lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Suicide Alley

message: This single was reviewed in August 1989 by the New Musical Express, which has led to the belief it was released then. It was in fact released in Autumn of 1988 (as per the Record Collector article), and the first published review was in Jan '89 in Beat the Street. 194.69.166.101 (talk) 16:04, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Release Date
Talk:Christine Angot

message: Angot claims (it is, at least, the principal subjet of Quitter la ville) that she was firt named by her mother's name, Schwartz (a jewish name).
She took her father's name, Angot, when the law permitted it. She was then 14.
Kakk (talk) 20:52, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Angot's name 
Talk:Christine Baranski

message: According to https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/tv/tv-news/the-good-fight-ending-season-6-1235155099/, the Good Fight is ending with season 6 -- just concluded. Yet, this page still has it running till preset. Is there any objection to changing this to 2022? HasanDiwan (talk) 20:29, 19 August 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  End of the Good Fight 
Talk:Onpu

message: Yes, if you type "onpu" into your cell phone, it will give you a musical note. However, the actual meaning includes the dakuten, long mark, small つ, etc. It is crazy to make this an article about cell phones. If I type だな into my cell phone in hiragana, it will give me DKNY as the first choice; this doesn't mean I'm going to write an article about the meaning of "dana" in mass communications in Japan. Talk about emoticons at emoticon. Dekimasu 22:33, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Christine Cushing

message: While this entry appears to be factual and, indeed, contains references, it is written in a tone more akin to an advertising brochure.  Its use of certain terms and its presentation connote enthusiasm, rather than being strictly informational.  I have not altered anything at this time, but I would appreciate the opinions of other editors. Samson3000 (talk) 22:03, 1 May 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Feel free to add the  template to it if you feel that way. Walter Görlitz (talk) 22:10, 1 May 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tone of Article
Talk:Sunday Girl

message: Is there any chance this article could tell us what the lyrics of the song  -  or indeed the title  - actually mean? ACEOREVIVED (talk) 20:25, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

message: Your information that Sunday Girl was released as the lead single from Parallel Lines in Australia may not be correct. I remember the first Australian single from Parallel Lines was Picture This. Sunday Girl was the B-side of the Australian pressing of Heart of Glass. ~~ Eligius (talk) 09:27, 26 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lead Australian Single from 'Parallel Lines'
Talk:Sunshine on My Shoulders

message: In the article, it read that John Denver said that he wrote Sunshine on my Shoulders when it was dreary out and slushy. But, I read somewhere else that he got it from a poem written by Jacquelyn Helton, the girl whom Sunshine was about.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.95.63.5 (talk) 05:57, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: The Story Behind The Track

message: Could someone provide a definitive clarification of this? The infobox here says -- single version 3:18; album version 5:10. Meanwhile, the article on the album John Denver's Greatest Hits states "The version of "Sunshine on My Shoulders" included here is the single version, featuring overdubbed strings", while listing it with time of 5:10. Is this indicating that the single version took the original Poems, Prayers and Promises album version, and added strings to it for the single, or that in the John Denver's Greatest Hits album, strings were added to the single version for this album? (The article on that album documents how a number of songs were re-recorded for it.) For that matter, since the single version ran 3:18, how can it be that version, if it itself runs 5:10?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.186.19.151 (talk) 00:15, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Some confusion
Talk:The Queen

message: It has been confirmed that the title 'Her Majesty the Queen' will be granted to Camilla, Queen Consort at the Coronation, which means that Queen Elizabeth II will no longer be 'the Queen'. Perhaps it might be time that this page reflects this fact. 2A00:23C7:6482:AA01:D9B2:BAE:2750:401F (talk) 16:33, 5 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Camilla will officially be style 'the Queen' on Coronation day 

message: The Queen (meaning Camilla) page on Official Royal Family Website (as opposed to Queen Elizabeth page on said site )
BBC News - King and Queen say thanks for 'glorious occasion'
Will add more as I can find them.  The i has a very good piece but it's only available in print as far as I can see.Romomusicfan (talk) 20:53, 8 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  And so she is 

message: So at what point should Camilla get top billing above the late Liz 2? Romomusicfan (talk) 07:30, 9 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Order of The Queen_s

message: ...before she is just another dead queen and need no longer be singled out for a special mention on this disambig? 2.24.70.133 (talk) 11:28, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Elizabeth II - how long?
Talk:Christine Hamilton

message: I Support the move request. Considering she just changed her name 2 days ago, she is by far better known under her real name. So WP:COMMONNAME applies here and supports the previous article name. TJ Spyke 17:40, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I would also support the move per WP:COMMONNAME since I expect most people know her as "Christine Hamilton" even if that isn't legally her name. Adambro (talk) 18:08, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

text: Definitely rename back to Christine Hamilton, with a redirect from British Battleaxe. Harry the Dog WOOF 11:02, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Especially since on her website she still refers to herself as Christine Hamilton. If sge isn't actually usingthe name, neither should Wikipedia. Harry the Dog WOOF 13:25, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Per the consensus here and WP:COMMONNAME, I have now moved the page back to Christine Hamilton. Adambro (talk) 13:56, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Move request 
Talk:Christine Kane

message: I'm moving unsourced material here. Move it back after citing. Megalibrarygirl (talk) 17:00, 24 February 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unsourced material
Talk:Christine Kaufmann

message: In the article it is said she's German and was born in Germany. Still she's in "Austrian actor stubs" and with that, has a clapperboard with an Austrian flag. Nothing about Austria is said in the actual text. 85.217.36.50 (talk) 15:02, 10 April 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: And what is even stranger: she is said to be born in "Lengdorf, Styria". But when check the articles, they say Lengdorf is in Germany but Styria in Austria. I think that cannot be possible. 85.217.36.50 (talk) 15:07, 10 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: What does ((cn)) mean? Kdammers (talk) 03:38, 24 September 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: . — Wyliepedia 11:53, 28 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  ((cn)) 

message: The infobox photo of Christine Kaufman was taken in 2014, which was three years before her death. She is 69 years old in the photo and obviously a senior citizen. It's logical and common sense that the infobox photo of a movie starlet should show the person when she was in her prime, not shortly before her death at age 72.
I would much rather see a picture of Kaufman when she made "Town Without Pity" in 1961. In that movie, she is a teenager and very beautiful. A picture of a woman when she was in the prime of physical beauty is more marketable than a photo of the same women more than half a century later.
Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis is a good example of how the press tries to show people in their best light. Mrs. Onassis died in 1994 at age 64. In her later years, she had lost most of her stunning physical attributes, which is typical for virtually all women, not just Onassis. When she died, Newsweek Magazine placed her portrait on its front cover. The photo was taken circa 1960 (about 35 years before her death), and she is shown as a beautiful woman. Newsweek knew that a photo from 1960 would sell more copies of the magazine than photo from 1993. That's common sense.
If I had a photograph of Christine Kaufmann from 1960 that wasn't copyrighted, I would replace the 2014 photo with the 1960 photo. Youth sells.  Anthony22 (talk) 16:21, 18 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Infobox could use a  better picture of Christine Kaufmann
Talk:Christine Korsgaard

message: She has been described as "one of today's leading moral philosophers"[1] because of her work in defense of Kantian views in moral theory, and "the greatest contemporary proponent" of "a distinguished philosophical tradition that conceives of humanity as a task."[2] 
[1] https://ndpr.nd.edu/news/24047-the-constitution-of-agency-essays-on-practical-reason-and-moral-psychology/
[2] Melissa McBay Merritt, "Motherhood in Ferrante's The Lost Daughter: A Case Study of Irony as Extraordinary Reflection," Philosophy and Literature, vol. 41, no. 1 (April 2017), 184, 186. 
This is followed by a scholarly parenthetical whose thickets I don't even wish to begin to penetrate: 
(The expression alluding to Kantianism—"a distinguished philosophical tradition that conceives of humanity as a task"—is, originally, from Jonathan Lear, A Case for Irony [Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2011], p. 3, and in Merritt's article Korsgaard is enrolled in this tradition.)
"Because of her work" set me off; it's not normal to see specific causal attributions in grand gestures of platitude. I wondered, what kind of source would actually say such a thing? So I go to the source and it's a book review which opens up with the sentence: 
This volume collects ten influential papers by Christine M. Korsgaard, one of today's leading moral philosophers.
This hardly represents a considered, consensus view. And it's not linked to a "because" statement as far as I bothered to read. 
And now I don't trust the next assertion, and I'm wondering what editorial mindset produced that thicket parenthetical. 
This is more than I can resolve in 60 s, so I simply moved it here, and out of the active BLP spotlight, until it is better considered by those in the know. — MaxEnt 21:38, 12 March 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Puff sentence from lead for review
Talk:Superwoman (Where Were You When I Needed You)

message: Help! I'd like to add a citation for the part in the top section that mentions Stevie Wonder's zodiac sign but I don't see how to edit or edit source.  
-- mz (talk) 16:36, 29 January 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Editing the top section of the article 

message: In the article intro, someone added the two sentences:
Given that no sources were cited for this lyric-meaning attribution, I am removing it. Zelous cat (talk) 15:03, 28 November 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dubious meaning attributed to song
Talk:Sure Know Something

message: The giant, mostly POV paragraph needs references or needs to go.  I'll clean up the rest of the article when I check back on the references. Desirsar (talk) 09:29, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  POV "Review" 

message: "The song incorporates disco music into the usual style of a rock ballad. It is one of two disco rock hits for the band...". While it's true that "Sure Know Something" is a soft rock ballad, it has absolutely no disco elements. The only tracks in "Dynasty" with an undeniable disco flavor are "I Was Made For Lovin' You" and "Dirty Livin'". The rest are rock/pop rock songs. No disco anywhere else in this album. To me, this was written by one of those who think that Kiss became a disco band and that "Dynasty" is Kiss' disco album. "I Was Made For Lovin' You" is their only disco-like hit.Alvabass (talk) 18:13, 13 March 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Biased/wrong statement
Talk:Christine McCafferty

message: I have removed the sentence about the fact that McCafferty was selected through a process that was later contested in the courts, as it is misleading. It implies that the process remains illegitimate and thus makes the MP's place in Westminster seem more controversial than it is. It does not continue to state that political parties are allowed to use AWS until 2015, and thus I consider it to be a violation of NPOV. What'smore, it does not provide any biographical information of relevance about the subject. AJMW (talk) 00:57, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry but it does not suggest the process remains illegitimate in any way whatsoever, it just shows the facts - i.e. that illegal sex discrimination occurred in 1996. The fact is that the shortlists were illegal right up until 2001 - in other words the whole of the term served by politicians elected in 1997, thus it is hugely notable.  The change of the law in 2001 is i totally irrelevant to this discussion anyway as it was not retrospective at all - i.e. it did not seek to excuse and thus did not legalise any of the illegal selections that took place in 1996. To summarise - the law was clearly broken, thus the MPs place in Westminster IS controversial (or at least the first term they served was)- that's why it is notable.--Shakehandsman (talk) 01:52, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: All Women Shortlists
Talk:Surfer Girl (song)

message: Hal Blaine's book says he played on "Surfer Girl", but I wouldn't be surprised if it was Dennis Wilson like this article says.  A citation would be nice...anyone? SlubGlub (talk) 07:59, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Ditto, many years later. Carptrash (talk) 04:42, 18 January 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dennis Wilson Or Hal Blaine?
Talk:Kevin Lynch (hunger striker)

message: Change "Londonderry" to Derry. 2A01:4C8:8A1:410E:2D45:81E3:E8C7:E97 (talk) 09:11, 23 May 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: The article does not use the word "Londonderry", but the title "County Londonderry" - this is as per the  agreement reached in 2004, as explained at at WP:DERRY - "Derry" for the city, "County Londonderry" for the county. - Arjayay (talk) 09:20, 23 May 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 23 May 2021
Talk:Surfin'

message: I was wondering if someone could help me out. The Wikipedia page that has the complete list of songs by the Beach Boys says the producer of "Surfin'" is Nick Venet. This page, however, says it's Hite Morgan. Anybody know for sure?
Bri4daz (talk) 19:23, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: As a Capitol staff producer and A&R man, there's no way Nik Venet would have produced "Surfin'" for an independent label.Andrew G. Doe (talk) 12:54, 2 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Producers

message: A flag on this page asked for editing out some of the excessive quotes. I have done so. Please check and see whether you feel I have cut too much. Hifrommike65 (talk) 21:52, 29 June 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Excessive quotes in the article 

message: James Murphy's book goes into great detail about the myths regarding the song, particularly the recording dates and the apocryphal "Labor Day weekend" story. I began working on redoing this article but probably will never get around to completing what I started, as the story get too complicated and I don't have the necessary free time to invest. Hopefully someone reading this can pick up where I left off (see User:ILIL/sandbox/Surfin'). I can also lend a PDF of the book to anyone interested. ili (talk) 06:43, 16 May 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Factual accuracy
Talk:Surfin' Safari (song)

message: The "Recording" section notes instrumental differences in the official and early versions.  It should also note that the lyrics were different in the early version.  (And it should note that the early version(s) have now been officially released on the "Lost & Found" album).  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.202.33.17 (talk) 17:37, 21 July 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recording
Talk:Christine Pountney

message: This article doesn't have an infobox.  
I recently encountered a handful of contributors who very aggressively claimed that placing an infobox on a BLP article required talk page consensus.  If no one responds, after a reasonable period of time, I will place one here.  Geo Swan (talk) 11:19, 16 June 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, I object. And please note that the ArbCom sanctions (about which you were warned three weeks ago) states that insults and personal attacks, soapboxing and casting aspersions are ... unacceptable. You post, bearing examples of that (as well as being untruthful), breaches those restrictions. – SchroCat (talk) 14:37, 16 June 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  infobox
Talk:Svefn-g-englar

message: "Nýja Lagið" ("new song"), which has not yet been recorded in studio
Are there any (sourceable and verifiable) plans to do so, to justify the use of 'yet' here? It's been several years now, and it may well be that this song will never be recorded in a studio. --Thegooseking (talk) 18:58, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nýja lagið
Talk:Sway (Rolling Stones song)

message: ::Corrected lyrics to "expect" per original recording [] and various lyric sheets.
Calamitybrook (talk) 10:08, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Lyrics

message: I seem to recall that Mick Taylor has claimed credit for writing or co-writing "Sway". Do we have some info about that one way or the other? If it isn't definitely settled, should we just report the claim? Best wishes and have a great day. 69.161.25.98 (talk) 22:25, 27 March 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: I've read Taylor's claim, but no other reports on that, so that's not enough to alter the song authorship in Wikipedia (WP:PRIMARY), as it was some time ago. Now, I would favour including the claim in the article text. Something like Mick Taylor claims that the song was actually written by Jagger and himself, though it is credited to Jagger / Richards and a citation leading to that claim.--Gorpik (talk) 08:52, 28 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Credit to Mick Taylor? 
Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Hornet Mafia

message: Hit number 6 on Google for "hornet mafia" is http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Wiarthurhu How is that verifiable and not original research? Dual Freq 22:43, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's only evidence that even Wikipedia is a place where this term has appeared. WP, by the way, is not often not a very good source, as the difficulty I have had in fixing some stubborn errors demonstrates. --matador300 01:14, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

text: Can you name a Navy official who was in the Hornet Mafia? Dual Freq 10:52, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: What about the AEGIS Mafia or the NTU Mafia? There are a half dozen usenet references on them, certainly some folks disappointed with that decision as well. However, none of them deserves an article. You haven't even named one member of this alleged mafia. Dual Freq 22:33, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

text: Oh yeah, I found a Grumman Mafia note on usenet as well as a couple google hits on Tomcat Mafia. I'd better head off and make a couple new articles. Dual Freq 03:18, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Verifiability via Google

message: So as not to clutter up the votes:
*Comment The sheer number of references, and its relevance to the issue already on  the F-14 article, the controversy over the preference for the F-18 over the F-14 means that this is  just as worth including as the "Fighter Mafia". The only difference is that Hornet Mafia hasn't hit the books yet, and that's entirely possible as some F-18 books have been published that can't be searched from the internet.--matador300 01:23, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: *The sheer number of references...as in 34. Shocking.--Mmx1 01:41, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: *No, you have no idea what you're talking about. The term fighter mafia, as cited by sources on the Light Weight Fighter page, was created by Col. Riccioni to describe himself. Boyd, Christie, and Sprey who were advocating the use of E-M to design fighters...within the Air Force. Hornet mafia is a contraption of random internet users. --Mmx1 20:09, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

text: The difference between "hornet mafia" and "fighter mafia" and "vast right-wing conspiracy" are that the latter two are well sourced by reliable sources. Fighter mafia in the sources laid out in Light Weight Fighter, VRWC has thousands of news hits and was originally coined (or popularized) by Hillary Clinton. One the other hand, you have a newsgroup post from some guy that thinks he read it in Gillchrist's book. Yea....right. I mock its use; but that doesn't mean it's notable enough for encyclopedic entry. --Mmx1 01:27, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Extraneous comments moved from main page
Talk:Christine Vachon

message: The listings of all the awards associated with every film Vachon has produced seems to me to seriously unbalance the article; while some are probably relevant, especially those which are for the film as a whole rather than specific workers on it, it seems to me that this information generally belongs on the articles for the films themselves, with reference to highly relevant awards and the overall quality of Vachon's work in the main text. If no-one raises any objections, I'll make that change in a day or two. Gusworld (talk) 09:40, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, I've gone ahead and done it -- all awards info that wasn't already present has been moved to individual film articles. Haven't had time yet to fact check those sub-articles or wikilink awards, but will try and get to it. Certainly improves the readability and relevance of this one. Gusworld (talk) 10:59, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Awards listings
Talk:Sweet Little Sixteen

message: er gehört zu den raffiniertesten Textern der Zunft: So steckt etwa noch in Sweet Little Sixteen eine frühe Reflektion der Groupiekultur  
(text: Sweet Little Sixteen
She's got the grown - up blues
Tight dresses and lipstick
She's sportin' high - heel shoes)  
see also this  --Neun-x (talk) 17:35, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Subtext]]: contains hints to [[Groupie]] culture
Talk:Sweet Thing (David Bowie song)

message: I am considering moving this page to Sweet Thing (David Bowie Song) to match Sweet Thing (Van Morrison song), which at the moment only has a disambig link from the top of the bowie page. Create a disambiguation page to reflect NPOV?
Please throw in your twopence worth.
Dvorak (wtkwhite) 17:48, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: As neither song is clearly and undoubtedly the prime usage, I agree this makes sense. --Dweller (talk) 10:29, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

text: Hmmm, this seems unnecessary (POV of a disambiguation suffix?) but non-controversial, please go ahead. Also, by a quick glance, both articles don't strike me as very notable (and yeah, I may be wrong). -- Pepve (talk) 14:30, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

text: Oh, and note the caps: Sweet Thing (David Bowie song), not Sweet Thing (David Bowie Song). -- Pepve (talk) 14:31, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

text: The NPOV was supposed to be treating similar articles and two songwriters the same. But notwithstanding that, as Dweller says, neither is more notable or more likely to be an intended destination. --Dvorak (wtkwhite) (Talk) 17:07, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

text: Speaking as a casual fan of both artists, I agree with the above, and say go for it. -Freekee (talk) 03:52, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi! FYI, there is Sweet Thing (Chaka Khan song) too. Oda Mari (talk) 18:16, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for the intel. that complicates things. Are there any others? Dvorak (wtkwhite) (Talk) 22:42, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I have no idea. But there's Sweet Things (song). Oda Mari (talk) 05:27, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Page Move 
Talk:Christofer Johnsson

message: While the image may not have the best quality, it is free. Anybody can search for a free replacement. Leaving the article without image may encourage people to upload fair use images directly, while having this picture may make them ask here why we use such a bad quality, where we can explain about the difference between a free and a fair use image, and encourage them to upload a better free image. -- ReyBrujo 03:47, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Image 
Talk:Robert Boyd (physicist)

message: Runcorn 22:46, 9 August 2006 (UTC)