lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:4AD

message: no need for an article. easily merge for best Light2021 (talk) 20:58, 6 July 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Hm, while I'm usually a fan of merges, I don't think this is necessary here. The 4AD article contains a lot of 4AD specific stuff (the artist listing could be omitted though, IMHO) and while I knew about 4AD before I didn't even know that Beggars Group existed as a label. Evilninja (talk) 06:32, 7 July 2017 (UTC)

text: Strongly disagree. 4AD is arguably more notable than the extant label group, and existed as a very well-known independent label for 12 years before acquisition by Beggars Group. --Canley (talk) 06:55, 7 July 2017 (UTC)

text: Oppose – "no need for article" is too vague of a rationale for merging. North America1000 09:20, 7 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed merge with [[Beggars Group]] 

message: I didn't add the Importance template (appears to be  -- pinging here), but I'll second the question. Is there a good reason this section exists? I have yet to see this on any other label page. – Broccoli & Coffee (Oh hai) 04:46, 29 July 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: I've now removed the section. SilkTork (talk) 18:08, 30 July 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: I suspect the importance of this section might no longer be obvious to younger users. 4AD was more an art-project than a profit-making enterprise, which is why you will see nothing like the Catalog Numbering section on pages for other labels. In a time before the internet, offering a vast schema of taxonomic information was both ground-breaking and a puzzle for collectors to complete. The importance of the information is demonstrated from the way that the section has been kept intact for the last eight years and over 400 edits by numerous users. The breakdown of the catalog system after Watts-Russell left the label mirrors the label's change in focus; and the recent abandonment of the system, replaced by the sequential numbering, demonstrates this further. Aston's recent history of the label structures its chapters around the catalog numbering system. I'll add an introductory paragraph from page 104 of Aston's book in the hope that this will provide sufficient context.  202.67.117.245 (talk) 15:46, 6 August 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: I think there needs to be actual evidence that the 4AD cataloguing scheme is actually interesting enough to warrant such a detailed section. The quote provided states  "It was all part of the bespoke detail that set independent labels apart from the majors" which would suggest, without further information, that such details were/are typical of independent record labels in general. Aside from this, further sourcing is probably necessary for this section's content. Cripesohblimey (talk) 15:05, 16 November 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Catalog numbering scheme section
Talk:Boris Onishchenko

message: Corrected the transliterations, added the Russsian spelling. Putting in a note about the variations in transliteration, as promissed. Cat-o-nine-meows 13:12, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: I've made a slight change to the wording on the weapon modification. Original wording says that Ornishenko had modified it. This MAY have been true, but the modification may have been made by others. We only know that it was modified.I'll expand this article further, based on Richard cohen's "by the Sword" book when I get chance. Epeeist smudge 15:17, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Modifier?
Talk:Transform Drug Policy Foundation

message: r u from Wrexham?
No --Aspro 17:18, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Not sure quite how to come up with a citation for: 
'TDPF's reports and policy documents have gained wide credibility'
But its a good point.
*Thought of using link to  -But it's off their own website.
:(Yet one has to be pretty well thought of to keep getting asked to take part in some of these events.) 
*Also, it has also been funded by other foundations of a type, that have excellent vetting procedures (those that have personally applied for grants will understand this only too well) These foundations are:-
: The Allen Lane Foundation, 
::The Network for Social Change, 
:::The European Commission, 
::::The Joseph Rowntree Reform Trust, 
:::::The Linnet Trust, The Glass House Trust, 
::::::The Esmeé Fairbairn Foundation and
:::::::The Network of European Foundations and finally
::::::::  The Linbury Trust. 
*Also, some of their sponsors are (I would think) pretty level headed and that would suggest TDPF passes the credibility test. But again it's still off their own site. 
*And I don't have any video of the 'big wigs' nodding in agreement on the television debates or in the House of Commons. 
But independent evidence of  this groups credibility would be an important addition to the article but can't think of a source that would sum it up. However, it maybe that the average reader could form their own idea from the information as a whole.Any comments?--Aspro 14:26, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Credibility 

message: 'Parents Against Legal Additive Drugs: Parents Against Legal Additive Drugs website
This  organisations needs to have a link to (or from) this site. The concerns of both org's  are mutual !!! (I think!?) --Aspro 22:53, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Other Organizations
Talk:Eastwood Village

message: I'm sure the Eastwood Mall is notable, but the article deals with that notability very briefly and with references which may not be meaningful to a person outside Alabama, or perhaps outside the United States.  If it can't fill a page, then it might not be important enough for an article of its own and an article on Shopping Malls of Birmingham, Alabama would be more substantial. Darcyj 13:12, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well that, and the Eastwood Mall in Niles, Ohio is arguably more notable, given that it is the largest mall in the United States.  (See article.)  To that end, I'm moving this to Eastwood Mall (Birmingham), and changing this page to a disambiguation page. -- SwissCelt 16:05, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Notability 

message: * Eastwood Festival Centre is not the former Eastwood Mall. After the mall was demolished the site was redeveloped as "Eastwood Village". (see Bhamwiki:Eastwood Mall and Bhamwiki:Eastwood Village). The Festival Centre was developed in the late 1980s, nearly 30 years before Eastwood Mall was torn down. The former mall was notable for being one of the first enclosed shopping malls in the South and for many years the largest. If the Ohio mall is moved to Eastwood Mall, I would think that at least some disambiguation would be helpful in case anyone is researching the historically notable development in Alabama. (No one would think to look for it under this misnomer) --Dystopos (talk) 19:37, 23 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Inaccurate
Talk:2010 FIFA World Cup

message: Change Capacity of soccer city stadium to 94 736
The Wikipedia page and a number of other sources are provided to verify that the provided capacity is incorrect and needs to be changed:
http://stadiumdb.com/stadiums/rsa/soccer_city
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FNB_Stadium
https://www.stadiumguide.com/fnbstadium/ Sir Reginald Gordinham (talk) 20:44, 23 July 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Capacity is 94,700, at the time of the World Cup, per what's in the FNB Stadium article. StadiumGuide says capacity during World Cup was temporarily reduced to "about 85,000." —C.Fred (talk) 21:00, 23 July 2022 (UTC)
replies: text:  Not done: as per C.Fred answer. P1221 (talk) 14:07, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 23 July 2022 

message: The best young player of the 2010 FIFA World Cup was Thomas Müller but the best player and winner of the golden ball that year was Diego Forlán. (Do not include my IP address please, I’m having troubles making an account) anon.
: The article already says that Diego won the golden ball RudolfRed (talk) 19:31, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 21 June 2023 

message: The Xhosa translation for 2010 Fifa World Cup is wrote in an incorrect language. Can those that can respectfully fix this error. 41.116.101.103 (talk) 07:14, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Xhosa Translation error.
Talk:Students for Sensible Drug Policy

message: References in articles are used to verify the information that precedes it from a unbiased and reliable third party. Simple linking to the webpage of topic does not verify anything and borders on advertisement. I have removed instances of this in the article. See WP:PRIMARY.--Esprit15d • talk • contribs 15:05, 26 March 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Removing "references"
Talk:Alexandr Romankov

message: Changed "Alexandre" to the correct transliteration "Alexandr".Cat-o-nine-meows 13:21, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Aizukotetsu-kai

message: Has anyone proven any of the claims made regarding this 'Oujo No Ude'? Given the source of this information is completely unverified, has no back up/sources with regards to other publications & seems entirely made up given the lack of further information since. 49.192.133.141 (talk) 13:25, 3 June 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proof of unaffiliated person
Talk:1934 FIFA World Cup qualification

message: Moved per consensus.  --Pkchan 13:27, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

message: The information on group one says that the third match wasn't played, but the table seems to indicate a 3-0 win to Lithuania. Which is it? Grutness...wha? 12:37, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Group one 

message: Did Poland withdraw or not?  There is a result for a second match of the group, said to be played the very same day as the first one!  At least two of the statements (withdrawal, match played, date of match) are wrong.  Which?  Fomalhaut76 (talk) 21:08, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Group five 
Talk:1938 FIFA World Cup qualification

message: Moved per consensus.  --Pkchan 13:27, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

message: Did Spain withdraw from the 1938 World Cup or was it rejected. A FIFA document says "Spain's entry was not accepted due to the political circumstances which made it unlikely that they would be able to play all their matches". 
FIFA Fact Sheet: History of the FIFA World Cup (TM) Preliminary Competition (by year)
--Crabbylucy (talk) 03:39, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Withdraw or Reject?
Talk:1950 FIFA World Cup qualification

message: Moved per consensus.  --Pkchan 13:28, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

message: From the article, it seems that Wales, Ireland (IFA), Luxembourg, Israel and Cuba were the only participating teams that were not invited to compete in the World Cup, all other non-qualifying teams having received (and in many cases, refused) an invitation. Is that correct? --Roentgenium111 (talk) 13:41, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Non-qualifying teams
Talk:1958 FIFA World Cup qualification

message: Moved per consensus.  --Pkchan 13:29, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Why did FIFA reject the entries of Ethiopia and Korea Republic? Article doesn't say. Transaction Go (talk) 14:01, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Rejected Entries

message: The fifa document FIFA Fact Sheet: History of the FIFA World Cup (TM) Preliminary Competition does not list Hong Kong as having taken part (or withdrawing) from the 1958 edition. Instead it lists Hong Kong as having entered World Cup qualifiers for the first time in 1974 (page 27).--Crabbylucy (talk) 06:57, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Hong Kong

message: In a Swedish book on the 1958 World cup qualification, it's said that one of the already eliminated teams had to play Israel and Belgium and Uruguay told they weren't interested (my translation).  Does anyone have a source stating that it actually only was the UEFA teams that were included in the lottery?  Fomalhaut76 (talk) 15:10, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Only UEFA losers could face Israel?

message: Just wondering why qroups 1 and 2 in NAQ have been swapped about from what FIFA have on there website. Shouldn't they be switched to be inline with what FIFA have?
Stevie fae Scotland (talk) 16:01, 11 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: North American Qualifying
Talk:1962 FIFA World Cup qualification

message: Moved per consensus.  --Pkchan 13:30, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Move

message: Maybe the page could explain why Ethiopia was in the European section. My guess would be as host of the African Nations Cup and African Nations Cup qualification and world cup qualification round were the same (as they are now) and as Ethiopia's were the african nation cup hosts they wouldn't have to qualify so they were put in the european section.However an exact explanation and a citation would be nice rather then my guesswork. Phil Nolte (talk) 19:55, 24 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I came here to ask the same question. I was unable to find anything on RSSSF or newspaper articles from that time. --EdgeNavidad (Talk · Contribs) 09:45, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Ethiopia

message: For some reason, I am unable to properly transclude separate portions of the 1962 FIFA World Cup qualification (CONMEBOL) into the article. When I try to transclude each of the groups, all three appear in each section. If anyone is able to help me sort this out, that would be great. Thanks, Estevez99 (talk) 06:26, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: Help with Transclusion
Talk:1966 FIFA World Cup qualification

message: Moved per consensus.  --Pkchan 13:30, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

message: Why did the move from Japan to Cambodia make South Korea withdraw? What was the reasoning for their protest? Article doesn't say why. Transaction Go (talk) 15:56, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  AFC First Round 

message: I wasn't sure if the 18 was correct, so I checked it against the FIFA document FIFA Fact Sheet: History of the FIFA World Cup (TM) Preliminary Competition (by year)
Entries were received from 21 teams: 1 from Oceania (Australia), 3 from Asia (Korea, Korea DPR, Philippines), and 17 from Africa (Algeria, Cameroon, French Congo, Ethiopia, Gabon, Ghana, Guinea, Liberia, Libya, Mali, Morocco, Nigeria, Senegal, South Africa, Sudan, Tunisia, UAR/Egypt). The applications from Philippines, French Congo, and (due to apartheid) South Africa were rejected, leaving 1 from Oceania, 2 from Asia, 15 from Africa - so the 18 is correct if rejections are accounted for. (There's sometimes inconsistency in the way they are counted on these pages.) Later Korea and all 15 African countries would withdraw, leaving Australia and Korea DPR to battle it out.
--Crabbylucy (talk) 08:09, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Count of CAF/AFC countries

message: I'm not sure this is appropriate, but all other qualification main pages list all games played and all the tables. Shouldn't this also be the case here? Zokniaw (talk) 11:26, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Of course it should.  I had the same reaction. Fomalhaut76 (talk) 22:04, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Clickable format 

message: The map shows three African countries as qualified, among them Mozambique.  I don't understand how that happened, but it should be changed (by somenone who, unlike me, knows how to do it...). Fomalhaut76 (talk) 22:04, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: All of a sudden I understood now, that Mozambique and Angola are marked as taking part of the 1966 World Cup, because they were then colonies to Portugal.  But should colonies really be seen as part of their "mother countries" on a map like this?  Fomalhaut76 (talk) 15:49, 5 July 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: By this time Portugal did not have colonies but rather "overseas provinces" so technically they were the same as the rest of Portugal except detached from the rest of the nation. I won't pretend to know if it would be appropriate if they were in fact colonies. --RevTenderBranson (talk) 08:36, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
replies: text:  Several of the players were in fact from Angola and Mozambique, so Portuguese participation in 1966 was not exclusive of mainland Portugal  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.28.190.206 (talk) 15:02, 24 October 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  The map
Talk:Andrew Nelson (lexicographer)

message: :The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section. 
The result of the move request was: Move all, and build one dab page for Andys and Andrews alike at Andrew Nelson. Cúchullain t/c 14:02, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
Talk:1974 FIFA World Cup qualification

message: Moved per consensus.  --Pkchan 13:32, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

message: This site has some good information about 74 qualifying but i dont know how to make the tables for it.
http://www.rsssf.com/tables/74q.html  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 143.239.7.2 (talk) 19:12, 13 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Would love to work on this. Icedwater (talk) 13:04, 8 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Qualifying info
Talk:1978 FIFA World Cup qualification

message: Moved per consensus.  --Pkchan 13:33, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

message: Good info on qualifying here if anyone knos how to make tables for it
http://www.rsssf.com/tables/78q.html  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 143.239.7.2 (talk) 19:11, 13 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Qualifying info 
Talk:1990 FIFA World Cup qualification

message: Moved per consensus.  --Pkchan 13:34, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
Talk:Sam and Twitch

message: I can't find a decent source to say that Casefiles was cancelled, but there hasn't been an issue since #25 in 2006. How do we update the artucle to reflect this in a suitably wiki-way?
JonStrines (talk) 10:28, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Casefiles Cancelled?

message: Sam And Twitch(along with the rest of humanity before the Apocalypse) return after Spawn rebuilds Earth with his new powers. Just Thought you should know. I dont have all the details, I just know they're back. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.106.177.64 (talk) 23:33, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Spawn 154(SPOILERS) 

message: I think this article needs rebuilding from the ground up. Waaay too much fannish speculation and devotion. It's okay to like the characters but Wikipedia likes a nuetral point of view. Lots42 00:57, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: By all means!  Go for it! Drewcifer 01:10, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I knew I missed an important detail in my comment; I haven't read the entirety of the series, so I don't want to spoil myself (I only read the sections of article I had already read in comic form). I really hope that made sense. Lots42 16:05, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree.  The descriptions of the characters' personalities is way too crufty. Nightscream 23:49, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: NPOV
Talk:1994 FIFA World Cup qualification

message: Moved per consensus.  --Pkchan 13:35, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

message: If it helps, look to the improvements that several IPs and users made on the 1998, 2002, and 2006 qualification pages. These should help with the rewrite. The same applies for the 1990 and 1986 pages. jd22292 (Jalen D. Folf) (talk) 05:47, 10 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rewrite
Talk:Sam-Son Farm

message: Someone put an "unreferenced" notice in this article. It is not needed, because the information is all fact-based from numerous public records. - Ted Wilkes 13:36, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Incorrect; references should be provided wherever possible. PKT(alk) 18:36, 29 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: untitled
Talk:2002 FIFA World Cup qualification

message: Moved per consensus.  --Pkchan 13:36, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
Talk:Baren (printing tool)

message: Does anybody have the foggiest idea what this is supposed to mean:
"A disk inside the Baren takes 40-50 days to create, as the craftsman glues one sheet of paper on the disk each day. The disk must then dry for a year's time before the baren is assembled. Other parts of the Baren are woven and formed from parts of the bamboo plant, requiring the skill of a true master. Only one known person in Japan is still making traditional baren for a living."
I am wondering if perhaps it is nonsense vandalism. Bus stop (talk) 20:52, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: According to Ralph Mayer's "Artist's Handbook of Materials and Techniques," a baren is a "slightly convex stiff pad sheathed in thin bamboo." Bus stop (talk) 22:54, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: What does this mean?

message: This article really needs a picture.  Does anyone have one to submit? neffk (talk) 18:34, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Picture needed
Talk:Indianapolis Mini-Marathon

message: It IS one.  I think I've read this before, and there's no doubt that it was copied and pasted here, to stand in for what someone somehow thinks is an non-biased outlook on the event.  This is annoying, because the 500 Festival Mini-Marathon is in fact one of the premier mini-marathons in America, and possibly the world as well, drawing some of the largest crowds (a record 35,000 slated for 2006), both professional as well as amateur.  Due to this...I'll get started cleaning it as soon as possible. --Chr.K. 13:44, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Advertisement
Talk:6-step

message: Both the 2-step and 3-step variants are described in very unencyclopedic terms; they are basically a how-to guide, which is something that Wikipedia is not. They certainly need to be cleaned up. They could possibly be moved to another article entitled 6-step variants because there are so many potential variants (even though only two appear so far), but I think they are in the proper place. Draeco 13:54, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Un-encyclopedic "Variants"
Talk:Fordham University School of Law

message: I don't have time to write it myself atm but I'm surprised this article doesn't have a history section? The about us page on the official website does have one. There should be a place to say women started being accepted after a vote on September 12, 1918 1Veertje (talk) 22:17, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  History section