lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Battle of Cerro Gordo

message: The grammar seems to me to have been improved since the un-signed and un-dated comments above. If it is too much trouble to sign and date posts, how about using four tildes '~' (on the right of most keyboards), which will do it automatically ? That way, other editors will know if such comments are still relavent. 
RASAM (talk) 15:51, 29 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Grammar

message: Section 1 Battle in its first sentence reads:
"United States forces captured the port of Veracruz on March 27, 1914."
The English Wikipedia "Siege of Veracruz" article (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Veracruz) states the siege of Veracruz ended on March 29, 1847.
75.80.126.65 (talk) 04:54, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Date of the capture of the port of Veracruz 

message: I undid an edit from January 7, 2013 that changed only the year in a sentence to 1914 instead of 1847 in the revision right before that on December 21, 2012.  
That corrects the year but there is still an issue regarding the date of the capture of the port of Veracruz between March 27, 1847 in the December 21, 2012 revision and March 29, 1847 from the English Wikipedia "Siege of Veracruz" article (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Veracruz).
75.80.126.65 (talk) 05:51, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Undid January 7, 2013 revision in favor of December 21, 2012 revision 

message: According to the introduction "The battle saw Winfield Scott's United States troops outflank Antonio López de Santa Anna's larger Mexican army" however according to the info box on the right, it says the US had 12,000 men while Mexico had 8,700, so who had the larger army?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 107.181.106.116 (talk) 12:54, 18 April 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Who had more men?
Talk:Our Man Flint

message: Does anyone have a ringtone that sounds like the Hot Phone in the Flint movies? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.59.102.101 (talk • contribs) 2005-09-11T04:41:14 (UTC)
:There is a reference link in the article to a YouTube video that contains a sample clip of the sound from the movies. It's up to you to figure out how to turn it into a ringtone. I believe the sound was generated with a standard Touch-Tone dual-tone multi-frequency (DTMF) telephone, so if you're fleet-fingered, you could also play it on an old pushbutton desk phone and record your performance. — Foxtrot1296 (talk) 13:28, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hotline telephone sound 

message: Apprechiate?!?!?  I would think (or apprechiate) we would use a dictionary or SOMETHING when creating articles for an encyclopedia.
:Agreed. A spell checker and thesarus would be nice. Then I wouldn't have to make simple mistakes like that. --J-Star 16:21, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Apprechiate?! 

message: I attempted to create an article on Derek Flint, and I got this article.
(I was doing this prior to creating links to parody and spy films.) Dogru144 17:47, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Need article on Derek Flint?

message: The movie kind of shows global warming used as a science-fiction weapon (rising temperatures in the arctic are mentioned repeatedly, etc.). AnonMoos (talk) 20:33, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Global warming
Talk:Two and a Half Men

message: Revert 4281700 was unnecessary 24.112.172.121 (talk) 15:04, 17 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  False positive revert 

message: Shouldn't Kutcher's name be on the top of the starring list as he is one of the main star of the show? 188.113.95.213 (talk) 17:37, 14 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Kutcher is the main actor
Talk:Interstate 180 (Illinois)

message: The article states that I-180 has an intersection with Illinois Route 6.  That is false.  No such intersection exists.  Route 6 does not extend that far north at this time.--Will 05:33, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No one else implemented this.  So I did. Will 00:31, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Eh? No, it intersects U.S. Route 6, which is true. That's the exit to Princeton and Spring Valley. But the exit list already demonstrates this, though it doesn't show the control cities as of yet, I believe. —Rob (talk) 11:45, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  No intersection between I-180 and Illinois Route 6 exists 

message: Since I-180 is an Interstate, the call to Template:il browse should show Interstates. Will (Talk - contribs) 03:59, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nav box lists Illinois routes -- not Interstates 

message: The description of this interstate seems very biased to me.  Its an interstate that goes nowhere, therefore of course it has the lowest traffic density of maybe any other interstate.  There is no mention that this interstate could connect Chicago straight to Caterpillar. There is also no mention of the amount of traffic that goes out of their way to stay on the interstate and therefore passes through Bloomington on I-39 to I-74 to get to Peoria.  There is most likely thousands that would take I-180 if the interstate did not end abruptly.  Instead, they go a 30 to 45 minutes out of their way through Bloomington to stay on the interstate to get to Peoria.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Melilly (talk • contribs) 
: The navbox is per WP:USRD/INNA. As for the description... well, if the description reflects the truth, how is it biased? The I-180 / Illinois Route 29 upgrade has been discussed but not funded, and most grassroots organizations have been able to prevent the upgrades of Illinois Route 116 and U.S. Route 24, the only other alternatives. If the IL 29 project gets funding, it will receive a mention in this article. —Rob (talk) 15:54, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article Bias / Perjoritive Description 

message: Why are the exit and mile numbers listed incorrectly? I checked on Google Street view and they start from the North end at I-80, not at the South end. NintendoTTTEfan2005 (talk) 21:53, 23 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mile Markers/Exits
Talk:Battle of Paris (1814)

message: In the Battle of Paris was involved Graf von Wartenburg, I presume? belissarius (talk) 03:24, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Würtemberg 

message: I think the article Battle of Montmartre should be merged into this article beacause they speak basically about the same thing.-Andynomite (talk) 13:45, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: removed. 15 months without discussion seems long enough to realise no one supports merge. Ma®©usBritish [Chat • RFF] 03:21, 4 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merging 

message: The battle of Arcis-sur-Aube did NOT end in a defeat of the Coalition troups. This is false. Napoleon retreated after realizing the size of his foe.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:1205:5045:1BC0:3CE4:F8C2:DC6D:ADEF (talk) 13:57, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Campaigning in North-East France: Error
Talk:Battle of Zealand Point

message: Personally I think the wording might be a bit misleading. Prins Christian Frederik was not the last Danish ship of the line, only the last in the (although very decisive for the future of the navy) Gunboat War.
http://www.navalhistory.dk/english/naval_lists/types/shipsoftheline.htm RhoDaZZ (talk) 13:44, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Consequences... 
Talk:Battle of Cape Finisterre (1805)

message: This edit war is ridiculous. The entry in the infobox concerning the result has gotten to the point where it should just be removed. Frankly if you can't summarise it, then leave it out and put it in the article under the Aftermath section. Centy – [reply]• contribs – 04:34, 7 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: If I understand you, a thoroughly-cited result should be removed because a well-known vandal keeps tampering with it while never producing a single source? Albrecht (talk) 14:33, 7 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: A thoroughly-cited result should be discussed in detail in the article and not make the infobox look ridiculous. Put one citation in the infobox or something like that and then the rest in the article. Or even better, take my suggestion and remove it from the infobox. Actually make readers read the aftermath to allow them to make their own conclusions rather than just give them a one word summary: Britain won/France won etc. Centy – [reply]• contribs – 10:15, 16 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Result
Talk:Battle of Sphacteria

message: someone plz remove the wide text....I don't know how to do it, or why it is there...other than that, it looks good to me
:Done. Adam Bishop 06:20, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Untitled 

message: Firstly, Thucydides did not say Hippagretas--one of the Spartan commanders--was killed in action. Actually, according to Thucydides' description, Hippagretas just lay with corpses, though for this reason other Spartans considered him dead but he was in fact not. I will delete the tag of 'killed in action' for now.
Secondly, I cannot find any information about the figure of Athenian hosplitai or peltasts. I will be grateful if anyone could kindly provide me the sources. Cheers!
Plz do contact me if you have got any questions.
子罕 (English)/子罕(Chinese) 13:53, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Some Details about the Military Conflict Inbox 

message: The 'Overview' states that Demosthenes requested reinforcements from Athens, which were sent out under Cleon; what are the grounds for this assertion? Thucydides (IV.31) states that Cleon arrived at Pylos 'bringing the force which he had requested'. Some people interpret 'he' as referring to Demosthenes; however, there has been no previous mention of such a request from Demosthenes, and 'he' is at least as likely to refer to Cleon himself, and to his request (Thucydides IV.28) for certain forces to accompany him.
I do not know if the statement in the Overview derives from Kagan (the only source cited apart from Thucydides), but in view of the uncertainties it seems to me far too categorical, and should at least be qualified.Chronarch (talk) 19:17, 17 September 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Demosthenes' request for reinforcement (?)
Talk:Battle of Olpae

message: Hello, I have edited the article (sources + some reasons) in line with the Wikiversity course Kurs:Der Peloponnesische Krieg (Peloponnesian War). ----Erkan Yilmaz (evaluate me!, discussion) 11:06, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Battle_of_Olpae&diff=153721821&oldid=134574087 edits]
Talk:Battle of Mantinea (418 BC)

message: Some readers may not know the reasons for the Spartan humilliation at 420BC Olympic Games (Spartans were forbidden to participate and make sacrifices to Zeus by Elean veto).  Does someone opose to include a comment? M.Campos (talk) 13:16, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Prelude to the Battle/Olympic Games
Talk:Battle of Fallen Timbers

message: A 1995 exploration and research by archaeologist-historian Dr. G. Michael Pratt of Heidelberg College discovered a concentration of musket balls in the heavy clay soil of an agricultural field 3/4 mile north of the (erroneous) site on the river bank. Also found in a wooded area next to the field was a rusted bayonet and parts of a trade musket. 
Musicwriter 03:20, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Battle site was elsewhere 

message: Apparently the only verb the writer knew was "secured." This hurts readability. Dfoofnik (talk) 20:50, 9 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Aftermath: Tempted to the Thesaurus 

message: Background + Aftermath + Legacy are about 3 times as long as Battle.  Need to rethink.  Battle is the articre; other sections need to move to other articles or just be deleted. Sbalfour (talk) 04:16, 22 December 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: I've trimmed nearly all of the overbearing Background section.  The 'Battle' is still only 2 paras out of the whole overburdened article. Where's the juice? Honestly, I don't think any of the editors who worked on this article know anything about the battle.  For example, there are three other generals in this battle, and at least 4 other Indian chiefs not mentioned. Sbalfour (talk) 01:48, 11 January 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sections? 

message: This article states at least 3 times that Little Turtle led Miami at Fallen Timbers, but it is never cited.  Can anyone provide a source?  We know Little Turtle argued against engaging Wayne, sent his son-in-law to join Wayne, and (according to some) ceded overall control to Blue Jacket and/or was replaced by Turkey Foot.  It's entirely possible that Little Turtle was at Fallen Timbers, but I think this is a statement that deserves to be challenged.  I want to remove it, but I'll wait for some responses just in case I'm wrong.  Canute (talk) 19:20, 29 July 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: I withdraw my question.  There's a source (cited on Northwest Indian War) stating that Little Turtle resigned his position of leadership, but still fought at Fallen Timbers. Canute (talk) 00:38, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Little Turtle? 

message: This article had a maintenance tag added for abbreviations.  It's difficult to find them all, but it seems like the offending abbreviations are the ranks used in the Battle section.  I've spelled them out and linked their first usage to corresponding articles.  I've removed the maintenance tag.  If you find more abbreviations that I missed, please spell them out.  Thanks! Canute (talk) 16:47, 1 November 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  abbreviations
Talk:Battle of Duck Lake

message: Can anyone tell me what "the Regina front" in this article refers to? I consider myself a fairly well read scholar of the Rebellion and have never encountered such a description. In my understanding Dumont rode out from Batoche to capture the provisions of Duck Lake, and there were no other "fronts" as battle had yet to take place. - Wyldkat
:"Front" is not the best word, and the phrase should read "to," not "from." What was meant: The Métis were initially gathered near the North Saskatchewan to guard against a sortie from Fort Carlton; before Duck Lake they moved south against the Mountie advance from Regina and Fort Qu'appelle. Please correct accordingly. Other articles on this topic are probably in need of similar attention; I encourage you to go ahead and fix errors you find. Albrecht 04:40, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Regina Front? 

message: The paragraph on First Nation's Involvement appears to be a direct copy of content from virtualmuseum.ca., so I removed it entirely.McMuff (talk) 00:37, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: First Nation's Involvement
Talk:Telecommunications in Cuba

message: In September of 1900 Cuba tried to warn Washinton of an approaching Hurricane that hit Galveston Texas, the method of communication used was via a cable? Can anyone tell me what was a cable in 1900??? could it have been morse code via a real copper cable?? thanks
Much of the Caribbean has had telegraph and then/telephone services since the late 1800's.  I can't see why Cuba would go back to "morse code". Cuba's phone company. ETECSA CaribDigita 03:08, 30 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: History

message: What were the broadcasters in Cuba called before Castro's government took office? Or was it an "I Love Lucy" joke that it was called CBS... the Cuban Broadcasting System? I can imagine a similar name, but not an identical name. Cuban Broadcasting Company... or Cuban Broadcasting Service... GBC 20:14, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: TV and Radio in Cuba
Talk:Battle of Batoche

message: This account is really biased in favour of the Canadian government. e.g. "A very dangerous situation developed when a group of Métis rushed the artillery. Only Howard's directing a heavy stream of Gatling fire at the attackers prevented a disaster." Would it not be disaster for the Metis to have a Gatling gun firing at them? This page needs to be rewritten to be more objective!  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.64.105.79 (talk) 01:13, 25 September 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Biased

message: This article was rated C class by an independent assessment (military) August 23, 2014. Comment by reviewer: "C-Class. Still has uncited paras, bit unsure about whether it properly covers the topic, but have given the benefit of the doubt, as it was already assessed as =y. Please bring it back when fully cited. Regards," 
Suggestions for improvement: references needed for every paragraph and further expansion of the page.-- Kayoty (talk) 18:55, 24 August 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Assessment
Talk:Millie Small

message: The Daily Mirror (not a WP:RS) has reported that Millie has died. Mjroots (talk) 07:32, 6 May 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: So has the Jamaica Observer - here - which I assume is reliable.  Quotes included from Chris Blackwell and Ernest Ranglin, so no doubt, I would say.  Ghmyrtle (talk) 08:00, 6 May 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Death
Talk:Interstate 380 (Pennsylvania)

message: On the talk page for Pennsylvania Route 380, I wrote this:
(Title: There is an I-380 elsewhere in Pennsylvania.)
OK, I see the item about removing PA 80 because 80 was being taken for I-80 elsewhere in Pennsylvania.  But nowadays, I notice I-380 in eastern Pennsylvania, heading from I-80 toward Scranton.  How is it handled on those little white rectangular signs in Pennsylania?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.63.16.82 (talk) 15:09, 1 June 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Still have PA 380 elsewhere in Pennsylvania.
Talk:War of the Lance

message: I believe the War of the Lance article should not redirect to Dragonlance, instead be a Dragonlance event explaining the war. I am considering writing that article in the near future, so don't be surprised if the redirection is broken. -- ReyBrujo 05:11, 11 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: You are certainly welcome to do so. This redirect, together with many others, is waiting for someone to develop it into an article. · Naive cynic · 09:42, 11 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: War of the Lance redirect

message: Would it be plausible to add the War Infobox to this and any other dragonlance wars, such as Blue Lady's War or Chaos War? DoomsDay349 23:23, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No, there was a discussion here, where they complain about using infoboxes for "real" things in fictional articles. I guess we should leave the articles without an infobox. -- ReyBrujo 23:28, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Alright, just checking.  DoomsDay349 23:31, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: War Infobox

message: Why did someone randomly place the cite needed on this article?  There are lines left alone and others that someone felt the need for a cite.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.190.4.245 (talk) 02:39, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Wish I could explain that... they seem to be in all sorts of D&D articles that way. 67.175.176.178 (talk) 03:51, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Citation needed explosion
Talk:Battle of the Lipari Islands

message: C class. The introduction should mention the two commanders, Boodes and Gnaeus Cornelius Scipio "Asina". The article does not have a lot of information (B2 = no) which may be because it does not exist. Maybe another reviewer would be more generous. Djmaschek (talk) 02:51, 14 July 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Many thanks for looking at this. I have no intention of hawking the article around looking for a more favourable review. Mostly because yours are usually on the money: firm but fair and often with insightful (or just obvious but overlooked) pointers as to how to improve. I have expanded the lead, and added a little to the main article. This has more or less exhausted the sources I am aware of. You are correct, there isn't a lot of information on this skirmish. It is only notable because it was the first ever naval clash of the Romans and the Carthaginians. The ancient sources don't help; one modern historian comments "Polybius [excepted]... other sources are fragmentary, consisting of anecdotes, many of which are implausible. The very nature of the war makes it difficult for them to provide a coherent account." Gog the Mild (talk) 14:14, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi Djmaschek. 18 months on, hopefully a little wiser regarding the ways of Wikipedia, I have had another crack at this. I would be grateful for any comments you may have as to how close it may now be t B class. Obviously, if time or motivation don't permit then I entirely understand. Gog the Mild (talk) 13:04, 11 March 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Review notes
Talk:Battle of Drepana

message: Should't the commander be Hamilcar (Drepanum) instead of Hamilcar Barca? Pibwl ←« 22:52, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Hamilcar

message: Hannibal Barca the son of Hamilcar couldn't had taked part of this battel. He was born two years later!  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.66.230.189 (talk) 17:57, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Hannibal
Talk:Battle of Cape Ecnomus

message: There is no indication here whether the battle lasted hours or days. Does anyone know? Grant | Talk 12:46, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Duration? 

message: I understood that the Carthaginians had the elements marked 2,3, and 4 (in the diagram) in a line, with 1 advanced, so that it would look a little like a "j" from the coast of Sicily. The diagram, however, has both 1 and 4 advanced, so that it would look like a backwards "c".  The article text makes it seem that the "j" is correct. Also the "j" seems to be confirmed by the external link (at livius.org), which shows 2,3, and 4 all in a line.Mazzula (talk) 18:02, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Carthaginian Fleet 

message: "Battle of Cape Hermaeum" returns 184 Google hits, where "Battle of Cape Hermaea" 5 only. Hanberke (talk) 08:51, 5 December 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Good spot. Changed. Gog the Mild (talk) 17:11, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:   Hermaeum or Hermaea 

message: Hey Gog, I have some queries if you don't mind.
:: Of course I don't mind.
* Most of your First Punic War serie's articles use "Polybius's" while this uses "Polybius'"?
::Fixed.
*  Shouldn't it be "In 264 BC the states of Carthage and the Roman Republic went to war"?
::No. It is not normal to specify the type of governance of a country when mentioning it.
*  Remove "his" per one of my comments in other FACs.
::Done.
Thanks for replying. Cheers. CPA-5 (talk) 13:46, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Cheers. Gog the Mild (talk) 13:55, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Little queries

message: The image used in the infobox is historically inaccurate. Compare the galleys in the fanciful illustration with those in trireme.
:Bearing in mind that they are from a different shipbuilding culture, from 50-100 years earlier, of much smaller ships and based on a modern reconstruction. Gog the Mild (talk) 18:46, 16 July 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: "outiggers"? As in Outrigger? They are not that bad. But yes, not that good either. The tusks may be an attempt to show the "oar-buster" fittings from a slightly later period. Gog the Mild (talk) 18:46, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

text: They generally were, although we don't have specific information regarding this encounter. Gog the Mild (talk) 18:45, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

text: I would be inclined to move the image down to the bottom of the Battle section and add an "as imagined by" to the caption. I don't know how Peter would regard that. Also pinging  and  who take an interest in this sort of thing. Gog the Mild (talk) 18:45, 16 July 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Gog, I don't like splitting up posts so I'll reply in one go here. I've never seen ancient galleys depicted in the way that's shown here. I've also never seen any indications of radically different ship designs between different Mediterranean powers. Can you please provide some sources to back up that the Saint-Aubin illustration is considered historically accurate? Peter Isotalo 22:30, 16 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Infobox image is inaccurate