lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:His tag

message: * User Angela moved the his tag article to polyhistidine tag, because of a trademark issue. I have written several parts of the original article and I don't agree that a his-tag is the same as the poly histidine tag. The purification and detection methods that described in this article work for the his tag, but I am not whether everything can transferred to the poly histidine tag. The copy paste edit from Angela did not improve this article, but made it rather confusing by mixing things up. 
* The term his-tag is the most frequently used term in scientific literature and the term poly histidine tag is used less frequent.
* The trademark name for the His tag is 6xHis tag (Qiagen, which holds an exclusive licence for parts of the technology)
JOK 11:26, 25 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: His-tag versus poly histidine tag
Talk:Prithviraj Chauhan

message: Prithvi Raj Chauhan was a Rajput emperor.Please mention in the introduction section that he belonged to Chauhan Rajput caste. Abhimanyu200 (talk) 03:57, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Cannolis (talk) 04:12, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 10 December 2023
Talk:Cassini and Catalan identities

message: Warehousing this proof. Charles Matthews 11:58, 25 October 2005 (UTC)
Talk:Apple Panic

message: Correct year (1982) noted by numerous sources: , . --Animosity 12:04, 25 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Coulis

message: Can someone determine the grammatically correct plural form of coulis and add it to this listing? Is it 'couli'? -ChefKent
:it would be coulises which would be pronounced like 'cool-eez.' --24.227.68.114 16:13, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, the Longman Pronunciation Dictionary for upper intermediate and advanced learners, 3rd edition, says that the plural form is coulis (i.e. the same as the singular form). This goes for both British and American English. --Butterfly67 (talk) 18:21, 25 October 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  plural 

message: I came to the Coulis page (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coulis) from the page on Deglazing (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deglazing). 
There is specific mention there as follows:
"The sauce can also be thickened with a starch such as flour, or reduced with a steady heat forming a richer concentrated sauce, sometimes called a coulis if produced from cooking sea food."
On the Coulis page however, there is no mention of sea food. I am not an expert on Coulis and cannot provide specific information. It does seem mildly conflicting however. Perhaps an expert could modify either article?
--Sidkhullar 17:46, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not an expert either, but I do know for certain that a coulis can be produced from more things than seafood. I thus cut out that phrase from the deglazing article. - SimonP 17:52, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

text: There are certainly at least two meanings, an older one for the type of broth, the newer one for fruit- or vegetable-based thin sauce. The new meaning is popular since 1980, so older English sources might use the old meaning. Now reflected in Coulis#Older uses, see also #Removed the baking source below for the possible third meaning (essentially, a puree soup). Викидим (talk) 22:22, 4 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Possible conflict? 

message: I'm not sure how good of a source this is, but in the Longman Pronunciation Dictionary for intermediate and advanced learners, 3rd edition, it says that in British English, the stress is on the first syllable (/'ku:li/). For the plural form, it says that /-iz/ is the most common choice in both varieties (BE: /'ku:liz/; AE: /ku'li:z/), but that /-li/ (or /-'li:/ in AE) is possible, too. --Butterfly67 (talk) 18:45, 25 October 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pronunciation 

message: I have removed the following text and the source for it:
: The term originally referred to the released juices of cooked meats, then usually to puréed meat-based soups, and today can sometimes refer to a puréed soup of shellfish.
Reason: it contradicts all other sources I have seen: coulis is strained and thus thin, not thick. The English word is very new (Merriam-Webster says, from 1952), Oxford references say the old spelling was "cullis" and meant broth, not thick soups. Since the source is on baking and not sauces, I have chosen to remove this one. If concurring sources are found, I have no objection against returning the text  and the source back into our article. Викидим (talk) 22:10, 4 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removed the baking source
Talk:Legend (Henry Cow album)

message: Feel free to comment at Talk:Legend (disambiguation)#Merger proposal.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 02:42, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merger proposal 

message: A query has been raised here about two additions made to the article:
#The US and Japanese editions of this album were remixed (added here last month)
#The 1998 CD editions were made from a vinyl copy (added here in May 2010)
Does anyone have any sources supporting these statements? —Bruce1eetalk 09:29, 3 May 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: It's been several weeks now since these queries were raised and there have been no response. I've removed the unsourced statements. —Bruce1eetalk 13:43, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

text: Thanks for confirming that vinyl was used as the CD source. Now, do you know of a published source stating this fact? I can see here that Steve and Bill were thanked, but there is no mention that vinyl was used as the source. I removed that information from the article because you (quite correctly) requested supporting evidence and none was forthcoming. To restore that information supporting evidence would be required, and for Wikipedia it should be from a reliable published source (see WP:SOURCES). There must be something out there. —Bruce1eetalk 07:36, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

text: While blogs and emails are generally not accepted as reliable sources, they would help in justifying the addition of this information. I would be happy to use them and add a note saying that more reliable sources are required. Can you provide the link to the blog? Regarding Eroc's email, perhaps screenshots would be best (not pure text as that would be open to manipulation). But you will need to get his consent first to have it published on Wikipedia. If you send me a message using this link, I'll email you my email address, and you can send me the screenshots. Then I'll upload them into Wikipedia. Thanks for helping out. —Bruce1eetalk 13:58, 21 June 2015 (UTC)

text: Not a problem – if you do find anything new, please let us know. Thanks for all your efforts. —Bruce1eetalk 05:30, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

text: Thanks for that. I've restored the fact that the 1998 CD edition was transferred from a Japanese vinyl copy citing your source. As blogs and forums are not generally regarded as reliable sources, I've also requested a better source. —Bruce1eetalk 11:40, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Queries
Talk:Unrest (Henry Cow album)

message: Cover artist Ray Smith might deserve his own article, judging by his credits at discogs. Here's another source from Prog Rock FAQ: All That's Left to Know About Rock's Most Progressive Music Martinevans123 (talk) 13:44, 27 December 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: An article would be nice. Chris mentions Henry Cow's encounters with him in the early 1970s, and I've found a couple of books that mention his painted-sock art work, here and here (I don't have preview-access to the Prog Rock FAQ). But is this enough for a free-standing article? Biographical information is what we need. I'll scratch around and see if I can find something. —Bruce1eetalk 17:43, 27 December 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok thanks. I'll look too. I could copy the Prog Rock FAQ material here without breaching copyright? Martinevans123 (talk) 17:59, 27 December 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Copying small portions of the book and emailing them shouldn't be a problem. Have a look at "Fulfilling a request" at the top of Resource Request. —Bruce1eetalk 21:21, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

text: Yes, thanks. Which would you prefer? Martinevans123 (talk) 22:08, 27 December 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: If it's not too much trouble, emailing me the extracts would be great. I've sent you a Wiki email with my email address. Thank you. —Bruce1eetalk 07:28, 28 December 2017 (UTC)

text: I've finally created an article for Ray Smith. I had seen biographies for him previously, but I couldn't be sure that they were the right Ray Smith. Then I saw this Guardian obituary which made explicit mention of Henry Cow, and everything fell into place. Strangely, I haven't been able to find his full date of death, or his date of birth for that matter. But anyway, he went on to become quite an accomplished artist. —Bruce1eetalk 15:39, 28 July 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ray Smith
Talk:Megaladapis

message: I only find 4 references to the term "Koala lemur" in google scholar and 10 references to "Koala lemurs".  On  the other hand Megaladapidae brings back 153 and "Megaladapis" 358.  It seems that the common name is less common then the scientific name. and should possibly be moved back to the genus name.--Kevmin (talk) 17:15, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry I missed your comment earlier.  Most of the major secondary sources on lemurs mention this species (as well as the sloth lemurs, monkey lemurs, etc.) by common names.  The same goes for the taxonomic authorities for lemurs.  Generally, WP:PRIMATES prefers common names to scientific names when available.  Additionally, the academic literature tends to prefer scientific names to common names, so I'm not sure if what you're referring to is a fair comparison.  However, if you still prefer to move it back, we could discuss it briefly at WT:PRIMATES. – VisionHolder « talk » 05:24, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: The current ratio at Google Books, which of course has both popular and scientific titles, is 33 for "koala lemur", 17 for "koala lemurs", and ca. 10,500 for "megaladapis". I think it is fair to conclude that the scientific name is by far the most commonly used one for this genus. Iblardi (talk) 21:14, 17 June 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Per Wikipedia:Tree_of_life#Article_titles: "In cases where there is a formal common name (e.g. birds), or when common names are well-known and reasonably unique (e.g. "Cuvier's dwarf caiman"), they should be used for article titles." – Maky « talk » 23:34, 17 June 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: And "Wikipedia does not necessarily use the subject's "official" name as an article title; it prefers to use the name that is most frequently used to refer to the subject in English-language reliable sources". "koala lemur" obviously doesn't fit these criteria. "giant lemur" seems somewhat more common, getting 500+ hits on GB, but it is still far less frequent than "megaladapis". Hence I propose to rename the article Megaladapis. Iblardi (talk) 06:33, 18 June 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Koala lemur
Talk:Jay Dratler

message: According to IMDB, not Dratler got the Academy Award for best screenplay in 1949, but John Huston (The Treasure of Sierra Madre). --Stilfehler 18:08, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Academy Award? 
Talk:1995–96 NBA season

message: I went ahead and deleted this entry from the "Notable Occurrences" section because including it is so silly.  The man shot two three pointers and made one of them.  Saying someone went .500 from the three point line is just a dumb thing to point out if they only shot two.  It's highly insignificant.  It would only be meaningful if someone shot a few dozen attempts and shot %50.  1 of 2 is not statistically significant.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.243.169.205 (talk) 04:56, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Shaq going .500 beyond the arc
Talk:Alex Lovell

message: I have found pictures of Alex on, for example the five web site (i.e. http://www.five.tv/media/image/11777254.jpg) but is it legal to upload these to Wikipedia, as they belong to five, is this fair use, and if it is, how do I go about uploading this picture so it will appear in the article rather than as a link? - Gary Kirk 09:25, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: See Wikipedia:Copyrights#Image guidelines.  Maybe someone else can help further.  To upload an image to Wikipedia, use the Upload file link in the toolbox. -- Smjg 16:29, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No it is not legal. Fair use promotional images must come from a section of a website clearly labelled as a press kit with clear copyright permission indicated. The JPS 16:37, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Untitled 

message: I took out the statement of the age gap between them, because it seems silly to include it.  But is even his DOB really notable enough to have here, considering that:
* he doesn't have his own article here
* even if he did, his DOB would belong there rather than here
-- Smjg 14:40, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gavin Shorter's DOB 

message: Is there any suggestion anywhere that Lovell was complicit in or aware of the phone-in competition fraud that led to BrainTeaser's demise? 79.66.90.209 23:58, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  BrainTeaser fraud 

message: A crackpot stalker has been jailed for sending her threatening letters: Guardian writeup Should this info be added to the article? --Ef80 (talk) 15:07, 3 January 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Stalker
Talk:Hackney College

message: I didn't think it worth setting up a distinct disamb page. Note also University stub removed. The Community College is *not* an institute of higher learning. It may offer some external courses that are  actually seconded to Birkbeck or other Unis, but this is common with every Adult/Further Education service in London, profitless to list them all as HE centres. Bit weaselly on the continuity between the first Hackney College and the Seminary, I know, because I haven't been able to trace exact info on that transition so far. In fact some sources suggest that these may not have been a succession, but count as two independent startups. Actually not sure right now. Tarquin Binary 12:28, 25 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: 2005
Talk:In Praise of Learning

message: It contains the members of Slapp Happy, sure, but unlike the previous collaboration, this has been entirely marketed as a Henry Cow release and such is how it is catalogued on most databases and other similar resources. 181.115.61.65 (talk) 23:46, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Correct, it is a Henry Cow album, not a Henry Cow/Slapp Happy album. Slapp Happy had merged with Henry Cow at that point and didn't exist as a group any more. But in the album's liner notes, the name "Slapp Happy" is still used, for example "Beginning: The Long March" and "Morning Star" are credited to Henry Cow/Slapp Happy. —Bruce1eetalk 00:19, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  This is not a Slapp Happy album
Talk:Kids in America (film)

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 policy on article titles.
*This should be a speedy move per nom. Simply south (talk) 23:20, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Survey

message: At the very end of the film, during the credits, the two main characters share a kiss lasting five minutes and fifty-eight seconds.  The film seems to imply that this is the longest on-screen kiss in cinematic history, beating a previous record from 1941’s You’re in the Army Now of three minutes and five seconds.
Having never seen You’re in the Army Now, I can neither confirm nor deny that such a kiss appears in said film.  Nor do I possess any knowledge about the lengths of other on-screen kisses.
All I can confirm is that 2005’s Kids in America indeed had a five-minute-and-fifty-eight-second kiss at the end.
If this is indeed the longest on-screen kiss currently in film history, this fact would seem notable enough for inclusion in the article.  Can anyone confirm or deny whether there are any on-screen kisses exceeding the one at the end of this film?
allixpeeke (talk) 14:16, 23 November 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Kiss at the End 

message: This article could use a few more citations and a bit more expansion. Critical reception etc. --Lord Matt (talk) 22:46, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  This article could do with a few more citations.
Talk:Concerts (Henry Cow album)

message: I propose renaming this article to Concerts (Henry Cow album) as all the sources I've seen refer to the album as Concerts and not Henry Cow Concerts. Does anyone have any objections? —Bruce1eetalk 13:52, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I take it there aren't any objections, so I've done the move. —Bruce1eetalk 09:26, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rename
Talk:Basques/Archive 2

message: I am working through a list of unwikified articles. I have found a short, unwikified article on Xabier Arzalluz, who I understand is a Basque politician. However the English in it is rather poor and I don't feel confident that I could fix it in a way that presents the correct information. Please could editors with better knowledge of Basque politics look at this article and make any appropriate changes. Thank you very much. --rbrwr± 20:22, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Xabier Arzalluz]]
Talk:Great Michael

message: Did she see any action at all in her life (Confirmed action, I mean)?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.229.224.133 (talk) 13:32, 7 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Fight?

message: What was her French name? Bastie 13:12, 25 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Name? 

message: Article reassessed and graded as start class. --dashiellx (talk) 18:19, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Tag & Assess 2008 

message: I was looking at the measurements, and the length looks right, but the beam (the width of the ship) being 11m seems way off. Can someone confirm that? That would be a really thin carrack!  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ecdmuppet (talk • contribs) 20:27, 31 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Are the measurements right? 

message: The quote from William Dunbar is given in modern English. Dunbar, however, wrote in Middle (mediaeval) Scots, so this quote has to be a translation, yet it is presented as the original and authentic text (and has been copied in that incorrect form throughout the internet). Could we please have the authentic text or, at least, a footnote stating that this is a translation, along with a link to the original source?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.193.240.11 (talk) 12:01, 16 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  william dunbar quote not authentic? 

message: Sorry, Brendandh, but the source you quoted doesn't go that far.  The only sentence bearing on Mons Meg is "There is a suggestion that one of her guns was the famous Mons Meg, still to be seen in Edinburgh Castle."  That is far too vague on which to base any level of assertion, even given the high probability that "there is a suggestion" = "some nationalist made a wildass claim based on no evidence beyond moonshine and hot air."  Beyond that, extraordinary claims require extraordinary citations. Since anyone with knowledge of Age of Sail stability issues recognizes the utter absurdity of a ship such as Michael failing to founder from the sheer weight of a cannon far too large for any sailing ship, we need not only multiple definite sources, but I'd like to see some measure of contemporaneous sourcing as well.   Ravenswing   19:12, 3 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mons Meg? 

message: Reference 1 is to Neil Oliver. He's an archaeologist, not a Historian, no matter that he is the talking head on a number of History programmes on the BBC. There must be a stronger reference?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.145.65.222 (talk) 20:16, 29 August 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reference [1]
Talk:Princess Katherine of Greece and Denmark

message: Isn't this a duplicate article of Lady Katherine Brandram? User:Dimadick
I believe that these should be merged.  Information is repeated in the Lady Katherine article, and this gives much more information.Prsgoddess187 16:25, 7 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Merged an redirected! The Minister of War (Peace) 14:05, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Her post-marriage style was listed as "HRH Princess Katherine, Lady Brandram". I've corrected this to "The Lady Katherine Brandram", since her husband was (so far as I can tell) neither Sir Richard nor Lord Brandram, so she was not entitled to be "Lady Brandram". She was granted the style of a duke's daughter, i.e. "The Lady Katherine Brandram". Her foreign style would have been something like "HRH Princess Katherine, Mrs Richard Brandram". DBD 17:04, 15 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Style
Talk:Branford, Connecticut

message: Hey all, I'm the WikiProject Cities assessor of this article. If feedback is what you want and need, come to my talk page and give me a holler! --Starstriker7(Dime algoor see my works) 19:52, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: WikiProject Cities

message: I am proposing that the article noted above be nerged with Branford, Connecticut.  Discuss it here.
I second the merge.
:me threeGzuckier 18:56, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Proposed Merger with [[Branford Hill]]

message: The other page has no information, other than an unsourced reference to the Quinnipiack Indians, that is not on this page. --InkQuill 18:41, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've redirected that page to the Branford article since it doesn't really have verified content not already here. --Polaron | Talk 02:24, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Proposed Merger with Indian Neck (Branford)

message: How can you guys forget that Gravy master is based in branford ct!!111
:I see that Gravy Master, a company, does indeed give its contact address as being based in Branford, CT.  Not sure if it is important to mention in this article or not. doncram (talk) 01:13, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Gravymaster
Talk:Scott Peterson (disambiguation)

message: I've added a link to this disambiguation-page at the beginning of Scott Peterson (convicted murderer). I hope this ends the edit war between you 2. Peace, Nanouk 13:47, 25 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Edit war

message: I removed the golfer Scott Peterson from the page, whose name is actually Scott Petersen.  --Marco Passarani 21:19, 26 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removal 

message: — JIP | Talk 11:19, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  AfD result 

message: Disambiguation pages titled "(disambiguation)" are not used when there are only two articles involved. The only type of disambiguation page that ever has only two articles on it (and is supposed to; obviously hundreds and hundreds of disambig pages currently violate disambig guidelines) is a page like GWB, which not only doesn't have "(disambiguation)" at the end (and thus is something that people will regularly find with the Search engine, unlike this page), but also has no dramatic likelihood for one article to be looked for over the other. This is not the case here; over 99% of people who search for "Scott Peterson" will be looking for the convicted murderer. So, the clear course of action is to have Scott Peterson and Scott Peterson (writer) simply link to each other at the top of their pages, and not to add the silly extra step of requiring people to visit a disambig page for no reason too. A easy little link is much easier than a whole distinct page for so little information. -Silence 17:52, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Note