lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Sixth-rate

message: The Template:Wiktionary which redirects to Template:Move to Wiktionary was removed as this article is one of six ratings of the Rating system of the Royal Navy.  This stub is to be developed further as noted in Talk:Rating system of the Royal Navy.  Please do not move this article. Thanks, Petersam 03:35, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Template:Move to Wiktionary

message: Please do not remove the first paragraph as it functions as a quick navigational aid to the other articles in this series.  Thank you. Petersam 03:54, 18 Oct 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: First paragraph is navigational aid

message: 18 officers seems a little much. Counting the officers (commissioned, warrant, mids), I only count 13, where are the other 5 then? --ProdigySportsman 04:36, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  18 officers seems too much for such a small ship. 

message: It has become apparent that the words "first rate", "second rate", etc have become capitalised over the last year or so.  This seems to me to directly contradict the guidance at Wikipedia:Manual of Style (capital letters), and I have changed them back again.  To clarify, if we were talking about frigates, we would use lower case, because it's not a proper noun; "first rate" is exactly analogous. The usage on :Category:Set indices on ships follows the lower case usage almost exclusively, as far as I can tell.  Please address any concerns here before making wholesale changes back again.
On another note, some of the hyphenation has been rather patchy.  Adjectival use will require a hyphen (first-rate ship) but when used as a noun (first rate), it does not.  Again, I've made the changes were I've spotted the need.  
Apologies if I've missed any or introduced any errors, since we all err from time to time. Shem (talk) 22:31, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Capitalisation 

message: The "Atropos" in "Hornblower and the Atropos" (C.S. Forester)is also a sixth rate although a sloop-of-war rather than a frigate. Davidt63 (talk) 11:57, 16 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fiction
Talk:Sinn Féin the Workers Party

message: Perhaps this whole entry should be redirected to either The Workers Party (Ireland) or Official Sinn Féin. Sinn Féin The Workers Party was only a name that party adopted for 5 years between 1977 and 1982. In any case, some changes seemed desirable:
# SFWP was not Trotskyist but Marxist-Leninist
# The Provisional IRA and Provisional SF split from the existing party, and not the other way around (hence the terms 'official' and 'provisional'). although recognising this makes for more awkward phrasing
#" Now regarded as a politically spent entity, with later splits occurring within the Workers Party - firstly "Democratic Left" (briefly known as 'New Agenda'), before Democratic Left was subsumed into the Irish Labour Party." first phrase POV, WP/DL split was long after SFWP had become The Workers Party 
# whole second para. has POV issues in my view and of dubious relevance. First of all most points of previous version are relevant to Official IRA or indeed INLA not SFWP. - I have rephrased as appropriate. But in general this is a very selective and negative choice of points to raise about this political movement.Palmiro 03:55, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)

message: I've redirected this to Official Sinn Fein: apart from anything else, it's a better article than the one on the WP. Palmiro 14:48, 30 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Redirect
Talk:Salafi movement

message: @VenusFeuerFalle 
It wouldnt be accurate to assume that Salafis have a homogenous take on "music, drawing, etc". There are internal disputes within Salafi scholars over these issues. For example, the Salafist clerics like Shawkani asserted that music was permissible. Rashid Rida believed that drawing pictures of animate objects was permissible, etc.
Nor is it academically fair to imply that there is a homogenous take on music, drawing, etc. within the four schools either. However, the vast majority of positions (including the mu'tamad ,i.e, official posotion) within the 4 traditional madhabs prohibit music.
These are primary sources, and I am linking some popular Hanafite (non-Salafi) fatwa websites:
1 (states that music is prohibited in Hanafi madhab)
2 3 4 (clearly states that drawing animate objects is prohibited in Hanafi madhab)
The statement that these positions have "legal precedents within the 4 madhabs" are factually correct. That is not to suggest that neither Salafis nor the 4 madhabs have a unanimous view on these issues. This implies that these are legal differences of "Ikhtilaf", and not a doctrinal point of contention.
Shadowwarrior8 (talk) 13:54, 28 August 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: True, it might be a prejudice and the source, after rechecking, is merely an interview about a woman who adheres to this interpretation. I would be fine if we remove this source altogether. It doesn't seem to contribute anything significant nad might create artificial sharp distinctions between Salafism and Sunnism. VenusFeuerFalle (talk) 13:50, 29 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hanafi view on music, drawing, pictures, etc 

message: Since the edit summary is not for discussion, here the summary in case someone has an urge to discuss this:
religious blogpages do not fall under the category of WP:RS and an explanation of the Salafs is Template:Off topic except you want to suggest that there is a relation between Salafs and Salafis, but this directly contradicts the Wikipedia guidlines and the purpose of an encyclopedia VenusFeuerFalle (talk) 13:25, 5 June 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Revert discussion
Talk:Runabout (Star Trek)

message: I made a couple changes to the article, such as adding a few sentences on the runabout that was destroyed by the Orion Syndicate in an attempt to keep Quark from testifying against the syndicate.  Would anyone know the name and registry number of that ship?
:I believe you mean the Runabout from "Ascent". If so, I think that in some shots of the crashed runabout you can see that the name has two sections (i.e. Rio Grande) and we know the Rio Grande was never lost. Also, although non-canon, the Fact Files mentions that the Rio Grande was the ship in question and was recovered by the Defiant. This would seem logical, as apart from being unable to fly, the runabout appeared intact and repairable given time. (This screencap from "Ascent" shows the crashed runabout, with a fairly clear name: []) 
It seemed to me that after the introduction of the Defiant that runabouts weren't seen as much on Deep Space Nine anymore.  Especially in later seasons, it seems as though runabouts had little on screen time when compared to earlier seasons of the series.  Is it just me, or has anyone else noticed this?
JesseG 08:47, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Changes

message: I've started working on a merge-and-redirect to an amalgamated list of Starfleet starship classes; you can track the work in progress here. I've explained the rationale for a merge/redirect, and solicited responses to a few questions, on the Star Trek wikiproject talk page here; if you're at all interested, please take a moment to read and respond. --EEMIV (talk) 02:53, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge and redirect

message: in the episode Playing God, Dax says that one of these is 14 meter wide, which means it's 21m long and 6m wide, given the scale of the models. 72.243.192.113 (talk) 08:03, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  size. 

message: The image we have now is very dark, and the ship indistinct. It'd be great it someone can get hold of a brighter, clearer image. --EEMIV (talk) 21:05, 16 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Better image
Talk:Nile Rodgers

message: Reverted some edits about Nile Rogers "headlining" at Bestival 2014. Last line of Telegraph (London) article: "Other popular acts taking to the stage across the weekend include OutKast, Foals and Chic featuring Nile Rodgers." That's not "headlining". John Nagle (talk) 19:04, 27 September 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Bestival
Talk:British National Vegetation Classification

message: :These comments moved from Talk:Woodland and scrub communities in the British National Vegetation Classification system.
No, it wasn't accidentally placed. The pages appear to possibly be cut-and-pasted from somewhere. A government document perhaps? Or some other document? Possibly copyrighted? Or is this original research? In most of these cases (except a copyright violation, of course) might this material be better placed in wikisource and not wikipedia. I guess I'm just confused as to where this information is coming from. Also, if it should stay in wikipedia, might the reader be better served if a lot of this information were merged together into fewer pages? Ewlyahoocom 09:24, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi. Thanks for the above. Hopefully I can set your mind at rest with the following explanation. The NVC is one of the topics I am concentrating on at Wikipedia as it is an important topic, otherwise unrepresented here, and I have the necessary knowledge to write about it (and probably few other Wikipedians do, or have the inclination to write about it). The topic itself is pretty big - there is a lot to say on the methodology, the history, each of the groupings, and each of the (200+) individual communities. For that reason I felt I had to split the subject matter up over many pages. I'd welcome observations on the structure chosen - i.e. a series of "central "pages, a set of pages per community type, and then one page per community - I feel it is a fairly natural structure, but maybe there are other ways of doing it? The primary source document is the 5-volume set British Plant Communities although other source documents will be used in due course to supplement the info in there. It's a kind-of government-related document, I suppose in that JNCC is a government body. I do not believe we have a breach of copyright issue here, in that the information I have included to date merely extracts the key informationm from, synthesises and interprets what is in this work. If you compare a community entry in BPC with a community page here, you'll see what I mean. It's definitely not original research - all content here to date has come from this primary source document. Do please come back with further comment if that doesn't alleviate your concerns. SP-KP 14:02, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: move to wikisource?

message: has been nominated for deletion. I've created a potential replacement, at  Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 15:05, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Infobox NVC community
Talk:ABKCO Records

message: It is known that Allen Klein called ABKCO a A Better Kind of COmpany warpozio 05:43, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:2004 Hong Kong legislative election

message: Is the division of the functional seats available? Gangulf 06:01, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Someone should copy a table like this over and reformat the geographical constituencies too. --Jiang 01:06, 24 Sep 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Division

message: I must say this article is full of useful information and details. I thank those who have contributed their time and effort in creating this article. However, I think this article is getting too long, too repetitive and rather confusing. For those of you who have visited this particular article in the Chinese Wikipedia, you will know what I mean. In my humble opinion, I think the Chinese version of this article is a lot more organized and coherent. Anyway, I will try to list out some of the problems that I found and I will list them out individually, so that we could discuss them seprately.
*For instance, the results and outcome of this particular election is repeatedly  scattered everywhere in the article, instead of written in one specfic section altogether. 
*Also, this article has been created for more than two years, and it has evolved ever since. Another problem is that people tend to focus too much on contributing their own pieces of information, while the general transition between different sections are neglected - this article requires for MORE INTEGRATION.
*The details in this article could become more clear and legible.  For example, I recommend that the names of the candidates to be merged with the election result, organized into tables, just like the  Chinese Wikipedia version. 
Other less important issues include the following:
*Chinese translation of candidate and party names are useful, but do they need to appear more than once in the article?
*Descriptions like "Pro-government" and "Pro-democracy" are also additional details that are useful to distinguish between different politicans and parties, but could we organize them into a table or chart?
These are the issues that I have discovered thus far. Feel free to comment on any of the them above, or add another issue that you think requires attention.--OH-J 07:47, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article Needs Reconstruction 

message: *Isn't it supposed to be yellow?--128.208.36.172 (talk) 03:02, 4 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Color of the Liberal Party
Talk:Enschede

message: This is a nice start article, but the complete lack of sources makes it unsuitable to be classified as B-class. I have not checked the other criteria for B in detail; pending correction of this issues. Arnoutf (talk) 20:45, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: NL assessment

message: I reverted an WP:SPA here for the following reasons:
WP:V - All the deleted claims were completely unsourced. While being noteworthy (like Ds. Leendert Overduin) the section was unclear.
This is just plain wrong. The archives of the Eigth Bomber Command are available online and list "airport Enschede" as a "target of opportunity".
This passage is someones personal opinion and "a vibrant artistic scene" can hardly be called neutral. The "low economic activity" given for the "laid-back attitude" is an insult to the inhabitants.
This, or course, is the payload. See also Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/International School Twente. 
Kleuske (talk) 14:52, 12 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why I deleted stuff... 

message: Of course I support the local team, i don't think it belongs in the lede. Enschede is host to many things en we can't mention them all in the lede. Kleuske (talk) 19:39, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: F.C. Twente
Category talk:Genetics

message: I have split out many of the articles into one of the subcategories, :Category:Classical genetics or :Category:Molecular genetics.  My rationale for the split is this: if the article clearly refers to techniques or concepts well developed before the discovery of the structure of DNA, then it should be in the former (e.g. Mendelian inheritance), if it is a technique or concept that was primarily developed after, then it goes in the latter (e.g. transgenic or  reverse genetics).  For concepts that are not unambiguously assignable to either category, or generalize across both fields, or overview articles involving both classical and molecular techniques/concepts/traditions (e.g cytogenetics and epigenetics) then leave it in the the current category :Category:Genetics. --Lexor|Talk 07:00, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Comment

message: I included this page, but I am well out of my area here.  I read the Inbreeding page and think that it needs work and placed it here in the hope that someone qualified would give it some attention.--Counsel 20:10, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Inbreeding
Talk:The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy (film)

message: To avoid what might become a potential edit war, here are the names of all of the planets seen in the movie. Spellings come from The Making of The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy book (), providing behind-the-scenes information on the movie.
#Earth
#Viltvodle 6 (or VI or six - the radio series script says Viltvodle Six)
#Vogosphere
#Magrathea
#Earth II
— Preceding unsigned comment added by JohnDBuell (talk • contribs) 14:20, 14 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Planet Names

message: The radio series article and the TV series article both have sections on their respective development. Do we want to add one for the movie's development, starting in 1979, and ending with the 2005 release? --JohnDBuell | Talk 20:31, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Add movie development section?

message: Was Deep Thought watching Blue Peter? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jeffr (talk • contribs) 16:44, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: No - it's a cartoon made by director Garth Jennings awhile ago for his kids. He says on the Director's commentary. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MattGiuca (talk • contribs) 12:37, 25 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Blue Peter

message: We have a reference to other books section, but I'd like to see a comparison to the original books section. How is the movie different than the book storywise? Does it add things from other books into the script? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Linklewtt (talk • contribs) 17:20, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Comparison To Books

message: Any objections to setting up auto-archiving for any items on this page that are over ten years old? DonIago (talk) 14:11, 21 September 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: I started an auto-archive, leaving five posts over a year's time. Wyliepedia @ 08:27, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks, though it looks like you just set up the link to archives, not the archival process itself. I'll take care of it. DonIago (talk) 18:44, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Note: The bot will only archive signed messages, and a lot of the ones above are unsigned, and therefore will need manual archiving. Aidan9382 (talk) 04:38, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Or, just find them in the history and let a bot do it. Wyliepedia @ 04:24, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Auto-archiving?
Talk:Photosynthetic pigment

message: "However, none of the pigments absorbs well in the green-yellow region, which is responsible for the abundant green we see in nature."
Quick qoogling for spectra (for example, carotene) shows that it isn't true. So I set citation needed tag. IMHO it is wrong connection between green color and absense of green-absorbing pinments, because we well know the reason why the leaves are turned to yellow in automn.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.109.30.109 (talk) 16:32, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think rhodopsin qualifies as a photosynthetic pigment. I added phycobilin, bacteriorhodopsin and bacteriochlorophyll. Do we have them all now? AxelBoldt 06:23, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: I deleted the video as it was an commercial advertisement video and not a video about photosynthetic pigments.Felipe Jo (talk) 07:44, 18 December 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Promotional content
Talk:Van Nuys Airport

message: Reverted claim from "America's" to "worlds" per Los Angeles World Airports. 
http://www.lawa.org/ (Place mouse cursor over letters "vny", and read brief info to left.) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by The anon (talk • contribs) 00:11, 15 September 2004  (UTC-8)
Van Nuys Airport is the world's busiest general aviation airport and the 18th busiest in the world.<---Which is it? Tim 00:58, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: They are different statistics.  #1-17 in the world are not general aviation airports.  Dbchip 01:45, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: comments

message: Other airport articles have sections on ground transportation.  This one does not.  The airport is about 3 km west of the Van Nuys Amtrak station, 7724 Van Nuys Blvd, Van Nuys, CA 91405, but the article does not mention this fact, or how to get from the airport to the Amtrak station. This would be helpful information. r3 (talk) 18:20, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ground transportation 

message: So I was a little surprised to read in the intro that VNY is the third busiest GA airport in the world.  I've been googling furiously ever since, and I can't find a) a single source to back this up (that isn't quoted directly from wikipedia), b) when the change occurred, c) what the first two are if this is true.  Our World's Busiest Airport article shows VNY as busiest GA with sourcing back to the airport's website (not the best, I know).  The second busiest that I know of (and according to Wikipedia), Centennial Airport is clearly behind VNY in terms of daily ops.  I sincerely question the veracity of the third busiest statement — VNY losing its iconic status would have been huge news in the aviation world and the fact that I can't find a single RS anywhere supporting it certainly adds fuel to the fire.  If no one can provide an actual source, I'm going to source the claim back to this 2003 gov't study, the most recent I could find.  —bbatsell ¿? ✍ 17:34, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Third busiest? 

message: This section seems problematic. It contains numerous examples, too many in my opinion to hold the reader's interest. The list is longer than the description of the airport itself, and yet not one word of it is attached to a reference. I'm thinking trim the list down to a few particularly notable examples that demonstrate it has been used many times as a filming location, only including examples that can be properly verified. Beeblebrox (talk) 02:37, 27 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  "filming locations" section 

message: Base established in 1942, history is missing here, just one Airport! not 2!  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:A452:7D4C:1:F474:68E6:56CC:737C (talk) 04:54, 29 March 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  double alert, 2 pages covering the same topic !!
Talk:Warner Bros.-Seven Arts

message: About 2 years ago a merger suggestion was placed on this page. I think it can be removed by now. Any suggestions? warpozio (talk) 09:31, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Merger suggestion
Talk:USS Phoenix (CL-46)

message: Image added, thanks for uploading it! Stan 14:38, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: 2004 comment

message: The article currently includes the claim that the General Belgrano was, as of 2009, still the only ship to have been sunk by a nuclear-powered submarine.  Technically couldn't the Ehime Maru also count?  She was sunk in a collision with the nuclear powered USS Greeneville.Occasional Reader (talk) 22:43, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sunk by nuclear submarine 

message: I think I heard the TV programme QI say that the ship was known as USS Lucky. Is this so, and should it be included? I have been contributing to the irony article and find this quite interesting. Myrvin (talk) 10:18, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  USS Lucky 