lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Nagato-class battleship

message: I have fixed this article somewhat, however there is some stuff to be done. Feel free to contribute, and please do if you can.
96.243.206.236 (talk) 00:57, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: It now is clearly back up to Start quality. It obviously still needs the wartime history if it is to be brought up to B class. PKKloeppel (talk) 02:01, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Help

message: In the section World War II the phrase "When the war started for Japan" is what? Inaccurate, weasel words, cover-up?  Reminds me of how the American Civil War was covered in Georgia high schools in the 50s and even beyond.  Japan declared war on the U.S. and the British Empire (by Imperial rescript signed December 7, 1941 [Japan date])and followed it up by attacking Pearl Harbor on December 8, 1941 (Japan date).  74.190.109.98 (talk) 20:38, 11 June 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Considering that the sentence immediately before that discusses the attack on Pearl, this comment is pointless.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 20:56, 11 June 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: No, not pointless - World War II did not start FOR Japan - needs an active phrase, not a passive one. Another choice would be to just delete the phrase. But your change is even better and more direct, thanks. Neonorange (talk) 21:07, 11 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  When the war started for Japan ... 

message: The info-box claims that 2 were completed and 2 lost, but the Nagato obviously survived the war to be sunk at Operation Crossroads. We don't treat that as being "lost" for other ships that were sunk in that manner (e.g. the Agano-class cruiser article lists only 3 as being "lost," despite the Sakawa having been sunk in Operation Crossroads).
It seems that it should be changed to say "Lost: 1". I'd offer to do it myself, but I have a pathological fear of editing infoboxes. Just a Rube (talk) 03:20, 26 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lost: 2?
Talk:2010 FIFA World Cup qualification – CONCACAF first round

message: ====Leg 3A====
====Leg 3B====
====Leg 3C====
====Leg 3D====
Matthew_hk tc 16:20, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think it would be better not to use knockout round brackets for a format like this. - MTC (talk) 17:28, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Group 3

message: Matthew_hk tc 16:20, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think it would be better not to use knockout round brackets for a format like this. - MTC (talk) 17:28, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Leg 3D

message: Where are the dates? --ChaChaFut (talk) 00:57, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Dates

message: I would question the necessity of this page as it does not appear to contain any additional information from what is already available at 2010 FIFA World Cup qualification (CONCACAF) -- LanarkLiberal (talk) 15:58, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Necessary?

message: Instead of creating another article for the second round, why don't we just add the second round matches here just like it was done in the 2006 qualification? Azuran (talk) 23:31, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  First and second rounds in the same article. 

message: So... the scoreline is 10:0 - but there are only 9 goals listed underneath. Same goes for the FIFA (granted, unofficial) match report. I'm fixing to "be bold" and change it to 9:0, because that's the number of goals listed individually, and maybe FIFA will clarify. Kingnavland (talk) 07:07, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: News reports (FIFA etc) all give 10:0.  It's much easier to miss a goal scorer's name than to write the score on the scoreboard wrongJlsa (talk) 07:48, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  True enough... I figured there might have been a miscount and the media just checked the top of the page with the miscount, copied the score down and moved on. Having been on the wrong side of games like that, you lose track pretty easily. I did edit the 10th goal to reflect the word from FIFA (89th minute o.g.) Kingnavland (talk) 22:40, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Grenada-Virgin Islands

message: Is Canada in? If someone replies, please notify me! Androo123 (talk) 03:14, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Canada
Talk:Mark Bourrie

message: I noticed two of his books were missing. I see a lot of Canadian author entries have this problem -- keeping current-- and I will try to get them up to dateOneofff (talk) 21:48, 24 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Books

message: There is currently a discussion at the biographies of living persons noticeboard regarding an issue on this article. Editors interested in this topic are welcome to comment in the discussion. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 05:03, 1 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  BLP noticeboard discussion
Talk:The Swingers

message: I am pretty sure you will find that Practical Jokers and Counting the Beat (album) are one and the same. The former was the name of the album when originally released in Australia, and the latter appeared later - perhaps it was the overseas print or something. My copy of the Counting the Beat album has both singles mentioned in the article. 
--Commking (talk) 08:18, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The AllMusic Guide sums it up correctly. Muzilon (talk) 08:10, 14 November 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: One album, or two?
Talk:Alfred Hitchcock: The Art of Making Movies

message: I don't think these videos should be deleted, since this attraction is now closed. Who else agrees or disagrees with me?--5VH9 (talk) 17:09, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ride Videos 

message: Did this attraction really last 40 minutes long? I have a full ride video of the pre-show and main show which lasts about 18 minutes.--Snowman Guy (talk) 14:30, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Attraction Duration
Talk:Shilpakala Vedika

message: This is a popular auditorium of Hyderabad. You can find it mentioned even in the artcile, HITEC City. It is now presently the biggest auditorium owned by the state government of Andhra Pradesh. I'm sure once you Gooogle it, you'll know its prominence. Randhirreddy 17:15, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
Talk:Robot Building

message: This article is obviously a promotional piece. Sumet Jumsai's buildings are on the whole impractical, dismal, standard high-risers with an 'amusing' skin, and invariably badly executed. Needs to be flagged.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sartoresartus (talk • contribs) 14:41, 6 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Puff piece

message: Seeing no obvious variance from the good article criteria; i.e. the article is well written, well referenced, stable, broad, and NPOV, I have passed this article and listed it as a good article —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jayron32 (talk • contribs) 03:32, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: GA Review
Talk:Brayon

message: Conversely, given their proximity to Quebec, many Acadians consider them to be non-resident Québécois.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.216.168.100 (talk) 01:55, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The comment about "non-resident Québécois" is referring to Acadian perceptions of the Brayons, not to Acadians. Bearcat (talk) 20:01, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Personal note removed from article 

message: Do they use alveolar trill or uvular trill? --Komitsuki (talk) 04:55, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  "r" in Brayon French 

message: I contest the notion it is largely disputed as a dialect of Quebec french, but Acadian is. Brayon people are mostly Quebec descendents, its speakers live on the border of Quebec, and Brayon is also spoken in parts of Quebec. Acadian french is less like Quebec French than is Brayon. I believe it is completely fair to say Brayon is a dialect of Quebec French and that Acadian is a dialect of French. The very fact it does not possess its own words makes it a dialect based on pronounciation and few Acadian incorporations. The fact Acadian "possesses" its own words and phrases makes it not a dialect of Quebec French. Brayon is a dialect of Quebec French just as Joual, Chaouin, and Magoua is. I believe we need to look into the first sentence under the "dialect" section in the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.139.0.55 (talk) 16:07, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dialect 

message: Can someone explain the etymology of the name "Brayon"? Whence comes it? Tim in Canada  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.73.125.247 (talk) 21:36, 16 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Etymology? 

message: This article is unreferenced and the "dialect" lacks any attestations. This appears like a standard Québec accent to me. I will delete the Dialect section in a few days if no academic sources or audio comparisons are found. --AntiRaceshifitng (talk) 01:58, 22 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unreferenced
Talk:Shanklin

message: Could some note be made of the role of the chine and pier in Operation Pluto.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Stuffed cat (talk • contribs) 20:54, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Operation Pluto

message: Can we remove the "too long intro" tag as it has been shortened by adding extra paragraph headings ?--Streona (talk) 07:38, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I put that template in as a stop gap - I would have put the headings in myself when I had the time, but someone else (presumably you) got there first.  Well done! --Peeky44 (talk) 12:44, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Tag

message: 86.163.62.138 (talk) 16:56, 13 June 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  shanklin 
Talk:Palmomental reflex

message: Talk:Frontal_release_sign and WT:MED
Sanjpatel1 (talk) 10:46, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: See also

message: Worth including? JFW | T@lk 21:48, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  This made it into the NEJM
Talk:Dawenkou culture

message: You're right. That quote was taken verbatim, but the relationship of the neolithic signs to Shang is controversial. 
For the record, I don't think the Dawenkou are a good proxy for modern Austronesians in a genetic sense, more like they were in the same interaction sphere. There are many explanations for the Dawenkou similarities, but I can't really segue into that on a Wiki article. I think their ancestral composition would be something like that of Southern China Dai or North Thai etc. possibly with more Southeast Eurasian/Oceanian etc. admixture due to the fact that the 'contact zone' between East Eurasians and Southeast Eurasians was much further north during this time period. 
--Easy772 (talk) 07:31, 16 June 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Dawenkou contribution to Shang language

message: I know this is at best a borderline secondary source, it's the closest I've seen. I feel the need to balance that paragraph outweighs the strict formality, but feel free to revert if anyone is unhappy with it. 
Easy772 (talk) 06:18, 16 July 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Borderline is something of an understatement, given that the cited page contains no mention of Dawenkou, Polynesians or Austronesians, but only tentative remarks about Chinese Neolithic remains in general.  The rest of the paragraph isn't a lot better either.  Kanguole 10:14, 16 July 2015 (UTC)
replies: text:  You're right regarding no mention of Austronesians. I was taking it as a kind of "sky is blue scenario" seeing that many researchers in various fields have noted those similarities. I also should have cited from page 120-131, my mistake, they do mention Dawenkou just not on p.131. And yes, neolithic North China which includes Dawenkou isn't necessarily the same as Dawenkou . I can wait until I stumble upon a more explicit source, but I think it's pretty clear that Dawenkou weren't closest to Polynesians physically, despite noted "resemblance". Easy772 (talk) 19:28, 16 July 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Dawenkou closest physically to East Asians
Talk:William George Nicholson Geddes

message: This is my first proposed article for Wikipedia and unfortunately I have created one with lower case letters in middle and surnames instead of upper case as intended. As yet I have not worked out how to change this. My apologies. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gordon Masterton (talk • contribs) 
:You need to use the 'Move' tag, but new users only get access to this tag after four days. I can move the article for you. The best location might be George Geddes (Scottish engineer) (there is an American who is already George Geddes (engineer)). By the way, I hope you noticed that another wikipedian has nominated this article for deletion - you may want to comment in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/William george nicholson geddes. Sam Blacketer (talk) 17:59, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:The Tuskegee Airmen

message: I will provide a more extensive update to the article in the next days. Bzuk (talk) 15:00, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: New variation

message: The plot summary here is pretty inadequate. It talks about characters without introducing who they are, discusses points of the plot without explaining their context or significance, leaves large portions of the plot and important characters out, and contains some inaccuracies. I haven't seen the movie in 10 years and even I remember that it wasn't a "court" that was convened to discuss the black pilots, it was a congressional hearing. Someone who has seen the movie recently should go through and clean the plot summary up.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.145.34.169 (talk) 22:20, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Plot Summary

message: Recently, a large change was instituted under the euphemism of "cleanup". Comments. FWiW Bzuk (talk) 00:36, 30 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: New revisions

message: I don`t agree with the comment/implication that a link to the Wikipedia article (on the claim that the 332nd never lost a bomber) is invoking Wikpedia to verify Wikipedia. It is simply directing readers to another article which examines the subject more closely, and it is then verified there, or at least provides references. The use of Hyperlinks to other sections of Wikipedia is well established and to be encouraged. --JustinSmith (talk) 08:49, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: The very simple way to make a link is a wikilink to one word then provide secondary or tertiary sources. FWiW, see article now. Bzuk (talk) 13:53, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Nope, that's like linking inside Wikipedia; just isn't done. FWiW, you can't use a Wikipedia article to validate another Wikipedia article, what you use are outside sources to provide an authoritative statement. Bzuk (talk) 18:06, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Historical Accuracy Sub section 

message: I propose renaming this article "The Tuskegee Airmen (Film)" to avoid confusion with the main article on the Airmen themselves. Scyg (talk) 12:27, 25 November 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rename article?
Talk:Prokaryotic cytoskeleton

message: What is the reason to consider the Min system a part of E. coli cytoskeleton? As fas as I understand, it is not enough to form filaments, cytoskeleton has to be able to perform some mechanical/structural functions. This was never shown for tis system, it only has regulatory role.--67.169.103.87 (talk) 10:24, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Is there any filamentous protein network in eukaryotic cells that is not considered to be cytoskeletal? I can't think of any off the top of my head. MinD is a dynamic, filament-forming protein with roles in cell division. The fact that it works in a way that isn't directly comparable to better-established systems should not, in my view, exclude it from the umbrella category of "cytoskeleton." I think we have to be open-minded and willing to revisit and redefine concepts like "cytoskeleton" as new things crop up. MicroProf (talk) 14:31, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Min system 

message: Shloud'nt be eubacterial : all of these proteins seem to be extracted from eubacteria.
What about archaeal cytoskeleton ?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.241.178.233 (talk) 20:51, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  procaryotic 
Talk:Aman

message: Is the location in Tolkien's works really that much more important than the other meanings of this term, enough to justify treating it as the primary meaning on wikipedia? PatGallacher (talk) 22:23, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Amān has a much wider meaning than was indicated in the DAB page (see Amān at Encyclopaedia of Islam, BrillOnline.com). We will need an article on the topic. The term already shows up in articles. Arminden (talk) 16:23, 2 January 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Amān in Islamic law: important term, article needed 

message: daddy long legs 2601:14C:8000:76C0:651A:ED61:7008:E6B0 (talk) 14:55, 15 July 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  daddy long legs
Talk:Jinsha site

message: This edit established the use of the page as BC / AD. Kindly maintain it. — LlywelynII 16:45, 15 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: WP:ERA

message: Here is my feedback, per 's request. I am commenting on the article as it currently appears.
*In the sentence "Simple jars with small bases and pointed-bottom sauces were the most common pottery found.", sauces may be the wrong word, or it may be used incorrectly.
*The sentence "The conservation of Jinsha has been through the construction of the Jinsha Museum." is awkwardly worded, and it implies that the construction process itself was what preserved the site.
*The sentence "Poor stabilisation aids the development of pathologies." isn't very clear to lay readers.
*It's not necessary to note that there's more information on the civilization's collapse in Chinese, unless the article doesn't adequately summarize the opinions of experts.
If you have any questions about my feedback or how to improve any of the issues, feel free to ask me, and I will help to the best of my ability. Clarinetguy097 (talk) 19:43, 7 June 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Feedback
Talk:IBP, Inc.

message: I have added in detail about the original company, IBP, and references made to it in Eric Schlosser's Fast Food Nation. Ivankinsman (talk) 18:04, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

message: For the Tyson beef recall, the original article incorrectly capitalizes "coli" and did not give the serotype.  I corrected and added, but if anyone feels strongly, please revert.  However, the source is lawyers, not scientists. Gigemag76 (talk) 20:00, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: E. coli

message: This article has been revised as part of a large-scale clean-up project of multiple article copyright infringement.  Earlier text must not be restored, unless it can be verified to be free of infringement. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions must be deleted. Contributors may use sources 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. --Yoenit (talk) 01:06, 31 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copyright problem 

message: The "important facts" section is inherently POV given that the idea of importance is entirely subjective, but more importantly it contains a huge amount of material whose only source is "answers.com". It has been tagged since 2009 and I think it is an appropriate action to remove the section until sources for the claims are located. I have done so. EstafetteSpurry (talk)  —Preceding undated comment added 15:19, 18 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Important Facts"
Talk:Panlongcheng

message: The following coordinate fixes are needed for Panlocheng location.
https://www.google.com/maps/place/Panlongcheng+Relic+Site/@30.6985099,114.2475523,14.73z/data=!4m12!1m6!3m5!1s0x342ea9e719423471:0x1278d2e161cab28c!2sPanlongcheng+Relic+Site!8m2!3d30.6966628!4d114.2601951!3m4!1s0x342ea9e719423471:0x1278d2e161cab28c!8m2!3d30.6966628!4d114.2601951  
seems more the location for the archeological site.
This is a first time posting, so I hope this is correct.
—Peter Vermuyten
:. Thanks for pointing out the error. Deor (talk) 15:13, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Coordinate error 

message: Need more photos. 173.88.246.138 (talk) 23:18, 22 December 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Need more photos
Talk:Taosi

message: Wasn't the bell excavated from the Taosi archaeological site, and dated to c. 2085 BC, made out of 97.86% pure red copper? If only 2.14% other materials, should it still properly be referred to as "bronze"? 173.88.246.138 (talk) 21:12, 3 September 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Bell
Talk:Stanley, County Durham

message: Intersnack- big employer??andycjp (talk) 01:48, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: *Lamplight Arts Centre: became Stanley Civic Hall — currently closed &  up for sale — see https://www.thenorthernecho.co.uk/news/24161582.stanley-civic-hall-sale-huge-repair-bill/
*Stanley Youth Centre: closed.
**Could perhaps now add SYPC, the Stanley Young People's Club? And also SAYC, the Stanley Area Youth Consortium?
*Annual summer playscheme: is this currently running? See https://www.vap.org.uk/vap-s-work-in-the-uk/past-projects/stanley-youth-centre-summer
NB re sports — could maybe add links from eg https://www.stanley-tc.gov.uk/sportsleisure/ — eg Indoor Bowls? Protalina (talk) 08:52, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Some parts of "Leisure" section now belong in "History", plus could add a few other sports & leisure facilities 

message: Proposal: summarise the historical parts, & transfer to history; change 'Governance' to 'Local government and services'. Within that, create three paras: 1) Local government is provided by Stanley Town Council. Its responsibilities [description]; 2) [description of composition of Council, results of last election, etc]; 3) [description of next tier ie Durham County Council - responsibilities, composition, etc] + [MP, constituency, etc] .
– Protalina (talk) 12:12, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Most of the Governance section belongs in History 

message: Greetings! Looking forward to feedback. Thank you.
Suggested aim: include whatever helps the reader understand how Stanley is connected – or not — to transport networks.
Proviso: anything historical should go in the History section.
Proposed wording:
Stanley is about 4 miles (6.4 km) from Junction 63 of the A1(M) motorway. Stanley Bus Station[citation] is an interchange for lines served by several operators.[citation] The nearest Tyne & Wear Metro stations are Felling, Stadium, and Gateshead, each around  away; all three serve both lines of the Metro's network. The closest railway station, at Chester-le-Street, is on the East Coast Main Line and about  from Stanley. Newcastle International Airport lies  away, and the Newcastle International Ferry Terminal some . Protalina (talk) 00:04, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:   What info to include in section 'Transport links'?
Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2007/Candidate statements/FT2/Questions for the candidate

message: I'd like to withdraw question 15 (how should ArbCom treat admins vs non-admins) as it is really already answered above (#8?), but I hesitate to remove it and screw with numbering - esp if you are in the midst of drafting a reply. Please delete it or strike through, as works best. Jd2718 (talk) 18:11, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Withdraw one question
Talk:Am I Black Enough for You? (album)

message: There should be some mentioning of Billy Paul here, who wrote the song "Am I Black Enough for You" in the first place. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Billy_Paul  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.226.234.186 (talk) 23:12, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: ... Which in turn was heavily sampled in Schooly D's song, as well as dialog from (I believe) Roots. I'm pretty sure that the title track was also a single; it certainly received airplay on independent radio. - Keith D. Tyler ¶ 21:30, 5 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled