lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Project Genesis (Star Trek)

message: : The torpedo was detonated inside the starship Reliant, which was itself inside a nebula of highly charged gaseous particles. As a result, it had to basically create an entire star system from scratch - a G type star, as well as the planet itself. However, the original design did include a subroutine for star creation, that was utilized for the creation of the Genesis planet's sun, and presumably there was a planet formation routine as well that were both flexible enough to create an active solar system, even from nebula material. Otherwise the torpedo would not have been able to form those coherent structures for even a short time.
Should this be included? The novels aren't really canon, and Regula was well illuminated in Star Trek II, which would suggest an existing star. --DaveJB 23:03, 3 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  Why wouldn't the nebula have enough mass to form a planet? Evercat 00:59, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I have to agree with Wingnutmax that my understanding of how the Genesis Planet was formed was that it was created outof the planetoid Regula.  Does anyone have any evidence from the movie cannon (not books) that it was formed out of the Mutara Nebula instead?  A friend of mine assumed this was the case, but I have to wonder.  Stephenw77 12:11, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Stars (and therefore complete solar systems) form from nebulae - therefore mass available wouldn't be a problem.  The cover blurb for a VHS copy of The Search For Spock I have states the planet was formed from the nebula, but I doubt the canonicity of that.  In the film, however, Genesis detonates in the nebula yet the planet is formed in empty space, implying that the nebula has gone somewhere.  Here I suspect it is best to cover both the alternative theories since the films are unclear on this point. 79.77.63.221 (talk) 19:28, 22 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: According to the film novelization for Star Trek III, Grissom returns to Regula and re-visits the Genesis cave. Depending on how canon the film novelization is, that would definitely suggest Genesis was created from the nebula. Ambaryer (talk) 17:56, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: There has been a merge tag on Genesis Device for a long time - could someone who knows the subject make the merge, or comment why it shouldn't be done. Kcordina  Talk  09:43, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge

message: "Project Genesis" was a primary plot element in Star Trek II, with some follow-up in Star Trek III. Carol Marcus, the Genesis Cave, the Regula I station, the Reliant visiting Ceti Alpha V... this article should be merged into (or at least redirect to) Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan. -- Aatrek / TALK 16:25, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: In response, I have requested that Project Genesis (disambiguation) be move to the now-available name.  Discussion should take place on that talk page.Novangelis (talk) 20:40, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge discussion
Talk:Kevin O'Connor (footballer, born 1982)

message: As of this writing there are two paragraphs in the article, and it isn't clear that both of them are describing the same person. It also isn't very clear that the person is notable (especially in the first paragraph). -- Gyrofrog  (talk) 23:05, 3 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Unclear

message: Updated the stats according to the official Brentford website  Chris (talk) 13:14, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Brentford Apps
Talk:Arbiter (electronics)

message: Did a bit of cleanup on the text, to improve readability and to make it clearer why this is important.  Please check for correctness.  Thanks.
(Having once been a systems programmer for one of the rare UNIVAC 1108 multiprocessor mainframe systems designed before sound arbiter design was figured out, I was painfully aware of this very real problem.  Not fun.  I like the reference to the Ginosar paper; apparently some designers are still getting it wrong.)  --John Nagle 16:55, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cleanup on text 

message: The above-referenced sentence is not presently sourced, and I suspect we could only source it by Karl's statements, which may not be reliable.  — Arthur Rubin  (talk) 21:37, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unfortunately, it is not possible to do this in a fixed time. 

message: Please include a diagram for an modern arbiter in cmos, so that we might get a feel for one. Feb 2011  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.4.193.8 (talk) 08:08, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  diagram please 
Talk:Mitsubishi UFJ Financial Group

message: Good job on assembling this page and connecting related company pages. Christopher Mahan 23:56, 3 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Wikipage

message: The list has been tidied up, whilst someone put in a lot of time + effort many years ago, the list was too long, very clumsy + had no sources. Devokewater 13:23, 5 April 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Subsidiaries
Talk:Marubeni

message: emailed Marubeni for permission to use the historical information that came from http://marubeni.co.jp/english/company/history.html. Christopher Mahan 00:10, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

message: The last section on "From V-shaped recovery to a new leap forward" seems to have been copied directly from the official website (http://marubeni.co.jp/english/company/history.html), without any signs of given permission. Will be tagged accordingly. IR Mongoose (talk) 06:09, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Considerably more than the last section. Thank you for tagging your concerns. The material was pasted in December of 2007. Barring verification of permission, the article will likely be restored to this version following seven days to allow regular contributors of this article to produce a rewrite or request permission. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 00:45, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Text copied from company website 

message: One or more portions of this article duplicated other source(s). The material was copied from http://www.marubeni.com/company/history/history_1.html and other sections of that site. Infringing material has been removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a license compatible with GFDL. (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 printed material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. 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.  --Moonriddengirl (talk) 03:21, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copyright problem removed
Talk:Salem Media Group

message: Use of the naked term "audiences," while common for broadcasters, performers, promoters, etc., may be less appropriate than something like "consumer audiences" or "consumers" in the context of weighing for-profit religious broadcasting against non-profit religious broadcasting.  Might that be a reasonable or inconsequential change to bring the page more in accord with the maintenance template's concern? Jetpower (talk) 06:55, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
replies: text:  Can you rephrase all of that?  I really have no idea what you're trying to say.  24.51.192.49 (talk) 19:10, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

text: While I think there is some difference between 'consumer audiences' and 'audiences', the difference may be minor or fuzzy in this case. Overall, it seems that these terms could apply similarly to for profit and not for profit organisations depending upon the organisation's format and goals. Whereunto (talk) 11:04, 11 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  For-profit status and maintenance
Talk:Joseph Henry Lynch

message: "Critics say that the women in much of his work are portrayed in a sexist manner and that most of them look alike to each other"? I have never heard nor read about this critique before. Actually it surprises me that there ARE any critiques - I have never read one and I'm the owner of www.jhlynch.org. To me this sounds like the personal opinion of the person who added this line.
:Ok I just removed the sentence (though I am not the one who had added it). --BorgQueen 22:34, 13 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:The Fast and the Furious (2001 film)

message: :The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
The result of the move request was: no consensus. (non-admin closure) Mattdaviesfsic (talk) 22:33, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: The Fast and the Furious (2001 film) →  – The franchise is both officially and commonly named Fast & Furious. The extended form, The Fast and the Furious, almost exclusively refers to the original film, so WP:SMALLDETAILS applies. There was a time where the franchise was also named The Fast and the Furious (see the third film), but this has not been the case since 2009 (see the fourth film). Per WP:ONEOTHER, a hatnote on the film article pointing to the franchise will suffice. A similar situation exists with The Evil Dead (the original film) vs. Evil Dead (the franchise). InfiniteNexus (talk) 08:01, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 11 December 2023
Talk:Solitudes (Stargate SG-1)

message: * Why do they not try to dial another planet than Earth ?Hektor 01:01, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

message: Is this the first episode that explicitly mentions shock absorbers/dampeners around the gate which stops the severe shaking when the gate is dialled?
If so it probably should be added to the continuity section as i've never heard it mentioned in any other episodes and it explains why the gate shakes like buggery in the first (few?) episode(s) but not afterwards.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.20.163.70 (talk) 20:00, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  stargate vibration suppression 
Talk:Lamrim

message: I think it will be a good idea to put in some new sections: 1)lam rim lineage (with the lineage lama`s named), 2)prelimenaries for lam rim meditation: the djor Chö and 3)lamrim retreat 4) the 8 great Lam Rims
please some coment on this.
thanks, Tjvogel (talk) 21:52, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

message: I began a section with the above heading in the Tibetan Buddhism article, then realised this was already here and linked to it instead. The proposed subheadings I had were
*lineage of the Stages of the Path - sutra etc, Atisha's Bodhipathapradipa (byang-chhub lam-gyi sgron-ma), Kadampa, Gampopa, Tshong-kha-pa
*features of the Stages of the Path - systematic progression in concepts (enumerate concepts)
*method of training in the Stages of the Path
hearing, analytic meditation, focussed meditation in retreat
Are these bits useful? Are there problems with them? I hope to move other stuff over to here and hope others will like it.
Moonsell (talk) 11:23, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Stages of the Path ''(lamrim, lam-rim)''

message: I've attempted to make this section a little more neutral by qualifying some of the claims and removing the sweeping conclusion at the end.  I'm still uncertain what is meant by the sentences that refer to the hidden meaning of the sutras being contained in the number and ordering of topics- can anyone clarify this point, or is this just some sort of esoteric way of saying that meaning was encoded in the selection of subjects that Atisa was later able to divine?  Second, this section seems to be attempting to address concerns about the authenticity of Lamrim as something that was taught directly by Shakyamuni, but unless there are specific critiques of this particular teaching, I don't see a reason to get into that- I would assume that it should be taken for granted that tantric and Mahayana teachings are not generally regarded as authentic by Theravada practitioners, and that that fact doesn't need to be mentioned for every single Mahayana and Vajrayana sutra in WP.  What would be helpful here is an accounting of the history of the texts as a document- Vajrayana practitioners regard them as having been created by the Buddha and revealed by Atisa, but surely someone has traced their earliest mention in a manuscript, earliest extant examples of this type of text, etc.  --Clay Collier (talk) 10:33, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: This section claims lamrims cover tantra as well as sutra. We need to lose that misconception. There is no need to allude to tantra in this article. Moonsell (talk) 11:44, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Authenticity Section
Talk:Lord Loss

message: Note: I'm currently working on a character index for future Demonata books. --Jeff 14:01, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Urgh... the format for this page is terrible. I have yet to read the book, so I don't want to risk reading spoilers, but this really needs fixing by someone. Tartan 18:37, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Format

message: Can someone add infoboxes for all of the series?  Bec is the only one with an infobox Andy mci 19:52, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Infoboxes

message: Is there really a place for this in this article?  If anyone agrees, i'll take it out.--ANDY+MCI=Andy Mci 16:50, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Character index 

message: Sorry about taking out the whole character section. I'm sure that you spent a lot of time on it, but it really was not appropriate in the article. It took up an unnecessary amount of space, was not to wiki standards, and contained way to many unneeded spoilers from the book. It would perhaps be a little more appropriate on a page dedicated to characters from the series. -AtionSong 15:04, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cleanup 

message: I have changed Trivia to Facts but this still is not saisfactory
DragonLK (talk) 19:59, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Trivia 

message: This section has a couple of issues which need to be addressed.  First, it needs to be restructured to read like an encyclopedia article.  Second, it currently looks like a review or fansite as opposed to containing neutral and verifiable information. --Ericdn (talk) 20:23, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reception 

message: There needs to be a summary for this book. This article looks ridiculous without it! 188.48.50.87 (talk) 19:06, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Honestly, it looked pretty ridiculous with the summary that was here previously.  It read like a 4th grade book report.  If you (or someone) can add a concise, brief summary to the article please do.  Syrthiss (talk) 19:40, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

text: I added one but it's not the best summary, I'll admit. You're welcome to criticise and even more welcome to edit it. Raisin56 (talk) 02:34, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  No Summary or plot synopsis?
Talk:The Man Who Never Was

message: In the article it says that the corpse was one homeless Glyndwr Michael, but at the linked site about his grave it says that he was indeed a British major called Glyndwr Martin.
Could anyone clarify that?
* It's been a long time since I read the book, but if the story of "Glyndwr Michael's" death is accurate (rat poison) then he cannot be "Major Martin"; the XX Committee (the department of British Intelligence responsible for misdirection) specifically sought out a cadaver of a person who had drowned - in the event that the Germans performed an autopsy.  It would blow the whole ruse if "Major Martin", who supposedly drowned after his plane crashed at sea, was found to have taken rat poison before his death! --Insley 05:08, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: See our own Operation Mincemeat article - "Through the most discreet inquiries they were able to secure the body of a 34-year old man who recently died of chemically-induced pneumonia as the result of ingesting rat poison.... Since the man died of pneumonia, the fluid in his lungs would be consistent with that of a man who had been at sea for an extended period." --John Kenneth Fisher 03:11, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The only problem I see is that all the articles I can find on modern rat poison say that it kills by interfering with blood clotting causing internal bleeding  Certainly the rat poison of 1943 must have used a different method of killing if it produced pneumonia and this difference should be noted otherwise the claim that "Glyndwr Michael" is Major Martin is of questionable value.--BruceGrubb (talk) 20:53, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

text: It should be said that the identification of Major Martin as Glyndwr Michael is *not* made in the book about which this article is written, so it shouldn’t be included here as if it part of the book - as it stands it looks like the book revealed the identity, and the dispute over the identity on the Operation Mincemeat page is a contradiction of this. Montagu *never* revealed the identity of the corpse used, that was the work of much later researchers. It should also be said that the Navy have chosen John Melville (also mentioned on the Mincemeat page) as the true “Major Martin”, and he seems to be a stronger candidate.Jock123 (talk) 11:44, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Contradiction? 

message: This article doesn't seem to talk much about the film. It also manages to contradict information in the Operation Mincemeat article. If there is not enough information to make an entire article on the film, should it be merged into the other article? Pennywisepeter 16:19, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Contradiction 

message: Which is the particular Goon show referred to, anyone? Please? Safebreaker (talk) 22:51, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: IIRC, the Goon Show episode had the same title as the film, i.e., The Man Who Never Was.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.7.147.13 (talk) 16:07, 25 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Goons reference
Talk:The Licked Hand

message: Should be transwikied to source. Doesn't belong here. -- Миборовский U|T|C|E 01:41, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

message: Where do all of these alterations come from? From what I can tell they aren't cited at all, and it seems to me they're just junk. Of course they're going to be endless versions of an urban legend like this. Some of them just seem out of place. For example "In some versions of the story, the message reads "HUMANS CAN LICK TOO, MY DEAR" making the killer seem even more of a creep." How does the addition of two words make him "seem even more of a creep?" This article really needs a clean up. BrainDance (talk) 16:26, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Alterations

message: I once heard a version where the dog had been left outside and froze to death. The words weren't written anywhere, it was just sort of implied that the thing under the bed was a monster. Sea Captain Cormac 20:13, 21 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Possible other version?
Talk:Andi Watson

message: I've got the basic stuff down but still needs work. I'd like to see more on the comics themselves giving some explanation on how his style has developed along with stuff on the themes of his work. Skeleton Key could do with fleshing out, as could Love Fights. Peteashton 01:41, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Progress
Talk:Palos Verdes Peninsula High School

message: The information on Rolling Hills High School has been combined onto this page.  Can we setup a separate page for the information specific to that high school from before the merger (or at least a Disambiguation page)?  There is a large community of alumni who would like an article about Rolling Hills High School, and that information (in particular the older Rolling Hills Titans' logo) does not exist in Wikipedia because it has all been merged together into this single article.  I have a public domain copy of the original logo to upload to Wikipedia once a course of action for this article is decided.
Thomashenschel (talk) 21:08, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rolling Hills High School 

message: *PVPHS's yearbook staff also holds the record for the largest yearbook in the Guinness Book of Records.
Could we ahve a source for this please? -Willmcw 01:42, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Yearbook

message: wtf? this doesnt have anything that explains our schools academic superiority
even crappy schools like princeton high school stated in their wiki that they are 100something'th place (lawl?) in the nation. some1 really need to include those type of statistics on our wiki -_- —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 58.127.97.83 (talk) 07:02, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  who the hell wrote this 

message: This isn't a very good category. What's the point of it? There's not enough information suitable for an encyclopedia. The category should be deleted. 68.225.240.44 (talk) 19:28, 21 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Penninsula vs. PV Rivalry

message: How about the mention of some infamy? 3 Palos Verdes High students arrested in grade-tampering plot
* This incident refers to a neighboring high school, Palos Verdes High School. --Demagol, The One and All (talk) 17:43, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Hacking
Talk:Funkadelic discography

message: Serious cleanup.  If the song doesn't have a page it shouldn't be linked just becaues something of the same name has a page. The style also needs some work. gren グレン 01:47, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

message: Awesome work by Andrzejbanas who created the tables and added the chart positions for all the studio albums. I recommend making the tables wider for the Live album and the Compilation albums, since they don't have any chart information.
FYI: Today I created separate pages for three of the compilation albums as well.
Doomsdayer520 (talk) 15:53, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tables 
Talk:Harold Davenport

message: The MacTutor article says that Davenport was always a heavy smoker.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.157.230.88 (talk) 09:57, 16 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Note 
Talk:Yohji Yamamoto

message: [Review requested for translated article]
Language and formatting excellent.  One citation needed for apparent quote: "supresses mode with antimode".  Short article - is there more information in the Japanese article which could be brought across?  If not, is there information available (in Japanese; couldn't find much on the English web) about Yamamoto's life beyond fashion?
CastorQuinn 23:55, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Review Requested
Talk:Stain (album)

message: With the exception of "Nothingness" the song articles on this album retain barely any information. I do not feel I can expand on them and i'm surprised they haven't been made into redirects --Mrmoustache14 (talk) 22:59, 7 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Articles
Talk:Charles E. Merrill

message: Green Cove Springs is a real town whose Wikipedia article points to its official website. Occasionally someone misremembers the town's long name, which accounts for the name variations Glen Cove Springs and Green Grove Springs. Supporting evidence:
The other two towns have 0.03 and 0.11 percent as many Google hits, and the references with any information about them indicate they are identical with Green Cove Springs. That is, if all the Google references were accurate, all three would have to be in the Jacksonville area, all three are the home of athlete Nolan Carroll, all three have a Navy base, all three have a Clay High School and all three have zip code 32043. So there is really only one town, and its correct name is given on its official site. Art LaPella 02:19, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled