lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Revenue stamp

message: This article needs some sources, especially for statements like revenue stamps "are often made from the same type of paper as banknotes".  I haven't seen any such revenue stamps.  Ecphora (talk) 03:06, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sources needed 

message: The suggested question has been asked on the WikiProject pages for Economics, Taxation, Finance and Philately, and users have been invited to provide their answers here - kindly awaiting your replies! BigSteve (talk) 13:26, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Names for document stamps

message: I don't get how the stamps are used to collect taxes. Are they placed directly onto the products and paid at time of purchase?  Please answer in the article as well as here. --Jeiki Rebirth (talk) 02:29, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Basically, you have to buy the stamp from the government (or tax collecting body) and place it on the item in order for your licence to be valid, your document to be admissable in court, your packet of cigarettes to be legal to be sold etc. Since the stamps cost the government almost nothing to make and they keep the money, that amounts to a tax. I greatly simplify but that is the idea. This is mentioned in the History section but may need expanding upon. Maidonian (talk) 05:55, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: It would be a good idea if what you just said was incluided in the article.190.51.80.124 (talk) 23:01, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I gave it a whirl. Stan (talk) 13:34, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  confused 

message: It seems like postage stamps are a kind of revenue stamp used to tax mail.  Are postage stamps considered a type of revenue stamp?  If not, why not? 138.16.18.24 (talk) 01:02, 22 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Postage stamps 
Talk:Life Expectancy (novel)

message: I don't quite understand the point of those two sections. I'm going to remove them as I don't see why those links are here without any text to explain them or back them up. If I'm off base go ahead to revert me. Agentchuck (talk) 04:39, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  The phenomenon in other...?
Talk:Committed effective dose equivalent

message: Agree with proposal to merge with committed dose equivalent. This is complicated by having too many different dose quantities that confuse the reader especially as there are two main systems in the world - USA and ICRP. 
See
*  - "The confusing world of radiation dosimetry" - M.A. Boyd, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. An account of chronological differences between USA and ICRP dosimetry systems.
Dougsim (talk) 09:01, 26 May 2014 (UTC)
Talk:Cassiar Mountains

message: These ranges flank the Alaska Highway to the south east of the Teslin River; somebody driving the Alaska Highway maybe might be able to help, so I added "Alaska" to the reqphoto (there's an biannual migration up and down in the fall and spring with hordes of camera-toting Alaskans and other Yanks who've probably photographed the northern outlier of these ranges, which is fairly striking....oh I amended "the Yukon" to "Yukon"; I say it the former way too, official usage is without the "the" (and actually it's the proper way to "use" Cariboo and Chilcotin, too....)Skookum1 (talk) 04:36, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: All maps and image go by the Yukon. Black Tusk (talk) 04:40, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: even on Yukon? I suppose....it's rather a name/guideline/most common usage issue...I know Yukoners who say "the Yukon", but it's true that the official use is simply "Yukon"....hmmmm.  Yukon at least doesn't redirect to The Yukon, as that's the main article title....Skookum1 (talk) 05:56, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Holland's map just has "Yukon" (without "Territory")....Skookum1 (talk) 05:59, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not talking about in general. It's the categorazation (e.g. Category:Wikipedia requsted photographs in Yukon redirects to Category:Wikipedia requested photographs in the Yukon). Black Tusk (talk) 06:04, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: And according to Category:Wikipedia requsted photographs in Yukon, it says: This category page should be empty. All entries should be recategorized under Category:Wikipedia requested photographs in the Yukon. Black Tusk (talk) 06:18, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Reqphoto note

message: The reason I had Alaska in the reqphoto template was because of the number and frequency of Alaskans who make the trip via the Alaska Highway; all of them go by this, some have probably photographed them.  I recall myself the view at Teslin Junction or whatever it's called; I hadn't known it was the end of the Cassiars I was looking at, but anybody who drives through there is likely to ahve gone "wow, nice mountains" and more than a few must have snapped shots of it.  A lot of those people would be Alaskans, or visitors to Alaska who drove overland....that's why I put Alaska in reqphoto; note I didn't put the WP Alaska template in at the same time...Skookum1 (talk) 23:01, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Why Wikipedians in Alaska re reqphoto
Talk:One Door Away from Heaven

message: The character section could easily morph into the plot synopsis section. Lots42 18:51, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Suggestion 

message: I merged the character and plot section. Plot still needs work; but it's far better then before. Lots42 (talk) 09:29, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merged
Talk:Daimler 250 V8

message: This covers same subject as Daimler 250 which I have edited, though, looking at it, Daimler 250 V8 might be better title? Seasalt 23:07, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Daimler 250 V8 would be a better title, but this article is pretty poor. The other article, with this title would be best Alastairward 13:00, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  I agree. I first added the article "Daimler 250" a while back, when there wasn't even a mention of this car, but Daimler 250 V8 is a more accurate title. This version of the article is very hit-or-miss. -B Price 10th May 2007. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 203.208.73.212 (talk) 06:12, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Duplicate article
Talk:Nisab

message: I did some cleaning up and fixed some ambiguous sentences. I'd like to continue working on it -- this is my first article -- and if there's anything I should be doing, please let me know.
Cunningcourage (talk) 16:59, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

message: Where in the Quran it states the 20...??? I think you confuse with the Hadith!  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.36.33.229 (talk) 01:33, 8 March 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Indented line
Quran does not even mention 2.5 percent Zakat, let alone anything about the Nisab. Just do a calculation on let us say a Widow has 100,000 worth of cash at hand, and she is retired or never worked on her own, and inflation is 2.0 percent. She stands to lose a lot of money to Zakat and Inflation. This system being promoted by "Shariah" is extremely inefficient. Zakat of 2.5 percent has absolutely no basis in Quran!  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.237.200.23 (talk) 09:24, 9 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Where in the Quran ? 

message: The article is short of reflecting the wide scope of applications of nisab and seem to focus on how nisab is to be calculated for gold and silver. 
I added sections on nisab for livestock and agricultural produce. There needs to be a section on nisab for merchandise, minerals and treasure troves (rikaz). 
Also the article does not clarify how nisab should be established. The one year rule is not accurate. For instance, schools of thought differ whether nisab should be maintained at the end of the year, both ends of the year or throughout the year.
Finally, the article relies on a single source for the evaluation of classical dinar and dirham to modern currency. There is a large literature and difference of opinions on this matter.(Nawawi676 (talk) 04:42, 23 July 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Need to be comprehensive 

message: I just made 2 edits to this page.  I believe the first should be uncontroversial, as it mostly consists of grammatical and wording changes intended to make the article read more naturally in English.
My second edit (which I deliberately separated from my first edit in case anybody wanted to revert the changes in question) removed two things.  First, I deleted the implied and unsupported claim that a coin must be worth more than the materials used to create it; see the pre-1982 US penny as a counterexample.  Second, I removed the reference to the World Islamic Mint because a Google search leaves me highly skeptical that this organization is at all notable. Imyourfoot (talk) 04:30, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  New Changes
Talk:Counts per minute

message: You do not discuss/mention the EFFICIENCY of the detector, which relates cpm to dpm.  Please update.19:12, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: In the section Counts_per_minute#Count_rates_versus_disintegration_rates there is a short discussion on (and link to) counting efficiency, as of February 2015, thanks to User:Dougsim. —Hulten (talk) 13:08, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Detector efficiency

message: The section Counts_per_minute#Count_rates_versus_disintegration_rates compares Bq with cpm. While the mention of Bq is imperative, the comparison should be between dpm and cpm.
I could change this and clarify that paragraph, if I understand it correctly: Bq and dpm are decays per unit of time (difference is a factor of 60 seconds per minute), while cpm tends to measure dpm, but depends on the counting efficiency. Correct? —Hulten (talk) 13:08, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes there could be improved clarity there. Bq would best be compared with disintegrations per second and cps. Just have to make sure difference between events at the source and events at the detector are still clearly differentiated. Dougsim (talk) 03:23, 18 April 2015 (UTC)
replies: text:  I have made minor changes. I reduced the switching between disintegrations and counts in the concerning paragraph, which should make it read more easily.
—Hulten (talk) 07:50, 18 April 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Comparison with other units
Talk:Get Minted Poker Live

message: It's not an ad, it's just a stub. As for notability, it's a television show. Surely it's notable enough. Certainly someone else thought it was notable enough to warrant a link from the page Greg Winters (the presenter). Nutlow 23:17, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You could expand the second sentence/paragraph a bit. I'm really unclear about what it's trying to say. What does it mean that the show consists of reconstructed hands from the online poker network? How are payouts "almost" instant? The reason I thought it wasn't noteable is because I'd never heard of it, and this page didn't tell me what's important about it. The best thing to do now is to show what makes this show notable, so the next person who comes along isn't confused like I was. GertrudeTheTramp 23:36, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
Talk:Denver Police Department

message: I added the "unbalanced" template because the article is unbalanced. Most of the content of the article is about "controversies." None of the article talks about, for example, police heroism, etc. In its current state, the article is being used as a vehicle to foment negativism (at the expense of the positive) about the department.  Jeffrey Beall (talk)  22:53, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I have removed the section. I recommend that one does not re-add it without adding more to the other sections of the article. This article is about the PD, not the PD's controversies. Griffinofwales (talk) Simple English Wikipedia - Come and join! 16:52, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

text: There are several of the huge sections that are about acquitals and no charges being brought. Definitely inappropriate for the article as worded and have been removed. Perhaps one sentance summary covering the events may be appropriate, but the sections as they stood are not. Active Banana  (bananaphone 22:30, 4 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: And I have no objections whatsoever to the sections that remain being much more pared down. I just didnt have the desire to read the sources and attempt it myself. Active Banana  (bananaphone 22:38, 4 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unbalanced 

message: http://www.news.com.au/world/denver-police-seize-tablet-delete-video-of-brutal-arrest-but-it-had-backed-up-to-the-cloud/story-fndir2ev-1227137812835  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2003:45:4950:AB30:95D2:B008:2C63:FF22 (talk) 11:41, 30 November 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  New Case 

message: What kind of weapons does the DPD use? Glock-pistols? Sig Sauer? Smith & Wesson? --Exodianecross (talk) 06:33, 10 February 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Weapons
Talk:Baron Burghersh

message: Leigh (or rather his source) is off the mark in both cases. The existence of Stephen de Burghersh is attested, and so the peerage of 1303 cannot have been extinct, only dormant. As for the 1330 creations, the attainder can't be ignored: Richard could have inherited nothing from his attainted father, and was never Baron Burghersh. Since the barony was never held again after 1409, unless we start explicitly tracking the heirs of peerages under attainder, etc., I'm going to roll back the changes. Choess 23:26, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Succession to the barony
Talk:Lin and Larry Pardey

message: Don't you wish some people would read things before slapping speedy deletes around?
Lin and Larry Pardey are a married couple famous internationally for their expertise in small boat sailing.
That's the first sentence - a claim of notability. Slow down on the speedies......
Petesmiles 23:31, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes. I read that sentence. The one with no sources at all to back it up. IrishGuy talk 23:38, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Whoa!

message: I'm sitting with my copy of their book. I know they're famous because almost every serious cruising sailor i've known has recommended them to me over many years - it also helps that their books are fantastic - what's the best way to progress? Petesmiles 23:43, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ok, so help me out 

message: unless i'm reading things wrong - a speedy is also only applicable for 'no claim of notability' not for a completely unsourced claim of notability - is this right? Petesmiles 23:44, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  ...also 

message: - It's their homepage, but has good bio stuff, and up-to-date info etc. I don't have oodles of time, but when i've checked out some of the guidelines for using author's own homepages as a source i'll start bunging lots of that stuff in... all hands are welcome on deck to assist! Petesmiles 23:54, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Good Starting Source 

message: In its current state, I believe that this article meets the criteria of asserting notability. At a quick glance on google, it appears that there is a fair amount of information out there on these people, and they have published enough books/dvds to have a potential arguments for notability. Not to say that I'd advocate keeping in an AfD discussion, but I think the article rises above the speedy deletion standard. 
All that said, I would recommend that the original author continue expanding and sourcing the article to remove any question that these individuals meet WP:BIO. ScottW 00:18, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recommend removing speedy delete tag 
Talk:DEAP

message: How is the 128nm scintillation light produced by the recoil of argon nucleus ? - Is it Cherenkov radiation, radioluminescence, or some form of photoluminescence ? - Rod57 (talk) 11:44, 29 August 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: How is the 128nm scintillation light produced
Talk:Vox (blogging platform)

message: Isn't it interesting how this article mentions the small-potatoes, open-source competitor Wordpress.com blog service twice? Shouldn't it reference SixApart's own, comparable, TypePad? —Preceding unsigned comment added by T2X (talk • contribs) 09:34, January 8, 2007 (UTC)
:TypePad is not relevant to this article as it is a paid service and Vox is a free service, the article, however does mention Six Apart's free blogging service LiveJournal - as well as Blogger and Wordpress.com --bdude Talk 09:40, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Possible bias

message: Could someone add info on why Vox closed? For example, was it unprofitable? 82.113.148.68 (talk) 10:37, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Why did Vox close?

message: Couldn't find much for this platform in Google, but there is a bunch of stuff in LexisNexis  czar ⨹ 03:15, 27 December 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Notability 
Talk:1860–1861 New Zealand general election

message: 
:New Zealand general election, 1860–1861 → New Zealand general election, 1860–61 — WP:MOSNUM states that while a full closing year is acceptable, a closing CE–AD year is normally written with two digits (1881–86) unless it is in a different century from that of the opening year (1881–1986). Note that the proposed names use endashes (as they should). Schwede66 18:52, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Presumably as no redirects were in place, a formal WP:RM was not necessary. billinghurst sDrewth 03:02, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 
Talk:Michael Joseph Savage

message: The image associated with this page is not that of MJ Savage.
The following URL shows what he looked like:
http://www.primeminister.govt.nz/oldpms/1935savage.html  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 218.101.88.193 (talk) 02:14, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Um, people age mate. --Lholden (talk) 02:17, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

text: I've been thinking, after just seeing  on Flickr -- what about that photograph? That page links to  which suggests we'd be good to go. Any objections if I were to try? -- Jonathan Ah Kit (talk) 00:04, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Untitled
Talk:Lida Abdul

message: she is an american artist
every thing here is wrong!!!!
--------------------------
BORN 1963 not 1973!!!!
she had nothing to do with iranian art!!!
who is the editor of this artikel???
how is the writer of this biography?
 it is not correct!!!
:I found the above unsigned comments while categorizing the List of Iranian women. While the argument that she may be of Persian descent could be used, she is certainly Afghani. Sidatio 15:31, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Questions of nationality

message: I don't know what particular cultural/political issues surround the Afghan v Tajik debate, and would appreciate if the IP address that keeps replacing Afghan with Tajik would explain here. All the online information I can find about the artist describes her as Afghan, Afghanistani and/or being born in and partly residing in Afghanistan. So, her nationality is Afghan/Afghanistani (whichever is the conventional formulation). --Ethicoaestheticist (talk) 20:21, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Nationality

message: She was born in 1973.
I don't understand why someone keeps changing her to tajik.  If it comes down to ethnicity within Afghanistan then the person who keeps changing it is rather petty!  Besides she is of mixed ethnicity within Afghanistan.  This does not make her less Afghan.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tincocoon (talk • contribs) 04:27, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Some changes 

message: I have reviewed the article beacuse it was tagged for a factual accuracy dispute and made the following changes, based on the references linked here:
* "Tajik ethnicity" is not mentioned in sources, removed
* "Lives in the United States of America" is contradicted by artist's bio on own Website. Removed.
The notable exhibitions and awards are sourced. No other factual discrepancies are apparent. The tag has been removed. Please respect the policies and do not add unreferenced material to this biography of a living person. Enki H. (talk) 16:44, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Factual accuracy review (June 2009)
Talk:Rogelia Cruz

message: This article was proposed for deletion by User:HWood2 on 2007-02-06 . I believe that this action was in response to my deletion proposal  of an article that seems to be of great importance to HWood2. If the proposal is serious, I invite HWood2 to make a case here, but I would guess this to a case of poor wikiquette. Srice13 05:05, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Prod 

message: In my opinion this entry meets the notability requirements of a biography; it just needs some formatting, copyediting, and a further statement of why the subject is famous (other than being a Miss Universe contestant, which I believe –  I'm not certain – is enough to pass the notability test). I know that Rogelia Cruz was one of the first women involved in the guerrilla in Guatemala, and as well one of the first women to receive a posthumous homage as a left-wing leader, but I have not found a source that states something like that. --ChaChaFut 05:33, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article's subject seems notable enough
Talk:1853 New Zealand general election

message: Hugh Carleton was the first MP elected, but he was not elected, as he was unopposed.  Elections only occur where there is more than one candidate! He was selected as an MP.203.184.41.226 (talk) 08:20, 15 July 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: The commonly accepted terminology for such a case is to have been "elected unopposed". Schwede66 22:43, 15 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  First elected MP
Talk:1871 New Zealand general election

message: Infobox-only 94rain Talk  05:37, 31 January 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: I've turned it into a redirect. There's nothing that the existing article can't deal with. Schwede66 06:13, 31 January 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed merge with [[1871 New Zealand general election in the Māori electorates]]
Talk:Seton Lake

message: Is there any validity to the depth being 1500 feet? Very few lakes even get that deep at their deepest, much less as their average. In fact, that average would be deeper than that of Crater Lake (1148 ft. average), and only two lakes in the world appear to have a greater average depth (Tanganyika and Baikal). I know British Columbian lakes tend to be excessively deep, but this doesn't seem quite true. 130.218.12.34 (talk) 01:43, 12 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Depth?
Talk:1875–1876 New Zealand general election

message: There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:New Zealand general election, 1860–1861 which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you.  —RM bot 19:00, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: as per discussion. billinghurst sDrewth 03:03, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Move discussion in progress

message: The date range given for the election isn't right (28 Dec 1875 to 4 Jan 1876). The Gladstone election, for example, was on 20 Jan 1876. Schwede66 18:53, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Election dates
Talk:1884 New Zealand general election

message: Some specific results can be found at http://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/cgi-bin/paperspast?a=d&d=HBH18840717.2.9.1&l=mi&e=-------10--1----0-all Adabow (talk)  11:34, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Useful reference
Talk:1887 New Zealand general election

message: The article says that the election was held on 22 July 1887. I've had a look at some newspapers and from that, it would appear that the general election was held on Monday, 26 September 1887:
* Christchurch Star
* Ashburton Guardian
What's given in the article appears to be wrong, but I don't just want to go ahead and change it, as it then talks about "confusion in Wellington in September 1887 when the members gathered to form a government" - I can't imagine that they would have all made it to Wellington before the month was over. Schwede66 08:16, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  election date