lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Cities/U.S. municipality notes

message: Hello! I feel like I have been looking for this page for years! I have beef with the incorrect usage of the term Census-Designated Place across Wikipedia in articles on U.S. towns and unincorporated areas. I don't know if many editors have ever seen this page or if it is on anyone's watchlist, but it would seem to be the place to develop a policy for usage of terminology for unincorporated areas. 
My own opinion on the subject is that the term "CDP" should never be used, except when referring specifically to the Census or discussing Census data. Any other usage is ambiguous and awkward! No one ever says, hey, I'm going over to the ol' census-designated place down the road to do such-and such! Nope. Town, village, township, colonia, parish, borough, etc., all these, sure. CDP? Never. So can we figure something out? I'm really tired of reading articles that start with "Place X is a census-designated place in the County of Y in the State of Z. Thoughts? Darkest Tree Talk 18:24, 26 February 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Distinguishing CDPs from other unincorporated places makes a certain amount sense in the context of Wikipedia because CDPs are better defined and documented than other unincorporated places.  For most of them, the Census Bureau is the only reliable source for area and population.  Most of these articles were originally generated from Census data, so "census designated place" is a fairly accurate definition of the article's subject matter.  There is no uncertainty about what "census designated place" means, so it is not ambiguous.  In fact, CDPs have the advantage of well-defined boundaries, which (at least in California) other unincorporated places do not have.  It's true that the term is not in common use, but the same objection could be made about the word "unincorporated".  The status quo is not entirely satisfactory, but seems reasonable to me.  Best regards,—Stepheng3 (talk) 18:36, 10 March 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: This page should probably be deleted as it appears to be some more or less forgotten jottings. Consider joining the discussion here. older ≠ wiser 19:33, 10 March 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay. Looks like Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Cities/US Guideline#Census-designated places is the right place. Darkest Tree Talk 16:12, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Policy on usage of the term "Census-Designated Place"
Talk:Bobrinski Bucket

message: Zero google hits for Bobinski... is it Bobrinski? 68.81.231.127 03:30, 13 Dec 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: It is, and I have corrected it thusly.  --Kelly Martin 01:14, 3 Jan 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: — Assignment last updated by Jglasgow03 (talk) 22:48, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: Approaches to Islamic Art
Talk:History of Papua New Guinea

message: The article says that the first PNG people came from Southeast Asia.  But it should state where those people came from before they got to Southeast Asia.  Badagnani 11:14, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Origins 

message: There's only a hit of mention of the development of agriculture in the highlands, and no mention at all of the European discovery of native agriculture. This was a major discovery in the history of anthropology. This is a serious omission. It's the whole reason I came to this article. —MiguelMunoz (talk) 21:05, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Wikipedia is an encylopedia that anyone can edit. Help yourself. Kortoso (talk) 20:41, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Native Agriculture 

message: As I recall the issue was more that Australia would only supply AFP officers if they were exempt from being charged for any crime over there. When this was removed the Aust government pulled them out. Tigerman2005 (talk) 06:41, 13 July 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Australian police

message: Three prehistory in Papua new Guinea 180.150.254.240 (talk) 14:30, 26 March 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Social sciences
Talk:Operation Pierce Arrow

message: The line "The U.S. lost two aircraft to anti-aircraft fire, with one pilot killed and another, Ensign Everett Alvarez Jr., becoming the first U.S. Prisoner of War in Vietnam." is incorrect, I believe. Floyd Thompson was the first U.S. POW in Vietnam, captured in March 1964. Please correct me if I'm wrong.--Corbec023 (talk) 16:52, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Floyd Thompson was captured 26 March 1964, according to http://www.pownetwork.org/t1.htm.
Georgejdorner (talk) 18:05, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  First U.S. POW in Vietnam
Talk:Dukes of Lorraine family tree

message: * The note at the bottom of the chart, referring to "Charles VI of Austria" should be changed to "Charles VI as Holy Roman Emperor." Charles VI was not even from the Austrian ruling House; he was the only Emperor since 1438 who was not. He was from the Bavarian ruling House.--StanZegel 04:17, 13 Dec 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: No, this is Charles VII you are referring to. john k 15:10, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  You are correct. I know better. I don't know what I was thinking when I posted that. thanks for catching it. --StanZegel 15:37, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Corrections Needed 

message: There are several errors on this family tree relating to the succession of dukes in the 17th century.    Francis II was duke only briefly in 1624.  His son Charles III then reigns for ten years, until 1634.  At this point, I think Nicholas II is until 1661, but I'm uncertain.  In 1661, Charles III returns, reigning until 1669/70 (not sure of exactly when the French came in).  Then comes the French occupation, but most European states continue to recognize Charles III, his nephew Charles IV, and Charles IV's son Leopold Joseph, as Dukes respectively from 1669/70-75, 1675-90, and 1690-97.  After that, I think it is correct, although, again, Leopold Joseph was recognized as legitimate Duke by most powers between 1702 and 1714, even though the duchy was again occupied by the French. john k 15:10, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Numerous errors

message: Im sorry to say but this tree needs to be completely redone; the names are completely wrong its embarrassing! 
*Elizabeth of Orleans > Élisabeth Charlotte d'Orléans
*Charles Henry, Duke of Lorraine-Vaudemont > Charles Henri, Prince of Commercy
*Anna of Lorraine-Elbeouf > Anne Élisabeth de Lorraine
*Beatrice of Ouscance > Béatrice de Cusance
*Claudia of Valois?! > Claude of France, Princess of France
*Ferdinado I of Medici, grand duke of Tuscany > Ferdinando I de' Medici, Grand Duke of Tuscany
*Antoinette of Bourbon-Vendome > Antoinette de Bourbon
*Renée of Bourbon-Vendome > Renée de Bourbon
Just to name a few! H.I.M Empress Marie Anne Victoire 17:25, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Once again..
Talk:Cystercosis

message: What particular U.S. law? Rmhermen 04:19, Dec 13, 2004 (UTC)
:An interesting question, especially since wild pigs don't pay the least attention to laws. WhatamIdoing (talk) 05:30, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: What

message: Is this the same as Cysticercosis?  WhatamIdoing (talk) 05:30, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge?

message: Yes, this is the same as Cysticercosis.  I think that this should merge into that page because it is much more detailed, and a higher-quality page.  I don't know how to merge them, or suggest that they be merged though.
Doctorsoph (talk) 19:29, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge
Talk:Orange Grove affair

message: * sees Carr facing the prospect of entering the witness box at ICAC – a situation he has faced only once before, early in his term, over the removal of the then Director General of the Department of Community Services.
* Carr stands accused of sending his Chief of Staff, Graeme Wedderburn, to make it clear to the Assistant Planning Minister, Di Beamer, that she was to follow the proper planning processes.
* What will become devastatingly apparent is that Di Beamer is a Minister well out of her depth, and on top of her failure in her capacity as Juvenile Justice Minister to handle the crisis at the state’s highest security juvenile detainee centre, she will be struggling to keep her place in the Ministry beyond early 2005.
* When Orange Grove is closed to retailing the operator, Nabil Gazal and Gazcorp, is expected to sue for damages, leaving the beleaguered ratepayers of Liverpool possibly liable for millions.
                        
Now that the heat has gone out of this issue, it should be noted that Carr did not enter the witness box, ICAC found that no one had acted corruptly, Di Beamer remains a Minister and Gazcorp did not sue Liverpool Council. Jeendan 09:04, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: So much hoohah and hype over nothing. No-one was charged over the affair. It was a media beat-up. LemonForest (talk) 05:08, 10 October 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Telling Stories (album)

message: Why isn't there a background and writing section explaining why the album took so long to come out?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.18.113.3 (talk) 01:51, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why the long wait? 
Talk:List of battleships of Russia and the Soviet Union

message: this page combines the didferent types. there are more of each type however and this list will get quite long.
*I've merged in the Steam Battleships and Dreadnought Battleships - there were some discrepancies, but I believe these were mostly due to transliteration issues. Would be worth checking against a reliable source, though. Shimgray | talk | 17:56, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: [Untitled]

message: Hi Wikipedians,
To me this is a useful list, however it seems that there is too much information for this type of article. I propose removing most of the text (eg: history) as it should be already in each ship/class article; and give tabular format to this list. Columns might be something like: name of ship (with interwiki to article), class (with interwiki to article), years of service, key characteristics (length, beam, displacement, main and secondary armament), fate, comments. Maybe some "good" naval list article could be used as benchmark? Feedback on this proposal will be very much appreciated.
Regards, DPdH (talk) 08:00, 25 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry I couldn't get to you earlier. I was out of country at the time of the post. I believe that it has been established that lists should have history, as per List of battlecruisers of the Royal Navy, List of battleships of Germany and List of battlecruisers of Germany, to name a few. Hope this helps. Buggie111 (talk) 16:08, 3 September 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for your response, I was unaware of this guideline or agreement. Is it exclusive to the "Battleships Portal" list articles, or applicable to wikipedia lists in general? Where is this guideline documented? Thanks & regards, DPdH (talk) 15:54, 7 September 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I believe it should only be a short summary of the class history – not each individual ship. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 16:18, 7 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is this "just" a list article? 

message: This article is missing the Ekaterina II-class, which is indirectly refences at one point in the article but never linked or mention directly.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ekaterina_II-class_battleship#Ekaterina_II 132.170.55.255 (talk) 19:52, 2 November 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Those ships are better characterized as ironclads, not pre-dreadnoughts or newer like the others.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 01:48, 4 November 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Missing Ekaterina II-class
Talk:Faraz Rabbani

message: --196.205.233.155 17:35, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Headline text 

message: It is shocking beyond belief that people actually discussed deleting this entry at any point in time, Shayk Faraz is one of most important up and coming Islamic Scholars and his website Sunni Path is very popular in Muslims around the world, not only that he is a student of some of the best and most widely recognized Islamic scholors in Shayk Nuh Keller and Mufti Taqi Usmani. Zainub 19:05, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Wikipedia is not an unsourced encyclopedia, no matter how much personality he carries, it needs reliable independent sources to prove it. Failed WP:GNG Ontor22 (talk) 13:35, 25 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Shocking

message: I have tried to enhance the neutrality of this article by rewriting it, removing things that I cannot find sourced except in articles or blogs directly connected with the subject, and using the third-party Muslim 500 as a source. Regards, George Custer's Sabre (talk) 12:00, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  January 2017 article rebuild 

message: This article is confusing. Unable to find reliable source in reference section. Independent source must be included for the article to survive otherwise it is subject to deletion. Ontor22 (talk) 13:44, 25 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Confusion
Template talk:Pop music

message: Like Template:pop, this template is proposed for deletion. But I added a template because I found that template classier and more informative than this. but TUF-KAT believes that Template:pop looked too vague and inappropiate for articles to follow. --Gh87 09:32, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Template:pop was put forward for deletion as individual genre pages are getting their own infoboxes in future. see here for more info. i'm removing the proposal for deletion from this one as footer templates are handy for navigating genres with similar characteristics. --MilkMiruku 19:41, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposal for deletion 

message: Indi-pop and Indie pop sound the same and therefore indi-pop will be changed to indian pop. ThundermasterTRUC 09:23, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Indi-pop/Indie pop 

message: Should Dance-pop be added? Thanks - RockandDiscoFanCZ (talk) 13:47, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Dance-pop]] 

message: This has been repeatedly added, but is a red link to a recently deleted article, and thus is very likely to be reinstated (see WP:RECREATE). If it is re-created with sufficient changes and not deleted, that would demonstrate notablility and then it would be a candidate to be included on this template. At the moment there is very little point in having it included here.--SabreBD (talk) 11:18, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Disco-Pop]]

message: Are Indie pop & Noise pop part of pop? Superastig (talk) 11:41, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: No they shouldn't because they are sub-genres of rock music (see here. As I have pointed out a number of times. Of course if you can offer some reliable sources to the contrary there would be grounds for a change.--SabreBD (talk) 12:50, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Indie Pop & Noise Pop 

message: I found some issues on this template like how can Doo-woop, Crunkcore and Northern Soul are subgenres of pop music? 
Also, you all know that popular music and pop music are different, right? Why y'all put such "best selling" lists? Why we make them as two synonyms? We should separate "popular music" and pop music into different templates.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by GogoLion (talk • contribs) 11:35, 1 October 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, totally agree that this has long needed to be split into pop and popular. Solidest (talk) 13:27, 29 November 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  This template is messed up 

message: Do we really need a separate section devoted to "notable" artists? That kind of thing seems very arbitrary to me. Classicalfan626 (talk) 22:39, 28 September 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: You're right. I removed it. Binksternet (talk) 23:39, 28 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Notable artists
Category talk:Calcium channel blockers

message: It was a pretty long time ago that the neurotoxins issue began.  Basically, look at the talk page for :Category:Neurotoxins.  My current feeling is that the category neurotoxins is too vague to be useful; what is or isn't a neurotoxin needs to be defined clearly and reasonably, or I say we should scrap the category.  Neuromodulators is a category I think we should start working on and include channel blockers, vesicular exo/endo-cytosis blockers, and synaptic receptor blockers.  --Chinasaur 08:52, 13 Dec 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Placeholder name

message: shouldn't this article contain a paragraph about Chemical elements placeholder names (e.g. ununseptium before being assigned the name Tennessine)? I should say yes.(talk) 17:03, 01 March 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Don't forget unobtainium! Msramming (talk) 03:43, 30 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Chemical elements 

message: Should point A and point B qualify as placeholder names? Here is an example from the Wikipedia transport lede paragraph: In other words, the action of transport is defined as a particular movement of an organism or thing from a point A to a Point B. I'm having trouble easily finding a reference. M.boli (talk) 01:32, 11 August 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Point A and point B? 

message: :
But is it used as a placeholder? —Tamfang (talk) 03:54, 23 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  GOMER
Talk:Tristão da Cunha

message: WikiProject Biography Summer 2007 Assessment Drive
Barely a Start class.
The article may be improved by following the WikiProject Biography 11 easy steps to producing at least a B article. -- Yamara 18:13, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Wikipedia:WikiProject_Biography/Assessment#Class_parameter|Biography assessment rating]] comment 

message: I think this should be split to two separate articles. Quite confusing as it is. jni 09:28, 13 Dec 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: 2 articles
Talk:Novato High School

message: If anyone learned anything from the votes below, it's that someone has to write this article or it will cease to exist.  Right now it's just a discussion page pretending to be an article.  Someone write about notable alumni, the actual size of the school and its piggyback school, and get write that football paragraph or delete it.  --Mrcolj 14:23, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Just copy any high school's template.  Should only take you an hour to get it going.  --Mrcolj 14:27, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Write this

message: from VfD:
Not notable. Sander123 09:41, 13 Dec 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: *Please have a new look at the page Novato High School, I added a lot of information today and made it into a real article. It could surely still need some TLC, but I believe it is a major improvement, and I hope that some of you will reconsider your votes based on this. Houshuang 18:31, 15 Dec 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Deletion Votes
Category talk:World Heritage Sites in Russia

message: Russia World Heritage Sites official site, resources:  
A slightly different list is at List of World Heritage Sites in Europe#Russian Federation
* <S>Architectural Ensemble of the Troitse-Sergiyeva Lavra(Trinity Sergius Lavra) in Sergiev Posad</S>
* Central Sikhote-Alin
* <S>Church of the Ascension, Kolomenskoye</S>
* <S>Citadel, Ancient City and Fortress Buildings of Derbent</S>
* <S>Cultural and Historic Ensemble of the Solovetsky Islands (Solovetsky Monastery)</S>
* <S>Curonian Spit</S>
* Ensemble of the Ferapontov Monastery
* Ensemble of the Novodevichy Convent
* <S>Golden Mountains of Altai</S>
* Historic and Architectural Complex of the Kazan Kremlin
* <S>Historic Centre of St. Petersburg and Related Groups of Monuments</S>
* <S>Historic Monuments of Novgorod and Surroundings</S>
* <S>Kizhi Pogost</S> (ideally, should be Kizhi Pogost)
* <S>Lake Baikal</S>
* <S>Moscow Kremlin and Red Square, Moscow</S>
* <S>Natural System of "Wrangel Island" Reserve</S>
* Uvs Nuur Basin (es:Cuenca del Uvs Nuur)
* <S>Virgin Komi Forests</S>
* Volcanoes of Kamchatka
* Western Caucasus
* <S>White Monuments of Vladimir and Suzdal</S>
<S>Striked out</S> those that have existing articles and are included in the category. I removed Pavlovsk, Peterhof and Strelna. They are nice places, but not in the list. Paranoid 10:28, 13 Dec 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Optimized Link State Routing Protocol

message: The article suggests that OLSR doesn't work on smaller computers because of the overhead of continuously checking routing etc. Yet it is part of the Freifunk firmware that has been designed to run on Linksys WRT54G's , and seems to do so successfully. Can any experts offer some more information? --mgaved 21:44, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Small computers - problems or not? 

message: The article is about the OLSR routing algorithm.  The OLSR-NG section is about a particular implementation of OLSR (the unik-olsrd daemon).  This section must go.Jec (talk) 03:40, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I stand by my opinion that the OLSR-NG section doesn't belong in this article.  OLSR-NG is just an implementation of OLSR that doesn't use completely brain-damaged data structures, and hence scales moderately well (a few hundred nodes in a single routing domain is really not that big a network, and a WRT54-GL has a fairly powerful processor). --Jec (talk) 22:03, 29 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I would agree with 83.136.33.3. OLSR-NG is a massive improvement of OLSR and should have it's space in this lemma. In many other cases, "new implementations" of a pre-existing thing even get their own lemma. Please bring OLSR-NG back. Ds77 (talk) 21:48, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: The OLSR-NG section must go

message: Can anyone state it clearly that what is the difference between MPR and MPR selector??--Gqqnb (talk) 21:53, 16 November 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  MPR vs. MPR selector
Talk:Central Region

message: :Disagree. This page should instead become a disambiguation page, incorporating the material below. Andrewa 18:05, 14 Dec 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Note that the examples below are made up, fx there is no specific central region of Mars, and no Urduba philosophy at all. But I do believe there should be a disambiguation page here with the specific nontriviel meanings, such as Central Region (Singapore), which is an actual name. Thue | talk 18:50, 30 Dec 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Central Region" can be about anything. We should never use such a common name if there is no common meaning