lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Witch (Buffy the Vampire Slayer)

message: I think the current section on "censorship" gives a false impression. The original uses "Nazi-like" in a way that is often used in the English language (esp. in the US), meaning "authoritarian", "very strict", "no-nonsense" etc. In other words, it is used in a non-literal way (the mother is not actually considered a Nazi). Another example would be Seinfeld's "Soup Nazi". In German, this meaning does not exist for the word Nazi. If someone is called a Nazi in German that means he is someone supporting the ideology of Hitler's party. So there had to be a translation removing the Nazi part to remain intelligible to the audience. Calling the mother a Nazi in German would have made no sense at all. (Consequently, "Heil" had to be clipped, as well.) The translation they did come up with doesn't really mirror the original's intent, but that's another issue. The German dubbing of Buffy has many problems translating the language and pop culture references, this is just one in a long list. Censorship has nothing to do with it. If you want to create a list of differing, strange or plain false translations in the German version of Buffy, you could make a book from it. In a nutshell, this "incident" isn't notable. I also highly doubt that Nazi references are "routinely removed" from German translations, but I can't prove that. Maybe all those used in the same way as above. The German airing of Seinfeld's "Soup Nazi" most likely didn't contain the word Nazi for the same reason. 134.130.4.46 11:37, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removal of Nazi is a translation issue, not censorship 
Talk:Never Kill a Boy on the First Date

message: There might be some confusion between the name of this article and Waterdown's CD entitled "Never Kill The Boy On The First Date" Just some food for thought.-- Jreferee 16:12, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Since the television episode appears to be the well known primary meaning for the phrase, I added a disambiguation link - This is an article about the television episode.  For the album, see Waterdown - to the top of the article.  It links the reader to a differently titled article containing the similar 'Never Kill Boy on the First Date' concept that the reader may seek instead of the current article. -- Jreferee 21:20, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Never Kill The Boy On The First Date
Talk:Angel (Buffy the Vampire Slayer episode)

message: The entire writing section seems to be completely redundant. Coredlia shallow? Well, yes. If it went entirely, I don't think the article would suffer.
And I could swear Kendra never assuemd Buffy was a vampire. Kendra is naive but I don't think she makes such a rookie mistake, despite the smooches she saw.Lots42 09:51, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Opinions 

message: Recently added to the lede:
: The narrative follows Buffy, coming to terms with her feelings for Angel. However when the pair finally kiss, she makes a shocking discovery: Angel's a vampire! But Darla is playing a deadly game manipulating both Buffy and Angel to the Master's will: one of them will die...
I'd prefer something that reads less like a TV Guide listing, but that's just me. —Tamfang (talk) 04:39, 1 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  breathless summary
Talk:Separation of duties

message: First link to the ISACA definition of SoD is broken. It should be replaced.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kdridder (talk • contribs) 11:45, 15 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Broken link 

message: In the Application in general business and in accounting section, the sentence: SoD is fairly new to the IS department, and a high portion of SOX internal control issues come from IT. is needlessly opaque for several reasons:
# The term "IS" is not explained
# The term "IT" is not explained
# The term "SOX" is not explained
# The term "IS" and "IT" are used interchangeably
Also, a "portion" cannot be high or low, but it may be large or small. Either "a high percentage" or "a large portion" should be used, instead.
Unless someone has a better idea, I intend to replace the sentence with: 
SoD is fairly new to most Information Technology (IT) departments, but a high percentage of Sarbanes-Oxley internal audit issues come from IT.
Thoughts, anyone? — UncleBubba ( T @ C ) 23:49, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: No comments; edit made. — UncleBubba ( T @ C ) 12:38, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unclear sentence--Undefined abbreviations
Talk:The Inspector General (1949 film)

message: It should be noted that since character names are not specified in the credits, their form in the cast list is taken from various resources, primarily AFI Catalog of Feature Films and IMDb, as well as from personal viewing by editors. For the record, below is a reproduction of the cast listing in the opening credits:
               WBWARNER BROS. PICTURES            Presents
                         Danny                          Kaye                             in                          "The                       Inspector                       General"           Color by TECHNICOLOR                            with                  WALTER SLEZAK                            and                 BARBARA BATES               ELSA LANCHESTER                 GENE LOCKHART                       ALAN HALE                   WALTER CATLETT                     RHYS WILLIAMSA WARNER BROS.–First National Picture
                                                                            Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 20:54, 29 June 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Character names are not indicated in on-screen cast credits

message: This film was parodied in Episode 113 of Mad Movies with the L.A. Connection. Would this go in an "In Popular Culture" section or similar?
Popefelix (talk) 14:38, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Mad Movies With the L.A. Connection
Talk:Laverda

message: the motorcycle brand laverda and agriculture brand should be split.  they don't even use the same logo, shown in the header..
:And given the current status of the motorbikes, perhaps the agricultural company should be at Laverda, with the motorbikes at Laverda (motorcycles) ?? Article is looking good though, with more inline citations it would be worth going for WP:GA. FlagSteward (talk) 16:19, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Bimota

message: If there were any discrepancies between the book "The Ultimate History of Fast Motorcycles" and the information that Bimota listed on their web page concerning the total number of each model made, I used Bimota's information.--Davidwiz (talk) 21:53, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  I would add they should have the famous Bimota Tesi 1d on here, the most beautiful bike I have ever seen.--24.205.238.10 (talk) 05:28, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: List of Production Models
Talk:Dion and the belmonts

message: I find several spellings in WP. Dion and the Belmonts, Dion & the Belmonts, Dion and The Belmonts... They redirect to the Belmonts. It should all be changed to redirect to this article, and then the spelling of this title should be changed to "Dion and The Belmonts". I think that's the proper spelling in the record books. Note that capitalization matters. I can't do it.  George Slivinsky 13:14, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
Talk:Terry Pratchett's Hogfather

message: The logo in the trailers isn't exactly the same as the one I used from the calender. If anyone can get a screen capture of it, that'd be great. Daibhid C 14:17, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Logo

message: Isn't tv series a bit inappropriate for the name of this - it's basiclly one long show split into two parts for schedudalling reasons. Perhaps a move to something like Hogfather (TV adaptation) would be more appropriate? Poobarb 16:01, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree, and as such have moved the page. Mike Peel 19:25, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Should the infobox be modified as well? -- Annie D 22:09, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Name

message: :Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *Support or *Oppose, then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's naming conventions.
*Support. Because that's its commercial title. Annie D 04:23, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Survey

message: ION Television, Sunday, November 25 (7/6c). Travb (talk) 05:33, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Will be showing  November 25

message: I added a new section on the differences from the novel, but as I own neither the book nor the film my facts, while all true, will probably need to be added on; I'm sure I didn't list all the differences but I'm pretty sure the ones I did list are correct.--Scott Greenstone (talk) 17:46, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Added new section

message: The Wiki page says that the limited edition (2-disc) release came with an individually numbered case and signed card from Terry Pratchett. Is this true? Mine didn't... JaffaCakeLover (talk) 17:01, 9 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Limited Edition
Talk:Richmond K. Turner

message: The major problem is that huge section in the middle with long quotes from Dyer's biography of Turner bearing on culpability of Turner for Pearl Harbor.  Good grief.  That whole section could be summarized, probably by one paragraph, and the rest referenced.
Then after dwelling on Pearl Harbor for hundreds of lines, the rest of the war, particularly after Guadalcanal, is given very brief coverage.  I mean, sure Pearl Harbor was important, but come on, there was a lot of war after that.
I wish I had time to clean it up, but I don't.  But it clearly needs work. Bigmac31 23:40, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Now there's no mention of this at all. __meco (talk) 17:08, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

text: It may have been a mess before, but now its a nothing.  It now reads like a fluffed up resume of someone who just hung around here and there and didn't do anything.  Which is not the case with Turner.  Bradkay (talk) 08:11, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  This article is a mess 

message: Suggest setting up a Wikiquote article for Turner and linking to that.  BrokenSphereMsg me 23:39, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Too many quotes in this article
Talk:Streamline diffusion

message: This article has unfortunately enough been written solely from memory. I searched for good sources, but could not find any. It would be great if someone could provide a good source. Bfg 13:29, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled section

message: Could someone please explain what we're talking about here?  Is this fluid dynamics? No fair typing random equations out of the book and pretending they are articles. --Wtshymanski (talk) 13:38, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Context
Talk:Counties of the United Kingdom

message: I've redirected County-level areas in the United Kingdom‎ and Counties and similar areas in the United Kingdom‎ to point at this article. A discussion of what (if anything) should be taken from them, and where it should go in the existing articles on UK local government should take place here. MRSC • Talk 10:39, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Forked content

message: This appears under the map as en:Lieutenancy areas of Scotland. Unfortunately, I don't know how how to remove the en: using the new editing format. Koro Neil (talk) 04:57, 20 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Link from Scottish map
Talk:SimMall

message: As of now, the game lacks notability in that it appears to be unheard of on the Internet (including major video gaming websites, and Blitz Games' official website); checks on Google also produce nothing about the game.   Unless the creator of the article addresses this issue, this article is potentially deleted, per Wikipedia:Verifiability for the lack of notable sources. ╫ ２５ ◀RingADing▶ 13:33, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Potential deletion candidate
Talk:Jerzy Grotowski

message: I added the NPOV tag because the article uses a lot of very complimentary, flowery terms to describe the subject and his works.  If these were adequately sourced, it might not be NPOV.  Please add citations or rewrite to be more neutral. Karanacs 19:14, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That is not NPOV you are talking about. You appear to be requesting citations. To which "flowery" terms are you referring? On a quick perusal, I can't see any. Please be more specific and use the correct tag if requesting more sources than Towards a Poor Theatre. DionysosProteus 23:04, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: NPOV

message: I don't have the gumption to figure out templates etc. to fix it, but how come it says he was born at age 75?
141.202.248.68 (talk) 20:05, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I think I get it actually -- this is the age he'd be were he not dead.  I guess the template should take death date into account.
141.202.248.68 (talk) 20:08, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Born ... age 75? 
Talk:Structural history of the Roman military

message: This Featured Article had its last review in 2008 and since then has fallen a bit out of standards. Issues spotted:
* several uncited sentences;
* "clarification needed" tags in the text since 2013;
* Livy, Polybius and Tacitus are primary sources, maybe they should be replaced by secondary sources, ie. modern historians?
* Is that "Strategy Page" reliable? (ref. 28)
* the lead is divided in "Phases" but I see no reference to this "division" in the text. Is this OR?
Needs tune-up; if the issues above are not corrected, the article can be nominated for Featured Article review. RetiredDuke (talk) 11:44, 11 November 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: The lead could maybe be rewritten to match with the current divisions in the article - or additional sectioning might be used to more clearly highlight the separations: I'll go about trying to do this. Regarding "modern historians": a simple JSTOR search reveals many sources of interest: although I might not have time to edit this article, I can provide relevant ones to interested editors on request. This seems particularly interesting. RandomCanadian (talk / contribs)  14:55, 22 January 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  FA in need of review 

message: In the quote table within "Professionalisation during the Republican period", Polybius is said to write "...four thousand foot and two hundred horse..."; however, reading Histories 1 16:2 he states "...four thousand foot and three hundred horse...". This is made even more strange by the fact that the quote table follows up with "when any unusual necessity arises, they raise the number of foot to five thousand and of the horse to three hundred". Maybe I'm not searching thoroughly enough, but I can't even find a mention of any such clause either in the original Greek or in LacusCurtius.
What is it really even citing? Where does "1:268-70" make an appearance in Histories?
Apalsnerg (talk) 06:34, 23 January 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Erroneous quote of Polybius? 

message: I suspect it has simply been an automatic replacement process and not vandalism, but the Pilum made from "Popular imagination" feels misplaced... poplar wood maybe? --84.118.56.83 (talk) 00:28, 28 February 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm by no means an expert in Roman history but "Traditionally they were armed with a sword known as a gladius and two throwing spears known as pila: one the heavy pilum of popular imagination and one a slender javelin." doesn't seem to be referring to the material, and well "popular imagination" (as evidenced in comics like Asterix) certainly seems the right description. Cheers, RandomCanadian (talk / contribs)  00:42, 28 February 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Popular Imagination
Talk:Comparative sociology

message: This article is just a stub, but an awkward one at that. Conflates comparative and cross-national research. Comparative sociology is done on many levels and with many units of analysis, including: organizations, communities, religions, etc. As a method, it has been highly developed and refined. See Charles Ragin's work, for instance... DA Sonnenfeld (talk) 20:20, 22 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: In need of considerable development

message: Comparison is a research approach, strategy, design, method... It is used in many (if not most) sciences. An article about comparison as an research method would make more sense but I see that the comparative method page has been monopolized by linguistics. How can we correct this? D. Cordoba-Bahle (talk) 22:17, 6 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: There is no such thing as ''comparative sociology''

message: All text in this article is cited from A Dictionary of Sociology by John Scott. I've added in a few citations, but other sources would definitely improve the article. Kangarooth (talk) 08:46, 18 May 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Dictionary of Sociology by John Scott
Talk:Wave–particle duality relation

message: Is this article talking about the classic double slit experiment or not?  It seems to me that the relation derived is valid for this, but the text mentions lenses and what not which seem superfluous.  --Michael C. Price talk 13:38, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I believe it is. The topic as a whole is a sub-topic of coherence theory, which deals with coherence and fringe visibility of different light sources. The physics of coherence is of separation of time or space (which is just a statement about speed of propagation of waves.) The book on Optics by Hecht and Zajac provides a solid introductory overview. Lenses show up typically to get the brightness big enough in the lab to be able to measure the things. What should probably be done is to contrast this relation against the framework of semi-coherent light sources. Other notable subtopics of coherence theory are Hanbury-Brown and Twiss effect. linas 15:36, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Experimental setup

message: It's fairly clear what D means in the extreme cases of D=0 and D=1, but I wonder if there's any way to explain what it means for intermediate values in terms that aren't too technical? It's defined in terms of the absolute value of the probability it went through one slit vs. the probability it went through the other, but what can this even mean in quantum mechanics if we're not using an interpretation with hidden variables? Orthodox QM doesn't say there's a definite truth about which slit it went through on each trial, so how does one define the "probability" it went through a given slit in a trial where no detectors were present at the slits, and D is less than 1 but greater than 0? The third-to-last paragraph says "If we detect the photon at (F), we don't know where the photon would have been detected in the aperture plane and D = 0 characterizes our ignorance"--so does that mean the probabilities PA and PB are the probabilities the phoon "would have been detected" at one slit vs. the other if there had been detectors present there? Hypnosifl (talk) 02:17, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Can meaning of "D" parameter be explained conceptually?

message: I think we have to be careful in saying the the wavefunction is a statistical construct. I thought that may been what born thought but the idea of the wave nature of molecules is more extensive than simply a distribution based off of lack of knowledge like much of statistics. 128.255.75.223 (talk) 15:03, 12 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Statistical?

message: The inequality should correctly be called Englert-Greenberger-Yasin inequality. The name of the page should also be appropriately modified. The inequality was derived by Greenberger & Yasin, and Englert in two independent papers. There is not reason why Yasin's name should not be included.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tabish q (talk • contribs) 08:41, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Where is Yasin?
Talk:Progressive dispensationalism

message: Discuss here also. DFH 18:43, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Don't merge.  They are distinct theologies that should not be conflated. Biasedbulldog 20:29, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge to [[Dispensationalism]] ? 

message: Gundry is not a progressive dispensationalist, so the section on his eschatological posttribulational views will be removed. The vast majority of progressive dispensationalists hold to a pretribulation rapture, just as the vast number of revised dispensationalists also do. Lamorak (talk) 03:46, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The fact that the vast majority of progressives hold to pre-tribulationism naturally means that not all hold to it; this is a distinction that should be noted in an informational article. For that reason, I've edited the beginning of the second sentence under the "Comparison" heading to reflect the "vast majority" wording, and noted that there are variations where the rapture question is concerned. I don't know of any other major variations, as I've never heard of a progressive dispensationalist who denied a distinction between the church and Israel, a seven year tribulation, or a literal 1000 reign of Christ.Phoenix1861 (talk) 16:34, 12 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Robert H. Gundry 

message: Dispensationalist Arnold Fruchtenbaum (not a progressive dispensationalist) argues for another view of the Covenants, that the Gentiles in the body of Christ have entered into the spiritual blessings of applicable Covenants. For example, they do not enter into the Land Covenant, which promises physical blessing to the people of Israel, but they do enter into the spiritual blessings of the New Covenant, i.e., knowng God and a new heart and forgiveness of sins through the Messiah Jesus. The literal fulfillment of the New Covenant however, is during the Millennium.
I do not have the citation at this time. Perhaps this can be attributed and worked in to the section "Progressive" relationship between the covenants.Caryw777 (talk) 16:50, 28 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Another New Covenant View 
Wikipedia talk:Images with missing articles/lib.utexas.edu

message: To whoever looks after this list (Magnus?): I suspected that the red link for "John Piermont Morgan" was a typo for John Pierpont Morgan, so I corrected it. I checked the UT page containing the image and it also contains the typo. The photo there is surely of J.P. Morgan (at an earlier age than the famous photo which accompanies the WP article on him), but the dates the UT page  gives for his birth and death- 1786-1836- don't fit at all. Had the subject of that photo died in 1836, I'm quite sure there wouldn't have been such a photo of him. My guess is the photo actually dates from about the 1880s. I find lots of results on a Google search for "John Piermont Morgan", but the pages to which they lead all seem to actually be about J. Pierpont. I wonder how the mispelling got started? It does appear to be quite common, at least on the Internet. Whyaduck 13:52, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Typo in list