lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Hazel Creek (Great Smoky Mountains)

message: A well-worn Cherokee trail connected Hazel Creek to Cades Cove on the Tennessee  side of the Smokies. The trail followed Shehan Branch, crossed the Pinnacle, and ascended Eagle Creek to Ekaneetlee Gap, a col just east of Gregory Bald at the crest, and descended into the cove. From Cades Cove, the trail proceeded to Tuckaleechee Cove  and the Overhill settlements. Other less-used trails connected Hazel to Forney Creek on the other side of Welch Ridge to the east and the Tuckasegee River area around modern-day Bryson City. 
Looking at USGS maps, I'm not sure what this is talking about.  I don't see a ‘Shehan Branch’ on the map, and Eagle Creek doesn't lead to Ekaneetlee Gap.  The route that would make sense on the map (using 'modern' names) would be:
# Up Sugar Fork (via Haw Gap Branch)
# Over Picken's Gap (between Jenkin's Ridge and the Pinnacle)
# Down Pinnacle Creek
## Either cross over Big Fork Ridge if you know how to find the gap, and head downstream on Eagle Creek
## Or go until Pinnacle Creek meets Eagle Creek and then head upstream
# Go up Ekaneetlee Creek to Ekaneetlee gap, which is about 4 miles east of Gregory Bald (along the trail)
Kjsharke (talk) 00:28, 11 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cherokee trail 
Talk:Chinese nationality

message: This page differs very significantly from the style established for disambiguation pages at Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Disambiguation pages. Issues include:
*More than one blue link per bullet
*Final punctuation
*Use of flag icons
*Bullets with no description or definition
*Bullets with long, complex description
*Links to pages related to nationality, but which could not reasonably be called "Chinese nationality"
Cnilep (talk) 04:43, 31 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Clean up
Talk:John O'Shea (disambiguation)

message: If the argument is that the Footballer is the most notable John O'Shea (which I would dispute, since I've heard of none of them), then the footballer page should be moved here rather than the page redirecting there. If anyone disagrees, move the disambig page back to John O'Shea (disambiguation), move the footballer page to John O'Shea, and put a note on top of the footballer page directing searchers to John O'Shea (disambiguation). Cheers! bd2412 T 19:26, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: After reviewing incoming links, I have reversed myself on this and made the above changes. Cheers! bd2412 T 19:30, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:RAF Fighter Command order of battle 1940

message: The reason this table has been added is to provide complete clarity as to the organisation of RAF Sector Stations and their Satellite Aerodromes - the main purpose of "Bases and Squadrons" is to provide a list of where RAF fighter units were based on one day of battle; it does not list several aerodromes which were used by Fighter Command during the battle (eg; West Malling, Hendon), gives no indication of the alphabetical designation of each Sector, nor does it provide a clear explanation of the administrative control that the sector stations had over the satellites ("Aerodrome Assigned to" does not indicate this at all clearly). 
Naturally, there is a great deal of overlap, but there is also different information provided. This article carries the title of RAF Fighter Command Order of Battle 1940; adding a clear list of Sectors, Sector Stations and Satellite Aerodromes is justified. To argue that duplicating information is somehow harmful or detrimental to the article is a stretch; the same could be said about the main "Battle of Britain" article, in which a lot of information is duplicated. Several hours of work went into creating the new table, and to have it arbitrarily removed by one editor, without discussion, is unreasonable.Minorhistorian (talk) 02:09, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Table of Sector Stations and Satellite Aerodromes 

message: The article gives the OOB as being as of 15th September 1940, yet one of the primary sources used is Price The Hardest Day, which relates to 17th August 1940 as does the OOB listed within it.  An OOB for 15th September is given in Wood & Demster, The Narrow Margin, which contains significant differences from Price.  A decision needs to be made as to which date is to be used and adhered to. NtheP (talk) 19:40, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The only mention of The Hardest Day is footnote 6, which is related to a potted description of the Sector Stations; these were relevant to the command structure of Fighter Command throughout the battle. The Battle of Britain Then and Now Volume 5 is the primary reference for the unit code letters, squadron names (eg:152 "Hyderabad" Sqn), radio call signs, etc, and confirms which units were officially accredited to Fighter Command during the Battle of Britain; the list of 71 units is on page 255. This does not give the locations of the units on 15 September and supplements the information given in Woods and Dempster, which is not listed in the bibliography, nor is there any citation to the book. A note to this effect had been added. Minorhistorian (talk) 22:18, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Date of order of battle

message: This list includes Kirkwall. Doing a little Googling turns up Kirkwall Airport, formerly RAF Grimsetter. Can anyone confirm Kirkwall was actually Grimsetter. Maury Markowitz (talk)
:I believe so, I dont think it was actually called "Kirkwall" while under RAF control. MilborneOne (talk) 17:29, 13 January 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Good enough for me, I'll update this. Maury Markowitz (talk) 16:06, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  RAF Kirkwall?
Category talk:Stub-Class Alternative medicine articles

message: The Glossary of alternative medicine is ideal for both avoiding stub articles to begin with; as well as the for first step in deleting stubs that will never be expanded beyond one or two paragraphs.
Topics that will only be one or two paragraphs can be easily added to this glossary.  In addition, the content of the glossary of alternative medicine can, also, be easily referenced in articles (for example, Doctrine of Signatures).  —Preceding unsigned comment added by John Gohde (talk • contribs) 19:39, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Our Glossary is a Workable Solution to Stubs
Talk:Holly Palmer

message: I came here looking for information, having accidentally seen her video on Youtube, "That's why they call it Rome." Had a real "who's that???" experience. I'd vote her "notable" or at the least becoming so. Don't delete. Profhum (talk) 19:38, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Notable enough

message: My edits were not caused by any contact with Holly Palmer.  I don't know her, nor even know who she is, etc.  I was interested in the Wing F. Fing book, which I read years ago, and found this page in that way.--Jimbo Wales (talk) 07:13, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  In case anyone wonders
Talk:Charismania

message: The meaning has nothing to do with mental illness. When “mania” is used as a suffix it means “enthusiasm or obsession” (unless in a medical context). Such as Wrestlemania, Beatlemania and Obamamania.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glossary_of_manias Harpervi (talk) 01:09, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mania
Talk:Savill Building

message: Sounds rather like an advertisement. Could mention the massive issues they had with damp coming through the roof as soon as it was built and the cost of fixing this. EAi (talk) 01:03, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Go for it Tkn20 (talk) 15:37, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Damballa (company)

message: There are literally thousands of computer security startups. Most do not have WP pages. All of the references I can find for this article are sourced to pr-placed news stories --- "got their series A", "got their series B", "published a survey". Awesome. But why are they notable? The article needs to make a claim for notability, and then back that claim up with sources. Does this one? --- tqbf 19:44, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I wrote the article.  I am not affiliated with the company, and still do not see any notability problem.  First, it is very well referenced.  Second, there are several features that establish notability, including the innovative purpose (with associated mainstream coverage from NYT), funding, and government clientele.  There are not thousands of startups with all of these features.  I agree that much of the information is provided by the company, but that itself does not show a lack of notability.  You are welcome to add information from other sources.  However, I am removing the notability tag.  Superm401 - Talk 17:37, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I updated the Damballa, Inc. entry to better reflect the current state of the organization. I am affiliated with the company, but worked to make sure any additions were neutral and factual. Please contact us at Damballa with any questions or concerns you may have regarding our company, our research or our products. We appreciate your input.Jldeitch (talk) 19:07, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Notability for this startup
Talk:James Goll

message: Article's subject might not meet WP:AUTHOR to qualify for notability as a creative professional, despite having written several books.  Also may not meet general notability requires as founder of non-notable organization Encounters Network or as his stated profession in the article, "marketing guru."  Any editor who would like to consider discussion deletion of this article may see WP:AFD. Blue Rasberry 19:12, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Notability

message: This article sounds like a press release. Although I have no problem with James Goll's notability (as far as I am concerned, we could have interesting articles about almost everyone on the planet), any article must show objectivity and must be informative. This article is mere puffery. James Nicol (talk) 05:08, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tone 

message: I suspect the main author of this puff piece is the man's daughter. Is there any Notability, demonstrated by RS, at all? KJP1 (talk) 16:19, 12 January 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Notability again
Talk:List of people associated with Australian Christian Churches

message: I don't believe it is useful for this list to include individuals whose only 'association' is to have attended the Church.  A list of officials and pastors etc. is potentially useful however.  I've removed some names accordingly.  —Moondyne 07:32, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Inclusion criteria in this list
Talk:Luton Castle

message: This article cites no sources. I've had a, albeit very quick, Google search and cannot find any references to a 'Luton Castle'. Did it actually exist? Can someone locate a reference? Sotakeit (talk) 09:48, 17 October 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I have added a ref for both castles but it is not clear if the name "Luton Castle" was used for either and some of the later text it is not clear which castle is refered to. MilborneOne (talk) 19:01, 17 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  References 
Talk:Krewstown, Philadelphia

message: Please keep the article about Krewstown.  New material further establishing its significance will be added soon.  Zulitz (talk) 19:57, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Comment

message: What can we add to this article?  More details on the Krewstown mall?  The rail line that runs through the area?  Local schools the area feeds to?  Info on the bridge and the surrounding woods? Info on the police horse stables? Reference to the historical church and cemetery? Also how about a map/outline of the area?  Specific geographical boundaries? Geographical boundaries might help a lot so it gives us guidelines on what to add to the article. Centerone (talk) 08:11, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  What to add?
Talk:Dance of the Yao People

message: Need to translate this text:
以粤北云南等地区的瑶族传统歌舞鼓乐为素材创作了，1952年初上演后由茅沅据此改编为管弦乐《瑶族舞曲》，1953年在北京首演，乐曲广受欢迎并被改编成多种演出形式，包括民族管弦乐等。 Badagnani (talk) 20:50, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Translation
Talk:Eagles of the Empire

message: I was wondering if there are any like minded editors who could help me to improve this article.  I have made a start but it is dificult for me as I am inexperienced in the writing of articles (and I only have 1 Eagle Series book in my room for references etc).  Thanks. TheTrojanHought (talk) 20:03, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Help 

message: Don't forget this is not a 'fansite' - it is an encyclopaedia and the first appearance of a publication is the most significant to the history of a title. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 09:44, 7 January 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Covers
Talk:Donnington Castle

message: It seems this version of the article contains material duplicated from pastscape; the evidence can be seen here. I am working to remove the violations, but felt it should be noted here on the talk page. Nev1 (talk) 18:49, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Copyright issues
Talk:Warfare Officer

message: There are a number of articles (Warfare Officer, Engineer Officer, Sub-lieutenant, Midshipman, and probably many more) which refer to Fleet Board as a step that transitions a Royal Navy officer from an officer by order of the Admiralty into a comissioned officer but I can't find an article for it.  Normally I'd just write it but I can't find any sources on the Royal Navy site which discuss what that actually means.
Some specific questions for this article:
Let's say you start out as a cadet with the rank of Midshipman -
* When, during Warfare Officer training, do you become a 'commissioned officer' in the Royal Navy?  Midshipmen in the U.S. Navy are promoted to Ensign when they graduate from the Naval Academy, but this doesn't seem to be the case in Royal Navy.
* How long does it take a midshipman who has passed fleet board to be promoted to sub-lieutenant?  After passing the examination?
* I believe Acting Sub-Lieutenant was used previously between passing fleet board and the actual paperwork.  Is it immediate now?
* Historical info for this specialty (I think WWI and WWII should be sufficient)
Thanks for your help!
Kirk (talk) 12:53, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fleet Board
Talk:List of books of the King James Version

message: A recent editor has introduced many spelling errors into the article. Apparently the editor has been confused by the funny looking fonts found in older books. For instance, not even the oldest printings of the KJV contained any "gofpels", but rather gospels, and yes, that funny looking sigil really is an S and not an F. Likewise, the editor seems to have confused the letters U and V, which truly is an easy thing for a modern reader to do when presented with these unfamiliar fonts. 
For this reason, I am reverting his edits. The spelling used in this article follows The Bible: Authorized King James Version, Oxford World's Classics (), which should probably be added as a reference to this article. Rwflammang (talk) 16:09, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Spelling errors

message: :The following section got cut from Chapters and verses of the Bible; I think it more rightly belongs in the article. It needs a little bit of work for the Apocrypha section, so in the meantime I am storing it here. Rwflammang (talk) 15:20, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: New ref:  Rwflammang (talk) 15:20, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Statistics

message: I contain a blue copy in my room. The OT and NT turned out half-fold so magically. You try it out. It's just coffee and skim milk. Bye. Moreovaltine (talk) 00:55, 24 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Holy Bible King James Version
Talk:Anglican Church in North America

message: The passage about a case of Holy Orders being "dissolved" cites a letter from a bishop to the former minister in the case.   The letter is cited from a copy stored on Google Drive.   There are some problems with this material and the citation.
The letter is unpublished primary source material, so the discussion of it in this article constitutes what Wikipedia calls "original research".  This is contrary to WP guidelines: see WP:OR.   If there is a publication of journalistic quality discussing the case, that would be a suitable source to use in discussing the topic here.  -- Bistropha (talk) 08:43, 18 April 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Apparent OR in discussion of "dissolved" ordination 

message: Hi, . I just want to address the subject of your recent edit summary (). I think you are quoting a source other than that which you are citing. Unlike the 2009 ACNA constitution, the 2014 revision that you cited has a much more narrow definition of the term ministry partner, as we can see in title I, canon 7. Could we confirm that we are looking at the same documents? 142.160.89.97 (talk) 21:02, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: You are correct, 142.160.89.97. I apologize. However, wouldn't it have been more constructive to simply rewrite the entry to say "ministry partners and affiliated ministries" rather than slap a verification needed tag? Ltwin (talk) 21:07, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thank you,  – apology accepted. And it was  as opposed to , but you're right, fixing a problem is always preferable to merely identifying it. I didn't plan on rewriting the paragraph at that particular moment, but I hoped that myself or someone else would handle the issue in the future, now that it had been identified. 142.160.89.97 (talk) 21:13, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ministry partners 

message: Why exactly do we need the French and Spanish translations of the church's name in the lead? Ltwin (talk)
:The Spanish translation doesn't even match the name used in the church's own translations. Since it's unsourced, removing is probably appropriate. — D. Wo. 16:55, 24 November 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: French and Spanish translations

message: I just reverted an addition of the adjective "conservative" in the opening sentence because it linked to political conservatism which isn't really an ACNA tenet.  Certainly the ACNA is 'doctrinally' conservative as compared to TEC or ACC but that's not really the same thing.  I am not sure what word and or wikilink might work Fundamentalist and Evangelical are both too politically loaded and generally refer to movements that have a much longer history of conflict the Mainline Protestantism than the majority of ACNA which only distinguished itself relatively recently.  My tentative preference is to leave out the adjective and have the discussion on the lead explain the theological positioning, but I am not irrevocably opposed to one; I just want it to be as accurate as possible.  Eluchil404 (talk) 05:03, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Description in opening sentence
Talk:Robert Shields (diarist)

message: More diary excerpts could be added, provided they are dated and appropriately referenced. Help if you can! :) - Gobeirne (talk) 23:35, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Excerpts 

message: Robert Shields total lifetime output is listed as taking up 81 cartons in this article.  However, the article on hypergraphia lists his total output as 91 cartons.  Which is correct? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.10.241.205 (talk) 
:* Well, there's a few different estimates. In the interview with Michael Feldman he says 81 boxes and counting, the Sideswipe and Daily Mail articles said 91 boxes when it was handed over in 1999, and the count of boxes listed at the WSU Manuscripts, Archives and Special Collections catalog comes to 94 boxes. I've gone with the WSU count, as it's a primary and up-to-date source. - Gobeirne 04:58, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Number of Cartons
Talk:Pastoral Provision

message: I rewrote the section on the TAC and added a link to the Wikipedia page on them and in particular the section on the discussions with the Vatican.  I think that this is the best way to handle this section.  Anyone interested can go to the TAC page, which will probably be updated more frequently, accurately, and comprehensively.  --Bruce Hall (talk) 06:28, 22 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Traditional Anglican Communion

message: Would someone explain the list of "faculty"?   The article contains a list of names and academic fields, but with no explanation of what they do in relation to the pastoral provision.   Chonak (talk) 04:30, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Faculty?

message: Should the redirect to Anglican Use be reverted?  See discussion on Talk:Anglican Use--Bruce Hall (talk) 07:04, 7 July 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Following a discussion on Talk:Anglican Use I have reverted the redirect and have tagged this article with Template:Primary Sources. After enough time has elapsed for some editing, then there will be a discussion about merging this with Anglican Use, or maybe with Clerical celibacy (Catholic Church).  See and participate in the full discussion at Talk:Anglican Use. --Bruce Hall (talk) 05:40, 22 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Should the redirect to Anglican Use be reverted? 
Talk:Wallingford Castle

message: I've gone through and given it a bit of scrub and general expansion. I've removed the longer lists, as they weren't referenced and I'm not sure they were adding a lot, and added in some more pictures and a plan of the castle. It may well need a quick scrub through in terms of copy-editing though. Hchc2009 (talk) 17:18, 27 April 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: The list of lords of Wallingford Castle has been readded. Any thoughts on its place in the article? As it stands a list of names isn't immensely helpful and as the article's been expended it's repeating much of the information already there, but perhaps it would be helpful to present the information with more detail such as dates and reasons for change over. Nev1 (talk) 19:06, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Expansion... 

message: "The nobleman William Martel, Stephen's royal steward..." - is this a Butler, Steward (office), or Lord Steward? SilkTork *Tea time 13:29, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: The original source said "royal steward"; I've gone for Lord Steward, the later title that descends from this period, as the best link.Hchc2009 (talk) 19:10, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: What sort of steward?
Talk:Swaffham

message: Is the Swaffham Bolbec mentioned here actually Swaffham Bulbeck, Cambridgeshire and nothing to do with Swaffham Norfolk?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by RobertWalden (talk • contribs) 14:16, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Swaffham Bolbec?

message: * see  will delete section. --palmiped |  Talk   21:22, 27 April 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Wrong Swaffham

message: The reference to the Breckland Christian Fellowship appears to me to be rather more of an advertisement than genuinely encyclopeadic content.Tagilbert (talk) 20:24, 13 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Christian Fellowship?
Talk:Hananuma Masakichi

message: Is anomalies-unlimited.com really a good source? It doesn't seem to be very.. reliable. Check out some of their other content. Pretty silly stuff. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.108.164.44 (talk • contribs)  08:46, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Good source?

message: According to http://boingboing.net/2009/06/17/whatever-happened-to-1.html, the artifact was damaged in the 1989 Loma Prieta Earthquake in San Francisco, but has been mended and has been on display in the Wisconsin Dells for years.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.0.136.201 (talk) 07:27, 27 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Incorrect Information?
File talk:Yellow Emperor.jpg

message: I have been a big fan of Wikipedia since its inception. However, I cannot allow such racist image names to continue. "Yellow Emperor" could be taken offensively by many people of Oriental descent. Does anyone else feel the same?
Thank you.
He is actually called the Yellow Emperor. Thus, the image name suits the subject matter. Jellocube27 (talk) 19:41, 28 January 2009 (UTC)