lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Government National Mortgage Association

message: "The arrangement seemingly benefits everyone involved" - this word "seemingly" is quite suspicious. As a matter of fact, I like that one, but perhaps some elaboration on the matter would be useful. --Ruziklan 12:13, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Suspicious sentence 

message: This article would be a lot easier to understand if there were some type of flow chart relating the market, ginnie mae, and all the other acronyms.  Right now, it's kind of dense and confusing. Joe056 (talk) 15:47, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Flow diagram 

message: Ginnie Mae securities are the only MBS that are guaranteed by the United States government.
Is this true anymore?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.22.234.171 (talk) 22:40, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Needs Update

message: Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac have been taken over by the government by the "October 7, 2008 conservatorship and the subsequent planned Treasury infusion of capital support the senior liabilities, subordinated indebtedness, and mortgage guarantees of the two firms."  The key term here is "support." The idea is for the GSEs to recover and not require government guarantees. 
This is mentioned in another article on this site.
Jlgood4 (talk) 23:51, 31 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Not as True as It Once Was

message: I deleted the worst of the POV stuff.  It was all added by a single user "BMDC" on April 21st, 2010 in the course of 16 edits, those being the ONLY edits performed by said users.  So I will assume it was a HUD or Ginnie Mae employee who wrote from such a POV view.  However, the article WAS in lousy shape and the user at least cleaned it up and made it presentable. Safiel (talk) 05:13, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  NPOV edits by user BMDC 

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) 00:29, 30 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  removing POV tag with no active discussion per [[Template:POV]] 

message: A request has been submitted to WikiProject United States for a new article to be created on the topic of Housing in the United States. Please join the discussion or consider contributing to the new article. Best regards, -- M2545 (talk) 09:04, 4 November 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Notification: [[Housing in the United States]]
Talk:Dodie Smith

message: Nickname because the surname is Smith and the first name is Dorothy, also because the common plaintiff in an action of ejectment was Doe d. Smith  v Roe (i.e. Doe - nominal plaintiff - on the demise of Smith - the real plaintiff v Roe - the casual ejector) Tsinfandel (talk) 22:32, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Doe d. Smith 

message: In the "Early Life" part of the article, it states that Dodie Smith was an only child. Later on the article reads, "she and her sister converted to Christian Science". Is this possibly a stepsister? A child of the second husband?
207.233.123.254 (talk) 22:44, 1 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sister? 

message: The text includes (as at 9 February 2012) the following statement: "Her fourth play, Call It A Day,  was put on by the Theatre Guild on January 28, 1936, and ran for 194 performances."  The 'Theatre Guild' wikilink leads to the New York Theatre Guild, which seems improbable for this stage in Smith's career, and is not supported by indirect evidence (e.g. the synopsis of the contents of the December 1935 issue of the UK-based 'Theatre World').  Further, there seem to be numerous UK-based Theatre Guilds to choose from without the bother of crossing the Atlantic.  Can anyone check this out, and correct it? --Simon the Likable (talk) 20:03, 8 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Which Theatre Guild? 

message: Dodie was very healthy as a child 82.18.5.59 (talk) 11:14, 24 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Health
Talk:Hampstead Garden Suburb

message: The list is impressive- anyone who is anybody has lived in HGS. I spent a night as a guest there in 1973 if that helps! The issue is that this is a top level article on Architecture, and Urban studies  and in that context, it is inappropriate. It says nothing about the world wide relevance of this architectural innovation. Use the English heritage map search to examine each of the listed buildings in NW11. Each of these is notable enough to have a mention.
London is more problematic. All London boroughs display separate lists. Camden has a lists of lists article Lists of people from Camden.  Hampstead displays a separate list linked through # See also#  as was copied here.  There is also a link on the Lists of people from Camden. List of people from Barnet could benefit from linking to List of notable people who have lived in Hampstead Garden Suburb 
But Brixton is an example of an article where the list hasn't yet been floated.
My other worry is the undue weight given in to flash-in-the-pan media celebs who will be gone long  before the building crumble, who crowd out people like Lord Justice Levenson. I will discuss this at the London 103 Meetup and see if we can more clarity.--ClemRutter (talk) 07:39, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: List of notable people who have lived in Hampstead Garden Suburb
Talk:The Capture (novel)

message: I've removed Jake from Ax's acquired morphs because there's no concrete evidence to show that Ax actually acquired Jake's DNA. Jake/Temrash remove Ax's hand as soon as it is placed upon him, and knowing what we do about Frolis morphs, it wouldn't make sense for Ax to have Jake's DNA acquired twice. --Matt 16:10, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually Jake/Temrash does not remove Ax's hand. Despite the outburst, he doesn't move because Ax's tailblade is already at his throat. -- Noneofyourbusiness 03:44, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Besides, in #8, it is mentioned that Ax morphs into Jake, Cassie mentioning that he acquired him beforehand. 152.31.229.30 18:28, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Ax morphing Jake
Talk:The Starlight Barking

message: I suspect this book was first published earlier than 1967, this may just be the date of first publication with one specific publisher. PatGallacher (talk) 14:28, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll take a look into it, though a 1997 article states " Now in re-release: ``THE STARLIGHT BARKING, by Dodie Smith (St. Martin's, $8.95), the original 1967 sequel to ``The Hundred and One Dalmatians." -- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 14:36, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Date

message: Well, I thought my additions to establish notability were quite reasonable.  Should we treat these issues with a degree of flexibility? PatGallacher (talk) 17:58, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The review is a self-published site from an unknown person. It fails WP:RS and can not be used to establish notability. An Amazon search result does not establish notability either, nor do we include such links in book articles. -- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 18:02, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

text: That doesn't mean the sequel is notable enough to have its own article. As it stands now, what info we have on the sequel could be condensed and put in a subsection of the main 101 Dalmations article. Remember, notability does not confer. Smith isn't so widely published/recognized an author that all of her works are considered instantly notable, nor is this sequel piece showing signs that it gathered any notability at all, despite being a sequel to a classic. (I rather liked it myself, but I like odd pieces sometimes LOL). -- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 18:23, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

text: There is no valid reason to make an exception here. The review is self-published. If we allow those links, people would flood the encyclopedia with their blogs and personal websites. For Amazon, that isn't necessary at all. The article itself should discuss multiple publications, but even without the link, we already have a link that provides all of that info - the ISBN link. And, unlike Amazon, it links to a neutral, non-commercial listing. -- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 18:35, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Notability
Talk:BaBar experiment

message: Shouldn't the amount of stored charge be measured in Coulomb rather than in Ampere? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 132.187.47.100 (talk • contribs) 12:21, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually no. It's stored current. The electrons move around the storage rings, and so Ampere is the correct terminology. It is also what the BaBar experiment call it. aLii 15:27, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

message: Is there any value to the long list of institutions? It really detracts from the readability of the page, and it will be a pain to keep accurate. At the least, shouldn't it be moved to its own page? -- Josh Thompson 17:50, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually it won't change, BaBar turned off a few months ago, so this article needs an overhaul to the past tense.  I agree about the readability, but I don't think it deserves its own page, we just need to put it in a table format.  The readability will increase if some things are added: the DIRC, motivation for the experiment, the dataset... I'll tell you what, I'll be working on my thesis in a couple of months.  I'll try and give it a great overhaul then, if no one gets to it first.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.146.33.130 (talk) 21:25, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: To be accurate it changed this year. The university of Tel Aviv (Israel) and Guwahati (India) joined the Collaboration this year. That the experiment stopped data taking does not mean that the collaboration is dead!  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.226.86.237 (talk) 17:19, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Institutions List 

message: Why did it shutdown in 2008 ? (frustrating given the 3.4 sigma report in 2012) Why was the integrated luminosity less in final few years ?  Could mention in a history section ? - Rod57 (talk) 21:08, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why did it shutdown in 2008
Talk:Shelter (automobile)

message: So we're talking about a mirocar a la Isetta then eh?  Not bad.  Wo this was a short project?  Too bad. -Daniel Blanchette 18:20, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: This sotry is partly true was it not for that Van der Goot build a car first for himself and only afterward started planning building a car in a series. It was first intended for sale, but the press was not so gentle to the project. Only then it was thought of renting the car out. It took a trained mechanic about 15 minutes to exchange the gearbox/motorunit.
Only 4 were ever build, of which one survived, another one was later build from spare parts.
Ref: Autodesign in Nederland by Jan Lammerse 89.100.130.31 20:51, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Partly true
Talk:Hassassin

message: Please read the article at WP:MUSIC carefully, and update this article (or revert it to a redirect if the band is not yet notable.) --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 12:34, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I have searched with Google for the band, and have also looked in vain for a discography or media mentions on their website (it is a shame I don't read Polish.)  The original contributor has had a week to provide notability information, so I am restoring the redirect to Hashshashin.  --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 09:45, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Notability
Talk:Hall Place

message: This concerns POV tag cleanup.  Whenever an POV tag is placed, it is necessary to also post a message in the discussion section stating clearly why it is thought the article does not comply with POV guidelines, and suggestions for how to improve it.  This permits discussion and consensus among editors.  This is a drive-by tag, which is discouraged in WP, and it shall be removed. Future tags should have discussion posted as to why the tag was placed, and how the topic might be improved.  Better yet, edit the topic yourself with the improvements.  This statement is not a judgement of content, it is only a cleanup of frivolously and/or arbitrarily placed tags.  No discussion, no tag.Jjdon (talk) 18:53, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  POV tag 

message: I have tagged this article for attention. It lacks references, and there have been numerous edits by a user, BexleyHeritage, who's name (breaching Wikipedia user name guidance) suggests a close affiliation with the subject of the article. Some of these edits appear to be promotional, adding unencyclopaedic content to the article.Paul W (talk) 10:50, 12 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Multiple issues and possible COI
Talk:Treaty of Moscow (1920)

message: I will ask details about the treaty from Karakhan's wife, Marina Semyonova, next time I visit Moscow :) --Ghirla -трёп- 12:39, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm sure she will reveal many secrets concerning the forceful Sovietization of Georgia. :)--Kober 13:04, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No, she will reveal many secrets concerning the forceful Georgization of Russia at the time when a certain "wonderful Georgian" (actually, a few of them) ruled the sixth part of the inhabited world. --Ghirla -трёп- 15:08, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Forceful Georgization of Russia?? Heh, I like your sense your humor. That "wonderful Georgian" (©Khrushchev) actually considered himself "Russian" or sometimes "Russified Georgian" while Lenin referred to him as Great Russian Chauvinist. Try to check some easily verifiable sources other than Soviet "history" textbooks and I promise you will find many interesting things you’ve never heard of. Regards, --Kober 15:16, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

text:  Hehehe that was good one LOOOL :) ok, Alas the comical, I reviewed your references actually and they are properly used. Great Job ones again Kober. You should also use David Langs, A History of Modern Georgia. Thanks Kober, keep up with your great contributions. Ldingley 15:36, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thanks a lot. I actually used Lang's work as a reference. The 1921 Soviet invasion also occupies several pages in this book and I'll use this info for the upcoming Soviet-Georgian War article. Btw, I've also found a Russian translation of the records of the 1950s US Congress hearings on the Soviet Occupation of Georgia. I've never heard of this document before.--Kober 15:43, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

text: Kober, sorry I missed Lang’s references. The US senate document existed a long time and I actually used it for my thesis in 1995 at York University. Ldingley 16:01, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Really? Did those hearings lead to any decision? As far as I know the US never officially recognized the Sovietization of Georgia as an occupation. Thanks, --Kober 16:17, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Tile Hill railway station

message: It is a nice picture, but the train obscures the railway station. Snowman 12:45, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I have replaced it with a picture of most of the station from the new road bridge. Snowman 09:53, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Image

message: The dates and names given prior to  were consistent with those given in Butt (1995), pp. 15, 230 - that is: 9 April 1838 opened as Allesley Gate; 1 September 1863 renamed Allesley Lane; 1 April 1864 renamed Tile Hill.
The edit mentioned above was presumably sourced to this page which is self-contradictory regarding the pre-1864 names. The first paragraph has "Initially it was named Allesley Lane station and then in 1857 renamed as Allesley Gate" in the second sentence, but later reverses this to "Allesley Gate station renamed Allesley Lane". --Redrose64 (talk) 08:34, 16 March 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I was just going with what the source said. They can't both be right surely?! Are there any more sources? G-13114 (talk) 23:35, 16 March 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: The problem is that your source is self-contradictory. --Redrose64 (talk) 13:54, 17 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Early names
Talk:Goodnough Dike

message: I'll upload images tonight. LymanSchool 12:47, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

message: This dike is non-notable.  There are only 858 GHits on this name, some of which reference a romance novel by the same name.  This article also lacks any references.  Rather than AFD, it could easily be merged into Quabbin Reservoir, a much more appropriate course of action. Mmoyer 00:38, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge into [[Quabbin Reservoir]] 
Talk:Unary operation

message: I added a phrase on the notion of "single input" which seems not very meaningful to me.
An example should be added (e.g. a "binary" (mathematical) function defined on AxB is a unary function defined on E where E=AxB ; a function proc(name,age,address) could as well be written as a function proc(person) where person = struct{name,age,address}, and of course this is already true in a hidden way for several "hidden" complex types (complex number = (real part,imag part), long int = (low word, high word), etc.))
It could be discussed whether this might not apply to functions with various types of "arguments" (in / inout / out) (where the latter are in fact an "improper" way to return the output). — MFH:Talk 12:50, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

message: Isn't factorial an unary oparation? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.177.121.50 (talk) 14:06, 16 November 2006‎
:I was just about to ask the same thing! It is probably the example most people know, so I think it would make a good example, unless it actually isn't. Does anybody know? --WikiDonn (talk) 02:25, 25 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes it is, now included, with extension. — Rgdboer (talk) 02:58, 2 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Factorial
Talk:Esphigmenou

message: The article on the Esphigmenou Monastery is very far from beeing neutral. The autor does not hide that he is a supporter of the monastery, he accuses the present patriarch of Constantinople of beeing an heretic etc. I think an entirely new article, worthy of Wikipedia, should be written by a competent person. As this monastery is quite a lot in the international medias, I think it is important.
Fratersolberg 11:23, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The article is too far from being neutral. It has been edited by anons expressing the radical view of the Esphigmenites. It does not need cleanup or de-POV-ing, it needs a complete rewrite... --Michalis Famelis (talk) 15:08, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  NPOV dispute  

message: I have completed a full rewrite of the article. IMHO it is in much better shape now. At any rate, any feedback is welcome. --Michalis Famelis (talk) 19:17, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Complete rewrite 

message: There has been some recent edits moving from one bias to another, now to an extreme. Things are going to have to change, the article is full of unsourced, POV pushing material at this point. I will post some problems later and see what can be agreed on? 75.73.114.111 (talk) 12:53, 25 February 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Things have been much improved thanks to "Dr.K" who cut out POV pushing from both sides. One thing though, I feel we should supply links to not only the main website for the current occupants, but also for the second group who also claim the monastery but do not currently occupy it. So, you can see I added both links in, so you can see both sites and both sides. I hope "Dr.K" agrees with this.75.73.114.111 (talk) 20:46, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Terrible POV bias after recent edits
Talk:H10 Bletcham Way

message: How does it not cite? There is nothing to cite - the route description is a combination of a map of milton keynes and my own knowledge... User:Tom walker 14:00, October 17 2006
:I realise the above comment is 7 years old but for the benefit of new editors reading it - "my own knowledge" is not allowed as a basis for content in Wikipedia, as it is impossible for others to verify; although of course it may be used to challenge factually inaccurate content presented by others. If it is based on reading a printed map then the publication data of said map should be included as a citation, particularly the year of its publication as road layouts do get changed from time to time. The article is still under-cited and needs a reference to a published source (being a bit more detailed than just the coordinates, as bare urls are prone to link rot). Baldy Bill (sharpen the razor|see my reflection) 08:36, 6 October 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah I'd never say that nowadays. At the time Wiki policy was far less clearly outlined. Anyway I've changed it now to a ref to the MK City Atlas that I have. Tom walker (talk) 09:55, 6 October 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for that, also added infobox and extra ref, duly reassessed as start-class. Baldy Bill (sharpen the razor|see my reflection) 15:48, 6 October 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Michel Sarrazin

message: If anyone has the inclination, modern scientific names should be found to support this part of the text: 
"Other discoveries included l’Arum Canadense, which could treat tumours, l’Aralia Canadensis, which treats ulcers, l’Aster corora, for epileptic seizures, and l’Angelica Canadensis tenufolia asphodeli radice which can be used as a sedative. Moreover, the native people of New France taught Sarrazin that the sap from Arbor acadiensis could be used to treat sores."  
-- AKW-ward (talk) 17:41, 27 November 2018 (UTC)
Talk:Nick Cravat

message: The date '98' is listed after Cravat's birth date in the info box. Since he died in 1994, he would have been about age 82, as listed after the day of of his death below in that same box. I tried to edit out the '98' , but it didn't it appear on my edit version of the Cravat page. Perhaps someone else can solve this. I'd like to know why '98' doesn't shown on the (or at least my) edit page.
Jonxwood (talk) 02:23, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unable to Edit Error in Nick Cravat's Info box