lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:HMS Leander (1882)

message: The original text of this article was as follows:
:HMS Leander was a second class cruiser of the Leander Class which served with the Royal Navy.
:She was built by Napier in Glasgow, being laid down in 1880, launched in 1883 and completed in 1886.  She served in the Mediterranean from 1886 to 1893, was in reserve in Devonport from 1893 to 1897 and then served in the Pacific from 1997 to 1903.  She did harbour service in Devonport from 1904 to 1913 before she was sold to become TS Indefatigable.  She was renamed Carrick II in 1941 and broken up, by Wards in Preston, in 1947.
:Reference
:Cruisers of the Royal and Commonwealth Navies by Douglas Morris. Maritime Books 1987. .
Errors and possible errors
*launched in 1883 and completed in 1886 - Conways says launched in 1882, and commissioned in 1885.
*She did harbour service in Devonport from 1904 to 1913 before she was sold to become TS Indefatigable.  She was renamed Carrick II in 1941 and broken up, by Wards in Preston, in 1947. - no that was her sister ship Phaeton.
*She served in the Mediterranean from 1886 to 1893,  - no she was on the China Sation from late 1885 to 1895 (revision --Toddy1 (talk) 14:45, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Is ''Cruisers of the Royal and Commonwealth Navies'' an unreliable source?
Talk:HMS Daring (1893)

message: This article shows the Commissioned date in the Infobox as February 1895, but in the "Service history" section it states, "She was commissioned at Portsmouth on 23 February 1900 ...." The latter date is likely wrong, but someone with access to The Times reference needs to verify. Zcarstvnz (talk) 12:51, 6 November 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Commissioning Inconsistencies
Talk:3dvia

message: Per WP:CITE, the sources used in this article should be cited in the body text, and not only mentioned in the 3dvia#References section.  Thank you. --lifebaka (Talk - Contribs) 21:32, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: References
Talk:Alberbury Castle

message: I consider this paragraph is mistaken:
An abbey adjoining the castle, with a single high tower with a triangular roof, that may have been useful as an outpost or a look out, still exists today. It was founded by the FritzWarin family during the reign of Henry I. It housed the Benedictines of Grammont from France. They may have been Dominicans, as they called their religion Albus Monasterium ("White Monastery" or "White Minster").''
for following reasons:
*the adjoining building is the present day Alberbury (St Michael) parish church, whose description its basic structure matches. Citeable evidence it was ever a monastic building needs providing.
*the Grandmontine monastery, Alberbury Priory, had its church located to the north of the main village of Alberbury on lower ground close to the River Severn, its remains incorporated into the farmhouse called White Abbey and not on the site of this parish church.
*Benedictines were a separate monastic order from the Dominicans, who were preaching friars. St Dominic did use the older orders like the Benedictines to model the order he founded in the 13th century.
*It was the house, not their religion, that was given the names meaning White Monastery.
I have rewritten the first sentence of the paragraph and deleted the last two sentences whose detail does not appear supported by the citations as referring to the parish church.
Cloptonson (talk) 15:09, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Confused/confusing detail about 'adjoining' abbey
Talk:Franklin Delano Roosevelt Park

message: A map of the park's boundaries would be nice. Cacw (talk) 21:16, 18 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Map request

message: (I moved this comment from the article. - SummerPhD (talk) 15:56, 28 September 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I couldn't immediately find construction dates for the buildings, but Friends of FDR Park say "The Park's boathouse, gazebo and American Swedish Historical Museum are current reminders of the Exposition." - SummerPhD (talk) 16:11, 28 September 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Built for the Expo?  
Talk:Robot navigation

message: I'm looking forward to this article!  Keep up the good work!  - Jameson L. Tai talk ♦ contribs 21:47, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: I'm looking

message: * Expansion
* Bring up to date
* Ensure all terms and possibilities are covered: DARPA contests for vehicles etc, ambulatory bots in factories etc.
Chaosdruid (talk) 21:39, 7 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Attention needed

message: I am proposing the addition of Autonomous Flight Controller descriptions to the article.  AFCs are already used in fixed wing and multirotor drones, and there is an implementation path for airlines described in this Forbes article https://www.forbes.com/sites/oliverwyman/2017/10/25/single-pilot-commercial-flights-are-not-far-off-even-if-fully-autonomous-flight-is/#4235ba8e3b17 
Any thoughts or advice?  StreetSign (talk) 14:40, 17 July 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Autonomous Flight Controllers
Talk:Cameroon Democratic Union

message: On 26 October 2007 Everyking moved this article from Democratic Union of Cameroon to Cameroon Democratic Union saying; "the party is always referred to in english as cameroon democratic union".  A Google search, on 28 November 2007, found 1,500 hits for "Cameroon Democratic Union" and 3,600 hits for "Democratic Union of Cameroon", so the statement of Everyking obviously needs to be made more specific.  For example, if discussions on camerounlink.net are used as a basis, clearly "Cameroon Democratic Union" is ahead as it gets 326 hits while "Democratic Union of Cameroon" gets only 3 hits.  This is also true at postnewsline.com where "Cameroon Democratic Union"  gets 24 hits, and "Democratic Union of Cameroon" gets only 1 hit.  At blackwell-synergy.com, however, things are more balanced, "Cameroon Democratic Union" gets 8 hits and "Democratic Union of Cameroon" gets 5 hits.  All 13 of the publications indexed at blackwell-synergy.com are in English. So obviously it depends upon the source, and the party is not always referred to in English as the "Cameroon Democratic Union." --Bejnar (talk) 21:47, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Move
Talk:Broughton, Aylesbury

message: The ough in the Milton Keynes Broughton rhymes with woe, but we also have Loughton (rhymes with how) and Woughton (rhymes with huff).  So, out of curiosity, how is Broughton, Aylesbury pronounced? --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 12:26, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The "Brough" rhymes with door. -- Roleplayer (talk) 12:30, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pronunciation of name?
Talk:Caldecote, Buckinghamshire

message: It is not obvious why this article even exists? The only reason I can think of to keep it is that the name may be recycled for the proposed "north-eastern expansion area" (though I doubt it because it would be too high a risk of confusion with Caldecotte, leading to emergency services going to the wrong place). 
Is there a convincing reason to keep it? --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 14:05, 29 October 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge into Moulsoe and change to redirect?
Talk:Calvert, Buckinghamshire

message: It doesnt feel appropriate to me that this page is classed under "landfills in the UK", because that's just one part of the article. Pauljmackay (talk) 11:04, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
Talk:Bottlenose Dolphin Research Institute

message: At least the first few paragraphs of this article are copied almost verbatim from the personal website/foundation of the editor who posted this who is apparently the source of all the references on the page as well as the biologidst and director of the "Institute". As it stands, this article is simply an ad for the website and should be revised to standards or taken down.Bob98133 (talk) 21:58, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: As of January 26, 2009 nothing much seems to have changed (apart from my own edits today). Isn't there anyone out there who can take look at this?--Technopat (talk) 08:37, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Plagiarism

message: The following coordinate fixes are needed for Bottlenose Dolphin Research Institute - BDRI
42 29.24 N
008 51.29 W
—77.27.95.71 (talk) 16:53, 19 December 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Deor (talk) 19:23, 19 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Coordinate error
Talk:Samuel Bernard (financier)

message: the picture shows king louis XIV. and is painted by samuel bernard. it hangs in the chateau chenonceaux, where i have seen it with my own eyes. the owner of the castle, a french count, presented it to the king after louis XIV. spent some days in the chateau on a hunting vacation. the king was grateful and sent a portrait of himself by the famous painter hyacinthe rygaud to the count. this rigaud-picture is also to be found in the castle. this informations can be found in a good travel guide on the castle.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.128.243.38 (talk) 14:37, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  wrong picture
Talk:Ford, Buckinghamshire

message: This article must surely make up its mind. It is first described as a hamlet, and later it informs us that it is a village and not a hamlet. I suggest the article should be made consistent.
92.29.34.47 (talk) 16:50, 24 June 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Ford is a hamlet by the measures employed by Wikipedia, so have edited article.Tmol42 (talk) 23:22, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Village or Hamlet 
Talk:Great Kingshill

message: Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: http://www.lkvs.org.uk/pages/aboutthevillage.htm. Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.) For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you.  Pol430 talk to me 20:38, 7 June 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Are you sure the village society hasn't copied sections of this article and then copyrighted it?  The village website has copyrighted their text as of 2009, however elements of the text you have removed have been in this article since it was created in 2003.  See this version of the article from December 2003. -- roleplayer 20:54, 7 June 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: You're probably right, I've restored the text. I didn't check the article history, I assumed it was recently created in the same way Little kingshill was. Guess that's what you get for investigating copyright while tired... Signing off. Pol430 talk to me 21:07, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

text: These revisions:  further show the evolution of the text over time on this site.  The village website is in the wrong, not this article. -- roleplayer 21:04, 7 June 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Forgive my vociferous reply, I was an anon editor who created and worked on many of the Buckinghamshire articles before I signed up for this username.  Can we also restore the text on Little Kingshill too please?  Now that we know it's not copyrighted. -- roleplayer 21:12, 7 June 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually scrub that, I'll create a better version at the correct location. -- roleplayer 21:17, 7 June 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copyright problem removed
Talk:Kingswood, Buckinghamshire

message: The pub that used to be situated on the main road in Kingswood was indeed called the Crooked Billet. In 1984-1985 I lived in the next house along the road from it and I used to go there frequently. At that time there was not (nor has there ever been, to the best of my knowledge) any establishment called the "Cook and Fillet".
It seems to me that the edit which changed the name of this pub was probably an immature prank. Ralphclark (talk) 17:07, 2 July 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: A quick search suggests similarly; I've altered accordingly. I hope the beer was good back in 1984-85, Ralph! Hchc2009 (talk) 19:19, 2 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Erroneous edit
Talk:Meadle

message: I would propose to add a note on the name and re-direct this article to an appropriate heading for hamlets in the parish of Monks Risborough of which it forms part.
Anybody searching for it would be taken straight there.
I will not do this for a week or two in case anyone feels strongly about it.
The same applies to Askett and Owlswick
Waysider1925 (talk) 11:42, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Proposal to re-direct
Talk:Shreding Green

message: It's spelt "Shreding Green" (one d).
See:
http://www.shop.ordnancesurveyleisure.co.uk/shopbylocation/502500/181500/3500/GB/all/Shreding-Green
Which shows a section from the Ordnance Survey maps for the UK clearly showing the spelling. This matches all the other freely-viewable online maps (Google, Bing, Streetmap etc).
There is no place in the UK called "Shredding Green".
Further evidence of the misspelling can be seen from the Land Registry (eg title number BM86704) which must be purchased from the LR.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.166.71.27 (talk) 13:01, 14 April 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: The signpost on entering the hamlet is spelled Shredding Green 82.45.24.60 (talk) 19:25, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Just because it is on a map does NOT mean that it is accurate 82.45.24.60 (talk) 19:26, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
Talk:Whiteleaf, Buckinghamshire

message: 'plain daft' is a bit strong. I thought we were meant to be courteous.
If you do not like the re-direction I do not see why you had to delete all the new text - or perhaps you think the old text is correct. I would myself categorise that as 'plain daft' (though I would not normally have said so). There was never a medieval monastery at Monks Risborough and I do not know any reputable or authoritative work which suggests that there was.
Also the name does not come from the cross but from the chalk cliff, which was almost certainly a natural formation and far older than the cross.
Also, strictly, the cross is not in Whiteleaf but above it, merely named after it.
Wikipedia Geography says if there is no more than a couple of paras that could be said about hamlets it may be best practice to merge their articles with that for the parish.
I do not mind there being short articles for the individual hamlets, but I am quite unrepentant in saying that everything in Monks Risborough is best described there, so that any one wanting to know about MR can read it all there in one article without whizzing about elsewhere. The hamlet entries can describe the hamlets themselves but anything beyond that is best in the main article, which includes all the hamlets.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Waysider1925 (talk • contribs) 14:46, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

message: I have altered the paragraph on the name and added a reference. White Cliff is not Old English and there is no evidence that the name was used before Tudor times at the earliest, possibly the 18th century.
I have also changed the paragraph relating to theories on the Cross. I was unhappy that the article implied that some people still believed the story about a medieval monastery although, of all the theories, that is the only one which cannot possibly be right, as there is not only no archaeological evidence for such a monastery but no such monastery is mentioned in the ecclesiastical records of the country nor in the Valor Ecclesiasticus (the valuation made before the dissolution of the monasteries). However the theories are quite amusing and I have added some others that I have seen. Some may think that there should be references to the books where they are quoted, but I am not in a position to give these at present. I hope to add them later. Does anyone know where the story about a monastery came from? I have never seen that one.
I have also restored a short reference to Momks Risborough, as the article did not mention that Whiteleaf is in Monks Risborough.
I hope this will not be contentious.   Waysider1925 (talk) 17:17, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Amendments of 9 Jan 2009
Talk:Yamaha CP300

message: This article is written in a very unencyclopedic fashion, and should be rewritten.  All the parts that specifically deal with the instrument itself are fine, but the first sentence in particular stands out as poorly written and unencyclopedic.  Thank you.  --lifebaka (Talk - Contribs) 22:15, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Unencyclopedic
Talk:The Closet Opened

message: # "supposedly based upon the writings of Sir Kenelm Digby". So far as I know, everyone supposes that. If anyone doubts it, the reason for doubt would be interesting to know. Otherwise "supposedly" seems like a typical Wikipedia word to avoid simply saying they are from him. True, many of the recipes are written as collected from acquaintances, whose names are given, but who would have collected them, if not Digby? 
# "the book echoes an earlier age". Which age would that be? Surely no such collection of mead recipes survives from any age or from any culture. The contributors were not from an earlier age: they were Digby's contemporaries. Andrew Dalby 15:00, 14 November 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: This has been answered -- thanks -- Andrew Dalby 13:53, 15 November 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Two queries on wording
Talk:Transfăgărășan

message: Minor grammatical issues solved, although the article still needs improving.
Ftpaddict (talk) 22:20, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Untitled 

message: In the road infobox at the top of the page, the Romanian name says Drumul Naţional 7C; it should be Drumul Național 7C (replace U+0163 by U+021B). Unfortunately, I do not understand how to modify text in the infobox.
Lilalas (talk) 10:50, 26 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Infobox: T-comma vs. T-cedilla
Talk:System requirements (spacecraft system)

message: Bearian 17:58, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
Talk:Agaclytus

message: If you must add era tags, please keep the neutral "BCE" and "CE". I would prefer it in this form. Lupus Bellator (talk) 17:51, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Personal preference isn't a sufficient reason to change from one convention to the other, per WP:ERA.Cúchullain t/c 19:28, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: The Plotinus example at WP:ERA permits the use of an era designation when one may be helpful to the reader. It should be up to those contributing content to decide which era style to use. Cynwolfe (talk) 22:15, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Era style
Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Claud "Rick" Koerber

message: May I respectfully suggest that new authors, especially those who attempt in good faith to comply with wikipedia policy and guidelines, be encouraged as to how they can improve their articles, rather than seeking summary deletion.  The effort here may be amateurish, but with a few exceptions, I see little difference (other than length) between this article and those about bigger-name people like Robert Kiyosaki and Donald Trump.Freeacadien (talk) 22:36, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
Talk:Common tsessebe

message: BBC reports on a peculiar sexual behaviour of the Topi. I could add the info from the BBC article, but I think it would be better if it were done by someone with access to the actual article published in the Current Biology journal.bogdan (talk) 22:42, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Sexual behaviour

message: I'm currently updating Wikipedia with the latest scientific taxonomy of the Alcelaphinae as it is in Wilson and Reeder (2005). Therefor a huge clean-up is needed for these species, including this one.This page was formely called Topi, but that is now a subspecies under another species. Peter Maas\talk 12:15, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, very much still needed between this one and Topi. Dicklyon (talk) 15:18, 17 May 2022 (UTC)

text: OK, I did the split, taking Common tsessebe back to close to what it was before all the more general species info was added.  Please see if I got it about right, and help tune it up. Dicklyon (talk) 01:37, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Moved and taxonomy clean-up needed 

message: Reference number 5 links to a quote on a Hartebeest's speed and not  a Tsessebe. These are 2 different animals. The Tsessebe is widely regarded as the fastest antelope in Africa and has been quoted as reaching speeds of up to 100km/h.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Boyshey (talk • contribs) 10:44, 24 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Speed
Talk:Puerto Rico Open

message: Should the 2018 event be included in the main table? I almost think it might be better to mention it separately. pʰeːnuːmuː →‎ pʰiːnyːmyː → ‎ɸinimi → ‎fiɲimi 22:30, 24 February 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unofficial 2018 event
Talk:Cervantes (Soulcalibur)

message: "Cervantes 2P costume looks like Nightmare's weapon, Requiem"....
WHAT???  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Six string brad (talk • contribs) 01:56, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  ??? 

message: In the trivia section, someone put that Cervantes was a Spanish writer and de Leon was a Spanish explorer. I think this is irrelevent information, considering that Cervantes is a Spanish name and doesn't necessarily mean he's named after those two people. I'm sure there are plenty of Spaniards with the same names of Cervantes and de Leon. Should I delete this info?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Six string brad (talk • contribs) 02:01, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Spanish Name 

message: Okay, this is pretty much just like the old character analysis section from before. I'm removing these for the same reason people from before deleted the character analysis section. If you want to find out why, check out Taki's and Kilik's talk pages. If people want a strategy guide, they should go to fansites. Mythmonster2 (talk) 06:22, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Gameplay
Talk:Endgame: Blueprint for Global Enslavement

message: The article states that shortly after Endgame's release, it was outselling both Sicko and An Inconvenient Truth. First off, how shortly after? Second, is there any way this can be verified without using Alex Jones' site? Amazon.com currently puts Endgame at #637 in DVDs , while Sicko and An Inconvenient Truth are at #101 and #178 respectively . Now, I know that the article is talking about shortly after the DVD's release, not now, but if Endgame is being outsold by so much now, it makes me wonder if it's true that it was ever outselling the other two. And even if it was, it was probably only for a short time, making it hard to verify. I'll keep looking for a source, but for now, the "citation needed" tag needs to remain.
EDIT: I took at look at the Jones page www.infowarscom/articles/alex/endgame_amazon_number_3.htm  which provides a screenshot (not necessarily trustworthy, as it could have been edited) and a clarification: it wasn't #3 in DVDs overall. It was only in documentary DVDs. I'll edit the article to reflect that. The Amazon.com best-selling documentary page doesn't have Endgame anywhere in the top 25 currently, even though Jones said it was #3 on November 14, 2007. In fact, as of now, it's #28, far below both An Inconvenient Truth and Sicko. --clpo13(talk) 23:04, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reception section