lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:The Beatles' Decca audition

message: total rubbish at the moment unfortunately. I've never seen so many tags at the top of the article, but each of them (and more besides) is spot on. Most obvious of all, it doesn't actually seem to say anything about the actual auditions. Should be drastically contracted and merged with History of the Beatles. Badgerpatrol 02:49, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Total rubbish

message: the article states "The remaining ten songs from the Decca audition have never been officially released, although they have frequently surfaced on grey market and bootleg releases." however, this looks like an official release. is it? isn't it? Kingturtle = (talk) 04:47, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  official release? 

message: Back in the 80s I met a guy called SHULMAN LIVESEY who is an accountant, born 1927.
He claimed that he was on the Decca Board and when the discussion was held which group to sign, the music directors votes were split 50/50. So the accountant was asked for his opinion and purely on business criteria his deciding vote went against the Beatles. He emphasised that he himself was not knowledgeable in pop music to take such a decision but that he solely made up his mind on the business advice provided by the other board members. 
Now this may just have been some silly ploy to impress me and get my attention, on the other hand, SHULMAN LIVESEY is an accountant and a successful business man.
If somebody could confirm whether he was with the Decca Corporation in 1962, then I would say that this story be most likely true  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.114.144.16 (talk) 06:02, 8 October 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  who turned the Beatles down at Decca? 

message: http://www.rollingstone.com/music/news/rejected-beatles-demo-tape-up-for-auction-20121123
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/music/the-beatles/9695499/Rejected-Beatles-audition-tape-discovered.html
50.0.12.196 (talk) 01:03, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rejected Beatles Demo Tape Up for Auction 

message: Mark Lewisohn's recent biography puts the Decca audition into a slightly different light; he points out that it didn't make business sense to turn down the Beatles - the recording and pressing charges were all internal and the (miniscule) royalties were paid in arrears. It's been calculated that taking Brian Epstein out to dinner to tell him they weren't going to sign the band cost more than signing the band. Lewisohn has a theory that Epstein essentially turned down Decca; he didn't like the attitude of the producer or company and thought the band deserved better.
Apepper (talk) 18:20, 18 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lewisohn biography 

message: Question: Did the Beatles title their song "Sheik of Araby" despite Sheikh being the standard Romanization of شَيْخ Elmeter (talk) 17:56, 29 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sheik?
Talk:Viridian design movement

message: I am declining a speedy deletion of this article.  Feel free to send it to WP:AfD.  --Kralizec! (talk) 05:46, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I've redirected the Viridian design movement article to the Bright green environmentalism article and move the content of the former into a new section of the latter. --Loremaster (talk) 12:18, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Speedy deletion
Talk:HMS Enterprise

message: What is a "Vigin Galatic"? ("VSS Enterprise for the proposed Vigin Galatic ship.")  Does it have anything to do with a vegan Vogon? ➥the Epopt 03:09, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry, it is a mispelling of the link on my part. It has been corrected to link to Virgin Galactic now. Fosnez 16:54, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vigin Galatic 

message: third enterprise is said to be in the late 1700s, fourth is said to be in the early 1700s  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.202.146.202 (talk) 07:50, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  there seems to be a year mixup between the third and fourth enterprises 

message: I just happened to come across this while looking up other things to do with Alaska/British Columbia history - see this link and look for the "1839: Massacre at Nulato" entry; none of the ships listed overleaf fall into the time frame, there's a gap 1830-1848....Skookum1 (talk) 04:26, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: There are no ships missing from the list, using both volumes of Colledge, the RN's page, and various other ship list sources. It may be that your source is confusing the British East India Company's Enterprise of the period with a Navy vessel. Benea (talk) 04:44, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: a gap: HMS ''Enterprise'' at [[Nulato, Alaska]], 1839

message: According to the current list, “HMS Enterprize (1775) was a 10-gun tender captured by the Americans in 1775.” which fits the mention at the Royal Navy's Enterprise history list. However, the article USS Enterprise (1775) says the ship was named HMS George before capture, and renamed Enterprise by the Americans. (with the talk page citing Early American Ships for the HMS George name.
So does the Royal Navy itself have the original HMS name wrong, or did Early American Ships by John Fitzhugh Millar get it wrong?
I'm also pointing this out on Talk:USS Enterprise (1775) to seek more input. ―MJBurrage(T•C) 00:33, 14 July 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  HMS Enterprize (1775)
Talk:Blue walleye

message: All of the information in this article was already contained in the Walleye#Blue walleye article, so I changed it to a simple redirect. — Dave 03:10, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: All of the information except for listing Blue pike under :Category:Extinct fish.  Restoring article. —Viriditas | Talk 11:18, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

text: As I see it, though, there are four difficulties with maintaining the entry here: 1) the name "blue pike" is not the official trivial name for the fish — the fish is properly called the blue walleye (according to the AFS Official List of Fish Names); 2) the fish is, at best, a subspecies of walleye, although there is some doubt about even that, and including it on the walleye page makes that clearer; 3) the fish shares most of the life history and other parameters described for the walleye, information which, in the name of parsimony, really needn't be reproduced here; and 4) it is the normal tendency to discuss various subspecies on one page unless the subspecies entry is large enough (textually) to merit its own entry, which does not really obtain here. If your objection stems from the :Category:Extinct fish entry, is there no way to include the extinct fish category on the walleye page? — Dave 22:07, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've moved it to Blue walleye as per the text in the article and proper taxonomic labeling.  (Why perpetuate an erroneous common name?) -- Miwa * talk * contribs ^_^ 16:26, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Merged into Blue walleye

message: Recent research
http://www.researchgate.net/publication/267897578_Using_Ancient_DNA_to_Solve_the_Mystery_of_the_Extinct_Blue_Pike_Sander_Vitreus_Glaucus_Hubbs has come to the conclusion that, "The historic 'blue pike' is indistinguishable from walleye, indicating that taxonomic designation is not warranted." I can't determine whether this is now generally accepted by the field, so this may require the attention of an expert as well.  Also, claims that the "extinction" of the blue walleye is on par with the extinction of the carrier pigeon seem unwarranted and unsubstantiated. Hobosremain (talk) 19:44, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Tagging as out of date

message: It's not extinct. 167.100.4.24 (talk) 14:38, 1 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  It's not extinct
Talk:Bec (novel)

message: I have removed the book's blurb from the article because I'm pretty sure that it was against the copyright rules. If anyone would like to correct me then feel free to (as long as you have proof that it is allowed). Tartan 15:59, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Blurb removal

message: Is it true that Bec is going to travel with grubbs and Kernel in this book? Doesn't sound very true.
<in reply to the above> Nope.... this book is situated nearly 2 millenia before Grubb's time. I think they'll meet either in "Blood Beast" or Book 6.
I wrote this about three months ago, and i thought it sounded stupid even then.  i wonder why the hell it was even put in?--Andy mci 17:45, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  verification 

message: Only 1 week until bec is released-Andy mci 17:59, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  YAY 

message: How is this article a stub?!Andy mci 16:58, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  stub 

message: Anyone who read the book will know theres a major plot twist at the end.  should that be put on or not? Andy mci 18:50, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Spoiler 
Talk:Computer Olympiad

message: http://www.cs.unimaas.nl/olympiad2006/rules.html for the 2006 site. 70.111.251.203 03:23, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Old talk

message: Anyone have a list of the winners of the past tournaments? There needs to be much more work on the Computer Olympiad information. 70.111.251.203 03:27, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Winners 

message: Not WP:NOTABLE itself, but worth expanding on here (slightly). Sending WP:APPNOTE to , , ,‎, , , , ,  and . Boleyn (talk) 07:47, 24 July 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Merge all. The information in the individual pages can be summarized in a single table. QVVERTYVS (hm?) 08:56, 24 July 2015 (UTC)

text: Endorse proposed merge. Vrac (talk) 14:31, 24 July 2015 (UTC)

text: Support merge. Summary tables are more efficient. Perhaps a table for each event type to make tables less onerous. Newwhist (talk) 14:55, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge proposal: [[1st Computer Olympiad|1st]], [[2nd Computer Olympiad|2nd]]. [[3rd Computer Olympiad|3rd]], [[4th Computer Olympiad|4th]], [[5th Computer Olympiad|5th]], [[6th Computer Olympiad|6th]], [[7th Computer Olympiad|7th]], [[8th Computer Olympiad|8th]], [[9th Computer Olympiad|9th]], [[10th Computer Olympiad|10th]], [[11th Computer Olympiad|11th]], [[12th Computer Olympiad|12th]], [[13th Computer Olympiad|13th]], [[14th Computer Olympiad|14th]], [[15th Computer Olympiad|15th]], [[16th Computer Olympiad|16th]], [[17th Computer Olympiad|17th]] and [[18th Computer Olympiad]] to here
Talk:State of Sequoyah

message: I really think the fiction should be in a seperate article. Jon 18:15, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fiction section 

message: Quoth the article (emphasis mine):
The delegation received a cool reception in Washington. Eastern politicians, fearing the admission of two more Western states, and no doubt unwilling to admit an "Indian" state, put pressure on the U.S. President, Theodore Roosevelt, who finally ruled that the Indian and Oklahoma Territories would be granted statehood only as a combined state.
Can anyone come up with a specific source for this?  It sounds totally plausible to me, but I'd like to see some kind of evidence for it.  The "no doubt" makes it sound like a later commentator is making assumptions.  The Oklahoma page only notes Eastern reluctance to add two more Western states, for what it's worth.
Also would be useful to know what portion of Indian Territory's population was actualy Native American in this period. --Jfruh (talk) 04:11, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: According to the US Census in 1900 (pdf warning) Indian territory was 13.4%, or slightly more than one in eight; Indians made up about 7.2% of the combined territory. --66.251.24.139 17:44, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Anti-Indian sentiment? 

message: I think perhaps a new title be created and this article be moved to it.  I was thinking something along the lines of Sequoyah (Historically Proposed U.S. State) would be much clearer and less ambiguous than the current title which is vague and not accurate in the sense that there is no state known as Sequoyah that currently exists.  --Champaign 08:38, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: OK. You guys were right. Sorry, my sincerest apologies! Champaign (talk) 03:31, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposal to move [[State of Sequoyah]] article to a new title 

message: I changed this importance scale to TOP for this article. Of course I would like to request community input in this matter. I feel like since the State of Sequoyah set some of the groundwork for the Oklahoma compromise and later statehood , it should be recognized as of top importance. Or at least High importance. Trey Wainman (talk) 07:53, 24 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Change to Top Importance | Wiki Project Oklahoma
Talk:Early fires of London

message: Boudecia did not burn down London, she burnt down Colchester. [Unsigned but by User 86.3.234.23]
:According to Boudica (and every printed history), the Iceni burned Colchester, Londinium and Verulamium in 60 AD. Mikedash 14:43, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: I've added a 'refimprove' tag to the Anglo-Saxon fires section, since I don't trust ANY of the dates. A fire in 962 that destroyed St Pauls (not in this list) is recorded in the Anglo-Saxon chronicle - but where do the other dates come from? -- John O'London (talk) 14:35, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Anglo-Saxon fires 

message: In the section mentioning the 1633 fire and the damage it did to London Bridge  states that "this accidental "firebreak" prevented the bridge from being damaged by the Great Fire of London three decades later in September 1666." However the Great Fire of London article states in the section for Monday 3 September that "The spread to the south was mostly halted by the river, but it had torched the houses on London Bridge and was threatening to cross the bridge". Furthermore  London Bridge article states that "The Great Fire destroyed the bridge's waterwheels, preventing them from pumping water to fight the fire". Thus while the 1666 Great Fire did not destroy the bridge or cross it as if might have done had the pre-1633 buildings been in tact I don't think it is fair to say that the bridge was completely prevented from being damaged by the fire break. Dunarc (talk) 20:40, 7 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Claim in 1633 fire section about London Bridge
Talk:Ranganatha Swami temple

message: I propose that this article be merged with Sri Ranganathaswamy Temple.  Although there are a number of Ranganatha Temples, and perhaps each deserves its own article, I think for the moment, there is insufficient material for an article on each.  Further, merging (or a disambig page) would facilitate searches for individual Ranganatha temples.  --BostonMA 03:50, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge Proposal
Talk:Crompond, New York

message: I noticed that Crompond was listed both in Cortlandt, New York and Yorktown, New York.  My map shows that the community is at the eastern edge of Cortlandt, so I corrected the three pages. Nricardo disagreed with me.  I sure hope he is right because he undid my work, but then, he is from that area. Stepp-Wulf 03:53, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: My backup for this change can be found by examining the maps here: , as well as the town websites of Cortlandt and Yorktown.  --Nelson Ricardo 04:40, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Hi Stepp-Wulf! I'm sure we've met before on Wikipedia.
Although I am sure it's not my place to put my assumptions on the article itself, I decided to address you on the talk page. Possibly, the hamlet itself is located in the town of Yorktown, although the Census-designated Place is mostly located in the town of Cortlandt. Also, Cortlandt Manor, New York is not an official government entity; it is merely a hamlet in Cortlandt, however this article states that it is in the "Town of Cortlandt Manor" someone else may take the liberty to edit that, as is the purpose of Wikipedia.
Cheers, sb  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Serafino bueti (talk • contribs) 02:24, 5 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Hamlet vs. CDP location
Talk:Tsul 'Kalu

message: I removed 
* Some wags and skeptics have recently dubbed the Tsul 'Kalu legend; "Help Jerry! My daughter has married a Bigfoot!"
from the article. I could not find it in any of my searches. If anyone else can find a verifiable source please add back in. Cougaria kit (talk) 23:53, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Removed Notes section

message: What's up with the first paragraph? What's this "Mountain monsters third season", is it really central to this article? Is it important to note that it was "mentioned in the fourth season"? There's no link or reference of any kind to this "Mountain Monsters" or its third or fourth seasons. What a travesty! 176.72.191.47 (talk) 22:11, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: This article could use some work

message: say Nani notch say That’s how you get rid of them 64.127.165.134 (talk) 21:35, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Very much a boneappleteeth Moment 2600:8804:8609:6C00:9857:36E3:4470:BCED (talk) 00:46, 8 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cherokee Devil how get rid of them 

message: Nowhere in the current article is the native name of this creature, written in the Cherokee syllabary. The sources in this article (one of which doesn't work) also don't list it. This feels like a pretty big omission. 
I ask partially because I find the current title of the article to be very odd, "Tsul 'Kalu" doesn't feel like it makes phonotactical sense in the Cherokee language which mostly has a CV (consonant followed by vowel) syllable structure (ironically, some of the English corruptions listed in this article, such as Tuli cula and Jutaculla, do make phontactical sense in Cherokee), so I think the current name used throughout the article might be due to a corruption made to sound "intentionally foreign" (the "Tsul`kälû' Tsunegûñ'yï" stuff with all those diacritics and apostrophes straight out of the "Guide To Make Your Language Sound Alien To English-spakers" almost certainly is). Pescavelho (talk) 19:05, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Native name not listed anywhere in the article
Talk:Keetoowah Nighthawk Society

message: You need to create a separate article for him.  I am not opposed to him being mentioned in the encyclopedia, but you should create a page on him and CITE all of this material.  It's way out there and not part of our original culture which probably has encyclopedic merit, though it could have such merit on its own.  Creating an article on him could cite more references than allowed in an article on the Keetoowah Society.  Thanks. Waya sahoni 05:00, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Red Hat Duke 

message: Please go and read this section.  Using wikipedia to promote your website is not allowed.  Wikipedia is not a link repository.  All of your materials fail WP:RS.  If you want to create a page about your organization, you can, but it will be mercilessly edited and scrutinized.  You cannot place POV and unverifiable information into the Keetoowah Society Article - it's not about you or your Cherokee Shaman.  You can place such content in an article about Red Hat Duke (Keetoowah Leader) and his movement.  Create this link Red Hat Duke (Keetoowah Leader) and you can edit that page to your hearts content with your POV materials and WP:RS sources.  That's allowed -- in an article about itself.  But expect the article to be scrutinzed by me and any vanity edits will be removed. Waya sahoni 21:22, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[WP:RS]] by Blueotter
Talk:Treaty of Alcáçovas

message: The article says that the Treaty was signed between "Portugal" and "Castille". It later adds that "Aragon was not a signatory". For me this makes no sense. Looking at the original text of the Treaty one can clearly see that it is an agreement between "the King of Portugal (...) and his son" on one side and "Don Ferdinand and Dona Isabella, by the grace of God, king and queen of Castile, Leon, Aragon, Sicily, ..." on the other side. I am therefore modifying this part of the article, unless somebody opposes it. Hispalois 22:25, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Signatories of the Treaty
Talk:Naruto the Movie: Legend of the Stone of Gelel

message: Sorry people, I kinda screwed up the movie caption while trying to move this thing back. And dunno how to fix it. If someone can do that or knows how and can tell me, that'd be great.
::The Wretched
::: lol No worries buddy. It's been taken cared of Zeta Nova 17:09, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Oh Shit! 

message: # Strong support - see Talk:Daikatsugeki%21_Yukihime_Ninp%C5%8Dch%C5%8D_dattebayo%21%21. --TheYmode 02:36, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Move page 

message: The article tile uses Illusionary Ruins, but the article itself and the infobox use Phantom Ruins. Can someone knowledgable about the film change whatever need to be changed? I assume one has to be wrong. --69.156.207.146 23:27, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Really neither one is incorrect, Japanese can be hard to translate, so they're both pretty correct. So whichever sounds better. :P Moocowsrule (talk) 05:51, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Question about the film's title

message: Is that date in the description of the movie accurate? I never heard any plans for Naruto's other movies to be released in America yet.
--User:sonicmaster1223 23:40, 9 September 2007
Movie 2 comes out next year--Blue-EyesGold Dragon 03:59, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: To be more specific, the release lands in June 12th. Zeta Nova 19:05, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: The Movie's American Release

message: Someone wrote a bunch of crap in the movie's plot section. I got the text back, but I don't know how to do links or anything. Can someone please fix this?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.176.124.195 (talk) 14:36, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Help?
Talk:Chota (Cherokee town)

message: If there is a pre-1745 primary source document that mentions Chota, be sure to cite it before modifying this sentence.  Please note the following:
*There was a "Chota" in the Lower towns in South Carolina that is mentioned in 1717 and 1721.  Historians often confuse this Chota with the Overhill town of Chota (Schroedl, Overhill Cherokee Archaeology at Chota-Tanasee, 9).  
*Several sources claim that James Needham and Gabriel Arthur visited Chota in 1673.  This is based on a letter written by their employer, Abraham Wood.  The letter, however, does not name the village, and it's debateable as to whether or not Needham and Arthur were even in the Overhill country.  This error might be rooted in Samuel Cole Williams' Early Travels (1928), in which Williams notes the village encountered might have been Chota.
*Some sources (mostly genealogical) mention a "Moytoy of Chota" as the father of Moytoy II (of Great Tellico).  I think this is based on Emmet Starr's History of the Cherokee Indians (written in 1922).  I don't have access to the book, so I can't say whether or not he's basing it on documentation, oral tradition, etc.  It receives scant attention elsewhere, so I mostly ignored it.  Bms4880 (talk) 19:33, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Chota not in the historical record before the 1740s 

message: Basic information to add to this article (which anyone interested in this subject would expect to find here): the etymology of the name "Chota." 173.88.246.138 (talk) 16:30, 23 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  To add to article
Talk:Gadugi

message: Probably this article will not be a long one, but still, more can be done to improve it.
* are there more examples that can be used to illustrate this idea?
* are there similar concepts in other cultures that can be added in a "See also" section?
* references to print materials?  If there are, then the current website references can be moved to an "External links" section.
Please cross off the list as they have been completed.  Thanks. CJLippert 02:24, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  To do to improve