lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:The Adventure of the Three Gables

message: The comment about this being one of the many crimes Holmes commits during his career is tendentious. Back in the day I would have edited the article to say so, but nowadays the revertor bot would have undone my change as soon as I'd clicked OK.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.53.56.45 (talk) 21:35, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

message: "the information from Langdale Pike" -- What information?  Who or what is Langdale Pike?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.235.184.247 (talk) 04:24, 4 December 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Langdale Pike
Talk:The Adventure of the Three Garridebs

message: The article Killer Evans appears to have significant overlap with this, and the character appears nowhere else in fiction, so a merger seems sensible.  Richard Pinch (talk) 16:53, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It does indeed! I was talking to my wife about this, and she thinks it is absurd! Why, if every Sherlock Holmes villain had his own article, they would be as many as the oysters on the sea bed! I have merged the articles. I have to go, the pot of custard on the hob is bubbling over! Hands of gorse, heart of steel (talk) 22:20, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merger 
Talk:The Adventure of Wisteria Lodge

message: I can't make sense of the sentence "Holmes spends the next while reconnoitering the local country houses…."Lestrade (talk) 13:53, 7 November 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: 'While' in this context refers to a portion of time, in respect to its duration. As in "I was talking to the receptionist, and then I found out all the while she was actually listening to someone talking in her phone ear piece". or "it took him a while to do the job".  So the sentence means; Holmes spends the next {duration of time} reconnoitering.121.74.224.51 (talk) 00:38, 10 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Garble

message: Any evidence for the character of Don Juan Murillo being possibly based on Juan Manuel de Rosas, who was the totalitarian ruler of Argentina, complete with cult of personality, secret police and death squads. His regime fell in 1852 and he fled to England, to live there until his death.
A murderous Latin American dictator with the same first name living in exile in England. Coincidence?
I actually put this in the article but I took it out again. It occurred to me the identification is still just speculation and somebody who was more of a Sherlockian than me might know better.
Catsmeat (talk) 16:32, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Catsmeat, you're correct. It's clearly based on Rosas. What we need is a good source. --Lecen (talk) 15:34, 15 November 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: The Tiger of San Pedro
Talk:The Afghan

message: I removed that passage stating that the book had unfavorable reviews and mentioning Amazon's ratings.  Amazon uses user reviews, so it can fluctuate quite easily (its got 4/5 stars atm).  If anyone wants to up up critical acclaim, they should get a review of the book instead of Amazon.Epsoul 15:33, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removal of Amazon Rating
Talk:The Age of Intelligent Machines

message: Why is there a See Also for Simulated reality: the idea that we're living in a simulation. Is this a big part of the book? Seems out of place, unless we are going to pile on a whole bunch of other See Also pages. Silas Ropac (talk) 03:37, 8 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  See Also 

message: This seems odd "The Age Of Intelligent Machines is the title of an artificial intelligence documentary (1987) and book (1990)" Is this article about the book or the documentary? If both, we need to talk about the documentary somewhere. If just the book, we can ax the part about the documentary.  Or maybe note it somewhere "BTW there is a also a documentary by the same name" but not put it in the lead like that.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Silas Ropac (talk • contribs) 04:53, 8 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Documentary 

message: Content section could use more content. I used information/quotes from the reviews articles so far. There is way too much to summarize the whole book, but maybe highlight something key like his discussion of the Turing Test? Silas Ropac (talk) 14:42, 8 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Content 

message: As requested I have re-assessed the article to reflect the recent work done. I have assessed it as C-class because, while it does have reasonably well-written and well-organized content, there are two sections "Background" and "Essays" that do not provide citations indicating where this content is coming from. I also suggest switching the section name from "Essays" to "Style" so that it can be more comprehensive in discussing how the information was delivered (e.g. essays, non-fiction genre, academic vs. popular science, etc.). maclean (talk) 20:16, 10 March 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks! I added citations to the Background, that was an oversight. I added one to the Essays section, it's just to the table of contents because that is where the list of essayists comes from. I will look into renaming and expanding the Essay section. Hard to think of what to say exactly on first blush. Silas Ropac (talk) 20:43, 10 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Re-assessment (Stub to C-class)
Talk:The Alternate Asimovs

message: The introduction states that the original End of Eternity is 20,000 words long, but in the section dedicated to it, it says 25,000.
24.201.66.122 (talk) 22:48, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Conflictual Information
Talk:The Amateur Emigrant

message: From the 1984 Hogarth edition, The Amateur Emigrant (pub. 1895) had two parts: From the Clyde to Sandy Hook and Across the Plains (pub. 1892), hence the article should be expanded to include both parts. Raban’s introduction says that the book “is the best account ever written of the great European adventure in the ninteenth century, the passage to America, the New World”; and is not marred by the “ingratiating charm” of much of his work. Hence will do so. Hugo999 (talk) 08:15, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
Talk:The Angel of Darkness

message: Vampires are a flying creature that lives on blood. If a vampire dousn't drink any blood then they will dye. First they will have a thirst,then they will start going insane,next they will have another thirst,just stronger. The rest is undetermened.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.218.229.190 (talk) 22:25, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vampires
Talk:The Animator's Survival Kit

message: This is an advertisement, not an article.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.236.33.116 (talk) 22:07, 6 May 2017 (UTC)

message: Exactly what kind of sources are needed? Do we really need a source to prove that it was written by the Academy-award-winning director Richard Williams, when his name is right on the cover? And doesn't that very fact alone already make the article notable?  If anything, there should be an "expand" tag on here. Esn (talk) 08:34, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Sources/notability
Talk:The April Witch

message: The final sentence of the story seems to indicate the instance of an "avail". 68.4.56.206 06:19, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: "...to no avail..."?
Talk:The Architecture of Happiness

message: There was a nice piece in the Independent this month which acted as something like a teaser for this book. Perhaps it might be a nice link:
http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/alain-de-botton-nice-buildings-dont-always-make-us-better-people-887147.html
(I don't add it myself as there is a possible conflict-of-interest issue as it mentions Gresham College).
   Jamesfranklingresham (talk) 14:57, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: External Link suggestion
Talk:Iris chrysographes

message: I think this page should be renamed Iris chrysographes, with a disambiguation page for Black Irises.  The Jordanian examples are VERY different from I. chrysographes, not the same thing at all.  See http://www.jordanflora.com/black_iris.htm.   I've changed the text to reflect that but it's not ideal having the article titled Black Iris and then going on to deal pretty much exclusively with I. chrysographes.  But I'm new to Wikipedia editing and don't know how to do it - can anyone help?  Piepacker 08:27, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It was renamed and carried out in 1 June 2010‎ DavidAnstiss (talk) 23:39, 25 February 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Page rename needed
Talk:The Art of Electronics

message: Is there a picture of cover page for 3rd edition with proper licensing compatible with Wikimedia terms? Does anyone think if we should contact authors and ask for a cover page photo? These guys usually answer e-mails and would most probably provide a free photo of the cover page.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ali Mirjamali (talk • contribs) 10:48, 8 June 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cover Page Photo 

message: When was the first edition published? The article doesn't say at present. Qwfp (talk) 08:03, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  First edition
Talk:Mandelbrot (cookie)

message: Which was first? The recipes are functionally identical.68.5.64.178 06:42, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Biscotti or Mandelbrodt?

message: : 76.169.104.9 was nice enough to add her mother's recpie for mandelbrodt, it of course, does not go in the main article so I moved it here.  Someone could move it to Wiki cookbooks Epson291 08:28, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Mother's Recipe

message: This page was originally named "Mandelbrot (bread)", with the parenthetical to distinguish it from the much better known Mandelbrot set. On 5 February 2007,   this page from "Mandelbrot (bread)" to "Mandelbrodt", ending in dt instead of t. I propose moving it to "Mandelbrot (cookie)". 
There are a number of variant names for the food in English— "mandelbrot", "mandelbrodt", "mandelbrod", "mandlbrot", "mandlbrodt", with del or dl in the middle and t, dt, or d at the end—  but "mandelbrot", with del and t, is by far the most frequently used, according to these Google searches (using quotation marks to keep Google from trying to "correct" the spelling):
almond  "mandelbrot"  "mandelbrodt" -set		   800
almond  "mandelbrot"  "mandelbrodt"			 1,550
almond  "mandelbrot" -"mandelbrodt" -set		21,100
almond  "mandelbrot" -"mandelbrodt"			56,300 
almond -"mandelbrot"  "mandelbrodt" -set		 1,990
almond -"mandelbrot"  "mandelbrodt"			 2,700
almond  "mandelbrod"  -set				    81
almond  "mandelbrod"					    71
almond -"mandelbrot"  "mandelbrodt" "mandlbrod" -set	     0
almond -"mandelbrot"  "mandelbrodt" "mandlbrod"		     0
At present, Mandelbrot is a DAB page, and renaming it would create unnecessary complications. And while the word literally means 'almond bread', it is more accurately described as a cookie and is so called in the article. Therefore I propose renaming (moving) it to "Mandelbrot (cookie)", with the most common spelling and the current perception of its type.
--Thnidu (talk) 07:41, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. --Thnidu (talk) 01:19, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  various spellings 

message: There are no Variant spellings. It's always spelled "מאַנדעלבראָט‎" 50.168.2.21 (talk)
: Only by the Yiddish-speaking Jews of Eastern Europe. The German-speaking Maskilim always spelled it "Mandelbrot". --ABehrens (talk) 05:13, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Variant Spellings?
Talk:Two Ocean Lake

message: If I understand correctly, the reason for this lake's name is that the water from this lake drains to both the Pacific and Atlantic Oceans.  Is this correct?  Shouldn't this fact (if true) be put on this page? 164.67.151.60 (talk) 22:16, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: * Its a misnomer.  The continental divide actually runs to the plateau to the northwest over Two Ocean Pass, which is where Pacific and Atlantic Creek diverge.  The lake, which is named after the pass, is well on the western side and only drains into Pacific Creek. CosmicPenguin (Talk) 02:55, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reason for name
Talk:The Artefacts of Power

message: so which is it? Mikachu42 (talk) 21:16, 8 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Artifacts or Artefacts
Talk:The Artist's Handbook of Materials and Techniques

message: The artcle incorrectly states the year of first publication as 1951. It was first pubished in 1940, according to the blurb about the book on the Barnes and Noble website. I diodn't make the change because I don't know how to include the citation. (And have better things to do with my time than to 1) read all the extraneous junk I'd have to forge through, to learn how, then 2) deal with Wikipedia admin/moderator politics.)
In general Wikipedia content is much -- much, much -- better thanj two years ago. It's almost reliable (also a comment that applies, "generally").  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.40.35.153 (talk) 12:24, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Much later, but now it is fixed. The copyright page of the fifth edition printed in the USA by Penguin says "originally published in 1940." __ Just plain Bill (talk) 02:05, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: [Untitled]
Talk:The Artist's Way

message: I am currently doing an edit on this article in my sandbox User:Tinkermen/SandboxAW
some of the information in this article was copied word for word from here;http://www.theartistsway.com/tools/the-basic-tools
I will be making the proper changesTinkermen (talk) 19:21, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Re:edit 

message: Need to add some recent articles and interviews as the article makes it seem as if all she's famous for is marrying an actor...which is NOT the case!
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/02/style/julia-cameron-the-artists-way.html
https://psychcentral.com/blog/the-prosperous-heart-an-interview-with-julia-cameron/
https://www.thecut.com/2016/04/julia-cameron-the-artists-way.html
https://www.psychologytoday.com/gb/blog/ethical-wisdom/201401/the-artists-way-interview-julia-cameron
Veryscarymary (talk) 15:46, 10 January 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Interviews 

message: I think this article could really benefit from a critical response section if anyone would like to take that on. Totorotroll (talk) 19:17, 6 December 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Critical response
Talk:The Ascent of F6

message: It would be rather difficult for Mr. Auden's brother to have climbed K2 to its summit before 1936 as this mountain had not yet bene climbed to its summit as of that date.  Perhaps this section read that Auden had climbed "on" K2.Bigturtle (talk) 23:05, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Note
Talk:The Autobiography of Alice B. Toklas

message: http://www.nybooks.com/articles/article-preview?article_id=12419 Hyacinth (talk) 18:47, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Source: Thomson autobio

message: While the infobox lists the genre of the book as 'autobiography', does not the text make it clear that it's anything but? Twang (talk) 02:32, 25 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Auto-bio
Talk:The Autobiography of Charles Darwin

message: Note: Should have info on how long the book is. Richard001 (talk) 11:14, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  
Talk:The Autumn of the Middle Ages

message: "He saw the period as one of pessimism, cultural exhaustion, and nostalgia, rather than of rebirth and optimism." I believe it was the other way around. In the autumn period the leaves die, but their colours are beautiful. 77.175.64.145 (talk) 18:53, 24 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Other way around
Talk:The Bad Popes

message: I found the following references, I leave it to someone else to see if these are worth while and add them to the article:
* Great dynasties of the world: The Borgias
* Acts of the Popes
* Lessons from Church History: A Brief Review of Papal Lapses
* Popes who were actually terrible people
* Worst Popes in the Catholic Church history
* 10 Most Evil Popes in History
* Sinful & Reckless “Bad Popes”: How Many Were There?
* What to Think About Bad Popes
* Which Pope Was The Worst? On Bad Popes and Dogma
* THE BAD POPES
* How Bad Were “the Bad Popes?”
* The most incorrigible popes in the history of the Vatican
* The Bad Popes
Alquantor (talk) 05:23, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  About the notability of this article
Talk:The Beast in the Cave

message: Man Killing the Beast?
If he killed the beast, how could it have talked and be revealed to be a deformed human. Should this be changed to something to the effect of believing that he killed the beast?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.235.201.100 (talk) 17:19, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

message: Man this is my favorite of the author's works and it's really sad to see how poorly developed this article is. Not only is it missing information on the story like it's development and reception, but it also doesn't cite any sources which is just plain lazy. There needs to be citations and more information on the story added to the article in order for it to mee wikipiedia's standards.--Paleface Jack (talk) 19:13, 16 May 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Citation and Expansion
Talk:The Beast Master

message: * "Lyn's Books". Lyn McConchie. Last updated 2012-09-17. Retrieved 2013-05-01.
According to McConchie, the third and fourth Beast Master books (2002, 2004) were ""written solely by Lyn from a brief collaborated outline." I suppose McConchie's description is accurate and the same is true of Norton collaborations with some other co-authors. Evidently some worked at her High Hallack in Tennessee, where I suppose there was some discussion with Norton. (Anne McCaffrey described some collaborations in which she worked out details with co-authors who lived at Dragonhold outside Dublin for a while.)
McConchie does not say so much as quoted above about the fifth Beast Master (2006), published 15 months after Norton's death. I suppose that her description of their four Witch World books pertains. For instance, of The Duke's Ballad (2005): "Witch World setting, marketed as by Andre Norton and Lyn McConchie, although all writing and revision done by Lyn using Andre’s background."
--P64 (talk) 22:03, 1 May 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Co-authored sequels
Talk:The Best Christmas Pageant Ever

message: this isn't right!
the whole character list is wrong.
i have the book close to memorized, as my dad reads it every christmas, and they never mentioned some of those characters in the list. the few that are in the book are slightly incorrect or don't have names, though they are mentioned in sequels. i'll be on later to fix it, but i can't for a long time. if anyone wants to do it before me, go ahead
thedrtaylor (talk) 15:31, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  what?
Talk:M-11 (comics)

message: Regarding the phrase "M-11 was the only one of the 11 series produced", my interpretation is that all numbered units are unique --RedKnight (talk) 14:12, 30 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Menacer Series 

message: The biography begins incorrectly.  The Human Robot which appears in Menace #11 is the same one which becomes a member of the Agents of Atlas which is in the primary Marvel reality. See http://www.marvunapp.com/master/hum.htm for details on appearances. --RedKnight (talk) 23:16, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Origin in Biography
Talk:Hugh Kenner

message: Lawyer and blogger Scott Johnson reports a striking book review written by Prof. Kenner:
:Hugh Kenner provides the best modern example I know of anger provoking genius into a review that might stand on its own as a literary masterpiece. Kenner was the foremost expositor of literary modernism. In The Reactionaries by John Harrison, a forgotten critical mediocrity, Harrison had brought Yeats, Wyndham Lewis, Pound, Eliot and Lawrence before the bar of liberal judgment and found them all wanting on political grounds. In his review of Harrison's book ("The Sleep Machine," collected in William Buckley's anthology Did You Ever See a Dream Walking?), Kenner noted that Harrison's book had been a critical hit among the tastemakers [...] despite Harrison's utter cluelessness regarding the authors under discussion. Kenner was not amused:
::This fatuity, this ignorance, this silliness, this stark insensibility, none of it would be worth five minutes' attention but for the highly symptomatic fact that reviewers paid it no heed at all in their headlong endorsement of Mr. Harrison's attitudes. The Reactionaries is not only a tract of writing thought publishable in 1967, it's something influential pundits in that year were willing to endorse. That is its interest. In itself it's negligible. Were it a doctoral dissertation its contribution to knowledge would be this, that we should know how unqualified was its director. The author is imperfectly acquainted with his material, grossly unacquainted with the existing scholarship, and not always free from the suspicion of having leafed through big books for telling things to quote. And yet, that gratitude, those plaudits, those reviews! Can we conclude anything from those, beyond the fact that reviewers read rather fast?
If only all book reviews were that well written and that entertaining! Cheers, CWC(talk) 08:40, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: A striking book review
Talk:The Big Nowhere

message: this sounds like a press release, especially as you get towards the bottom.
Mercmisfire 00:07, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  non-neutral POV 

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) 15:05, 15 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  removing POV tag with no active discussion per [[Template:POV]]
Talk:The Blind Side: Evolution of a Game

message: I just removed a whole litany of dialog from the article. yes i did   Please, please, please use the talk page for talking.  cuz theres no piont to think what you people whink about this. so Don't use the article for talking.  I understand some users may have a disagreement about whether the book is factually intact.  If you can back up your claims with sources then feel free to re-add the section.  Accusing an author of inaccuracies with no proof is tantamount to libel.  Provide sources for your additions.  Thank You  68.183.66.34 (talk) 02:31, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Agrred. That didn't belong the article. --Damiens.rf 19:27, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Factual Errors

message: Horrible man who uses race to hate.   Horrible. Where would you be?  Really?  You must hate white people so bad. Wow. Where would you be????  You are so fortunate. But you just are so hateful. 2600:6C58:6400:1443:FD80:1C4:23D9:6214 (talk) 07:33, 2 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ingrate