lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Sherwood Anderson

message: Anderson was the recipient of first Dial Award in 1921. Ostensibly this was for his achievement in writing Winesburg, Ohio (novel) (at least according to: Hatcher, Harlan. Creating the Modern American Novel. Murray Hill, NY: Farrar & Rinehart, 1935.). I'm thinking this should be incorporated into the article at some point. Currently though I don't see an appropriate place to stick it. --Olegkagan (talk) 04:22, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Dial Award 

message: I dont know much about Sherwood Anderson yet, but there is a problem here with the mention that F. Scott Fitzgerald thought "Circle of Death" was one of his two best novels. It isnt listed among the body of work at the bottom of the page and is not easily found online. If it is a short story, as I suspect it may be, this needs to be altered. SF  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.230.184.247 (talk) 20:36, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I think you're right to question this. I've looked at a number of Anderson bibliographies and have not seen Circle of Death mentioned in any of them. We shouldn't exclude that it may be a short story, but that would still make the statement incorrect. If I can't find any citation for this statement, I'm going to remove it as it appears to be of dubious quality.--Olegkagan (talk) 02:50, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Circle of Death"? 

message: What is with more than half of his Works being listed with a publication date after he was dead? Are these simply new printing dates, or were these works actually 1st published after his death? Aren't the Works supposed to be listed as the date of 1st publication, or if another edition, than list the edition as well with the new print date? Aren't a list of Works meant to give the reader an idea of when the author was published? Stevenmitchell (talk) 09:35, 8 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I noticed that too. Some of those appear to be articles/essays published in other books (which I don't believe belong in this bibliography). Some of them, as you can see, are indeed books of collected letters, some are just dated wrong (I'm talking about, probably among others, Perhaps Women and No Swank, which were both published while Anderson was still living). I'm currently putting together some notes on Anderson's bibliography and will be cleaning this one up in a few days, time permitting. --Olegkagan (talk) 02:36, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: List of Works
Talk:Campaign Against Political Correctness

message: See my points made here - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Philip_Davies --Albert 16:13, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Philip Davies - Parliamentary Spokesman? 

message: The group hasn't said or done much since 2007, I changed it to past tense, but in hindsight, it's up to CAPC to say when they are no nolnger active,so i'll undo edit.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by AnarchoGhost (talk • contribs) 22:11, 9 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: CAPC defunct?

message: First paragraph no verb. Differently-grammared wordstrings ungood. Conventionally-educated writeperson desirable. ➥the Epopt 15:06, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cleanup
Talk:Heritage High School (Newport News, Virginia)

message: When I first went there in September of 1997, there was another principal. Does anyone remember his name? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 66.160.64.46 (talk) 20:07, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  There was a principal before mr. Sweeney 
Talk:2006 Indianapolis 500

message: In the qualification table, what are the "ES" and "QS" columns, and what do the letters in those columns mean? Chuck 16:22, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: I put the sections in rougly chronological order - sorry for not filling in the edit summary; I hit enter by mistake before I added it. Chuck 15:23, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Section order 
Talk:Dance Dance Revolution Extra Stage

message: I propose that this page either be merged with the DDR page or deleted entirely.  There simply is no reason to have an entire article on this subject, when Extra Stage can adequately be explained in a few paragraphs on the DDR page.  Also, now that I've copy edited this page a little, hopefully it looks a bit better, but this page is generally an embarassment to the DDR community.  If anyone has any other ideas, please contribute as this page desperately needs some attention. --Rahzel 16:23, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think the topic is notable enough for Wikipedia, but not as its own article.  Recommend a merge with Dance Dance Revolution — Santiago22 (talk) 19:32, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

text: Is it cool if i suggest this be merged as well, even though i'm not registered? Why would this be a solo article at all? Plus, its incredibly poorly written. This coming from someone who plays DDR often. 71.224.246.205 20:43, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
Talk:Lethbridge College

message: I added the "not to be confused with University of Lethbridge" hatnote to the top of Lethbridge College because both institutions are in the same town, Lethbridge, Alberta, and share a similar name. Someone unfamiliar with the schools or the area (like me) might be looking for a college or university named "Lethbridge" that is in Lethbridge unaware that there are two (in the United States there is no universally accepted difference between the terms "college" and "university"). -Mabeenot (talk) 22:11, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The only thing similar about their names is the word “Lethbridge”. In Canada, where these two institutions are located, there is an established difference. Lethbridge College doesn’t even offer degrees. I feel that such a practice could lead down a slippery slope, especially given the American usage. After all, it wouldn’t make sense to create college redirects for every US university article, and university redirects for every US college. --Kmsiever (talk) 03:48, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

text: I'm with Kmsiever on this one. The USian interchangeability of "college" and "university" isn't terribly relevant in this situation; the institutions aren't in a USian context. And if you were actually trying to find a college or university in a town you weren't personally familiar with, wouldn't you go to the town's or city's main article (or category) first to look for an "Education" section, rather than randomly typing "City University" or "City College" into the search box just to see what might come up? The latter strategy, frex, wouldn't help you find Laurentian University or Dalhousie University or Camosun College — or a vast number of American schools either, for that matter. Bearcat (talk) 04:26, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Fair enough. You're more familiar with Canadian higher education. In response to Kmsiever's slippery slope comment, we already have redirects and disambiguation pages that mix universities and colleges in the United States (for examples, see the hatnotes for Boston University and Trinity University (Texas)). -Mabeenot (talk) 05:38, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Those aren't really parallel situations to what's been done here, though: one is an article hatnoting to a dab page that lists multiple entries, and one is a disambiguated title backhatting to dab pages (which isn't really necessary in the first place). Neither one is really comparable to an A-to-B hatnote between things that are both undisambiguated unique titles. Bearcat (talk) 09:08, 4 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok. For a closer comparison, check these out: Dartmouth University, University of Santa Monica, and Hamilton University. -Mabeenot (talk) 17:52, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

text: I'm Canadian, and I understand the difference between University of Lethbridge and Lethbridge College, but I see absolutely nothing wrong with hatnoting the pair of them. There is a chance that some (possibly non-Canadian) reader might confuse the two, and the names do share a similarity.  PKT(alk) 23:36, 4 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Not to be confused
Talk:Multifactorial inheritance

message: are the multiple genetic mutations and the multiple enviromental factors are 2 seperate groups?
can one be wihtout the other? will it still be considered muliple inheritence?
--M siterman 16:29, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  clear definations please 

message: The sources could be improved, but I think there is enough stable information here to keep readers fairly informed. That is, I found enough agreement between my sources that I could say a fair bit. And to the extent that I did, I was a bit pedantic regarding my citations, but for cites, you can't be too pedantic, I suppose. 
I had a policy of keeping the definitions as standard as possible. I took out gray areas such as schizophrenia (actually, psychiatry in general, since they haven't established much of anything), intelligence (whatever that means), and stuck to established illnesses for which multifactorial inheritance seems established -- although this article falls short of a formal literature review, where I would like to cite medical journals, textbooks, and so on.
I also felt that "multifactorial inheritance" does not suggest "illness", and so any normally-distributed multifactorial phenotype fell within the scope of this topic, such as height and skin colour.
Pking123 23:59, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: A boatload of new stuff
Talk:School Without Walls (Washington, D.C.)

message: There is an institution of the same name in Rochester, New York, with many similar philosophies. There may be other schools beyond these two that carry that name; I'm not sure.
Suggestion: Rename this page to School Without Walls (Washington DC), allow for creation of a new page called School Without Walls (Rochester), or something similar. KingAlanI 02:58, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Other school with same name

message: Multiple times the girls soccer team was the best in the city, yet this article only mentions the boys baseball team coming in second. What about how the girls lacrosse team had a male player using title 9 at one point.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 100.36.49.17 (talk) 02:16, 20 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Sports

message: "just a block from the notorious 13th and K street area"
What is notorious about this park / area?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Colonycat (talk • contribs) 00:32, 5 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  What is notorious about 13th and K street
Template talk:USRepVicePresNominees

message: I think Andrew Johnson should be listed on this template. He was nominated on the GOP ticket in 1864 (it was called the Union ticket) but it was the Republican Party.Smith03 16:39, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Does anyone object if I change the list from last names only to full names, as was done on ?--Old Hoss 16:13, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I went ahead and changed it to full names since there were no objections for over a week.--Old Hoss 17:01, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Full names
Talk:Hail Caesar

message: There is no evidence that this film has gone into production.  As it's halfway through 2006 already, I doubt the film will be released this year.  It looks like if the Coens do make it, it will be after "No Country..."  So the earliest release date I can see is 2008.Bjones 17:54, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: 2006?

message: who's this song by? the only song i know of is AC/DC's. or maybe somebody else is writing it. could somebody please cite the song, so it won't be deleted? Jailbreaker22 00:29, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  hail caesar song
Talk:Doc Gallows

message: On the April 27, 2018 episode of the podcast "Talk is Jericho"(Talk'n Shop SOBER in NYC), Gallows stated that he would like his Wikipedia page to reflect that he is "single and ready to mingle".  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Phoenixdriver99 (talk • contribs) 00:55, 7 May 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Personal Life 

message: Article has a message from December 2018https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luke_Gallows, stating the article needs to be updated. The article has been updated to match current worldwide events as of 28 May 2020. Is there a way to remove the message from the article? Aiden4Real (talk) 02:08, 29 May 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Updates 

message: There was a revision made (and edited, correcting a typo the next day) that while reflecting accurate information, I don't believe is noteworthy. The revision appended this to the introductory section
On October 14, 2020, Doc Gallows and Karl Anderson defeated "Luke Warm" Luke Owen and Mr. Davis to become Quizzlemania Tag Team Champions, which they currently hold in their first reign.
Quizzlemania is an offshoot of the WrestleTalk podcast, primary hosts of which are Luke Owen and Ollie Davis, from the UK. Nice blokes, and I'm a fan, but it's hardly relevant. I suspect that some of their fans added this
I haven't done any editing on wikipedia for at least a decade I think, so hardly feel that I should revert this, but instead just wanted to point it out  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Quayrodent (talk • contribs) 19:13, 11 February 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Questionable revision Jan 30/31 2021 

message: I fixed most of the incorrect information Luke Gallows isn’t called Big Bald Gallows and he doesn’t weigh over 900 pounds 2600:1702:20:1880:446C:341A:3B47:72AA (talk) 16:50, 26 October 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: If necessary, page protection may be requested at WP:RFPP. 331dot (talk) 16:51, 26 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Make sure to lock this page soon haters are  trying to give misinformation
Talk:Ralph Taeger

message: Richard Lamparski, author of the Whatever became of...? series, wrote that Taeger was briefly engaged to Stephanie Zimbalist before his marriage to Linda Jarret. But Stephanie would have only been 12 years old when Taeger married Linda. So I deleted that sentence about Ralph and Stephanie's brief engagement that I added yesterday.
DL77 16:48, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Web content management system

message: Should these links below be included?
;Vendor Neutral Articles About Content Management Systems
*(links removed by user:Andypandy.UK)
—Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.137.90.147 (talk • contribs) 16:50, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Duh, NO. Why do you keep on with this? Link to the original articles or not at all. · rodii · 16:54, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

text: contribs) 16:12, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: The page is also clearly vendor-biased; none of the disadvantages of Web CMS as compared to straight HTML are mentioned. -Such as extreme complexity of admin interfaces, the restrictive nature of the templates as regards page layout, backup/restore issues, an endless list of  hacking/defacement vulnerabilities, and the need to edit websites 'live' (with mistakes immediately visible to the Web before the page can be proofread) are mentioned. --Anteaus (talk) 10:13, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vendor Biased. 

message: This page should be removed and replaced - vendor bias is clear and does in no way represent accurate or balanced information on WCMS
09:15, 22 March 2009
 I am also developing a CMS through ASP.Net  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.168.205.185 (talk) 14:27, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vendor Biased. 

message: Can I add my concerns that in my POV this page is limited and dated --ClemRutter (talk) 11:27, 17 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Disquiet

message: Delegation entry duplicates Access Control, etc.
Pmartycz (talk) 21:22, 15 March 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Capabilities section is full of unnecessary repetitions 

message: Why have filenet on this page? It's mainly geared toward the enterprise and files. Not web content.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Drumblog (talk • contribs) 19:28, 18 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Filenet isn't a wCMS
Talk:Sir Adam Beck Hydroelectric Generating Stations

message: This article needs information about the Great Northeast Blackout that occurred in 1965 and stemmed from this powerplant.  I would consider it a stub. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.13.255.87 (talk) 16:50, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Seems to have been added. GA-RT-22 (talk) 22:38, 1 September 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Strike! (1998 film)

message: The movie summary needs a clean-up--62.209.19.224 (talk) 06:47, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

message: I merged this to All I Wanna Do (1998 film) per the guidelines of WP:COMMONNAME and WP:NCFILMS which require the most commonly used name to be the name of the article. Per Rotten Tomatoes, etc., All I Wanna Do is the most commonly used name. Mmyers1976 (talk) 21:22, 17 August 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merged to [[All I Wanna Do (1998 film)]]
Talk:Dilation and evacuation

message: — Assignment last updated by Ewingdo 15:21, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: 2023-24 WikiMed Directed Studies

message: Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? Is there anything that distracted you?
The article is overall adequately complete. It includes relevant information surrounding D&E, its indications, descriptions, risks, alternatives and even the recent laws judicial changes surrounding abortion in the United States. There were no sections of the article that I found distracting or irrelevant to the topic. 
Is the article neutral? Are there any claims, or frames, that appear heavily biased toward a particular 
The article appears to be neutral. It does a good job of pointing out the standard management of D&E with relevant sources. It also indicates instances where there is a no consensus or insufficient evidence.
Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
The article doesn’t advocate for any certain viewpoints. It does mention the impact of abortion laws on the D&E procedure. However, discussing the varying viewpoints around abortion laws would not be appropriate for this article. 
Check the citations. Do the links work? Does the source support the claims in the article?
All of the citations are functional. I was able to connect the information included in the article to the citations listed. 
Is each fact supported by an appropriate, reliable reference? Where does the information come from? Are these neutral sources? If biased, is that bias noted?
Each new piece of information is supported by a relevant and appropriate reference. A lot of the information is sourced from American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, a very credible organization. Other information is sourced from reputable journals like Obstetrics and Gynecology. Those journal articles seem to be neutral in viewpoints. 
Is any information out of date? Is anything missing that should be added?
A lot of the information originally included in the article was outdated. SDlren did a great a job of adding statistics from 2022-2023. Relevant information surrounding the new abortion laws was also included. A lot of the sources cited were recently published as well. 
Tacobellbeanburrito (talk) 15:14, 15 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Peer Review
Talk:Robert Minor

message: Someone just deleted this article I started, saying it was to short. Please don't be so damn quick to delete it this time, and maybe I can get a chance to write it!!! Bronks 16:53, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There is a "construction banner" that you can put up when you are working on a new article. Two of these brackets { { and then the word construction and then two closing brackets } }. You don't include any spaces, obviously... Just lay that up there at the very top of the page when you start working and people will leave you alone, or they should. Carrite (talk) 16:29, 5 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Don't delete this article again!
Talk:The Justice (journal)

message: Added the npov tag after article was edited from saying the Justice is "one of" the independant student newspapers to "the" independant. The Hoot is another independant student weekly.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.55.200.20 (talk • contribs) 16:54, 30 May 2006
The Hoot is not really independent. It has to go before the F-Board to ask for money in order to print, while the Justice receives a set proportion of the student activity fee, making it completely independent.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.113.38.124 (talk • contribs) 06:32, 2 June 2006
So...a newspaper that receives secured funds from students is independent while another that receives non-secure funds is not? Independent on the Justice masthead means independent from the school administration (which both papers are). Neither is independent from the students as BOTH rely on funds from the students (just from different pots). Just because the Justice's funds are described as secure, doesn't make the paper independent. If the students held a vote and took away the Justice's funding, it wouldn't be able to print. Just like if the f-board cut enough of The Hoot's funding. Bottom line, the only accurate statement that can be made is that the Justice's funding is more secure than The Hoot's but that neither is independent of the students and both are independent of the administration.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.55.200.20 (talk • contribs) 17:08, 2 June 2006
WHY was the article about the Justice removed? It has been established since 1949 at Brandeis, which is the 31st most notable school, according to US News and World Report. I do not understand the decision at all to redirect "the Justice" to a judge. maybe "justice" alone but not the title of a newspaper that had 24,670 on-line views SO FAR this month.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.64.99.48 (talk • contribs) 02:53, 11 December 2006
AND the person who did the deleting did not wait for there to be any disussion about it. He did it before there was debate!—Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.64.99.48 (talk • contribs) 02:57, 11 December 2006
:It wasn't deleted, it was redirected and I've left the editor a note about it.--EarthPerson 17:45, 12 December 2006 (UTC)