lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:French Tarot

message: *I don't think the two should be merged
*Neither do I; there seem to be notable differences - oppose. RedvBlue 17:59, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed merge with [[Tarot]] 

message: *What does the term chief mean? I assume it's the person who wins the bid.
*What's the order of the cards? I assume 2-10, Page, Knight, Queen King Ace?
*I'm not clear on the significance of the bids. The first bid sounds like you're just bidding to make the 56 points, then doubling the stake you could lose, and then increasing the stake but improving your odds by adding the dog to your score, then upping the stakes further by having the dog count for whoever wins the hand.... I'm not clear on what the advantage is to making a bid or what the disadvantages are for making the last two higher bids. 
--BigCow 05:54, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Things that aren't clear 

message: French Tarot and French Roulette can be corelated as follows:
  0-+
  1-1
  2-2
  3-3
  4-4
  5-5
  6-6
  7-7
  8-8
  9-9
 10-10
 11-V
 12-C
 13-D
 14-R
 15=1
 16=2
 17=3
 18=4
 19=5
 20=6
 21=7
 22=8
 23=9
 24=10
 25=11
 26=12
 27=13
 28=14
 29=15
 30=16
 31=17
 32=18
 33=19
 34=20
 35=21
 36=*
That permits to use French Roulette as random modifier while playing French Tarot. Zero can be used as special modifier. CBMIBM (talk) 21:01, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  French Tarot and French Roulette 

message: In the section titled Main phase, "value" is used to describe the rank order, but then the section on scoring uses "value" for the number of points of the card.  I would like to suggest using the word rank instead of value in the Main phase section.128.2.5.212 (talk) 07:10, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Different uses of the word "value"

message: This page is placed into two categories which are redundant. I've tried to edit the page to remove them, and I can't seem to find these redundant categories. Does anyone know how to delete them?Smiloid (talk) 01:28, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: redundant categories

message: tarot-en-ligne.com is a divination link not a french-tarot game
tarotenligne.com is a fake link (no game on-line behind the button "jouer en ligne")
You can add www.webtarot.fr and www.objectiftarot.net who are the historical french tarot online game.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.125.234.15 (talk) 04:39, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  links
Talk:Ferguson v. City of Charleston

message: *Comment Does anyone think this decision could be used to prevent doctors for drug testing pain management patients?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pillowmurder (talk • contribs) 22:19, 3 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: — Assignment last updated by Twillia2001 (talk) 01:41, 28 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: Gender and the Law
Talk:Japanesepod101.com

message: This page is informational.  The article talks about what the website provides, but does not advertise for the company.  If administrators can point to specific texts, please advise so appropriate changes can be made.  More information will be added shortly.  Jlfan 05:44, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think this is blatant advertising, and this has a source which both asserts and supports notability.  --Haemo 05:46, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Edit History

message: The article also fails to mention that the so-called "free trial" their website offers is actually a permanent subscription and the "free" gifts offered at the beginning are there to confuse you to give them your credit card details (to pay for the postage). After this you need to actually subscribe to one of the paid options in order to access the page where you have the option to cancel your subscription - otherwise the bills for your life time account keep coming. These are all facts anyone can look up by logging on to their website. As for the gifts (package of CD:s), although anecdotal, I personally never received anything but bills from them. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.250.70.125  (talk • contribs) 08:40, 6 March 2010‎
I have the same experience. It seems the person who created and maintains this article is associated with the company, and is mainly just doing it to promote their site. 126.7.231.244 (User ) 21:50, 8 June 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Free trial
Talk:Primetime Emmy Award for Outstanding Drama Series

message: Please comment at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Television#Adding_seasons_to_award_winners.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR)  15:36, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Template restyling opinion needed 

message: It's true that Law & Order is at its core a procedural, with only very lightly-serialized elements as a general rule. However, its Emmy-winning season, season 7, had a three-episode arc—"D-Girl", "Turnaround", and "Showtime"—concerning a high-profile murder case. In addition, the episode "Entrapment" was basically a sequel to  season 3's "Conspiracy" .
I propose that the existing wording concerning serialized story arcs either be deleted or edited in the interest of accuracy. (Cf. a similar passage in 49th Primetime Emmy Awards.)
107.15.35.102 (talk) 05:16, 21 February 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: I've since amended the article by placing a footnote to the claims that Law & Order did not have serialized arcs. 107.15.35.102 (talk) 07:59, 10 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Since the advent of ''Hill Street Blues'' in 1981, every winner has had some serialized arcs with the exception of ''Law & Order''." 

message: I think that putting the winner series in bold would help identify it better than just a different background, like in the Golden Globe Award categories.181.170.25.228 (talk) 15:46, 24 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Winners in bold
Talk:Toyota Hilux Surf

message: I have reversed the prior redirection to the Toyota 4Runner as the differences between the Surf and 4Runner aresufficient to warrant separate listings.Differences exist between the Surf and 4Runner in terms of mechanical specification, trim level, market perception,penetration and availability, competing vehicles in respective markets etc. Each deserve their own dedicated pages.
 To assume a page written with the specifics of a US model and market details will suffice for a different variant vehiclesold in other markets is very presumptuous and inaccurate          Morr 11:28, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
Talk:4-Hydroxy-5-methoxydimethyltryptamine

message: Nice job whoever cleaned up this page 71.52.51.151 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.52.51.151 (talk • contribs) 05:47, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Untitled 

message: Why was all the clearly sourced and verifiable data, such even the IUPAC name, a literal systematic title based on structure- removed? Its was referenced properly through chemical databases as well as other identifiers. It seems that care was not taken when deciding nothing was good enough after, perhaps hastily, or perhaps sincerely finding something worth removing. I can accept an edit may have not fully risen to the standards- but taking away even the literature published melting point cited properly and even the actual IUPAC name was a bit extreme, although comical. ChurchofSacredSynthesis (talk) 00:34, 11 June 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Please make a specific WP:Edit request below, using template  to specify your desired change(s). Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 18:42, 12 June 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Ahh so there is a systematic method that shifts accountability when a ranking member garners enough attention they wish not to reciprocate. Fair enough, you certainly seem to have navigated the internal procedures quite well. I have no wish to fill out the forms leaving this matter finished for now. I will return to this talk page in with the upcoming synthesis publication after submission to a journal when it is released. I'll just leave it here in a comment for those who prefer information curation over creation. My contributions will be done after the submissions approval and reporting to various databases. Thank you for...the overall collection of correspondences here? Hexyltryptamine (talk) 20:46, 12 June 2023 (UTC)
replies: text:  Feel free to leave a link to the article below, after it has been published.  Best of luck with your forthcoming publication. Mathglot (talk) 03:26, 13 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removal of verifiable Data
Talk:The Translation of the Meanings Of Sahih Al-Bukhari

message: I was very surprised upon initially reading this article.  The criticism under the Shia view section seems like it was pulled directly from answering-ansar, referring to the translator as a nasibi and presenting the criticism as objective fact rather than opinion.  I'm editing it now and will be on the lookout for any other breaches of the Wikipedia:Neutral point of view policy. MezzoMezzo 05:49, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Major bias in this article
Talk:Piper Aircraft Co. v. Reyno

message: This is the seminal case on forum non conveniens.  Someone should write something.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.202.123.3 (talk) 03:22, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

message: There are three references to a Gilbert case as precedence, but I don't know the exact title of the case so I can't link to it.  Any idea which case this refers to? RJFJR (talk) 20:29, 18 January 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Gilbert?
Talk:Roderick

message: While Roderick has an original etymology, it has also been used as the english form of a wide variety of names (as an anglo).  Should there not be a section here listing Roderick's use as an "Anglo" since Roderick was historically used as such.  It would also increase cross referencing since any historical figure for whom "Roderick" was use as the anglo of their original name would be more easily accessed - even if the figure themselves is not listed.  18:51, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Anglos

message: On 13 November 2008, Berig moved this article from Roderick (name) to Roderick, citing in the edit summary: "moved Roderick (name) to Roderick: the "(name)" part is superfluous."  The "(name)" portion of the title was part of a uniform article naming practice that identifies articles that are about the individual name, as opposed to disambiguation pages (not articles) that list extant Wikipedia articles. --Bejnar (talk) 19:00, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Alright, if you feel it's important, I move it back.--Berig (talk) 19:31, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The (name) part is indeed unnecessary. There are numerous name articles at the simple title. The parenthetical phrase is only needed if disambiguation is necessary. older ≠ wiser 01:28, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Indeed.--Berig (talk) 05:57, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Roderick (name) as title
Talk:Rorik of Dorestad

message: I am not shore about the year 863 mention in the article about the destroying of Dorestad, it think it has to be 873, look for the article about Dorestad. Greetings --Anneboer 20:42, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  863 or 873 
Talk:Globus pharyngis

message: I removed this from the article:
"Psychoanalyst Carl Jung alleged that globus is widely known to come from swallowed tears. (from "Die Struktur der Seele", 1928.)"
It's clearly outdated.  I think it is not worth retaining. Robert Brockway 05:53, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Outdated Suggestion 

message: I've seen this spelled "Globus Pharyngeus", which is correct?
Kevink707 (talk) 16:20, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Correct Spelling 

message: The first section states that globus sensation is not dysphagia. The next paragraph, however, clearly refers to dysphagia as its cause.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.252.115.250 (talk) 14:42, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text:  It's a badly worded (even 8 years later), but it's a sensation so it can be accompanied with or without dysphagia, although usually it isn't. Or rather, if someone is presenting with difficulty swallowing and a globus sensation, they're labelled with dysphagia, not globus pharyngis, if that makes sense. Mvolz (talk) 08:33, 31 August 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Incosistency 

message: The redirect Stuck in throat feeling has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at  until a consensus is reached.  Edward-Woodrow :) [talk] 22:09, 21 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  "[[:Stuck in throat feeling]]" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]]
Talk:Normative social influence

message: This page was created for an extra credit assignment for school. Avalenti 05:55, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

message: Good info on this page! I'll just be adding some new sections and information to this page. Doing it as part of a class assignment. Thank you!Jblim23 (talk) 08:35, 11 November 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: @User:Jblim23: Please add end of paragraph citations; a number of paragraphs is missing them. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 10:59, 26 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Making some additions to the page 

message: Missing citations- Although someone went through and pointed out the fact that citations are needed, no one has actually gone through and added the sources. So I would urge the fact for either the original author or someone familiar with the topic to add the needed citations.JO88888888 (talk) 02:46, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Missing citations
Talk:Avatar Records

message: a user named Drmies has repeatedly tried to vandalize this site by deleting important information.  I have worked VERY hard putting in VERIFIABLE references to almost all of the information in this article. This article has 18 references by reputable news organizations including The New York TImes, the Los Angeles TImes, Billboard Magazine, etc.  Other references include important music industry blogs, articles from the US, UK, etc.  I have also sought to "clean up" the article by taking out unverifiable information.  There is no "name dropping" in the article - people who want information about this and other record labels want to be able to know what recording artists have release music on the label, what songs were released, albums released and how they related to each other.  If there is SPECIFIC errors please correct them - just don't trash the article.  thank you.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zarembo (talk • contribs) 20:16, 15 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Stop Trashing this site!
Talk:Zero Cool

message: Someone did a poor job of creating this page and wrote over the Hackers (film) article, but I seem to have fixed it. Funny, I've never heard of this book, read any work of Michael Chricton, and I don't care much for the film. But this annoyed me. dr. yesterday 05:44, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Prior content in this  duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: http://www.hardcasecrime.com/books_bios.cgi?title=Zero%20Cool. Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.)
For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, and, if allowed under fair use, may copy sentences and phrases, provided they are included in quotation marks and referenced properly. The material may also be rewritten, providing it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Therefore, such paraphrased portions must provide their source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you.  Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 19:40, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copyright problem removed
Talk:KDM

message: isn't the use of Streetkiaz.com in this artical considered advertisment? I am a huge KDM fan when it comes to their autos...and own a site myself related to the market...but I have never heard of this place...and last time I checked it was stricly forbidden on Wikipedia...just a thought.
:: this is strictly a disambiguation page for the acronym KDM, not a place to put the actual content. Initially the content for the Korean Domestic Market was inlined here, but then it has been moved (rightly so) to own page. You may place your comment there. And do not forget to sign it by using the "Equilibrioception (talk) 18:23, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: -- Equilibrioception (talk) 18:23, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Louisville Metro Hall

message: Should we rename this article to Louisville Metro Hall, as that is its official name now?
Also, which Louis XVI statue should be the prominent one?--Bedford 17:49, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I think that would be the best name for the building. A redirect however from the old name to the new name would be needed since some people still refer to it by the old name. I also like the current picture of Louis XVI on the page, not sure witch one is the prominent one. Jahnx (talk) 18:13, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll hold off until Stevie or W.Marsh give their opinion.  Thanks for your opinion.--Bedford 18:16, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

text: The building also has the mayor's office.  I'll go ahead and rename once this article's DYK time has elapsed.--Bedford 18:48, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Rename

message: Someone is confusing the courthouse of 1837 with a ten-storey structure with a total area of 283,000 sq. ft, called the Metro Hall Annex, at
517 Court Place (directly behind Metro Hall) which is in this link from the article: http://www.turnerconstruction.com/cincinnati/content.asp?d=2021.
I have fixed this once, but now remove this page from my watchlist: you're on your own folks. --Wetman (talk) 20:31, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: This attitude is ridiculous.  Most editors would have made a correction the second time and defended it. Stevie is the man! Talk • Work 05:31, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Deleted the 10-story statement, It should be obvious that it is not a 10 story building and such a building would have been impractical in 1843 without electricity and elevators. Turner Construction is touting its modern day construction of another judicial facility. see List of Metro government facilities clariosophic (talk) 19:55, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: a ten-storey structure
Talk:Vipava Valley

message: The photograph depicts the village of Branik which is NOT in Vipava Valley but rather in the parallel Branica Valley. I would suggest to present an alternative photograph instead. MarkoD (talk) 12:06, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Has been replaced. --Eleassar my talk 13:32, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

text: I have nothing against the replacement, but just for the record: Branica Valley is part of the Vipava Valley. Any reference will confirm this. Viator slovenicus (talk) 12:50, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: As far as I have Google checked the sources, Branik Valley is not part of the Vipava Valley. They're always juxtaposed. Can you provide a source to confirm your statement? --Eleassar my talk 09:17, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

text: Let's start with this (includes a map), this; and this one; or this one. I could continue endlessly like this. Also check the Slovene wikipedia: :sl:Branik. Can you please revert all the changes you made in this regard (in the articles on Nevin Birsa, Branik, etc.): the Branica Valley is not really a valley (more of a transitory canyon), and it's unlikely to ever get a wp page in English (it doesn't even have one in Slovene). Viator slovenicus (talk) 14:54, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok, thanks for having provided the sources. I'll include a bit of material discussing the microregionalization of Vipava Valley as described at  (pg.7) and revert the changes to the articles. I'll also redirect Branik Valley and Branica Valley here. --Eleassar my talk 15:39, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Misleading photo
Talk:Norumbega

message: Video game reference seems trivial in this context. 128.102.107.197 (talk) 07:44, 7 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Untitled 

message: Removed without explanation in  one case and WP:NOTDIR in the other case, which doesn't seem to cover this. I've raised it at WP:ELN but it's a holiday season so there may not be much response. I do think that after I replaced it discussion here would have been appropriate rather than just removing it again with no justification. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Doug Weller (talk • contribs) 07:14, 22 December 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Davistownmuseum
Talk:Sadar North Baptist Association

message: Note:  Project Banner with Tripura workgroup parameters was added to this article talk page because the article falls under :Category:Tripura or its subcategories. Should you feel this addition is inappropriate , please undo my changes and update/remove the relavent categories to the article -- Amartyabag  TALK2ME 11:22, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[WP:INDIA]] Banner/Tripura Addition
Talk:Carl Wilkens

message: I believe that it needs to be more grammatically correct and more accurate with spelling.  I am working on it
This is just poor in general. We need some experienced people on this, and I'm not one. 62.69.45.176 (talk) 23:20, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  This is a good article but, 

message: Could someone (or maybe the organisation that created this) please cite sources and improve the neutrality of the article? In fact, I would say that the amount of flags we can add to this can be increased!  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.49.75.177 (talk) 12:54, 15 October 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Citations and Neutrality 

message: I've removed an old neutrality tag from this page that appears to have no active discussion per the instructions at Template:POV:
::This template is not meant to be a permanent resident on any article. Remove this template whenever:
::#There is consensus on the talkpage or the NPOV Noticeboard that the issue has been resolved
::#It is not clear what the neutrality issue is, and no satisfactory explanation has been given
::#In the absence of any discussion, or if the discussion has become dormant.
Since there's no evidence of ongoing discussion, I'm removing the tag for now. If discussion is continuing and I've failed to see it, however, please feel free to restore the template and continue to address the issues. Thanks to everybody working on this one! -- Khazar2 (talk) 04:00, 27 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  removing POV tag with no active discussion per [[Template:POV]] 

message: Not the best person to solve this as new and do not know how. But this is really lacking!  — Preceding unsigned comment added by MarcusLeland (talk • contribs) 21:15, 29 September 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Almost No Citations/References!
Talk:Yuty (crater)

message: Haven't translated from Scots yet, however Scot's article is fairly lacking in itself anyway and probably needs a re-write. -- Librarianofages 06:45, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Post 2007 
Talk:E. Frances White

message: I am shocked to see that Professor E. Frances White's Wikipedia page is being for lack of notability.  Her book Dark Continent of Our Bodies is a hugely important text in the canon of feminist theory and is frequently included on the syllabus for graduate level theory courses.  I worry that her "lack of notability" is actually a reflection of a lack of respect for her subject, black feminism.  Ctinnola 06:53, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled