lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:List of compositions for piano and orchestra

message: When I first started going to live concerts, this would be performed most years.  The program notes always pointed out that Falla did not want this played as a concertante work, but simply as a work with a prominent piano part.  The fact that a virtuoso is needed to do it justice was not supposed to mean that the player was to be treated as a "soloist".  And yet, I would look up from my notes and what would I see? - the piano front and centre, with a celebrity soloist who got star billing in the same program notes that said they shouldn't.  Curious.  I guess virtuosi being what they are, they would not be content to sit quietly near the back, and dressed only in the same garb as their other orchestral colleagues.  So maybe Falla's instructions were never realistic.
The point of that background was to wonder whether it's correct to have this listed under "Other Concertante Works", or whether we should follow Falla's instructions and list the piece under "Other Orchestral Works with a Prominent Piano Part". JackofOz 20:10, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Nights in the Gardens of Spain

message: Please see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Classical music/Archive 19# Lists of works for piano/keyboard and orchestra, where we're revisiting the duplication between this list and List of compositions for keyboard and orchestra.  --  JackofOz (talk) 01:51, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Duplication issues with Piano and Keyboard lists

message: John Cage's Concert for Piano and Orchestra is not mentioned. I don't really know the piece well enough to know which category it belongs, but this piece should be added to the list. --  () 03:33, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Missing?

message: Somehow, Beppe's three piano concertos were added underneath Peter Benoit, who was a late romantic composer. I found a German version of the page for Beppe, but the English page has been removed. I'm not sure what to do about Beppe's unlinked name, since I didn't see any other composers in the list without links. Culveyhouse (talk) 06:02, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Flint Beppe added without English link
Talk:Third Cinema

message: So, am I correct in understanding:
: first cinema -- studio production
: second cinema -- independent director
: third cinema -- socialist effort
--Elijah 20:11, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

message: Thought people interested in this article might like to know that :Category:Women screenwriters is being considered for deletion. — scribblingwoman 02:28, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Category "women screenwriters" up for discussion 

message: The Fanon quote in the original Spanish version of the manifesto is "hay que descubrir, hay que inventar" – "we must discover, we must invent". Discuss is not among the meanings of descubrir, so the quote in the English translation is a mistranslation. While the quote has a prominent position, being up in the article's lead, it does not have a clear role in the present version of the article. Rather than correct it, I've taken the simple approach of editing it away.  --Lambiam 08:01, 16 May 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fanon quote
Talk:WD Austerity 2-10-0

message: I added the bit about DVL having seen her at the Baron Street site last weekend. I'm not sure exactly why she's there; however, since the railway's not steaming her I'm assuming she's there for servicing of one kind or another. Anyone have anything more concrete? 86.132.227.128 01:44, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Status of Dame Vera Lynn
Talk:Body kit

message: Merged from Body kits. SilkTork 20:20, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Merged

message: I removed the comment about "Peugeot were perhaps the first to bring the factory bodykit back to the fore in 1997". I briefly worked at Ford in 1995/1996, and we had reams of promotional material on our (hideous) RS bodykits for the then-new Ford Mondeo. Not that I'm giving Ford the credit, mind you... -- DeLarge 15:04, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Removed comment

message: "Many advantages to body kits include better aerodynamics as well as having a high degree of aesthetic value" Huh? Many body kits give more drag and are ugly as my knob. I've removed my knob. // Liftarn
A lot of tuning companies also add body kits to help with aerodynamics. Examples being Ruf, Gemballa, Brabus, Novitec and Overfinch. Redstoneprime (talk) 08:48, 26 February 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Advantages? 

message: is there any benefit to these or do they just make the car look sportier?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.224.66.237 (talk) 22:53, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  just for looks? 

message: Right now, the only reference is from an opinion blog site.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sagquattro2009 (talk • contribs) 17:42, 25 February 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  More references
Talk:GamesTM

message: As a subscriber to this magazine, I can confirm it is the best multi platform games magazine there is available in the UK. Unfortunatley it's publishers have been bought over, and my subscription has been affected, I had to buy my last edition from the shop, and the current edition #41 has not appeared yet, hopefully this will be sorted out soon.
...
1. Sign.
2. Does this have any relation to the article? Discussion pages are for discussion of the article iteself, not discussion of the subject of the article.--The last sheikah 20:14, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Games TM

message: "Although the content of the magazine was largely unchanged, it received a complete visual makeover (albeit a complete rip-off of Edge)".
This is a woefully biased statment and I am removing it.
Your thoughts are appreciated.
--James Brown Monster, 22:01, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Biased statment

message: Is the magazine name actually "GamesTM" ? Or is that actually the Trademark symbol writ large, and not part of the name? 76.66.194.212 (talk) 05:21, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Name
Talk:Borromean rings

message: @David Eppstein I just removed the wrong claim that the Borromean rings are one of the up to 21 regular tessellation links defined in https://arxiv.org/pdf/1406.2827v3.pdf
This is obviously false: Table 1 of the paper doesn't contain any link with just 3 components.
In more detail: the complement of the Borromean ring does consist of two regular ideal octahedra. However, the condition in the paper is stronger: the decomposition of the manifold into octahedra needs to have enough symmetries to take any flag to any other flag of the same orientation. That is: each octahedron can be taken to any octahedron by a symmetry. And each orientation-preserving symmetry of an octahedron must be realized by a symmetry of the manifold fixing the octahedron. - Matthias Goerner  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 23.93.72.121 (talk) 03:23, 18 January 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok, that's clear enough. I removed the unused reference left by this change. —David Eppstein (talk) 07:27, 18 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Borromean rings are not a regular tessellation link 

message: The correct pronunciation of "Borromean" is approximately bore-oh-MAY-in (and not boh-ROME-ee-in as the article claims). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:200:c082:2ea0:444e:7fbc:5a62:4fb6 (talk • contribs) 18:41, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: The article's claimed pronunciation in English is boh-ro-MEE-in. The colon in the IPA indicates the long vowel. It is referenced to a published source. I am sure that other languages would pronounce the penultimate vowel differently. Do you have a published source for an English pronunciation that uses  in place of ? If so we could at least include both pronunciations. —David Eppstein (talk) 19:25, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wrong pronunciation 

message: : reply to 
In the figure, those are not geometric circles.  Perhaps the lighting from the simple raytracing is misleading.  That particular projection sends them to true planar circles, but in 3-space they are pringle shaped as has been mentioned.  You can also do it with ellipses, but then they won't project to true circles, as in the figure. Rybu (talk) 19:38, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Regular circles 

message: : reply to 
Perhaps it would help to include a more realistically rendered image.  Here is a true-life picture of essentially the same configuration, but in the "bad" projection they appear as hexagons, rather than circles. https://www.printables.com/model/161860-borromean-rings-hexagons  Rybu (talk) 19:42, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: There is a realistically rendered image with ellipses already in the article, at the start of . It is not the image I would choose for the lead of the article, though (and neither is your image of notched hexagons). —David Eppstein (talk) 20:44, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Diagrams
Talk:Ponca State Park

message: * The Nebraska Game and Parks Commission link clearly states: "Both the park and the town are named for the proud Native American tribe that once inhabited the area. It was the famed Ponca Chief Standing Bear who fought and won the court battle to have the Indian declared a "person" under American law." http://www.ngpc.state.ne.us/parks/guides/parksearch/showpark.asp?Area_No=143 One very important reason that the Ponca have this notariety, and have this town and park named for them, is because of Standing Bear. Since the State of Nebraska feels this is of sufficient importance to include it in their description of the park in their website, I am offering a statement about Standing Bear in this Wiki article. Jerry picker 20:31, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The city of Ponca was founded in 1856 (http://www.ci.ponca.ne.us/), 23 years before the Standing Bear's court battle.  While Standing Bear is an important figure in Native American and Nebraska history, it's clear that the city was not named in honor of him, and it's a stretch to claim that the state park was either.  I presume the reason that the Game and Parks Commission mentions Standing Bear is to provide the average person with any sort of connection to a tribe they are otherwise likely to know nothing about.  If you'd like to discuss this further, please leave a message on my talk page.  –Swid 21:01, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: The name "Ponca"
Talk:Bongwater (band)

message: What does bongwater mean?
It's water that has been used in a bong for filtration.Monkeypillow 09:46, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: This article is one of [ thousands] on Wikipedia that have a link to YouTube in it. Based on the External links policy, most of these should probably be removed. I'm putting this message on the talk page, to request the regular editors take a look at the link and make sure it doesn't violate policy. In short: 1. 99% of the time YouTube should not be used as a source. 2. We must not link to material violating someone's copyright. If you are not sure whether the link on this article should be removed or if you would like to help spread this message, contact us on User talk:J.smith/YouTube Linklist. Thanks, ---J.S (t|c) 00:45, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  YouTube links
Talk:Chervil

message: The ancient Greek name does not mean "leaves of joy" it means "leaves of hello" or "greeting leaves". Chara is joy, chaire is hello.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.204.71.129 (talk) 23:32, 30 September 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Ancient Greek Name is Wrong

message: The picture does not show chervil but cicely which happens to
be called "Spanish chervil" in many languages.
Chervil is small (30cm), has delicate leaves and small fruits.
Cicely is much larger (1m and more), with stronger leaves
and characteristic long fruits. The picture on the cicely page
depicts the plant nicely. Cicely is a perennial, which chervil
is annual. 84.189.182.68 20:36, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Did you mean 'cooking'?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.2.130.132 (talk) 16:50, 29 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Culinary arts"??
Talk:Stopper knot

message: Not sure how to do this, but I think this term should be renamed.  "Stopper Knots" are a category of knots.  There is no one knot named "stopper", as the examples in the definition imply.  There is however, in nautical terms, a "Stopper", which refers to a length of line, tied to another line, that "stops" the other line from running.  
So "Stopper (Knot)" is not the name of a particular knot, it's a category of knots, and probably should be renamed here as Stopper-Knot so it's not confused with a "Stopper" (the short length of line)...  blah blah blah...  Now I am confusing myself!
Not sure how to go about clarifying this.  -- (unsigned comment made 2006-02-01T20:38:07 by User:Dviglione)
:The above comment was made prior to a revamp of the page.  Hopefully the new version is somewhat clearer.  If it were to be eventually split out, I would suggest the title "Stopper (sailing)" or "Stopper (nautical)" and leave the title of this article the same. --Dfred 23:31, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Does nautical usage belong in this article?

message: Also, in the picture of the Flemish Bend, backed up by  double overhand knots, those are not actually double overhand knots--at least not according to your page on the knot by that name. Those backup knots are basically half of a double fisherman's knot. I don't know if they have a name besides that. This knot should be mentioned in this section, though, because it's a common stopper knot used in climbing. Same with a version that uses three wraps of the rope instead of two (this variation is often called a barrel knot). -- (Unsigned comment by User:38.117.172.158, 2007-03-07T20:23:49)
:Yes, thanks for the comments.  You're correct that this knot is known by several names -- although it is in fact topologically identical to a double overhand knot -- and my recollection was that the climbing books I've seen use the name "Double overhand knot" when referring to its use as a backup knot. Incidentally, I have considered merging Strangle knot and Double overhand knot, but my feeling is they should be left as separate articles.  Perhaps additional discussion is warranted in the Double overhand knot article regarding various forms it can take.  --Dfred 23:31, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Double overhand knot?

message: Recently a page covering the same topic was created at Stopper knots.  A couple days ago proposed on Talk:Stopper knots that the article be merged here (such as it is) and made a redirect.  I just added offical merge-from/to tags.  --Dfred 14:11, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I have already merged the article Stopper_knots in this article. And removed the merge-from/to tags as well. Cheers! Bu b0y2007 03:23, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge from [[Stopper knots]]
Talk:Fort Worth Star-Telegram

message: Re: "From 1923 until after World War II, the Star-Telegram had the largest circulation of any newspaper in the South, serving not just Fort Worth but also West Texas, New Mexico, and western Oklahoma." Any source for this? First of all, it's doubtful West Texas and New Mexico would consider themselves part of the south. Second, I highly doubt that the Star-Telegram really sold more copies than the papers in New Orleans, Atlanta, Memphis, or Houston, since those cities were all substantially larger than Fort Worth. And the Star-Telegram had competition from the Fort Worth Press. Perhaps the author means the Star-T's circulation area was geographically larger than other papers, which could be true. Jbenton 20:38, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: As a resident of Arlington, a suburb in eastern Fort Worth, I can vouch that many college intellectuals at both the University of Texas in Arlington, and the local Tarrant County Community College network refer to the Star Telegram as the "Startlegram". 69.148.75.78 04:41, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Startlegram" 

message: An news collum abour William Henry Patrick bringing his Bomber back to his field after the plane was shot up. 1944? any help would be appreciated.
Sherwood Patrick —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.18.250.87 (talk) 15:16, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  WWII William Henry Patrick, 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I wanted to add citations for the statement that the Star Telegram is the nation's oldest online newspaper. I have identified two sources, one from the Poynter Institute  and an article from the Editor&Publisher in 1995  that support this statement. OCE1772 (talk) 20:03, 26 March 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Online presence
Talk:City of Heroes/Villains OCs

message: The creator of this page should soon be placing it up for speedy deletion (reason G-7, own article deletion).  Discussion between him and I that has lead to this action, including the reasonings for it, can be found at User talk:CaptainJade9#City of Heroes/Villains OCs and User talk:TexasAndroid#Jade Response. - TexasAndroid 22:00, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Deletion request. 

message: Discussion between him and I that has lead to this action, including the reasonings for it, can be found at User talk:CaptainJade9#City of Heroes/Villains OCs and User talk:TexasAndroid#Jade Response. - TexasAndroid 22:00, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Reason for Deletion -CaptainJade9
Talk:List of major artifacts in Dungeons & Dragons

message: If anyone is reading this, I added an entry for this Artifact.
Not long afterwards, it got a message stating that it may be deleted for not satisfying the notability guidelines. Please help me if you can. Lordsnarf 04:50, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Acorn of Wo Mei 

message: All of these dead links really should be pruned & redirected.  I mean, many of the artifacts themselves warrent nothing more than a paragraph in the primary sources; the ones that are more notable can be linked but the rest should just direct here.  --mordicai. 21:32, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dead, red wikilinks 

message: I removed teh in-universe tag because it does not apply. There is nothing in-universe here and the books listed are ones published in this universe (as opposed to some other).  The article needs work which I will begin on Monday. Web Warlock (talk) 02:03, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  updates 

message: The apparatus of Qualish is not listed. (from the DM's guide)  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.193.50.100 (talk) 05:16, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't recall seeing the Apparatus of Kwalish ever listed as an artifact. I'm going to remove it, but feel free to mention it somewhere on Magic item (Dungeons & Dragons). BOZ (talk) 17:54, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Object missing 

message: The "master plan" links to an album by some drummer 189.178.66.170 (talk) 20:46, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Master Plan
Talk:Constitutio Antoniniana

message: However, it had the unintended effect of allowing provincials the hope of becoming emperor, and of starting uprisings with that hope in mind (the first to do so being Maximinus Thrax only 23 years after this edict). This would play a major factor in the Crisis of the Third Century and the eventual fall of the Roman Empire.
:I understand that there are plenty of Pat Buchanan fans out there, but calling Constitutio Antoniana "a major factor" in the eventual downfall of the Western Roman Empire is an unacceptable POV statement - for the counterargument (that the extension of Roman citizenship rights to the entire freeborn population of the Empire was the major reason it even survived the crises of the 3d century) looks, to me, at least as reasonable, if not more so, than the idea that unruly barbarian soldiers were waiting with baited breath to receive their citizenship rights before they decided to rebel. The majority of usurpers, rebels and new emperors continued to be Romans after the passing of Constitutio Antoniana, anyway.
Leave Buchanan's theories out of historical articles: the Roman armies by themselves were unruly, undisciplined and violent enough by the beginning of the 3d century to make any bemoaning over the "barbarization" of Rome a farce.
The stated reason for Caracalla to declare this edict, was to increase the number of worshipers of Roman gods. It was exempt from including the dediticii into citizenship, which the definition is unclear. Regardless of the reasons behind the edict, Citizenship was no longer a privilege or an incentive. Sfgator (talk) 17:05, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Farbrausch

message: The releases section is too large for the article.  I'd suggest doing away with the table, including screenshots for only one or two important releases, and listing general releases line by line. --Vossanova 20:58, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

message: I think the article needs a biographical section.
* Formation. (Farbrausch was founded in 1999 by Ronny "rp" Pries, Tammo "kb" Hinrichs and Felix "yoda" Bohmann, because in their opinion their previous groups (Smash Designs and Teklords) failed to offer a creative environment for their work.)
* The Elitegroup-connection. (Some members of Farbrausch were constantly accused of being members of controversial demogroup Elitegroup, which won The Party 1999 with their demo Kasparov. Some members admit this, some deny, some tongue-in-cheekily alternate between the two.)
* The Ambience votefaking. (fr-02 won the Ambience demo competition even though their demo failed to run on the compo machine and was never shown. Members of FR simply found a stack of unused votesheets at the partyplace and used them to vote on their own demo.)
* Major releases:
** .the .product production details
** .poemtoahorse
** Candytron
** The.Popular.Demo
* "Quirks" such as numbering of the releases, the .dot.design (especially .hund).
* Branching to .theprodukkt
* "I DON'T WANT YOU KEBBY" incident.
Would be nice if someone could agglomerate all this into a nice big article. (kb? ;)) //Gargaj 20:53, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Looks good, go with it! :) Seriously though, that's about 90% of what you need for the article.  We can just change the bullet points to paragraphs, and expand them whenever we feel up to it.  But for now this is enough to get started.  --Vossanova 15:42, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I gave it a try but i just can't seem to make an enjoyable text out of it. :( // Gargaj 14:03, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  It's on my to-do list. --Vossanova 20:40, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  So? :) // Gargaj 19:00, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Well, I have been busy lately with work and MindCandy.. I did manage to redo the release list (looks like Fairlight's) and add a few notes. --Vossanova o< 14:35, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  History 

message: So how about an article for Debris? I think it might be worth it... // Gargaj 23:07, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  debris.
Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Jaroslaw Nowicky

message: I have checked with the National Cancer Institute, which was one of the organisations claimed to have supported his material.  I was given this statement "The material did not show sufficient anticancer activity to recommend further study.".  This is not exactly an endorsement.  It also contradicts claims that were made in the referenced supporting page.  The decision to delete the page (at least with it's existing content) was correct.  Mozzerati 20:58, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
Talk:Raouf Abdul Rahman

message: Today I made some copyedits, added links to some more news reports and moved the article from Raouf Abdul Rahman to Rauf Rashid Abd al-Rahman. The reason for the move is this: English-language articles from various news organisations give Rahman's name in a number of different ways (including, for example, Raouf Abdel-Rahman). This news report from Al Jazeera's English-language website gives his full name (including Rashid), and their transliteration seems more convincing than the ones found in articles from other outlets. "Raouf" seems to be the transliteration used in French (to give the [u] sound), whereas it should be "Rauf" in English. --Bwiki 19:58, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Name