lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Untermensch

message: Here is what Longerich says about the dsetruction of the Warsaw Ghetto:
 — Diannaa (talk) 14:59, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Destruction of Warsaw Ghetto 

message: I’ve consistently attempted to remove a falsely sourced claim about the Nazis continuing to consider the Croats subhuman despite an alliance with the Independent State of Croatia. The source used to back up this claim was
Europe at war : 1939-1945 : no simple victory by Norman Davies, specifically pages 167 and 206. These pages, nor this entire book, back this point. This is a claim that is baseless and appears to have just been used to paint the Croats as useful idiots which is an oversimplification. I’ve uploaded the two pages to an image hosting site so you can check for yourself without having to go out of your way to acquire the book like I have. https://ibb.co/RgrxQ5D
https://ibb.co/RhXy6bw GawainKois (talk) 00:01, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: --WikiLinuz (talk) 01:47, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: This does nothing to specify the continued classification of Croats as “Subhuman” by Nazi Germany, this just groups all Slavs together to note that various Slavic peoples fought for Germany. Germany did not have to agree that the Croats were Slavic for this to be the case. GawainKois (talk) 02:12, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Falsely sourced claim about Croats
Talk:Sliding puzzle

message: "We will call sliding puzzles only those puzzles that are essentially two-dimensional in nature" ... well, okay ... but you'll have to break out "sliding block puzzles" to account for things like the Slide Cube
See also Talk:Tiling puzzle and Talk:String puzzle.  Restored because:
* Not listed in Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Karlscherer3, and therefore not properly deleted per VfD
* Google shows that "sliding puzzle" is a legitimate generic term, and therefore Wikipedia should have a spam-free article on it.  We cannot let a spammer decide for us that we can never have a Wikipedia article on a particular term which Google shows to be in relatively widespread independent use.
-- Curps 07:14, 7 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Untitled 

message: This article survived a Vote for Deletion. The discussion can be found here. -Splash 02:54, 20 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Vote for Deletion

message: "This property separates sliding puzzles from rearrangement puzzles." but the link redirect at the article. 216.86.113.233 (talk) 05:21, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  redirection at rearrangement puzzles 

message: The 15-sliding puzzle was wildly popular in several versions employing letters.  For example, the "Ro-Let" Buy This Word Game, and the more complex "Scribe-o", and "Lingo" games with more tiles.  None of these seem to have been mentioned at all, but they do form a unique subcategory:
https://img1.etsystatic.com/000/0/6138521/il_570xN.207972547.jpg
https://s3.amazonaws.com/bonanzleimages/afu/images/9242/5982/_b-gm_r_bmk___kgrhqj__gwezw56vugebm8zz4hp_w__0_12.jpg
http://www.cs.brandeis.edu/~storer/JimPuzzles/SLIDE/CornellCrossword/KeithArticle2011.pdf  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.85.43.249 (talk) 23:51, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Missing Classic Examples
Talk:Speed reading

message: :Category:Pseudoscience on the grounds that said epithet (a highly, and often unfairly, stigmatizing epithet, IMO) was unwarranted, based on the content of the article. Okay?--Solomonfromfinland (talk) 02:20, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: I removed

message: Herewith an assist: 
Howard Berg - a fast reading and learning prodigy - mentions "schema" (psychology), as a factor that influences reading speed.  The more you know about what you read, the more your brain can pull-up related knowledge and the easier facts stick in the memory. And for reasonings that are made in the article or facts that are mentioned, the (speed) readers can skim-read "jump" over those phrases and paragraphs, because they already know about them and scan the text for new facts to them or viewpoints and words or word-combinations not previously seen in the articles' context. 
Anybody with time to weave mention it that in the article here. Thy --SvenAERTS (talk) 22:21, 8 November 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Howard Berg mentions "schema". Anybody has a link to a wikipedia article on this and we have to mention that in the article hear
Talk:History of Palau

message: From cleanup:
:History of Palau should be merged with Palau and deleted --Woggly 11:34, 29 Mar 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: IMO, this format should only be used when the subarticle is too large to be included in the country article with efficiency. This article is, however, small enough to fit into the article on Palau, so I'm with Woggly. Jon Harald Søby 09:11, 19 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Marbury v. Madison

message: Infobox says "Laws applied: U.S. Const. arts. I, III; Judiciary Act of 1789 § 13". Article I of course falls within the scope of Congress and its policy-making (i.e. laws). Wouldn't be the case of referencing Article I also directly in the text if possible? And, secondarily, shouldn't "Category:United States Constitution Article One case law" be added? Lone Internaut (talk) 17:45, 31 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Laws applied 

message: In the captions to the 4 portraits besides the 'Background' section, Jefferson is attributed with the belief that 'Marbury's undelivered commission was void'.   Is that so: the Court held it was not void, of course.  Marbury had the title of JP, just lacked an easy means to prove it.  (No point rocking up to the JP court and demanding to take a seat - or writing to the Treasury demanding the salary - if you didn't have the Commission or a court order to evidence it).
 
Would Jefferson even have thought in such legalistic terms - 'void' having a distinct legal meaning.
Wouldn't it be truer to say in the caption that Jefferson 'believed withholding Marbury's commission was a legal way to prevent him assuming the judgeship'  ? Laworr1 (talk) 06:41, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  'Void'?
Talk:Chicken sexing

message: the caption is too informal. Secretlondon 22:05, 29 Mar 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: old comments

message: Okay, maybe I'm wrong... I don't have a degree in avian medicine or what-have-you... but I didn't think that birds had rectums!  There's the cloaca, internally, and the external opening is called the vent... but this article refers to a rectum.  Could someone please explain where a bird has a rectum? EthanL (talk) 12:21, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vent Sexing 

message: The proper term is "Chick sexing."  Chick sexing is the method of distinguising the sex of a chick, not a chicken.  According to the Dictionary of Occupational Titles, the job title is "Chick Sexer."  Also, not that the show "Dirty Jobs" is the greatest resource of information, but the episode that featured this profession was called "Chick Sexer."
I am not against having both terms mentioned in the article, but there should be some clarification.
—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Kcoutu (talk • contribs) 21:28, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Chicken sexing should be Chick sexing
Talk:Master sergeant

message: Both views are incorrect and the clarity issue is continouly being sought.  As a MSgt there is a fine line on the use of MSgt and MGySgt.  The MSgt / MGySgt is the senior tactical and technical advisor to the commanding officer where as the 1stSgt and SgtMaj are responsible for all administrative matters and advise the commander appropriately.  
===Master Sergeant / First Sergeant?===
* Can someone clarify the difference between Master Sergeant and First Sergeant in U.S. Army? - Wguynes 22:23, Mar 29, 2004 (UTC)
* Again, same question as above, but for the U.S. Marine Corps. - Wguynes 05:40, Mar 30, 2004 (UTC)
* The article currently states that a master sergeant is usually given the courtesy of having a room called to "at ease" upon entrance. Shouldn't this be "called to 'attention' upon entrance as opposed to 'at east'"? -allevolve 22:19, 3 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Untitled 

message: * Can someone clarify the difference between Master Sergeant and First Sergeant in U.S. Army? - Wguynes 22:23, Mar 29, 2004 (UTC)
* Again, same question as above, but for the U.S. Marine Corps. - Wguynes 05:40, Mar 30, 2004 (UTC)
* The article currently states that a master sergeant is usually given the courtesy of having a room called to "at ease" upon entrance. Shouldn't this be "called to 'attention' upon entrance as opposed to 'at east'"? -allevolve 22:19, 3 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Master Sergeant / First Sergeant?

message: Surely Master Sergeant Samuel Doe deserves mention in this article? Grover cleveland 01:55, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: HAHA, no.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.41.143.1 (talk) 17:51, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Samuel Doe

message: I've been in the US Army for more than a minute and I've never heard anyone call a Master Sergeant called Top unless he's either about to be frocked first Sergeant (1SG) and already acting 1SG or he's just left the position and soldiers are running on autopilot. The army is a big place with differing traditions but I don't think that to say that Top may refer to a MSG in the US Army is just not wholly accurate. SPC(P)USA, Baghdad
--L3viTheBitter 13:03, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  MSG/Top 

message: Article reassessed and graded as start class. --dashiellx (talk) 17:34, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Tag & Assess 2008 

message: A recent edit in the Army section states:'when not in the position of first sergeant, master sergeants are addressed as "master sergeant".' Is this a recent change to Army custom and policy? And if so, does that also apply to staff sergeant and sergeant first class, as it does for staff sergeant and gunnery sergeant in the Marine Corps? I am not aware of a change in Army custom or policy re a requirement to address master sergeants as such. CobraDragoon (talk) 14:23, 28 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Army Master Sergeant; Verbal form of address for
Talk:Pie rule

message: I'm not sure we need to mention the "refined" pie rule since AFAICT that phraseology is only used in the Orbit rules.  Elsewhere on the web it looks normal that there may be n moves before the swap can be used - Orbit just allows passing in some of those moves. Kevin Saff 22:34, 29 Mar 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, traditionally the swap rule is a single move.  The triple swap is effective in games with no defined centre--those on an infinite plane, say.  Since there a single piece has the same value 'anywhere,' three pieces played give a nice balance.  However, if you want more web resources for that, I probably couldn't find them. Phil Bordelon 00:04, 4 Jun 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: In "New Rules for Classic Games" by R. Wayne Schmittberger, there is a discussion about an Asian five-in-a-row game (whose name I forget) where there is also a refined pie rule.  It was a pie rule more complicated than "A moves then B chooses what side to play".  I also like the idea of a pie rule Chess Variant. Samboy 05:51, 19 Mar 2005 (UTC)

message: perhaps it is worth noting that this 'pie rule" comes up as early as the ancient greek myth of Prometheus: the gods have the people divide the slaughtered cow into two piles and the gods get to chose one of the divided piles to be sacrificed to them and the other pile is left to the people to eat. 89.134.199.32 (talk) 20:09, 15 September 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  a cultural reference
Talk:The Planets

message: I found this page via discussions offwiki and noticed there were content based reverts simply because the . That is not valid reasoning for a revert, when the fix can be as simple as just fixing the margins instead.
It would be different if the edit was content related or clearly an incorrect add for the page. Best I can tell, it's neither. Soni (talk)  13:09, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Revert for "formatting"
Talk:Fascism/archive5

message: I just read Lawrence Britt's article on fascism , one of the external links mentioned at the end of the (protected) article. Seems that most of his bullet points apply equally well to Nazi Germany as to the Soviet Union. This bolsters my personal opinion that Fascism and Communism are totalitarian twins. "Communism in 20th century Europe was as guilty of crimes against humanity as fascism." 
Dictatorships have a dismal track record of improving the lot of the common people. It seems that economic prosperity goes hand in hand with political freedom.
Proponents of Communism claim that it liberates the masses from the oppression of dictatorship (such as Hitler inflicted), capitalism (cf. excesses of the early industrial revolution) and religion (opiate of the masses, evils of the Crusades, "mind control").
Ironically, proponents of fascism also claim to liberate the people (at any rate, the "master race") from tyranny and poverty. But it sounds to me like two evil giants fighting over which is to be the biggest tyrant of them all. And both sides persecuted religion terribly.
 --Uncle Ed 19:18, 29 Mar 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Fascism and Communism
Talk:Different-sex sexual practices

message: :"Finally, an individual who practices both same and different sex sexual behaviour may identify himself or herself as gay, lesbian, bisexual, straight, or not at all. "
So, all these words are pretty much meaningless? Meelar 01:10, 30 Mar 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Quite to the contrary, I would say they are meaning-full, they have an excess of meanings. Hyacinth 01:28, 30 Mar 2004 (UTC)

text: If you follow some ideas of Queer theory, that's exactly the idea, I think. Dysprosia 01:40, 30 Mar 2004 (UTC)

message: Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Different-sex sexual practices
Decision is to merge the content.
Merged, however, decision on Talk:Homosexual sexual practices was to keep (it was merged also). Please continue at Human sexual behavior.Hyacinth 01:16, 13 Apr 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  From [[WP:VFD]]
Talk:Battle of Harpers Ferry

message: Does anyone have a citation for this, from the "Aftermath" section of the article:
"... the Union Army sustained 12,636 (44 killed, 173 wounded, 12,419 captured)."
In the article it's cited to a National Park Service page which is a dead link, and the current NPS page  gives a figure of 12,700 captured, with no mention of KIAs or wounded.  Such a specific piece of information -- like the Confederate killed and wounded earlier in the sentence, should be cited.
Unless anyone can provide a citation, I will replace the information currently in the article with that reported by Sears and Murfin, as indicated in note #23. Beyond My Ken (talk) 08:36, 21 September 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: I have marked the old NPS age as a dead link and removed it from the article, replacing it with CN tags. I have not, at this point, removed any of the figures given, as I have hope that someone will come up with a citation for them. Beyond My Ken (talk) 23:22, 21 September 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: I have replaced the CN tags with a cite to an Ohio State "eHistory" page, although I'd like a more authoritative source. Beyond My Ken (talk) 23:27, 21 September 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: I've added a reference to the NPS CWSAC report data PDF confirming the Ohio State numbers. Mojoworker (talk) 04:02, 5 October 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks.  The sources are fine, but I'm still somewhat suspicious of the numbers reported because of their precision. In the context of the Civil War, when the accounting of the manpower of both armies -- but especially the Confederates -- was rather lax, to know exactly how many soldiers were wounded, killed and captured is odd.  As the Ohio State source says "Casualties are unusually precisely known..." (emphasis added).  I don't think there's anything to be done about this, the sources are reliable, and we use what we have, but I find it strange. Beyond My Ken (talk) 04:43, 5 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Citation needed
Talk:Postal worker

message: 67.162.170.108 04:37, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Postal worker]]

message: If anyone ever gets around to expanding this article, here is an interesting story from Slate about postal workers throwing mail away. It contains several links to similar stories, including this New York Times article from 1874. faithless (speak) 13:03, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Potentially useful story 
Talk:Trinity Church Cemetery

message: Somehow things have been moved around from page to page and three separate cemeteries have been merged. All are owned by Trinity Church; two have similar names (Trinity Churchyard and Trinity Cemetery) but the cemeteries are miles apart and the distinction between them should be maintained. - Nunh-huh 01:25, 30 Mar 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: That's not Ralph Waldo Emerson, it's Ralph Waldo Ellison, a different person. The birth year given for him was still incorrect, so I fixed it. SilverCityChristmasIsland 22:00, 5 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: comments

message: Wow, does the official title really use the term "Chapel" at both ends?  Jim.henderson (talk) 17:26, 31 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: No, I fixed the name. It was referred to as a chapel, now a church as well.--NortyNort (talk) 22:34, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Chapel of the Intercession Chapel  

message: Which is it? Is the satellite burial-ground of Trinity Churh of Wall Street (which is Anglican) at St. Paul's CHAPEL (a satellite Chapel just a tiny bit north on Broadway, still further south than the Woolworth building)? Or is it St. Paul's LUTHERAN Church, 315 West 22nd Street. In the article's sentences the word "Chapel" combined with the fact that the name is linked to the article on Saint Paul's CHAPEL (also Anglican) a short way north from the original, on Broadway still south of the Woolworth Building, suggest the former, as one would expect. The caption in the right-hand bar listing the three non-contiguous burial-grounds of Trinity give the "St. Paul's" burial-ground as the LUTHERAN Church at 315 West 22nd Street. This is not adding up. Something's wrong.69.86.131.77 (talk) 01:15, 2 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Which St. Paul's? 

message: Appears in car chase though the cemetery in "Cotton Comes to Harlem". 194.207.86.26 (talk) 02:28, 4 January 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cultural References
Talk:Brčko/Archive 1

message: Muhamed Mesic, on the Goran Jelisic page you claim that he was born in Bijeljina, on this page you claim that he was the town's (Brcko's) most famous resident.
Make up your mind if you want to be taken seriously.
--Igor
*Albeit you have the most beautiful of names (as it's also my brother's, I happen to know it means warrior of peace), someone being born somewhere doesn't imply that he must live there. Jelisic was born in Bijeljina, but spent all his life living in Brcko. I for one was born in Niksic, but happen to live in Tuzla. Muhamedmesic 07:33, 27 Aug 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Goran Jelisic

message: This 2005 edit by  said separated articles about district and city but it didn't explain the reason for full disambiguation. AFAICT Brčko (town) is the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. In fact, I don't think anyone really says "Brčko" and means the district; whoever wants to refer to the district, by and large actually mentions that. Does anyone disagree? --Joy [shallot] (talk) 14:48, 10 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  pointless disambiguation
Talk:Cardiology diagnostic tests and procedures

message: Why is the U.S.A. so far behind the  rest of the World in not adopting mmols as the standard unit of most blood tests?--Anthony.bradbury 00:01, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: And for the record, in the UK LDL is routinely measured; it, and the ratio with HDL, are critically important in assessing cardiac risk.--Anthony.bradbury 00:07, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Blood tests 

message: It seems there is a typo here. I would have fixed it myself, but I can't make head of tails of it.
Radionuclide testing using thallium or technetium can be used tos of perfusion abnormalities.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Carel.jonkhout (talk • contribs) 00:30, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  mistake in section 3.4: Cardiac stress testing
Talk:Hikaru Sulu

message: Sulu has no established middle name. That comes from a comic book, which is non-canon.
::I would agree if it comes from a non-canon source, the middle name should be deleted from the article lead and info box. SonOfThornhill (talk) 16:30, 13 December 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Kato 

message: I was cleaning up a dab page for Kato and came across the "fact" that in the Japanese version of the Star Trek series, the character is called "Hikaru Kato" - this despite the fact that the character wasn't even given a first name until the series. Additionally, the info about the alternative naming doesn't appear to be cited. I doubt the veracity of this, and would recommend the following:
:# the redirect be removed and the Hikaru Kato page speedily deleted, and
:# the alternative naming be removed from the Kato dab page.
- Jack Sebastian (talk) 14:11, 9 June 2010 
(UTC)
I should watch the episode "The Naked Time" again. If I remember correctly, the navigator (Lt. Kevin Riley) calls Sulu by the name Hikaru when Sulu runs from the bridge.
----Andrew Besso
:: The name Hikaru first appeared in a 1980 novel. The name was never spoken onscreen until the sixth movie.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.196.162.105 (talk) 02:03, 3 October 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: If you heard that, you're the only one in the history of Trek fandom to do so.  Powers T 17:54, 9 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hikaru Kato?? 

message: Removed the date of birth since it is from an unofficial source and is non-canon. The source further conflicts with canon for Kirk's official canon birthdate calling into the question the entire source material.
'is born on June 24, 2230'--168.161.192.15 (talk) 21:48, 12 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Date of Birth
Talk:Emil Lenz

message: Türk dili yoxdu? 212.47.137.68 (talk) 03:51, 8 January 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mən 

message: Was Lenz a Protestant? 192.109.217.74 (talk) 05:53, 3 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Religion