lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:To Have and to Hold (Johnston novel)

message: The article says:
To Have and to Hold is a 1900 novel by American author, Mary Johnston. Published by Houghton Mifflin, according to the New York Times it was the bestselling novel in the United States that year.
But according to this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_bestselling_novels_in_the_United_States_in_the_1900s
The book was featured in that list, and it says that list is "as determined by Publishers Weekly". Indianparttime2 (talk) 06:13, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: "...According to the New York Times.."

message: The citations listed for the apparent 2011 movie adaptations both lead to 404's (deadlinks). Might want to get a better source?
WikiJoeBee (talk) 22:51, 2 October 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Deadlinks 

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: moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) Lennart97 (talk) 09:40, 4 November 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 27 October 2021 

message: The article says the Governor sets Ralph free, so Ralph then goes to Virginia although he is forced to "remain in a gaol" but then is lured into a trap and captured. That doesn't seem to completely make sense. How can he remain in a gaol if he wasn't put into the gaol in the first place? Is he still in the gaol when he is lured into the trap and captured? It might also be best to avoid the archaic word "gaol", even if the novel uses it. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 23:13, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is Ralph free or remaining in gaol, and is he captured while he is in the gaol?
Talk:The Primrose Ring (film)

message: Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0008460/. Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.)
For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, and, if allowed under fair use, may copy sentences and phrases, provided they are included in quotation marks and referenced properly. The material may also be rewritten, providing it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Therefore, such paraphrased portions must provide their 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, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you.  /wiae 🎄 01:32, 14 February 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copyright problem removed
Talk:Riders of the Purple Sage

message: the word 'lassiter' hows been referenced a number of times for a gun; what brought me here was the Trash (Firefly) episode where they refer to the laser as a 'lassiter'. can anyone comment to the cultural/historical reference this book has made on such things? JoeSmack Talk 18:06, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The first 30 hits on this search make a prima-facie case against there being any reference outside the Firefly universe, other than Lassiter being a widely known surname in English-speaking countries.   The only reason i did my search is that no one has recorded any report on such a search, and even if i am not the only one to try it, my response should limit the collective effort of further editors (who otherwise might hope you were more likely than not to have a worthwhile hunch), to those prepared to bet on what i think i have demonstrated to be a wikt:long shot#noun.--Jerzy•t 10:00, 27 December 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Lassiter" in modern times 

message: I intend to continue adding to the Plot Summary and Infobox until they are complete. I have something written up about Major Themes, which I'll post soon in the future. I release the Plot Summary and Themes under the GFDL.
Avisitor2 03:30, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Plot Summary and Infobox 

message: The polygamous antagonists in Riders of the Purple Sage aren't Mormon fundamentalists, just nineteenth century mainstream Mormons. --76.177.185.31 (talk) 04:09, 21 September 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mormon fundamentalists? 

message: "By the second chapter we have been introduced to many of the major characters in Riders of the Purple Sage. The statement, “'If by some means I can keep him here a few days, a week—he will never kill another Mormon,' she mused. 'Lassiter! ... I shudder when I think of that name, of him. But when I look at the man I forget who he is—I almost like him. I remember only that he saved Bern. He has suffered. I wonder what it was—did he love a Mormon woman once? How splendidly he championed us poor misunderstood souls! Somehow he knows—much.'” explains early Jane’s intent to transform Lassiter to be less resentful of Mormons."
Tone seems wrong, does not seem to add much. Leaving here for comment in case I am wrong.Elinruby (talk) 00:34, 16 March 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  removed this text
Talk:Rob Bartlett

message: This may be a partial copyvio of .  -- Pakaran 22:55, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
Talk:Douglas Fairbanks in Robin Hood

message: There's an excellent account of Douglas Fairbanks making his 1922 "Robin Hood" in Kevin Brownlow's book "The Parade's Gone By...", University of California Press, 1968, pgs. 247-257.  The movie was originally going to be called "The Spirit of Chivalry".  A slump had hit the movie industry so Fairbanks himself put up the money, a million dollars, and became sole owner of the movie.  He established the Robin Hood library for accurate research.  500 workmen were employed to build the sets.  The set was too big for ordinary arc lights so they built huge tin reflectors, 20 feet across, to reflect sunlight.  Real chain mail was too heavy, it "would break your back", said Allan Dwan, the director, so they used heavy burlap sprayed with silver paint and just used chain mail for the close-ups.  The work continued at night, lit by huge lights, which attracted mosquitoes.  The silhouette of the huge castle could be seen from miles away.  It was built on the old Jesse Hampton studio grounds on Santa Monica Blvd., near La Brea, which was just empty fields at the time.  The structure towered 90 feet above the street.  There was no detailed script during the shoot; Fairbanks, under his pseudonym Elton Thomas, with Allan Dwan and Lotta Woods, scripted the movie as they went along.  The shooting of "Robin Hood" was Hollywood's big tourist attraction.  The picture broke box office records almost everwhere; it ran for so long at Grauman's Egyptian Theatre that the streetcar conductors there announced "All out for Robin Hood" instead of announcing the street.  "Robin Hood" ended up costing $1,400,000 but it earned $2,500,000.  The picture was awarded the Photoplay 1922 Medal of Honor (this was before the Academy Awards).  The film later became lost for many years but was discovered in America by a collector.  The poem at the beginning ("So fleet the works of men...", etc.), is Charles Kingsley's "Old and New".  The picture was shot to be shown at 22 frames per second (fps during this time period varied).  Allan Dwan, the director, said "It was the atmosphere that we strived for far above anything else".  The castle was designed by Wilfred Buckland and was said to be the biggest structure ever built for a silent film; its size was further increased by a glass shot.  Fairbanks copyrighted his film as "Douglas Fairbanks in Robin Hood" as a caution against imitators.  I hope this info improves the article.  I'll let Wiki editors decide how to incorporate it.63.198.19.168 (talk) 02:50, 7 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Summary of making of  "Robin Hood" movie from "The Parade's Gone By..." by Kevin Brownlow 

message: This article is incomplete and is missing important information on the film's theatrical and home media releases which needs to be added to the article.--Paleface Jack (talk) 18:14, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Missing Release section
Talk:A Few Moments with Eddie Cantor

message: The song "The Dumber They Are, the Better I Like 'Em" is sung by Eddie Cantor (Stephen DeRosa) in the 3rd episode of the 1st season of Boardwalk Empire (titled "Broadway Limited") at 17 minutes and 20 seconds into the episode. However, I can't find any reliable sources that state this. --Spunionztastic (talk) 23:36, 3 July 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  In other media
Talk:He Who Gets Slapped (1924 Film)

message: Wrong Lion?
The article says this film featured the first appearance of Leo the lion, but the article on Leo the lion says the first MGM lion was Slats, with Leo only making his appearance many years later.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.100.118.29 (talk) 14:23, 27 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: transliterated as Tot, kto polučájet poščóčiny
Who by? A Czech? Transliterated properly into English, that would be Tot, kto poluchayet poshchochiny
Nuttyskin (talk) 23:23, 8 May 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  transliterated as ... 

message: He Who Gets Slapped was copyrighted in 1924. Today, the copyright expired and there is now a copy on the Internet Archive. It's link is at https://archive.org/details/mymovie_20190920
for linking and uploading to the site.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.149.123.221 (talk) 16:17, 1 January 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  This film is now in the public domain
Talk:The Monster (1925 film)

message: -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 23:38, 14 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removed material from Genre section (original research if no source is presented)
Talk:2004 Nunavut general election

message: There is no discussion here yet so I am starting it.
I see no source for the voter turnout of 110%...
 * I looked through the refrence links, 
 * I can't find any refrence to it with google.
every thing I do find is a crappy mirror of wikipedia.
if a source is not given I'm going to takeout that claim...eventually [unsigned]
I don't know the source offhand, however I would recommend that you not change this without further research.  Given the difficulties of enumeration in Nunavut, it is not unusual for turnout in some areas to be over 100% of the formal registration.  CJCurrie 23:47, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thats for the Canadian federal election, 2004 and not the territorial one. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 13:55, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Mademoiselle from Armentières

message: In my public library in the 1950s there was a book, probably 100,000 words with different versions of Mademoiselle from Armentieres - all clean. Perhaps Inky Pinky Parley Voo? Evidently written by an American in the 1920s. Worth citing?
AidWorker (talk) 21:49, 24 December 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  There is a book of the verses 

message: As a lot of French girls und women had been raped in war time epoche by Brits and US-Americans, the lyrics need to be analysed in a more profound way. Is this a song about raping an French woman? --94.217.143.208 (talk) 14:31, 18 July 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: By all mans provide a WP:RS source that suggest or discusses this. Where is your evidence that "a lot of French girls und women had been raped in war time epoche by Brits and US-Americans"? The song itself may well predate the First World War. Martinevans123 (talk) 14:47, 18 July 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Song about rape?
Talk:The Gallopin' Gaucho

message: A lot of YouTube videos with the audio with this movie that were uploaded today have been striked down by Disney. I uploaded the movie without the audio on YouTube and it has not been copyright striked, so I assume it needs to be removed from here ASAP. 2TB (talk) 00:50, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Video needs audio removed because it is still copyrighted
Talk:Plane Crazy

message: I have updated the release date info according to information gleaned from the 'Ask Dave' section of the D23 website, a Disney enthusiast magazine run by Disney. Here's the webpage. That entry is not going to be accessible as the site is updated with new entries so I have saved a copy of the page as of August 18, 2010 here.   —Preceding unsigned comment added by Vazel (talk • contribs) 13:16, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: a very intresting resource, about date and publishing, is that law research  related to disney copyright 88.149.209.85 (talk) 12:04, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Release date

message: Shouldn't something be said about the length of the film? How long is it? --Nathan (Talk) 18:41, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Length 

message: hi  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.151.242.69 (talk) 00:49, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  just crazy 

message: It is unproffesional to remove the picture. Please, please, please, ADD IT BACK!
--68.61.147.66 (talk) 21:51, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  WHY REMOVE THE PICTURE!?!?!? 

message: This page states Plane Crazy, released on arch 17, 1929, is "the first creation of the character Mickey Mouse".  This contradicts the Steamboat Willie page which states it was released on November 18, 1928 and considered the debut of Mickey Mouse.  Shouldn't this be clarified in the context to avoid the confusion? User:rsstore  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rsstorey (talk • contribs) 21:16, 15 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Possible incorrect data 
Talk:The Skeleton Dance

message: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vXkQSiJG7fk&feature=related
This is a animated short entitled "Skeleton Frolic", directed by Ub Iwerks (who animated The Skeleton Dance) for Columbia, released in 1937. It seems to be a direct sequel to The Skeleton Dance, just in color, featuring the same theme and many of the exact same situations as the Disney original (the ending in particular comes to mind). There is no Wiki article for this short and I would have listed it on the Skeleton Dance page, but I didn't want to write about it as there is no concrete proof that it is in fact a sequel to the Disney original, although all evidence seems to suggest that.
Just something to consider. I leave it up to the powers to be if it should be included as part of this article or not.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dire51 (talk • contribs) 13:00, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Sequel?
Talk:Luther (film)

message: Needs to be split into separate articles for each film. - Alan Smithee 00:55, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree --rogerd 22:14, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Done, I tried fixing most of the links, but some of them I wasn't sure about.  See Special:Whatlinkshere/Luther (film) --rogerd 22:40, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Split
Talk:The Divine Lady

message: This article has been tagged for speedy deletion as a copyvio of .  However, the majority of the text of the article has remained the same since January of 2003.  Since the site this article is accused of copying from is currently not responding, I'm unable to do any sort of investigation, but it's entirely possible that that page is a copyvio of this article.  Admins, please wait to delete until details can be confirmed. Thanks, —bbatsell ¿? 23:04, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Now the site is back up (albeit slow).  The Internet Archive has the page first archived on October 12, 2004.  The domain name was not registered until January 22, 2004.  I think that these two facts, combined with the fact that the content on Wikipedia was written on January 21, 2003 show that this is in fact not a copyright violation on the part of Wikipedia, but on the part of erbzine.com.  I will leave the article as is and allow others to respond before removing the speedy deletion request later today.  —bbatsell ¿? 23:14, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You are probobly right. I have checked other items on the page and it seems they have taken other article too like The Admirable Crichton. The statement "All Original Work ©1996-2006 by Bill Hillman and/or Contributing Authors/Owners. No part of this web site may be reproduced without permission from the respective owners" threw me off.--Balloonguy 23:28, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Speedy deletion / copyvio
Talk:Hallelujah (film)

message: There is no exclamation mark in the title - checked against the title card on the DVD release and the BBFC entry for the original release. The overall title should be edited to amend this but it appears I can't do this.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by RFWilmut (talk • contribs) 09:40, 2 September 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Hallelujah! (film) was moved to Hallelujah (film) on March 7, 2016, two-and-a-half years after the above posting. —Roman Spinner (talk)(contribs) 20:26, 7 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  No exclamation mark in title
Talk:Abraham Lincoln (1930 film)

message: It should be noted that character names are depicted in the opening credits and their form in the cast list is taken from that on-screen billing. For the record, below is a reproduction of the opening credits:
JOSEPH M. SCHENCK           PRESENTSD. W. GRIFFITH'S    ABRAHAM     LINCOLN
                            FEATURING                     WALTER HUSTON                                            AND                              UNA MERKEL              ADAPTED FOR THE SCREEN BY                    STEPHEN VINCENT BENET            STORY AND PRODUCTION ADVISER                   JOHN W. CONSIDINE, JR.                           UNITED ARTISTS PICTURECOPYRIGHT MCMXXX BY FEATURE PRODUCTIONS, INC.
PERSONALLY DIRECTED                BY     D. W. GRIFFITH
                     CONTINUITY AND DIALOGUE         STEPHEN VINCENT BENET AND GERRIT LLOYD                     PHOTOGRAPHY BY                         KARL STRUSS                            SETTINGS BY                 WILLIAM CAMERON MENZIES                           EXECUTED BY                           PARK FRENCHPRODUCTION MANAGER            MUSIC ARRANGEMENTS          O. O. DULL                             HUGO RIESENFELD
                           EDITORIAL ADVISER                                     HAL C. KERN         FILM EDITOR            ASSOCIATE DIALOGUE DIRECTORJAMES SMITH (film editor)              HARRY STUBBS (actor)    SOUND TECHNICIAN                           COSTUMES        HAROLD WITT                             WALTER ISRAEL                          PRODUCTION STAFF              RAYMOND A. KLUNE AND HERBERT SUTCH
  CHARACTERS                   PLAYED BY      IN THE ORDER OF THEIR APPEARANCETOM LINCOLN_________W. L. THORNEMID-WIFE_____________LUCILLE LA VERNENANCY HANKS LINCOLN__HELEN FREEMAN (actress)OFFUT________________OTTO HOFFMANABRAHAM LINCOLN____WALTER HUSTONARMSTRONG__________EDGAR DEERINGANN RUTLEDGE_______UNA MERKELLINCOLN'S EMPLOYER__RUSSELL SIMPSON (actor)SHERIFF_________________CHARLES CROCKETTMARY TODD LINCOLN____KAY HAMMOND (American actress)MRS. EDWARDS_______HELEN WARE
STEPHEN A. DOUGLAS___E. ALYN WARRENHERNDON (Lincoln's law partner)_______________JASON ROBARDS (Sr.)TAD LINCOLN___________GORDON THORPEJOHN WILKES BOOTH____IAN KEITHJOHN HAY       (SECRETARY TO THE PRESIDENT)__CAMERON PRUDHOMMEGENERAL SCOTT (Civil War)_________JAMES BRADBURY, SR.YOUNG SOLDIER_______JIMMIE EAGLEGENERAL GRANT________E. ALYN WARRENSECRETARY OF WAR STANTON____OSCAR APFELGENERAL SHERIDAN______FRANK CAMPEAUGENERAL LEE___________HOBART BOSWORTHCOLONEL MARSHALL_____HENRY B. WALTHALL
The closing credits depict the production logo and THE END.
                                                                                                                                                             Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 05:25, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Character names are indicated in on-screen cast credits
Talk:Check and Double Check

message: The current article lists "Ring Dem Bells" among the Duke Ellington pieces in the film. I have not found evidence  that this is accurate. Instead, they perform "The Mystery Song" and "When I'm Blue" in addition to the pieces listed. 
http://desguin.net/DukeEllingtonPanorama/www.depanorama.net/index.html
https://books.google.com/books?id=868gEAAAQBAJ&newbks=1&newbks_redir=0&printsec=frontcover&pg=PA87&dq=when+I%27m+blue+Ellington+double+check&hl=en&source=gb_mobile_entity
https://www.discogs.com/release/14967748-Duke-Ellington-Volume-11-1930-Complete-Edition Sojambi Pinola (talk) 14:36, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Duke Ellington songs
Talk:Just Imagine (film)

message: "Just Imagine!" was NOT set in 1988.  Anyone who is vaguely familiar with the film knows that it was a 1930 production that imagined life in the future world of 1980, half a century hence.  In fact, clips from the film were shown on the CBS Evening News on the January 1, 1980 broadcast, since Walter Cronkite remembered the vision of the future that didn't quite come true.  Mandsford 03:36, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Year

message: In the reception part it says " By the time it was released, movie musicals had greatly declined in popularity". 
I fail to see how this is possible, when movie musicals had just a few previous years before been made possible with the advent of talkies. Furthermore, the heyday of musical films had not yet reached its peak. In the following year, 1931, over 100 musical films were released on Hollywood alone, and people like Frank Sinatra, Gene Kelly and Ginger Rodgers had not yet even reached stardom. See Musical film Scifist (talk) 14:27, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Musicals declined in popularity" 

message: Wikipedi says is a modern 2d/3d graphics co, founded in 2002. Is somebody making a joke here (reference in article to that company producing graphics for this 1930 film). 81.157.165.14 (talk) 22:45, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Post Amazers" 

message: There definitely needs to be some information on the film's preservation or lack of it, and just how complete surviving versions are. According to John Clute's article on The Encyclopedia of Science Fiction website:
:"As a viewing experience, Just Imagine must be imagined to be seen, so rough and seemingly gap-filled are its known surviving versions, which may have been photographed from 16mm prints; the best song, 'Never Swat a Fly', was only recovered in recent decades. What remains, befogged and bedraggled, does in any case convey a sense that the original may have been almost as hard to parse, both as visual display and as an attempt to exploit some poorly grasped sf topoi in order – it may be – to release some of the tension of living in 1930." Lee M (talk) 02:17, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Preservation status 