lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Interstate 69 in Kentucky

message: I just drove the entire future I-69 corridor in Kentucky over the weekend in both directions.  There are no I-69 signs up at the moment, just the future corridor signs are currently posted.  --Holderca1 talk 13:28, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: I-69 signs

message: Should the part of the proposed I-69 from US 41 to the proposed Ohio River bridge should added onto the exit list. If added, it will need to be marked as unbuilt since it ain't open to traffic yet. Cwater1 (talk) 00:31, 23 January 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Only if we know what the junctions are going to be and can cite them.  There is a lot of speculation in proposals, so it's best to be cautious if we can't prove what we know. –Fredddie™ 06:41, 23 January 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  I-69 exit list 

message: On top of this artocle, it has a update needed template. Not sure why it is still there. I'm pretty sure that this article has been updated since November 2010. Cwater1 (talk) 23:13, 11 August 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Remove Update Needed template
Talk:Interstate 69 in Louisiana

message: preliminary junction list: User:NE2/I-69 --NE2 11:49, 4 December 2014 (UTC)
Talk:Interstate 69 in Texas

message: Is there a public domain map that could be slapped into the article?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fotoguzzi (talk • contribs) 10:12, 6 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Map added.  Not sure if I should include 69E, 69C, and 69W since they are covered in separate articles. Kenny G TX (talk) 09:43, 30 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  How about a map? 

message: Can someone please provide a source for the statement about the possibility of redesignating U.S. Route 69 as and extension of U.S. Route 175?
I know the intent was to provide a good possibility for the avoidance of confusion with the I-69/US 69 interchange, but a source is required.
Thanks!
Allen (talk) 22:06, 20 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Redesgination of [[U.S. Route 69]]? 

message: We saw the approval of both I-69E, and I-69C; but is there news about the Victoria to Laredo segment becoming part of I-69? Great50 (talk) 16:33, 3 June 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: It will be I-69W eventually, but there's no freeway-grade segments yet for them to designate yet.  I believe I-69E & I-69C will be where you see the most work in the short term.Froo (talk) 00:45, 5 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Victoria to Laredo Segment? 

message: Since US 77 from Robstown to the I-37 junction outside Corpus Christi was the first highway to receive an I-69 designation (soon to be redesignated I-69E), shouldn't that be mentioned as a segment? Tkirton (talk) 01:05, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I-69E has it's own page with exits and such - (Jrooksjr | C | T) 15:51, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  I-37 to Robstown Segment? 

message: The unopened I-69 exits south and north of Houston Needs to be removed, or but as |type=unbuilt. It's highly confusing, and it's not signed as I-69 Yet. -EBGamingWiki  — Preceding unsigned comment added by EBGamingWiki (talk • contribs) 14:12, 15 December 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Exit list

message: Does the exit list from Roseburg to Victoria need to added or is it not finalized yet? Cwater1 (talk) 17:41, 13 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rosenberg to Victoria segment
Talk:Cable carrier

message: This is discussing a product currently manufactured by over six manufacturers worldwide: a product for which you do not currently have a category listed. I am in the process of listing these leading manufacturers.
: At first, I though that you were only writing information for just one company. If you're going to cover all major manufacturers, it's fine. Anyway,  please cite secondary sources about the subject. Ivansanchez 10:58, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

message: This link gives better results:
http://www.directindustry.com/tab/cable-drag-chain.html
--Kölscher Pitter 15:18, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Better link 

message: Is a cable carrier really a synonym for a drag chain?  This says Question: People talk about drag chains. What are they talking about?  Answer: Drag chains are tire chains used on the trailer tires to enhance braking and control. California, Oregon and Washington all require drag chains.  At a minimum, the article needs expansion, right?  —EncMstr (talk) 18:27, 17 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  drag chains? 

message: Drag chains are also the big, heavy bunches of chains used to slow down a ship being launched down a slipway into a river or other body of water.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 149.254.219.31 (talk) 16:16, 1 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Disambiguation.
Talk:Triton 24

message: I have started a page on a popular sailing yacht built in Sydney during the 1980s called the Triton 24. An association ran briefly from the Middle Harbour Yacht Club, Sydney Harbour, although wound up in the mid 1990s. Despite its popularity and progressive design, the Triton is in danger of vanishing from history, being under-represented in documentary and pictorial sources and almost totally absent in online, internet based historical recordings.
Garycrockett 10:58, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
Category talk:Prophets in the Hebrew Bible

message: The line
It also includes every article that makes use of Template:Prophets of the Tanakh that does not use the following extended code:
        { {Prophets of the Tanakh | categories=no}}
is not very Wikipedia-ey  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.34.44.45 (talk) 16:20, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Bad Format

message: This discussion has been moved to Talk:Prophecy#Claimed by Christianity? as it related to that article. Fayenatic (talk) 18:15, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Claimed by Christianity?
Talk:Navicat

message: I'm the writer of this article and a long-term user of Navicat.
I wrote this article from a neutral point of view. I would love to hear the comments from the person or administrator who said this article is an advertisement.
kc
220.246.65.46 11:11, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: While I agree that the article could have a more NPOV in some regards, I think the habit of some editors of throwing maintenance tags around, without explaining the reasoning behind them is stupid. It just leads to a lot of articles cluttered with noise, which nobody ever removes, because no one know why they were put there in the first place. I've removed the tags, so hopefully whoever put them there can explain the reasoning for them a bit on this talk page before re-adding them. Jerazol 11:25, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Advertisement?

message: What encyclopedic purpose does "Prominent Users" server?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.127.183.209 (talk) 17:25, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  sure looks like an ad 
Talk:Pyrethroid

message: The introduction section is rather long, providing detailed information that would be better as (a) new section(s). There is also explanation of related substances that could very easily be removed, instead just having the link to the article for more information.
Example:
The sodium channel consists of a membrane protein with a hydrophilic interior; this interior is effectively a tiny hole which is shaped exactly right to strip away the partially charged water molecules from a sodium ion and create a thermodynamically favorable way for sodium ions to pass through the membrane, enter the axon, and propagate an action potential.
The previous sentence has a link to the article for sodium channels.
I would make changes but I don't trust my own sense of formatting and descriptive helpfulness.
--184.57.79.116 (talk) 08:40, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  The introduction section 

message: This article contains a contradiction or error. Allethrin was the first pyrethroid. It was first synthesized in 1949 in the United States by Milton S. Schechter at the Agricultural Research Service in Beltsville, Maryland  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Steve8009 (talk • contribs) 19:07, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Allethrin 

message: Some internet sources suggest that it may be more toxic to cats than, say, humans or dogs. If this is true, some information on such toxicity should be incorporated as being of general importance (given the popularity of cats as pets) I am not an expert and if anyone has authoritative information on this, please incorporate it in the article. Saurabh.jaywant (talk) 11:40, 8 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Toxity to cats 

message: The statement that pyrethroids breakdown in sunlight after two days is not supported by the citation. Indeed elsewhere the US EPA has stated that pyrethroids have a half life of 30 days in the soil, and there is strong evidence that microbial action is the primary means of breakdown.
Recyclotron (talk) 11:28, 16 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Unstable in sunlight are the 1-st generation pyrethroids, developed in the 1960s (bioallethrin, tetramethrin, resmethrin etc.). The other ones are much more stable. Krasss (talk) 19:25, 17 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Breakdown in sunlight 
Talk:Kadam kadam badhaye jaa

message: Hi all
This is the Marching Song of the INA - Indian National Army , the Lyrics are in Hindi and hence they are written in English text but the pronounciation is to be done like in Hindi Dilect.
Very few copies of the compleate lyric exists and hence should be preserved and not deleted - specially for people intrested in this marching song.
The actual Song as sung is as :-
please downlaod and play in MP3 palyer
Joyban70 11:19, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information, and reproducing lyrics in full is not appropriate on Wikipedia.  When we remove the lyrics, is there anything left that will be of encyclopedic value supported by reliable secondary sources? -FisherQueen (Talk) 11:27, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

text: Wikisource It would be appropriate to consider addition of the lyrics to Wikisource and linking to them from Wikipedia.  See, for instance, Wikisource:Wikisource:WikiProject Lyrics. --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 11:44, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
Talk:Federal Public Service Mobility and Transport

message: French:
*http://www.mobilit.fgov.be/fr/indexleftf.htm
*http://www.mobilit.fgov.be/fr/indexReframed.htm
*http://www.mobilit.fgov.be/fr/index-fr-text.htm
Dutch:
*http://www.mobilit.fgov.be/nl/indexleftn.htm
*http://www.mobilit.fgov.be/nl/indexReframed.htm
*http://www.mobilit.fgov.be/nl/index-nl-text.htm
WhisperToMe (talk) 23:48, 16 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Frames

message: *http://www.mobilit.fgov.be/data/rail/NSArapp2010e.PDF
*http://www.mobilit.fgov.be/data/rail/NSArapp2009e.PDF
*http://www.mobilit.fgov.be/data/rail/NSArapp2007e.PDF
WhisperToMe (talk) 00:47, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Additional things
Talk:Animation software

message: I don't think it should be deleted. But it definitely needs a cleanup. Perhaps a name-change to "list of 2d animation software" 134.47.109.184 11:31, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Post your opinion on the AfD discussion page for this article.  As it is now, it is too POV for even a list.  And Wikipedia isn't the place for mere lists. — Frecklefσσt | Talk 12:17, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Deletion
Talk:HMS D4

message: The article Martin Dunbar-Nasmith reports a remarkable incident in the life of D4 which should certainly be incorporated into this article. --BjKa (talk) 19:02, 22 July 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Taking the King for a ride 

message: It seems that the German submarine SM_U-3_(Germany) commissioned in 1909 was the first submarine fitted with an (offensive?) deck gun, two years before HMS D4.--Mschiffler (talk) 20:36, 29 July 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  First submarine with a deck gun?
Talk:HMS D5

message: Picture caption reads: HMS D5, 7 January 1915
:It was sunk in November 1914. Valetude (talk) 17:04, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Removed date - it was date published not taken Lyndaship (talk) 17:55, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Date wrong
Talk:Lombard banking

message: This article contradicts itself. Near the beginning it claims that Lombards were not trusted, and a few paragraphs down it claims that they were. Cjwilks 12:29, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay then I will add a template to the top of the page. The sunder king 12:21, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Contradictions

message: The section about the 14th century and the collapse of parts of the banking system certainly opens more questions than it answers. It could very well be expanded with some actual, material content and not only a few external references, which despite being very entertaining and thought-provoking may be a little afflicted with bias and/or coming from sources with a less than perfect renown for scientific integrity. It may be bad Google-fu on my behalf, but the Great Indexer does not seem to display any prominent sources that are clearly free from suspicion to be spinoffs of the initial LaRouche/Schiller Institute articles. What does actual economic history research have to say about the issue? It is indeed very interesting. Rootmoose (talk) 00:44, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: How is it possible that Jesuits were involved with money lending in the Middle Age, if the Company of Jesus was not established until 1540?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.163.84.144 (talk) 16:06, 8 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Collapse of lombard banking around 1340 ? 

message: Lombard Street in San Francisco was apparently not named so because it had any history of financiers, bankers, etc.  It was merely named after a street in Philadelphia. See https://www.sftravel.com/things-to-do/attractions/iconic-sf/lombard-street.  This claim should be removed from the article. Rhythm Droid (talk) 20:59, 1 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Inaccurate Claim
Talk:Zap

message: I think Zap, ZAP and Zapp should be merged, as suggested by WP:DAB#Page naming conventions, but I thought I'd ask here, rather than just merging them. Tim Ivorson 2007-08-20 12:21, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Zap and ZAP should definitely be merged.  Less sure about Zapp—I think a pair of "see also" links would be mildly preferable, but a merge with appropriate redirects created might also be acceptable.  Xtifr tälk 19:44, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: In that case, I'll merge ZAP, but not Zapp, into Zap. Tim Ivorson 2007-09-13 10:36, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Proposed merge
Talk:Administrator of the government

message: "in a colonial or dependent territory or a constituent part of a state" is correct for the States/Provinces of Aus/Can but then that overlooks the fact that Administrators are appointed to replace GGs to notionally manage the governments of entire countries. 202.89.152.147 01:03, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Intro 
Talk:Gag Manga Biyori

message: Why is this article named Gyagu Manga Biyori? It should be correctly Gag Manga Biyori. That would be like if I named the Jump Square article Janpu Sequea. – 「ＪＵＭＰＧＵＲＵ」@Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia 19:17, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gag Manga Biyori
Talk:Killay, Swansea

message: The text on the killan colliery disaster closely resembles a similar passage from welshoalmines.co.uk -  Ear1grey 12:54, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Copyright material used?

message: The Hendrefoilan Primary School article was proposed for deletion; it's only a short article and can be merged here, and it seems to be the only school in the community. Peter James (talk) 18:55, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Klbrain (talk) 18:31, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge from [[Hendrefoilan Primary School]]?
Category talk:European royal families

message: the "kings of ancient judah" are not european, they are middle eastern - semitic dynasties who never ruled european territory... why are they included?
and the ptolemaic dynasty ruled over egypt, which, and this may come as a surprise to some of you who are obviously very confused, happens to be located in africa. these two clearly non-european dynasties are included, but no mention of the house of osman - a royal house which held territory in europe...
wtf?
== The order on this page? ==
On the list of pages, some of the "House of ... " articles are listed under the name of the House, while others are under H for "House."  I'd like to move them all under their own names if nobody objects.  And the same for the Princely House of Luxembourg, under P.  140.147.236.195 (talk) 20:11, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I fixed it for the Pages.  Now all the pages "House of N" are filed under N instead of under House of.  Maybe I'll figure out how you do it for the subcategories.  140.147.236.195 (talk) 14:45, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: While I was at it, I also had "Princely family of Liechtenstein" moved to L for Liechtenstein, rather than P for Princely.  140.147.236.195 (talk) 14:46, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Kings of ancient Judah, Ptolemaic Dynasty

message: On the list of pages, some of the "House of ... " articles are listed under the name of the House, while others are under H for "House."  I'd like to move them all under their own names if nobody objects.  And the same for the Princely House of Luxembourg, under P.  140.147.236.195 (talk) 20:11, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I fixed it for the Pages.  Now all the pages "House of N" are filed under N instead of under House of.  Maybe I'll figure out how you do it for the subcategories.  140.147.236.195 (talk) 14:45, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: While I was at it, I also had "Princely family of Liechtenstein" moved to L for Liechtenstein, rather than P for Princely.  140.147.236.195 (talk) 14:46, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  The order on this page?
Talk:Chaos

message: I see that, without a deletion discussion, this article has vanished. Even the history has gone, although clones of the article still exist on the web at e.g. http://chaos.co.tv/
I thought there was an official process for deleting Wikipedia articles, especially useful ones like this?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.124.75.122 (talk) 09:04, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Where did this article go?

message: This has a circular disambiguation with Disorder. Each page links to the other. I think it is due to the renaming of this article.--Bte99 (talk) 17:54, 25 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: § Music Sorter § (talk) 08:42, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Circular Disambiguation 

message: There are currently over 400 articles that link directly to this article directly because it used to be different. There are other articles that should be linking to the disambiguation page, but since this is not officially named (disambiguation) Wikipedia thinks those articles are linked inappropriately. At a minimum I recommend we name this article with the (disambiguation) extension. Next point the current article name to this new page with (disambiguation). Then the other articles can be modified to point directly to the correct article (I have been spending hours doing that already). Also articles with the intent to point directly to the (disambiguation) page can be properly configured without Wikipedia getting upset about it. § Music Sorter § (talk) 08:53, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I now better understand the issue and no longer believe there is anything to fix.§ Music Sorter § (talk) 15:37, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  This rename is a nightmare and should be fixed 

message: A pre-existing broad-concept article is at Talk:Chaos/old version. -- 202.124.73.35 (talk) 02:45, 13 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Broad-concept article
Talk:Sedgley Park R.U.F.C.

message: I've just made quite a series of corrections to this entry but remain unhappy with the rip-off of what is copyrighted material in the History section. I also do not think that the History section actually meets Wiki standards, being fa too flowery, self-promoting and non-NPOV, but someone else will have to fix that. I wrote the words in the History section for a club website, where they are appropriate, but never expected someone to copy and paste them into Wikipedia, where they are not. Sitush 13:14, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
Talk:Explore Evolution

message: Looks good. A couple of rough edges that might do with smoothing off:
* "trumpets" will probably get into trouble over NPOV, a less colourful word might be better.
* "consistent with the Discovery Institute intelligent design campaigns, "Stand up for science" and "Critical Analysis of Evolution"." lacks a start to its sentence (and is not a continuation of a sentence either in the earlier quote, or introducing the quote).
Hrafn42 13:17, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This article seems heavy-handed and anti-intelligent design in it's form and function. It's neutrality is in dispute.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.95.237.98 (talk) 18:05, 5 August 2014 (UTC)

text: Since the aims are rather obvious, have changed "it aims" to "its evident purpose is". . . dave souza, talk 19:23, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Initial comments 

message: As explained in the Comments section, I would barely rate it a good "Start." —Brightflash 12:06, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Needs some serious work . . . 

message: The article is a bit heavy-handed with the templated direct quotations, which breaks up the article alot. I'm going to turn some of them into inline quotes and/or paraphrases. HrafnTalkStalk 15:27, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Direct quotations 

message: HrafnTalkStalk 05:09, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Timmer article on 'Explore Evolution' 

message: Is World Magazine, which is extensively cited & quoted in the article a RS? It would appear to fall under WP:RS#Extremist and fringe sources, and so should not be cited except for information about themselves. HrafnTalkStalk(P) 10:15, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  World Magazine 

message: One thing that is glaringly missing is any presentation of the book's actual contents. Without this the whole article is pretty much pointless.
Lehasa (talk) 12:34, 18 June 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Need section on contents 
Talk:Loropetalum chinense

message: The article as written mentions "form" and "variety" (and uses "var. rubrum" in photo captions), but does not address whether this infraspecific variation is best treated at the variety level or at the form level, or ignored altogether for taxonomic purposes.LarryMorseDCOhio (talk) 13:26, 30 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Taxonomic status of variants 

message: I am curious how this species came to be called "chinense."  I thought plants indigenous to China were typically named "sinensis" from the latin word for Chinese, for instance Wisteria sinensis, Camellia sinensis, or Cordia sinensis.
To be clear, I'm not questioning the article's accuracy, just the odd name.  Thanks, 24.90.212.130 (talk) 01:31, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Chinense vs sinensis
Talk:Blue Mounds Fort

message: Lookin' good pal. You want me to do copy edits as you work or wait til your done? Just copy the infobox from Apple River Fort, and the structure which you appeared to so you probably already know about the infobox. IvoShandor 13:26, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Lookin' good

message: I have just completed assessing this article for the Military History project and believe this article to be a Start class article. I believe that it could be improved by addressing the following:
* Coverage: the history section could probably be expanded. What happened after the fort's first commander was killed? 
Once the article has been expanded, you may life to see reassessment. This can be done by adding the article to the list at WP:MHA. If you would like more detailed comments on how to improve the article, listing it for peer review might help. This can be done by going to WP:MHPR. Hope this helps. AustralianRupert (talk) 03:20, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Rating