lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Gomphosis

message: The link titled "amphitharotic" links to an internal Wikipedia page that has not been created yet. I am currently unaware of the adjective form of nouns having their own dedicated wiki pages. Can we not just link to the wiki page Amphiarthrosis?
The one reference cited ("Articulations") links to (http://commons.bcit.ca/biology/articulations/synarthrotic.html). This page no longer exists, which I suppose is not entirely surprising considering the retrieval date of 01-29-2008 (7 years ago). I was unable to find a current URL for this particular page. If anyone knows a currently linkable-URL for this same reference, please fix the link or post here.
Worst case scenario, I have an Anatomy & Physiology textbook I can cite from. I could at least throw a Taber's Cyclopedic Medical Dictionary definition in there. Any objections? This page could use some more academic citations anyway, so bring on the peer-reviewed sources please!
Fetters of ennui (talk) 08:04, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Need to fix broken links, add valid references
Talk:Gratification disorder

message: — Assignment last updated by Michaelo415 (talk) 18:37, 1 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: Foundations II

message: - Look at each source and see if it is reliable
- Look for more sources and information to add to the article
- Different headings/sections (definition, signs and symptoms, cases/case studies, Use in Differential Dx etc.)
- Make the article more digestible (less jargon, more lay language)  — Preceding unsigned comment added by FatemehNovin (talk • contribs) 21:53, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Goals
Talk:Jorge de Castro Font

message: I tried to rework the article a bit. It had major issues with neutrality and organization, and whatnot. I added as many sources as I could get, but there are still some missing. Particularly in the section about "Legal issues" (I labeled them). I will try to keep working on it later. Thief12 (talk) 03:05, 20 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Citations needed
Talk:Russian knapweed

message: i dont get how people call things weeds. this "weed" is a pinnacle of nature. its conquered your land and now commands respect.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.3.57.13 (talk) 14:22, 5 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: It's even considered noxious weed in North America. Russian knapweed biochemically inhibits the growth of other plants, and it is poisonous to horses. See , , and . --97.72.189.172 (talk) 04:12, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Weed

message: It seems like Russian knapweed is offically known as Rhaponticum repens since 2006. See , species:Rhaponticum repens, and Commons:Category:Rhaponticum repens. I think this article should start with "Russian knapweed (Rhaponticum repens, formerly known as Acroptilon repens) is a...", and be moved to the correct actual species' name. Commonscat:Rhaponticum repens could be added. --97.72.189.172 (talk) 04:12, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Species

message: Russian knapweed is also known as Turestan thistle, creeping knapweed, mountain bluet, Russian cornflower, or hardheads. --97.72.189.172 (talk) 04:26, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Synonyms
Talk:Influenza A virus subtype H5N9

message: Is there sufficient known about it to merit a separate article? Rathfelder (talk) 13:07, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed and  Klbrain (talk) 22:16, 22 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed merge with [[Influenza A virus ]]
Talk:Habit cough

message: This article relies on marginal and primary sources, when plenty of secondary reviews are available.  I have placed a list of secondary reviews and other sources in Habit cough#Further reading, and am planning to rewrite this article from scratch in sandbox.  SandyGeorgia (Talk)  14:03, 1 May 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: It does look to be a problem; now my problem is to write all of this up in a sensible way that represents all views :)  I am slowly working in my sandbox, but what I should probably do is add an entire History section that better explains the 2006 guideline. SandyGeorgia (Talk)  20:27, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sandbox rewrite
Talk:Hair whorl

message: Would that be counter-clockwise from the exterior point of view, or the scalp's point of view? Because they are opposite directions. :p  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.44.241.215 (talk) 14:58, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: thought Maybe if you live below the equator it would go in the opposite direction. 2605:2B00:40FF:6C00:34D8:1B63:4131:A6A3 (talk) 02:24, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  counter-clockwise hair whorl 

message: These things have not been scientifically established, it should be stated that they are questioned.
See here for a nice summary:
http://udel.edu/~mcdonald/mythhairwhorl.html
Cstanford.math (talk) 22:04, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hair whorl connections to sexuality and handedness 

message: :A hair whorl is a patch of hair growing in the opposite direction of the rest of the hair.
Growing in the opposite direction? That doesn't make sense and doesn't describe what it actually is. It's a patch of hair growing in a circular direction around a visible center point. Cstanford.math (talk) 22:04, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Definition of hair whorl
Talk:Candler School of Theology

message: I hate redlinks.  Does anybody want to work on that? Reverend Mommy 00:06, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Redlinks

message: I think it's pretty sad that this lengthy article doesn't mention that Candler is located in Atlanta, Georgia. Or am I just not reading it carefully enough?  Stepheng3 (talk) 20:51, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  location 

message: I think the numbers about Pitts Theology Library are outdated (https://pitts.emory.edu/about/index.cfm). Does someone want to update them?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Worldinfrontofthetech (talk • contribs) 15:50, 8 February 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pitts Theology Library numbers update?
Talk:Health reimbursement account

message: I found the example completely incoherent.  I think I understand, so I might come back to fix it -- someone else might give it a try first. 75.171.132.134 (talk) 05:25, 7 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  incoherent 

message: It doesn't make a lot of sense to have an article about the "notional derivative" without an article about its parent concept. II | (t - c) 10:09, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Move to health reimbursement arrangement? 

message: Either this article should be lower-cased, to match Health savings account, or that article should be capitalized.--Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 06:36, 13 December 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  capitalization
Talk:Víctor Varela

message: The text is virtually identical to that at ModernClassical.com, but it is not clear which came first and if we have a copyright violation.  --Deskford (talk) 11:02, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Modern Classical seem to have ripped us off.  There are a host of these: eg, I sent Hans-Ola Ericsson to WP:CP and it returned with the comment "evidently reverse infringement" .  We need to watch out for Modern Classical as they apear to rip us off without placing the relevent copyrights info on the pages.  --Jubilee♫clipman 03:13, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

text: BTW, 's contributions are almost three years old.  There is a string of suspicious IP edits from , though, which is a near single-use and probably static IP address.  This IP added this article to our beloved List of 21st-century classical composers as well as adding an ensemble to List of contemporary classical ensembles.  It also edited Dies Irae for some reason.  --Jubilee♫clipman 03:31, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Possible copyright violation
Talk:Petasites

message: I belive this arcticle should contain some more published and offline sources.--Pecopteris (talk) 16:46, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  No Published Sources 

message: The citation ref name=Facts&Comp is not open access, only with login and pass and should be replaced with a citation that anyone can access. Plantsurfer 23:24, 22 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  inaccessible reference 

message: 75% of current article is about medicinal use of the extract from some of the species. At some point we could split out the herbal extract and its uses from the plant/botany details ? - Rod57 (talk) 12:52, 15 November 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Could split out butterbur extract into separate article
Talk:Gundelia

message: The GA nominator has reverted the removal of the GAN of this article, stating that removal was not failure. In that statement he was actually correct – the two actions are different – but the removal was in accord with policy.
The Wikipedia:Good article nominations/Instructions begin as follows (emphasis added, footnote displayed):
: "Nominators must have contributed significantly to the article and be familiar with its subject and cited sources. Reviewers have the discretion to remove any drive-by nominations they come across. 
:::[Footnote:] If the nominator is either the author of less than 10% of the article or ranked sixth or lower in authorship, and there is no post on the article talk page, it can be uncontroversially considered a drive-by nomination."
Removing a nomination in this way is not the same as failing the nomination. Accordingly, I'm removing the one on this page now as a drive-by nomination. 
I note in passing that the article also contains "citation needed" tags and other wholly uncited paragraphs, so the immediately available alternative to removal is to fail the GAN. Chiswick Chap (talk) 08:43, 13 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removing versus failing drive-by GA nominations
Talk:Lactuca

message: Why not merge this page with "lettuce"???  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.224.252.10 (talk) 14:00, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The lettuce we know and eat is a species, not a genus. Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 12:41, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

message: Isn't Wild Lettuce an anaphrodisiac? 86.17.211.148 (talk) 22:08, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wild Lettuce
Talk:Cirsium vulgare

message: on 7/15/2022 i (Asciencepotato) added a photo of a bull thistle as my first ever edit. i thought i added it to the gallery of images but it appeared on the side beside the references, and now the gallery of other images seems to have disappeared. i am worried i did something wrong and now they are gone.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Asciencepotato (talk • contribs) 18:44, 15 July 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recent changes 

message: Hello! This is to let editors know that the featured picture :File:Mooie bloeiwijze van een Speerdistel (Cirsium vulgare) 03.jpg, which is used in this article, has been selected as the English Wikipedia's picture of the day (POTD) for November 7, 2020. A preview of the POTD is displayed below and can be edited at Template:POTD/2020-11-07. For the greater benefit of readers, any potential improvements or maintenance that could benefit the quality of this article should be done before its scheduled appearance on the Main Page.  If you have any concerns, please place a message at Wikipedia talk:Picture of the day. Thank you! Cwmhiraeth (talk) 10:44, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[:File:Mooie bloeiwijze van een Speerdistel (Cirsium vulgare) 03.jpg]] scheduled for POTD
Talk:National Conference on Organized Resistance

message: Deleted comment about fictitious "anti-sanitation" campain
Reverted because of vandalism - someone had edited page to redirect to Cleanliness page
This page should be about NCOR, not about criticism of NCOR from a tiny fringe group of people from the AU campus.
66.92.169.10 16:09, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

message: Is Oct. the month 98-2008 ? 73.247.83.158 (talk) 21:51, 24 January 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Yearly meeting.
Talk:Serratula tinctoria

message: I don't think the flower-photo shows Serratula tinctoria.  I don't want to change it without confirmation,but  Serratula tinctoria as I know it has individual quite large flowers, generally with each flowerhead at the top of a long stem - not the grouped flowerheads shown.   I think this may be another Serrulata?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.71.104.222 (talk) 07:45, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
Talk:Achillea ptarmica

message: I suggest a disambiguation page for "goose tongue"; it currently redirects to this page, but "goose tongue" is also a common name for Plantago maritima. 156.34.35.161 (talk) 23:30, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
Talk:Petasites frigidus

message: WP should never claim that a wild plant is edible without documentation.
Here's something that might do in this case:
http://www.pfaf.org/user/Plant.aspx?LatinName=Petasites+frigidus
:Kortoso (talk) 16:20, 2 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edibility
Talk:Petasites hybridus

message: Hello! This is to let editors know that :File:Petasites hybridus_inflorescence_-_Keila.jpg, a featured picture used in this article, has been selected as the English Wikipedia's picture of the day (POTD) for May 3, 2023. A preview of the POTD is displayed below and can be edited at Template:POTD/2023-05-03. For the greater benefit of readers, any potential improvements or maintenance that could benefit the quality of this article should be done before its scheduled appearance on the Main Page.  If you have any concerns, please place a message at Wikipedia talk:Picture of the day. Thank you!  — Amakuru (talk) 10:48, 20 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Featured picture scheduled for POTD
Talk:Recreational trawler

message: I suggest a few changes to this page, starting with the name.
May want to change "Cruising Trawler" to "Recreational Trawler," which is a better description for these types of boats. Not all trawler owners "cruise," which connotes long-term voyages (several weeks or more. Many -- perhaps most – trawler owners just make day trips or weekend trips.
I also suggest changing the picture. A Nordic Tug is a fine boat, similar to a trawler and admired by most trawler owners. But it is a production boat that mirrors a tug. Boats such as a Grand Banks 42, a Mainship 400 Trawler or a Nordhavn might be better examples.
I suggest the following changes to the entry, in the interest of modernization: 
A Trawler is a type of recreational powerboat and is so named because it looks similar to a commercial fishing trawler. Like a commercial fishing vessel, a cruising trawler has most recreational trawlers have a displacement hull and a raised pilothouse. the pilothouse is raised. The engine and mechanical room is under the main cabin and can be quite large. Usually trawlers have a single engine and a large fuel capacity, though most are slow, topping out at 8-9 knots. Many modern production boats now use semi-displacement hulls and twin engines to increase speed. The general design of trawlers is quite seaworthy.
Combined with the efficiency of a displacement hull, Single-engine, displacement-hull trawlers generally can go far before needing to be refueled and can be home for between 2 to 8 persons for many days and can be a permanent home.
Trawlers generally range in size from 30 to 70 feet.
--TheMadMariner 00:15, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: The article cites a single source, but the article's contents is all in one: solid, concise and pretty exhaustive (addresses all types of trrawlers I know off), so the source used also seems to be good (didn't look into it now).
The problem is, that news sources (nautical magazines etc.) about trawlers are usually not exhaustive, but mostly writing about what is new, and address only one or some types, and even that with partial info. Sources addressing this subject systematically are both rarer and harder to find.
I think additional references would be welcome by somebody that already knows about then, but are not urgently needed in a way, that an immediate systenatic search for them is necessary. Marjan Tomki SI (talk) 08:12, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Single source template applied to the article
Talk:Rudbeckia hirta

message: how tall do blackeye susans get  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.8.160.238 (talk) 00:40, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Height 

message: I recently uploaded some new photos of Rudbeckia hirta, below. I realise there are already many photos of this flower, but feel free to use if useful. Dcoetzee 19:12, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Some new photos 

message: If one is going to say "sometimes" something, an explanation should be given of when and/or under what conditions the "sometimes" happens. Is it for different varieties, different parts of the country, random chance? Help us out here.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.40.203.249 (talk) 08:58, 2 June 2010‎
:It is a perennial in its native range. — Berean Hunter (talk) 20:43, 16 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  "It is an upright annual (sometimes biennial or perennial)..." 

message: There is a lot of science here and that's fine. What isn't here is the edible parts. This is very dangerous! Warning people that some parts are inedible but not explaining is a dangerous practice. People will eat parts of it, believing it's probably okay. That's just the way it is. I'm a nurse, and am very familiar with this type of thing. It is better to either remove the remarks about it being edible at all, which I do not recommend since it is encyclopedic information, or simply list what parts are edible. If one isn't sure, then it really shouldn't be addressed at all in the article. MagnoliaSouth (talk) 19:37, 28 May 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Indeed the sources ive seen claim no part of the plant is edible, though also not toxic. 90.247.227.132 (talk) 15:20, 25 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  To make this truly encyclopedic...
Talk:Scorzonera

message: Scorzonera roots are used as a cheap replacement for asparagus or for their own sake in Germany for instance, and are called "Schwarzwurzeln" ("black roots") there. They're regarded as a staple vegetable there. Scorzonera root has a mildly sour taste and a firm texture. They're white as asparagus inside when the black skin is removed. The roots are often sold in cans (skinned). I've just eaten some! I think that in other countries like France or Italy, the roots are eaten as well. 91.49.126.50 (talk) 18:41, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Also used as a food plant
Talk:Hurricane Floyd (1987)/Archive

message: There is no evidence that this storm was a direct continuation to the Great Storm. The direct impact was minimal, and a long storm history does not mean the article should be kept. The writing is horrible in many places. Based on these, I vote this be merged back to the seasonal article. Hurricanehink 17:24, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Debateable. Floyd might be related the Great Storm,  when more evidence is avaliable in post storm analyisis. Floyd did moved in the direction of where the Great Storm hit and if you can extend Hurricane Floyd's track (which I did by guessing) and factor in the fast foward speed and other stuff in the equation then the two storms might be related. Storm05 17:28, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Maybe yes, but there is no actual evidence the two were the same. In addition, if they were the same, the Great Storm already has an article, and doesn't need another article reiterating what was already said. The actual part of Hurricane Floyd did little in the way of damage. Hurricanehink 19:47, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The last point is the important one.  If they were the same storm, we don't need two articles for them.  Just redirect this article to that one. Jdorje 21:35, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: What happens to the information when I redirect the Hurricane Floyd article to the Great Storm 1987 Article ? Storm05 13:06, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It depends on how much information can be used. Considering much of this is on the actual hurricane, it could be redirected to the 1987 season. Hurricanehink 15:45, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

text: Go for it. Get the old axe out and slice it in two ;) Hurricanehink 12:01, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Axe ready. -- §Hurricane ERIC§ archive -- my dropsonde 22:04, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge
Talk:Radicchio

message: Quote from article: In fact, radicchio contains intybin, a blood and liver tonic, as well as a type of flavonoid called anthocyanins. The words "liver tonic" are not acceptable as the word "tonic" has no practical meaning in terms of the practice of medicine. Claims such as this should be avoided unless referenced by clinical trials. A casual search using Google Scholar reveals no relevant information to help with the chemical intybin. Other references found are from herbalists only and as such offer only pre-clinical observations that are of no use.b_calder (talk) 19:52, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

message: I removed the claims about chicory causing blindness and being toxic and brought it into line with the main chicory page.  A search of the medical literature for radicchio, chicory, or Cichorium with blindness returns no hits, and animal studies of chicory extract have shown that the liver does not break it down into toxic products.
Solenoid (talk) 05:12, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Toxicity

message: I am aware of the nutrients listed in Radicchio, but is it possible we could get a 'health benefits' commentary as well? I have read that it is an analgesic (pain-reducer), as well as a sedative (thus making people sleepy). I am sure there are other properties that I am unaware of, but one of the wikipedia dietitians may be able to elaborate upon. Stopde (talk) 13:13, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Health benefits 

message: Someone put a  tag on the claim that "its roots can be used to mix with coffee". There's more discussion of this practice (at least, with chicory in general if not specifically radicchio) at Chicory#Root chicory, History of East Germany#Coffee crisis, 1976–79, and Ricoré; Coffee substitute also discusses the use of chicory root as a coffee substitute (not admixture). Unfortunately, none of those articles seems to provide sources. Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:35, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Use in coffee 

message: The article seems to contradict itself on the species of the radicchio cultivar. Is it a variety of chicory or lettuce? Mmcatmag (talk) 17:52, 23 August 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Species of radicchio
Talk:Ageratina

message: :Snakeroot → Ageratina — WP:NC indicates looking to verifiable reliable sources to guide name selection.  Since this article is about a genus, Ageratina  would seem appropriate.  Additionally, multiple plants have common names with the label "snakeroot". ENeville (talk) 16:25, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Requested move

message: I have two groups of Ageratina, but I don't know whether they are the same species. Please helping me!  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 223.104.147.164 (talk) 07:31, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  How to distinguish different species? I would like to have a tool like a parallel search table. Thank you! 

message: it can be used as medical 103.215.224.234 (talk) 05:49, 22 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Urtica
Talk:Anacyclus pyrethrum

message: The page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anacyclus_pyrethrum seems to be related to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anacyclus. I came to the former by clicking the linked text "pellitory" on the latter and then from there (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pellitory) clicking the hyperlink text "Anacyclus pyrethrum" (the first in the bullet list).  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.108.47.167 (talk) 12:30, 10 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Several pages on same (?) subject. Should be combined or better x-referenced.
Talk:2512 (magazine)

message: Please see the article on the French Wikipedia and the feature image in the article news magazine. Keesiewonder talk 00:21, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: A Stub; not Spam