lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Newfie

message: Is this epithet ever applied to people from Labrador? —Charles P. (Mirv) 05:06, 22 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: The term has been applied inappropriately -- at least geographically -- to Labradorians, moreso back in the day when the province (and previous country) was merely called "Newfoundland". That it is an "incorrect" application of an epithet is irrelevant; people who use cultural or racial epithets are generally not geographic scholars. SigPig 02:00, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

message: That list of "Newfoundland links" was ridiculous. I deleted a bunch of them that had nothing to do with the subject of the article whatsoever. Also, two of other links were dead; they went as well. --Qviri (talk) 12:30, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: "But he says Newfie is now recognized more as a term of endearment or a term of familiarity..." It seems things have changed. The word is no longer taken as an insult.69.6.162.160 23:27, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The Alberta government is not the final arbiter of what is or is not offensive to Newfoundlanders. --SigPig 03:37, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

text: I do (find it offensive), and most people I know do as well. SigPig 03:49, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

text: Is it considered more offensive than Aussie for an Australian or Pom or Limey for an Englishman? Magic Pickle 00:00, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I do not know how offensive those terms are to their respective peoples; I do know that generally, "Newfie/Newf" is, at best, condescending, and at worst, contemptuous. -- SigPig |SEND - OVER 18:06, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

text: Generally, Limey and Pom are not seen as offensive by us English. Looks like I'd better apologise to that Newfoundlander at work... Magic Pickle 19:41, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

text: Most of the external links are inappropriate for Wikipedia. Links to social networking groups like MySpace and Facebook are specifically discouraged. The other external links do not have anything to do woth the article. See WP:LINKSTOAVOID. One link , , is to a site which has been dismantled. Unless someone can provide rationale for keeping these links, they should be deleted. Silverchemist (talk) 04:34, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links 

message: I only know there's a slur "Newfie" and don't know what it means.--5.102.224.19 (talk) 13:39, 3 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  How could this article have been written without once mentioning what's the stereotype itself for Newfies.
Talk:21 Jump Street

message: :The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
The result of the move request was: not moved. (non-admin closure)  ■ ∃ Madeline ⇔ ∃ Part of me ; 21:11, 2 April 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: 21 Jump Street →  – Both this television series and the later movie remake are both very notable. The film actually gets more page views. Feel like neither is the true primary topic RedPatch (talk) 13:34, 26 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 26 March 2023
Talk:Queen of Angels (novel)

message: IMO, essentially the whole description here (as of 21-Sep-2005) could be moved out of the spoiler warning, since it merely describes the setup, and doesn't reveal any surprises that can't be derived from reading the back cover. — B.Bryant 05:10, 22 September 2005 (UTC)

message: http://www.literator.org.za/index.php/literator/article/view/677
©Geni (talk) 23:42, 13 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: potential source
Talk:Obliteration phenomenon

message: Actually, Einstein (co)-authored quite a few papers dealing with various aspects of the special or general theories of relativity.  If the example refers to the 1905 paper on electrodynamics (which founded special relativity), then it is not directly relevant to cosmology, so it would usually by pretentious and a waste of spacetime to cite it.  If the example refers to the 1916 paper laying out the foundations of the general theory of relativity, again, this is not directly related to cosmology.  If a cosmologist needs to refer to a standard concept or technique from gtr, it makes more sense to cite a recent textbook, since the theory has developed greatly since Einstein's time.
I suppose this doesn't obviate the point that this makes life hard for influence tracking or whatever the information scientists are interested in, but it shouldn't be hard to compile keywords of terms used in gtr (say) and then to count articles using these frequently as having been heavily influenced (probably only indirectly) by Einstein.---CH  (talk) 05:21, 22 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Bad example?

message: Garfield says in his article, "[t]his process of scientific obliteration was first described by Robert Merton in his beautifully conceived book, On the Shoulders of Giants." However, he himself seems to have coined the term: "The 'obliteration' or 'palimpset' phenomenon affects citations to discoveries that are so quickly absorbed into the fabric of science and technology that they become (to use sociological jargon) too quickly institutionalized."
The true originator of the phrase should be identified by checking Merton's book to see what he says.
WilliamDenton 03:35, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I checked Merton's book by using Amazon's Look Inside the Book feature. It turns out that Merton was describing a different phenomenon under the names palimpset syndrome or anatopic syndrome. Merton was not refering to the complete obliteration of citation, as Garfield is. Merton was referring to the temporary obliteration and the subsequent mis-citation to the most recent author to mention a concept or use an aphorism. I don't have time now to fix up the entry, but perhaps someone else will. --Nick 04:53, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Who coined the term?
Talk:Bargaining

message: Perhaps this article should be merged with Haggling? Fourthgeek 16:52, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Support Netrat (talk) 16:37, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

text: Support Strumphs (talk) 23:53, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

text: Plz read Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not Netrat (talk) 16:37, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge

message: This section is in dire need of references. Also people have added sentences to it that does not have anything to do with Behavioural Theory, but are rather baseless assumptions about where bargaining more often may take place. --Kebman (talk) 08:43, 11 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Behavioural theory 

message: When I first read this article, I expected to find some relevant and information on how to effectively bargain. I found little of use. For that the article is too messy and in no way gives a complete picture on how to effectively bargain, or even the process of simple bargaining. For instance both Nash and The Prisoners Dilemma are used over and over without giving a relevant example, although there are links. The article is simply too easy to confuse with the much wider topic of negotiation, although bargaining is a special way of negotiating a price. --Kebman (talk) 08:47, 11 September 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: WP is an encyclopaedia, not a collection of manuals. So the article should be a description of what bargaining is, not a manual on how to bargain. Thomas.W (talk) 09:52, 11 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Negotiation vs. bargaining 

message: Would this section be appropriate? There's many sources out there. 110.175.102.204 (talk) 14:30, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Criticism of bargaining/haggling?
Talk:Gustatory system

message: I have added considerable material to this page, including many inline citations requested by the administrator.  The material is mainly concerned with the mechanisms and methods of gustation and not about the perception of taste which has its own wili page.
I am prepared to edit the material under the heading Importance.  It would involve removing much of the material without inline citations and directing the reader to the taste wiki.  The idea is to more closely conform to the WikiProject Medicine guidelines.  The Gustatory system page would remain in its present location.
Does anyone object to this editing activity?
Steamboat Jim (talk) 19:35, 23 November 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Entries around December 2012, time to remove taste material

message: HELP!!! In my second edit (see history), the page came out all funny like it looks now. I don't how to revert, and even if I did I dont want to lose the stuff I added. Can anyone assist? Benji64 00:30, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  older entries 

message: The parts on describing the neuron and action potential should probably be removed as they have their own section.  I am still unclear of the etiquette involved in editing so I will leave it someone else for now.MilitantLeftist 07:53, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Neuron and action potential 

message: Most information on this page is redundant with the information on basic tastes in the article about taste. Suggested merge. --Tinctorius (talk) 23:58, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Almost all of it is redundant, and that which isn't is lacking inline citations. Could you describe the content you were looking for?  --Arcadian (talk) 03:29, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge with [[taste]] 

message: I'm building easy to understand tables for all the sensory systems. If you have any ideas please write them here. User:Leveni 1 March 2011
: Please debug them a bit before committing them.  And don't capitalize non-initial words in headings, like "Brain".  I reverted at auditory system already; put it back when it looks sensible, but don't leave out all the intermediate nervous system stages there.  Dicklyon (talk) 04:42, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Table for Gustatory system 

message: I deleted the recent edits for a number of reasons:
* They were poorly sourced
* The sources were not properly formatted
* Much of the sourcing was a non-peer-reviewed website, not a reliable source
* There were many typos
* Much of the information was not consistent with the rest of the article, and did not appropriately link to other wiki articles so as to make the ideas more clear.
In general, original research is suspected.
But I agree that the lead should be expanded, and external sources via inline citations need to be provided as references. Does anyone have anything to contribute in this regard?
: I am not promising to "fix" anything, I am removing non-peer-reviewed original research. Eflatmajor7th (talk) 03:14, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recent deletions, lead, and citations
Talk:B.O.T.A. tarot deck

message: Is this one the "colour it yourself" deck that comes with a box of pencils? We should mention that if so. —Ashley Y 06:39, 22 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I apologize for that. I am in the process of trying to organize the tarot-related articles but I don't have a knowledge of the alternative decks so thank you for pointing that out! Sam 20:51, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

message: The article reads like an essay. All I see is original research. It has no encyclopedic content. The books listed in the Bibliogrpahy all appear to be primary sources, not peer reviewed books, theses, or journal articles. There are no direct citations to these or any other sources in the text. Sources must be verfiable and reliable. - Parsa 10:50, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unverifiable and unbalanced content
Talk:Cathedral of St. John the Baptist (St. John's)

message: I spaced the four images out somewhat, and User:Jcmurphy changed them back.  I feel that the clustering at the beginning of the article could use some improvement.  Any comments?  Jkelly 06:48, 22 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Images

message: It began much earlier in the 19th century in Newfoundland than is stated in this article - see Dictionary of Canadian Biography Vol X "William Grey".  Grey was recruited by Bishop Feild and acted as diocesan architect.  He was an active member of the Ecclesiological Society which propagated the ideas of Pugin.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.105.233.203 (talk) 13:28, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Gothic Revival

message: In the article it says that all but two windows were destroyed, then that the sole surviving window can be seen in the sacristy.... one is not two, ain't it? So, what's wrong here? Did the other one break later? Or did only one survive?
Sunstarfire (talk) 07:45, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  All but two windows survived?
Talk:The Enid

message: Change of "depression which suggests Bi-Polar disorder" to "depression which possibly suggests Bi-Polar disorder". Depression alone does not suggest BPD without a manic component and this is not re-enforced by the article. The balance of the article 'suggests' an exciting and wild life, but without an explicit statement that this was the result of mania, a diagnosis of BPD is unsupported.
Having said that, in the spirit of de-stigmatisation, and explicit statement in an article that Godfrey  lives or lived with BPD would be most welcome.
L-Bit 06:58, 22 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Fine, I don't have much time myself at present. The article does need some references to back the history up, and though I didn't know Francis had a page it's not generally considered useful to link to Myspace pages. I've also started Robert John Godfrey if anyone's interested. --Rodhullandemu 17:15, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: > Hi Rodhullandemu
> 
> I was the band's manager from 1975 to 1778! Please don't reverse the additions because they are relevant and accurate. If you don't believe me - talk to Robert!
> 
> Best Regards
> 
> Mike
Yes, but they need to be supported by evidence external to Wikipedia, and they're not. However, I will try to speak with Robert this weekend - I need to discuss his own page anyhow. Debates like this really should be documented in the Talk pages in any event, in case there needs to be a review.
Regards, --Rodhullandemu 01:50, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  ==email== 

message: The following message was added to the article by : I've removed it and copied it here, as it's more appropriate for the article's talk page:
::I, Robert John Godfrey (cadacman) will be updating this page over the coming weeks to reflect the band as it now is. I have made a start. Please do not hesitate to contact me for any reason.
PamD 23:27, 24 November 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  2021 update
Talk:Neuromuscular-blocking drug

message: this is very short notes.. and will be fixed up...  so please do not edit just yet. Thank you very much. --LowLifer 11:52, 22 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Initial comment

message: I suggest that this page be moved to neuromuscular blocking drug (plural to singular) in accordance with Wikipedia:Naming conventions.  Any objections?  Also, why the hyphen?  Thanks much, delldot | talk 21:20, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Neuromuscular blocking drug does sound sort of strange. However, if it's your wish, do so. Nobody will stop you. --NomaderTalk to me 21:40, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

text: however it does leave out the paralytic agents that don't work specificially at the NMJ such as botulium toxin. ER MD 07:50, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Wait a minute, we're supposed to trust you when you swore that no MD would ever remember anatomy, or biochemistry, but undergraduate microbiology? that you remember? you're an undergraduate volunteer at some sort of a clinic aren't you? that would explain why you sound so much like a teenaged internet troll--64.12.117.13 15:11, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Move?

message: What do you guys think about using ACh as an abbreviation for acetylcholine? I understand that it's common practice to abbreviate in notes, outlines, etc. etc. but I've never seen it done in a proper textbook and certainly never in an encyclopedia. I propose that we don't abbreviate here (especially since someone might have arrived to this page somewhere in the middle and won't know what the heck ACh is without reading the very beginning). Docbento 23:04, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  ACh abbreviations 

message: The article has recently popped up in the last few days (possibly the result of a class project?). It's got a lot of information, but virtually no one calls them Quaternary ammonium muscle relaxants; pharmacologically, they are referred to as neuromuscular blocking drugs. True, a major characteristic of pretty much all of them is a quaternary cationic nitrogen atom. This is because they are mimicking the structure of acetylcholine, so as to competitively bind in its binding pocket. But overall, quaternary ammonium muscle relaxants and neuromuscular blocking drugs are the same thing. Dr. Cash 04:10, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge [[Quaternary ammonium muscle relaxants]] into this article

message: I had to move some info to main articles to fit the remaining info into the table Mikael Häggström (talk) 15:20, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Note to the tabling 

message: Support the November proposal to merge Neuromuscular blocking agents with this page, suggesting this one (drugs) as the more natural target. I see the earlier, modest counterargument from the 2006 discussion, but even botox fulfils the IUPHAR definition of a drug. So, clear overlap, if not duplication. Klbrain (talk) 16:31, 21 December 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree Anesth Earth (talk) 08:16, 6 April 2023 (UTC)

text: Klbrain (talk) 16:16, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge proposal
Talk:Subramanian Swamy

message: Conspiracy Theorist word should be removed 2409:4042:2D9C:147D:0:0:688B:2310 (talk) 04:15, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the  template. User:CanonNi (talk|contribs) 05:59, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 13 April 2024 

message: I am not seeing the justification for this recently added descriptive in the lead. He appears to have aired controversial/unsubstantiated claims as this source puts forth but which only mentions the label in passing. The second source is also more about BJP dissidents, including Swami, rather than his conspiracy theories.
Even beyond these sources, the preponderance of the sources on the page (and the article itself) focus on his economics, politics and litigation rather than him being a prominent conspiracy theorist. This label is generally reserved for people who are patently known for airing conspiracy theories not for people who have in addition to their primary vocations aired them. See for e.g. the articles and Talk page discussions of Donald Trump, Joe Rogan, Tucker Carlson and others where similar labelling has been rejected for the leads. Gotitbro (talk) 23:12, 5 June 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Conspiracy theorist
Talk:Abitibi—Témiscamingue (electoral district)

message: the picture on the right depicts only 1/5 of the region, furthermore, i do not see mention of Vallée-de-l'Or wich is the biggest district. Rouyn-Noranda City is not a district.
Please do not enter half-assed information.
-abitibi native
:You are confusing the region with the riding. The map shown is accurate. -- Earl Andrew - talk 22:21, 22 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: :The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
The result of the move request was: moved.  – robertsky (talk) 20:20, 8 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: support yikes! dabing with mistakes is a new one!—blindlynx 00:34, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 1 May 2024
Category talk:Washington, D.C.

message: Result was no consensus (no change), see archived discussion for details. (SEWilco 16:23, 26 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: [[WP:CFD]] 18 Aug 2005

message: Consensus was to keep, see archived discussion for details.  ∞Who?¿? 07:20, 22 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: [[WP:CFD]] 15 Sep 2005
Talk:Acorn woodpecker

message: Could we add a map of their habitat?  RJFJR (talk) 22:49, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Map?

message: Hello! This is to let editors know that :File:Acorn woodpecker_holding_a_nut_in_its_beak-0225.jpg, a featured picture used in this article, has been selected as the English Wikipedia's picture of the day (POTD) for May 9, 2024. A preview of the POTD is displayed below and can be edited at Template:POTD/2024-05-09. For the greater benefit of readers, any potential improvements or maintenance that could benefit the quality of this article should be done before its scheduled appearance on the Main Page.  If you have any concerns, please place a message at Wikipedia talk:Picture of the day. Thank you!  — Amakuru (talk) 10:25, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Featured picture scheduled for POTD
Template talk:Award2

message: Adapted as :
:fr:Modèle:Récompense
Ultrogothe 07:40, 22 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: fr

message: Why was this changed? I liked the blue design better. Gflores Talk 16:15, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: change

message: The "Minor barnstar" is streched to the same size as the normal one, which makes it look really pixellated and awful. 68.39.174.238 05:24, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Problem 

message: Due to some issues with contrast, I have now added the textcolor parameter. 68.5.224.107 17:45, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Contrasting 

message: Why the heck would this template claim to add pages to Category:Suspected Wikipedia sockpuppets? That hardly seems the stuff of a nice award. - Dravecky (talk) 22:58, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sockpuppets? 

message: Is there any way to control the width of the template?  — MusicMaker5376 16:43, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Width 

message: this template is uncategorised...
:Category:Wikipedia award templates?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 144.53.226.17 (talk) 05:11, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  add category? 

message: Could an additional parameter be added to allow the "topic" text to be justified to the left or the right, with the default (no input) being the center? Thanks! - tucoxn\talk 02:02, 21 November 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Done, I added |align=. Cheers, LittleMountain5 03:47, 21 November 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit request - left and right justification of topic
Talk:Cec Linder

message: According to IMDb he was born in Timmins, Ontario. Can anyone confirm if this is right for sure? SD6-Agent 08:06, 22 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: According to IMDb he was born in Radziechow, Poland.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.78.253.49 (talk) 03:54, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: It would be one of today's Radekhivs, the one in Silesia was called Märzdorf back then. 46.186.34.3 (talk) 13:50, 29 September 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Since Cec Linder was born in Galicia (Eastern Europe), his native city in Galicia is Radekhiv, a part of Ukraine since 1945. In 1921, the year of Linder's birth, the city was a part of Poland and was referenced by its Polish name Radziechów.    Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 09:50, 30 September 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Birthplace

message: On a Junior Non-Commissioned Officers' Course in 1974, I dimly recall seeing a training film (on intructional technique, perhaps?) with Linder as a corporal in crisply-pressed bush dress that suggested it was done in the late 1950s or early '60s. Is there anyone out there who might have a title? Did he make other films for the Army?
Ab.chaplin (talk) 11:29, 13 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cec Linder's military training film credits 

message: I always found that Cec Linder bore an uncanny resemblance to the much better known actor George C. Scott. 69.157.140.113 (talk) 02:31, 15 August 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Resemblance to George C. Scott