lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Udaloy-class destroyer

message: Hi,
According to the "Ships" list in the Udaloy-class article, the hull number for the vessel "Admiral Kharlamov" should be 548.
But the picture heading the article shows the vessel "Admiral Panteleyev", and this also carries the number 548.
In the "Ships" list, there is no number listed for "Admiral Pateleyev", so maybe the number 548 have just been related to the wrong name in this list.
Or, the name for the ship in the leading picture is wrong.
Which is right?
Allan Sørensen--87.49.245.32 12:38, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: As you'll see from Jane's Fighting Ships, the Soviet and Russian Navies, up to 1993, changed pennant numbers every three years and when ships changed fleet. Now pennant numbers only change when ships shift from one fleet to another. So it is possible that both ships carried it at one time. Buckshot06 (talk) 11:36, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Error on hull numbers in the "Ships" list for the Udaloy class. 

message: Isn't Udaloy the NATO name?  Perhaps this should be noted somewhere.  118.90.23.172 (talk) 12:46, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Not so much a NATO name as an informal name. It's quite normal for ship classes to be named informally after the first of class, even when there is a formal "project" name. Compare the British Type 45 destroyers which are also known as the Daring class - but the British are not particularly consistent in these things, the Type 23's are officially known as the Duke class after the type of names rather than the first of class (but are generally referred to as Type 23's), and the Type 12I frigates were _always_ known as the Leander class. The USN is generally pretty consistent in applying the first of class name to the class as a whole.86.172.173.22 (talk) 18:19, 22 January 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: "Udaloy-class" is the NATO reporting name (from the Anglo-American practice of naming the class after the lead ship) - the Soviet/Russian designation was/is Pr.1155 Fregat. Figgis302 (talk) 16:58, 18 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  NATO name 

message: this video from onboard Kulakov suggests it's not completely up to Udaloy II standard, for instance the report mentions 100mm main guns rather than 130mm. Some nice pics of Varyag as well. 86.172.173.22 (talk) 18:19, 22 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Kulakov 
Talk:French Revolutionary Wars/Archive 1

message: The extended (wikified) quotation from Mignet may not be the best way to handle the context of Europe at this time, but it seems pretty much on the mark and it is public domain. As usual, it can be rewritten; if someone does so, please pull it out of quotation marks. I personally would suggest either a comprehensive rewrite or leaving it as is (possibly with further wikification), rather than falling between two stools. -- Jmabel 21:21, Jun 21, 2004 (UTC)
By the way, if anyone wants to expand this article, possibly even into a series, Mignet gives an extensive account of these wars, and his material is uncopyrighted and readily available on line. -- Jmabel 00:02, Jun 29, 2004 (UTC)
I'd note that there's currently some duplication, as Napoleonic Wars, First Coalition, and Second Coalition all have some discussion of this material.  Some sort of effort to reduce the doubling up would be of use, I think.  The History of France series, btw, is currently pretty miserable, as well.  At any rate, yeah, maybe. john k 05:17, 29 Jun 2004 (UTC)

message: Recent addition at the bottom appears to be to a poor scan of a 1911 EB article, on Wikisource. Mentioning the EB article is useful, I guess, but why link to a bad scan of it? Anyone want to try cleaning this up on Wikisource? -- Jmabel | Talk 05:44, July 12, 2005 (UTC)
A cleane up copy of the 1911 article, would be a great replacemnt for what we have now, it really goes into depth and isnt really out of date.--Gary123 17:17, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wikisource 

message: Wow, not a mention of the battles between the Spanish-Napoleonic vs Portuguese-English alliance? And you dare call this... an Encyclopaedia?? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 85.138.0.158 (talk • contribs) 15 August 2006.
: Those of us with any sanity call it a work in progress, about 5-1/2 years under way, by an almost entirely amateur staff. If something has not been written there is no person who was more responsible than you for writing it. 
: In this case, though, I suspect that the problem is that the article you want is Napoleonic Wars. Do let me know if what you are looking for is not there, either. - Jmabel | Talk 04:58, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Portugal 

message: It is not particularly critical, but WP:MIL guidelines indicate a preference for no flags (or at least, small flags). Carom 03:32, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Flags in Infobox
Talk:Henry Peach Robinson

message: Much of this page has been vandalised by [] Splatterman, an unregistered user. - I will revert their edits sinarau (talk) 02:04, 28 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Copied from Henry Peach Robbinson's oil paintings, contributed by : needs work on sourcing. Gordonofcartoon (talk) 01:19, 31 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Oil paintings
Talk:Armies of the Crusaders

message: Anyone delete anything, and I'll call a crusade against you. And send a few Soviet Space troops too.
This is now a redirect page. --Funandtrvl (talk) 21:26, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Notes

message: I'm surprised no one has actually discussed anything about this article.
:Well, no one knows about it, because it isn't linked from any other page except your userpage. Adam Bishop 20:04, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Oh 

message: The idea that since Islam forbids alcohol, and Christianity does not, the Christians were drunk and the Muslims not ignores the fact that people actually sin quite a bit. The prohibition on drinking was widely breached by the upper class in the Muslim States.  That being said, no commander turned up to any significant battle so shtonkered as to be unable to command: we would know because it would have been recorded by observers.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.3.65.1 (talk) 00:52, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't know what Fundamentalist fool added that in but I removed that nonesense. Exactly were will the Crusaders get their wine, if the region was dominated by Islamic powers? Tourskin (talk) 01:15, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: That did happen actually - Ilghazi was frequently recorded as being drunk. Adam Bishop (talk) 06:43, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Silliness 

message: "Contrary to popular belief, crusading soldiers wore armour far heavier than their Saracen and Turk counter parts."
Id sure like to see some trustworthy source material for that sentance, since it contradicts just about everything Ive ever read about the muslim armies in the Lavant during the crusades.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.226.70.172 (talk) 00:41, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: How do you explain a smaller Crusader army defeating Muslim armies much larger? The Turks were lightly armed, the Mamelukes were heavily armed yes, but the Turks called the Franks "Men of Iron". I'll try to find something. Tourskin (talk) 00:47, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Source please
Talk:Bianca Ryan (album)

message: I see the note about the 2 bonus tracks available on the CD that's available at Target, but the CD that's available at Walmart is advertised as having one bonus track.  Is the Walmart CD bonus track one that is not available on the Target CD? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.80.171.124 (talk • contribs) 
:Dunno, what's on the Wal-Mart CD? RadioKirk (u|t|c) 05:20, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
Talk:Expediency Discernment Council

message: ...is "the System" mention in the full title? Given that such organizations outside the usuall 3 are given names like "National [...]" (EG. NSC), that choice strikes me as a little strange. 68.39.174.238 10:57, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  What exactly... 
Talk:Stewart McKinney (politician)

message: I remember back in the 1990s I was reading back issues of the Hartford Courant and they frequently had little boxes of what the senators and Reps voted on that week.  This guy almost always voted with the Democrats.  Why isn't his voting record a part of this article?  He was a RINO.--68.118.188.188 (talk) 15:21, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bias

message: no
Merge - clearly the same person. Disambiguator 04:30, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yep, should be merged. The correct spelling is "Stewart," (see official GPO listing in 100th Congress so this should be the main page and the other redirected here. --Sprkee 00:28, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: yes merge.  There's not much on the other page.  Staib 02:30, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merged with other article 

message: Perhaps a blood transfusion was one possible HIV transmission route, but the article should mention the posthumous outing of McKinney: http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/story?id=2531627&page=2. MJFiorello 04:37, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: and the New York Times article at the time of his death et. al.  Have added reference that and fixed up wording.  It was early days of the epidemic and people just were unclear about what was going on.  Additionally people were just more "closeted" then. CyntWorkStuff (talk) 19:42, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  HIV/AIDS
File talk:Tarponback.jpg

message: Thanks for adding your note on my "talk page" regarding this image. I believe that I have fully described the reasons for the use of this image under the fair use. 
Could you please explain how a picture of a concept car from over 40 years ago fails the first fair use criterion. In other words, how is it possible to describe and illustrate a subject that does not exist and how do you create a freely licensed image of it today. 
Because show cars like this Tarpon were destroyed, it is not possible to take a picture of it today. Will taking yet another picture of the factory photo qualify? I like to learn about this subject, but I do not think another image generation can hide the original! 
The purpose of including this image is to help illustrate the characteristic design incorporated into the fastback. I believe it adds to the value of the article, in addition to the aims of Wikipedia. 
If you disagree, I welcome your questions and a detailed discussion of the concerns. 
Thank you CZmarlin 04:43, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I discussed this with CZMarlin on his talk page, but for the benefit of people coming here: I was mistaken in appying the "replaceable fair use" tag to this image. After CZmarlin's comments, I removed it. —Chowbok ☠ 18:07, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
Talk:Delta Hotels

message: Per WP:NOT, the list of non-notable properties really doesn't belong here. I tried removing it once, but got reverted with no comment. If you think this list belongs here, please tell me why, otherwise I'm going to remove it again. Please comment here before restoring this list. Kendall-K1 (talk) 17:03, 25 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  List of properties
Talk:USS San Antonio

message: I removed  from Talk:USS San Antonio because it is unnecessary. This determination is based on the "usage" section of the template documentation. 
This template should be placed only where it's needed. Don't visit talk pages just to add this template, and don't place it on the talk pages of new articles. Talk pages that are frequently misused, that attract frequent or perpetual debate, articles often subject to controversy, and highly-visible or popular topics may be appropriate for this template. (Emphasis mine)
As the article meets none of the criteria listed, its usage is inappropriate. Senator2029 【talk】  18:31, 5 November 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: But again, where does it say the template "must be removed" if the criteria doesn't meet with your interpretation of it? Going around and removing  (repeatedly removing) templates from pages when there is really no demonstrable need for it is pointless. Also, I asked you about this a month ago and you never responded, nor responded to the article tp then, why is that? Not trying to turn this into  big deal or anything, but it seems that some communication would go along way here. - wolf 18:49, 5 November 2021 (UTC)
replies: text:  Removal of the template is not prohibited, and is within the discretion of any editor. I give the reason as "unnecessary" because that is the term the template documentation uses ("This template should be placed only where it's needed.") As stated above, it does not meet any of the four criteria for placement, and thus is unnecessary. I have made my case for not using this template on this talk page, and accordingly removed the it. Before reverting, please make your case why it use on this page is required. Senator2029 【talk】  04:29, 6 November 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removal of Talk header template 

message: Criticism Section: [ref]Reilly, Corinne, "Investigation Puts Troubled Ship Back Under The Gun", Norfolk Virginian-Pilot, 15 April 2011, p. 1.[/ref]
I can't find an actual URL for this reference. It appears to be behind a paywall, or at least requires a registration/password.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 180.75.242.32 (talk) 10:04, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Found and added another ref that supports this content and the Virginian-Pilot ref. - wolf 23:17, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Free web links are a convenience, not a requirement. For verifiability purposes, a hard-copy newspaper or paywall-accessible page is also sufficient. ~Anachronist (talk) 02:24, 2 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unreachable reference?
Talk:Pat Dodson

message: I have a note that says he was born 29 January 1947, but I don't know where I got that info from and I can't verify it online.  Anyone know if it's true or not?  --  Jack of Oz [your turn] 03:20, 1 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Date of birth

message: Senator Dodson was elected, not re-elected, in 2016. It would be more accurate to say he was "returned to the Senate following election".  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.154.208.5 (talk) 22:33, 5 September 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: 2016 Election

message: Hello all.
I've just added dates that I can verify for Pat Dodson's directorship at the Central Land Council and Kimberley Land Council. However, I'm not completely sure that the CLC citation is the best it could be: it's necessary to click through to the page, and then click on the "Read" button on the 1985 image for the detail. If anybody knows how better to cite this source, please feel free to correct my citation.
Purple Lorikeet (talk) 02:59, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Citations for the central land council
Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Hotels

message: Hello! Last week I posted a request to the L'Ermitage Beverly Hills article talk page asking anyone active there to review my proposed revisions to the History section. (The current material is largely unsourced and includes a lot of details that I have been unable to verify.) My request can be found here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:L%27Ermitage_Beverly_Hills
I'm an employee of EOS Hospitality, the company managing L'Ermitage, and thus have a clear COI. As such, I'm reaching out to experienced editors to review my draft. Hoping someone here can help, or at least steer me in the right direction. Thanks! Mcg2132 (talk) 17:01, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  L'Ermitage Beverly Hills: Request for review 

message: Hello guys, I would like to write the article of Life House Hotels, here you can find some information; what do you think? Meets the notability criteria? Thanks --Alessandra Boccone (talk) 16:00, 5 April 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi, I tried to fix the Life House page, do you think now the warnings can be removed?--Alessandra Boccone (talk) 11:37, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Life House Hotels 

message: I have (with the help of others) made a small user script to detect and highlight various links to unreliable sources and predatory journals. Some of you may already be familiar with it, given it is currently the 39th most imported script on Wikipedia. The idea is that it takes something like
*John Smith "Article of things" Deprecated.com. Accessed 2020-02-14. (John Smith "Article of things" Deprecated.com. Accessed 2020-02-14.)
and turns it into something like
* John Smith "" Deprecated.com. Accessed 2020-02-14.
It will work on a variety of links, including those from ,  and .
The script is mostly based on WP:RSPSOURCES, WP:NPPSG and WP:CITEWATCH and a good dose of common sense. I'm always expanding coverage and tweaking the script's logic, so general feedback and suggestions to expand coverage to other unreliable sources are always welcomed.
Do note that this is not a script to be mindlessly used, and several caveats apply. Details and instructions are available at User:Headbomb/unreliable. Questions, comments and requests can be made at User talk:Headbomb/unreliable.
-  Headbomb {t · c · p · b}
This is a one time notice and can't be unsubscribed from. Delivered by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:01, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  User script to detect unreliable sources
Talk:Anchorage-class dock landing ship

message: This might be better classified as a list?--Looper5920 10:09, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

message: In particular, were these ships ever used, outside of a training or development context, i.e. in real-world operations, particularly in anything like a combat situation? 2600:381:9690:206E:55C9:5FD8:78D8:D2DC (talk) 23:34, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Operation history?
Talk:Whidbey Island-class dock landing ship

message: I assessed this as an "NA" class article because it should be a list.--Looper5920 10:28, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: But it has the possibility of being expanded, which is why I've changed it back.-MBK004 02:21, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Wikipedia talk:Requests for arbitration/Hkelkar/Workshop

message: Hkelkar and Bakaman, I think only arbitrators can place proposals on this page. BhaiSaab talk 05:30, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: If that is the case, then let the Arbitrators delete the posts and I won't mind.Hkelkar 05:35, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

text: No, check the top you will see that anyone may make and comment on proposals.  Such comments are sometimes useful to the arbitrators.  Be nice though, as the arbitrators really do read everything in the case, and you don't want to make yourself look bad. Thatcher131 05:37, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay, thanks. BhaiSaab talk 05:39, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

message: ======
The user has been warned for personal attacks on his talk page (he has altered these warnings which hides this, but is still clearly seen). 
TwoHorned has attacked User:CltFn on this page: 
*He says:
**Since this user has made contributions only on extremely controversal topics (see his contributions [226] which are almost 100% oriented into nasty islamophobic entries), I'm wondering what kind of farce is intented to mean his barnstar for contribution to islamic articles in Wikipedia. --02:40, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Personal attack by TwoHorned 

message: The user has been warned for personal attacks on his talk page (he has altered these warnings which hides this, but is still clearly seen). 
TwoHorned has attacked User:CltFn on this page: 
*He says:
**Since this user has made contributions only on extremely controversal topics (see his contributions [226] which are almost 100% oriented into nasty islamophobic entries), I'm wondering what kind of farce is intented to mean his barnstar for contribution to islamic articles in Wikipedia. --02:40, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: {{User|TwoHorned}}

message: Please see this WP:AN posting. (→Netscott) 00:25, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Of note relative to this case

message: (moved from workshop section, in response to the proposed ban on Bakaasuprman)
Oppose Bakaman is willing to talk with those who disagree with him—including myself—rather than at them, which cannot be said for many, if not most, of his comrades.CiteCop 16:25, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: moved from workshop
Talk:Robert Altenkirch

message: This image came from a press kit or similar source, for the purpose of reuse by the media. Pridepol 05:31, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This reads like a copy and paste. CopaceticThought (talk) 06:12, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Mathews Tuya

message: This name does not appear on officially gazetted maps, cf. BC Provincial Basemap].  If it has a published name in climbing guides or geological papers that more or less qualifies it, although climbing-guide names are helter-skelter and not used outside the climbing community.  Please provide a cite for this name or the "delete" tag will be placed on this article.Skookum1 05:32, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: See Catalogue of Canadian volcanoes: Mathews Tuya.  --Seattle Skier (talk) 08:03, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cite needed 

message: I believe the name was given to it by geologists,  in honor of Canadian geologist Bill Mathews, who coined the term "tuya" in 1947 to refer to such formations in general.  It is not named for somebody named "Mathew".  I do know that Volcano World has it listed as Mathew's Tuya, Canada, but that is almost certainly an error.
The citation listed in several geological papers is: Simpson, K., 1996, The geology, geochemistry and geomorphology of Mathews tuya: A subglacial volcano in northwestern British Columbia [BS thesis] Vancouver, University of British Columbia, 97 p.  If someone can locate a copy of this thesis, I would be grateful.  The UBC library online catalog has no evidence of it.
The article should be moved to the correct name.  I'll do it if there are no objections.  Thanks.  --Seattle Skier (talk) 09:04, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mathews Tuya, not Mathew's Tuya
Talk:2006 Ferentari riot

message: I gather that there is a bit of a fight over the content of this right now. Separately from the matter of the facts (which I do not claim to know): DI.goe's version is in places rather poor English. 
When people have sorted out the substantive matters (which I suggest people bring here to the talk page rather than edit warring), feel free to ping me for English-language cleanup, if needed. - Jmabel | Talk 02:00, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Current state 
Talk:Hiroshi Miyamura

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) – robertsky (talk) 15:49, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Hiroshi H. Miyamura →  – The current title doesn't quite make sense to me since adding an initial for his nickname, "Hershey", doesn't quite make sense to me. I believe it should either be named Hiroshi “Hershey” Miyamura or simply Hiroshi Miyamura. I don't have strong feelings either way but do feel it should be moved.  and  have both argued for one or the other, so I'm raising it here to get more visibility and hopefully get an agreement. DCsansei (talk) 13:29, 24 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 24 October 2023
Talk:Luma (video)

message: I don't think this word was created in the NTSC (~1953) era.  For example, some of the members of the original NTSC committee published a book (under Hazeltine laboratories) explaining how NTSC works.  They use the term luminance, and make note of the incorrect order of operations.
also see  Glennchan 06:06, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: NTSC origin

message: I always thought luma was short for luminance, and chroma short for chrominance. In a long discussion, it gets tiring to see the long words so many times.  Also, I always thought that gamma corrected signals were to match the characteristics of CRT display devices. Gah4 (talk) 10:15, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  short