lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Fetal personhood

message: This should be merged into fetus or expanded. As it stands, it would fit in the legal issues in Fetus.  Unsigned comment from Hipocrite at 18:06, 8 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I think it would be better to expand it. The subject is certainly significant enough to deserve its own article. And perhaps the Fetus and Abortion articles could link to this article.  And by the way, the merge template placed on this article says to discuss, but the word discuss doesn't link to this talk page; it links to the Fetus Talk Page, where nobody seems to be discussing it. Is there some way of making a template direct to a different page?  Ann Heneghan (talk) 22:04, 16 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes there is. Use  instead of . The  template links to the current page's talk page. --Damian Yerrick (☎) 04:02, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

message: From the article:
:"Historically, "quickening," when the first fetal movement is detected, was considered the point at which human personhood is achieved."
Not under English common law, nor current English or U.S. law, as I understand it. Or can you provide a cite showing otherwise? -- The Anome 19:38, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Quickening 

message: The ideas in this article are, in my opinion, necessary, but they only show one part of the issue. I don't agree with the merging of "fetal personhood" with fetus, and I would only support its merging with person under the condition that a separate section be added to include both fetal personhood and baby/child personhood. Otherwise, I think that this article should remain but be expanded to include the latter, as it is an important part of the controversy, and essential in a cross-cultural discourse of the issue. 
I need to find some sources for this, and I will not post anything until I have them, but as I have read in multiple anthropological texts, there are several cultures who do not grant personhood (as in naming, accepting as a member of  society, etc.) to their offspring until the offspring have reached a certain age. This may be up to three or four years after birth in some areas, and is believed to be mainly a result of high levels of infant mortality: the death of a baby who is not yet a member of society may have less of an impact on the society; likewise, giving a child a name may create a more intimate bond between namer(s) and namee, thus making the child's death harder on its family/guardian(s). Cases like these demonstrate (indeed, reiterate) that personhood is a cultural construction, and should be examined on a cross-cultural level.  
If anyone else has ideas/insights/sources pertaining to this information, or has a serious problem with my proposal, please share. I will, in the mean time, look for some sources to back up these claims. --Romarin 03:05, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cross-cultural aspects of personhood
Talk:Merchant Ivory Productions

message: Where these two guys lovers? User:143.231.249.141
:Im pretty sure they weren't and I can't find any evidence they were. Jihg 23:27, 20 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Does Call Me by Your Name truly qualify as the film of Merchant Ivory Productions, and should its awards be placed among the Merchants' filmography? For my view, the only connection between them is James Ivory's screenplay as well as his producer credit, which is not even recognized by award bodies. For example, see the Academy Award for Best Picture page, etc. LordTort (talk) 18:22, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Call Me by Your Name affiliation
Talk:Democratic Youth Federation of India

message: Isn't the page Democratic Revolutionary Youth Federation just a redirect for this one? 
Lsjzl 19:18, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No. DYFI is the youth wing of the Communist Party of India (Marxist). DRYF is the youth wing of the North Bengal splinter-group Communist Party of Revolutionary Marxists. --Soman 10:21, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, thanks Soman! Glad I asked first... just getting to know this place! Lsjzl 12:22, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Duplicate page?

message: It is just an organization for hoodlums who act on the orders of Communist Party bosses. In cahoots with SFI,it has been instrumental in holding hostage any educational reforms initiated by the Govt in Kerala
sumal 07:09, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hoodlums

message: The names of the leaders and top brass of the youth movement can be added. Their names are not codified well in the net. Please add. (Niketsundaram1977 (talk) 22:06, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Need the names of the leaders 

message: Neither DYFI nor CPI(M) claims in their organisational documents, that they are related. DYFI according to their constitution is an independent organisation for Indian youth. There is no mention of a youth-wing organisation called DYFI in CPI(M)'s constitution as well. Therefore, such references in the article must be removed. prp 16:57, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  No Original Research policy violation
Talk:Honda Super Cub

message: In 1959, Honda was a small shop and wanted to break into the giantbUS market. Unfortunately, Piper held the trademark Super Cub so Honda used the name Step-Thru. Using Grey Advertising, they sold and millions and millions under that name, starting in the very early 1960s. Unfortunately, the Internet only knows what's been put online, so if an editor's knowledge doesn't extend past the mid 90s, and if they're from a country where the Suoer Cub trademark wasn't already claimed, they don't know this. However, their ignorance of the facts shouldn't give them autocratic control over content. (Forgive them, Jimmy Wales, for they don't know what they don't know.) The Wikipedia android app doesn't seem to support putting a picture in a comment here so please visit https://www.pinterest.ca/pin/355714070563016250#imgViewer
It's an ad by Honda from the 1970s. They call it the Step-Thru and proudly say " The Most Popular Motorbike Design in History". The words Super Cub do not appear anywhere.  Honda started using the Suoer Cub name in somevnon-American markets during the 1980s, as far as I can tell, but I don't know the date-by-country figures. SmarterAlec (talk) 00:38, 21 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Honda Step-Thru 

message: in 1985 when the c50 was redesigned the engine had a redesign to introduce a fully automatic 3 speed gear box also a parking brake was added for this purpose 2A00:23EE:19D8:841F:FC7D:F33D:E031:997 (talk) 08:55, 19 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  honda c50
Talk:Blood (disambiguation)

message: I have an interesting question about this disambiguation page - why is it that the more common (the remark relating to commoness is subjective - I don't have evidence for this, yet) usage of the concept of blood (as in, to be connected by blood, affiliated by blood, related by blood, etc...) is not given a mention?  Surely the symbolic usage of the word blood is at least worth a mention - I'm sure that this is an oversight.  If I have enough time, I will try to write the wiki for this (though I doubt that I would be anywhere near as capable of writing the associated wiki for blood and how it is used in relation to nationalism, etc... anywhere near as well as some of the more notable contributors).  
Just a suggestion.
: JFW | T@lk 19:32, 8 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I've added Kinship. —jiy (talk) 11:09, 6 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Question
Talk:Micro ribbon connector

message: Did Amphenol invent did this connector?  I don't want to add this until I can get a definitve answer. Gadget850 18:27, 8 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Amphenol?

message: Is the 14-pin Amphenol DDK connector used in the Roland Digital Control Bus another size-variant of this? They look very similar. -- Finlay McWalter··–·Talk 23:17, 31 December 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Digital Control Bus

message: A discussion is taking place to address the redirect :Micro ribbon=edit. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 March 8#Micro ribbon=edit until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.  𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 21:41, 8 March 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Micro ribbon=edit" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]]
Talk:George Adams (scientist, died 1773)

message: There is some confusion in this article between the father and the son. The son lived 1750 - 1795; the father until March 5, 1786. — RJH 18:27, 8 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: When I was evaluating this to decide what to do about the split tag, I found it very confusing as to whether the article was refering to father or son. This is especially problematic after the paragraph where the son is first mentioned. I can see why the article ought to be split, but either it is split by someone who knows the subject any way or the ambiguity will need to be resolved before someone else can make a split. This is why I have added the confusing tag. Op47 (talk) 17:58, 27 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Split/Confusing tags 
Talk:Privateer (video game)

message: Wouldn't it be better to make this page a redirect to Wing Commander (computer game)#Wing Commander: Privateer and incorporate there whatever new material is here?
* The game has another article here: Wing Commander: Privateer. Content should be brought over there and leave a redirect here. I might be doing this when I get the time. For now I've only changed the merge tag. Bisco 09:23, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
Talk:Iron Kong

message: The Iron Kong PKs in new century zero were referred to as 'Iron Kong MKIIs' if I'm not mistaken. They're usually called Iron Kong Mary Type outside of that.
*I checked the episode just recently muyself; the dialouge specifically calls them "Iron Kong PK types." The name "Iron Kong Mary" is only used in several of the Zoids video games. --202.92.76.129 23:05, 8 August 2005 (UTC)
Talk:General relativity resources

message: User:El C, good catch!  The site blackholes.org does not appear to be affiliated with either Caltech or Cornell (not even registered in same state as either of those institutions), and the linked file appears to be nonexistent.  We need to be very careful to examine anon edits for this kind of mischief. ---CH 01:29, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Link added by anon to blackholes.org

message: Hi, Fropuff, I agree this book is somewhere between advanced UG and graduate.  I do tend to try to encourage students to aim high, which tends to shift my judgement of level upwards from those with more experience teaching "live" students :-/  I still prefer calling it "UG" because of its exceptional clarity and because I'd really like all UG physics students to read it.  The (excellent!) appendices are also indicative of a textbook intended for "dual-use".  Anyone else?---CH 01:34, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Carroll, grad or undergrad?

message: I extensively rewrote the August 2006 version of this article, which is largely based upon a more extensive list at the website Relativity on the World Wide Web, which was originally created by me, but is now hosted by someone else.
I had been monitoring this list for bad edits, but I am leaving the WP and am now abandoning it to its fate.
Just wanted to provide notice that I am only responsible (in part) for the last version I edited; see User:Hillman/Archive.  I emphatically do not vouch for anything you might see in more recent versions, although I hope for the best.
Good luck in your search for information, regardless!---CH 23:50, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Students beware

message: I first learned GTR from "Space-time and Relativity" by Sir Arthur Stanley Eddington. But I do not see it on this list. Is it still in print? (Perhaps it was 1920. Space, Time and Gravitation: An Outline of the General Relativity Theory. Cambridge University Press.  which I see in his biography.) JRSpriggs 10:29, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sir [[Arthur Stanley Eddington]]
Talk:Arthur Dove

message: That discussion continues...Modernist (talk) 22:48, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Discussion was closed in favor of removal. Werieth (talk) 22:49, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

text: I do care. These images need to be seen. Coldcreation (talk) 22:32, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
replies: text:  So, because YOU feel the images need to be seen, its okay to go against WP:CONSENSUS and WP:NFCC? -- ТимофейЛееСуда.  22:34, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
replies: text:  No need to scream. I will find more public domain images of this important artists works (published before 1923). Coldcreation (talk) 22:41, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
replies: text:  I do apologize for raising my caps; you are correct that was uncalled for. Also, I should have phrased it better, I do not care if the images are used. But I do care if policy is followed and consensus determined that those images did not. It looks like there are many many paintings by Dove that are in the public domain.  The other option is to make the images not violate WP:NFCC (specifically #8) and gain consensus for their inclusion.  As an outsider, it looks like there is no context of the Me and the Moon image in the infobox.  Per WP:NFCC there must be critical commentary and there was none.  For the other image (Nature Symbolized or Reefs) the article only discusses that he creates it.  Point 8 of WP:NFCC requires that there be content in the article about the non-free images that requires the images be included.  What this breaks down to is you don't need to see the image to know he painted it.  But if there were content about the style he painted on that specific image, and why he painted, or the colors, etc, it would be necessary to the image being there. Good luck with whatever you choose to do. -- ТимофейЛееСуда.  22:46, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

text: Thanks Stefan appreciated...Modernist (talk) 23:43, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Discussion
Talk:Top Gun

message: Operation El Dorado Canyon occurred after the filming of the film and just a month before release and no direct conclusion can be tied that the actions occur during this operation as said operation didn’t occur yet when the film was filmed 2603:8081:4F00:A716:8D83:DB3E:30E0:F601 (talk) 15:12, 3 July 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Remove Operation El Dorado canyon from plot description 

message: Should we give Maverick a wikipedia article? Dangervest69 (talk) 02:50, 1 December 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: With the release of Top Gun: Maverick, and the fact that film may now reveal more background info on him, and the fact he is one of Tom Cruise's most iconic roles, yes. HM2021 (talk) 19:22, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

text: Start in a draft, and see if find enough unique content to support a split, and references that support notability. Thanks, Indagate (talk) 19:27, 7 January 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. The articles on Llewyn Davis, as well as Ethan Hunt from Mission: Impossible could provide some inspiration. HM2021 (talk) 06:09, 8 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Character Pages 

message: Allmovie clearly states Top Gun is an action drama, and since Top Gun 2 is action drama, this one is too. HiGuys69420 (talk) 14:39, 8 June 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Not necessarily. BilCat (talk) 22:16, 8 June 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: AFI and AllMovie both support "action" and "drama", although both also support "romance". I'm fine with "action drama" or possibly even "romantic action drama". --GoneIn60 (talk) 23:58, 8 June 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: ok so can i put action drama? HiGuys69420 (talk) 02:23, 9 June 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Doesn't look like anyone else is weighing in, so yes. --GoneIn60 (talk) 13:23, 10 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Top gun 2 is an Action Drama, so this film is one too 

message: There happens to be two different "Top Gun" films. One of them sharing this same name is a 1955 western film starring Sterling Hayden, with it's article link below:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Top_Gun_(1955_film)
This article deals with the 1986 film. I feel that the title should be "Top Gun (1986 film)" for this particular movie. Of course, this is only a suggestion. 
What do you Admins think?Frschoonover (talk) 17:07, 8 September 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Nope. The 1986 film is far and away the primary topic for "Top Gun". If it were not the primary topic for the phrase, then it would be at "Top Gun (1986 film)", not "Top Gun (film)", as disambiguated film titles don't have primary topics. But that doesn't apply to main primary topics, as in this case. (Note that I'm. not an admin, but titles aren't an issue where only admins can comment. However, I am a page mover, so I have experience with article titles and page moves.) BilCat (talk) 22:54, 8 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Shouldn't This Article be titled "Top Gun (1986 film)" to differentiate itself from "Top Gun (1955 film)"
Category talk:Wikipedia articles needing copy edit

message: Suppose the editor who created an article removes the copyedit template without any further explanation, and removes it a second time after it is replaced?  Along with doing that, the editor removes the notability template and the hoax template, also without any further explanation. I am the editor who initially posted the copyedit template, but others posted the notability and hoax templates.  What is to be done now?  I am too experienced an editor to get into an edit war, so I am asking for help and advice from other editors. --DThomsen8 (talk) 21:23, 29 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Start a discussion on the talk page inquiring as to their rationale and explaining yours. -- Beland (talk) 01:45, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removal of copyedit template 

message: May I please request someone to copy/edit the article on Sally Kellerman, that I have worked tremendously hard on. I am trying to make her article meet GA standards. Thank you. - unsigned comment by , 25 April 2014
:, the best place to make these requests is the Guild of Copy Editors' Requests page. – Jonesey95 (talk) 22:36, 25 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sally Kellerman's article
Talk:Nuns' Island

message: In accordance with Wikipedia:Naming conventions (use English), the article title should be the most commonly used English name, "Nuns' Island". - Farquard 19:14, 8 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: In the first paragraph of the History section, the citation is placed in the middle of the paragraph. The information after that appears to come from the same source but is not cited. Can the citation be moved to the end of that paragraph?—Evans310 (talk) 15:26, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Suggestions
Talk:Monochromator

message: Who calls it AU!?  It's always OD!
:Yes, it seems odd ( OD ? ;) ) to me too !!! --Totophe64 13:25, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: AU/OD

message: I just want to say that this is, in my opinion, a truly excellent article that exemplifies the best of what Wikipedia can be.  When I came here, I had a vague notion that a monochromator was a device for producing monochromatic light and probably involved prisms in some fashion.  When I had finished reading the article, I felt I understood monochromators quite intimately - their origin, construction, use, and significance.  The process was painless, which means in effect that the Wikipedia article was serving as an optimally impedance-matched source of knowledge for my (educated, but non-specialist) mind.  Congratulations to the authors of this fine article. 198.202.68.51 (talk) 18:10, 24 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Excellent article

message: Could a section be added that discusses instrumental errors that can be caused by monochromators? I'm thinking particularly of transmission as a function of wavelength and accurate wavelength calibration. For wavelength calibration I think it is worth noting here the use of the atomic emission lines of mercury and the absorption spectra of Holmium Oxide (Standard Reference Material 2034) detailed in NBS 260-102 as a wavelength calibration. We could also discuss effects due to spectral bandwidth such as wavelength inaccuracies and the effects on spectra like broadening of peaks. Nwagers (talk) 02:48, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Errors from monochromators 
Talk:List of extreme points of Iceland

message: Shouldn't the southernmost settlement be on Heimaey?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.148.72.66 (talk) 13:44, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Vík is slightly further south. --Bjarki (talk) 11:11, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Vestmannaeyjar?
Talk:Chilean Chess Championship

message: Does not descrbie the event, is simply a list of winners. — HopeSeekr of xMule (Talk) 19:42, 8 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Non-descriptive 
Talk:Jani Rita

message: Can anyone confirm if this deal has an exit clause if he makes the Oilers? --Scimitar parley 19:50, 8 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: * Too bad.  I was hoping to see him line up full-time with Edmonton. --Scimitar parley 19:28, 9 August 2005 (UTC)

text: * This is odd: Rita signed by Oilers --Scimitar parley 19:43, 10 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Signing in Finland
Talk:Visitors' Gallery

message: As part of the efforts to modernise Parliament, the Strangers' Gallery is now called the Public Gallery. Perhaps a new article and a redirect should be created? http://www.parliament.uk/visiting/attend/debates/  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.195.126.183 (talk) 15:28, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Incorrect name
Talk:Nuclear Power 2010 Program

message: On August 8th, 2005 I obtained permission to use the quote "A production tax credit of 1.8 cents per kilowatt-hour for the first 6,000 megawatt-hours from new nuclear power plants for the first eight years of their operation, subject to a $125 million annual limit. The production tax credit places nuclear energy on equal footing with other sources of emission-free power, including wind and closed-loop biomass" from:
Steve Kerekes
Senior Director, Media Relations
Nuclear Energy Institute
Wash DC
202/739-8073
Simesa 20:35, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think we really need permission for a short quote of two sentences... --Delirium 00:07, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think Simesa intended more to confirm the validity of the quote, since numbers are involved.--Xiaphias 08:15, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

text: Oh sorry, I should've waited till January 2008 to post that. --Xiaphias 08:17, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Permission to use quoted material 

message: From Nucleonics Week, July 2006, "Areva is now estimating US$ 1800-2000/kW capacity for US EPR, Westinghouse $1500-1800/kW for AP1000, and GE $1850/kW for ABWR and $1600/kW for ESBWR." Simesa 15:14, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Costs of new plants 