lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Sablefish

message: I deleted the statement that sablefish flesh is low (indeed "very" low) in toxic metals. As a bottom feeder high on the food chain it is actually not surprising that sablefish meat is on average relatively high in mercury. Indeed, a New York Times article says, "Many popular varieties of seafood, including black bass, striped bass, bluefish, halibut, lobster, monkfish, black cod (obiter: a common market term for sablefish), skate and snapper, are so high in mercury that the department suggests no more than one serving a week of any of them for those women and children." Although a blanket generalization fails to capture the fact that mercury levels in sablefish vary widely between samples, it remains misleading to reassure readers that sablefish tends to be particularly safe to consume. I suspect the statement to that effect originated in some organization eager to promote Alaskan fisheries. Myron (talk) 18:02, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Heavy metal levels 

message: I did not edit this to append "and Korea" because I'm not sure what the threshold for commercial importance is. I can only say from anecdotal evidence that it is very popular in Korea, although considered expensive and reserved for special occasions.--Baroque&arrow (talk) 01:01, 2 December 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes. --Macrakis (talk) 19:37, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  "...and is commercially important to Japan" 

message: Thank you User:XXzoonamiXX for trying to clarify things, but your repeated edits to the "Fisheries" section have changed the meaning of the sentence about management areas making it incorrect. I though that the use of "contiguous United States" in the sentence  made it clear that Alaska and the other western states have separate management for Sablefish. The references associated with that sentence also make this clear. I've added "three areas:" to the sentence to further clarify that Alaska, B.C., and the contiguous western states should are separate management areas. -IGTaylor (talk) 23:25, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Management areas in the Northeast Pacific 

message: Seriously, can we get a "morphology and body size" section?  According to fishwatch.gov, females can exceed three feet in length and start reproducing at 6 1/2 years and over two feet, and males start reproducing at 5 years and 1.9 feet (no word on their max size), which is just barely enough information for my purposes and generally not enough to be getting on with.  Matthias von Schwarzwald (talk) 17:12, 4 April 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: I've added text on size and weight to the Description section. If you need more detail, such as information on maturity, see the referenced documents. And feel free to add what you find to the wiki page. -IGTaylor (talk) 20:54, 7 April 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  How big is it?   

message: Known parasites should be added. 162.219.229.245 (talk) 18:27, 26 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Known parasites
Talk:William R. Peers

message: Regarding the main page’s entry, In Popular Culture, for a Hollywood movie about General William Peers that was “cancelled”: 
This movie was to be about the My Lai massacre in March 1968. The movie was to be called Pinkville, filmed in Thailand in 2007, and released in the U. S. in 2008 or 2009. The main character in the movie was to be Peers. 
There is sufficient reason to doubt that those behind the film had any intention of actually making the film. It was cancelled on a flimsy pretext after several months. The director is still talking about making the movie but there is no indication that he means what he says. There are websites that claim the movie will be made but the motives for posting these sites appear dubious.  
The remark or section, In Popular Culture, should be deleted. 
It would not be surprising if eventually there is a big lawsuit, brought by the family of Peers, against United Artists. 
Signed: GTW Hammerhead151 (talk) 09:30, 22 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  In Populur Culture
Talk:Triglidae

message: This should be merged with Prionotus_carolinus
"The pelvic fins have been thought to let the fish "walk" on the bottom, but..."
 
Should this sentence not read "pectoral" fins and not "pelvic" fins?
--Bajutsu (talk) 22:12, 22 September 2013 (UTC)

message: — Assignment last updated by HaploidPenguin (talk) 01:47, 26 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: Principles of Biology 2
Talk:Marcus theory

message: Ok, starting in on this article.  It needs...
A basic introduction
A developement of marcus theory.  I think that I will focus mainly on the graphic depiction of the theory, as it is easier to grasp and perhaps later will put in the thermodynamic development.
A section discussing marcus-hush theory and how it is similar and different from marcus theory.  Perhaps introduce the Robin-day classification
A section with links to other prominant theories of electron transfer.
April 9, 2007: Hey -- I'm starting in on work on this page as well. I have a number of good graphs of Marcus theory I'll work on uploading, but will first try to get the basic equations in. Feel free to contact me at m.w.holman@gmail.com with questions
June 8, 2008: Aiming to fix the lack of context here and make this more clear -- let me know if more input is needed -Elmundomike 03:39, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Earlier work 

message: Hi all. The sign in between lambda and G is minus, or plus? I think it is minus, at least, to be consistent with the diagram. --HappyCamper 01:45, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: \Delta G is defined as Efinal - Einitial - in the figure shown, this implies Delta G is negative.  \lambda is always positive and is defined as Efinal(at initial state equilibrium geometry) - Efinal(at final state equilibrium geometry) - therefore the Marcus rate is maximized when the   -free energy change is equal to the environmental relaxation (lambda), so it should be a plus. On the other hand if you wrote \Delta which is the exoergicity (i.e. \Delta = -\Delta G) then yes it would be a negative. 18.74.1.251 (talk) 16:27, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, I see what you are saying, you're right. The diagram makes it seem as if absolute value |\Delta G^\circ| is the quantity of interest, but of course this is wrong. I don't suppose you have an idea for how to fix up the picture? Or perhaps a brief note to emphasize that \Delta G = E_f - E_i would suffice. Your thoughts, 18? --HappyCamper 16:38, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, I think just stating the sign convention for free energy change should suffice. 18.74.1.251 (talk) 17:12, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sign
Talk:Arizona v. Fulminante

message: Someone with more legal expertise may want to look at how I cited case opinions because I'm not sure I got all of them correct. This case produced a very decided court. Just look how the opinions are cited from Findlaw:
*WHITE, J., delivered an opinion, Parts I, II, and IV of which are for the Court, and filed a dissenting opinion in Part III. MARSHALL, BLACKMUN, and STEVENS, JJ., joined Parts I, II, III, and IV of that opinion; SCALIA, J., joined Parts I and II; and KENNEDY, J., joined Parts I and IV. REHNQUIST, C.J., delivered an opinion, Part II of which is for the Court, and filed a dissenting opinion in Parts I and III., post, p. 302. O'CONNOR, J., joined Parts I, II, and III of that opinion; KENNEDY and SOUTER, JJ., joined Parts I and II; and SCALIA, J., joined Parts II and III. KENNEDY, J., filed an opinion concurring in the judgment, post, p. 313.
''
I did the best I could to clarify in the listing on wikipedia, but if someone and make it even easier to understand that would be great. -- Johnny06man 15:48, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It was a pretty decent start. I've added to the article, but the main thing I changed with the various opinions is that I called part III of White's opinion a concurrence. I know I'm disagreeing with Findlaw, but part III agrees with the outcome the rest of the court reaches, and only disagrees on reasoning. If it were a stand-alone opinion, everyone would call it a concurrence in the result. Tikwriter (talk) 22:51, 3 August 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: I was cleaning up vandalism on various articles by 205.155.216.40 and noted he had changed the dates on this article. I reverted his edits, assuming they were vandalism, but someone more knowedgeable than me needs to double check them.
--A. B. 19:28, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dates
Talk:Billy Crudup

message: Can't we get a better picture? 216.141.239.117 04:21, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: How can he be "well-known" for his role in a film that has yet to be released?  This does not make sense to me.75.168.153.186 (talk) 01:29, 1 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  really? 
Talk:Southern pigfish

message: This article was based on the corresponding section in Ayling's Collins Guide to the Sea Fishes of New Zealand, and/or corresponding articles at fishbase.org or niwascience.co.naz, none 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.  --Geronimo20 (talk) 19:31, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copyright problem removed
Talk:Irving Aaronson

message: I think there are a couple of sentences that are misleading at best.
First, the article states:
 In 1925, it was with this band that his first compositions were recorded with an underground record company.
I don't see any support for this statement, and "underground" record companies didn' really start until the 1930s (see hensteeth.com), the statement make it appear these were "blue" records.  Is this statement really meant to convey that the records were a private issue?  Certainly these existed in the mid 1920s.
The second sentence I have a problem with is this one:
 In 1926 for Victor they made their second album.
It was about in 1926 that the record companies made their first albums, but this was for large-scale classical works.  Pop/jazz records were always in singles until the late 1930s.  Should the sentence read "their second record" instead of "album"?  
I wanted to discuss this before making these changes, but will go ahead and do so in a bit if no discussion follows.  Thanks!  78.26 (talk) 21:38, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: no discussion, so I made the above edits. 78.26 (talk) 14:58, 13 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article problem areas 

message: I can't see any reason the artice Irving Aaronson and his Commanders shouldn't be merged into this page.  The group does not exist as a separate unit independed of the leader.  78.26 (talk) 14:57, 13 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Merging [[Irving Aaronson and his Commanders]] to this page
Talk:Synanceiinae

message: The interwiki's are incorrect, the species stonefish has the same iw's as this family. Dryke 00:07, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

message: Removed "Bloch & Schneider" from the middle of the sentence "Its species are known to have the most potent neurotoxins of all the fish venoms, secreted from glands at the base of their needle-like dorsal fin spines." Nick Beeson (talk) 16:41, 27 March 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vandalism
Talk:Clady, County Londonderry

message: I removed this, as I've never heard of it, even though I live nearby. I asked a few people I know who live nearby, who also hand't heard of this. Google also produces no information on it, so if it's true (which is doubtful), let's see a source.
It's true. My mothers from there.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 146.115.19.123 (talk) 08:17, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Is it possible that Clady is Claudy, if so an article already exists?Jaqian (talk) 15:55, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Nope two different places. Derry Boi (talk) 22:50, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Cool. As they are both in Derry and the Irish name is the same I wondered was it a duplicate. Jaqian (talk) 13:21, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Window controvesy
Talk:Jan Boerstoel

message: Delete, poem is copyrighted, and not in English, author is not notable. Jimbo68 15:59, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: This is a totally invalid speedy tag.  
# The page has existed more than two days
# No URL is quoted for the supposed copyvio
# The poem has been given authors permission for online publication
# Of course the poem is not English - the author is Dutch!
# If it's felt the author is non-notable, then that's a matter for AfD, not speedy.
Dlyons493 Talk 16:25, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Holdon 
Talk:Ilija Trojanow

message: WikiProject Biography Summer 2007 Assessment Drive
The article may be improved by following the WikiProject Biography 11 easy steps to producing at least a B article. -- Yamara 07:27, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Wikipedia:WikiProject_Biography/Assessment#Class_parameter|Biography assessment rating]] comment 

message: Copy vio? Information entered in one big chunk at beginning. No references. Mattisse 16:20, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Discussion

message: FYI: as ist written e.g. here he did not get permission to entry the US without declared reason. As he was one of the people who signed the letter to Angela Merkel to take actions against the US spying (:en:2013 mass surveillance disclosures) some might come to some conclusion ...Sicherlich  Post  10:56, 1 October 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ban to entry the US 
Talk:List of neighborhoods in Dallas

message: I propose to merge the content of Southside Dallas into here. The article has been an unexpanded stub for long, and it is unclear why it should stay as a separate article. It might be merged into this list. On the other hand, there does not seem to be a corresponding list entry; maybe it's not a recognized community? Perhaps someone familiar with the area can clarify. 
Please add your comments below. Proposed as part of the Notability wikiproject. --B. Wolterding 12:20, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merger proposed (Southside Dallas) 

message: Where is little Mexico? I know its disappearing but i think there should be an article.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mexihcatlacatl (talk • contribs) 23:59, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Little Mexico 

message: There is an area of southeast Dallas called "Kleberg" - See Kleberg, Dallas, Texas
Where should it go? WhisperToMe (talk) 02:29, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Where should Kleberg go?

message: DMN had a blog about bridging the North-South divide: http://web.archive.org/web/20080509122901/http://www.dallasnews.com/opinion/northsouth/
WhisperToMe (talk) 19:45, 3 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: North-South Divide

message: does 12804 pandora dr belong to lake highland high school?? 2603:8080:68F0:8B0:21E7:E363:12FB:1037 (talk) 00:38, 9 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Distric
Template talk:Wfun

message: I tried to use this on my user page, but as you can see in this diff, it didn't work as intended, so I removed it in the next edit. Can anyone figure out why it won't properly display the message I provided as parameter #2? If you can get it to work, you have my permission to save the edit to my page so long as that's the only change. thanks!  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Macks2008 (talk • contribs) 15:09, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  I broke it?
Talk:Boulevard de la Zone

message: Speedy tag is from my wiki stalker.  If felt appropriate let's take this to Afd.   Dlyons493 Talk  16:33, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You have a Wikistalker? So do I, but things haven't gotten to lows such as these yet. Goes without saying that I oppose the deletion. Now that this has my attention, shall we embellish a bit? THEPROMENADER 16:49, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Wikipedia talk:Wikipedia Signpost/2006-07-24/Skutt suit

message: Might want to mention that the history of the article before July 22, including all the possibly defamatory stuff, has now been deleted from Wikipedia. Oddly, a 02:59, 11 July 2006 version of the article, which does not contain any negative material but is longer than the current stub, is still available in the Google cache. Oh, the article is now semi-protected. Don't know if you want to mention that, because it's immediately obvious. Casey Abell 16:34, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: And it was me who performed the recent deletion and I was the one who performed the protection of the page. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 01:33, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Article history deletion

message: I think that it is more likely that the other IP besides 68.96.26.20 that is involved is 68.99.30.137, rather than 68.107.235.103. It made very similar edits to 68.96.26.20 and the comments were worse. I probably would have just said two IPs rather than identifying them (no offense to Michael :-) ), but if they are mentioned, I think it should be accurate. -- Kjkolb 10:20, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Based on the structure of the article, it seemed that the first quoted passage, from 68.107.235.103, came from one of the IPs identified in the lawsuit. It's possible that is not the case, and if so I would agree with your analysis of the likely candidates. While some inference is required, I wanted to make clear, without republishing the allegations themselves, that there is more involved in the case than commentary about exorbitant tuition. --Michael Snow 17:48, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: IPs involved
Talk:Wyandotte Caves

message: This article claims that Wyandotte Cave is the largest cave in Indiana, with 25 miles of passage.
The July 7, 2009 Edition of the "USA Longest Caves" list, which is compiled by Bob Gulden, gives a completely different story.  This highly respected source, lists Wyandotte Cave as #76 in the United States, with a mapped length of 9.200 miles.
It is surpassed (in Indiana) by Sullivan Cave with 9.632 miles of surveyed cave, Blue Spring Cave with 20.810 miles of surveyed cave, the Lost River Cave System with 21.009 miles of surveyed cave, and Binkleys Cave (Indiana's longest) with 22.798 miles of surveyed cave.
This needs to be corrected in the article.
Wyandotte Cave is a huge cave with very large passages.  If you consider volume, it might have some claim to Indiana's "largest" cave.  But, it is not 25 miles long and it is not Indiana's longest cave.
170.141.109.39 (talk) 20:10, 7 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Feel free to fix or correct anything. :) Be bold!. —Charles Edward (Talk | Contribs) 22:34, 7 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Serious problems with information in this article. 

message: I did some research in order to address a cite needed tag I added to this article a while ago.  I have ended up removing the statement.  See this diff.  
There is some evidence that cold water accelerates the process as it dissolves more carbon dioxide than warmer water.  However, cave formation is a complex process and temperature is just one of many factors.  Other factors counteract the effect of temperature, and in reality caves form faster in warmer climates because of them. See , pg 7.
I've left the "icy-cold" descriptor of the water, because it probably did have some effect, but that effect is overstated by asserting that cold water dissolves limestone "much faster" than warm water. ~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs)problem solving 23:57, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Effects of temperature on cave formation 

message: I've somewhat crudely marked with Bad linked references and dead link that the Questia link is not going anywhere helpful. It seems to be a now shuttered research database, but I have no idea what the intended citation was. Ullpianissimo – (talk) 00:05, 30 March 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reference #7
Talk:Masters of Cinema

message: Someone pegged this page as being "an advertisement" and being about a "non-notable website". This page is perfectly legitimate, it is information about "Masters of Cinema" and the website is far from "non-notable", it is award-winning, non-profit based, and has been around for over five years.
N. W. Peerpee 16:43, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: If the website is so notable and has been around for so long, how come there are no listed citings by major news agencies, magazines, etc? Please add some quickly if you wish to prevent the deletion. You may also wish to comment on the AfD page, rather than on the article's talk page. LinaMishima 21:56, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

message: i WOULD vote with my feet to keep this site. It is non-commercial in nature, maintained by the devotees of the Art known as Cinema and thus belongs to the general treasure of knowledge, rightfully here in wikipedia. I personally have seen entries in this encyclopedia with infinitely less content and shallow essence, so why the heck not a professional site (one of its kind) entirely devoted to the true masters of Cinema? There are many people across the world who sacrifice their time and energy , sometimes at the expense of their families and friends to keep that great resource going! IMO it would be a big loss to Wikipedia if you delete this article. Please consider keeping it. Thank u in advance.
: This isn't really the place for that comment.  It belongs at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Masters of cinema.  What's more, the hard work of the people at the MoC site isn't really a criterion for it's place as an encyclopedic entry.  Jun-Dai 02:00, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  KEEP 

message: If the "list of Criterion Collection" page is gonna be deleted then logically it follows that the list of releases on this page should also be removed.
I personally am against both decisions, but either both should stay or both should go as it would hypocritical to remove one but not the other. Energizerspark (talk) 20:00, 15 June 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, absolutely it should not be here per WP:NOTCATALOG for exactly the same reason the Criterion list and all other lists of this kind were deleted: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Powerhouse Films releases; Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of British Film Institute releases; Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Twilight Time releases; Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of BBC home video releases, the list goes on... --woodensuperman 12:06, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Release list