lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Caroline Winberg

message: Is she seriously a supermodel, or is she just a model? -Branddobbe (talk) 09:15, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Thames and Severn Canal

message: Check this out: Can water network curb shortages?.  They seem to be proposing that the canal could be used to send water to London...? — Johan the Ghost seance 16:22, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Future use for water distribution? 

message: * Suitably referenced, with inline citations
* Reasonable coverage - no obvious omissions or inaccuracies
* Defined structure, with adequate lead
* Reasonably well written for grammer and flow
* Supporting materials - Infobox, map, images, POI table
* Appropriately understandable
I have assessed this article against these criteria, and am rating it B. Bob1960evens (talk) 16:55, 6 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Assessment

message: "Cotswold Canals" is a neologism coined to refer to the canal link from the Severn (or at least the Sharpness canal) to the Thames. Historically it consists of two canals: the Thames and Severn (T&S, this article) and the Stroudwater Navigation (SW). The restoration project covers both canals, but all the information is in this article... so we end up with a section on "Phase 1b" in this article on one canal, which refers entirely to the restoration of another canal. I suggest this is unsatisfactory. We could:
* (A) Move the restoration information to the relevant canal. Problem: Phase 1a covers parts of both canals.
* (B) Merge the two canal articles. Obvious historical problem.
* (C) Make a separate article "Cotswold Canals restoration" for the whole project. If one day the connection is actually completed, it is likely the name(s) will change, and then there would be an article on the current canal, plus historical articles on the original T&S and SW canals.
I think (C) is the best choice, but invite comments. Imaginatorium (talk) 08:51, 5 January 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: 1a is mostly Thames and Severn though (certainly all the locks are). Thus I'd go with option A for now. 1b is pretty much pure stroudwater.©Geni (talk) 20:10, 6 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Page title and scope
Talk:Invisible Sun

message: The song was not banned by the BBC - just the video. I can distinctly recall watching Top Of The Pops back in '81, and they used a montage of photos of the band to accompany the song.
109.157.4.59 (talk) 08:53, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: User William M. Connolley reverted my deletion of the section "Source of title." As it stands, the material is unsourced and contains blatant, even audacious, original research. As is the case across Wikipedia, "unsourced material may be challenged and removed," hence the removal. Please also note that while the material itself could be sourced, it would need to be sourced as the inspiration for the song title, not simply to the books mentioned. In other words, a reliable source stating that Sting or other members of the Police were influenced by this material. Simply pointing out that the term "invisible sun" has been around for centuries and then claiming that Sting must have forgotten that he heard it someplace is original research and not permissible. 
Further, even provided that such a link can be found and sourced, there's far too much material in this article on the past usage of the term "invisible sun." Its length befits an article on the term itself rather than as simply inspiration for a song title. 
I am going to wait a few days before acting again, but this material as written should not remain here. PacificBoy 08:55, 25 March 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I reverted your change, because it was unexplained. Its a good idea to explain deletions. In this case, you're partially wrong: its not unsourced; I checked before restoring it. It is clearly sourced. However, your claim of OR may well have merit. Probably, there should be a separate page for the alchemical "invisible sun" concept William M. Connolley (talk) 09:06, 25 March 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: "Source of title" OR
Talk:Carolyn Bennett

message: It still hasn't happened, according to the House of Commons website; and Elections Canada has not announced her seat being vacant. G. Timothy Walton (talk) 17:01, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Resignation as MP
Talk:Carolyn Brown (choreographer)

message: Please tell me why you removed the CAROLYN BROWN, dancer, author with Merce Cunningham Dance Company description; when it absolutely had no problems whatsoever.  I cannot find the history anywhere!  This is absurd!
http://www.randomhouse.com/knopf/catalog/display.pperl?isbn=9780394401911
http://www.answers.com/topic/carolyn-brown-1
http://64.233.169.104/search?q=cache:Q6tTz92YDcEJ:www.slc.edu/news-events/2007-2008/2007-09-27.php+carolyn+brown+merce+cunningham&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=6&gl=us&
--Riceflan (talk) 20:08, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Carolyn Cassady

message: I've started a BLP noticeboard post here to discuss the adequacy of the sourcing given that no media outlet has apparently yet reported this. postdlf (talk) 16:43, 21 September 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: The blog post is clearly inadequate to report a death, so I have removed it. If she has really died, reliable sources will report it soon. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 17:11, 21 September 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Added to the BLP discussion and have also nominated this person's article as an ITN/Recent death here. Shearonink (talk) 21:31, 21 September 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, the ITN discussion has been closed. Shearonink (talk) 01:25, 22 September 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: And now the In the News nomination-discussion been re-opened... Shearonink (talk) 17:57, 22 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reported death 

message: I noticed conflicted DOB dates for Carolyn Cassady, both April 28, 1923 verses April 23, 1923. This article has the DOB: April 28, 1923 but did not have citation. Jooojay (talk) 04:27, 20 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Day of birth
Talk:Abd al-Ghaffar

message: I asked the administrator who deleted Abdul Ghaffar (Chemist) where the A7 concerns that prompted the deletion were discussed.  
The original article is still in the google cache.
It seems to me that this should never have been a speedy deletion -- that it should have been a .  Geo Swan (talk) 22:10, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  deletion review 

message: Several people have made changes to this article, offering edit summaries saying they were cleaning the page up, or clarifying it.  Unfortunately, these clarification introduced serious inaccuracies and ambiguities.  I have restored some of the earlier, more accurate, less ambiguous wording.
Cheers!  Geo Swan (talk) 16:58, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  explanation
Talk:Carolyn Cudone

message: Is encyclopedia.com a credible source? It has Oxford, Alabama as her birthplace. 88.114.246.209 (talk) 19:00, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  birthplace?
Talk:Carolyn Davidson (graphic designer)

message: $36 or $96? not consistent with what it says on the nike swoosh wikisite  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.189.131.204 (talk) 03:55, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

message: The Nike website (has changed since the article was written; can search FAQs for "Davidson" and find the information) says that her name is Caroline, not Carolyn. Baseballbaker23 (talk) 04:44, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Carolyn or Caroline?
Talk:Carolyn Farina

message: Why did she stop appearing in films? She seemed very good. Is there a mystery?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.169.162.100 (talk) 12:55, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Is she related to Richard Farina? --24.215.156.125 (talk) 21:26, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled 2

message: I'm going to post a few links here in case they prove useful. Softlavender (talk) 04:04, 19 February 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Links
Talk:Carolyn Forché

message: i've added some refs, but the discussion needs a lot more. Slowking4 (talk) 18:21, 24 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Carolyn Hax

message: There was a "Citation Needed" tag at the end of a sentence. At the end of the next sentence there was a citation. That citation covered the facts in both sentences. Putting a citation at the end of every sentence in a paragraph, where all the stated facts are in one reference, violates Wikipedia style. The style manual advises keeping citations to the minimum necessary, to keep the readability high. If the paragraph has multiple statements of fact, which do not all appear in one reference, then of course place the proper references. I moved the information to group it for clarity into the paragraphs that have one reference for all of the information in them.  Nick Beeson (talk) 12:28, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Citation
Talk:It's a Wrap (Mary J. Blige song)

message: :The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. 
The result of the move request was: Moved. (closed by non-admin page mover), disambiguation at basename.  Silikonz💬 05:17, 24 February 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: It's a Wrap → 
Proposal 1: :It's a Wrap (Mariah Carey song) → 
Proposal 2: :It's a Wrap (disambiguation) →  – There are now two Wikipedia articles about songs with the same title (i.e. this one and "It's a Wrap" (Mariah Carey song)) and I do not believe either are the primary topic. I would propose making It's a Wrap a disambiguation page instead. I was not sure if this would be a controversial move so I wanted to get feedback on this proposal. Aoba47 (talk) 18:22, 11 February 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: How does it meet NSONG? Heartfox (talk) 00:45, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Charted on the Hot R&B/Hip-Hop Songs, secondary source coverage . 162 etc. (talk) 19:02, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Charting indicates that a song "may be notable enough that a search for coverage in reliable independent sources will be successful", not that it is notable. The second source is from the person who mixed the song. There is neither significant nor independent coverage. Heartfox (talk) 20:41, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Start an AfD then. 162 etc. (talk) 22:34, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 11 February 2023
Talk:(It's All Down to) Goodnight Vienna

message: I thought about altering a sentence in this article to read:
The lyrics also contain the London slang term "bohunk", which is a mildly derogatory term for a person of Hungarian or Czech descent, though it is sometimes defined, by extension, as "a rough studipid person," which might fit better with the lyrical structure:"Felt like a bohunk but I kept my cool, ah-hah-hah."as the term is defined in that manner as a secondary defintion at dictionary.reference.com However, personally I don't know enough about the history of the term to feel confident in making that edit, but that is my suggestion if someone feels like changing the article.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.62.218.43 (talk) 09:33, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  The use of the term "bohunk" 

message: Isn't it "(It's All Down To) Goodnight Vienna," not "It's All Down To Goodnight Vienna"? The former is what's printed on all my CDs. Elfred (talk) 03:57, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Title 

message: The length of this song says it’s the single version. Shouldn’t we need a length for the album version if that’s true? 24.179.74.21 (talk) 14:47, 2 February 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Album version length
Talk:It's Christmas in Heaven

message: Although it's an interesting article, it sounds like one Wikipedian's interpretation of the song rather than an NPOV discourse. Not that I'm criticising it - I think it's a good article which should find a home on wikinfo or some similar site, but maybe not here. (I guess what I'm saying is that it's too good for Wikipedia!) --80.3.45.158 11:58, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Carolyn Seymour

message: "Best associated with portraying the role of Abby Grant in the BBC series Survivors in 1975"? Nonsense. Only sci-fi geeks have heard of that. Please try to remember, things like that are, in reality, only remembered by a minority, I know they congregate on the Internet but if Wikipedia is to be truly impartial, it should reflect this. Regarding SF/fantasy cobblers as the most important thing in an experienced actor's career is a new form of philistinism.
In the real world, if you're in a group of people and Ms Seymour appears on screen, the thing most people know her from is the Steptoe movie. Also, Take Three Girls was very popular in its time, having a far wider appeal than nerdy-boy sci-fi. And at the time, her reviews for The Ruling Class predicted an outstanding future and compared her to Glenda Jackson -- mind you, sci-fi obsessives probably don't know who Jackson is. Dolmance (talk) 20:58, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: There I was, listening to The Thousand Worlds audiodrama from Only the Monstrous when all of a sudden, I hear Dr Chakwas. 
Minor spoiler- Carolyn plays an older version of Rejoice from "The Innocent". I'd wager she appears in more from this series but I'm literally listening to the second one as I write this.
Anyway, this should probably be included in the article. IDK what it'd go under though. A discography perhaps? JjStrawb (talk) 10:26, 7 August 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Missing some Big Finish work
Talk:Music appreciation

message: I thought music appreciation was a racket designed to sell concerts and recordings of a small subset of a small selection of composers (like Mozart, Beethoven, Tchaikovsky) while keeping other composers (like Kraus, Wilms, M. Haydn, Khrennikov) on the fringe, and even neglecting the less marketable output of the 'great' composers handpicked by marketing. Anton Mravcek 16:26, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It also involves mythologizing the famous composers' lives. It's much easier to tell the story of Beethoven tearing up the title page of the Eroica Symphony than to explore the actual genesis of the work. Volunteer Sibelius Salesman 19:35, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Comment
Talk:It's No Secret (Kylie Minogue song)

message: Since the image, :File:ItsNoSecret.JPG, has removed by one editor citing WP:NFC, without saying how this image specifically violates it, I am starting a discussion here so that the image is not deleted simply for being orphaned.
The current consensus for alternate covers in infoboxes, per Template:Infobox album#Template:Extra album cover that can then be tied to Template:Infobox single, are that they pass WP:NFCC if the alternate cover is "significantly different from the original and is widely distributed and/or replaces the original has generally been held to pass this criterion."  This alternate cover is significantly different from the original cover and is widely released in Australia, which is the home country of the singer, and therefore passes the criterion. Aspects (talk) 18:25, 27 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fair use of alternate cover 
Talk:It's Oh So Quiet

message: Concerning the track listing, there's a few versions according to Discography Björk 1995.xlynx 08:01, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Track listing 

message: I am looking for evidence that Betty Hutton recorded a song called "Blow A Fuse" rather than "It's Oh So Quiet". I have found no reliable source that backs this up. Labalius (talk) 20:47, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Blow A Fuse 

message: I have now linked a scan of Billboard magazine to the article, which shows that Betty Hutton released "It's Oh, So Quiet" — Labalius (talk) 13:19, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Confirmation 

message: This song was used in s01e04 of FlashForward in the beginning. Not sure how you can make note of that but a good chunk of it was used near the beginning and in a literal way. Trivia section?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.222.106.112 (talk) 23:00, 2 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  FlashForward 

message: Some years back I heard a radio documentary that included a section about this song. The person reminiscing noted that the orchestra and studio had been booked for a number of hours, and had been busy rehearsing away, but Bjork was so late arriving that they only had time to do a single take for the actual recording. I had hoped to find this confirmed here. Anyone know any more? -- EdJogg (talk) 09:01, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Recording 
Talk:Carrie Ann Inaba

message: Japanese
I agree, having seen her speak Japanese on Youtube, it appears that, besides having a heavy American accent, she has trouble forming some simple sentences, even though eventually they turn out to be correctly formulated. I guess that's not quite the definition of fluency.
--189.100.205.55 (talk) 04:44, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Since there is not reference that says she does, and there is evidence to the contrary, I'm going to remove the claim from the article.--Esprit15d • talk • contribs 02:25, 10 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:It's the Same Old Song

message: Aren't the Lyrics:
"It's the same old song, but with a different meaning since you've been gone"
Not
"It's the same old song, but with a different beat since you've been gone"
which would make the whole name of the song being an inside joke untrue
:You're right about the lyrics, although the "It's the same old song" part probably is an inside joke.  It looks like the person who thought the line was "with a different beat" wasn't very familiar with the song. Spaced1999 05:24, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Lyrics

message: Using the Android app I got editting problems. From the Cover versions onwards I got shown this text:
==Notes==

===References===
* Dennis, Robert (1998). Our Motown Recording Heritage, Part 3: Emergency Release. Recordingeq.com.
I don't know how to solve that problem, so I had to turn to a web browser version of Wikipedia to enable editting. 62.72.192.107 (talk) 18:02, 11 August 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Editting problems
Talk:Carrie Preston

message: It seems a little weird that her husband and brother are mentioned in the intro to her page, when she isn't mentioned until the middle of the third section of Michael Emerson's page and not at all on her brother's page. So the men get billing in there own right, but her page first mentions her husband, rather than the fact that she won an Emmy? I doubt any editor would consider stating that Michael Emerson was married to Emmy winning actress Carrie Preston, before mentioning that he was on Lost or The Practice. It just seems unnecessary to include that information in the intro. She isn't, and shouldn't be known primarily for who she is married to and that her brother is a stage actor. Steve Marethyu (talk) 13:56, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Husband and brother in the intro
Talk:It Ain't Easy (Ron Davies song)

message: In revising this page, I added information regarding John Baldry's album "It Ain't Easy", but could not figure out how to make the Wikipedia link go to his album by that name (there is a Wikipedia page on it) vs. Three Dog Night's. Wikipedia's page on the Baldry album is here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/It_Ain%27t_Easy_(Baldry_album) . I also added information on Ron Davies' recordings of it; one was on an album called U.F.O. There is no Wikipedia page on the album, and I don't know how to show it as a link to a page that doesn't exist. Frank Lynch (talk) 16:44, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: What is the justification for assigning this to David Bowie? Yes, he recorded it, but is there justification for putting his name in the parentheses, given how many others did around the same time, given that he did not write it, and given that so many others have recorded it since? Was it even a single by David Bowie? A B-side? (It was a B-side for Three Dog Night. It provided the name of the album for both Three Dog Night and John Baldry.) So, just wondering. Frank Lynch (talk) 11:15, 1 June 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I have fixed this by moving it to the original recording artist. Tassedethe (talk) 12:47, 5 June 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you. I could not figure out how to revert a page to its prior name for the life of me, and my "undo" attempts were (sad to say) destructive. This resolution is fine in my book. Frank Lynch (talk) 02:42, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: "David Bowie song"
Talk:It Doesn't Have to Be

message: I have removed the following: "the instrumental track heavily features Clarke's signature synthesizer programming along with a prominent acoustic guitar."
Firstly, it is arguable that there is any guitar in the song at all, but even if there is, I don't agree that it is 'prominent'. Clarke may have been seen miming to the song in the video and in TV apearances, but in many cases this is just a 'prop'. I also think phrases like 'features Clarke's signature programming' sound more like a review than encycopedic information.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Opwerty (talk • contribs) 19:22, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Presence of guitar inconclusive 

message: I originally removed: "Bell's lyrics touch upon patching up an argument between two people in a relationship ("you are on one side / I am on the other / are we divided?")."
Then immediately put it back in - I don't want to become a 'vandal'. However, unless it can be verified, at the moment it is just interpretation, so I think removal should be considered. I think it is debatable that this is what the song is about, and is seen by many as being more 'political' in nature. I concede however that the present interpretaion may be correct, and I'm suddenly getting 'flashbacks' to an Andy Bell interview in which he did state this. Opwerty (talk) 19:33, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I've removed it - this song is about more than two people arguing about the washing up. The African vocals in the middle eight surely hint at a slightly more contentious issue? 94.194.111.10 (talk) 03:36, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Song's subject matter debatable 
Talk:Carroll Hardy

message: Documented Hardy's pinch-hitting for Ted Williams with Retrosheet link. The narrative highlights it. 
RED SOX 1ST: Runnels singled; Tasby forced Runnels (third to
second); HARDY BATTED FOR WILLIAMS; Hardy lined into a double
play (pitcher to first) [Tasby out at first]; Ted Williams
fouled a ball off his ankle; this was the only time someone
pinch hit for Ted Williams in his career; 0 R, 1 H, 0 E, 0
LOB.  Red Sox 0, Orioles 0.
WHPratt (talk) 16:03, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Citation added
Talk:It Was a Good Day

message: This article doesn't seem developed enough for GA yet. The section on the content and samples is unsourced, and overall, the page seems under-developed. Furthermore, the chart positions aren't sourced. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells•Otter chirps) 22:33, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: GA review

message: Hello. Notice that the Wikipedia article in Spanish was accepted into the nomination for good. Greetings. Teby 95 (talk) 01:11, 27 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wikipedia in Spanish 

message: Gawker article.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.94.131.47 (talk) 01:02, 28 January 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: While several reports of someone supposedly establishing a date are out there, none of them would be considered WP:RS.  The Dissident Aggressor 20:19, 20 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Date determined? 