lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Ghosts 'n Goblins (video game)

message: The screenshot on this page is listed as a candidate for speedy delete. I don't know why. There's no speedy delete template anywhere, the image is not listed in the speedy delete queue. In short, there's no mention at all of this image being speedy deleted anywhere on wikipedia other than in the caption. Why? 198.182.30.82 15:28, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Speedy Delete?

message: No mention of it in the article. PrometheusX303 08:46, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gold Armor 

message: (please forgive any language errors, because I'm brazilian)
I think the Astaroth's true name is SATAN, because when you finish the game by the first time, you can read somethig like: This room is an illusion and a trap devised by SATAN.
Actually in all Japanese sources I've seen, Satan is the name of the demon that kidnaps the princess. 76.50.87.96 20:00, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  I don't know, but 

message: Someone added a pararaph about the actor Sam Witwer and his RPG-playing friends... or something like that, it isn't made very clear. To be honest, I don't see how it's relevant to the article except for the minor mention of the game, so I'm removing it and the source it cites. --RoyalFool (talk) 19:09, 2 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Regarding the Legacy section 

message: This entire section is already covered in and better suited for the Ghosts 'n Goblins (series) article, as it basically boiled down to listing every single sequel/spin-off and cameo appearance. As everything is already stated in the series article, I replaced the section with a link to that article and a brief descriptive paragraph.71.190.182.22 (talk) 03:52, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Legacy Section 

message: Why does it say Micronics developed this?  Capcom did their own ports for Famicom and both the Japanese and American versions only have Capcom copyright on the title screen (with Nintendo of America license on NES). JoeD80 (talk) 07:46, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Famicom / NES version 
Talk:Static Age

message: This article mentions the Jerry Only approved mixes that are bass prominent. But these mixes were circulating in bootlegs during the late 80's and early 90's. An online article said that Danzig played some tracks from the Static Age sessions in the late 80's on a radio show and I suspect that this is where the bootlegs came from (they sounded like they came from the radio) and the mix sounded exactly the same as the "bass heavy Jerry Only approved" mixes. I think this is why I liked the bootleg mixes better than the Legacy of Bruitality mixes despite the really bad quality of the boots (but none of us knew that static age would ever be officially released). So correct me if I'm wrong but I think the Jerry Only approved mixes are the originals. Gabriel77 14:08, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Mixes

message: In the doorway was "never bootlegged"? Then how was I able to download it?Whotookthatguy 12:19, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd venture a guess that bit of information is referring to the instance before the advent of its release on compact disc and in an age where many individuals with a computer have software intended for ripping audio to their hard drives. 75.2.56.35 05:45, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  in the doorway 
Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Frosthold

message: How long before a decision is made?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Robsteadman (talk • contribs) 
:Usually, if consensus to delete is reached in five days, the article is deleted.  See WP:GAFD.   —Quarl (talk) 2006-01-13 21:05Z
So can this now be deleted? All agreed? if so how does it get deleted? Robsteadman 19:12, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  How do we delete now as there is agreement? Robsteadman 17:32, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
Talk:Motor Sich Airlines

message: There's a total mess on the page: Motor-Sich is the world-famous aircraft engines producer in Zaporizhzhia (see also Progress design bureau, Antonov, Antonov An-70 etc.) The small and barely interesting airline that article is about was only established in the 1990s in order to diversify the business. Please somebody correct. Ukrained 14:43, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. Motor-Sich is about company. Probably need to do some page moves/relinking to make it clearly different. --TAG 22:55, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Tir Na Nog (video game)

message: Does anyone know anything about the mooted mid-nineties PC remake of "Tir Na Nog"? - Zagrebo 14:46, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

message: Where from can be found these screenshots? i couldn't find them...
(In early 1990s, Psygnosis Software planned to release a PC remake of the game, but the project was abandoned. Several promotional screenshots from it remain on the Web today.)  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nitrofurano (talk • contribs) 10:38, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The lack of specifics means that this was likely a hoax. I've deleted the statement. However, the Next Generation article I just added as a reference does have several screenshots of the PC remake.--Martin IIIa (talk) 14:30, 2 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Psygnosis remake
Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Missing encyclopedic articles/Missing diseases

message: How was this list generated? Quadell 15:08, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: See Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Missing encyclopedic articles#How to easily create a new list? --WS 00:26, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

message: IS complete. However can someone check the ones I did anyway (just have a look and see if what I did is fine, dont need to be critical, just point out any big mistake... like for eg... hey why is 3c syndrome redirecting to camels). I thought of just leaving them on, but i wanted to remove them to make it look as if I acomplished something :). Anyway here they are.
# 3 methylglutaconyl coa hydratase deficiency
# 3-hydroxy 3-methyl glutaryl-coa lyase deficiency
# 3-hydroxyacyl-coa dehydrogenase deficiency
# 3-methyl crotonyl-coa carboxylase deficiency
# 3c syndrome
# 3m syndrome
# 46 xx gonadal dysgenesis epibulbar dermoid
If all under order what do we do with the actual page? Do we delete it of wikipedia or? Thanks for ur attention.Calaka (talk) 13:23, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Page 12
Talk:History of Earth

message: Change "cloesely" to "closely". 2804:D49:8270:8100:88CD:D1CD:AD0:7938 (talk) 14:53, 2 December 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. Thanks for pointing this out. Dudley Miles (talk) 15:08, 2 December 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 2 December 2022 

message: Not sure where that diagram came from but why is it circular? I guess it looks kinda cool but I don't really know what it adds and it seems like it makes things a bit more confusing/implies something weird or misleading things about earth's history. Seems like a normal flat/straight timeline diagram would be better Finnigami (talk) 04:29, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why is the image circular?
Talk:Dirt Rag

message: This article needs to be a little less biased.  --Ray 15:02, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Comment
Talk:The Dawn Patrol (1930 film)

message: :".. when it finally became legal for it to be viewed once again."
Why wasn't it legal to view the movie? Had this anything to do with the Motion Picture Production Code? If so, I guess this only applies to the US audience? And when was this ban lifted? --Antheii (talk) 13:37, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Not legal to view? 

message: I intend to revise the article substantially. Comments? FWiW Bzuk (talk) 15:32, 11 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Rewrite

message: In the photo of the three actors by the plane, the man on the right is not Neil Hamilton (who played Major Brand). It looks like Gardner James, who played Ralph Hollister.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 144.92.226.122 (talk) 03:42, 25 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cast in Photo 
Talk:Twentieth Century (film)

message: This page was moved from Twentieth Century (film) to 20th Century (film) on January 4, 2015. The edit summary on the move reads, "Very clearly written this way in all sources". That isn't actually true; in any print or online source I've seen, the title matches that of the play. These print sources include Halliwell's Film Guide (page 852), Clive Hirschhorn's The Columbia Story (page 55), Pauline Kael's 5001 Nights at the Movies (page 796), and The Film Encyclopedia by Ephraim Katz. Here are a few that are online:
* American Film Institute
* British Film Institute
* The New York Times
* Turner Classic Movies
Few internal links point directly to 20th Century (film), but I will correct any that do after I move the page back. — WFinch (talk) 19:24, 4 April 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: ''Twentieth Century'' (film)

message: I don't know who decided this is a "screwball comedy." It's a parody and a satire on the Broadway play business, with Barrymore parodying himself with overacting and ridiculous dramatic dialog. Lombard, in the spirit of things, overacts, too. There are no, or very few, slapstick scenes. Perhaps the best one is when Barrymore picks his nose. That might be his opinion of the whole thing, too. It has very little in common with "Bringing Up Baby" or "His Girl Friday." It's not the screwball comedy you're looking for. Wastrel Way (talk) 01:05, 2 March 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: The British Film Institute seems to think it is: "Two films in 1934 are said to have kickstarted the screwball wave: It Happened One Night ... and Howard Hawks’s Twentieth Century". So does film critic Emanuel Levy, who wrote an article titled "Twentieth Century (1934): Howard Hawks’ Top Screwball Comedy, Starring John Barrymore and Carole Lombard". Clarityfiend (talk) 06:25, 2 March 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Screwball comedy?
Talk:Man's Favorite Sport?

message: Quote:  About the starlet for whom he had forgone the Paramount deal, Hawks summarized: "I think that Paula Prentiss is good.  She ought to be a big comedy star.  I don't know what's the matter."
I have removed this sentence as no mention of a forgone Paramount deal is made in the rest of the article. Maikel (talk) 16:58, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Paramount deal?

message: Quote:  Upon its release on February 5, 1964, Man's Favorite Sport? performed acceptably but not exceptionally (as had Hawk's previous film Hatari!).
I have removed the Hatari! reference as it is not clear what's meant by it:
*Hatari! had performed acceptably, like MFS?
*Hatari! had performed exceptionally, unlike MFS?
Someone please fix this, thanks, Maikel (talk) 18:00, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Hatari!
Talk:El Dorado (1966 film)

message: Well this is a horrible article, whoever wrote it obviously skipped the part about uses sources and not using your opinions. It sounds like the article was written by a reviewer rather than someone who used reviews as sources.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.137.207.191 (talk) 20:35, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: 1967 or 1966? Anna Frodesiak (talk) 00:44, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I moved it to 1966, everything else said 1966. JesseRafe (talk) 21:26, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  According to the article, it was released in 1967, though, which would make it a 1967 release.  When there's a lag between the filming and the release of a movie, the custom is to always go with the release date, which is why Red River is listed as a 1948 film instead of a 1946 one, for one John Wayne example. For another, there's Jet Pilot, which was essentially shot by Josef von Sternberg starring John Wayne and Janet Leigh in 1949 and 1950, with more subsequent work contributed by other, unbilled directors at the behest of Howard Hughes. The movie was basically finished by 1953 but Hughes kept making changes until it was finally released in 1957.  It's considered a 1957 film despite the fact that all the aircraft, which was originally going to be cutting-edge and up to the minute, were completely out of date to the point that it was actually a period piece by the time it was released, with everything utterly outdated. My point is, I think it would be safe to call El Dorado a 1967 film.  And by the way, there's an obvious reason Hawks wouldn't summarize the plot for Mitchum: he didn't want Mitchum to realize that it was a remake of Rio Bravo, in which Dean Martin had played Mitchum's part. Racing Forward (talk) 01:18, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article name and lede disagree
Talk:Drums Along the Mohawk

message: This article has had its infobox tag removed by a cleanup using AWB.
Any concerns please leave me a message at my talk page. RWardy 19:43, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removal of "needs infobox" tag 

message: Currently the article is about the movie, there should be an article split off for the novel. There are differences in the plot between the novel and the movie. BradMajors (talk) 07:52, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Split Article

message: This article about the movie and any article about the novel should mention that both are based upon historical fact, as the author relates.  A colonist out hunting chanced to see a large Native American Indian war party coming to attack his settlement to destroy it.  He fired his flintlock and dropped it in a stream, hoping to retrieve it later, and then took off running.  A line of eight or nine warriors with tomahawks jogged after him. In such chases, the rule was that one Indian brave would sprint forward to kill, forcing the prey to sprint.  This pattern would continue until the prey was winded, and a warrior could then sprint forward and kill the prey, usually with a thrown tomahawk.  But this hunter, whose name may have been Adam Helmer, was too big and too long of leg to catch: he succeeded in escaping all of his pursuers and got back to warn his fellow settlers. So when the war party got there, they found all of the settlers inside their fort with loaded guns awaiting them.  This is roughly what happened and is based upon my reading the novel two decades ago and then researching the incident.  As with many frontier incidents, not much more is known than is here related, not even if he was ever able to retrieve his flintlock.  Perhaps that is why it was a great incident upon which to base a novel.
rumjal 16:23, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: History

message: One should try to be historically accurate when discussing the historical accuracy of a work of fiction. The Loyalist regiment known as Butler's Rangers did not participate in St. Leger's expedition since permission to raise a regiment was not granted to John Butler until September 1777. During St. Leger's expedition, Butler commanded a contingent of British Indian Department rangers.
The Balliston Raid occurred in 1780 so could not have been a motivation for the 1779 Sullivan Campaign. The Attack on German Flatts (1778) is a better example. Griffin's Sword (talk) 17:16, 13 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Historical Accuracy
Talk:They Were Expendable

message: I think that the phrase "This film is considered by some to be Wayne's best performance." doesn't belong into the plot summary, so I put into the Preview-section.83.181.79.184 11:05, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: the other PTs were 78ft Huckins PT boats not Higgins PTs. They were expendable  the movie. 2600:1012:B140:3C8C:1D70:CF56:537C:9951 (talk) 06:24, 5 July 2023 (UTC)
Talk:Fort Apache (film)

message: I'm not sure that John Wayne shows contempt at the end of the film.  I think he expresses respect for Thursday's bravery and perhaps his discipline in the regiment. At the end we see Wayne wearing the French Foreign Legion kepi that Thursday favored as headgear. I think his contempt is more for the reporters.
Peter Reilly (talk) 21:25, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: John Wayne

message: Somebody needs to add a reference or more than one please, that this film is about Custer and the Battle of the Little Bighorn, etc.  Why isn't this film about the real fort and the battles fought with the White Mountain and San Carlos Apache?   Somebody needs to add some good references for this kind of statement. 4.240.117.70 (talk) 02:41, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  RE: Custer and The Battle of Little Bighorn, etc. 

message: At the end of the movie the child is played by John Terry Lepire.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ludgerltd (talk • contribs) 04:34, 2 November 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Shirley Temple & John Agar's Child
Talk:Mogambo

message: The word "Mogambo" does not occur in Swahili.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.179.49.237 (talk) 10:37, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Mogambo was the name of a popular Hollywood nightclub in the 1950s and 1960s. I'm sure the production crew just thought it sounded exotic and African and so borrowed the name. 69.125.134.86 (talk) 15:56, 4 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fake word 

message: See http://africanlanguages.com/swahili
This notes that the word does not occur in Swahili.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.179.49.237 (talk) 10:47, 31 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Details 

message: We are currently working on THE TRANSLATION into Spanish of this article. Translation work will be ready by the end of May 2013. For more information see Wikipedia:School_and_university_projects/Universitat_Jaume_I_-_E-translating PLEASE, DO NOT TRANSLATE THIS PAGE. IF YOU DO SO, PLEASE INFORM US AT Mcptrad --Mcptrad (talk) 12:08, 11 April 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Translation Class Project

message: This film was created while the Hays code was still in effect and it shows the "true love" couple to be one committing adultery. According to the film codes, audiences were never supposed to sympathize with "immoral" characters so I'm surprised it's not noted here that there was any controversy about this film or how it effect Grace Kelly's career. 69.125.134.86 (talk) 15:58, 4 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  No controversy? 

message: Mogambo was released in 1953 with an aspect ratio of 1.37 which contrasts with the 1.85 (or higher) aspect ratios of most films produced since 1953. I attempted to add the aspect ratio information to the Wiki Info Box (between the categories running time and country) but the editing software did not seem to allow this particular change. So, whoever is able to add the aspect ratio category to the Wiki Info Box can do so at their disgression.
Knowing the aspect ratio may be a help to those viewing the film on a regular cable-tv or satellite channel. Some services may show 1.37-aspect films in the middle of the screen surrounded by black areas, while other services may show such films utilizing the entire TV screen. 
BTW -- the source of Mogambo's aspect ratio data is found here  ... http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0046085/technical
You can easily google search IMDB for the aspect ratio data on nearly all films as follows
IMDB (Movie title) (year) technical
Thanx-A-Lot, Fgf2007 (talk) 22:51, 15 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Add Aspect Ratio Data to Info Box
Talk:Two Rode Together

message: Oh, dear. She pops up from nowhere, and that sentence is not in English as we know it.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.97.124.193 (talk) 13:28, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Belle

message: Woah nelly. That production section seems like it was authored by a complete troll. "One of the film's most renowned and impressive shots has been credited solely to Ford's mean streak"? Seriously? I haven't seen the film or read much about it, but someone who has should rewrite this and add citations. Toscaesque (talk) 21:14, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Production section

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) 14:59, 15 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  removing POV tag with no active discussion per [[Template:POV]]
Talk:All the Pretty Horses (novel)

message: This is an automated message regarding an image used on this page. The image :File:All the pretty horses mccarthy cover.jpg, found on :All the Pretty Horses, has been nominated for deletion because it does not meet Wikipedia image policy. Please see the image description page for more details. If this message was sent in error (that is, the image is not up for deletion, or was left on the wrong talk page), please contact this bot's operator.  STBotI (talk) 17:06, 28 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: An image on this page may be deleted

message: What exactly happens to the fourth horse, the one John Grady got from the Purisima hacienda, when he escapes with the captured captain?
It's on page 273 (in my version): "He took the waterbottles and he slid the bridle down off the grullo's head and caught it and he stroked the grullo under the jaw. I hate to leave you old pardner, he said. You been a goodn." 
He leaves the horse in the arroyo in the desert when he builds the construction for triggering the pistol. But why, and what exactly is that construction for? Is the horse part of the construction, e.g., triggering the pistol shot when their followers try to capture the horse? Or is he using the construction to shoot the horse (without the other three horses knowing)? If so, why (was it wounded, ot has it become too much of a burden), and how could he ensure that the bullet hits it?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.231.139.122 (talk) 14:41, 15 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  What happened with the fourth horse? 

message: my sense is that due to her hand being injured she never married.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.37.99.86 (talk) 02:17, 19 February 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is the aunt a widow?
Talk:The Apple Dumpling Gang (film)

message: This article had no movie poster image, so I supplied one.  Unfortunately, the image I retrieved from impawards.com is not the best; it has rather visible creases and wash-out from glare.  If someone could find a better version of the original movie poster, I would appreciate it.  Reimelt 17:45, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Image of Film Poster

message: Having just watched this movie, I noticed that Henry Morgan, fresh off of shooting M.A.S.H. episodes, calls to a woman in the final shootout.  He calls her "Mildred," which was the name of his character's wife on M.A.S.H.  I wonder if this was done on purpose?
:I don't know about the connection with the name "Mildred", but Harry Morgan had already finished this movie by the time he joined the cast of "MASH".  This movie was released in the summer of 1975, and Morgan joined "MASH" in the fall of that year.67.45.113.180 (talk) 16:59, 6 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Trivia?

message: I read somewhere that this movie was set in 1878.  The California Gold Rush was in 1849.67.45.113.180 (talk) 16:57, 6 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  California Gold Rush? 

message: These edits introduced conflicts with the official Disney website for the film, including adding a director and cast member not listed by Disney, as well as describing an appearance by a character that did not appear until a future Disney film, played by the unlisted cast member.
Jaoakley (talk) 02:05, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reverted edits by 71.49.156.126