lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Police and Justice Act 2006

message: This is a rather restricted commentary on an important Act of Parliament, focussing on one comparatively minor aspect.  The Act includes:
Part 1: Mainly about police forces
*police Reform
*establishment of a National Police Improvement Agency which will replace the Central Police Training and Development Authority and the Police Information Technology Organisation
*amends the Police Reform Act 2002 in relation to the powers of Community Support Officers.
Part 2: Mainly about justice
*amends the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 in relation to "Police Bail."  
*amends the Criminal Justice Act 2003 relating to "Conditional Cautioning."
Part 3: Mainly about anti-social behaviour
*further provision about anti-social behaviour
*every Local Authority is to have a "Crime and Disorder Committee."
*"Parenting Contracts"
*Anti-Social Behaviour Act 2003 (Part 3) amended.  
Part 4: Addresses various Inspectorates  
*amends the various Acts which address the powers of the Chief Inspector of Prisons; Inspectors of Constabulary; the Chief Inspector of the Crown Prosecution Service; the Inspectorate of the National Probation Service and the Inspector of Court Administration.
Part 5: Miscellaneous Section  
*amends an Order in Council made under powers in the Extradition Act 2003 (controversial with extraditions to USA)
*Computer Misuse Act 1990 amended with the creetion of certain offences including unauthorised acts with intent to impair the operation of a computer.  
*further provision relating to forfeiture of indecent photographs of children
*Protection of Children Act 1978 amended.
At least some of these ought to be included in the article.  Emeraude 15:18, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

message: I have rewritten this article, basically around the notes I placed above.  My reasons for doing so are as follows:
1.  The bulk of the original article was from a discussion forum of the Open Rights Group (see ) so therefore almost certainly a copyvio.
2.  It gave undue weight to a comparatively small part of the Act, failing to mention any other provisions at all.  A Google search will bring up hundreds of references to the Act, most of which concern various local authorities discussing how they will respond to its provisions. There is hardly a mention of the computer crime issues.
3.  It was not written, as had been tagged previously, in an encyclopaedic tone, and, in my opinion, could not be, given that it is basically a forum.
4.  Neutrality had been disputed (though no explanation given as to why).  This is almost certainly the case, given its origin.
This is an important Act in many ways and it may be that another editor who has knowledge of the specific affects on computer misuse may be able to expand on the topic.  That goes for the other sections as well.  Emeraude 15:01, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Major revamp
Talk:Kallima inachus

message: What about at least a dead-leaf butterfly redirect?--85.220.11.109 (talk) 08:41, 29 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Hello! This is a note to let the editors of this article know that :File:Kallima inachus qtl1.jpg will be appearing as picture of the day on December 13, 2013. You can view and edit the POTD blurb at Template:POTD/2013-12-13. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. Thanks! — Crisco 1492 (talk) 22:54, 27 November 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[:File:Kallima inachus qtl1.jpg]] to appear as POTD 

message: As this is WP why is there so much in-house terminology that the reader needs to refer to the glossary. As an "encyclopedia" the language needs to be accessible & at least paraphrasing would help. Manytexts (talk) 09:58, 13 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: terminology

message: Uropyia meticulodina. https://www.google.com/search?q=Uropyia+meticulodina&newwindow=1&espv=210&es_sm=122&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=o3gQU-uiPI3koATf-4Ag&ved=0CAkQ_AUoAQ&biw=1280&bih=737  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:8:B580:80B:B565:B602:2E33:412D (talk) 11:53, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Not the only creature known as the Dead Leaf Moth.
Talk:List of Strategic Simulations games

message: Other lists like this one, such as list of Electronic Arts games, are arranged alphabetically.  Would this list be better organized thus?  That way we could use the compact table of contents (see list of Electronic Arts games) so readers could quickly find any particular game.  If not, should we create an additional list, arranged alphabetically? — Frecklefoot | Talk 15:27, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Personally, I kind of like the chronological ordering, in that it does a nice job of showing the release of titles over time.  This is particularly good for companies which produced many games over many years.  You are correct that there is a precedent for alphabetical ordering, though. --Slordak 15:38, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Better as an alpha list?

message: I started making the list into a sortable list, so that readers could sort games by year or alphabetically, whichever they preferred.  I got through about 1984 and then realized, everyone might not like the new table.  If not, go ahead and revert (or discuss if you'd rather).  Without any discussion within the next few days, I'll go ahead and finish converting. 
I also thought the list could be improved by adding a "genre" column (e.g. World War II simulation, sports simulation, etc.).  But that'd come later, but it'd be another factor to sort by. — Frecklefσσt | Talk 19:57, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Sortable better?

message: Unless I am mistaken, this list is missing some of their most popular titles.
Earth 2150 and Earth 2150: The Moon Project.
Also, I have noticed, that I have seen many of the titles in the list at Best Buy.  So it might be useful to note that supplying video games to Best Buy is one of their more successful approaches to publicizing video games.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.204.19.34 (talk • contribs) 
:I think you're right about the two missing games.  Be bold and add information when you see it missing.  As far as placing product with Best Buy goes, they are a major software retailer and I don't think you can cite distributing titles to them as a successful approach unless you can find a verifiable reference that says so.  But that would be more appropriate for main article anyways, and not this list.  Besides, they were around long before Best Buy was a big deal, so they really can't be one of the main instruments of their success. But it all hinges on a verifiable reference, otherwise it's original research, a big no-no here on the 'pedia. — Frecklefσσt | Talk 01:53, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  What about Earth 2150 and Earth 2150: The Moon Project?
Talk:The Second Coming (Percy novel)

message: I also feel that "Full summary" should probably be relabeled as "Plot". I may read the book someday and don't want it to be entirely spoiled for me (I've already read some of the plot here in editing it), so could anyone please carry these suggestions out? (Edit: Added word "suggestions" in last sentence.)--Thylacine24 (talk) 17:48, 13 September 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Opening summary and full summary need to be more integrated
Wikipedia talk:Local Embassy/Français

message: Bienvenue sur la page de discussion de l'ambassade Francophone du Wikipédia anglophone! Cette page est reservé pour les messages concernant  l'article elle-même, et non pour des commentaires destinés aux ambassadeurs
Laisser un message		Welcome to talk page of the Francophone embassy of the English-speaking Wikipedia! This page is reserved for messages concerning the article itself, rather than messages for the Ambassadors  Leave a message
----
j aimerais que  soit en francais  il y a  des  personne  ne  save  pas lire l anglais  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.161.82.229 (talk) 16:34, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

message: Bonjour,
Je suis disposé à traduire des articles du Wikipedia anglophone pour le Wikipedia francophone.
Je suis un tout nouveau contributeur (mais vieux utilisateur) donc je "patauge" encore un peu.
Quelqu'un peut-il m'aider à trouver les bons articles?
Je souhaiterais commencer avec des articles pas trop long, pour me faire la main...
Vous trouverez mes centres d'intérêt sur ma page . Merci de me contacter sur ma page discussion Stourson (talk) 20:25, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  traductions anglais vers français 

message: bonjour
la page des ambassadeurs francophones aurait besoin de ménage et d'actualisation.
il ne devrait y avoir que les ambassadeurs actifs d'au moins 3 mois. (pour que la personne qui contacte puisse avoir une réponse)
actifs en 2015 (à partir d'une contribution):
Anthere 
Rdb -> name change? Benutzer:rdb
Booksworm 
Oreo Priest 
Neranei -> name change Keilana 
User:Thesocialistesq-> name change AndySimpson
Tamfang
rʨanaɢ ->name change? Rjanag 
WATERFOX -> name change KuduIO
Ericleb01 
Grind24 
mais je n'ai pas regardé les contributions sur le compte global seulement sur le compte wikipedia anglais.
Vatadoshu (talk) 09:32, 11 March 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  actualisation 

message: I'm removing inactive editors from this page.  That includes approximately these editors:
*  CET  ♔  
* Genius101
* User:Dreamafter
* Goeagles4321
* Fire 
* Rdb 
* Nol Aders
* Zj 
* Craigy144 
* Evilphoenix
* Greeves
* Calaf
* 
* lucasbfr
* ChrisDHDR
* GrooveDog
* Tedejomadrid
* Eeppeliteloop
* 
* Ericleb01
* Grind24
* Abdallahbigboy
If you get this message and wish to stay on this list, please freely add yourself to the list again.  Thank you. WhatamIdoing (talk) 21:49, 8 February 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removing inactive editors
Talk:Sturnus

message: New paper in Mol. Phyl. Evol. due out soon, gonna resolve most if not all of it. Dysmorodrepanis (talk) 16:38, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Systematics/taxonomy

message: Added a mating systems sections below the current species portion and above former species. The information is relevant to the two current species and has scientific literature to back up findings for both species. This section includes three mechanisms that peer-review literature covers (parental care, differential allocation, and sexy sons hypothesis). Completed April 13th, 2018. Mitch  — Preceding unsigned comment added by VARLEYM2 (talk • contribs) 22:34, 13 April 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mating System Update
Talk:Defense industry of Iran/Archive 2

message: I notice that there is a PDF cited in this article listing Iranian equipment.  Please be careful: the full, unedited original appears to be at Tel Aviv University, but has differences in content.  —Michael Z. 2006-07-21 23:00 Z
::After a quick comparison between the weapons lists I see no difference, other than Fajr-3 missile not being mentioned under "Weapons of mass-destruction". ArmanJan 23:12, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Questionable source 

message: I think this page needs a big cleanup. We've listed dozens of products and weapons systems, however there are very FEW sources and references that Iran is actually domestically manufacturing these. 
My gut feeling is that many of these actually need to be on the Iranian Military's hardware pages as opposed to the military industry page.
As a result, ive stuck the cleanup, original research, and accuracy flags on this.
Any opinions?
::I think you are right.  Every day it seems as if there are more redlinked weapons with silly names on the list.  My feeling is that lists of things should be avoided if at all possible.  Maybe a para about each weapon type and a link to the hardware article?  The dislike of lists purely subjective however, and I would love to hear some other opinions. L0b0t 11:27, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  CLEANUP TIME!!! 

message: Please do not add anything to this list without also citing sources.  Several anon editors keep posting unverified weapon systems, and equipment.  It is starting to get out of hand. L0b0t 16:23, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Anon edits to the list of equipment 

message: I've moved all the unsourced calims to the section below.  These should now be easy to either source or delete.  Thanks for last source Smackmonkey, it was a good read.  Cheers. L0b0t 18:34, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Untagging and cleanup
Talk:Floating-point arithmetic/Archive 1

message: I do not understand the sentence "Absorption : 1.1015 + 1 = 1.1015" in the section Problems with floating point. I guess that absorption (with a p) means that two different real numbers are represented by the same floating point number, but 1.1015 is approximately 4.177 so I cannot see how that is the case here. Jitse Niesen 22:42, 8 Aug 2003 (UTC)
replies: text: The author meant 1.1015 to be interpreted as 1 * 1015 (=1,000,000,000,000,000). The point they're making is that adding a relatively small number to a larger stored number can result in the stored number not actually changing. A dot is often used as a symbol for multiplication in (especially pure) maths, the article might be clearer with a different representation though. Hope that's some help -- Ams80 21:52, 13 Aug 2003 (UTC)
thread_title:  What is ''Absorption''?
Talk:Forever Blue (Cold Case)

message: Could someone please post a plot summary containing the motive for the Cold Case episode "The Plan" (2004). I can't believe the only summary I found failed to mention motive or deliberately withheld it. Too bad there's not a reliable venue in Wikipedia or IMDB for posting timely plot summaries with motives to save us from always having to watch it. Thank you.  --[[User:BusterGates@msn.com 03:52, 04 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Favor to ask 

message: This was a very important episode of "Cold Case", a landmark for gay characters on TV in my opinion, and I'm very happy that someone decided to do a page on the episode. I may try to add or change a few small things myself, I'm not sure. One suggestion I have is that when we get to find out the times this episode will be repeating, maybe we should post them. --JamesB3 15:52, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Great work 

message: I agree, great article, but it's a little rough around the edges. It might need to be cleaned up a little bit in regard to some of the wording. Also there are some events described in the summary that are incorrect, but they are pretty minor. Neinfraulein 05:50, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Some minor clean up?
Talk:The Pioneers (novel)

message: Please stop reverting without explanation.--Drboisclair 19:37, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  What is wrong with the material put in? 

message: This article appears to be based on one or more editors' interpretation of Cooper's text and intentions. The interpretation needs to be supported by Reliable Sources (RS), preferably secondary academic sources that have discussed the book. The article is striking for lack of citations to such sources.Parkwells (talk) 16:33, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Original research

message: Cooper's father was a Quaker entrepreneur and erstwhile real estate developer from Burlington, New Jersey. Central New York had been settled by English, German and Scots-Irish pioneers; the Germans were Lutheran and Reformed Church. While migrants from New England also settled western New York, by that time they were not considered Puritan but were Congregationalist and Unitarian. There were also Methodists and Baptists.Parkwells (talk) 16:33, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Not a Puritan society

message: The author himself, in the preface to a later edition, denies this connection. Is there secondary literature that plausibly asserts it nontheless? Otherwise we should delete it.--Oudeístalk  15:21, 25 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hannah Cooper
Talk:Cable select

message: This article is superfluous.  The information is already in the "AT Attachment" article.  Jeh 11:34, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that this article should be deleted because the AT Attachment article already includes most of the information. There's not a whole lot to say about cable select on its own, and I think the explanation benefits from having the rest of the AT Attachment information in the same article. There are probably some useful points in this article that could be added to the AT Attachment article, such as the sources which could be added as references. Still, this article should be delected to redirect to AT_Attachment#Cable_select. ~Kruck 18:40, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree, the redirect is exactly what's needed. Discussion though should probably happen in the AT_Attachment's talk page.  There's another merge pending too. Jeh 06:56, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Delete this article 

message: The connector at the end of the IDE cable is MASTER and the connector in the middle is SLAVE (http://www.seagate.com/support/kb/disc/faq/ata_cable_select.html). If you're thinking the middle connector is MASTER because of this (http://www.unixwiz.net/techtips/ide-cable-select.html) page, notice that this is a way to modify an IDE cable. The default is to have MASTER at the end of the cable. 
The use of 40 and 80 pin cables should be explained in the article, not just the image caption.
~Kruck 16:01, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, on the 40-conductor cable it is the opposite: Master (really "device 0"  is the middle connector and slave (really "device 1") is at the end. This was changed on the 80-conductor cable. The AT Attachment article explains in more detail. So the caption on the picture here was incorrect... but it's a moot point now. I'm not using this picture with the merge because there is really nothing about the picture that shows anything specific to cable select; it's just another picture of an ATA cable, and we already have one of those.  A closeup of a 40-conductor cable with the cut that implements CS might be useful. Jeh 18:27, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Connectors indicating Master and Slave
Talk:One Churchill Place

message: Kindly, what followed this section on this talkpage?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 126.209.22.70 (talk) 01:22, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: what followed this?
Talk:Castle Hedingham

message: I don't believe that there is any evidence for Robert Catesby, leader of the gunpowder plot, to have been a resident of Castle Hedingham. However, Mark Catesby (1682-1749), the notable natural historian, was born in the village (at the house of his uncle, Nicholas Jekyll; Catesby was actually brought up in nearby Sudbury). 
I believe that there was a family connection between Robert and Mark Catesby, though not a desperately close one.
Unless evidence is provided that Robert Catesby was born in the village I shall edit this entry accordingly.
Simondaw 10:30, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Roland Park, Baltimore

message: Neither Olmsted was an Architect - both were Landscape Architects. --Teda13 (talk) 01:07, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The Architect field in the template shows how the historic district is listed in the National Register of Historic Places only. The NRHP does not distinguish between landscape architects and regular architects in this field.--GcSwRhIc (talk) 11:00, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

text: Your issue is with the National Register of Historic Places. The template only reflects the fields that are part of the NRHP listings. If you take a look at a number of the listings, you will see that sometime builders and developers are listed as the "architects". In any event replacing architect with planner doesn't work as it is not a field. Regarding the legality of the matter, the details of the architect field come the National Park Service's web site.GcSwRhIc (talk) 03:45, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

text: Don't shoot the messenger. I am following the conventions of Wikipedia:WikiProject National Register of Historic Places and Template:Infobox nrhp which is to be faithful to to the NRHP listing. It might be better to go to those talk pages and discuss the issue there.  GcSwRhIc (talk) 22:20, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: I believe the article is conflating Roland Park with the Roland Park Company. I do not believe any racial covenants made it into the Roland Park development, but were included when the Roland Park Company developed Guilford. I know my original deed has no racial covenants.https://placesjournal.org/article/the-third-rail/  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.224.239.219 (talk) 16:33, 6 November 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Racial Convenants
Talk:Senator Theatre

message: why does this have a page but not the recher?
: Because the Recher really isn't that notable and I'm pretty sure it's not on the register of historic places. You could always make a page for it.... -- Mukk 03:02, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Recher

message: The page is now out of date.  I'm not an expert on this subject, but here is the 
theatre's website and news coverage from
CBS and
the Baltimore Sun. I also heard about it on the radio yesterday morning (WYPR).  96.234.186.135 (talk) 15:27, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Senator Theatre has reopened and is no longer single-screen 

message: I too am not qualified to update. But some of the sentences imply it no longer show first run movies, it now does since the reopening (after the Hairspray opening, most of the shows are current-run). For example, as of the date of this post, it's showing Grand Budapest Hotel and Captain America 2.  162.129.44.120 (talk) 20:26, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  The page still needs an update 

message: This article claims that Baltimore's Senator Theatre is the "oldest operating movie theater in central Maryland." There is no citation for this claim. The Wikipedia article for the Charles Theatre https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Theatre (also located in Baltimore) claims, also without citation, that the Charles is "the oldest movie theatre in Baltimore, Maryland." Both articles need citations, and, unless I am missing some nuance in the wording, one of these articles is incorrect regarding which theatre is oldest. Pjdjr (talk) 02:24, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Oldest operating movie theater in central Maryland?
Talk:Stranraer railway station

message: This station is not covered by SPT, although SPT branded trains operate from this station, services are provided by FirstScotrail, and the station is also wholly operated by FirstScotrail. Stranraer is in Dumfries & Galloway, not the Strathclyde area, and therefore the relevant transport authority to the station is SWESTRANS South West of Scotland Transport Partnership
(81.102.46.225 (talk) 16:37, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It is a shame that without delving into the depths of the Regional Strategy, the web site is particularly silent about any of the rail services passing through the area. The only rail picture on the web site is of a Pendilino (which I do not think stops at any stations in the area). I do think an article for this Transport Partnership is in order. --Stewart (talk) 19:22, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: South West of Scotland Transport Partnership

message: There is a strange section in the A75 road article about a Port Road line. Is it true? And if so, what is it doing there instead of here?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.97.11.54 (talk) 16:41, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Port Road line?