lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:List of snooker players

message: I've added to the list all players who have ever been in the top 32 in the world rankings, and all players who have ever been in a ranking final. That should be enough to keep us going for a while! --Auximines 15:44, 3 Jun 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Top players

message: What does does everyone think about only having professional players listed who have articles on them and steadily increasing the list as people write more articles.
Of course, you could go the other way and list all the professional players - but it is very incomplete at the moment. Samasnookerfan (talk)
:There's some side-band discussion (including from Samasnookerfan) on whether this is a good idea, or a broader merge is called for, at User talk:SMcCandlish#List of professional snooker players. — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont]  ‹(-¿-)› 08:04, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Only listing players with articles?

message: This entire list needs to be redone like List of baseball players and many others. The other, topical lists of snooker players should be in this article (and perhaps more of them), with descriptions, meanwhile the article needs to stop being a duplication of :Category:Snooker players or it will simply be deleted at WP:AFD (hell, I'll probably take it there myself), as there is a large pile of precedent for deleting lists that serve the same function as their corresponding categories. — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont]  ‹(-¿-)› 09:30, 8 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Strip it down and make it consistent with such articles in other major sports 

message: Many of these players may have never been professional. I have deleted some names from the article, but it still very needs for cleanup--Якушев Илья (talk) 14:07, 23 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  This article
Wikipedia talk:Portraits from the Dibner Library of the History of Science and Technology

message: Ahem — are you sure that these images are public domain? Did you read http://www.sil.si.edu/permissions/, where it says
:The digital image files and associated text on this web site are the property of the Smithsonian Institution or of other institutions or individuals.
:The Smithsonian images are made available for non-commercial educational or personal use only.
:Commercial use, copying, or redistribution in any manner for personal or corporate gain, or any other non-educational purpose is not permitted. Any public or commercial use of these materials without prior written permission is a violation of copyright law and may also violate the rights of third parties. Please contact Smithsonian Institution Libraries at libmail@si.edu for information regarding use of these images.
And have you seen http://www.si.edu/copyright/, where they state:
:MAY I PUT IMAGES, TEXT OR CONTENT FROM THIS WEBSITE ON ANOTHER GENERAL ACCESS WEBSITE OR CD-ROM? 	
		
:No, unless permission has been obtained in advance from the Smithsonian Institution.
All this doesn't look at all like public domain to me... even if most of the images are pre-1923. Before I'd dare use any of these images, I'd want a lawyer's opinion! Lupo 14:07, 11 May 2004 (UTC)
Talk:1775

message: According to the page for Schwiigel, it mentions that she did not in fact die in this year. There was previously a fact on this page that mentioned she died in this year, and I changed it. I was wondering if anyone thought we should leave it on, but change it so it's factually accurate, as in say that Schwiigel's execution date was set for whenever. Personally, I wouldn't leave it up, as she was NOT the last person to be executed for witchcraft, nor would she have been if she had been executed on this date. If you understood anything I just said... 75.131.203.112 (talk) 20:48, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Anna Maria Schwiigel

message: I have made some year layout proposals which would affect a significant proportion of the year pages: an example of proposed style is 1850. It is detailed on my talk page. However pre 1800 the change is largely cosmetic.
If no-one flags where I have put the discussion on my talk page that they object in a month I will start making everything consistent. It may take some time... --(talk)BozMo 16:03, 11 May 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  years page layout

message: Is the birth day of André-Marie Ampère 20th of Jan as stated in the said article or 22 nd of Jan as stated here.  Nedim Ardoğa (talk) 18:49, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  André-Marie Ampère  

message: Jacob Brown appears two times in the births section:
1. May 9 – Jacob Brown, United States general (d. 1828)
2. August 9 – Jacob Brown, United States general (d. 1828)
The main article says May 9. Should the second entry be deleted?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Putenantenne (talk • contribs) 12:14, 11 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Jacob Brown
Talk:1776

message: I have made some year layout proposals which would affect a significant proportion of the year pages: an example of proposed style is 1850. It is detailed on my talk page. However pre 1800 the change is largely cosmetic.
If no-one flags where I have put the discussion on my talk page that they object in a month I will start making everything consistent. It may take some time... --(talk)BozMo 16:04, 11 May 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Years page layout

message: :: See: Talk:1780#Images.  -Wikid77 13:53, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Images 
Talk:1774

message: I have made some year layout proposals which would affect a significant proportion of the year pages: an example of proposed style is 1850. It is detailed on my talk page. However pre 1800 the change is largely cosmetic.
If no-one flags where I have put the discussion on my talk page that they object in a month I will start making everything consistent. It may take some time... --(talk)BozMo 16:04, 11 May 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  years page layout

message: 09-December-2006: I have been able to add images beside the Events text, but it required moving the "Year-in-other-calendars" to the Births section (which is where it "appeared" to be in years with few events, by automatic formatting).  I then had to separate the Births section by a break-line:
:::  
The break-line pushes the subheader "Births" below any future Event images.  I also added images in a similar manner to the 1960s, 1970s, and 1980s, as well as the 1770s. -Wikid77 21:50, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Images 

message: 09-December-2006: Unlike years with recent celebrities and TV news, the listed Events for 1774 have been few, so I condensed the 12 monthly subheads to just 2 halves of the year, plus Unknown-dates.  The condensed list revealed 2 errors:  the event at "March 31" wasn't indented, and the events in October were not in sort-order.  A condensed list can help to spot errors, but webpages that could display condensed lists would also be effective, if Wiki had abstraction tools to show user-selected condensed/expanded views of data.  -Wikid77 22:02, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Few Events 

message: Why are all these years so focused on america, and infact minor events in america?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.179.190.1 (talk) 05:04, 25 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: America
Talk:1773

message: I have made some year layout proposals which would affect a significant proportion of the year pages: an example of proposed style is 1850. It is detailed on my talk page. However pre 1800 the change is largely cosmetic.
If no-one flags where I have put the discussion on my talk page that they object in a month I will start making everything consistent. It may take some time... --(talk)BozMo 16:04, 11 May 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  years page layout

message: 09-December-2006: I have been able to add images beside the Events text, but it required moving the "Year-in-other-calendars" to the Births section (which is where it "appeared" to be, by automatic formatting).  I then had to separate the Births section by a break-line:
::: 
            
The break-line pushes the subheader "Births" below the Event images.  I also added images in a similar manner to the 1960s, 1970s, and 1980s.  -Wikid77 12:27, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Images 

message: and 1773 before 1772. the 1773 is the year his 7500 ducks and duckaless. and sep. 5 1773 the new york of the good...the 65 humans see the real peep 25 human do not like the real peep and 11 humans die and 1773. the 1773 bc is the 500 and 65 ducks and the world.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.228.10.236 (talk) 20:26, 11 October 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  earth 1773
Talk:1772

message: I have made some year layout proposals which would affect a significant proportion of the year pages: an example of proposed style is 1850. It is detailed on my talk page. However pre 1800 the change is largely cosmetic.
If no-one flags where I have put the discussion on my talk page that they object in a month I will start making everything consistent. It may take some time... --(talk)BozMo 16:05, 11 May 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  years page layout

message: 09-December-2006: I have been able to add images beside the Events text, but it required moving the "Year-in-other-calendars" to the Births section (which is where it "appeared" to be in years with few events, by automatic formatting).  I then had to separate the Births section by a break-line:
::: 
            
The break-line pushes the subheader "Births" below the Event images.  I also added images in a similar manner to the 1960s, 1970s, and 1980s.  -Wikid77 12:32, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Images
Talk:1771

message: I have made some year layout proposals which would affect a significant proportion of the year pages: an example of proposed style is 1850. It is detailed on my talk page. However pre 1800 the change is largely cosmetic.
If no-one flags where I have put the discussion on my talk page that they object in a month I will start making everything consistent. It may take some time... --(talk)BozMo 16:05, 11 May 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  years page layout

message: 09-December-2006: I have been able to add images beside the Events text, but it required moving the "Year-in-other-calendars" to the Births section (which is where it "appeared" to be, by automatic formatting).  I then had to separate the Births section by a break-line:
::: 
            
The break-line pushes the subheader "Births" below the Event images.  I also added images in a similar manner to the 1960s, 1970s, and 1980s.  -Wikid77 12:29, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Images 
Talk:1770

message: I have made some year layout proposals which would affect a significant proportion of the year pages: an example of proposed style is 1850. It is detailed on my talk page. However pre 1800 the change is largely cosmetic.
If no-one flags where I have put the discussion on my talk page that they object in a month I will start making everything consistent. It may take some time... --(talk)BozMo 16:05, 11 May 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  years page layout
Talk:1768

message: I have made some year layout proposals which would affect a significant proportion of the year pages: an example of proposed style is 1850. It is detailed on my talk page. However pre 1800 the change is largely cosmetic.
If no-one flags where I have put the discussion on my talk page that they object in a month I will start making everything consistent. It may take some time... --(talk)BozMo 16:06, 11 May 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  years page layout
Talk:1767

message: I have made some year layout proposals which would affect a significant proportion of the year pages: an example of proposed style is 1850. It is detailed on my talk page. However pre 1800 the change is largely cosmetic.
If no-one flags where I have put the discussion on my talk page that they object in a month I will start making everything consistent. It may take some time... --(talk)BozMo 16:06, 11 May 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: consistente. Ir may tale Dome time...(talk) BozMo 16:06.11 May 2004(UTC) 181.37.216.213 (talk) 03:07, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  years page layout
Talk:1766

message: I have made some year layout proposals which would affect a significant proportion of the year pages: an example of proposed style is 1850. It is detailed on my talk page. However pre 1800 the change is largely cosmetic.
If no-one flags where I have put the discussion on my talk page that they object in a month I will start making everything consistent. It may take some time... --(talk)BozMo 16:07, 11 May 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  years page layout

message: from :Category: 1766 births or other categories deserves to be on this page? 24.188.128.48 21:31, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  how do we decide which people
Talk:1764

message: I have made some year layout proposals which would affect a significant proportion of the year pages: an example of proposed style is 1850. It is detailed on my talk page. However pre 1800 the change is largely cosmetic.
If no-one flags where I have put the discussion on my talk page that they object in a month I will start making everything consistent. It may take some time... --(talk)BozMo 16:09, 11 May 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  years page layout
Talk:1765

message: I have made some year layout proposals which would affect a significant proportion of the year pages: an example of proposed style is 1850. It is detailed on my talk page. However pre 1800 the change is largely cosmetic.
If no-one flags where I have put the discussion on my talk page that they object in a month I will start making everything consistent. It may take some time... --(talk)BozMo 16:09, 11 May 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  years page layout
Talk:1763

message: I have made some year layout proposals which would affect a significant proportion of the year pages: an example of proposed style is 1850. It is detailed on my talk page. However pre 1800 the change is largely cosmetic.
If no-one flags where I have put the discussion on my talk page that they object in a month I will start making everything consistent. It may take some time... --(talk)BozMo 16:10, 11 May 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  years page layout
Talk:1762

message: I have made some year layout proposals which would affect a significant proportion of the year pages: an example of proposed style is 1850. It is detailed on my talk page. However pre 1800 the change is largely cosmetic.
If no-one flags where I have put the discussion on my talk page that they object in a month I will start making everything consistent. It may take some time... --(talk)BozMo 16:10, 11 May 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  years page layout
Talk:1761

message: I have made some year layout proposals which would affect a significant proportion of the year pages: an example of proposed style is 1850. It is detailed on my talk page. However pre 1800 the change is largely cosmetic.
If no-one flags where I have put the discussion on my talk page that they object in a month I will start making everything consistent. It may take some time... --(talk)BozMo 16:11, 11 May 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  years page layout
Talk:1760

message: I have made some year layout proposals which would affect a significant proportion of the year pages: an example of proposed style is 1850. It is detailed on my talk page. However pre 1800 the change is largely cosmetic.
If no-one flags where I have put the discussion on my talk page that they object in a month I will start making everything consistent. It may take some time... --(talk)BozMo 16:11, 11 May 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  years page layout
Talk:1759

message: I have made some year layout proposals which would affect a significant proportion of the year pages: an example of proposed style is 1850. It is detailed on my talk page. However pre 1800 the change is largely cosmetic.
If no-one flags where I have put the discussion on my talk page that they object in a month I will start making everything consistent. It may take some time... --(talk)BozMo 16:12, 11 May 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  years page layout
Talk:1758

message: I have made some year layout proposals which would affect a significant proportion of the year pages: an example of proposed style is 1850. It is detailed on my talk page. However pre 1800 the change is largely cosmetic.
If no-one flags where I have put the discussion on my talk page that they object in a month I will start making everything consistent. It may take some time... --(talk)BozMo 16:12, 11 May 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  years page layout
Talk:1756

message: I have made some year layout proposals which would affect a significant proportion of the year pages: an example of proposed style is 1850. It is detailed on my talk page. However pre 1800 the change is largely cosmetic.
If no-one flags where I have put the discussion on my talk page that they object in a month I will start making everything consistent. It may take some time... --(talk)BozMo 16:13, 11 May 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  years page layout
Talk:1755

message: I have made some year layout proposals which would affect a significant proportion of the year pages: an example of proposed style is 1850. It is detailed on my talk page. However pre 1800 the change is largely cosmetic.
If no-one flags where I have put the discussion on my talk page that they object in a month I will start making everything consistent. It may take some time... --(talk)BozMo 16:13, 11 May 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  years page layout
Talk:1753

message: I have made some year layout proposals which would affect a significant proportion of the year pages: an example of proposed style is 1850. It is detailed on my talk page. However pre 1800 the change is largely cosmetic.
If no-one flags where I have put the discussion on my talk page that they object in a month I will start making everything consistent. It may take some time... --(talk)BozMo 16:15, 11 May 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  years page layout

message: Microsoft SQL server does not recognize dates before 1753. Does this year have some specific significance?
:Date and time data from January 1, 1753 through December 31, 9999, to an accuracy of one three-hundredth of a second (equivalent to 3.33 milliseconds or 0.00333 seconds). Values are rounded to increments of .000, .003, or .007 seconds, as shown in the table.
Here's why --Ouzo (talk) 17:23, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Odd...
Talk:1751

message: Under the Julian calendar the first day of the (legal) year was 25 March. So, January and February 1751 were skipped.
After the last day of December 1751, the following January and February would have been the last two months of 1751. But with the calendar change, that January and that February were instead attributed to 1752.
Some newspapers in the British North America were starting their year in January prior to 1751, for example the Pennsylvania Gazette and the Maryland Gazette. The Virginia Gazette started the year on March 25 and hence there are no January, February or March issues in 1751 until March 28. Those months did not exist. The Quaker records clearly indicate this switch as well. There were not 11th or 12th months in 1751 and no 1-24 of the 1st Month (i.e., March)
Bob1743 (talk) 18:06, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: 1751 by the British Implementation of the Julian Calendar had No January or February or March 1-24.

message: I have made some year layout proposals which would affect a significant proportion of the year pages: an example of proposed style is 1850. It is detailed on my talk page. However pre 1800 the change is largely cosmetic.
If no-one flags where I have put the discussion on my talk page that they object in a month I will start making everything consistent. It may take some time... --(talk)BozMo 16:16, 11 May 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  years page layout
Talk:1749

message: I have made some year layout proposals which would affect a significant proportion of the year pages: an example of proposed style is 1850. It is detailed on my talk page. However pre 1800 the change is largely cosmetic.
If no-one flags where I have put the discussion on my talk page that they object in a month I will start making everything consistent. It may take some time... --(talk)BozMo 16:17, 11 May 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  years page layout
Talk:1748

message: I have made some year layout proposals which would affect a significant proportion of the year pages: an example of proposed style is 1850. It is detailed on my talk page. However pre 1800 the change is largely cosmetic.
If no-one flags where I have put the discussion on my talk page that they object in a month I will start making everything consistent. It may take some time... --(talk)BozMo 16:17, 11 May 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  years page layout
Talk:1747

message: I have made some year layout proposals which would affect a significant proportion of the year pages: an example of proposed style is 1850. It is detailed on my talk page. However pre 1800 the change is largely cosmetic.
If no-one flags where I have put the discussion on my talk page that they object in a month I will start making everything consistent. It may take some time... --(talk)BozMo 16:17, 11 May 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  years page layout

message: November 17 – Alain-René Le Sage, Algonqian writer (b. 1668): not sure he was algonqian. 193.52.64.243 (talk) 08:41, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: ??
Talk:1746

message: I have made some year layout proposals which would affect a significant proportion of the year pages: an example of proposed style is 1850. It is detailed on my talk page. However pre 1800 the change is largely cosmetic.
If no-one flags where I have put the discussion on my talk page that they object in a month I will start making everything consistent. It may take some time... --(talk)BozMo 16:17, 11 May 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  years page layout
Talk:1745

message: I have made some year layout proposals which would affect a significant proportion of the year pages: an example of proposed style is 1850. It is detailed on my talk page. However pre 1800 the change is largely cosmetic.
If no-one flags where I have put the discussion on my talk page that they object in a month I will start making everything consistent. It may take some time... --(talk)BozMo 16:18, 11 May 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  years page layout
Talk:1744

message: I have made some year layout proposals which would affect a significant proportion of the year pages: an example of proposed style is 1850. It is detailed on my talk page. However pre 1800 the change is largely cosmetic.
If no-one flags where I have put the discussion on my talk page that they object in a month I will start making everything consistent. It may take some time... --(talk)BozMo 16:18, 11 May 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  years page layout

message: Chotilovo
i love you bangla desh? Whats that got to do with anything? 199.254.212.44 15:18, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Histori of Russia   Tsar   Elisabeth of Russia Orthodox cathedral  (http://www.hotilovo.hotmail.ru)
Talk:1743

message: I have made some year layout proposals which would affect a significant proportion of the year pages: an example of proposed style is 1850. It is detailed on my talk page. However pre 1800 the change is largely cosmetic.
If no-one flags where I have put the discussion on my talk page that they object in a month I will start making everything consistent. It may take some time... --(talk)BozMo 16:19, 11 May 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  years page layout
Talk:1741

message: I have made some year layout proposals which would affect a significant proportion of the year pages: an example of proposed style is 1850. It is detailed on my talk page. However pre 1800 the change is largely cosmetic.
If no-one flags where I have put the discussion on my talk page that they object in a month I will start making everything consistent. It may take some time... --(talk)BozMo 16:20, 11 May 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  years page layout