lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Duchy of Brunswick-Lüneburg

message: What would be the proper name for this article is a redirect to this, a mix of the English Brunswick with the German Lüneburg. Lüneburg in English is Lunenburg. It is either Braunschweig-Lüneburg or Brunswick-Lunenburg. Indeed, the Canadian town of Lunenburg uses the English form of the name of the German family. Charles 21:17, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The above comments are not correct.  The usual form of the name in English is "Brunswick-Lüneburg", anomalous though that might be!  Silverhelm 04:04, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mix of English and German 

message: This article needs a map.  Badagnani 07:53, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Map needed 

message: :Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *Support or *Oppose, then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's naming conventions.
*Support Per nomination and per my support of this passage of WP:NC(GN) which I feel has always resulted in the best location for articles. Charles 02:49, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: *Are you serious? Really, no. If you're going to start arguing for consistency then I guess we need to have an article on the Oswiecim concentration camp. There is no requirement for consistency. If you'd read WP:NC(GN) you'd see the note about names for non-existing territories. Charles 20:51, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: *Also, if you want to speak of "matching", why not change Brunswick to Braunschweig? Really now... Charles 20:52, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Survey

message: In order to conform to the usual convention, e.g. see Holy Roman Empire task force page and Wiki practice, I propose we move this article to Duchy of Brunswick-Lüneburg. Other examples include: Duchy of Schleswig, Duchy of Saxony, Duchy of Prussia, Duchy of Pomerania.
This is also in line with de.wiki whose equivalent article is Herzogtum Braunschweig-Lüneburg. --Bermicourt (talk) 20:10, 4 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Move to "Duchy of Brunswick-Lüneburg" 

message: The description of events in this article related to Charles II (1804 - 1873) and the Principality of Brunswick-Wolfenbüttel seem inconsistent with those in his his own article and the article on the Duchy of Brunswick. 2A00:23C6:148A:9B01:691F:F623:CF1E:F7D3 (talk) 23:34, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Charles II 

message: Duke Anthony Ulrich of Brunswick father of Ivan VI of Russia 82.200.143.211 (talk) 07:36, 22 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  missed
Wikipedia talk:No original research

message: When will Wikipedia start allowing original research? 2601:646:8B00:D590:A8D8:A7CD:CD01:F7C5 (talk) 06:38, 12 December 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually I changed my mind on this. I think we will start allowing original research within the next 5 years—with some possible estimates being as short as 100 hours until the ban on original research is finally lifted. Remsense诉 04:15, 2 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  When will Wikipedia start allowing original research? 

message: Your feedback would be welcome at this discussion about usage examples at linguistic articles, and whether they require sources: Talk:Franglais#Are usage examples "original research"? Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 17:14, 22 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Feedback requested on whether usage examples require sources
Talk:Giuseppe Tartini

message: After writing an article on Veracini, I noticed that the Tartini link was red. This was surprising to me, since Tartini is far better known than Veracini, at least to most other people (I don't have any Tartini in my CD collection). I know very little about Tartini, but I thought I could at least get the ball rolling by repeating here what is said in the Veracini article about Tartini. Dmetric 19:10, 16 Jan 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Veracini

message: This says he had an extra finger on his left hand.   Is this true?  JackofOz 03:06, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I doubt it. I haven't seen that suggested anywhere before, and because he was a violin player and pedagogue it would have been an important thing to mention. - Rainwarrior 16:08, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

text: This would actually have been an impediment to his playing, rather than an aid.  The odd person born with an extra digit on the hand cannot control it with any dexterity and it "gets in the way" of the adjacent useful finger. HammerFilmFan (talk) 15:28, 9 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Eleven Fingers?

message: :His best piece by far was Sarabanda for the cello. It was a beautiful mixture of peace and war, sadness and triumph, beautiful yet scarred. This work of art will always be remembered.
This whole passage by 86.148.181.198 is problematic and may warrant deletion. However, I'm usually hesitant to delete things, so I think I will leave it for now. I wonder if a way can be found to reword this in order to salvage it.--Atavi 18:20, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Sarabanda

message: Tartini wrote no operas and no church music whatsoever.
The "Istria on the Internet" page references a Miserere:
Also, ChoralWiki attributes a Stabat Mater to Tartini:
Kadsworld (talk) 04:56, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for pointing this out. I've found several references for a Stabat Mater and a Miserere, and I've changed the article. Wikipedia:Be bold encourages anyone to make the edits they deem would improve this articled. By that I mean that since you had the sources you could just go ahead and edit the article, rather than initiate a discussion.--Atavi (talk) 10:15, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  No sacred music? 

message: It's strange that this article reports that the musician is Venetian this definition has a reference (Britannica) which says that he is "Italian". There is no sense to report the historical nationality because some musicians of the same period are considered Italians Antonio Lolli, Niccolò Paganini, Pietro Locatelli, etc. --Ilario (talk) 19:22, 28 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Italian or Venetian 

message: De-W claims his full name was Giuseppe Alessandro Ferruccio Tartini ? Schissel | Sound the Note! 03:03, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Full name?
Talk:Black fax

message: Man, it's hard to google for "black fax".  I did find this , showing this isn't entirely a figment of my imagination. -- Finlay McWalter 19:53, 16 Jan 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh, I also found this, some animal-rights action group urging their members to black fax someone:  -- Finlay McWalter 19:57, 16 Jan 2004 (UTC)

text: You could also design a fax machine check if more than 50% black it will invert the black/white, I thought of this a few years ago before I even knew that anyone had done black fax before. --zzo38(✉) 16:37, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Several years ago - I'm thinking about 1994 - a friend of a friend sent an entire roll of patterned toilet paper to a fax machine. This friend of a friend, of course, had a matching mess of now unrolled paper on their own end to clean up, but, nevertheless, did accomplish the wasting of much thermal paper on the recipient's end. In the days of thermal paper, the color of the fax didn't really matter, and its surely a sign of the times that the black fax is the new choice for fax harassment. Zaphraud (talk) 04:48, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

text: How about Urban Dictionary or did they just add that based on this page?  Add enough pages on the internet in a big circular reference and nobody will ever know... they'll all appear to support eachother :) TheAmigo42 (talk) 22:50, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Nope, better: I added a link to a court document describing the use of black faxes (see page 29 of the PDF in the external links section.  I'm not sure how best to link that reference into the article.  TheAmigo42 (talk) 23:25, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Once upon a time, there was an article in Wired about griefing and the author admitted to black faxing someone. Except, in his variant of this torturous prank, he taped several sheets of black construction paper together so that his machine would send on a loop. 97.127.73.43 (talk) 22:05, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Sources

message: The use of the word "bonus" in the article is an obvious sign that the author envisions himself sending them, not receiving them.  TheAmigo42 (talk) 22:45, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Discussion

message: It would be useful to have a section on the legality of this practice in various countries, if such information could be found to use as citations. Xmoogle (talk) 20:29, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Legality
Talk:Jean Sibelius

message: I sent out some alerts as I did at the Kubrick discussion.  Please focus discussion on content rather than contributors. Disclosure:  asked me to monitor this discussion for civility. Regardless, I have no interest in the substantive outcome of this debate and don't consider myself WP:INVOLVED.At this point, I might suggest any interested party formulate an RFC. If there is no consensus for an infobox, then I would recommend a moratorium on further discussion of adding an infobox to this page. –MJL ‐Talk‐☖ 17:56, 12 December 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: MJL, thank you, but as explained above: another RfC would be another time sink, and how many more RfCs do we need to call the infobox wars over? ... which has been proclaimed in 2018, . Let's try, please. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:14, 13 December 2021 (UTC)
replies: text:  : I came across this discussion by accident. As the one who has probably spent most time and effort on developing the article, it would have been helpful if someone had pinged me. As for the infobox, I saw no need to add one myself as I believe all the essentials are summarized in the lead. That said, I would not oppose inclusion of the mini box suggested as it does include one item of useful information, namely a link to the list of compositions which was developed so well by . So please go ahead. Then Sibelius will be in the same league as Beethoven!--Ipigott (talk) 15:02, 14 December 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Discussion 

message: and : I agree that a short description under the photo is appropriate. However, there's just no way that's Sibelius in 1890 (in comparison to other photos and paintings from that period that show him looking much younger)! Rather, this looks to be Sibelius in, I estimate 1901–1905, around the time of the Second Symphony and the Violin Concerto. I did a bit of digging and found a link to the U.S.'s Library of Congress: https://www.loc.gov/pictures/item/99403967/. Seems they give the date as about what I suspected: "Portrait photographs and engravings of musical personalities. Illus. from: Die Musik, 1902-1903, supplement." I don't know if this is conclusive evidence, but at a minimum we should probably change the description to be "The composer in the early 1900s." Silence of Järvenpää (talk) 16:27, 31 December 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: I think that may be as conclusive as we're going to get; photograph dates are notoriously tricky to pinpoint, so at least we have some rationale for the caption. The only other solution I can see is maybe some Sibelius biographies have the picture and include a date? Aza24 (talk) 23:25, 31 December 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Infobox image
Talk:Symphony No. 1 (Sibelius)

message: naming pieces of music - see: Wikipedia:Naming conventions (pieces of music)
Convention: Name the article in its most common form, adding the composer's surname in parentheses after it if more than one piece has that title. For example, War Requiem, Violin Concerto (Berg), Symphony No. 6 (Mahler). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.48.181.238 (talk) 22:28, 16 January 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Untitled 
Talk:List of transforms

message: As you see, I divided the transforms into categories, so that people do not confuse the properties of transforms in different categories.  I think this improves the page.
I am not familiar with all of the transforms, if i misplaced any, i apologize, and please fix it.  Also, i grouped the transforms that i don't know into "other".  If anyone knows of a proper category (or categories), please correct. -- Kevin Baas 22:29, 16 Jan 2004 (UTC)

message: I would say Y-delta transform (electrical circuits) is a wrong entry in this list, as it doesn't have to do with the other mathematical transformations. Or am I wrong? --Abdull 11:07, 22 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  wrong entry 

message: Nowhere on Wikipedia have I been able to find the definition of a transform, what a transform really is. So, what does the word transform mean in Mathematics, and why isn't that explained anywhere on Wikipedia? —Kri (talk) 14:25, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: How about Transform (mathematics)? ~KvnG 14:06, 21 September 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: That redirects to Transformation (mathematics); it doesn't say what a transform is. —Kri (talk) 20:48, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  What ''is'' a transform?
Talk:Leffe

message: Can someone pls add the kcal for 1 Leffe Brune beer  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.21.101.177 (talk) 18:34, 13 October 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: According to this site it is 220 kcal. Invertzoo (talk) 20:52, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: A note
Talk:Catalan conjugation

message: I've done my best to translate this from the Catalan original, but my Catalan is far from fluent, so there may be mistakes. I generally haven't tried to translate the verbs used as examples, since only their form, not their meaning, is relevant to this article; someone with better Catalan should feel free to do so. 
Also, it is possible that I have not correctly translated some of the technical grammatical terms: I'm reasonably knowledgable in linguistics and formal grammar, but I'm a bit less than expert.
Have at it!-- Jmabel 00:43, 17 Jan 2004 (UTC)
Talk:Portraits of Periodical Offering

message: The real enyclopedia entry here is Zhigongtu (chih-kung-t'u) in general. A link to the entry on Liang Dynasty is also needed. Some links to further Zhigongtu would break the isolation of this potentially informative entry. Wetman 01:07, 17 Jan 2004 (UTC)

message: I removed a footnote due to OR. While the note contained some sources to back a few facts mentioned in it, the whole assumption that the Rouran ambassador was depicted in such way because of the actions of the Rouran Khagan is an idea of OP and so the whole thing is pure OR. Fries Montana (talk) 16:25, 8 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  OR
Talk:Catalan personal pronouns

message: The Catalan-language article was a bit wordy, while not addressing a few issues that could be confusing to a non-native speaker (like me!). As a result, this is as much a rewrite as a translation. -- Jmabel 01:23, 17 Jan 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: You'd probably do better to take up your question on the Catalan Wikipedia. I just translated; I'm only about a ca-1 level reader of Catalan. -- Jmabel | Talk 23:18, 25 December 2005 (UTC)

text: Totally agree with you. I'm a Catalan native speaker and this table is composed of articles, not pronouns. So I'll delete it. --Jose piratilla (talk) 23:38, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: [Untitled]

message: I know nothing about Catalan, but from the article I believe they are clitic pronouns, not weak pronouns.  Please rewrite and rename the article to Catalan clitic pronouns. - TAKASUGI Shinji (talk) 03:01, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Clitics?
Talk:Deneb

message: HIP 97871 actually belongs to V1291 Aquilae and the actual Hipparcos designation for Deneb is HIP 102098 please fix this  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nussun05 (talk • contribs) 08:05, 23 February 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wrong Hipparcos designation 

message: "adopted distance". This is a peculiar undefined phrase that I can't find anywhere on the internet. The definition of "adopted" does not include a meaning that would apply to distance. How does one "adopt" a measurement? I'm guessing, from context, that it is an agreed-upon distance because the actual distance is not precisely known. But this odd-ball jargon should be linked to a proper explanation.77Mike77 (talk) 15:10, 10 November 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: The term is widespread, at least in the scientific literature.  The distance of most stars is not precisely and reliably known.  Different authors publish different distances at various times, perhaps derived using different methods or just from different observations.  When an astronomer is working on a particular star and needs a distance, they will usually just "adopt" a previously-published one rather than go out and try to reinvent the wheel.  The adopted distance might just be any old random distance if it is not critical to their own research, or a relatively recent result that is considered reliable, or might be a careful statistical weighting of all the available research if it is important to be as precise as possible.  I'm not sure you'll find a suitable article to link this to; it would be little more than a dictionary definition.  Is an adjective and a noun going to be unclear to most people?  Lithopsian (talk) 15:43, 10 November 2020 (UTC)

text: From dictionary.com: "to choose or take as one's own; make one's own by selection or assent".  It is the first meaning in that dictionary, not always the first meaning in others, but a standard meaning.  Not really much different to adopting a stray cat or even a baby, but less paperwork :)  Lithopsian (talk) 15:45, 11 November 2020 (UTC)

text: As a scientific method, "adoption" could well be plucking out a random distance.  Or it may be a considered choosing of the best available distance.  In many cases it will be better to reference the original derivation of a distance, although an adoption might help to indicate a consensus value.  If you want to link it to something, go ahead, but linking individual words with a trivial meaning isn't usually helpful.  Maybe there could or should be (or is?) an article about the scientific concept, but I suspect it wouldn't amount to much.  Adoption (disambiguation) doesn't mention it, perhaps it should, but again where would it link to?  Lithopsian (talk) 16:43, 11 November 2020 (UTC)

text: On a more general point: are you just here to complain or do you have some helpful input?  There is nothing to stop you editing the article yourself if you think it needs to be improved.  It is a wiki after all.  Lithopsian (talk) 16:45, 11 November 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Adopted?
Talk:Lyndon LaRouche

message: self-defence  Correct spelling is:  self-defense — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.187.251.31 (talk • contribs) 03:04, 14 September 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Spelling error 

message: It is clear that the LaRouche movement and organisation, founded by its name giver, is a political fascist sect. They practice brainwashing. Sometimes they function as suborganisations and thus try to avoid prosecution. Directly or indirectly they are responsible for many destroyed existences, even up to deaths and suicides. A dangerous organisation! Stay away from them and anyone supporting or trivialisinf them.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Oliachay (talk • contribs) 19:42, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lydon LaRouche 

message: :Cultural Marxism conspiracy theory has an RFC for possible consensus. A discussion is taking place. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 20:08, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[:Cultural Marxism conspiracy theory]] has an [[WP:RFC|RFC]]

message: This page currently says "At least ten appeals were heard by the United States Court of Appeals, and three were heard by the U.S. Supreme Court", and the page LaRouche criminal trials vaguely implies similar things. However, I am having a devil of a time actually finding any LaRouche-based SCOTUS cases or decisions (with the exception of United States v. Kokinda, which is tangential). I am hoping someone can point me to those cases, and we should cite/link to them on this page or the criminal trials page. However, I suspect that none exist, and what this wikipedia article may be trying to say is that appeals were made to the Supreme Court, which denied them; if that's so, then none of the cases were ever heard by the Supreme Court. That would explain why I can find, eg, https://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/osg/briefs/1989/01/01/sg890463.txt, but no follow up. Dingolover6969 (talk) 12:37, 17 January 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I haven't been able to find any either. I guess the description on the other page LaRouche criminal trials, "three were appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court," is the more accurate one.  23impartial (talk) 15:16, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Supreme Court cases?
Talk:Ironic (song)

message: I'd like to know, if there are any authoritative or reputable sources about where the music video was filmed, and when exactly. -Mardus /talk 23:16, 19 March 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Music video: when and where? 

message: While none of the examples are really irony in the song, that fact makes the name of the song ironic in itself. All the "irony" is mostly coincidences. Since you're expecting irony but instead get coincidences, the song is an example of situational irony. 66.10.78.114 (talk) 16:53, 15 May 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Wikipedia is not a forum for general discussion. (CC) Tbhotch™ 17:02, 15 May 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  The irony of "Ironic"
Talk:Operation Gothic Serpent

message: As I said, this article with a little bit of work can stand on it's own, this article should deal with the lead upto Operation Gothic Serpent (there is a bunch of stuff on it on the Battle of Mogadishu page), the battles leading upto the Battle of Mogadishu, and the wind down of the operation and the consequnces. PPGMD 17:53, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Expansion 

message: During the first hours of the battle, the MH-60 Black Hawk, Super Six One, was shot down by a Rocket Propelled Grenade fired from the ground. Although firing an RPG upwards from the ground is usually fatal to the shooter, he managed to survive. The pilots did not survive. However, the crew survived the crash landing and held off the advancing Habr Gidr militia until the one and only rescue team was able to recover them.
poorly written and confusing. it looks like someone just inserted the sentence about the upwards RPG without really reading the rest of the paragraph  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.104.246.170 (talk) 02:59, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  can someone fix this 
Talk:Michael Moore

message: # 
# 
# 
# 
# 
# 
# 
# 
# 
# 
# 
# 
# 
# 
# 
# 
# 
# 
# 
# 
# 
# 
# 
# 
# 
# 
:.... 0mtwb9gd5wx (talk) 23:21, 2 July 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: .....0mtwb9gd5wx (talk) 23:27, 2 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  ??? 

message: Reading some of the more negative comments used against Michael Moore, someone might come to the conclusion that many of the people attacking this article would never have had anything positive to say. While critical remarks must be allowed, should they not be fair and reasonable? Since this is an article about Michael Moore, his documentaries and viewpoints - why allow it to become a platform for some of the more dodgy or ill-founded comments that are out there? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.149.166.254 (talk) 12:43, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Negative Talk

message: Is balance the main issue here? For is not Michael Moore's real 'crime' that of beating the right-wing at their own game? So when he starts to get some hits on target, out comes the flak to shoot down him and his message.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.29.103.95 (talk) 20:37, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Flak as a control tactic