lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Life Is a Highway

message: The song was used during Arnold's victory speech on becoming governor of California. Youtube link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CwoEOVDg_2s
No idea if its worth putting up on the page, just thought I'd mention it.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.107.78.22 (talk) 13:37, 3 April 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Arnold Sschwarzenegger's campaign use

message: why does this appear at the bottom of the article  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.38.11.18 (talk) 21:58, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Rascal Flatts

message: iTunes has it as 1992.--Jnelson09 21:04, 4 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: 1992 in the US. 1991 in Canada. Bearcat 00:36, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: 1991?

message: Did Tom Petty do a cover on this song before Rasacl Flatts?? 
Or maybe write it??
I see it all over the net as his song... I thought Joe wrote it?
:I only know the Tom Petty version, and I'm flabbergasted that I can't find anything on Wikipedia (or anywhere!) about it. 128.253.185.233 (talk) 04:53, 23 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tom Petty.. 

message: I know that the popular version is country, something Guitar Hero hasn't tried, but don't you wikiers think that this would be a good song for the popular video game series to try?--71.35.69.46 21:41, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Guitar Hero

message: The article states that this is Tom Cochrane's most famous song. I would have to disagree... Lunatic Fringe by Red Rider was also written by Tom Cochrane and is a major classic rock classic hit. Just something to consider.
75.169.36.157 (talk) 20:03, 7 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tom Cochrane's most famous song? 

message: Appears to be a modified 57’ with a blower. 2600:1009:B176:5E16:B4D1:1472:7E34:10C5 (talk) 20:42, 12 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Corvette from Rascall Flatts video
Talk:WP

message: Perhaps the best known (imho) WP on Wikipedia is as Wikipedia: namespace shortcuts. Perhaps add that to the top line disambiguating Wikipedia terms? I'm not fond of breaking the wall between the encyclopedia and the project, but perhaps in this case it's useful? 207.145.133.34 19:03, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  WP: shortcuts 

message: This entry has been removed several times, before adding an entry for White power, please check the article mentions the term per WP:DABMENTION. Widefox; talk 16:58, 29 July 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: and (per WP:DABACRONYM), that the acronym is used elsewhere in reliable sources. "Do not invent abbreviations or acronyms". Mitch Ames (talk) 12:55, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
replies: text:  Yes, per DABACRONYM. Thanks for correcting. Widefox; talk 22:21, 11 February 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  White power
Talk:Shaheen (missile)

message: Tidied the article up a bit and removed some stuff that didn't sound great - don't know enough to add anything though. --Si42 21:11, 4 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Fixed. The numbers were made up by someone. {Raza0007 | Talk} 19:11, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Comments 

message: I have replaced the image of Shaheen-II (one on the right) with the image of Shaheen-I (one on the left) as this particular page is for Shaheen-I missile. 
Shaheen-I is 12 m long and its TEL is 8 wheeler. Shaheen-II is 17.5 m long and its TEL is 12 wheeler. You can see it clearly in the images which one is Shaheen-I and which one is Shaheen-II.
I had replaced the image on the right earlier, with the image of Shaheen-I present at the bottom of the article for the same reason.
If someone does not like this image, feel free to add another good pic of Shaheen-I missile. Just make sure it is of Shaheen-I though. 
You can move the image of Shaheen-II TEL on Shaheen-II page, but there is already a beautiful pic of Shaheen-II on that page. I would recomend keeping the original.
Raza0007 18:37, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Shaheen-I pic
Talk:Pittwater Council

message: It would be good to have more info on the split from Warringah Shire Council. This is outside my speciality, and I won't edit the article as it would amount to original research. However, I would like to offer the following points which I consider interesting. (I lived in Pittwater area (Mona Vale) from 1985-1992, having attended Pittwater High School 1985-88, and am going from memory here.)
*It was a somewhat acrimonious split
*One of the main arguments by proponents of secession was that Pittwater was subsidising the rest of the shire. Once we split, our rates would go down. 
*After Pittwater actually split, rates went up quite dramatically.
*One of the key figures pushing for secession was local independent councillor Eric Green (if my memory serves correctly) who had made a strong showing in 
*(According to rumour, hearsay) the State Liberal MP Jim Longley agreed to grant a referendum with favourable terms on the condition that Eric Green would not contest a further state election in his electorate. (I have no idea if there is any clear evidence for this, and I emphasise that though it seems highly plausible, I heard the claim but saw no evidence).
*The referendum was held in quite an unorthodox fashion, as a postal ballot. From memory there was controversy over this, with an initial suggestion that more than 50% of voters would have to vote in order for the secession to be successful. This appeared to doom the bid for separation. However, the terms were changed (surprisingly, to my mind), and the if the final result didn't favour secession, the MP Jim Longley had the discretion to allow secession anyway. And that is what happened - the result was that a slight majority of voters who sent in their ballot rejected the split; but in the absence of an overwhelming majority of negative votes, Longley approved the split. And now that Green was occupied with the new Pittwater council, Longley might well have had reason to be glad to be rid of him. 
That's how things happened, according to the best memory of this cynic. --Singkong2005 tc 07:39, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Split from Warringah Shire Council
Talk:Skyhawk (Cedar Point)

message: This article survived an Articles for Deletion debate. The discussion can be found here. Owen× ☎ 21:27, 4 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Articles for Deletion debate

message: I thought this ride is still operating at Cedar Point? I've heard it was down but isn't it back up again?Wackyike (talk) 00:27, 8 December 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: The ride had some issues at the end of this season, not sure if it ever opened back up, but the ride would still be considered operating unless a long-term downtime is announced.FirstDrop87 (talk) 01:56, 8 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is it operating?
Talk:Identity Crisis (Star Trek: The Next Generation)

message: I put up a new summary in the Temp page for Identity Crisis which is original and should meet the requirements. Mokwella 21:46, 4 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: New Summary

message: Can the newly edited page replace the one I originally submitted with the copyright problems?  It's been over a week.  Mokwella 02:12, 17 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Status?
Talk:Guamá

message: Some of the links to citations were broken or no longer available, so I found other references when necessary and created a reflist. This page is no longer in the Articles Lacking Sources category. Chenoeh (talk) 00:14, 7 June 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Reflist
Talk:Stephen Dixon (author)

message: Hello, good work on Stephen Dixon, and thanks for the contribution. However, you did not any references to the article. Keeping Wikipedia accurate and verifiable is very important, and as you might be aware there is currently a push to encourage editors to cite the sources they used when adding content. From what websites, books, or other places did you learn the information that you added to Stephen Dixon? Would it be possible for you to mention them in the article? You can simply add links, or see WP:CITET if you wish to review some of the different citation methods. Thanks! — BRIAN0918 • 2005-12-4 21:18
:Hi, and thanks for your message. Generally, I can understand what you say about citing sources, but in this particular case having to state where I got the information from borders on the ridiculous. Just have a look at the stub: All it contains is a list of titles, information which I gathered from various online bookshops. Would you like me to quote amazon, Powell's, or Barnes & Noble? All the best, <KF> 21:27, 4 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: All you would have to do is create a "References" section and list all the links you used in the creation of that article. -- BRIAN0918  21:29, 4 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay, I'll try again: There is nothing to refer to so what would be the point of having a section entitled ==References==? You don't seriously expect me to cite http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/search-handle-url/index=books&field-author-exact=Stephen%20Dixon&rank=-relevance%2C%2Bavailability%2C-daterank/103-3540855-4082202 as a source? <KF> 21:35, 4 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: You can call it a "sources" section. The point is only to cite where your information came from. -- BRIAN0918  21:38, 4 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: In no academic institution anywhere in the world are faculty or students required to provide a source for a book list. A list of publications is public knowledge. Let's assume I had all of Dixon's books at home. What would be the source then? Am I supposed to write "my bookshelf" and add a photo of it? <KF> 21:47, 4 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: We are not an academic institution. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia that anyone can edit, or vandalize, if they choose. This is why sources are important, to be able to verify the content on pages. You're making this out to be much too big of a deal. -- BRIAN0918  22:51, 4 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Arthur J. Serratelli

message: I started this article.  If Bishop Serratelli moves to a higher position in the future, then maybe others will add more info.67.80.139.189 22:00, 4 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Samuel Holdheim

message: This article seem to be completely identical to the article in the Jewish Encyclopedia. See http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=845&letter=H&search=samuel%20holdheim
Shouldn't that be mentioned? --itpastorn 22:03, 4 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: It is mentioned (now), and allowed. ssepp(talk) 12:35, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Jewish Encyclopedia 

message: If there are any 'POV' issues on the page, they appear to be coming from a 'negative' quarter who wish to cast Holdheim in a bad light, as opposed to letting history do the talking. I won't speculate as to what branch of the Jewish religion these editors would be from... A Sniper 15:14, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: POV
Talk:Kushtia District

message: "Average literacy rate of the district stands at 25.8% with 30.9% for the male and 48.35% for the female." How can the average literacy rate of the district be lower than the male and female rate? DaGizza Chat (c) 22:12, 4 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: In 'infobox' TimeZone is showin 'BST'. It should be BDT. Thanks . Bauani (talk) 08:36, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: TimeZone
Talk:Invaders (comics)

message: What, no Tara?!? http://www.marvunapp.com/Appendix3/tarainv.htm Luis Dantas 14:01, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

message: I think that this team's origin as the 1940's (real publishing time) All Winners Squad should be emphasized more. The article makes a single mention of the All Winners comic book, but omits the fact that the entire Invaders team existed as the All Winners Squad in that old publication. You would not write an All Star Squadron entry without mentioning the JSA, so why this omission for Marvel's golden age team?--Drvanthorp 23:24, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Credit where credit is due 

message: In the image, there is a Soviet flag and the Swastika flag. There is nothing in the article about the USSR being in this, let alone being parallel with the Nazis. Some explanation, please?
: I think it's because of the plot line from that issue's story arc. If I remember right that's when it went over how the Invaders had helped the Russians in the war.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zalanth (talk • contribs) 19:30, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Umm? 

message: The member list should really be separated between the "Invaders" (the actual golden age character's who were part of the team) and the characters that were ret-conned into the Invaders in modern times, which includes all the "New Invaders" and characters such as Tara who weren't created till 2004.24.190.34.219 (talk) 03:02, 7 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  There should be a seperation between the Invaders and New Invaders
Talk:Scottish language

message: Your last change was uncalled for as far as I can see. Perhaps you can explain why you changed so much, coz "please don't pipe links" explains nothing. Calgacus 22:18, 4 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I think Mais oui! was referring to Wikipedia:Disambiguation, which suggests that disambig pages not wikilink other words besides the page titles, for example, how Scots language is currently wikilinked as Lowland Scots.  - orioneight (talk) 22:33, 4 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah ... so that's what "piping" means then?! Never knew that. Anyways, Lowland Scots has to be better than Scots for this dab, because Scots partially contradicts the very purpose of the dab - Scots just being a form of Scottis, the Middle English language form of Scottish (which actually meant Gaelic mostly anyways). Ignoring that, I'm still none the wiser as to why the links to Middle and Old Irish were removed, languages which were (unlike modern Gaelic in most cases) referred to as Scottish (i.e. lingua scot[t]ica, scottis, etc). Those links were put up by me. They weren't put up because I'm a deranged lunatic, but because they serve a good purpose. For instance, any person reading a translation of Bede or Adomnan just now who looks up Scottish will be more informed with these additions than he otherwise would have been. Many reading medieval literature (depending on the sensitivty of the translation used) will come across this word referring to these two languages. So, one either gives them a separate line, or gives their links on the same line as Scottish Gaelic. This is common sense. So, perhaps no-one will think it strange if I didn't think Mais Oui! gave enough reason for ditching so much. Calgacus 22:51, 4 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Mais oui! Changes
Talk:Chief technician

message: Users looking back through the edit history of this article will see that it has variously been listed as CT, Ch Tech and Chf Tech.  It is now back at Ch Tech again although I believe this to be an error.  See the RAF's own page for conformation that it's Chf Tech.  Although not official, CT (and C/T)are also in use.  To avoid an edit war I have decided not to amend this page.  Perhaps another user can check on the above facts and amend the page.
:Looking at webpages, Ch Tech is pretty common, as is Chf Tech. The latter is actually rather an odd abbreviation, as Chief is usually abbreviated Ch in most other British military contexts. The fact that the abbreviation is listed on the RAF website is not necessarily an indication that it is the only official abbreviation, as there are frequently variations (and even official websites often get things wrong - a number of official MOD websites talk about Aircraftsmen, with the incorrect 's', for example). The webpage lists Jnr Tech - I have always seen the official abbreviation as JT within the RAF. Don't necessarily take websites as gospel truth, official or otherwise. I shall readd Chf Tech, but I think Ch Tech should stay as well. -- Necrothesp 00:27, 5 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Rank Abbreviation
Talk:Tatas

message: I think this should probably be merged with Tata Group. peachlette 22:20, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

message: Google Tatas or Tata.  The first ~ half dozen links have nothing to do with an outsourcing group.
Request changing this redirect page or (better) the dis ambiguous page to give the more common vernacular.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 170.138.104.250 (talk) 21:16, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Far More Common Use of the Word Ta Ta
Talk:Select board

message: This seems to bear some resemblance to seletct vestries, but can't find any direct evidence of that.  Morwen - Talk 22:22, 4 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Select vestries

message: I have known 2 female selectmen in my own town who have said that they consider the term “selectwoman” to be patronizing. It is fairly common for women to serve on the board of selectmen in New England towns, so there seems to be no reason to be constantly pointing out their gender.Bostoner (talk) 02:12, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gender Neutral 

message: More towns are changing their name to Select Board for a gender neutral term. Would a change of the page name to “Select Board” be appropriate? We would also say in the first line that is is also know as a “Board of Selectmen”. Bluealbion (talk) 15:30, 16 October 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Selectmen is still the proper term. I would not think changing this name would be necessary at this time. Steve Lux, Jr. (talk) 22:02, 26 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Name change
Talk:Pretty Things

message: how they could be garage band if they are from england?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.124.232.28 (talk) 20:16, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Can a garage band be from England? 

message: I think more images should be used for the article between 1965 and 1970. If others can do it, thanksAmirhosein Izadi (talk) 04:15, 31 July 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: More pictures for the article
Talk:John Chinaman

message: Could someone add further elaboration on the cartoon that's on the page?  The text in it is barely readable, and some context would be nice as well.  --LostLeviathan 22:24, 4 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Done (& worth the wait, I hope). Ewulp (talk) 23:14, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cartoon 

message: I'm "Confuced". Do these refer to the same depiction, or is the latter a more benign version of the former? Clarityfiend (talk) 18:34, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: They are two slightly different characters, and you're right that the article wasn't very clear about this. Nast drew both characters at various times; I've done some rewriting to clarify that he didn't invent John Chinaman, who was already a familiar figure by the time Nast started publishing his work. Ewulp (talk) 06:23, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks. That's much better. Clarityfiend (talk) 07:31, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Chinaman or Confucius
Talk:Submarine tender

message: *US Navy page on submarine tenders
Deleted > 404 --tickle me 22:30, 4 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: External link

message: The article sates that the u.s. navy submarine tenders are designated as "AS", but the pictured ship has only "S" painted on it. If this is normal, there should be some mention of it. GMRE (talk) 13:48, 7 September 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Confusing info, or factual error
Talk:Korabl-Sputnik 4

message: http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/database/ScQuery has a slightly different launch time: 06:28 UTC. --Proofreader 17:59, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
Talk:Alt attribute

message: There is another page with content similar to this article: Alt text
Alan Pascoe 22:33, 4 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Appears to have been merged now. (, ) --DocumentN 20:23, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Duplicate page 

message: "In the sky flies a red flag with a white cross whose vertical bar is shifted toward the flagpole." 
This really bad! And I have pointed that out before.... 
# Is the main subject of this picture the sky? No. Then forget it. Begin the description with "A flag....." 
# What sort of cross is this? A seeing person with a little general knowledge may realise that a cross might be smaller than the flag itself (like that on the flag of Switzerland) or it might be diagonal (like that on the flag of Scotland). Describe the cross. " A red flies from a flagstaff. It is red, divided vertically and horizontally by a white cross...." 
# For the umpteenth time, the cross is not an animate being and is not referred to as who. ".... the vertical of which is shifted ....." 
# Where is it shifted? Flags have a front and back, a top and bottom, a left and right. Provided the flag is depicted the correct way around, (and it is) then it is simpler to say "...to the left" than "    towards the flagpole." 
That gives us: "A flag flies from a flagstaff. It is red, divided vertically and horizontally by a white cross, the vertical of which is shifted to the left." 
Could somebody change this or choose a different example. Amandajm (talk) 13:27, 20 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Is there some reason you don't do this yourself? 173.56.145.119 (talk) 05:46, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Can we pleeeease have a better example?

message: This reads very much like a tutorial that lacks thoroughness. Content should not be explained through examples, but rather through common terminology reinforced by examples. Nor should it be prescriptive of good HTML style (which, by the way, isn't a misconception because it's not a matter of fact; it's a matter of style).Spezied (talk) 17:20, 23 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  This is not a tutorial 

message: @Aoidh: Is the Search Engine Journal reliable? I've seen it criticized in The Signpost for this article, and it doesn't seem to be na actual journal. — VORTEX3427 (Talk!) 04:38, 17 October 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: I think it is for this, because the specific reference cited on this article is not written by a contributor but by one of their staff members, and they themselves are in turn citing John Mueller who would be reliable for statements about how Google's search engine works. The video embedded in the reference confirms what the SEJ reference is saying so I think it's reliable in this instance in that it provides evidence for what its saying i.e., Mueller's statements. - Aoidh (talk) 08:14, 17 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  SearchEngineJournal.com
Talk:Bung language

message: Maths 31.182.245.237 (talk) 16:24, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Math