lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Albany High School (Georgia)

message: For a May 2005 deletion debate over this page see Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Albany High School
----
Please do not revert changes without comment, and mark the changes as minor edits.  My changes were done in good faith and in keeping with the template located at Wikipedia:WikiProject Schools.  I disagree that a complete listing of the student government is notable, but I will refrain from removing it again pending further discussion on this page with other users.  Cheers.  --BaronLarf 13:43, May 12, 2005 (UTC)
* Speaking as someone who has also made contributions of note to this article, I agree that a listing of the student government is not necessary and a bit too granular.  Bahn Mi 01:10, 19 May 2005 (UTC)

message: This discussion has be replaced here from the history pages --BaronLarf 13:49, May 12, 2005 (UTC)
I have contacted the "Albany High Times" to ask for permission to use their content. Please keep the page up until i recieve a response. Thank you, twister3328 (Added 17:16, May 7, 2005 by Twister3328)
Do not post to this article again until there is a consensus on the temporary subpage (per copyvio message) Nick Catalano (Talk) 23:15, 7 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Earlier discussion removed from this page

message: This section focuses too much on the coach and not enough on the team's achievements. Where are the high-profile college athletes that attended Albany High? I feel much of the information on the coach in this article could be better used in an article for coach Mitchell. Fdssdf (talk) 05:55, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Football section problem

message: It seems this area, especially the section on the band, is written from a very biased point of view and needs badly to be re-written by someone with more knowledge of the subject than I. Demokratickid (talk) 19:15, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Extracurricular Activities section issue
Talk:List of territories acquired by the Empire of Japan

message: This article survived a Vote for Deletion. The discussion can be found here. -Splash 20:41, 23 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Vote for Deletion

message: North Korea was not an independent state at the outbreak of WWII. Nor was South Korea.
Why are Taiwan and Korea listed twice? It's not like they have been invaded / occupied / annexed twice, is it? Wikipeditor 11:16, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  “North Korea”? 

message: Japan never occupied Midway, so this should be taken off the list Masterblooregard (talk) 22:39, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Midway 

message: Is there any source that a "Japanese Antarctic territory" ever existed? Otherwise I would remove it from the article. -- 85.181.61.64 (talk) 19:33, 6 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Japanese Antarctic territory 

message: I've had a pretty difficult time finding how much actual *land* area was controlled, in total, by Imperial Japan at the height of WWII. The article Empire of Japan lists 766,027 sq mi, however that's only in 1938. Can someone please find this info and add it to this article? Coinmanj (talk) 03:48, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Total land area? 

message: Proposing merger of duplicate article List_of_territories_acquired_by_the_Empire_of_Japan into Territorial_conquests_of_the_Empire_of_Japan. Merger would not cause any article-size or weighting problems.Linhart.stephen (talk) 07:21, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merger proposal 

message: They were definitely occupied... Stardude82 (talk) 19:22, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  What about Attu and Kiska, Alaska?
Talk:Hungarian shield

message: http://pittweb.prm.ox.ac.uk/Kent/shieweap/shgenex3.html
Vienna national museum: http://www.kolumbus.fi/rauno.huikari/museokuvat/wnm_2_shield.jpg
This does not in the least resemble what is shown as a "Hungarian shield" in Gladiatoria fechtbuch which appears to be a much more offensive-capable shield.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.131.219.137 (talk) 09:36, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
Talk:Sensor web

message: This page has been hijacked.
Kevin Delin was NOT the first one to use, or the one that coined, the title "sensorweb".  The concept was developed in the military, and the title had been in use inside NASA for years before it became "public" -- this is typical JPL self attribution.  
To " Hey!" => It is impossible for the casual user to discern what is "commercial propaganda" from encyclopedic facts so it is important that contributors be ACCURATE about what they post.  As written, this entry is virtually useless and Wikipedia suffers as a consequence.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.183.60.150 (talk) 18:19, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  This article is misleading 

message: It presents a pedestrian view of the sensorweb concept that is narrowly targeted at commercial applications that can be deployed today with existing technologies.  NASA has identified technical features for future Earth-observing sensorweb scenarios that make the article's description pale by comparison.  What the article does to the sensorweb concept is akin to describing the personal computer by saying that it can do elementary school arithmetic.  This explains why certain statements made in the article (ability to "identify" things) appear to be out of context (i.e. see the comments below).
hey! that was just complaining... (it is up to us - ie those in the sensor web community) - to edit this entry to reflect the whole topic :-)  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 138.100.216.204 (talk) 07:55, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  This article is incomplete 

message: It seems this page has much in common with the products offered by SensorWare Systems. So much in common that it even used language directly from their website("over twenty Sensor Web systems have been deployed, some spanning as many as 6 miles and running continuously for over 3 years."). I think pointing out the connection between this article and that company would help this be less of an advertisement.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.174.23.10 (talk) 17:21, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Connection with SensorWare 

message: In fact, the SensorWare page is similar to the original NASA/JPL page.  And the NASA/JPL page provided much of the information to the article.  However, it seems more neutral now.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.133.247.67 (talk) 07:38, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Things more neutral 

message: Now complies as a brief summary with other details following in the article.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.133.247.67 (talk) 08:04, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Introduction
Talk:2010 United Kingdom general election

message: The article states this was "the first general election to be contested by the leaders of all three of the three leading political parties". Surely, this makes no sense? I suggest something along the lines that this was "the first general election to be contested by different leaders of the three leading political parties compared to the previous election".--WSmith26997 (talk) 21:38, 9 September 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Introduction 

message: The "Bigotgate" says " Despite this, Labour went on to gain the Rochdale seat from the Liberal Democrats, one of the few gains they made in the election". The problem here is that most sources would dispute this. It is a complicated issue. The Lib Dem Paul Rowen had indeed won The Rochdale constituency in 2005 and was defeated by Labour's Simon Danczuk at this election, the 2005 seat had significantly different boundaries. This on election night the BBC counted it as a Labour hold, as did The Times Guide to the House of Commons 2010, which also notes (on  p244) that the boundary changes helped Labour (and suggests that on these boundaries in 2005 Labour would have had 40.9% to the Lib Dems' 40.7%). I would note the claim of a game is not cited. It is true to say the Lib Dems, given their polling were favourites to win the seat, and on election night one of the BBC presenters (I think David Dimbleby commented that Labour's win was a surprise as the Rochdale electorate (especially women) had been expected to react negatively to the Gillian Duffy incident. I is also worth noting that Labour's vote still fell - with the the Times Guide indicating they were down about 4.5%, but the Lib Dem vote fell further by over 6% - other parties - notably the Conservatives - picked up these votes. Not sure how this could be best incorporated (if needed) in the article, but the statement as it stands is (I am sure totally unintentionally) misleading. Dunarc (talk) 20:49, 19 September 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Claim re Rochdale result in "Bigotgate" section 

message: Is this the best image available for use on Wikipedia of Nick Clegg? This image looks quite low-quality and blurry looking closer. I cannot find many high-quality images of Nick Clegg before 2010 or around the time of the election though. Qwerty123M (talk) 00:50, 13 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Image for Nick Clegg in infobox 

message: People keep changing the notional seat changes in the infobox, presumably because they don't understand the concept of the seat changes being notional due to boundary changes, or maybe they just haven't read the footnote. Having said that, do we have a reliable source for the notional figures? Mark and inwardly digest (talk) 09:30, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Notional seat changes  

message: 4,150 candidates stood in the 2010 general election (source), but the results table here only lists 3,720. The Grand Lunar (talk) 20:26, 8 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  The results table is missing a large number of candidates
Talk:Prester John

message: It seems some recent editors have destroyed the external link section linking to Cosmographia (Sebastian Münster).
So, I have uploaded the images individually to Commons in an effort to preserve the linkage:
File:Prete Gianni.jpg
File:Prester John Emblem.jpg
Avindratalk 02:26, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: I included the second one in the article. --Error (talk) 10:49, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cosmographia
Talk:List of Bushisms

message: Should this list be moved to the article Bushism?  It would seem neat, concise, and logical to have the description of a Bushism and the actual examples on the same page.  It would also prevent people interested in this topic from excess link following.
*no, because it's a list. Bushism explains what it is; furthermore, this would make that article very long.
:This should be in Wikiquote anyways. --Slac 03:02, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Talk:Humbug Mountain

message: wow, i just drove through there last month - i even took a picture of it. neat-o to find it on wikipedia!! Kingturtle 23:12, 7 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Comment

message: This article needs some tidying up of the references. For example Views of the Pacific Ocean can be seen from the grassy summit. is followed by no less than 6 inline citations. This is surely not such a controversial point that it needs 6 different references to back it up. This is after all a mountain by the Pacific Ocean. Is it controvershal that the summit is grassy? The over referencing just becomes impenetrable. Polargeo (talk) 21:37, 23 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I was just adding all references that contain that information. I'm not exactly sure which ones to remove and which ones to keep, since they all state mostly the same info. Any suggestions? LITTLEMOUNTAIN5 20:51, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I added this section before I took the plunge to review the article. This point doesn't fail the article for GA status at all. It is just my own point of view, feel free to disagree. Having such long lists of inline citations when not necessary is a little distracting. If you can just tone it down to the most relevent 2 or 3 of the references in each inline citation that would be better. Unless it is a vital point you are reinforcing or something people may question, in that case a list of 6 inline references may be entirely appropriate. As most of the references are unobtainable to me I can't really do this. Polargeo (talk) 06:07, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay, thanks. LITTLEMOUNTAIN5 23:54, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

text: [ Done.] Thanks! LITTLEMOUNTAIN5 21:24, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tidy up references 
Talk:J. T. Walsh

message: J. T. Walsh was born as James Thomas Patrick Walsh, his initials really were J.T. See: http://www.sfgenealogy.com/php/cabisearch.php
I'm not sure where this J.P. rumor comes from, but I can't find any reliable source for it.--Fallout boy 07:37, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: His real initials

message: "He died while a guest of the Optimum Health Institute, a spiritual detoxification clinic in Lemon Grove, California." 
Wow...that couldn't have been good for business!  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Captain Quirk (talk • contribs) 06:36, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ironic place of death
Talk:Peter Davis (sociologist)

message: "The couple married in 1981 as a result of her campaign for Parliament."
Could anyone tell me more about what this campaign was all about?
Eternal 23:31, 7 May 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I believe that it was simply that, back in the 80s, it was less socially acceptable for people to be living together in a long-term relationship without being married. As I understand it, Clark was advised that she should marry Davis before the campaign, as conservatives might not approve of her arrangements at the time. (I don't think it would have been that big a deal, and conservatives probably wouldn't have been voting Labour anway, but I suppose every little bit helps). I have a quote by her that says: "I think legal marriage is unnecessary, and I would not have formalised the relationship except for going into Parliament." (I can't find a proper source for this quote, though, so I can't vouch for its accuracy. But it matches my understanding of the matter.) -- Vardion 23:38, 7 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: There are quite a few rumours going on about Peter Davis.  Please do not add them to this page without verification (a news article) etc. --Midnighttonight Procrastinating on uni work... 22:35, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Once it is published, it is in the public domain, and can be included as a rumour.--Midnighttonight Procrastinating on uni work... 03:41, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

text: This talk page is for discussions on how to improve the article, not for the spreading of rumours. See Wikipedia:Talk page.-gadfium 04:05, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

text: The political right in New Zealand has been trying to smear Helen Clark and her husband for a long time. This is why Helen Clark's own entry has a vandalism problem. Wikipedia is just another way they can do it.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 61.254.246.237 (talk) 18:20, 25 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: rumours
Talk:Time Traveler Convention

message: As far as I know, nobody from the future wants to attend. Too crowded. 165.230.149.141 23:59, 7 May 2105 (UTC)
thread_title: Crowded

message: Note on tense usage: historical information about what happened at the convention should be in past tense as usual, but the invitation to future time travelers remains open so should be described in the present tense.  I think a hypothetical future time traveler's attendance makes most sense in the future tense, because it's in their personal future and that's the viewpoint that's relevant.  Thus "an invention ... would be particularly welcome".  81.168.80.170 08:30, 15 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Tense

message: Amal will be graduating soon (in the next couple terms), and as such, his "official" website on web.mit.edu will be removed. Any ideas on a slightly more permanent link we might use? (Wayback machine, maybe? Hopefully it'll get archived there soon.) The NYT article would be good, except that it's not freely accessible. Aerion//talk 06:40, 16 May 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Is it not possible to get it onto Geocities, Altavista, or a similar free webhost? UK-Logician-2006 13:29, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: External link

message: Since no one from the future showed up, does that mean none of my descendents could possibly come back for this?Cameron Nedland 03:06, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No, because with then not showing up, the future changed (because of the changes that they would make if they stayed there), and maybe because of those changes they will go there. 201.58.120.70 02:05, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Future possibility 

message: "The spacetime coordinates continue to be publicized prominently and indefinitely, so that future time travelers will be aware and have the opportunity to have attended."
Shouldn't that be "the opportunity to attend"? I mean it'd be in the time traveller's past (i.e. before their native time) but in subjective time, it would be the future. I think. 80.193.211.68 16:49, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The conditional future past tense doesn't exist in most current langauges, so it's hard to say what the appropriate term would be.  — Arthur Rubin |  (talk) 17:20, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: More tense
Talk:Conflent

message: yes, I know. The wording of it could be seen as questionable under the circumstances, but Conflent is within the current official borders of France, so...  Grutness|hello?  00:23, 8 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Geo-stub

message: User:Toniher is constantly reverting my contributions and accusing me of Vandalism... Maybe this morning the south of France has suddenly become part of Catalonia and I'm unaware of that fact. Meanwhile IT IS STILL A FRENCH TERRITORY and this article should say it so. Nobody is going to include a template with the "comarques of Catalonia" in a french territory wikipage.
I will not... I repeat, I will not tolerate this pro-catalan acting towards my home country!!!
This said, I would like to kindly ask all the contributors which feel the "urgent need" to fool and fill the Wikipedia world with Pan-Catalanism, Catalan Countries wannabe, Catalan nationalism and just plain false pseudo-Catalan History to restraint themselves from doing it. Not all the surrounding lands to Catalonia feel the need to become part of it, and the english Wikipedia will not become a highway to "export" their history "a la carte". Giving for right the fact that we should not generalize, I often wonders if these people suffer from the well-known "Catalan Small Penis Syndrome" (Are we allowed to say "penis"?)
WIKIPEDIA IS NOT A PRO-CATALAN POLITICAL PAMPHLET Maurice27 00:27, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vandalism by [[User:Toniher]] 
Talk:Monica Dickens

message: In 1964 Monica Dickens was signing books in Sydney, Australia, when she misheard "How much is it?" asked in an Australian accent as being a reference to a woman called "Emma Chissit".  This led to the popular "Strine" books, a humorous guide to Australian English as it was in the 1960s.
----
Emma Chizzit is sureley from fraffley well Spoken by Afferbeck Lauder, not the Strine books by him. ANd regarless how does this apply to MD? 00:25, 8 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Trivia
Talk:Genichi Taguchi

message: This sentence seems to be the central one of the whole article:
:Taguchi's innovation was to replicate each experiment by means of an outer array, itself an orthogonal array that seeks deliberately to emulate the sources of variation that a product would encounter in reality.
Unfortunately, the sentence is utterly unintelligible. What is an "outer array" or an "orthogonal array"? Could we see a tiny example? 141.140.6.60 00:28, 8 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  141.140.6.60 

message: Italicized part (from a previous editor) moved here from main page:
The squared-error loss function had been used by John von Neumann and Oskar Morgenstern in the 1930s. There is a theorem I think - help appreciated
: —- Xsmith (talk•contribs) 03:06, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Loss functions - theorem 

message: Is there any reason that the page 'Genichi Taguchi' is almost identical to the page 'Taguchi Methods'? The only difference is the first paragraph and the section on 'Life'. 202.180.110.18 (talk) 22:38, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Well spotted; I have inserted a brief summary here, with a link to the main article. We should not have the same text in both articles. --Jayen466 23:05, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Overlap between [[Genichi Taguchi]] and [[Taguchi methods]] 
Talk:Pangloss

message: There is an example of the naturalistic fallacy that should be noted by someone familiar with the book.  I can't tell if it is committed either by the character in the book or by the author of the article.  The statement before "in other words"   does not imply the statement after "in other words."  
"there is no effect without a cause" — in other words, everything in existence, from the human nose to natural disasters, is meant to suit a specific purpose.
--RedHouse18 23:28, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: The article currently says:
:The panglossian paradigm is a term coined by Stephen Jay Gould and Richard Lewontin to refer to the notion that everything has specifically adapted to suit specific purposes. Instead, they argue, accidents and exaptation (the use of old features for new purposes) play an important role in the process of evolution.
In his rather negative review of a book coauthored by Lewontin, though, Richard Dawkins remarks, "The 'Panglossianism'—J. B. S. Haldane’s term is (mis)used without acknowledgement...".  --Delirium 04:53, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  coinage 

message: Not sure if anyone agrees on this but the claim that Gould and Lewonton's reference to adaptationism as "panglossian" is nothing but a straw-man IS itself a straw-man.  The claim that Gould and Lewonton are making is that pan-adaptationism as presented in many pieces relies on an Argumentum ad Ignorantiam.  This is to say, the idea that all evolutionary traits are selected for optimality etc relies on an unfounded assumption.  Dennett and his coleagues would argue that if you do not see a way in which the trait evolved as "optimal" then you aren't looking hard enough or that it will eventually be discovered.  However, this begs the question by assuming the opposite of the position against which you are arguing as a premise. Certainly the adaptationists opponents in ths discussion wouldn't allow this premise to be accepted at face value.  Argumentation is needed, at least give some sort of epistemic justification. Bad form by any good philosopher's standards.
Ardentseigi 17:32, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Straw-man 

message: Not to be glib, but that's silly given that the first line of the article is "Pangloss is a character in Voltaire's novel Candide" which is an explicit citation.  Citations don't need to be subscript numbers of APA parenthetical references, it is acceptable to directly reference an author or work and consider that a "citation."  --FNV (talk) 17:43, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Not citing sources banner?
Talk:Belgrade, Montana

message: ----
Is Belgrade named after Belgrade, Yugoslavia? --Anon
:More likely than not. (Steampowered 10:57, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: At that moment, Yugoslavia didn’t exist. It was Kingdom of Serbia (1882-1918). 2A01:CB1D:676:3800:FD57:A961:32BE:984F (talk) 08:34, 27 January 2023 (UTC)