have a history section.  It seems strange to me that a compound like dicamba, which is nearly 60 years old, would have no such section.  I know it was invented by BASF in 1958, but that's all. Adv4Ag (talk) 22:23, 23 August 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: If you link me some sources I will add a section when I get some spare time. AIRcorn (talk) 23:52, 23 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  What - no history? 

message: The first sentence under "Use as an Herbicide" currently reads "Dicamba controls annual and perennial rose weeds in grain crops and highlands, and it is used to control brush and bracken in pastures, as well as legumes and cacti."
There are invasive species in genus Rosa (e.g., Rosa multiflora), but I can't find much evidence from searching the web or Google Books that "rose weeds" is a term that's actually used. Not only is it something of a linguistic oddity, but it also isn't clear whether the term is intended to mean "weeds within the rose family" or "weeds that grow among roses" (or perhaps something else entirely). 
Dicamba and rose horticulture references seem vague on this question as well. Apparently rose horticulture is a common use of dicamba, but multiple sources also mention that roses are sensitive to dicamba themselves. 
The term that consistently seems to show up in dicamba references is "broadleaf weeds", so I'm replacing the "rose weeds" part with this. But the "rose weeds" text has been around since 2011, so I want to be sure I'm not just blundering around and screwing up text that is generally accepted. 
Parenthetically, this sentence in its current form seems eerily specific for a statement that has no sourcing.
NillaGoon (talk) 18:53, 28 January 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Your change seems to be the better way to go. I'm not sure what was meant at first glance either if they meant Rosaceae or something else. Broadleaf is indeed the more plain language though. Kingofaces43 (talk) 21:47, 28 January 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  What are "rose weeds"?
Talk:Dimethyldioctadecylammonium chloride

message: When I did the initial search I was redirected to dimethyldioctadeccylammonium chloride and distearyl dimethyl ammonium chloride. Neither of which is distearyldimonium chloride.
Mr 63547828 (talk) 11:49, 18 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: "Dimethyldioctadecylammonium chloride", "distearyl dimethyl ammonium chloride", and "distearyldimonium chloride" are all synonyms for the chemical compound described in this article. -- Ed (Edgar181) 12:55, 18 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  What happened to distearyldimonium chloride?
Talk:Jhazmyne's Lullaby

message: This article would probably benefit from citation to support the following claims in the first paragraph:
• Being the notable release that it was, it made a huge impact on the metalcore genre. 
Needs citation to support that it was notable. Needs citation to support that it made a "huge impact" (which is also not very encyclopedic language).
To this day, it is cited as an extremely underrated album that influenced many people and bands to date.
• If it is true that it is cited in that way, examples of those citations should be included.
Panfan71 (talk) 19:08, 26 May 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Citations Needed to Support Claims
Talk:Quantum system

message: I don't think this page should redirect; it's unhelpful to click on "Quantum System" to clarify what a page is talking about and instead be taken to a page describing what Quantum mechanics is.
Yes, I agree, this is unhelpful to me, what is a quantum system?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.141.42.221 (talk) 04:30, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Redirect 

message: We should probably:
 * Define the difference between a normal 'system' and a 'quantum system'.
 * Provide an overview of their function within quantum mechanics (how they help solve problems/explain stuff).
 * Link to well known systems and types of systems (e.g. two-level quantum systems). 
109.158.27.60 (talk) 14:29, 30 December 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  On what this article should discuss 

message: A system is a set of interrelated parts (Bertalanffy et.al.), so systems are elements of our perception, are conceptual, NOT PHYSICAL. Relations usually stand on interactions, which are also subjective perceptions. Interactions are action/reaction instances for each object in the interaction, which implies causality. That is also a subjective perception. See Kant, Russell, Hume, etc.
The current definition "a portion of the universe" is appropriate, but it should be remarked that "a portion" is a subjective approach of the universe, a subjective definition of boundaries (because there are no physical boundaries in the universe). Nevertheless, the term seems quite incoherent within the framework of quantum mechanics. Since things are systems (because things are sets of physically interrelated parts), this is a definition of a "quantum thing": a quantum "whole", a quantum "body", and if interactions are strong, a quantum "solid". Approaching quantum mechanics within a terminology of the macroscopic realm seems a huge contradiction with the QM foundations.
I will not edit the page, I don't know the wikipedia rules.
Rodolfoap (talk) 12:34, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Incoherence of the term 

message: I propose to merge to Quantum mechanics. --Zotur (talk) 09:34, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge to [[Quantum mechanics]]
Talk:Outline of economics

message: See Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)#Major rename proposal of certain "lists" to "outlines".
The Transhumanist 01:28, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Major rename proposal of certain "lists" to "outlines" 

message: See the proposal at the Village pump
The Transhumanist 09:14, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rename proposal for this page and all the pages of the set this page belongs to 

message: I oppose the name change from "Outline of economics".  This page has belonged to a set of pages for years.  The current name of the set is Outline of Knowledge, which has been in place for well over a year (previously, the pages were called "Topic outline of...").  The set of pages share a common format that makes browsing the information in them easier, and the "Outline of" name more accurately describes the nature (and format) of the page.  They are hierarchical outlines, fitting together as branches or branches of branches of an all-encompassing outline of all knowledge.
User:Verbal appears to be engaged in long-term effort to assert his will over the Outline of Knowledge and Outline of Knowledge WikiProject.
To confirm this, look at his contributions over the past year and search for the word "Outline".
Several editors have opposed Verbal's attempts to convert the outlines, but he has ignored us, and continues to edit them in violation of Wikipedia:Tendentious editing.
The Transhumanist 01:16, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Oppose the move 

message: "Outline" is short for "hierarchical outline". There are two types of outlines: sentence outlines (like those you made in school to plan a paper), and topic outlines (like the topical synopses that professors hand out at the beginning of a college course). Outlines on Wikipedia are primarily topic outlines that serve 2 main purposes: they provide taxonomical classification of subjects showing what topics belong to a subject and how they are related to each other (via their placement in the tree structure), and as subject-based tables of contents linked to topics in the encyclopedia. The hierarchy is maintained through the use of heading levels and indented bullets. See Wikipedia:Outlines for a more in-depth explanation.  The Transhumanist 00:05, 9 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Quick explanation of Wikipedia outlines 

message: Branches of economics 41.89.105.2 (talk) 14:50, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Micro- economics
Talk:Corporate haven

message: Should this article be titled "Corporate tax haven" instead of just "Corporate haven"? Britishfinance (talk) 10:33, 5 February 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: @Britishfinance I agree. "Corporate tax haven" has double the google results of "corporate haven" and notable reliable sources call it "corporate tax haven". Jlahorn (talk) 14:20, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

text: I think "corporate tax haven" is clearer. CapnPhantasm (talk) 20:47, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Naming
Talk:Johnny Winter And

message: Why is the title Johnny Winter And? And what? 76.126.29.36 (talk) 01:12, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Explanation of Album Title

message: This article sites three references for the song "Rock and Roll Hoochie Koo" on Johnny Winter's album "Johnny Winter and". All three are used incorrectly here. They all correctly reference Rick Derringer's version of this song on his album "All American Boy". Johnny Winter's version does predate Rick's but sounds almost nothing like the hit version.
1.^ Reached #23 on the Billboard Hot 100 in 1974, making it Derringer's only US Top 40 hit
2.^ The track was also featured on the soundtrack to the 1993 film Dazed and Confused
3.^ is featured in the Xbox 360 version of Guitar Hero II
Our3cats (talk) 02:15, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Three incorrect references to song "Rock and Roll Hoochie Koo"
Talk:Wyndham Hotels & Resorts

message: This article seems like an advertisement, especially towards the end.  It needs to be re-written without the bias.  65.91.252.34 20:01, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This is correct.  I can touch it up but it needs a complete rewrite. 72.73.13.125 (talk) 00:39, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Notes
Talk:Back office

message: Hello, 
As I have edit the page and get the resource from the third website and I want to add the link of that website on the wikipedia page.
So my question is can I add the link on the External link portion? Abhishekdodani (talk) 20:58, 31 August 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: That would depend on the link and if it satisfies WP:EL. However, if the link just so happens to be to ehelpingbusiness.com, webcroz.com, or some other commercial link, the quick answer is likely "no". Apparition11 Complaints/Mistakes 22:57, 31 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Can I add the relevant link in the external link portion?
Talk:Tribute

message: Is there any evidence for the modern tribute information?  It really needs citations.Paladinwannabe2 15:22, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Tribute in the Modern Era

message: *Do not hide the fact. --Bentecbye (talk) 19:13, 7 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Korean POV

message: you deleted　this. What is the reason ?--Propastop (talk) 02:23, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: to [[User:Kuebie]]

message: Can we add a tiny bit about the modern use of tribute in literature for interest, people reading about the Hunger Games may find their way to this page.
The Hunger Games
Idyllic press (talk) 17:15, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Modern literature 

message: Explain using a right up on the  importance of tribute 107.189.31.93 (talk) 07:11, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  History 

message: "The medieval Mongol rulers of Russia also expected nothing more than tribute from the Russian states, which continued to govern themselves" what is that? There was no "russia" or "russian" states in such ancient times, if you want to speak in modern terms than Ukrainian lands suffered and payed tribute the most so refer to them as Ruthenian or Ukrainian states/principalities, but definitely not "russian". 46.118.237.59 (talk) 20:35, 15 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mongol rulers of "russia"?  

message: Maybe answer? 46.118.237.59 (talk) 18:48, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is anyone alive?
Talk:Karma (Pharoah Sanders album)

message: Overall, there are many good points in this article. Facts need to be referenced; for instance, while true that bassist Richard Davis played on Eric Dolphy's Out to Lunch! album, his career is known for far more than that one session. Also, the comment that the lyrics are 'dated' - I guess that no one on Earth after 1969 believes anymore (or would want to believe for fear of appearing dated) that 'the Creator has a master plan,' or that 'mother nature loves us all.' Just hippies trapped in that era.PJtP (talk) 21:50, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Neutrality

message: I'm removing the external link to the jazzsupreme website, as it no longer links. Not sure what the link was intended to demonstrate. Bottre73 (talk) 06:06, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removing defunct external link
Talk:Kenny (album)

message: There is no way "You Turn The Light On" is not a disco track, it's even getting kudos on You Tube for being a funky song. Disco was huge in 1979 and Rogers is a very diverse artist and took influence from it like he did with many other styles. Ludicrous to remove such content from an article on the album.  20:30, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Disco Album
Talk:Free Republic/Archive 8

message: If you guys have some issues, please settle them elsewhere.  You are cluttering up the talk page about this article.  The information about injunctions etc is not important for this (what should be) small, informative article on a website. --PTR 15:34, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Acknowledged, I agree and apologize.  As I mentioned above, I regret stepping into the middle of the squabble and I decline to participate further in that issue. Dman727 16:01, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

text: And yet you decline to remove the clutter you apologize for posting. Eschoir 16:25, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Eschoir, it is normally improper to remove talk page content that is actively being discussed (or even old content for that matter). Some people will attribute blanking of talk page content to hiding, covering up or other nefarious things..all of which would  simply further feed the squabblers.  With that understanding, if you, DeanHinnen or anyone else feel it necessary or proper to remove the text of the public document being discussed, I encourage you to do so with no complaint by me. Dman727 16:59, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm pretty new here, and as loth to remove another editor's copy as I am loth to allow lies about me to go unrebutted and unremarked upon.  But I have been trying to get someone to delete all the guideline-violative posts for days.  I say redact back to Dino's comment about the Free Republic logo. Eschoir 17:21, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Fair enough. You've requested it, I see that DeanHinnen attempted (although it was reverted as overreaching). I'll remove the portion that I posted. Dman727 17:53, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

text: Thank you. Eschoir 17:56, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

text: BFP isn't here, and claiming that he is here would be what we call "trolling," but I'll delete mine, back to where the discussion went astray. Dino 19:03, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Not a soapbox or a blog
Talk:Keynsham (album)

message: "for completists only."? 
I think this is an original album full of good tunes and moments. No demos, acetates, b sid(hidden-tracks)es or studio crack. Hardly antyhing for the "Completists."  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.151.42.6 (talk) 01:47, 28 February 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  I Disagree with th Only Review offered.
Talk:King Cool

message: The immediate description of the album King Cool is curently "King Cool is the coolest man in the world who is also a king."  This looks like possible vandalism.  I will now edit this obviously false descrip out and replace it with "King Cool is the title of the 2nd album by Donnie Iris."  BobCubTAC (talk) 13:25, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Possible Vandalism
Talk:Corydalis

message: It would help readers if the article identified the specific climatic features of those areas that affect the plant's growth.  Doctor Whom 20:16, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree, I will ask the guy who wrote that section. By the way, this is not an article only about Corydalis lutea, which is moreover an older, invalid name (symonym) of Pseudofumaria lutea. I think most of this article should be moved to Pseudofumaria lutea. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Aelwyn (talk • contribs) 15:04, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Florida and the Gulf Coast

message: Looked through the species under the Corydalis category on Wikimedia Commons, found the photos that were clear enough to serve as thumbnails, and added them to the article. There are a ton of photos, so it would be nice to classify the species under sections. — Eru·tuon 05:04, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  To do 

message: This species exists. 75.165.108.238 (talk) 00:47, 31 May 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you for your suggestion. When you believe an article needs improvement, please feel free to make those changes.  Wikipedia is a wiki, so anyone can edit almost any article by simply following the edit this page link at the top. The Wikipedia community encourages you to be bold in updating pages. Don't worry too much about making honest mistakes—they're likely to be found and corrected quickly. If you're not sure how editing works, check out how to edit a page, or use the sandbox to try out your editing skills.  New contributors are always welcome. You don't even need to log in (although there are many reasons you might want to).  The genus is capitalized and both genus and species are italicized, i.e., Corydalis aquae-gelidae. Walter Siegmund (talk) 15:23, 2 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  corydalis aquae-gelidae 

message: *
*
*
*
*
*
--Stone (talk) 20:53, 1 April 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Corydalis cava
Talk:Kingfish (1976 album)

message: Hello!  About these recent edits, it's usually best not to change a track listing from a numbered list to one using a track listing template.  Looking at WP:ALBUMSTYLE#Track listing, it says, "A track listing should generally be formatted as a numbered list.... In more complicated situations, a table or the  template may be a better choice...."  I know that some editors prefer using the track listing template, but converting an existing track listing from a numbered list is generally discouraged, unless it's one of those more complicated situations. — Mudwater (Talk) 22:31, 16 October 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, all good, thanks.  P.S. If you type an at-sign followed by the editors name, that doesn't send them a notification.  Alternatively you can use the  template, which does notify them and automatically adds the at-sign.  This is explained at WP:PING.  — Mudwater (Talk) 22:49, 16 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Track listing