lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:New Zealand national rugby union team

message: >Request to edit and update the All Blacks info, up to 16 July 2022 AmarikSZN (talk) 10:23, 16 July 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 12:39, 16 July 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 16 July 2022 

message: I reviewed the article as part of the Wikipedia:Unreviewed featured articles/2020/2004–2009 and I found the following problems. If these aren't addressed then the article will need a featured article review in due course.
*The lead contains peacock terms.
*The lead is 6 paragraphs long
*The Hansen era section contains 2 paragraphs that are unreferenced
*The foster era section has no references at all
*The tri nation series contains no references
*The current squad has no references
Desertarun (talk) 20:16, 11 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Wikipedia:Unreviewed featured articles/2020/2004–2009

message: 2023 squad announced today. 49.185.200.83 (talk) 08:13, 18 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  update due 

message: Early in the article it states a winning record of 76%, later on it says 76.95%. Should the first figure be rounded to 77%? Maybe just verify in case I'm mis-reading. 125.238.239.27 (talk) 08:16, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Win rate? 

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: not moved. Per consensus, WP:CONSISTENT.  – robertsky (talk) 13:15, 5 January 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: New Zealand national rugby union team →  – All Blacks is by far the WP:COMMONNAME, and I personally did not understand just by looking at the title that this article was referring to the All Blacks. Looking on Google Scholar, "All Blacks" has 7,180 results whereas "New Zealand national rugby union team" has 39.
This article was moved from All Blacks in 2008, which I disagree with the reasoning for. For one, it cites consistency with other articles which is an argument to avoid, and there is no sports naming convention which gives precedence to the current name. Another point in that discussion was that non-New Zealand countries refer to it as "New Zealand" rather than "All Blacks", but it appears to me that media headlines refer to it as "All Blacks", eg here, here, here, and here, so it shouldn't cause confusion to readers. —Panamitsu (talk) 10:19, 21 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 21 December 2023
Talk:Cheshire Cat

message: In addition to those mentioned in the In science section of this article, for the Cheshire Cat and its disappearing act - in particular its complete fading away, leaving only its smile (which always fascinated me in childhood).
That is: was Caroll's Cheshire Cat a satirical reference to the historical controversy around Bishop Berkeley's work The Analyst? With particular regard to Berkeley's words there "May we not call them the ghosts of departed entities?" This is mentioned by myself and one other in the Talk section for Wikipedia article on The Analyst. CatNip48 (talk) 14:15, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Other theories...
Talk:Sticky and blunt ends/Archive 1

message: * There should probably be a description of the symbols used in the figure.  "ACTG" are the nucletide bases of DNA.  The lower case "p" placed between the bases represents the phosphate group that links the nucleotides.  I inserted the p because I wanted to make it clear that the sticky fragments are not held together by the same forces that hold together the DNA strands.
* Could I suggest that you/we drop the "p"s? I see why you've included them, but it makes it harder to understand, I think. Also, the base-pairs don't line up anyway, in the fourth figure. Loris 17:24, 26 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Describe the symbols
Talk:Rhodium

message: https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/africa/catalytic-converter-theft-south-africa-rhodium/2021/03/03/dc288192-777d-11eb-9489-8f7dacd51e75_story.html
— Jo3sampl (talk) 02:13, 7 March 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Thieves stealing catalytic converters for rhodium (March 2021) Comment Copyedit (minor) 

message: See :c:File:Rhodium 78g sample.jpg. On its talk page, i mention that the description was originally in English and German, and i tried to add Finnish and Spanish, but there was a mistake in the wikicode, and the description didn't show properly. Please fix the wikicode; so that all four languages show, and the description looks the way it should. I repeatedly tried to fix the wikicode, but couldn't. See :c:Template:Multilingual description; i looked at that template, but still couldn't figure out how to fix the wikicode. This might also be helpful(?): :c:Commons:Language policy. Solomonfromfinland (talk) 16:53, 17 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Commons
Talk:Giorgos Seferis

message: 'the best translator of Lord Byron's poetry".
Into what language? Or into any language?
S.
:Into Greek. Seferiadis sr. was Greek, after all. He was also known for translating Ancient Greek texts into demotic Greek (controversial at the time.)Safie
I'm working on expanding this article in parts, so there are currently some sentences still in note form. Any comments/ corrections will be appreciated! Safie 22:31, 16 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: *Do we know something where is origin of Seferis´ family? Does his fathers family came from Pontus or Cappadocia? Because his name is Anatolian. Thanks-  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.151.217.147 (talk) 20:56, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Family Origin

message: This article has been reverted by a bot to  as part of a large-scale clean-up project of multiple article copyright infringement. (See the investigation subpage) This has been done to remove User:Accotink2's contributions as they have a history of extensive copyright violation and so it is assumed that all of their major contributions are copyright violations. Earlier text must not be restored, unless it can be verified to be free of infringement. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions must be deleted. Contributors may use sources 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. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously. VWBot (talk) 05:47, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copyright problem
Talk:Hair

message: What is this article actually about? It has: 1) content about the anatomy and physiology of hairs (hair follicles and all the rest), 2) a bit of content on the function of hair assemblages in mammals, and then 3) a lot of content on the practical and cultural aspects of that stuff humans have on their heads. Combining #1 and #2 in a single article makes sense (though why is that content also present in Fur?). But joining #1 with #3? The only justification I can see is the fact that both are referred to by the same English word, and that's as lousy a justification as it can get. – Uanfala (talk) 11:09, 24 July 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article scope 

message: An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect :Rambut and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 July 24#Rambut until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.  Plantdrew (talk) 16:56, 24 July 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Rambut" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]] 

message: It's crazy that there isn't even a link to hair cells or any discussion of hair's role in hearing. Dgisser (talk) 05:10, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Add section on hearing 

message: — Assignment last updated by Karinakathy05 (talk) 17:04, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: Rhetorical Practices from the Ancient World to Enlightenment

message: "Fia" isn't an acronym, it's the user ID of Annsofie Henriksen (sp?) at Long Hair Community, and should not be written in all caps. phma (talk) 10:20, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fia hairtype system
Talk:Pubic hair

message: Some sections of this article read almost like a attack on pubic hair rather than a source on it! European and American attitudes are treated as a universal norm, as if they don't exist at all and are just how pubic hair is treated everywhere. Even when other cultures are mentioned, the focus is entirely on pubic hair removal and negative attitudes towards it! Eden the plant nerd (talk) 19:23, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: It is very true that generic images of people on Wikipedia tend to be Caucasian Americans and Europeans. I added a picture of an Asian male with natural pubic hair, and it was immediately reverted, despite my note that it was being added to expand the range of races/cultures and appearances included. I do appreciate that most editors and most people who contribute self-images to Wikimedia Commons are male Caucasian Americans and Europeans. I also appreciate that it may be difficult for non-professional photographers to create high quality images of Black skin since a single flash or other light source may not produce good results. The main problem, however, is that there are few Black people who contribute to Wikipedia or Wikimedia Commons, just as there are few women. Tetsuo (talk) 13:33, 17 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Eurocentrism and lack of neutrality 

message: “ In some cultures, it is the norm for pubic hair to be removed, especially of females”
Vague and unfounded assertion without citation, suggest removal until at the very least solid citation is added to back up author’s opinion. The existence of public hair removal or estimated value of hair removal business is not a suitable substitute for proof that removal is the ‘norm’. 92.40.193.96 (talk) 20:15, 26 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vague opinion that removal is ‘the norm’ in ‘some cultures’ (which?) 

message: Shouldn’t the article reflect this? It only specifies the scrotum, but it appears to be quite common for the penis itself to have some hair growth too, and should probably be pointed out since so many men seem to think this isn’t normal. 2603:6010:11F0:3C0:FCF1:F716:4084:D010 (talk) 12:33, 24 June 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: True. In a very quick google search, I couldn't find a reputable source to cite, other than the study that mentions the percentage of men shaving the base of the penile shaft. Healthline mentions "a few hairs" and there some informal discussions (e.g. quora) about whether significant hair on the shaft is abnormal. I will add a quick mention to the intro and cite healthline.Tetsuo (talk) 16:11, 24 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pubic hair can also grow on the base/shaft of the penis 

message: this is a strange wiki. focus should be on health. keep it trimmed and clean so the bugs don't bite. don't pull it out or modify it excessively to create wounds. some people have lots, some dont. big deal. 2604:3D08:367F:F880:44E2:A48D:BA45:A287 (talk) 06:53, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  regular trimming is best health outcome should be highlighted
Talk:Archbishop of Canterbury

message: Tradition seems to dictate that upon stepping down as Primate, the former Archbishop is elevated to the House of Lords. There doesn't seem as clear a precedent for how this is reflected in the heading of the infobox on Wikipedia, however (see Randall Davidson and Cosmo Lang on the one hand, Rowan Williams and George Carey on the other.)
Thoughts? OGBC1992 (talk) 08:45, 27 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ennobled former archbishops
Talk:Goths

message: Even if we come to some clear action plans soon, it seems this topic might come back again, either here or on related articles, and discussions has been anything-but-helped by lumping big quotes into the normal talk page. So I hope this workpage helps: Talk:Goths/Quotes.--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 13:06, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: I've gone ahead and started a new article: Origin of the Goths. There seems to be a clear enough agreement that any attempt to expand discussions of this topic needs to be done somewhere else, and I believe our explanations of the topic need expansion somewhere on Wikipedia if they are to be clear and accurate. Highly compressed versions are constantly going to be controversial distractions. From my work on this new article so far, a single independent article does seem possible. (I am open to other ideas about merging it to other Goth-related articles. Other relevant articles are Origin stories of the Goths, Wielbark culture, Name of the Goths, and Gutones but I think the overlap is OK at this point.) I really hope this helps us in the future. I truly believe it can.--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 10:45, 29 June 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  collecting quotes to help future discussion about pre 3rd century "pre" Goths 

message: , I think all or most of the material you've added is not specifically about Goths but about what we modern people call "Germanic peoples"? Ancient authors did provide distinct descriptions of the Goths, but I think you are using descriptions of other Germanic peoples? Roman authors repeatedly insisted that the Goths were a Scythian people in terms of their customs etc. For example, a major part of the new material is a block of text from Mauricius about the "Fair haired peoples" such as Franks and Lombards. These are western European groups who the Romans did not associate with the Goths. The Strategikon has a different section for discussion about Scythian peoples, and in Book IV this work makes clear that Goths, as in other works, are Scythian. Are you not using the wrong section of the Strategikon? To give an example of a difference, while the fair haired peoples can easily be drawn out of formation by simulated retreats, the Goths are experts in performing such simulated retreats. And rather than being happy to dismount, like the fair-haired peoples, this work claims that because they grow up on horseback, the Scythians are not happy walking around on foot. If on the other hand we say this is not explicitly enough about Goths, that's fine, but we can't use descriptions of western europeans as a stand-in, surely?--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 16:12, 30 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  New section on warfare
Talk:Sarasvati River

message: I have moved sources and links into the entry, since no one else has done so. The statement " TheHelmand River in Afghanistan, which historically bore the name 'sarasvati' " does not tell us who gave it this identification with the Rig Veda river, nor when. Was it so called by locals at an early date? Or was the identification made by an Indian or Arab geographer? Why should we think this has relevance? This is pabulum as it stands. Wetman 01:36, 19 Oct 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Entry

message: The redirect Saraswoti Pokhrel has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at  until a consensus is reached.  Utopes (talk / cont) 19:45, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  "[[:Saraswoti Pokhrel]]" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]] 

message: This is a problem that I noticed with this article. It says that the Sarasvati is a myth, but NASA and ISRO have proven that there was a huge basin through which the river flowed. I myself do not know how to add citations. So I am asking you people to fix it. Badlucksuks (talk) 06:14, 22 April 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: You're right, it should be "mythologized." I've corrected it. Regards, Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 08:48, 22 April 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: thank you Badlucksuks (talk) 17:39, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  False information
Talk:Phoenician chronology

message: 1) It's redundant.  We already have articles on Phoenicia, the Phoenicians, and Carthage.
2) It's inaccurate (radiocarbon dates put the founding of Carthage in the last quarther of the ninth century BCE).
3) It relies on pre-modern sources, which themselves rely almost completely upon tradition, not evidence.
4) It's original research.--Rob117 19:55, 20 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  This should be deleted. 

message: I added the tag with the following things in mind:
# Attempting to add the title of the article into the first sentence in an appropriate manner
# Adding links to other relevant articles in Wikipedia
# Removing HTML and exchaning for Wiki-syntax where possible -- Done. Deskana (talk) 16:21, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cleanup (25 January 2006)
Talk:Billy the Kid

message: He became well known in the region when he joined the Regulators and took part in the Lincoln County War of 1878.
Add link to Lincoln County War Gi edits wiki (talk) 03:15, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Link to Lincoln War Article 

message: 2600:1700:EDB0:A440:53F1:9424:4CE:69BD (talk) 04:54, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Cannolis (talk) 05:34, 3 May 2024 (UTC)

text: The image is not a negative, obviously. The OP should have read the article's Dedrick ferrotype subsection, which says, "The image shows Bonney wearing his holstered Colt revolver on his left side. This led to the belief that he was left-handed, without taking into account that the ferrotype process produces reversed image." It's always a good idea to actually read the article before making comments about it. ;-) Carlstak (talk) 17:02, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 3 May 20244image is the negative he wasright handed 

message: When mentioning Henry McCarty’s baptism his last name is spelled as “McCarthy” 50.123.143.49 (talk) 23:30, 24 May 
2024 (UTC)
: It was more than "typos". It was part of some dubious info added a while ago that was cited to an inaccessible source, and that contradicted every reliable source we do have access to. I also removed some notes based on the dubious source and improperly formatted as refs, which they were not. Thanks for pointing this out. Carlstak (talk) 02:01, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Typos
Talk:List of islands of Indonesia

message: 1. Can the writer or anybody help clarify if this island really exists? 2. I couldn't find anthing about Erà Islands on the Net so far. Can the writer or anybody help? Thanks for your kind attention.ThomasYehYeh (talk) 00:43, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Dungeon's Island" in [[Central Java]]? and "Erà Islands" ?
Talk:Juliette Binoche

message: “ In this period, her persona developed from that of a young gamine to a more melancholic, tragic presence.”
The above is in the article and reads like an opinion.
Is it ok if I remove it?
It doesn’t have a source either.
Paige Matheson (talk) 19:28, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Opinion.
Talk:Epigenetic inheritance

message: I'm trying to figure out if we should draw links between Endosymbiotic hypothesis and here.  As far as I understand, the first organisms who developed endosymbiotic relationships with mitochondria did pass that information to their descendants without it being in the nuclear DNA.  Should I do it? Someone with a better understanding of these topics should let me know.
--Jimaltieri 22:40, 21 Jul 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  inclusion of endosymbiotic hypothesis? 

message: the first time I heard of EI was in a news article about rabbit fur colors being inherited in a lamarckian way.  is this BS?  i can't find any reference to it now.  if it is a real study, can it be described?  
the article says this was also observed in maize, but neither this article or the maize article details it.  i would like more details. - Omegatron 16:33, Feb 13, 2005 (UTC)
The article is fine, but what the heck does this have to do with Lamarck's discredited theory?  I can't see any real relationship between this and any form of Lamarckian inheritance.  Lamarckian inheritance acts as if mutations are created intelligently, for a purpose, and then passed on.  However, that is not the case for epigenetic inheritence at all! - unsigned by 66.155.200.129 at 17:13, 18 October 2005
:You're confusing yourself there, 66.155.200.129. Lamarckian inheritance is the inheritance of acquired characters. Remember the example of the giraffe stretching its neck to reach? Nothing to do with intelligent design. Read the articles and you will see! - Samsara 15:12, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  examples 

message: I think C. H. Waddington's role should be mentioned in this article. - Samsara 00:57, 30 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: History and etymology - Waddington

message: Just found this link (http://www.nature.com/nrd/journal/v5/n1/abs/nrd1930.html) in an article from nature with the subject of epigenetic therapy. You might want to consider if this is an emerging therapeutic field and how this would fit into your plans to merge entries. 
Cheers,
Karl
:Thanks for the link. My first instinct is that someone is probably trying to create buzzwords to get their next research funded under a new banner. The gulf in terminology and conceptual frameworks between conservative population genetics and epigenetics researchers is wide enough as it is. The article as just been appended to the bottom of my reading list, but do write something about it, especially if you feel you can refute my concerns! - Samsara 15:07, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Epigenetic therapy
Talk:List of botanical gardens in the United Kingdom

message: These were introduced in 2005 by , but are nonstandard and should be defined... but as everyone has left them for 18 years I thought I'd check here before spending time delinking them all. PamD 07:31, 11 October 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Eighteen years was a very long time ago! If the headings are inconsistent with today's heading I am content for them to be amended. I was quite new to Wikipedia then and was still working to earn my crust of bread so probably didn't have time to check out the details of the rules in place at that time!  Velella  Velella Talk   22:33, 11 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Links in section headings