lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Kancamagus Highway

message: I questioned a group of rangers at a Kank Forest-Service facility. One said the N "in" "KancamaNgus" came "from the south", surely meaning "flatlanders" mostly from the rest of the northeast (and probably even southern NH), but Another responded about remembering it from "before 1959" (when no one but locals, and historians, i guess, knew the name).  I'm confident that current usage is verifiable, but while looking for the documentation, could we keep an eye out for the history of the pronunciation?  Might this be in the Dictionary of American Regional English? --Jerzy•t 16:00, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I read the proper pronunciation from the AMC Guide many years ago.  I will say, however, that the correct pronunciation goes unnoticed by those who say KancamaNgus or KancamaNKus.  I would also appreciate any documentation that would lend credence to these mispronunciations.  JJ 19:34, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

text: As far as I know, it's "mawgus," and I'm going to edit the article as such.  Others can pipe in on this page.  JJ 16:29, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pronunciation 

message: Even aside from where the mysterious N comes from (compare Pago Pago and sherbet), how about resolving whether the correct pronunciation is "mahgus" or "mawgus" because the page has both. Matchups 15:10, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: As far as I know, it's "mawgus," and I'm going to edit the article as such.  Others can pipe in on this page.  JJ 16:29, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Contradiction on page 

message: I had only looked at this page, and not the NHR112, where the merge discussion took place. I was just clearing out the merging backlog - this merge has an entry in the Wikipedia:Proposed mergers, under September 2006. Someone must have forgotten to remove it after the discussion was completed. Thanks for pointing it out. Happy editing!  - xC -  | ☎  17:14, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merger proposal
Talk:Gustav Bergmann

message: I've started the article, and am currently doing research for the actual information on the page. Feel free to add/modify the categories. WP seems to have added a few extra ones for me (ie. The one like: "people in connection with religion or philosophy") for whatever reason. I also played with the philosopher info box that I stole from Nietzsche's page, but I couldn't get it to work right with the little information I had in it. So that can wait.
Again, I'm researching him right now, and would be pleased if no one added any information until after the date specified on the article page. Thanks! --Krovisser 17:26, 20 November 2005 (UTC)
Category talk:American writers

message: some subcategories are sovrapposing :
an afro american novelist should listed under both afro-american and novelist? --Melaen 17:31, 20 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes. It is normal for articles to be in more than one category. CalJW 17:20, 6 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: While it may be true that categories are not always hierarchical, it is generally preferred that an article not be both in a category and a subcategory thereof. What has been happening lately is that large categories have been getting subdivided into, to use this category as both a proposal and example,  and , two main cats under the supercat American writers. We can then use these categories for categories that already exist, which should accomodate every article at least twice.--Rockero 07:52, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Many articles should be in both categories and subcategories, especially when the categories get broken up into miniscule sub-categories.  Categories are for browsing and there is a point at which categories get less useful for browsing if they are broken up.  So I think it best that all American writers remain in this category as well as being duplicated in any of the subcategories.  This has been discussed quite a bit at Wikipedia:Categorization.  Also, I think there could be a value in having :Category:English-language writers which would contain ALL writers in English.  If you look at :Category:Writers by language, English is missing. -- Samuel Wantman 11:06, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Responding to old thread: Gendered and ethnic categories are non-diffusing, which means membership in the sub-cat should not remove you from the parent. However, you *can* diffuse on other criteria - for example, writers-by-state is diffusing for now. We need to start a broader conversation on how to categorize writers in this tree, which has now grown and has lots of possible sub-cats and lots of inconsistent categorization.--Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 14:23, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: subcategories

message: Some entries under C are being placed there because of first name, not last - Chet Day, for example. I have no idea how to fix this, as I'm new to editing - maybe someone more knowledgeable can? 5dots 21:55, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Nevermind, I just figured it out. 5dots 22:09, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm also seeing this behavior, not sure how to fix it. Hyachts 22:42, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Piping categories

message: Michael Ridpath is English, not American. Millbanks 22:05, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Michael Ridpath
Talk:Beer Goggles and Attraction

message: The Terminology section looks like it was written by someone with beer goggles, it has numerous typos that need cleaned up, and more importantly no citation. 72.144.61.226 (talk) 21:46, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Terminology section

message: great article :-) --Raddicks 17:40, 20 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Great!

message: I'm not wanting to delete this page, as an inclusionist, but I'm somewhat surprised this hasn't been at least nominated for deletion as a 'non-notable neologism' yet.--HisSpaceResearch 04:19, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: As a Scot, you'll know this term is in common use in the UK and you can see from the references such as the BBC that it's thoroughly mainstream. Somebody ought be able to turn to an encyclopaedia and find out about a topic, so it should be included. The article length is commensurate with its importance. Nunquam Dormio 19:39, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

text: It's also commonly used in the U.S., I also think it should stay.  Da Beyotch 16:50, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Seconding the statement that it's a common U.S. term. I removed the Globalize/UK banner. Cubelodyte 17:18, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Deletion

message: This is an extremely common reference in the U.S. as far as I know.  Having lived in California for most of my life and Georgia for a couple of years and experiencing it in both.  What portion of this article is in question for "Factual Accuracy"?
FreakBoy 23:28, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Factual accuracy

message: I'm having second thoughts about what I said above.--h i s   s p a c e   r e s e a r c h 11:47, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Deletion 

message: I read in Planet Simpson that the origin of this phrase was the Selma's Choice episode of the Simpsons (Bart tries on Beer Goggles in the Duff Gardens gift shop and sees Selma as an attractive woman). Since it features actual beer goggles rather than using them as a metaphor, I'm pretty sure this is where it started, but has anyone come across pre-1993 mentions? If not, I'll insert an origins section. --Helenalex (talk) 00:35, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Here's a pre-Simpsons alt.sex thread from 1990 using the phrase.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 146.101.142.57 (talk) 15:20, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Origin 

message: I've included a reference to an article critical of the mentioned beer goggles equation.  I'm undecided as to whether the equation should be mentioned at all; on the one hand it's plainly nonsense, on the other it illustrates the cultural interest in the phenomenon.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.172.19.20 (talk) 14:12, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Equation
Talk:Dihydroxybenzenes

message: I suspect catechol and resorcinol can also lose two hydroxyls from each molecule to form diphenolate ions like hydroquinone, but I have not found references stating this, so I have modified a previous statement on formation of diphenolate ions to mention only hydroquinone.  H Padleckas 17:41, 20 November 2005 (UTC)
Talk:United States congressional elections, 2006

message: This page is simply to list elections and their results, not to analyze them.  Let's save the analysis for articles on specific elections, to save space on what is already a long page. Per that philosophy, I've removed the comments about the Nebraska gubernatorial election.--Xinoph 17:41, 20 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Following the elections, here's a good results box to use:
|-
!bgcolor=white |Candidate
!bgcolor=white |Party
!bgcolor=white |Pct
|-
|bgcolor=#FFB3B3 |Republican Candidate
|bgcolor=#FFB3B3 |Rep.
|bgcolor=#FFB3B3 | 00%
|-
|bgcolor=#B3D9FF |Democratic Candidate
|bgcolor=#B3D9FF |Dem.
|bgcolor=#B3D9FF | 00%
Note: Incumbent in italics; winner first.  Third-party/Independent candidates may be added as necessary.  Not all candidates for a given office should be listed here; that should be reserved for the main article about that particular race.  But third-party/independent candidates who received a signifigant portion of the votes or who had major impact on the race should be listed here.
--Xinoph 23:32, 20 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Results Box 

message: Surely there's no need to have both this and United States midterm elections, 2006. What's not common could easily fit in both titles, or with a little bit of leeway.
:I disagree, Congressional elections are distinct, and only once every four years do they fall on the same date as "Midterm" elections. Also, midterm elections are a much broader subject, encompassing not only the congressional elections, but also most state government elections and thousands of local elections. --JMurphy 00:19, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Merge to United States general elections, 2006 or whatever.  No need for both if there is also United States House of Representatives elections, 2006 and United States Senate elections, 2006 --Henrygb 14:40, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge
Talk:Frank Langella

message: I remember some years ago it was reported he was engaged to marry Liz, but they never made it to the altar.  Was this true?  If so, we should mention it.  JackofOz 01:04, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Engagement to [[Elizabeth Taylor]]

message: IMDB and other sites list his birthyear as 1938, here it says 1940. Which is correct?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.33.240.232 (talk) 16:53, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  DOB 

message: *Worth noting he has this? 71.231.130.121 (talk) 06:59, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Nystagmus]]

message: An actor's career depends in large part on the way he looks. Pictures that accompany the article
should reflect this. Langella was a notably handsome man of the dark and dashing type in his
younger years. Although it's rather endearing that whoever wrote the article chose a photo
of Langella in his paunchy, grizzled 70's, there should also be one from his flashing-eyed,
raven-locked Dracula prime.
Younggoldchip (talk) 15:24, 19 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  New Picture Needed 

message: There is no mention of him as Ramses in Moses 2600:1700:A290:C3E0:40FA:920E:D2B:2482 (talk) 19:55, 3 April 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  There is no mention of him as Ramses in Moses 

message: I found his recurring role on DS9 buried down in the career section, despite it being his finest work. 23.186.80.194 (talk) 16:29, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  No mention of Star Trek in the intro?
Talk:Widow (typesetting)

message: Please specify how it disagrees... articles change, and it's hard to know what you mean.  Please also sign your posts thus: 212.44.19.62 10:14, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  How? 

message: Widows are at the top of a page, orphans are at the bottom. I have corrected the definition, moved the (incorrectly named) image to the right page, and added a couple of references. Please do not revert these pages back to the incorrect definitions! 143.252.80.110 21:16, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Okay, once and for all 

message: Large parts of the two articles, and of their talk pages, discuss widows and orphans, and the difference between them. Some content and talk is even exactly duplicated. The articles are intermingled to the extent that both terms, in both articles, are bold faced rather than internally linked to. I think they should both be merged into a new article titled something like Widow and Orphan (typesetting). 132.68.248.39 22:55, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge with [[Orphan (typesetting)]]
Talk:Moore Park, Toronto

message: I took out the paragraph about how pleasant Moore Park is because it was entirely POV. Something like that requires documentation, I would think. I don't consider Moore Park particularly beautiful, for example (<I>ostentatious</I> I could agree with), so I would like to see some evidence that a substantial number of Torontonians do think it's beautiful. Some of the assertions were also vague (about its being community oriented, for example – requires an explanation of what community orientation is) or redundant (the previous paragraph had already said it was a rich neighbourhood, which implies it's among the richest in Toronto). And I question the validity of the description of the mix of houses. John FitzGerald 18:45, 20 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Coy Gibbs

message: not sure how to add a death KandidKansan (talk) 20:10, 6 November 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Can someone update 

message: Coy died last night Ssiegmund3 (talk) 20:19, 6 November 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Coy Gibbs
Talk:Terri O'Connell

message: You are wrong about the part where she was driving too slow . . . it was not her fault . . .the clutch was broken and it would not ingage . . . my name is Kate Daniels and I helped her put that deal together . . . she is fantastic driver and a fantastic person!
:Racing-reference says that Hayes was "flagged." I'm not sure what that means. If someone can verify, thanks. --D-Day  My fan mail. Click to view my evil userboxes 23:56, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Factual Error
Talk:Dixie Kong

message: She is often stated to be Diddy's girlfriend, but in Donkey Kong Country 2, upon visiting Cranky the first time, he calls himself the "grandpappy" to both Diddy AND Dixie. So... Does this mean that, while they're seeing each other, that they're... related? With this comment, I can see them as distant cousins... And after all, they do live on an island, so a little incest wouldn't be too uncommon...?
:The dark underworld of Nintendo exposed.
::That's extremely unlikely to be the case. It's probably just a minor contradiction on Rare's part, not to mention the fact that "grandpappy" could be used very loosely. And of course, add to that the fact that Nintendo has solidly stated her to be Diddy's boyfriend multiple times while that was only said once in loose context. Xtremeblur 07:44, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: She also looks like a completely different species of monkey from Diddy. She doesn't have a tail. So, which is better, incest or interspecies sex?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.176.166.144 (talk) 01:03, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Relation to the Kongs? 

message: not cool apple carlito —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.251.25.10 (talk) 19:51, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  carlito 

message: Can anyone confirm that Dixie was originally going to be a playable character in Super Smash Bros. Brawl? How can her fighter data be seen if she is not in the game?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.224.28.235 (talk) 00:40, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dixie in Brawl
Talk:Joel Piñeiro

message: I did the merge from Joel Pineiro, because it appeared this article had the better title, but the article was an absolute state. I have left lots of unwikified information that I don't really understand (since i know nothing about baseball) in a blanked comment in the edit window, if anyone wants to sift through it then go for it.. Jdcooper 19:11, 20 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge

message: The redirect Joel Pinhead has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at  until a consensus is reached.  Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 10:01, 24 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  "[[:Joel Pinhead]]" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]]
Category talk:Films about time travel

message: I remember seeing a movie as a child (1970's-1980's film)... about a man whose wife died in a snowy car accident.  I think the man ran a boarding house.  Some guests arrive to watch some event.  The guests were time traveller's who travelled in time through a credit card like passport.  The man somehow ended up with one.  In the last scene, the man is with his wife who is playing the piano.  Does anyone remember this show?
Answer: I think you mean 'Grand Tour - Disaster in Time' (1992)  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.15.146.174 (talk) 22:42, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Has anyone seen this film? 

message: I don't want to say this page is unusable, but it is close to.   The premise is that when you are looking for a time travel film you rarely know the title, especially if you are looking for something new.    So spending hours clicking on each link is really mind numbing and you quickly realise that this format just does not work.
I suggest that the pages be reorganised so list each film by year of release with a short description.  This achieves a couple of winds, one the relevance to modern thoughts and secondly the plot summary would allow skimming and would make this infinitely more useful.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Adel314 (talk • contribs) 16:08, 24 September 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Suggest that this be reorganised
Talk:Kragujevac

message: The presented coordinates for location of Kragujevac are inaccurate. Correct coordinates for Kragujevac are  44° 1'14.94"N  20°56'19.76"E.
Those coordinates are not accurate, nor are the listed one. Correct coordinates are 44°00'36.3"N 20°55'01.9"E, where the official concrete marker is. And I will change them so. I'm referring to this circular marker on which city's coordinates are engraved https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/proxy/tWy1dmeuTxzo3qJktxtW2iM2ws73otlkdRS3hje7rRZrdRSuSTk8Yl8_08K4mKqjoBf1_QjrXx3dW_7t98LcbcRcbtOQIUuEoWkTV2XIJoHvbZxeVLogHMk7qVHOCK2Xfm8  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.223.118.233 (talk) 14:44, 4 March 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Inaccurate coordinates
Talk:Securities and Exchange Commission of Pakistan

message: I gave this page a much-needed copy edit -- it was as though someone was deliberately trying to obscure the meaning of the article by making the prose as dense as possible.  It still needs work.  If anyone wants the excessively non-notable "mission statement", and other meaningless bafflegab, they can follow the link to the organization itself.  Accounting4Taste 23:01, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copy edit 
Talk:Hurricane Juan (1985)

message: Needs more on impact. Jdorje 20:30, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Better? Hurricanehink 02:55, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Todo

message: Problem... What should be done about its effects in the Mid-Atlantic region? It was related to the storm, though it was a renmant combined with another system. Some sites say Juan caused 62 deaths, including the mid-Atlantic flooding, but the NHC doesn't mention it at all (though they don't mention a lot of things some times). So what should we do? Hurricanehink 02:55, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Looks like most of that info (in the Appalachian section) is already covered.  The only thing missing is clarification that this destruction was not necessarily due to the tropical system itself (likely the reason for no retirement). Jdorje 03:45, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry, I meant about the infobox. Don't even get me started on the retirement. It caused $1.5 billion in Louisiana alone, and combined with the Mid-Atlantic, it caused around $3 billion in 1985 dollars, $5+ billion today. I'm just wonderng should we mention the deaths and damage caused by the renmant in the infobox. Hurricanehink 03:48, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Seems like a similar situation to Hurricane Stan. Jdorje 03:54, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

text: Juan and Stan were worlds apart.  To not acknowledge all those deaths in Central America to Stan is ludicrous, and TPC knows it.  It's not like there was a circulation in the Gulf of Mexico before Stan arrived...the rainfall/deaths were directly attributable to Stan's circulation...no different than Mitch (1998) or Fifi (1974).  Juan and an additional occluded cyclone led to the damage in the Mid-Atlantic, which is shown in the Daily Weather Map Series.  I corrected it in the storm's summary, and added some rainfall information and a graphic.  thegreatdr 20:45, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed, except this is said and done with. Maybe we could have that information in paranthesis? Also, is this article any better, or is it still a start article? Hurricanehink 04:03, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I changed it to B.  Make sure you include metric units. Jdorje 04:24, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Problem 

message: According to the USGS figures are different for the flood. Maybe that section can be approved using this source. --Matthiasb (talk) 04:59, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Appalachian Mountains 
Talk:Irish Church Act 1869

message: :This was definitely one Irish Act that Gladstone managed to get right, 
::Unsuitable, POV
:although he expected that solving the problem of tithes in Ireland would make all other problems solve themselves.
::Possibly contentious claim as to motivations, would need supporting citation 
:This was a huge error on his part,
::Unacceptable POV
:and many came to see the work that Gladstone did with Ireland as insufficient.
::Again, would need citation
I've removed this addition, because although it makes interesting and valid points, it is not encyclopedic in its current form, and I'm not the person to correct it. EdC 09:03, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: [[User:81.79.201.25]] wrote:

message: Why does "Irish Church Act 1869" redirect to here, rather than the other way round?  80.5.88.40 (talk) 14:14, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Title of article 
Template talk:DNA antivirals

message: This template survived a discussion at TfD. Several editors said it should be 'flattened' in some way. The debate can be found here. -Splashtalk 19:46, 20 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. --Arcadian 19:23, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: TfD debate

message: Should viricides be added to this template?  -- stillnotelf has a talk page 02:00, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not sure, but I'd reckon not. This template seems to be for drugs taken internally. Perhaps ask Ben.c.roberts, the user who originated it ..?  Best wishes, David Kernow 18:11, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I also tend towards no, I just thought it should be brought up. -- stillnotelf has a talk page 23:28, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[viricide]] 

message: I propose this template be split into HIV and non-HIV antivirals.  It's getting very big.  User:Hopping T  04:09, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You can see what I created at Template:HIVpharm.User:Hopping T  22:26, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think that's a pretty good idea. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 22:39, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Split

message: NOV-002 is currently in Phase III under Fast Track Special Protocol Assessment.
why are you saying Never to Phase III?
http://clinicaltrials.gov/show/NCT00347412
Fully enrolled Phase III trial link supplied.
Bixbyte (talk) 16:27, 24 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: [[NOV-002]]