lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Young Socialist Alliance

message: I have just rewritten the entire piece, giving a straight minimal factual account, using the three recent memoirs by Barry Sheppard, Peter Camejo, and my own, along with Fred Halstead's Out Now. There was no reason to retain Peer Vinther's name, as he was a nice fellow but never played any national role and the coverage would be disproportionate as I could name 20 people who had much greater responsibilities. -- Leslie Evans, 9/6/2010  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lbevans (talk • contribs) 17:48, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Lam Qua

message: There are a number of online sources for the portraits, are there any on Wikipedia? Public domain? 209.178.168.182 06:07, 2 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Images needed

message: Please make sure that all names are romanised appropiately. Especially the article's title made me frown: Lam Qua is hardly an acceptable transcription. The two characters 林官 should be Lam Gun in Yale transcription as well as in Wong Sik-Ling transcription. Tin Qua (庭官) ist likewise problematic.
And "Qua" is being used as a redirect even though it is a surname in Ulster. I am not sure that this painter is important enough to be known by his last name no matter how it is romanized. Either way it sounds like the redirection should be removed.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.7.162.122 (talk) 03:19, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Romanisation

message: I don't think that the photograph on this page, taken by John Thomson, depicts Lam Qua. The same photograph is on Thomson's page and is captioned as "A painter at work. John Thomson. Honk Kong, 1871.", additionally Lam Qua died in 1860, before John Thomson started photographing in Hong Kong. The file description of the photo on this page, taken from the book the photo was published in, probably didn't intend to claim this was Lam Qua, but another one of the painters working in Hong Kong at the time, as the majority of the text describes the profession in general.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.241.60.105 (talk) 22:47, 1 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Misattributed photograph
Talk:Boogie

message: It would be helpful to know what metronome markings are thought to be appropriate to the boogie.   It seems to me that the example is faster than a "shuffle," and that therefore the more operative aspect of boogie is perhaps not so much shuffle, as swing.   (Yes, shuffle swings, but I'm not sure the boogie shuffles.)  If that tempo is typical.   Also, is not the pitch pattern in the example common to very many popular musics of the blues type?   What distinguishes this pattern from other blues-like pieces?   I suspect it is the speed.   I admit my impression is due to the boogies I heard growing up in the sixties, and they were played by rock bands: if the faster boogie is typical of the sixties, perhaps that could be mentioned.   Further: the expression "let's boogie" seems to suggest a faster speed: is this a more recent development, or is this more evidence that the boogie is basically quick?   I have trouble with calling something quick a "shuffle."   Certainly to "Shuffle Off to Buffalo" did not mean to get there quickly, but to get there at a relaxed rate.   Xophorus (talk) 06:29, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Metronome Markings

message: What parts of this article are too technical for a general audience and how may they be improved? Hyacinth (talk) 02:02, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Technical

message: This page needs a discussion of Boogie Blues - meaning one chord repetitive vamp music as popularized by John Lee Hooker and Canned Heat.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.251.137.102 (talk) 00:12, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed. The Boogie Blues genre - not just its primary innovator, John Lee Hooker and Canned Heat as well known disciples - but a reference to the widespread accepted use of "boogie" when referring to this specific type of blues song would seem required.BluWill (talk) 20:35, 16 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  What about John Lee Hooker and Canned Heat? 

message: The lead boogie sound clip is the bass line not the lead.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.175.55.5 (talk) 17:29, 4 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lead boogie sound clip in this article 

message: The article begins by defining boogie "swung" and "shuffle", both of which refer to subdividing the beat into 3 parts, but the first two examples listed (Chuck Berry's "Johnny B. Goode", T. Rex's "Get It On") subdivide the beat into two equal parts.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kevintimba (talk • contribs) 00:20, 21 January 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Serious Problem with the definition of "boogie" 

message: Borizan 176.89.179.63 (talk) 20:06, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ali
Talk:Tiffany Williamson

message: This article is a cheap article for the GutShot Poker Club and both this article and the Gutshot Poker Club article should be deleted. If anyone knows how to flag them then do so.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.113.236.226 (talk) 23:00, 15 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cheap Advertising for Gutshot 

message: I'd like to see some evidence of these so called "heated discussions" as far as i can make out her play has been universally panned.68.71.35.93 00:43, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Heated Discussions
Talk:Lord Edward FitzGerald

message: Did he disown his title during his life? I have heard he did and, if true, it would seem unusual that in death people give him his title.
:He had no substantive title; "Lord" means that he was the son of a Duke; it's a courtesy title, and can't be disowned, only used or not used. Used or not, it's how he's known to history. (One couldn't disclaim a substantive title until the passage of the Peerage Act 1963.) - Nunh-huh 06:18, 2 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: If it is a "courtesy title and can't be disowned" then surely we should be calling Tony Benn 'Viscount Stansgate'?
Viscount Stansgate is/was not a courtesy title, but a hereditary one, which at the time disbarred its then holder, Tony Benn, then Anthony Wedgwood Benn, from sitting in the House of Commons Millbanks (talk) 10:35, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Surely the 1819 repeal of the Act of Attainder would have returned his title to the dead man?Thegn 23:11, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: The place of marriage is given as Tournay, but I doubt whether this is Tournay, Hautes-Pyrénées. It is much more likely to be Tournai, now in Belgium, but at the time of the marriage in the Austrian Netherlands, so not in France. (See French Revolutionary Wars.) However, at various times in its history it has been in France. It even belonged to Henry VIII for a while. Does anyone have any better information than I have? LynwoodF (talk) 16:07, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: As nobody has commented, I have changed the spelling of Tournai and made the section heading less specific. Incidentally, two related articles give the spelling Tournai. LynwoodF (talk) 08:14, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I think you're right: see this, which I've added as a ref in the article. DeCausa (talk) 21:37, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thank you very much for that. It is pretty conclusive. I am glad you have sorted this out. This point was of special interest to me, as I live a short walk from Thames Ditton, where Pamela is buried, and Tournai is one of my favourite places. LynwoodF (talk) 08:49, 24 October 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Place of marriage
Talk:Leinster House

message: Is there any reason why this building looks like this one Province House (Prince Edward Island)
:DIY kits? Sarah777 (talk) 00:22, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Other Building 

message: Pronunciation guide please. GenacGenac (talk) 15:31, 6 December 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pronunciation 
Talk:Continental knitting

message: I appreciate the help from 12.32.13.98 filling out this page, but there's no reason to diss on English knitting so much, especially as the criticisms aren't even true.  English knitters can keep both hands on the needles perfectly well, and maintain yarn tension in the exact same way as Continental knitters.  When they do these things, their speed is not significantly different from Continental knitters.
Also, FYI, Combined knitting is not the same as Fair Isle, though it's a reasonable mistake if you've never heard of Combined before (I know I just learned about it this summer).  I've now stubbed it so that doesn't happen again.  /blahedo (t) 06:27, 2 November 2005 (UTC)

message: I don't know who wrote the captions on the pictures, but what is identified as clockwise in the knitting stitch is counterclockwise.  Using the top of the needle as the hub in the center of the clock, the picture showing how the needle is wrapped clearly would move from the number three on the clock to the number two, the opposite of the way the clock hands go.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 4.249.3.225 (talk) 21:57, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  directions mixup 

message: The statement "Continental knitting is preferred by professional hand-knitters, as it is the more efficient method, requiring the shortest number of specific hand-motions per stitch."  in the page, seems augmentative, especially without sources to back it up. Is this actually true/ are there any sources that state this specifically? Yes I am aware that the page suffers from a lack of sources in general.  --Karpenl (talk) 01:57, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I learned the "English" style while studying in GB, after having used the technique for a few years, a neighbour taught me the "Continental" knitting ("Oh God, I can't look at that. You are so slow!") which is definitely faster and especially reduces strain on the right hand, so it would seem reasonable for professional knitters to use the continental style. But it is difficult to find sources other than knitting instructions. 77.47.74.154 (talk) 11:08, 29 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Preferred by professional knitters?
Talk:Pencaitland

message: Robert Douglas probably merits an entry to himself as he is of equal historical importance to David Calderwood and it seems odd to have the bio details (which do not relate that closely to Pencaitland) for him in this context - have left as is for now. 210.184.34.205 LP
Moved Robert Douglas to his own entry.
Isn't there something about the bridge in Pencaitland? Ros Power 22:10, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
Talk:Kawasaki Ki-45

message: During your operative life having modified your armament, precisely ones equipped with ventral Bombs are used two planes how Kamikaze (how occurred in Okinawa more later) during the Allied Invasion of Biak Island, May 27, 1944 obtain unically certain damages at some secondary naval unit.
The next version, Kawasaki Ki-45 KAIc are one developed specialized in Night fighting why are indeed equipped with centimetrical radar in the nose,  --Zephirum 07:26, 2 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Seems more like a (very) bad translation to me.--172.190.211.78 (talk) 00:46, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  vandalism?
Talk:Çorlu

message: Could you put some more pictures on this article? Because it is very poorly illustrated.
== Commercial Pictures ==
In my opinion commercial pictures should not be put in such kind city articles, it is advertising.
--Infestor 06:51, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Comments

message: In my opinion commercial pictures should not be put in such kind city articles, it is advertising.
--Infestor 06:51, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Commercial Pictures 

message: Please give the IPA (including the stress, as appropriate) rather than an ad hoc pronunciation, which is liable to be misunderstood. — 85.211.0.240 08:31, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pronunciation 

message: This is unsourced. Going OR, the Antonine Itinerary puts it between Perinthus and Melanthias, and is inconsistent with the article. 72.66.60.173 (talk) 03:02, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Can we have a citation that Cenofrurium = Tzirallium? 
Talk:Monogenea

message: what made class monogenea be  a sparate class ???  what made it  more developed than  turbellaria ???\
==  ==how to mount the monogenea species?? i need that answer as soon as possible :)) please 
According to Animals without Backbones (R Buchsbaum), Monogeneans are separate due to loss of external cilia (they are not free living like the turbellarians), and the development of a special epidermis which prevents them from being digested.  Monogeneans have an enormously developed sucker. One more difference according the Buchsbaum is the Turbellarians are seen in commensal and mutualistic relationships, while Monogeneans are parasitic. Hope this helps.
Avigon 18:55, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: I'll admit I don't know much about Monogeneans, but there seem to be several descendent taxon pages that exist purely as linker stubs, with very little encyclopedic information that cannot be more easily obtained on other websites. The bulk of the information regarding Mongeneans seems to be at the genus or species level articles, so rather than a myriad of subclass, order, and family pages-- most with predominantly red linked descendents or redundant information-- perhaps a single list-style page can be developed with links to key taxa. In this way, readers can quickly find useful content, rather than clicking through several pages that effectively simply say "taxon B is a subset of taxon A with X subtaxa". Another option would be to merge multiple species articles at the level of family or order, with appropriate redirects, until existing articles are fleshed out. I'm interested in hearing other opinions.--Animalparty-- (talk) 22:18, 25 November 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lots of descendent stub articles: potential merge in order? 

message: ?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.235.179.170 (talk) 13:27, 18 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  etym
Talk:Queensland Legislative Council

message: I propose to tidy up :Category:Australian Parliaments a little by creating a new sub category within it called -  :Category:Parliaments of the Australian States and Territories . This category would contain articles on the Parliaments but not lists of previous parliaments. The category would then be listed at :Category:Legislatures of subnational entities in place of :Category:Australian Parliaments.  This would mean that this article will be listed under the new :Category:Parliaments of the Australian States and Territories instead of the current :Category:Australian Parliaments.  
If you would like to comment please go to Category talk:Australian parliaments 
Adz 07:51, 2 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reorganising Australian parliaments category 

message: This chamber of the Qld parliament no longer exists and little more can be said.MH au 05:59, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Oppose merge. There is scope for expanding this article.--cj | talk 05:14, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

text: Oppose. There is significantly more that can be said about it. It's not every day that half a government votes to eliminate itself.121.208.60.237 09:15, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge proposal 
Talk:Parliament of Tasmania

message: I propose to tidy up :Category:Australian Parliaments a little by creating a new sub category within it called -  :Category:Parliaments of the Australian States and Territories . This category would contain articles on the Parliaments but not lists of previous parliaments. The category would then be listed at :Category:Legislatures of subnational entities in place of :Category:Australian Parliaments.  This would mean that this article will be listed under the new :Category:Parliaments of the Australian States and Territories instead of the current :Category:Australian Parliaments.  
If you would like to comment please go to Category talk:Australian parliaments 
Adz 07:51, 2 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reorganising Australian parliaments category 

message: Contributions welcome here. Thanks. Timeshift (talk) 04:00, 24 December 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed. On what basis could you argue otherwise? The Drover's Wife (talk) 06:28, 24 December 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Greens are crossbench, not opposition 

message: Former federal Liberal Senator Eric Abetz seeking preselection for the 2025 Tasmanian election:
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-01-07/eric-abetz-seeking-liberal-endorsement-tas-state-election/103291250  
...is a reminder that the Tasmanian state Parliament has quite a number of former federal parliamentarians among its members including Ray Groom who went on to become Premier and I think more so than any other Australian state and territory parliaments.
I suggest strongly that this be noted in the article. 49.3.72.79 (talk) 02:26, 9 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Former federal MPs in Tasmanian Parliament
Talk:Parliament of Victoria

message: I propose to tidy up :Category:Australian Parliaments a little by creating a new sub category within it called -  :Category:Parliaments of the Australian States and Territories . This category would contain articles on the Parliaments but not lists of previous parliaments. The category would then be listed at :Category:Legislatures of subnational entities in place of :Category:Australian Parliaments.  This would mean that this article will be listed under the new :Category:Parliaments of the Australian States and Territories instead of the current :Category:Australian Parliaments.  
If you would like to comment please go to Category talk:Australian parliaments 
Adz 07:51, 2 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reorganising Australian parliaments category 

message: I dont know that the Parliament contains the Queen, I'm sure it contains the Governor and the two houses. The Governor is mentioned in the Constitution... the Queen has no actual power in the Parliament unless she appoints herself as Governor. Can anyone confirm/disagree? --Crazycrazyduck 11:33, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Queen in the Parliament 

message: Why have you switched the upper and lower houses in this article?, it seems counter intuitive to call them Upper and Lower and then list them in reverse order. Also the upper houses (and their members) are considered senior, in order of precedence than their Lower house collegues. I dispute that it is a fix. AlexanderFrancis (talk) 05:44, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: In order to keep discussion in one place, I've replied solely at Talk:Parliament of New South Wales#Upper_and_Lower_Houses_switch. Orderinchaos 05:52, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  Victoria's constitution does not use the terms "upper" and "lower" but rather explains different duties and functions. For what it's worth, though, the constitution does outline the LC before the LA. However, it does not treat the LC as "senior" to the "junior" LA. It instead says that the LC is a house of review. Vision Insider (talk) 05:44, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  assembly and council switch 

message: I used an image (the original LC boundaries) from the page Victorian Legislative Council on the page for Parliament of Victoria. I forgot to cite this in the original edit summary. Thanks so much to whoever made it, it's fantastic! :) Vision Insider (talk) 22:57, 22 March 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Forgotten citation

message: Thanks to all of  the users who contributed to Results of the 2018 Victorian state election (Legislative Council) and Results of the 2018 Victorian state election (Legislative Assembly), whose results tables have been used on this page.Vision Insider (talk) 00:28, 30 March 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Citation for other pages
Talk:Parliament of South Australia

message: I propose to tidy up :Category:Australian Parliaments a little by creating a new sub category within it called -  :Category:Parliaments of the Australian States and Territories . This category would contain articles on the Parliaments but not lists of previous parliaments. The category would then be listed at :Category:Legislatures of subnational entities in place of :Category:Australian Parliaments.  This would mean that this article will be listed under the new :Category:Parliaments of the Australian States and Territories instead of the current :Category:Australian Parliaments.  
If you would like to comment please go to Category talk:Australian parliaments 
Adz 07:51, 2 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reorganising Australian parliaments category 

message: I think this article is more than just a stub now and the stub tags should be removed.  Any objections? --ThirdEdition 04:30, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: None here. Mikelake 11:14, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Remove stub tags 

message: Im wondering how detailed to make this page, should this page conatain considerabely less than the main page of the two house, im thinking of thinks like the origins of the colors of the houses, the details about the clerks, seargeants/ushers, the significance of the mace and black rod etc etc can we put that here or just on the main page for the relevant house??
Mikelake 15:34, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd always thought that the details of each house would go on the houses pages and that this page would give an outline of all of the parliament issues and link to other articles. --ThirdEdition 00:46, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: How Detailed
Talk:Letters to the inhabitants of Canada

message: Re: Lettre adressée aux habitans de la province de Québec: should that be habitants?  --Saforrest 07:52, 2 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Check French version and English version the biography of Fleury Mesplet and it's listed the same the  is a Canadian Government web site and not a Wikipedia mirror. CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 08:07, 2 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  Habitans is an old spelling of the current French word habitants. -- Mathieugp 15:07, 2 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Spelling question
Talk:Ashvaghosha

message: Hi, if you are here to discuss about the merger, I'd like to inform you that the relevant place to discuss it is Talk:Asvaghosa. It has been contemplated to retain Asvaghosa as it returns substantially more no. of hits on google when compared to Ashvaghosha. Thanks, --Gurubrahma 07:58, 2 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  merge notice
Category talk:Legislatures of dependent territories

message: I propose to either merge this category with :Category:Legislatures of subnational entities by reassigning the categories OR to make this a subcategory or Legislatures of subnational entities. Do others have a preference for either option?  
Adz 07:59, 2 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: the more I think about it, I think it would be better just to make it a subcategory, because dependencies are a special type of subnational entity, and it would prevent the other category from getting cluttered in future. I'm still open to comments. Adz 08:15, 2 November 2005 (UTC)

text: As :Category:Legislatures of subnational entities has been moved to :Category:Legislatures of country subdivisions I suppose we could make the present category a subcategory of that one. __meco 16:31, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reorganising subnational legislature categories