lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Oregon Supreme Court Building

message: I'm somewhat skeptical that the existing Povey Bros. skylight in the courtroom was completely destroyed by the Columbus Day storm. Judging by the image, the current skylight looks pretty vintage to me. I know, I know, original research. Is there a source citing its repair and/or replacement? The source cited for the smashing of the skylight is Everything2, which I wouldn't consider a reliable souce since it's like Wikipedia except not as insistent on references. The E2 article says it used "Sources: The Columbian, www.columbian.com/
George H. Taylor, State Climatologist, www.ocs.orst.edu/
Hank Henry The Mail Tribune www.mailtribune.com " I found a cached version of the Mail Tribune article here that says the smashed skylight was over a meeting room. Was there more than one skylight?  This source says that during the 1980 renovation the courtroom glass was taken down and restored piece by piece (and the seal put in backward, which had to be turned around again!) but there is no mention of this glass being a replacement... Latr, Katr 23:29, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm pretty sure the info that it was smashed is correct, I double-checked the Mail Trib source before adding the info (used the E2 for easier reference). And yes, the courtroom on the 3rd floor is about the only thing up there, and if you zoom in on a satelite image you will see only one skylight. Now though it was smashed, there is more to the skylight than just what is in the picture (I cropped out a lot). If you look at the picture in the OSB story used as a source you will see the larger dome. The damage may have been more to the dome, with the seal spared. But even if destroyed there are other artisans who may have been able to restore the seal to the original look. With the Waller Hall article I came across an Oregon guy who restores stained glass windows. As to the law society piece, it also does not mention the addition of a protective glass dome at that time or have as much detail as the OSB piece. And the OSB piece could be read that the item in place now is a replica of the 1914 piece (hard to tell if the article means replica of the seal or replica of the original sky light). I never found a source saying when it was replaced and by who, but as soon as the Oregonian gets their archives online to go back to 1962 we can double check (I think 1988 is as far back as they go). Or I could wander over to the state library and look at the microfilm one day. Aboutmovies 00:35, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Cool, thanks for humoring me and my hunch. It would be interesting to find a story on the restoration, surely that would have made a nice human interest piece back in the day, though there was so much damage all over the state, maybe it didn't rate. Latr, Katr 18:08, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Skylight destroyed? 

message: Use this for some expanion. Aboutmovies 06:41, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Additions
Talk:Notre-Dame Cathedral Basilica of Saigon

message: According to User:DHN: "Nhà thờ" = church ("worship house"), "Đức Bà" = revered lady, the Vietnamese translation of "Notre Dame". Its official name is "Vương cung Thánh đường Chánh tòa Đức Bà Sài Gòn", which is "Saigon Notre Dame Basilica". Badagnani (talk) 00:51, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Etymology of Vietnamese name
Talk:Cape Clear Island

message: An féidir le einne alt Gaeilge a scriobh ar Cléire i Vicipéid (http://ga.wikipedia.org/)? 
: Scríofa anois. Go raibh míle maith agaibh go leir. Fiachra10003 (talk) 15:28, 2 February 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Bede BD-10

message: horizontal "snaking"  ???--Ericg33 (talk) 09:06, 3 July 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed, an imprecise visual metaphor at best. Snake#Locomotion is commonly lateral undulation making "horizontal" redundant; alternatively "horizontal snaking" may be the "S" shaped form a snake body has laying horizontally.  In either case, my interpretation is an oscillation about the yaw axis causing alternating left and right motions in the horizontal plane.  Oscillations about the pitch axis cause up and down motions commonly called "porpoising" (vertical undulation). – Conrad T. Pino (talk) 10:21, 12 April 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Term? 

message: The Peregrine Flight International test pilots killed testing this aircraft per this article:
*
*
– Conrad T. Pino (talk) 09:31, 12 April 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Test Pilot Obituaries 
Talk:The Highfield Mole

message: According to Amazon, the second book is called "Deeper" and will be available in May 2008.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.57.176.190 (talk) 00:49, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  The 2nd Book 

message: The novel The Highfield Mole (aka Tunnels)is being made into a major motion picture.
--The dragon library (talk) 18:06, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tunnels 

message: Added a sequels-section, and the amazon date for Free Fall.  Dracoster (talk) 19:31, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sequels 

message: I have assessed this article as a C class. To improve, I reccomend extending the plot summary and rewording it to avoid an in-world perspective, including in-line citations to support the article, and extending the lead paragraph to briefly cover all major sectinos of the article. If you have any comments on this assessment, please leave them on my Talk page. strdst_grl (call me Stardust) 20:04, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Assessment 

message: The following note was added to Tunnels (novel) discussion page:
Active Banana - The Highfield Mole page has been lacking significant citation and Wikipedia conformity in every way for the best part of 6 months. I have spent many hours today improving the article and citation in general, so it can act as a stand alone page. However, within hours you undo much of this - some of which I do agree with as the page now just reflects Highfield Mole content. If you are watching my activities, it would have been prudent to let me know before I put in all this work today. And the merger has been proposed for over 6 months - long enough time wouldn't you think for these notices to be removed! There were at least 2 parties originally against the merger! And might I add that much of the previous opposition to this was by a user who has subsequently been revealed as a serial Sock Puppet Master. Just how much longer do you plan on having this unnecessary notice posted here? And why is it that my view continues to be dis-regarded? Perhaps if you do have time on your hands you could approach me in a positive and pro-active manner in helping me carry out the much needed work on the Highfield Mole page!! (Lifesawhirl (talk) 00:26, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: see the merger discussion above. Active Banana  (bananaphone 00:27, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  Much of the merger discussions took place on the Tunnels page! Further to my unanswered questions above - Just how long do you propose displaying a redundant message? (Lifesawhirl (talk) 00:42, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merger with The Highfield Mole
Talk:Naval wargaming

message: I just assessed this article as Start-class; if anyone here is interested in advancing the quality of this article to B-class, one place I would suggest starting is to include more references. I noticed in just a short skim of the article that it lacks sources for much of the text. Including more inline citations would go a long way towards improving this article. Regards, Parsecboy (talk) 04:40, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Lack of references
Talk:Java APIs for Bluetooth

message: Some more in depth info about JSR-82 might be required.
Example code would be nice.
Links to tutorials etc too.
A diagramm that shows hows 2 bluetooth devices and how JRS-82 helps doing the connection --84.56.191.86 00:56, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

message: Can someone start an article called JABWT and redirect to this article?
JABWT =  Java BlueTooth Wireless Technology = JSR82 --84.56.191.86 00:56, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Redirect from JABWT to here is missing 
Category talk:Wildfires in California

message: The Cedar Fire of 2003 certainly belongs on this list, due to huge size, but it is also notable for very severe damage to buildings. The Oakland firestorm of 1991 isn't currently listed. The 1991 fire was influenced by weather and vegetation, like a wildfire; it caused a level of damage to buildings which is in the same league as the 2003 fire, and thus may be considered notable. However, the 1991 fire was orders of magnitude smaller in terms of burned area. I wonder if the 1991 fire, and others like it, might be included on the list of notable fires. Oaklandguy (talk) 06:29, 2 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  How (if at all) should we list wildland-urban-interface fires?
Category talk:Disasters in California

message: There are several entries that I don't believe should be considered disasters as they involve ground and/or water contamination that took place over many years.
I'm also aware of many more accidents with significant loss of life that should be included.
So what determines whether or not something is listed?
Bob (talk) 21:52, 14 June 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  What are the criteria?
Talk:Jorge Eduardo Acosta

message: The article reads:
"He was allegedly the one taking decisions concerning torture and assassinations in the ESMA center."
I think that "taking decisions" should be "making decisions".
Karl gregory jones (talk) 00:29, 4 January 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  "taking" decisions?
Talk:Tail (song)

message: I have restored this from redirect. This is the debut single release from one of the most commercially and critically successful Australian bands of all time. While the song itself wasn't a commercial success, there was sufficient information which is informative and noteworthy, while also being too off-topic for the album article. --rm 'w avu 03:15, 4 February 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Per WP:NSONG you have to do better than that and establish significant coverage in reliable sources to demonstrate independent notability. I will restored the redirect. Polyamorph (talk) 09:42, 4 February 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  restore 

message: We don't need two articles for the song, vs song + what outside Korea is the B-side. In ictu oculi (talk) 18:33, 13 May 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: , I'm all for the merge. Will add a mergeto template to the article about the single. Pichpich (talk) 19:34, 2 June 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge
Talk:Save Your Skin

message: I have restored this from redirect. This is the debut single release from one of the most commercially and critically successful Australian bands of all time. While the song itself wasn't a commercial success, there was sufficient information which is informative and noteworthy, while also being too off-topic for the album article. --rm 'w avu 03:28, 4 February 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Restored from redirect
Talk:Grave Concern

message: I have restored this from redirect. This is the debut single release from one of the most commercially and critically successful Australian bands of all time. While the song itself wasn't a commercial success, there was sufficient information which is informative and noteworthy, while also being too off-topic for the album article. --rm 'w avu 03:13, 4 February 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Restored from redirect
Talk:Full stop law

message: The law's name is a proper name and should be in capital letters - Full Stop not Full stop. This is both correct grammar and supported by the sources. This was suggested as potentially needing follow up during the page move (see comments in the move section).  Any objections? MartinezMD (talk) 16:15, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Title update
Talk:Margarita Belén massacre

message: Article reassessed and graded as start class. --dashiellx (talk) 12:03, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Tag & Assess 2008 
Talk:Military decorations of the Cold War

message: Article reassessed and graded as dab. --dashiellx (talk) 19:25, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Tag & Assess 2008 
Talk:Moïse Tshombe

message: Despite a few sources giving Moïse Tshombé, the correct spelling appears to be Moïse Tshombe without the é:
In ictu oculi (talk) 08:48, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: BBC News  and the NYT  both seem to agree with you. Good enough for me. Khazar2 (talk) 16:09, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Moïse Tshombe]]

message: "Fiction
These rumors were the basis for Daniel Carney's book that later became the 1978 film The Wild Geese, which starred Richard Burton. In the film, Winston Ntshona plays a pro-western, deposed African president, who is imprisoned following the hijacking of his plane."
What rumors exactly?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.197.91.136 (talk) 07:23, 16 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Missing sentence/section introduction?  

message: The article reads:
"Tshombe died in 1969; the official cause of death was listed as "death from heart failure.""
The word "official" implies suspicion that Tshombe died of some other cause.  The article says nothing about other causes.
If there is no doubt that Tshombe died of heart failure, "official" should be removed.
If "official" remains, additional information should be added about possible non-official causes of death.
Karl gregory jones (talk) 16:26, 12 October 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed.  I've removed much of this.  It now says he died of heart failure.  If there is anything questionable about this from good sources, it can be added with cites. --Escape Orbit (Talk) 16:33, 12 October 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Official cause of death
Talk:Molotov Plan

message: The Marshall Plan received more than $12 Billion in funding from the US Congress:  what kind of monies did the Molotov Plan receive from the USSR? - Aboudaqn (talk) 18:55, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Funding?

message: Did the name "Brother Plan" of 1947 influence George Orwell's name "Big Brother" in the 1949 novel Nineteen Eighty-Four? Aboudaqn (talk) 18:55, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Orwell's Nineteen EightyFour?

message: No reference to any Soviet document, no Russian version of the article, no articles in Russian on internet about it. Another west fake? 87.79.111.235 (talk) 15:00, 14 December 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fake article
Talk:Multilateral Force

message: As the UK and France actually developed their own nuclear submarine deterrent, what was the basis of Kennedy's view that "the United States was the primary power capable of building the requisite number of submarines and training their crews"?Royalcourtier (talk) 22:40, 24 October 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I assume it was, USA numbers met the requisite for "primary"; others only secondary. Clearing the bar depends on where we set the bar. Jim.henderson (talk) 19:18, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  British and French nuclear submarines 
Talk:Mutual Defense Assistance Act

message: I have a Image that I feel is relevant to this article. It is a shipping label that I have been trying to track down its use.. I have heard from a few sources that it was used on crates, etc dated from post WW2 during the Marshall plan when the
US Defense department was shipping goods to various national for mutual defense. The labels could have been on both ex WW2 materiel and post War materiel. These labels seem to date between 1947 and 1967.
I can send file to someone for review or possibly post it to the page but I am unsure how to do so..
Snowman1967 (talk) 05:50, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:National Intelligence Authority

message: I believe this reference to a National Intelligence Agency in the US is in error. Cite sources if you believe it exists. There was a National Intelligence Authority (NIA) established by Harry Truman on 22 January 1946 to coordinate the executive branch's intelligence functions. It oversaw the Central Intelligence Group (CIG), an early centralized intelligence agency in the US. Both NIA and CIG existed briefly, supplanted by the National Security Council (NSC) and the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) with the passage of the National Security Act of 1947. Reference: Intelligence: From Secrets to Policy (3rd ed), Mark M Lowenthal, 2006. --67.84.125.168 20:30, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The Niantic reference is obviously a joke. I've removed it and replaced it with an explanation that the NIA is a fictional organisation in the Ingress game. --Per Olofsson (talk) 10:06, 13 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: National Intelligence Authority
Talk:Adobe LiveCycle Designer

message: The article implies that LiveCycle Designer has a heritage that traces back to PerForm.  This is false.  
The Delrina products were distinct with no relationship to the heritage of LiveCycle Designer.  LiveCycle Designer roots, in terms of many of personnel and primary location of development, reach back through the Accelio and JetForm years; and, JetForm's products were distinct from Delrina's, and (if we must go way back) evolved from a product family from Indigo Software in the 1980's, before going public in the early 90's and renaming the company JetForm.
Yes, JetForm/Accelio did have a product called FormFlow which was a product name JetForm obtained the rights too via acquiring the Delrina forms products.  However, the only similarity between the JetForm/Accelio FormFlow product and the Delrina FormFlow product was the name.
The article also says that "When a form object is bound to an xml node, the value from that node may only be extracted once. If several objects share the same binding, only the first object will receive the node value when the form is processed."   This is untrue.  Multiple form objects can bind to the same XML node.
The article says "There are limitations in the ability of Designer to parse HTML and display it in a form; Designer cannot handle a number of fundamental tags, including ordered list, unordered list and tables."  However, this statement does not inform the reader of the context for the use of HTML, which is for representing formatted text within individual form object, not as a generalized approach to structured content.  Without this context the reader may infer that tables are not a capability for forms created with LiveCycle Designer, when this is not true.  LiveCycle Designer does not utilize HTML to describe tables, instead using the underlying XFA markup to describe tables and tabular layout.
Gavin mckenzie 00:39, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Sounds great - make the changes! :) Blade 17:17, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:NATO peacekeeping

message: I don't think this article needs to be deleted.  I think that NATO Peacekeeping is a big enough topic to warrant its own page.  I'll do some more work later. Staeiou (talk) 15:50, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: There really needs to be some sort of description provided in the Aghanistan and Yugoslavia sections on what the different peacekeeping missions are. Just putting a list of abbreviations isn't very helpful as the vast majority of people won't know what these abbreviations mean until they click on the link. We're either assuming an awful lot of background knowledge on the topic (in which case what's the point in the page?) or it's not up to scratch as a general overview for people with no knowledge of the subject.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.26.17.69 (talk) 11:52, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: More description needed
Talk:NATO Rapid Deployable Corps – Greece

message: This page is confusing - I see from their website, http://nrdc.army.gr/nrdc-gr-history that they were the NDC-GR, but sometime around 2013-2015 they seem to have changed to the NRDC-GR.  The intro paragraph echos this confusion, as it states the abbreviation if NRDC-GR, but then in the body of the article it keeps just using NDC-GR, which is the title of the article.  Can someone please clear this up?? NightBear (talk) 13:49, 6 August 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  NDC-GR or NRDC-GR?
Talk:New Look (policy)

message: This is one mangy looking airplane - surely their must be a better picture available that shows a B-47 in better preserved condition or, better yet, in service during the period being discussed.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.158.61.141 (talk) 19:49, 1 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  B-47 photo 

message: This line here is utterly unsupported, frankly the section should be taken out pending a re-write:
"The refusal of the United States to act to prevent the defeat of France by the Communist-led Viet Minh at the Battle of Dien Bien Phu, just four months after the Dulles speech, was proof that a situation of "mutual deterrence" had developed with the Soviet Union in which the use of strategic nuclear weapons for any purpose other than to respond to a direct attack on one's homeland or on one's major allies was out of the question"
It's facile to make this conclusion. The French were engaged in a colonial war -- really a war of reconquest of Indochina, control of which had been lost during WW2 -- and while the U.S. may not have wanted its ally to be defeated, the amount of effort it was willing to expend to prop up the French was minimal. The USA didn't even deploy conventional forces under its own flag to save the French forces in Indochina, let alone nuclear weapons. Considering this was a mere three years after massive military power was deployed to Korea (and two years before military units were deployed to Lebanon) the message here is that Ike didn't want to throw good money after bad, not that massive retaliation had its limits 68.43.0.152 (talk) 21:07, 23 December 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Dien Bien Phu??!?

message: Hi,
I am doing an assignment for my History course at the University of Sheffield which involves editing a wikipedia page and writing about the experience of editing and using wikipedia as a historical source, and I thought i'd give a heads up to anyone concerned before I start looking at any edits I want to make.
The New Look Policy came up in lectures and I have noticed that this page is not necessarily as fleshed out as it could be and that the sources used are limited. I hope to improve this by adding support from more recent scholarship. I have also noticed that the recent suggestion for change regarding the lack of evidence in the section on U.S. support of the French at the Battle of Dien Bien Phu has gone unedited, and I will attempt to redress that section after I research further.
I am open to suggestions and discussion around any edits that I do make, and if I intend to change a large portion of text or add a new section I will try and remember to give a heads up prior to doing so if I think it necessary to.
Thanks,
Ben
Addition: apologies, the edit to the section under "New" new look redrafting the identified problematic section by 143.167.202.23 was me, I just forgot to log in. Please let me know if there's any issues in that edit, thanks. 
BArnold-99 (talk) 16:10, 15 January 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  University History Assignment - A heads up