lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Template talk:Test templates notice

message: The template has been launched. Any suggestions and modifications to the wording and style of the template will be appreciated. Thanks! Sycthos 01:29, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Perhaps we should replace the "stop" hand with an info sign? Usually people associate the stop hand with vandals. I'll make the change, and please revert me if you think I'm wrong. Thank you, JHMM13 (T | C)   00:39, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Template Launch 

message: Moved to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject user warnings. Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 21:11, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is {TestTemplatesNotice} needed in all user warning templates?  

message: The template states that the optional parameter is "The name of the page upon which the test was conducted. " Since this template provides information on quite a few templates that can't really be described as "tests", such as , this should probably be re-worded. Tonywalton  | Talk 03:16, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I boldly changed the wording slightly to remove the mention of "test". Please feel free to revert and discuss here if this is a problem. Tonywalton  | Talk 03:21, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Test?" 

message: Let's add a parameter that makes item 2 disappear.  Too many templates include , but don't take that parameter (like ).  We need a fix. Will (Talk - contribs) 06:18, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  New parameter needed to hide item
Talk:Jehovah's Witnesses/Archive 18

message: Konrad, the problem as I see it is that no one completely removed from Jehovah's Witnesses has ever cared enough to become scholarly and anyone who has ever had dealings with them is considered biased if they say anything negative later.
In my opinion, it will be difficult to find a non-JW scholar who cares enough about the religion one way or another to become an authority on the subject, the general public likely won't care and Jehovah's Witnesses won't either. A scholar without an audience or support for his work is a rare thing indeed. The only ones who would care are ex-JWs, and their support will automatically poison Witnesses against them. Respectfully, Evident 00:05, 10 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: The source of something is irrelevant, and it is an ad hominem logical fallacy to even consider that (strictly speaking, not that it can't be wise to not pay attention to some fruitcakes out there). Either you can back it up with good proof or you can't. Assertions that ex-Jehovah's Witnesses' facts are somehow less good than the same facts revealed by somebody else should be just plain ignored. They're the closest thing to non-Jehovah's Witness Jehovah's Witness experts we're gonna find, and have seen everything that active Jehovah's Witnesses have. Claims by active Jehovah's Witnesses of bias in their facts have to be proven with hard proof, not ad hominem attacks and general pissing and moaning about bias.Tommstein 02:54, 10 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  The problem of finding non-JW, JW Scholars 

message: ran-cam, un-ngo, pedaphiles, blood, 1975, 1914, 607bce-587bce, docturnal flip flops, and lawsuits
just a small list of things that need to be addressed.--Greyfox 04:14, 16 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: A lot of that is already mentioned on the various pages. What is ran-cam? The defense contractor they have (had?) stock in?Tommstein 07:49, 16 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Yep  --Greyfox 01:28, 17 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  There needs to be a scandal section or page
Template talk:Elephant 6

message: The bands are listed according to their listing on the E6 fansite, which is a pretty decent resource.  Bands should obviously be moved around based on whatever (I'm a little iffy about Of Montreal being in the lower section, for instance), and more labels should be added as we get ahold of them.  My hope is that we can add them to E6-related articles. --badlydrawnjeff 01:33, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
Talk:Positive set theory

message: The previous version of this article contained some errors.  The notation given for
closure was the usual notation for a one-element set.  The class of well-founded sets
is not a set, and it is the (proper) class of well-founded sets which is the domain of the
interpretation of ZFC, not the class of sets with complements.
Randall Holmes 01:37, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Errors

message: I am quite curious to know if there are proofs that the sets of GPK+\infty do or do not form a carteisan closed category (those of NF do not: New_Foundations#Cartesian_Closure).  Has any work on this been published?  Any hunches? AshtonBenson (talk) 06:52, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Cartesian Closure

message: I arrived here looking for a definition and exlpanation of Positive Formula. (The Lemma Positive formula redirects to here). Could someone who knows about this please add a characterization of positive formulae? --178.26.101.59 (talk) 12:08, 19 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Positive Formula
Talk:Tyrannotitan

message: Very comprehensive article, but... as a secondary source, an encyclopedia entry should not rival the primary in detail. If someone who knows more about carnosaurs than I do comes along, maybe you could dumb this down a bit and just add a link to the relevent paper. Dinoguy2 01:42, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: This is an excellent and very informative article, however, as someone who doesn't actually know a great deal about the subject i had to look up many of the terms used. (particularly the scientific names for the body parts that have been discovered). Does anyone other than me think that it may be a good idea to add the more common names for the body parts in question for the benefit of dumb people such as myself? --Greebo cat 15:13, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes. Bit busy. Good to flag itCas Liber 23:08, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  A little technical? 

message: How come there isn't alot of info about this crecture? 360man\
That's because there isn't a lot of information on the creature itself. Paleo Kid (talk) 03:05, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  More Information? 

message: it swam? cool but it also says ceratosaurus could to, but ceratosaurus's artocle doesnt state that.Spinodontosaurus (talk) 18:44, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: There's no mention of swimming in the paper so I've removed it. All theropods were probably decent swimmers anyway, though whether tail-propelled is an idea only one or two people have floated. Dinoguy2 (talk) 19:59, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  swimming 

message: Mortimer, M. (2004), "The Theropod Database", viewed September 17, 2007. http://home.myuw.net/eoraptor/. 
Both of these link to this site http://depts.washington.edu/uwisp/. I gonna go ahead and remove them and put new ones in (likely from DinoData) Spinodontosaurus (talk) 17:44, 8 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Not sure what's up, are you working from a public IP that may have been blocked or restricted? Made the changes either way, the Theropod DB and DinoData are online only so shouldn't be used as data sources anyway. Dinoguy2 (talk) 18:05, 8 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  References 

message: According to theropod database, MPEF-PV 1157 (which is the largest Tyrannotitan) measured ~ 12.2 m, while the holotype is only ~ 11.4 m. http://home.comcast.net/~eoraptor/Carnosauria.htm#Tyrannotitanchubutensis.
So how 12.2 m could be average? Sorry for not the best english. I am from Poland. 7Alx
There are ? estimates of 13 point something.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dinosaur Fan (talk • contribs) 12:13, 9 December 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tyrannotitan length 

message: How heavy was it?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 112.134.20.124 (talk) 10:01, 26 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Weight 

message: How long is the femur? I'm calculating something to tell my friends my opinion of dinosaur sizes. Dinosaur Fan (talk) 12:20, 9 December 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Femur
Talk:Mercy Ships

message: One short sentence in the last chapter? Really? Please describe the Christian roots of this group decently! 84.152.57.109 (talk) 23:22, 7 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Originally a part of the YWAM (Youth with a Mission) family of Christian ministries" 

message: It would be good to have a section on the fleet, maybe pull it out of the History section.   Toddst1 (talk) 23:24, 4 October 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Fleet section
Wikipedia talk:Experimental Deletion/XD7

message: Alright, it's entirely possible I don't really know what I'm doing here.  My intent was to make something like XD6 but that uses :Category:Pages for deletion also.  If I've completely hosed things up and someone fixes and/or removes it, I won't be remotely offended.  Friday (talk) 01:55, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
Talk:Guillermo Gómez-Peña

message: G- do us a favor, if you are going to put up a self-promoting wikipedia entry and call yourself a writer link to something more substantive than a single page flash website.
:That website is a work of art in itself.  It's not "single page" whatsoever.  And you're right.  It is nothing but a stub I've been meaning to expand, but my wikimotto is that that's a problem "better resolved through contribution than complaint."  So either expand it or tag it for deletion, but don't just badmouth.  But thank you for your criticism.--Rockero 03:15, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: FWIW, I'm the one who put the stub here, hoping to get an article started—he's certainly notable enough—and I am certainly not the man himself, you are welcome to check my user page to see who I am. -- Jmabel | Talk 04:10, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

text: I moved it to trivia. If you want to call him Mexican American in the intro that's fine by me since for some the definition is fluid.danedouard00 00:46, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: I've removed the following fragment of a citation that was floating around, long detached from whatever it cited for. Someone may want to work out what can be cited from this source.
 | title = Gómez-Peña to Present 1999 Abramowitz Lecture
 | url = http://web.mit.edu/arts/about/news/extra/1999/1027_gomezpena.html\
 | format = html
 | date = 1999-10-27
 | accessdate = 2006-12-06
- Jmabel | Talk 20:11, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fragment of a citation 

message: I'd like to put forth a motion to remove the "Notability" tag from this article.  This artist has had a TON of press over the years, and we now have a pretty wide variety of outside sources (and can easily get more).  Clearly, the article still needs some work, but the notability problem really doesn't seem to be an issue.  Any objections? MisterB777 (talk) 17:13, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Remove Notability Tag 
Talk:Core-based trees

message: Username was created yesterday and every contribution is complete bullocks.  Probable sock puppet of User:Kingofengland created the same day whose contributions are all up for deletion or reverted.  "Core-based trees" is a real computing term but it has nothing to do with virus hunting.
*"2.4 Core Based Trees: Core Based Trees (CBT) is a protocol for multicast tree construction which also uses a center specific or shared delivery tree [1]. CBT is similar to PIM-SM in that they both initially choose a center from which they build the tree, however, in CBT, multiple centers are allowed for one group. In CBT a center is called a core, a group initiator (a user or administrator) sends out a CORE-NOTIFICATION message to all core routers for the group. This message initiates the building of a core tree which connects the all the group's cores as a core backbone. A join request is then unicast out to a known core address. Any core router for this group that receives the request can act on it and reply with a join acknowledge. No action is taken by intermediate routers until a join acknowledge is sent back to the requesting node. The join acknowledge creates the tree branch [1]." 
Durova 02:00, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: speedy delete reasons
Talk:List of biochemists

message: I believe it should and I do not understand why it hasn't already.
-because biochemistry and genetics are not the same. If anything the biochemists and geneticist list should be taken down/spit up.
Yes, some biochemists are geneticists but not all (and vice versa). I'd like to see two separate lists, with some people listed on both.Lisamh 01:32, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed--there are a very few who can't be classfied, and they can perfectly well go in both pages. If there is agrement, how do we get the merge notice removed? DGG 04:47, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: If there's consensus against the move on both talk pages, anyone can remove the notices after around five days. It's important to remove the notice on both pages. Espresso Addict 18:43, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Comments

message: I question whether people should be listed here whose notability is in an entirely different field, but happen to have gotten a degree in biochemistry along the way. I'd suggest that someone who could be listed in either of two fields be listed only in the major one, unless truly notable, like Pauling  or Pasteur.
In addition to the two I just removed, I question:
*Peter Coveney, who seems to belong in Biophysics,
*Sergi Durmishidze; any evidence?
*Revaz Dogonadze,, the article on him lists him as the discoverer of quantum mechanic electrochistry & does not mention enzyme catalysis.
*El-Halfawi, M. H., not mentioned in WP.
*Gish is an odd choice, because he's best known otherwise, but ...
*Varlam Gvaladze not mentioned in WP , any data?
*Kauffman is a biophysicist
*McGrath is a theologian
*Olsen's fame is not in biochemistry
*D M Vasudevan
DGG 03:42, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: non notable biochemists
Talk:Nakajima Sakae

message: The following statement is disputed:
"It was version of the famous Gnome-Rhône 14K, a license for which had been taken out in 1936." 
I myself haven't been able to find any support for it, so it's been removed from the article.
--Paul Richter 02:07, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Version of the Gnome-Rhone
Talk:Let there be light

message: I'm just wondering, the article is named Let there be light yet under Use all the examples are of "Fiat Lux", and the only other section is for literature.
What about, for example, Mike Oldfield's song "Let There Be Light," which includes the saying (in English) as well as the verse (In the beginning... etc.)
What woud something like this go under? Surely not Use, because all the examples there are Latin, and not under literature for it is not... --RazorICE 04:24, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fiat Lux, Let there be light, or both? 

message: I have removed the quote "So that means that God made the Earth in the dark." from the end of the first paragraph of "fiat lux" since it gets to questions of interpretation of the text itself, rather than a definite fact (a countering interpretation which I have heard is that water was there before God began creating since he never explicitly creates it, and thus light is the first thing he creates).  An encyclopedia is not the place for interpretations.  Crito2161 (talk) 21:24, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Interpretations 

message: "Dodogyuuun!" means Let There Be Light? Can someone include citations for that one? 201.92.230.234 (talk) 20:43, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Arceus 

message: I went looking for a Wikilink and found it here:  Atlantic Union College.  I was curious, so I went to their website and watched their YouTube video.  Unfortunately the only thing I could find in terms of a "motto" or "seal" was the image at the top of the AUC article, coupled with the name of the college and the motto, "The Cornerstone of Adventist Education".  There was nothing anywhere on their website about their motto being "Let there be light".  So if this is added back in, then there will have to be a reliable source added in with it.
 —  .`^) Paine Ellsworthdiss`cuss (^`.  20:21, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Atlantic Union College 

message: also: 
AC/DC song - Let There Be Rock 
--Tpyvvikky (talk) 03:22, 16 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  In culture 
Talk:255

message: Page was moved from Two hundred fifty-five to Two hundred and fifty-five according to the current convention for pages about numbers. (See discussion at Talk:One hundred and eleven) GUllman 03:08, 27 Aug 2003 (UTC)
thread_title:  

message: I moved this page to 255, created 255 (year) and made 255 (number) a redirect. pielover87 02:14, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: i agree wit you that 255 the integer is more intersting, but wha about consitsency? do we really want to move every page 1 (number) - 1000 (number) to 1 - 1000 and those to 1 (year) - 1000 (year)? whabout those more interensted in history than mathematics? Numerao 16:49, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  I undid the move, it is against the rules. The article about a number x, has to be at "x (number)". I will leave the discussion here though. Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 23:41, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: page move
Talk:Garcia-class frigate

message: Should the ships in this class be at USS Shipname (FF-XXX) or USS Shipname (DE-XXX)?
I'm inclined to think the former, since they spent more time after the redesignation than before. But the early years included the Vietnam War, and maybe some of them were most notable in that era. 
Any opinions either way?
—wwoods 02:27, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: See Wikipedia:Naming conventions (ships) for naming convention rules guiding naming of ships affected by the United States Navy 1975 ship reclassification. FF is correct. - Ageekgal 22:00, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  FFs or DEs? 

message: The Brooke class Guided missile ocean escort/frigates are only minor modifications of these ships. Instead of the second 5 inch gun mount, a Mk22 launcher with 16 Tarter/SM1 missiles is added. Aft of the mast/mack the superstructure extended aft on 2nd deck up further to provide necessary space. Instead of the SPS-40 radar, a 3-D SPS-52 was fitted. Propulsion plant was exactly the same between the two classes.
Wfoj2 (talk) 01:00, 2 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Related Ship Classes 
Talk:Fatal system error

message: When it reaches a point "where it cannot operate safely."? Can someone rewrite this to explain a little better as to how it knows something is unsafe? The OS is not an intelligence that can make a judgement call! 
Also, what actually IS meant with unsafe? Loss of data likely? Computer suddenly starts smoking? Windows calculator starts claiming PI is equal to 3? Would be great if someone who understands this better than I could take my comments and clear that up. Ingolfson 08:27, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Artificial intelligence? 

message: This article makes it sound like drivers deliberately crash the operating system with functions such as KBUgCHeck, when in reality that rarely if ever happens - system crashes are usually due to errors in the driver code (segfault-like, and of course others). 173.57.168.60 (talk) 19:16, 21 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Kernel Panics are rarely intentional 

message: In Windows 3.x and Windows 9x you can "press any key to continue" if a BSOD occurs. More often then not the system runs normal after this, but it can also crash or display a BSOD gain short afterwards. --MrBurns (talk) 17:31, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Windows 3.x/9x 

message: There is a duplicate article at Crash (computing). 
This article describes the logical process and names specific routines.
The Crash article describes the appearance to the user.
Should we propose a merge or somehow differentiate?  Should we put it to a vote? Stephen Charles Thompson (talk) 00:40, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Duplicate article
Talk:KCSP (AM)

message: == Listing of previous hosts needed ==--68.91.95.64 (talk) 01:03, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

message: Due to a low-level but constant stream of juvenile IP vandalism, I have locked IPs out of editing the page for the time being - I didn't feel there was much productive going on anyway, so the damage is slight. Please discuss here if you feel this should be reversed, or if you have any *productive* changes to propose. (ESkog)(Talk) 03:35, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected
Talk:God and gender in Hinduism

message: * Maybe we can mention Ardhnarishwar, an interesting concept in Hinduism. deeptrivia (talk) 02:46, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Ardhnarishwar

message: Currently the text reads like an exploration of sources that may support the primacy of neuter or feminine interpretations of divinity in Hindu theology. This is important and interesting material, however it seems WP:UNDUE given the prominence of Agni and Indra in the Rigveda for a start.
More systematic and chronological treatment of the topic would make it obvious to a reader that an NPOV approach was intended. Alastair Haines (talk) 04:08, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: POV

message: Some author of this article wrote "...Hindu traditions that alleviate God in the female conception, even as the source of the male form of God." Clearly the verb "alleviate" is wrong. I suspect whoever meant to write "elevate". I hesitate to alter the verb, however, in case a different meaning was intended. Any thoughts? Ellenois (talk) 17:02, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Verb Usage?
Talk:KWOD

message: Can not verify by radio, live to far away. The website in the info box does not exist. The link to the webcast is another station that is permanently muted. I thought that Entercom broadcasting classical could not be true. Also I searched the call letters on the internet, could not find it currently being used.1archie99 (talk) 14:17, 5 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Still in existence? 

message: This article should be renamed from "KUDL (AM)" to "KWOD".  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.27.198.89 (talk) 17:02, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Rename article

message: :KUDL (AM) →  – Official call letters, - redirect in the way ḾỊḼʘɴίcả • Talk • I DX for fun! 04:25, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Requested move 08 October 2014
Talk:WUNI

message: By 1993, they ran Spanish shows after 12 PM.
Strictly speaking, there is no "12 PM". Is it 12 noon or 12 midnight? Please clarify. Thank you! Rockhopper10r 02:50, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, Noon is "12PM" and Midnight is "12AM" (EmiOfBrie 02:50, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Time clarification needed

message: No claim of independent notability, tower can be mentioned in station article. MB 19:45, 21 December 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed merge of [[:WUNI-TV Tower]] into [[:WUNI]]  

message: *They are going by current virtual channel for information but then weave back and fourth via call sign for history. They both need to be cleaned up tremendously.
Virtual 27, WUTF-TV needs to have all history of channel 27, on the WUTF page, and Virtual 66, WUNI-TV, needs to have all history of channel 66 on their page.
The only difference between the two facilities is the call sign swaps. 
Necrat (talk) 13:43, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: What's your take? Mvcg66b3r (talk) 13:50, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  These articles are an absolute mess
Talk:KPRS

message: KPRS-FM was not known as "Hot 103 Jamz" in the 1970s and 1980s, as the article implies. That slogan came later.  In the era when Freddie Bell and Chris King were recorded DJ's, they called it "K-103" or "The Kansas City Connection." 192.127.94.7 (talk) 17:21, 18 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Nickname
Talk:KRBZ

message: I'm asking for a citation on whether or not he was actually let go because his ratings were down because ratings for midday shows on the radio are never good because people are usually at work or school and cannot listen to the radio during that time unlike the morning show and early evening show when people are usually in their cars.  I've tried to find a source myself but came up empty.  Bhall87Four Scoreand Seven 02:58, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ulanet's Departure 