lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Magic (UK radio station)

message: According to section 1.7.7. 1.7.3.* of Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not, Wikipedia is not a radio guide. Can this section, rather than be deleted, be changed to something like Programmes and Presenters. There are websites which can do a much better job of keeping a schedule up to date. 
*It was section 1.7.7. but it has since changed to 1.7.3. --tgheretford (talk) 07:18, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Schedule - Unencyclopedic

message: I cannot find any livestream of Magic 105.4 online, just the national feed. Does "Magic 105.4" still exist or is its output (aside from adverts) exactly the same as the national feed now? --AllOriginalBubs (talk) 20:06, 24 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is the "105.4" branding still in use? 

message: Is the station still on Sky? Mobile mundo (talk) 18:51, 2 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sky 

message: 
Proposal to Merge this page into Magic Radio as the 'Magic 105.4 FM' station took-over the 'Magic Radio' brand on 5th January 2015. See discussion page above.
Con.dir (talk) 08:14, 5 September 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merger proposal 
Talk:Broadnose sevengill shark

message: This article is a fish-related stub. Could someone please add the appropiate tag at the bottom of the page, thanks! Lenny 18:17, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Stub
Talk:Copper shark

message: A question for anyone watching the article - how accurate is this statement? For example copper sharks (locally known as bronze whalers) have very recently been spotted, and are spotted regularly, off the coast of Adelaide in Gulf St Vincent, which is an inlet of the Southern Ocean - hardly an example of a subtropical body of water. 202.124.89.27 (talk) 10:46, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  "found in ''subtropical seas and oceans''" 

message: I've never heard this terminology, ever, for the Bronze Whaler shark.  In all the science literature I've read since a child, in talking to many Australian friends of mine that all call in the Bronze Whaler, to BBC documentaries only a couple of years old referring to the species as Bronze Whaler, I can't believe "Copper shark" is the more common name. HammerFilmFan (talk) 03:14, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I've seen "copper shark" used by plenty of published sources. It's also used by the UN Food and Agriculture Organization, and is listed as the primary common name in FishBase, which is generally what we use to determine fish article titles here. -- Yzx (talk) 03:48, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
replies: text:  Ok, but in common talk as a sailor for many years (before retiring from the USN) and fellow fisherman etc., I've never heard them referred to in this way.  Oh, well, I prostrate myself before the UN - not.  HammerFilmFan (talk) 17:00, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

text: In Australia, it is commonly called a Bronze Whaler. This is also the primary name in the US as well, if we believe Shark Research Institute. Badja (talk) 09:39, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  is "Copper Shark" the best name for this article?
Talk:Dinah Manoff

message: Here are the links for the images which MUST go in the article:
* http://www.hissandpop.com/celebrities/m/dinahmanoff/
* http://tessietura.livejournal.com/
* http://www.gettyimages.ca/Search/Search.aspx?contractUrl=2&language=en-US&p=dinah+manoff&assetType=image#
* http://www.flickr.com/photos/siff/sets/72157624172585193/
* http://www.reocities.com/dinahmanoffpage/
May I make a suggestion? Put in the one from Flickr. Somebody is going to have to put that in, and it's not going to be me. Who?--E2e3v6 (talk) 13:49, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pictures Links 

message: It looks like 1956 is correct: https://www.instantcheckmate.com/people/dinah-manoff/
Crisso (talk) 23:10, 2 March 2017 (UTC)
replies: text:  I've removed the date altogether now as we only have primary sources suggesting 1956 and nothing at all cited for 1958 (and a quick google search doesn't throw up anything especially reliable). Crisso (talk) 18:50, 24 January 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you, . Eddie Blick (talk) 02:23, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

text: I've added a source for the 1956 date sourced with an Ohio newspaper. Mike Allen 23:17, 25 January 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for providing that documentation, . Eddie Blick (talk) 02:11, 26 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Birth year
Talk:Bullhead shark

message: they are deadly  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.20.164.71 (talk) 19:02, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Carcharhiniformes

message: Does anyone know or have access to an etymology? Because I'm really curious, and I bet most non shark experts who make it to this page will be as well. 2603:8080:5701:9E54:E0FB:BA41:E1D9:182B (talk) 03:39, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why are they called Ground Sharks?
Talk:Carpet shark

message: Heard that one in a discussion of pets likely to bite their owners. I had to look it up to see what it was.
74.134.114.185 05:39, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Euphemism 

message: The only things I have heard referred to as "carpet sharks" are pet ferrets. Gil gosseyn (talk) 04:30, 4 April 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ferrets
Talk:Edmund Backhouse (politician)

message: When did Edmund Backhouse become less of a Quaker and more of a Country Squire?
Vernon White 07:28, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: An unregistered editor has changed Youngest son of Jonathan Backhouse (1779-1842), banker, of Polam Hill, Darlington, and of his wife Hannah Chapman Backhouse, daughter of Joseph Gurney of Norwich. Both parents were minister of the Religious Society of Friends (Quakers), travelling in Great Britain and North America. . 
I suspect that both Jonathan and Hannah Backhouse were recorded ministers. They travelled "in the Ministry". Unless anyone can present evidence that they were not ministers, I shall revert, but perhaps add some explanation of the term "minister" Vernon White -  T A L K . . . to me. 17:17, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Members or Ministers?
Talk:Catshark

message: Could we put back in the number of species per genera. It gives a good overview of the number of species/ genus, especially for the layman reader.
cheers,
Bruinfan12 (talk) 13:48, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't particularly like listing numbers of species to that level of precision. The numbers for a big, diverse family like this changes frequently with taxonomic revisions and authors disagree on the validity of particular species, etc. If the diversity among the different genera are to be addressed, it should be in a paragraph with proper context instead of just a bare number. -- Yzx (talk) 07:49, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

message: This is actually a Formal Classification, and needs to be associated with a branching diagram to become a cladogram, and to be interpretable for non-specialists Barney Bruchstein (talk)  —Preceding undated comment added 18:40, 25 October 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  The `Cladogram' 

message: Why don't someone put in a section about the history of the Catsharks' name? Like who named it and why catshark? Things like that.108.188.90.42 (talk) 22:29, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Catshark Name 

message: This reference appears to be vandalism, but I can't find the insertion in the article history, and don't know enough about the subject to copyedit it out. --Ef80 (talk) 23:28, 10 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sonic Hedgehog
Talk:Cladoselache

message: Note: The following was copied from WikiProject Palaeontology on 1 November 2014. --Animalparty-- (talk) 19:45, 1 November 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: This discussion belongs on the talk page of one of the two articles in question, but the convention is to merge monotypic taxa. Since the family apparently contains mutiple genera, it would be best to have the family article present an overview of all genera, (shared features, temporal occurrence, etc), yielding to genera articles for specific details. --Animalparty-- (talk) 17:42, 1 November 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: As mentioned above, merging should only be done when the family/subfamily/etc. taxon is monotypic. This one isn't. In fact, the opposite has to be done; creation of articles for the red linked genera. FunkMonk (talk) 17:46, 1 November 2014 (UTC)

text: Merge tags removed. --Animalparty-- (talk) 18:53, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge discussion
Talk:Cow shark

message: recently, my friend and i have made up something we call a cow shark.  We didn't know there was anything actually called a cow shark untill today.  our teacher said that anyone can edit anything on wikipedia, so we decided to try.  According to Maddie, cow sharks eat lots of popcorn jellybeans, say mooch, and cause havoc on state property
74.61.13.198 (talk) 23:00, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  cow sharks 

message: This page has had alot of vandalism about the "Cow sharks eat popcorn and say mooch" thing, so I think maybe it should be locked.
--Little Blue Penguin (talk) 17:15, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vandalism 

message: cow sharks produce cheese  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.194.13.70 (talk) 14:24, 7 November 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  cheese curds 

message: Quote from https://fishbase.net.br/Summary/FamilySummary.php?Family=Hexanchidae (reference 1)
"Important recommendation:
The list below must not be used as an authority reference synonymy list like those found in scientific published revisions, which must be the source to be used and cited eventually when they exist."
Forgive me if I understood what this means (Englis´h isn't my first language) but it would probably be smart to find a source that doesn't make a statement like this Infinitecopper (talk) 19:05, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reference 1 reliability
Talk:Dogfish

message: OED has
dogfish |ˈdôgˌfi sh | noun ( pl. same or -fishes)
1 a small sand-colored bottom-dwelling shark with a long tail, common on European coasts. • Scyliorhinus canicula, family Scyliorhinidae.
2 [with adj. ] a small shark that resembles or is related to the dogfish, sometimes caught for food. • Several genera in the families Scyliorhinidae, Squalidae, and Triakidae. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Bueller 007 (talk • contribs) 04:50, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  dictionary def 

message: :"It is now illegal to kill or mutilate them when caught."
Is it really appropriate then to have a photo of a fisherman holding one he's just caught?
The other picture isn't very good without a caption to say where it comes from either. --IronChris  |  (talk) 00:06, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The photo and this discussion relate to spiny dogfish. Any effort to present this information should be directed at that page, not this page associated with the vague term, "dogfish". -IGTaylor (talk) 17:44, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Images 

message: I think the term "dogfish" is too vague and the energy spent here should be directed to the spiny dogfish page instead. -IGTaylor (talk) 21:22, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  We should be editing [[spiny dogfish]]
Talk:Dumb gulper shark

message: Hello! A few general critiques here:
- The qualitative information on the dumb gulper shark was somewhat vague. This section would benefit a lot from more quantitative information (Ex - "The body is slender and of moderate size". What are the measurements of the shark that would support these claims? Slender and moderate size are broad terms).
- There is very little information regarding the reproduction of the shark. How long is the gestation period? How large are pups when they are born? How long do they stay with their mothers? These are a few examples of additional information that could be added.
Kroth2021 (talk) 16:16, 3 February 2024 (UTC)
Talk:Chapter 24

message: The lyric vs. I Ching analysis is missing two lines.  I can't find anything directly referencing these.  If anyone can help, please feel free to complete the analysis.  The missing lines are:
"...it forms when darkness is increased by one..."
"...things cannot be destroyed once and for all..."
--A Knight Who Says Ni (talk) 02:19, 28 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: This entire section should be removed if the analysis does not have a reliable source. To "complete the analysis" would constitute original research. —Tim Pierce (talk) 19:18, 22 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  More analysis 

message: How does having the album label and release date make it sound like an advertisement? I don't mind the rewording but that's a ridiculous claim. As far as it being notable, why a cover version of an obscure Pink Floyd song have its own entry. That's the whole purpose of mentioning it in this article. The band is certainly notable and have their own article and I feel they certainly carry enough merit to be mentioned in this article. JohnBWatt (talk) 00:46, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: No offense was intended, and as to your last sentence, I agree, which is why I didn't remove it.  The label name does not have a Wikipedia article and is presumably not notable, and the release date is not significant for this article, although it would be significant for the tribute album, if it had an article.  The date and label name seemed to be advertising that it's a recent release, and telling how to find where it can be purchased.  As for notability, when I see a cover version entered (which happens almost daily in Pink Floyd articles), I check to see if the band and album have articles, and if there is any mention of the song in those articles.  If not, I have to presume the song is not a notable part of the band's repertoire, i.e. it may have been performed just once live, or appears on a non-notable album.  In this case, since the band had an article, I did not remove the entry entirely (as I would otherwise), but removed the non-notable parts.  As for this article, it contains sufficient useful information to justify its existence, and the song itself is an important component of a classic psychedelic album. --A Knight Who Says Ni (talk) 11:32, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Advertisement?
Talk:Flathead catshark

message: This article has been revised as part of the large-scale clean-up project of a massive copyright infringement on Wikipedia. Earlier text must not be restored, unless it can be verified to be free of infringement. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions must be deleted. Contributors may use sources as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously.
For more information on this situation, which involved a single contributor liberally copying material from print and internet sources into several thousand articles, please see the two administrators' noticeboard discussions of the matter,  here and here, as well as the the cleanup task force subpage. Thank you.  --Moonriddengirl (talk) 17:15, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copyright problem
Talk:Freshwater shark

message: I have removed the disambiguation tag from this page, as it is not properly a disambiguation page. Although the links on the page refer to kinds of freshwater sharks, or fish mistakenly called sharks, these are presented in the context of what a "freshwater shark" actually is.  The links themselves do not contain the phrase "freshwater shark". bd2412 T 15:36, 27 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Not a disambiguation page
Talk:Gulper shark

message: The lead paragraph says the range in the eastern Atlantic Ocean is "from the Congo north to France" but this does not match up with the map that's pictured.  The map shows blue all the way down the west coast of Africa, much farther south than the Congo.  Anyone know which is accurate? LarryJeff (talk) 17:39, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Range in the eastern Atlantic? 

message: The section on conservation efforts and legislation claims that "the gulper is not, in fact, a shark."  This is nonsense; of course a gulper shark is a shark!  I suspect whoever wrote this sentence was trying to make some kind of point, but I'm honestly baffled as to what it might have been.  This claim should either be clarified (and sourced!) or removed altogether. 64.251.148.125 (talk) 03:24, 30 December 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I went ahead and did this myself.  I figured it's unlikely anyone else would respond, so I decided to be bold! 64.251.148.125 (talk) 02:47, 3 January 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Good move! All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 01:31, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  How exactly is a gulper shark not a shark? 

message: Redirects here.  According to Compagno  it has no synonyms. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 01:31, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: ''Centrophorus niaukang''
Talk:Gummy shark

message: Why is it called "Gummy"?Chrisrus (talk) 05:29, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gummy Shark? 

message: Is it because the flat teeth makes it appear toothless, and therefore "gummy"?Chrisrus (talk) 05:32, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why it's called "Gummy" 

message: Hello, I revised this article for an in-class assignment. I believe that adding more information on why the shark has the name that it does and perhaps explaining what a "bag limit" is will help answer some of the readers unanswered questions.Autumn029 (talk) 17:34, 9 February 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article Revision 

message: Hello, I've recently made the following changes to improve this article;
I have broken the original information into four subcategories, along with adding information regarding the reproductive tendencies and size.
The four sources along with the other original sources have been recited.
I added a map of southern Australia where this species is commonly found and fished. 
The photograph of the shark was re-added because I accidentally edited over it. 
The remaining information from the previous version of the article may have been revised, reworded and/or grammatically edited.
These edits were originally drafted in my sandbox. User:Autumn029/sandbox Autumn029 (talk) 15:32, 5 April 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article Improvements
Talk:Bigeyed sixgill shark

message: ok i know for a fact that no animal has two different genus names, this pages has got Hexanchus nakamurai and Hexanchus vitulus which one is real please think about it and delete the incorrect page  —Preceding unsigned comment added by LeafGreen Ranger (talk • contribs) 19:41, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Two Names??? 

message: I wouldn't worry about it. "Hexanchus nakamurai" is the primary, legit scientific name you will find just about everywhere, while "Hexanchus vitulus" is a name you might find in some older literature. That is likely why the name is listed as a synonym, and why inputing the name to Wikipedia's search engine will bring you to the same place. Happy trails! Nightlight6 (talk) 23:05, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Re: Two Names
Talk:Bard High School Early College

message: Will someone please help me expand this essay?? I can not do it by myself, and so I am BEGGING for help. Someone had signed on to do it, and I offered to help, but he abandoned it! Thank you. Ladybug413 23:48, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: PLEASE EXPAND

message: This article is simultaneously covering BHSEC Manhattan as a school and the BHSEC school system. I asssume it is the entire system.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Warsong66 (talk • contribs) 00:14, 7 August 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: agree that this article needs a full-on rewrite into two different articles: one on the BHSEC system and one about BHSEC manhattan specifically. Mccartneyac (talk) 16:56, 30 August 2023 (UTC)

text: agree Ivannilych (talk) 22:27, 12 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title: BHSECM vs. BHSEC's

message: Nice topics just needs more refs to go up a grade. started. Welcome. Victuallers 14:35, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Assess
Talk:Kitefin shark

message: This article was based on the corresponding article at fishbase.org or niwascience.co.naz, neither of which are compatibly licensed for Wikipedia. It has been revised on this date as part of a large-scale project to remove infringement from these sources. Earlier text must not be restored, unless it can be verified to be free of infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. (For background on this situation, please see the related administrator's noticeboard discussion and the cleanup task force subpage.) Thank you.  -- ascidian | talk-to-me 12:26, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copyright problem removed 

message: The use of the word "exploited" in "Human Interactions" sounds to me emotive and NPOV HieronymousCrowley (talk) 08:26, 20 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: "Exploitation" is a standard term used by government agencies and conservation groups for fishery activities. See here for an example. -- Yzx (talk) 17:51, 20 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Exploited or just Used?
Talk:Lamniformes

message: Shark mackerel versus Mackerel shark ... which one should redirect here? Both? What is the relationship between the two. this seems confusing, and other articles often have a "not to be confused with..." section at the top. --Kuzetsa (talk) 08:07, 28 October 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Shark mackerel vs Mackerel shark 
Talk:Analysis of competing hypotheses

message: This topic is covered extensively in intelligence analysis. Howard C. Berkowitz 02:26, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thomas Chrowder Chamberlin's theory of multiple working hypotheses seems like a broad-concept version of this topic. HLHJ (talk) 21:44, 30 October 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge/disambiguate

message: It would appear that SSS Research is no longer in business: thincSoft Acquires Intellectual Property of SSS Research
The company doesn't appear to have done much in the way of advancing ACH.  I would therefore question the relevancy of SSS Research to this article on ACH, other than perhaps as an interesting footnote.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mike.wilmoth (talk • contribs) 01:49, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: SSS Research & DECIDE
Talk:Combat Support Group RAAF

message: Shouldn't this article be called Combat Support Group (RAAF)? A search of "Combat Support Group" suggests there were other units called like this in the US army. Regards, Comte0 (talk) 10:46, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Title