lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Consideration under American law

message: This Article should be merged with Consideration under English law under the title consideration.
Someone needs to distinguish mutuality from consideration.  For ex, in an option contract mutuality is not required unless the want of mutuality precludes consideration  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.35.126.14 (talk) 22:15, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merger 

message: Where did this text come from? Toward the end it says "Williams v Roffey will be discussed further below." Clearly this needs to be revised but it begs the question whether this whole text has been lifted from a textbook.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.214.188.71 (talk) 23:24, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Source 

message: Wow guys.  I'm an attorney and this page was pretty embarrassing.  If I was teaching a law school class on contracts and someone defined consideration like this, I would flunk them in a heartbeat, and if I was a judge, I would kick that attorney out of the courtroom.  Please keep legal articles succinct, to the point, organized, and accurate.  If you want to get into exceptions, fine. But, you have to lay the foundation before you paint the embellishments on the windows frames.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.143.126.71 (talk) 05:45, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: If anyone finds some of the old content helpful, please restore it:  http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Consideration&oldid=266057308  --Campoftheamericas (talk) 03:07, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: This page is pretty embarrassing

message: There are currently at least three pages on this topic, with some inevitable overlaps. They are this page Consideration under American law, plus Consideration under English law and Consideration . I suggest that the Consideration  page becomes a much shorter summary page, with directions to the other two, which then survive with improvements. The "Consideration under English law" page needs a lot of work! (I'll post a version of this message on the other pages). Any views? Arrivisto (talk) 10:21, 9 April 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rationalisation of consideration pages
Talk:Kimchi

message: On the last sentence of the "Procedure" section, the word 'affect' should be changed to 'effect'.
"The more fermentation that occurs, the more carbon dioxide will be incorporated, which results in a very carbonated-drink-like affect."
Thank you. LilaPingvin (talk) 13:48, 24 October 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: ‑‑ElHef (Meep?) 16:20, 24 October 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 24 October 2021 

message: >The first step in the making of any kimchi is to slice the cabbage or daikon into smaller, uniform pieces to increase the surface area
This isn’t true, a common style of kimchi is called pogi kimchi where the cabbage head is only sliced into halves or quarters. The Tran Dynasty (talk) 16:51, 8 February 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Isn't "the cabbage head is only sliced into halves or quarters" referring to the making, not the serving? As I recall, as a small child in Korea, it was made using large pieces, with large, flat stones (that had been washed) used to weight it all down, and then a cover was put on the large crockery jar, which was buried in the ground all winter. Whenever any was taken from it to serve in the house, that was then cut into smaller pieces. -- Valjean (talk) 18:27, 8 February 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  “Procedure” Column 

message: Can we get someone to look over the recent edits by some person named JakHoDo? There seem to be a plethora of edits by this person, many of which are written in a very unencyclopedic and frequently judgmental manner (e.g. many weasel words such as "strange," "peculiar," "naysayers," and "prejudice"; obvious opinionating; original research; lots of unsourced info; much of the sourced info is from pages best described as "political"; lots of irrelevant tangents; essentially using the article as his idea of a discussion page; demanding regular "inferences" rather than using sourced facts; questionable sources, such as newspapers known to advance nationalistic agendas; a weird fascination with describing "Columbus Exchange Theory" as having some sort of special exception for Korea and using this to claim "prejudice" against it directly in the article; making bizarre claims about being "millions of years" old; only semi-academic source appears to consist of a single organization with limited connection to academia and possibly existing to promote a nationalist agenda). Similar edits appear to have been made by this person on other articles, such as "Korean chili pepper," with equally little attempt at sourcing, basic grammar, or an encyclopedic tone. Wikipedia's articles are not a place for soapboxing, (poorly) inferring, opinionating, original research, or using a judgmental tone when casting doubt on cited facts. 121.124.108.18 (talk) 06:09, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recent editing
Talk:David Hackworth

message: "and his exploits at the time were rivaled only by the loyalty of his troops and the growth in his leadership skills and style."
What the heck is this - it's supposed to be a biographical statement?
I can't believe that the person who wrote this ever spent a day in military service.  This is terrible writing; overwrought crap.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 118.106.217.125 (talk) 09:41, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  What is this? 

message: In 2015 an IP editor added the peacock tag to the article, see this diff. There does not appear to be any discussion regarding it. Perhaps it is time that the tag be removed?--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 05:16, 16 March 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Peacock
Talk:South Gyeongsang Province

message: The duplocated notice by Sewing and the related discussion were moved to Talk:Dispute over the name Sea of Japan, not to make discussion scattered over Wikipedia.
:The above unsigned comment was added by Nanshu. --Sewing 16:33, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Sea of Japan

message: shouldn't there be mention of this? Woo Bum-Kon 132.205.44.134 21:32, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Woo Bum-Kon massacre in Gyeongsangnam-do
Talk:Xiongnu

message: I was going to correct a spelling in this article, but was prevented from doing so because it appears to be blocked from editing. Please fix this ridiculous situation! 2605:A000:FFC0:5F:F9BD:9D:B97C:57D4 (talk) 02:12, 9 November 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: The article was given permanent protection in 2021 due to persistent, most likelly long-term vandalism. This is not some "ridiculous situation" that needs to be fixed, but rather a measure to hinder extensive vandalism. This will only change if an admin sees fit to lift the protection for some reason, which I personally hope does not happen. Vif12vf/Tiberius (talk) 03:44, 9 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unable to edit this article 

message: A new discovery of a seal with a Khunnu tamga on the territory of Buryatia. It is necessary to insert
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/80/%D0%9F%D0%B5%D1%87%D0%B0%D1%82%D1%8C%D1%81%D1%85%D1%83%D0%BD%D0%BD%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%BE%D0%B9%D1%82%D0%B0%D0%BC%D0%B3%D0%BE%D0%B9.jpg Qwerty234234536 (talk) 08:35, 4 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  A new discovery of a seal with a Khunnu tamga on the territory of Buryatia. It is necessary to insert 

message: This new philological finding should be added to the Turkic languages section:
Recent research has revealed that in chapter 96 of the Book of Han (Han-shu), entitled "Western Regions", the Xiong-nu gave the title "拊離 (fǔ-lí)" to a ruler of the Lesser Wu-sun Kun-mo, a descendant of a Xiong-nu princess, who was killed in 30 BC as a result of a throne dispute. In chapter 50 of the Tongdian, Chinese sources clearly define the meaning of "拊離 (fǔ-lí)" as "wolf". With this military-political title, the Wu-sun were declared the protector of the western region of the Xiong-nu territories. For the same reason, this title was given to the ruler of the western wing of the state in the Gokturks, Seljuks, Khwarazmians, Mongols and Anatolian Turkish beyliks. In addition, the word "böri" is a word used in all Turkic languages, Mongolic languages, Korean, Japanese, Manchu-Tungus with the meaning of "wolf". These results may have revealed a connection with Altaic languages, especially Turkic languages. ref: Çoban, Ramazan Volkan. (2023). Türk Mitolojisinde Kurt Kültü (Wolf Cult in Turkic Mythology). Mus: Alparaslan University Publishing. Philosophia091 (talk) 19:01, 23 December 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes HaciMusto (talk) 22:15, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Adding new information to Turkic language section
Talk:Zero morphism

message: I don't feel the courage to define ring and group morphisms, and I think the categoric characterization is too much for most readers. David.Monniaux 22:39, 17 Sep 2003 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: :A morphism is zero if and only if it is constant and coconstant.
I can't find the defintion of constant morphism under Constant morphism. It justs says:
:The first characterization of constant functions given above, is taken as the motivating and defining property for the more general notion of constant morphism in Category theory.
—Preceding unsigned comment added by  JanCK (talk • contribs) 19:34, 20 October 2007
::I've now fixed this, as constant morphism is now defined in the article. Paul August ☎ 18:04, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I suspected constant=left zero but didn't have access to Herrlich-Strecker. Thanks. RobHar (talk) 19:19, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Glad to help. Paul August ☎ 23:06, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Definition of constant morhpism? 

message: Can someone write explicitely whether a category with zero morphism necessarily or not necessarily has a zero object? (not quite grammatically correct but you understand)  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Noix07 (talk • contribs) 19:04, 6 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: has Zero objects ?

message: The "Related concepts" section says:
I don't think C having zero morphisms automatically implies C has kernels / cokernels. But maybe this is not what the text meant to imply? Luca.defeo (talk) 13:02, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Kernels and cokernels?
Talk:Alexander I of Macedon

message: Cf Alexander the Great. User:Wetman
:That's Alexander III. Adam Bishop 23:08, 17 Sep 2003 (UTC)
thread_title: Comments

message: There are no sources for when he died. I was looking around a little bit and found that Google says 450 BC, another place says 452 BC, so how do we know this date is correct? AChildOfGod (talk) 15:57, 5 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Date of Death 

message: Macedonia was not part of Greece, and "philhellene" must be understood as if a leader of some American country, or of some other country elsewhere, were called "francophile." J S Ayer (talk) 13:58, 31 August 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Philhellene
Talk:Clericis laicos

message: The current apology for Boniface is uncritically taken from the Catholic Encyclopedia of ninety years ago. We need a more balanced historical background for this aggressive assertion of Papal power, a prelude to Unam Sanctam — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wetman (talk • contribs) 00:56, 18 September 2003 (UTC)
thread_title: [[WP:NPOV]]

message: Just start class, really, until it covers more of the context and reaction. See , Pope Boniface VIII, and Philip IV of France for starters and for sources. At minimum, the article needs to cover the late 1296 bull  and February 1297 bull  in between the challenge and the complete cave, where Boniface tried to get away with first suggesting he'd approve any requested taxes in this instance and then allowing "voluntary" "donations" from national clergy in times of emergency determined by the king. — LlywelynII 06:15, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title: [[WP:DONTLIE]]
Talk:United Nations trust territories

message: Can we get a list? RickK 03:04, 18 Sep 2003 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay, we have a list. Now, can we get the current status? Even though the article is written in past tense, there's nothing in it to explain what happened to each (or any) of the territories. — Jeff Q (talk) 05:13, 11 Mar 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you very much, Srs, for filling in the details! — Jeff Q (talk) 20:45, 17 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: List

message: Coming to this article from the LoN Mandates article, I expected to find out what happened to each of the mandates, and it seems logical to me that this would parallel the Mandates article.  While one article says all Mandates became Trusts in 1946, I don't see any of the Class I (or A?) mandates listed in this article.  I created a similar note in the other article talk page.  Mulp 03:28, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Link to League of Nations Mandates

message: There was never a 'Trust Territory of Ryukyu' under the control of the UN. --Minorities observer (talk) 08:29, 4 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  'Trust Territory of Ryukyu' 

message: The map provided does not appear to include numerous nations that were formerly part of the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands. JohnWarosa (talk) 01:04, 25 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Map of Nations Comprised Solely or Partially of Former UN Trust Territories
Talk:Catherine Schwartz

message: Is she married to Roger Chang or not?  His article had the supposed marriage deleted.  Let's keep them consistant.  If there's no evidence for it anywhere, I'm going to delete the comment here that she is married to him.  If someone can point to one page on the net that says they're married, we can put it back in both articles.  RickK 04:47, 18 Sep 2003 (UTC)
thread_title: Married to Roger Chang?

message: so... can you really link to a nude photo of cat?
It dosen't seem like the right thing to do, the image was released without her knowledge and approval.
Just a thought.
--Trockinson 01:12, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The word "herself" was linked to the image, but as of 2008 it was deleted anyway (404 error) so I've removed the link. -Lwc (talk) 13:39, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Nude photo

message: So let me get this straight. Cat's kid was born on 06/06/06? -- Riffsyphon1024 08:18, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Good thing they didn't name it 'Damien' :) -- Jalabi99 16:46, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Baby

message: Added a link to the podcast and that two new posts were added but in 2007...--89.139.230.71 (talk) 11:44, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  New Updates 
Talk:Coat of arms of Croatia

message: I have a couple of questions about the dates and ordering of the WW2-era coats of arms:
* Given that they're ordered by date of adoption, shouldn't the NDH one site before the Federal State of Croatia one?
* The Federal State arms are referred in the article of the same name as being those of ZAVNOH, rather than the federal state per se
* Given that the dating system has the Kingdom of Yugoslavia being terminated in 1941, I wonder if perhaps the Banovina should also be terminated in that year
Xt828 (talk) 04:29, 6 August 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually legally the Kingdom of Yugoslavia (and also Banovina of Croatia) existed until 1943 when it was reformed into communist Yugoslavia. Independent State of Croatia was a puppet state unrecognized by anyone except Axis powers and their puppet states. Basically it is an anomaly in a legal and historic context and is not a successor of previous states or a predecessor of the ones that followed. Shokatz (talk) 23:24, 23 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Coat of arms dates in the WW2 era 
Talk:Pooka (disambiguation)

message: moved. The Evil Spartan (talk) 09:04, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Unpersuaded while all the senses presumably derive from Púca, they are distinct. and the reader may want any of them. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 20:11, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Requested move
Talk:President of China

message: I removed the introductory phrase since to accurately explain the situation concerning the Republic of China's claims of sovereignty would take several paragraphs and is explained elsewhere.
— Preceding unsigned comment added by Roadrunner (talk • contribs) 06:35, 18 September 2003 (UTC)
thread_title: Comments

message: A disambiguation page should point to the actual titles of the linked articles.  Normally an entry starts with the linked article and a comma is inserted after the entry when a description is included. See Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Disambiguation pages. --Bejnar (talk) 16:36, 21 June 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Point to actual acticle names 

message: In the US dictionary president of China is Winnie the Pooh o and fuck those little dick fuck head said by me WinniethePooh2020 (talk) 09:49, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Winnie the Pooh looking motherfucker 
Talk:Portland International Airport

message: Ameriflight does not fly into Grants Pass anymore but they do fly into Roseburg. Please reflect this in the Airlines and Destinations section. 174.253.193.67 (talk) 23:00, 31 October 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. MadGuy7023 (talk) 23:12, 31 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 31 October 2022 

message: Change PDX-STL service on SW airlines to seasonal only.  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St._Louis_Lambert_International_Airport Newstipper (talk) 23:49, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Shadow311 (talk) 16:37, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 29 November 2023
Talk:MLDonkey

message: I removed the sentence
:Since the application allows downloads without offering uploads, the application has been criticized as supporting leeches.
It may be true that this criticism has been voiced, but since all peer to peer applications allow leeching, the criticism is grossly unfair and need not be repeated here. AxelBoldt 08:28, 18 Sep 2003 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Can someone please provide a reference for the allegedly violation of "no fake shares" rule? I have removed the following sentence until we find such reference, and if this issue is a thing of the past, this could be stated somewhere else in the article rather than on the feature list.As many users of the MLDonkey client (mldc) choose to report inflated share sizes, mldc is not welcome to many DC hubs, and violates the common "no fake shares" rule. (recently fixed)--For the love of Pi! (talk) 09:25, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Direct Connect

message: I have installed MLdonkey several times over the last years and the only network I ever got to work was the eDonkey network. I also read in an included readme file that development for some networks has stopped some 1-2 years ago and since protocol compliance is not guaranteed anymore, the affected networks might not be reachable via MLdonkey. I think it's erroneous to advertise MLdonkey as supporting so many different networks, while in fact this is only true in theory, but in practice the the software (out-of-the-box) cannot connect to most networks. If someone actually does use MLdonkey successfully on multiple networks, please provide links that provide the necessary information as to how do achieve this. Thank you. boarder's paradise (talk) 20:29, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: multiple networks functional?
Talk:Six Nations Championship

message: 11+2 is not 14!! BRACK66 (talk) 19:21, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  England grand slams 

message: England have 13 Grand Slams.
Please amend. BRACK66 (talk) 14:41, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Six Nations Championship 

message: There is currently a discussion on the Records and statistics of the Rugby World Cup talk related to the removal of some statistical tables. The discusssion can be accessed here. Your input is most welcome and, of course, the consensus of the community will be abided by. 79.154.65.115 (talk) 13:38, 1 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Discussion on Records and statistics of the Rugby World Cup to Remove Some Statistical Tables 

message: What kind of messing is going on here? For starters all Home Nations and Five Nations games only have the wooden spoon listed as all games lost when the article referenced makes such no claim. Infact it even clarifies the difference between a wooden spoon and a whitewash. Second of all, Wales have miraculously dropped to 10 wooden spoons when they were 17 only a few weeks ago while every other team has remained the same. How does that work exactly? Lastly how exactly was the wooden spoon not contested before 1894 when the book "Football: The Rugby Union Game" by Frank Marshall talks about Wales wooden spoon in 1892 (the year it was published)?
Stevenbfg (talk) 07:47, 27 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wooden Spoon section
Talk:Master's degree

message: Is it "masters" or "master's"? The article uses both. 86.182.85.138 (talk) 09:56, 5 November 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Definite apostrophe if used correctly. It's a possessive. The Big Hoof! (talk) 14:54, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Apostrophe
Talk:Ian Malone

message: ***This article should be deleted.  Ireland is not a party to the Iraq conflict and that a former Irish citizen mercenary died there is of little consequence.
Made a number of changes.
At no time has there been an age limit of 22 to join the defense forces.  As we do not know why Malone was rejected we should simply state that he was rejected.
Large numbers of people from Dublin do not join the British army.  That there was a tradition of doing so at one time is irrelevant and unencyclopedic.
The Irish guards were not founded because large numbers of Irish people served in the boer war.
Large numbers of people from the republic don't serve in the Irish guards.
The inclusion of  the statement from parents is not encyclopedic.
The remark that at one time he wished to join the French Foreign Legion is unsupported.
The defense forces were NOT officially represented and no evidence is presented that the gardai were officially represented (and indeed they could not have been).
The tone of the artice is more like a fansite.  Unencyclopedic.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.125.183.106 (talk) 22:52, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: *Ian Malone - Doesn't belong here if Jamie Murphy (soldier) doesn't belong either SD6-Agent 04:57, 3 Feb 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: From VfD
Talk:French Civil Service

message: to be continued
How does one reconcile the academic freedom for university professors, etc., as described, with the requirement not to express religious or political views? Say I was a professor of philosophy, working in political philosophy and philosophy of religion; surely part of my academic freedom would involve expressing views on such questions as whether there are compelling arguments for atheism, or for one political system or another. I can't believe that the discussion about not expressing religious or political opinions is meant to apply literally to all people who are formally civil servants. Clarification, s'il vous plait? Metamagician3000 12:01, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: [Untitled]

message: A "Criticism" is clearly missing here, as many (if not most) French people blame the fonctionnaires for just about everything that goes wrong in the country and the French administration (and the people that work there) are reputed for their incompetence, slowness and laziness, be it justified or not. And this has been for a long time: see Coluche's joke:
"Dans l'administration, il y a qu'on truc qu'on risquera jamais de voler, c'est l'horloge. Le personnel a les yeux constamment fixe dessus",
i.e: "In the French administration, there's one thing that's sure not to be stolen, and that's the clock. The staff has their eyes on it constantly". Jules LT 22:26, 13 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Criticisms