lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Category talk:Sexual orientation

message: I propose adding a new category called Heterosexuality? Any comments? Wuzzy 22:52, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  New Category? 

message: What is the diference between the category "Sexual orientation" and the category "Sexual orientation and identity"? If none, they should probably be merged. Wuzzy 11:56, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  What is distinction? 

message: The term "ex-gay" is not a sexual orientation (regardless of whether its supporters attempt to use it as such) and is not supported by the mainstream medical, psychological and counseling establishments.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Baraeris (talk • contribs) 06:09, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removal of ex-gay
Talk:Supply Belcher

message: quote: "His voice-leading is considerably smoother and follows the "rules" more frequently than the work of many of his contemporaries, for instance avoiding the parallel perfect intervals and open fifths which are a common feature of New England psalmody." 
What is the source/basis for this statement? In my experience his music has displayed voice leading that is, if anything, more idiosyncratic. What is interesting to me about his music is the degree to which there seems to be a logic of melodic line which leads to awkward harmonic motions, but certainly not 'voice-leading' in the typical sense. Perhaps I misunderstand you? In any case, I would be curious to know if this was a sourced notion or an opinion. 22:53, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
Talk:SF fighting knife

message: The rationale for this page is someone referring to the "SF fighting knife" thinking that it meant "special forces fighting knife." Since some of the published literature does list Sykes' name first (e.g. Sykes-Fairbairn Fighting Knife History) I thought that this page would be a nice one for disambiguation, rather than a simple re-direct. Initial stub by Rorybowman 22:57, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
Talk:List of places in Colorado: A–D

message: The article claims to be "current", yet it (up until I deleted them moments ago) includes Eastridge and Eastridge South - unincorporated places that were annexed by Aurora over 25 years ago. So long ago, in fact, that the ZIP code that was indicated, 80232, has since been reassigned. I suspect that the U.S. Postal Service waits many years before reusing a ZIP code, to avoid confusion.
What is the source of the information in this article, and how can we make sure that there aren't additional inaccuracies that are a quarter-century old?
Denvoran 23:02, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

message: This is a very useful page, but, shouldn't there also be a category "Places in Colorado"? Carrdonw 22:54, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Should there be a category? 

message: I am not sure you should have deleted those two entries. They have historical significance, and probably should remain, but of course they should link to an article that explains the history and that they no longer exist (as legal names). Carrdonw 17:26, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Deletions of Eastridge and Eastridge South 
Talk:Hemolymph

message: Contrary to the comments above, hemolymph should NOT be part of circulatory system, and should have its own article--even if it is short.  Experts on the subject are needed, however. Chiss Boy 23:13, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Experts needed

message: One of the scientists involved with the dissection of the colossal squid specimen in New Zealand referred to hemolymph as "the squid’s blue, copper-based ‘blood’".  Can a knowledgeable editor double check that squids do in fact have hemolymph, and if so, can the article be amended to include more than just insects?  I don't know the first thing about biological systems.  Also, the chemistry of hemolymph (if in fact copper-based) should be discussed. --BlueCanoe (talk) 00:17, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Colossal squid hemolymph? 

message: The following checklist is posted with the intent of determining whether this article meets the six B-Class criteria:
References
Is the article is suitably referenced, with inline citations? Does it have has reliable sources, and any important or controversial material which is likely to be challenged?
Scope
Does the article reasonably cover the topic, and does not contain obvious omissions or inaccuracies?  Does it contain a large proportion of the material necessary for an A-Class article, although some sections may need expansion, and some less important topics may be missing?
Layout and organization
Does the article has a defined structure? Is the content organized into groups of related material, including a lead section and all the sections that can reasonably be included in an article of its kind?
Well written
Is the article reasonably well-written? Does the prose contain no major grammatical errors and flows sensibly?
Supporting materials
Does the article contain supporting materials where appropriate? Illustrations? Diagrams? Infobox?
Understandable
Does the article present its content in an appropriately understandable way? Is it is written with as broad an audience in mind as possible? Does the article incorrectly assume unnecessary technical background OR are technical terms explained or avoided where possible.
Input anyone?
:  Bfpage |leave a message  02:29, 28 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: B-Class criteria checklist
Wikipedia talk:WikiProject edit counters/Flcelloguy's Tool/Configs

message: Please leave this page alone, as it is a page that contains global settings for User:Titoxd/Flcelloguy's Tool, in particular a disabling feature to stop misuse in case it occurs. Please discuss any changes you may wish to do here. Thanks! Titoxd(?!? - help us) 23:05, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
Talk:Christina piercing

message: Picture shown is post healing on a good piercing. Area should be shaved before piercing...Also I recommend a straight barbell be the correct length and bent to fit individual, as all womens anatomy and shapes are different.
—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 65.40.74.88 (talk • contribs) .
: I hear that in fact, straight barbell induce a higher risk of rejection and that surface barbells are preferable. The image shows a surface barbell. Rama 23:05, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Wikipedia isn't a how to guide. Though sometimes I wish it would link to sister sites like wiki how or wiktionary. Most have similar aims (educating the public, presumably) with a slightly different methodology. Oh well. That damn Cabal and their "Project"... 92.0.150.111 (talk) 14:45, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Type of barbell

message: did it get its name from aguilera?or was it before her time?
210.9.15.116 16:11, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  x tina
Talk:Christie

message: Christie (disambiguation) → Christie – standard WP:NC and MoS:DP
===Voting===
:Add *Support or *Oppose followed by an optional one-sentence explanation, then sign your vote with ~~~~
*Support per nom! --Lox (t,c) 15:51, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Requested move

message: :Add *Support or *Oppose followed by an optional one-sentence explanation, then sign your vote with ~~~~
*Support per nom! --Lox (t,c) 15:51, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Voting
Talk:Jennifer Ellison

message: The reference material for the relationship between Steven Gerrard and Jennifer Ellison does not relate to anything but the single she released.
I would suggest finding another reference for the relationship or removing the comment all together.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.246.168.11 (talk) 15:00, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Steven Gerrard 

message: I added her measurements, but it hasn't shown up on the page. Can anyone help? VenomousConcept (talk) 16:02, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Measurements 
Talk:Prometaphase

message: I was originally taught that the phases of mitosis were prophase, metaphase, anaphase, and telophase. I assume from this and from the name of prometaphase that it was commonly accepted as a distinct phase after the other four had been. So, what I’m wondering is how this part of mitosis was previously classified. Did people start distinguishing between the beginning and end of prophase, calling the second part prometaphase? Did a group of scientists decide that the end of prophase and the beginning of metaphase should be a distinct phase? Did a single scientist coin the term prometaphase, consisting of the second half of prophase and the first third or so of metaphase? Basically I’m asking 1) which parts of or how much of the former prophase and metaphase became prometaphase, and 2) (less importantly) how did this change occur? Twilight Realm 23:20, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The thing to remember is that the phases of mitosis are not some objective thing, they are subjective labels that humans use to break the continuous process of mitosis into smaller portions for easier comprehension. --Khajidha (talk) 11:30, 23 July 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: The summary at mitosis#Prometaphase mentions closed mitosis (as in fungi) when the nuclear membrane does not break down, but it not mentioned here. Should it be ? - Rod57 (talk) 16:14, 20 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  What about closed mitosis when the nuclear membrane does not break down 

message: this is incorrect
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pbio.0030157  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.5.11.5 (talk) 08:35, 13 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  figure not from prometaphase fibroblast but G0
Talk:Alabama's 1st congressional district

message: Wouldn't it be a space saver if the candidates' names were integrated inside the tables?  It seems to duplicate information the way it is currently structured.  Chadlupkes 23:23, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Note: Since the list of representatives and parties runs chronologically from past to present, it would be helpful if the visual representation; right now they are in reverse to each other.Parkwells (talk) 20:44, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Tables are reverse to each other
Talk:The Chips Are Down (screenplay)

message: How can the book be "in 1952" and yet still be "made into a movie in 1947"? This seems counterintuitive, and some clarification would be appreciated.
Nowalaters 23:28, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: "Les Jeux Sont Faits (The Game Is Up)"
to be misleading. Maybe I'm being picky. --^pirate 01:15, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Note

message: I believe that that this piece is approaching article-status in that it provides a clear description of the subject with a relavent degree of scope, as well as having been parsed by several editors. Therefore, I'd move to suggest that it be given article status. I will proceed to do so in a few weeks time, if unopposed, in order to provide for a reasonable timeframe in which others might respond.
--Sycron 18:30, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Stub No More? 

message: Why should this page be split up? This would only create stubs (ie. if splitting up the novel from the respective theatre and film adaptations) and the subject matter is all related, thus I find it hard to warrant splitting it up. --^pirate 18:23, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Disambig? 
Talk:Wildfire (2005 TV series)

message: "Format: teen drama".  Is a teen drama a drama aimed at teens or a drama focused on teen characters?  According to the article on teen dramas, a teen drama is a drama focused on teens.  According to the article on Wildfire, its young characters are mostly aged 20-22.  They're not teens, so either it's not a teen drama or the article on teen dramas needs to be revised. 
"60 minutes (including commercials)".  Why include the commercials?  They're hardly an integral part of the drama.  Anyone watching on DVD, or the increasing number of people with PVRs, won't see them 86.168.113.164 (talk) 18:08, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Format and running time
Talk:Pons Sublicius

message: The main thing wrong with the article is the accuracy, but the errors look like transcription errors. It certainly could and should be made accurate, but if you are going to go to the trouble, it could use some augmentation and formatting. I think anyone willing to check the sources and do the work should just jump in, as the article is easily fixed.Dave 23:31, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Written too quick or too late at night 

message: Wouldn't the Polack drawing be more accurately representative of the ancient river port / dock Portus Tiberinus'? Its position in the drawing is pretty much exactly where and what it would have looked like? The Pons Sublicius is generally acknowledged as being further downstream, roughly equivalent with the current Via del Porto. --Moree.101 (talk) 03:43, 18 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  a suggestion
Talk:Winnacunnet High School

message: It may make sense to mention Pamela Smart and a blurb of the related murder story, in this article.  This school is mentioned in the Pamela Smart article.  However, I can't yet find good reliable sources to confirm this connection (which is why I haven't yet made any change).  If a reliable sources linking the two can be found, both articles should refer to one another; or else; neither article should refer to the other.  --Rob 08:07, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Are any of these links reliable?     Can't sleep, clown will eat me 08:11, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Hey!  So this school is notable after all... for murder!  And I wanted it deleted! Go for it. Dyslexic agnostic 08:48, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

text: Shucks.  All I found previously was a bunch of WikiMirrors, tabloids and blogs, and your first link is CourtTV, which I would consider to be reliable (unlike what I previously found).  If nobody else does, I plan to add it, but haven't decided what/how to say it.  --Rob 08:54, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I have made a stab at entering the info. Dyslexic agnostic 06:16, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

text: I went to Winnacunnet and she in fact was an employee at WHS for a while.  I graduated class of 2004 and the joke was 'home of the pamela smart fan club'.  she did't work in the building proper, but across the parking lot when you first come up the driveway in the SAU building. -Kerry  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.61.136.96 (talk) 17:03, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Pamela Smart]]
Talk:Dundrennan Range

message: http://www.sundayherald.com/40306  is 404  : ( 78.148.107.233 (talk) 09:55, 22 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  external link 404 

message: Re my tag of 'Very nearly a copypaste from http://www.secretscotland.org.uk/index.php/Secrets/DundrennanRange'
I leave it upto wiki experts to decide how close copy+paste needs to be.
If this is legit then delete my tag and all is good. Mtpaley (talk) 01:10, 11 April 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: The purported source is a wiki, and the history can be reviewed. While I didn't check all contributions, I did spot check some of the changes, and the change to Wikipedia occurred prior to the change in the other wiki. For example, in the history we see the phrase "It has been claimed that environmental damage...:" added 12 June 2006, but that phrase was added to the other wiki on  07 August 2006. --SPhilbrick(Talk) 23:19, 11 May 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copy Paste 
Talk:Stolnic

message: I would recommend to unite with the article Stolnik, which deals with the same kind of function in Russia, Poland and Lithuania. Ewan2 (talk) 13:36, 17 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: To unite with the article Stolnik

message: Ewan2 (talk) 13:37, 17 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: To unite with the article [[Stolnik]]
Talk:Sam Chedgzoy

message: I assume it's association football, but the article is not clear. --Walter Görlitz 23:54, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: What Gamne?

message: Can somebody try and find out how his name is pronounced. My guess is , but can anyone else have any other ideas? RJL 23:28, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pronunciation? 
Talk:Himsa

message: I wish I had never read this article.
I'm thinking of doing an almost complete rewrite on this, at least getting the format right. I'll see, though. --PhoenixHallow 09:29, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Add a picture of them please. Why no picture?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thexrager (talk • contribs) 04:49, 5 November 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Because you inserted the image incorrectly, you just added a link. I recommend that you read this and this. Thank you and Happy editing. (: --Webclient101talk 05:43, 5 November 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Add a picture
Template talk:AutoCAD related articles

message: Template:AutoCAD related articles has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at Wikipedia:Templates for deletion#Template:AutoCAD related articles. Thank you.
:The debate reached no consensus on what to do. See here. -Splashtalk 21:10, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  TfD nomination of Template:AutoCAD related articles 

message: I have added a line with links to the articles on individual versions. Discuss. --ChaChaFut (talk) 05:06, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I find this unnecessary since in my opinion there is no need for an individual page for each version of the software. UltimateSephiroth (talk) 14:55, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Links to articles on individual versions
Talk:Lost World

message: The link for the 1925 movie links to the page for the novel. Is there a page for the movie? Also, no mention is made of Irwin Allen's 1960 version. CFLeon 00:04, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: movie

message: I disagree with splitting the dab page into Lost Worlds and The Lost World. The terms are too close, dab pages are meant to help confused readers navigate Wikipedia, who are not sure which link they are looking for. "Lost World" can be written any number of ways: 
*Lost world
*Lost World
*Lost worlds
*Lost Worlds
*The lost world
*The Lost World
*The Lost Worlds
*The lost worlds
etc..
All of these should point to the same dab page. If it's plural or singular, with a "the" or not, upper-case or lower-case, should not require separate dab pages.
-- Stbalbach 19:10, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: split
Talk:7th Panzer Division (Wehrmacht)

message: This would be standard title form for the articles in this series; the page to be moved to is currently a redirect to German 2nd Light Division, which should probably be merged into this article. MisfitToys 00:07, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Is this a fan site or a historical article? The 7th PD didn't go out of existence after the French campaing, but you might be forgiven for thinking so from this article. There's also a certain amount of Rommel-woship here. 
I re-added the well-earned neutrality tag. I am not an expert on this division, but surely we could add some OOB info and some actual operational history as opposed to the schoolboy stuff in the article now.  DMorpheus (talk) 15:06, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fan site? 

message: 2nd Light Division (Germany) states that it was later reorganized into the 7th. I was wondering if anyone has a problem with incorporating the information on there into here, and making the 2nd Light Division article a redirect to this one? §FreeRangeFrog 08:16, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  2nd Light Division merge?
Talk:Laws of electromagnetism

message: The most succinct way to express electromagnetic laws are tensorially. The universe appears to be Lorentz covariant, and so are tensors. In my opionion, the only other way to express them is in vector calculus form, since that is what is widely taught, and is less likely to confuse readers.
This article has used numerous unknown conventions, and, in my opinion, either requires lots of cleanup or modified in favour of either vector calculus/tensorial expressions of electromagnetism.
Secondly, if the equations in the article do not represent the same as Maxwell's equations in vector calculus language, then which one correctly describes observed phenomena? Masud 05:01, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Form of electromagnetic equations 

message: I have redirected this article to Maxwell's equations.  Wikipedia should have only one article discussing the rules governing electromagnetism.  If Yaw believes that the language and mathematical formalism used to describe that should be changed, then those changes should be made in the existing Maxwell's equations article, perferably after discussing those changes at Talk:Maxwell's equations as he started to.  Dragons flight 19:02, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Redirect 

message: My article addressed the Laws of Electromagnetism.  Does Maxwell's Equations address The Laws of Electromagnetism?  I think Maxwell's Equations do address the Laws of Electromagnetism, but they are incomplete and incorrect. 
I suggest Wikipedia put Maxwell's Equations under The Laws of electromagnetism.
Yaw 20:38, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: If you think ME are incorrect, you're waaaaaaayyy out on a limb, and your personal opinions don't belong in wiki. William M. Connolley 23:45, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Yaw, you need to find a different outlet for testing your original research.  Wikipedia is not that place.  try posting to the USENET newsgroup sci.physics.research and see what kind of feedback you get there.  you could also submit it to a reputable (or one that is not) journal of your choice. and, of course, you could put it on your own webpage. r b-j 01:09, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Are Maxwell's Equations addressing the Laws of electromagnetism
Talk:List of Nigerian writers

message: Shouldn't this page be alphabetized by last (or family) name, to make it consistent with other lists of authors? Bruxism 00:16, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

message: *In general, red links should not be removed from articles if they link to something that could plausibly sustain an article. An existing red link can indicate that a new article is needed. At any time, a Wikipedian may independently write an article on the linked-to subject, and when this happens, there's already a link ready and waiting for it. The red link also gives readers the opportunity to click on it to create the needed article on the spot.
* In topic/author lists, it is useful to include every topic/author you can possibly find or think of that could plausibly sustain an article. When they are turned into links, the list immediately shows where the gaps in Wikipedia's coverage for that subject are, since all of the topics missing articles will show up in red. Such lists are useful tools in developing subject areas on Wikipedia, as they show where work is needed most. 
* The red link may identify a need to create a redirect to another author.
* Some WikiProjects have bots that determine how many times a certain red link appears in Wikipedia. This is used to determine what articles are the most needed. Editors can also, after clicking on a red link, use the "what links here" function to determine how many times the subject has been red linked.
S711 (talk) 21:01, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Dealing with existing red links