lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:HP: To the Highest Level Na!

message: Seriously?  Hokus Pokus redirects to here?  Come on ... Disambig page at least ... 24.21.239.110 (talk) 02:17, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I concur. The article makes no mention of Hokus Pokus, therefor Hokus Pokus now redirects to Hocus Pocus. MarB4 (talk) 14:50, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
Talk:Hagonoy, Bulacan

message: Moved from article to talk (first paragraph retained) because this is a long legend without reference(s). RJFJR (talk) 18:11, 28 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Origin of name

message: Moved from history section to talk, unreferenced legend.  Not excatly sure where 'this' refers to. RJFJR (talk) 18:16, 28 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Legend
Talk:Shire of Cocos (Keeling) Islands

message: :The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. 
The result of the move request was: moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) 2pou (talk) 05:24, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Shire of Cocos →  – Official name as per MyCouncil and the official website. Steelkamp (talk) 04:34, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 30 December 2022
Talk:Zingaia

message: I haven't put any honking flags up top, but this needs better sourcing, mostly on the bits that sounded, well, like they are autobiographical or publicist-penned. I've made the tone more encyclopedic, but there still need to be more sources. - Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦♫ 07:01, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
Talk:Handuraw

message: I removed the tag since I found some references. Perhaps more references will be added once the third festival is set up this coming December 2008. --Lenticel (talk) 22:37, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Notability
Talk:Asia Miles

message: Wasn't this already deleted once? Jpatokal (talk) 03:48, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge again?

message: Hello all. I have recreated and rewritten Asia Miles article as I believe it is a notable subject for Wikipedia. In 2008, the article was nominated for deletion. The deletion nomination was made by an editor who was later banned. Now, Asia Miles is much more notable and hence I have written it from scratch. Article is much more longer and with suitable references. Further discussions is welcomed. –Wefk423 (talk) 14:27, 3 February 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Article re-created
Wikipedia talk:Requests for arbitration/Episodes and characters/Evidence

message: Due to the the evidence week happened during the Thanksgiving holiday, I was wondering if it would be alright if we had a day or two more to post evidence (granted that evidence can be posted after the one week, but meaning before the next stages are taken). -- Ned Scott 07:04, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I was going to ask that myself.  I basically lost four days of anything but family-oriented stuff (which, arguably, isn't particularly bad per se) due to the holiday.  I'm sure plenty of other people involved were busy for a few days as well. (Probably the arbitrators too)  A little extra time wouldn't hurt anything. -- Y|yukichigai (ramble argue check) 09:43, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

text: I have no problem with people taking a few days — I was wondering why no one had posted when I did. Cheers, Jack Merridew 10:38, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Because I didn't know how I was expected to provide evidence, and waited for someone to "show" me. And then it took some time to collect the evidence. – sgeureka t•c 12:54, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
Talk:Second Amendment to the United States Constitution/Archive 2

message: Seems to be some kind of anti-gun rights troll; if you look at his list of contributions, has gone on a rampage changing many gun-related pages into gun control blather. I vote he be banned.
Dullfig 05:27, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yabbut try whois bradymail.com — it's Brady Corporation of Milwaukee, not the Brady Campaign to Monopolize Gun Violence.  —Tamfang 06:30, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This is a sockpuppet for mail.bradymail.org (141.156.208.66) using traceroute.  His IP should be banned. Yaf 16:57, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  and, oops, bradymail.org (unlike bradymail.com) is connected with the Entity Formerly Known As National Coalition to Ban Handguns (see whois).  —Tamfang 19:45, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Who's this [[user:141.156.208.66|141.156.208.66]] guy?!

message: The section on US v Miller contains an external link that might be considered slanted.  Since it generally agrees with me I'm not gonna remove it, but heads up to those of you who feel differently. ;)  —Tamfang 18:26, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I just changed the external link to point simply to the actual text of the Supreme Court ruling on Findlaw.com because it is more neutral.  BruceHallman 17:02, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Enter Stage Right 

message: The third paragraph of the Legislative Process section says this:
It should be noted that the Bill of Rights Madison introduced on June 8th were not numbered amendments to be added at the end of the Constitution. The Rights were to be inserted into the existing Constitution. The Right to Keep and Bear Arms was to be inserted in the First Article, Section Nine, between clauses 3 and 4 following the prohibition on suspension of habeas corpus, bills of attainder and ex post facto laws, all individual civil rights. Madison did not propose inserting the Right to Keep and Bear Arms in the First Article Section 9 in which Congress's powers concerning the Militia are specified. This indicates Madison considered the Right to Keep and Bear Arms to be an individual right. (Annals of Congress, 1st Cong., 1sesss., 451) (Rutland, rev.ed., 196-202)
It could be made more neutral, shorter, less interpretive like this:
It should be noted that the Bill of Rights Madison introduced on June 8th were not numbered amendments to be added at the end of the Constitution. The Rights were to be inserted into the existing Constitution. The sentence that later became the Second Amendment was to be inserted in the First Article, Section Nine, between clauses 3 and 4 following the prohibition on suspension of habeas corpus, bills of attainder and ex post facto laws, all individual civil rights. (Annals of Congress, 1st Cong., 1sesss., 451) (Rutland, rev.ed., 196-202)
BruceHallman 17:29, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  The legislative process edit.
Wikipedia talk:Lists of common misspellings/P

message: "Predominately" is not a misspelling.  It's a (much) lesser used form; however, it's standard English, the same as the more widely used form "predominantly."
See, e.g., http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-pre2.htm and http://www.bartleby.com/68/26/4726.html . Kaimipono (talk) 07:37, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

message: Wiktionary lists parseable as a variant spelling of parsable. I feel that parseable should be regarded as non-standard, for the following reasons:
The Oxford English Dictionary (BrE) and the Random House Dictionary of the English Language (unabridged - AmE) both list parsable but not parseable. Most other dictionaries only list parse, with no indication of how to add a -ble suffix to it.
A thorough investigation of words in Merriam-Webster's Collegiate Dictionary ending in -eable finds that they all fall into two categories. One category includes likeable, moveable, useable, etc. They are all equal variant spellings (with likable, movable, usable, etc.) of words formed from verbs that end in a vowel, a consonant, and a silent e. The other category consists of words where the e must be preserved for the sake of pronunciation: peaceable, bridgeable (for soft c and g), malleable, permeable, and seeable (distinct syllables), among others. Parseable wouldn't fall into either category.
Searching Google or Wikipedia for frequencies is not helpful, because both of them do automatic spelling correction and return both spellings in a search for either one. In the past, before this was the case, I found majorities for parsable. More significantly, in both the British National Corpus and the Corpus of Contemporary American English (COCA), there are no occurrences of parseable. Admittedly, it's a small sample: parsable only occurs once in the BNC and twice in COCA.
Gwil (talk) 19:05, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  parseable
Talk:Idiotarod

message: None of the photo captions specify the city. Is it Portland? And: The Portland event apparently isn't happening anymore. See this Reddit discussion. The article needs to be updated to reflect, if that's true. And: The article spells the Portland event as Idiotarod, but online references have it as Iditarod. Which should it be?  Yesthatbruce (talk) 03:57, 16 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Are the photos from Portland? And other issues
Talk:Order of Woodcraft Chivalry

message: Discussion moved here from User Talk: 
Hi Corbie
As you saw I tried to make an edit on the OWC Wikipedia page.
I am a member of the the OWC and would like to make changes to the page to correct some missconceptions about the group.
The particular entry associating the group with witchcraft in the New Forest is incorrect.
I would appreciate your help on how to make the changes properly.
thanks
Morcott99  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Morcott99 (talk • contribs) 09:45, 8 March 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: I see the content you blanked was sourced. What are your issues with the source? - CorbieVreccan ☊ ☼ 18:07, 8 March 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Blanking of content
Talk:Romahapa

message: I've amended the comment about it being the "oldest school in South Otago" to "one of the oldest schools in South Otago". Toko High in Milton also has a fair claim to the title of oldest, as explained in the footnote (oddly, my dad went to both schools!). Grutness...wha? 08:26, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Oldest school in S.O.
Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/24/7 Customer

message: Hello...We agree and apologies that in past we made mistakes while creating the article. Now we have neatly gone through Wikipedia's guidelines on how to create the great article. You can see this new article is written in much more improved way.
Please note, our intentions are not to SPAM Wikipedia or advertise our services, we do understand that we need to add value and provide helpful information. That's why we have included this article in stub, so we can learn and grow in right direction. We request you to help us in developing this article. Please encourage us, we are now ready to take all necessary steps. Jpanalytics (talk) 08:29, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
Talk:Serb Volunteer Guard

message: These groups are mentioned, but in no way explained, if anyone has knowledge of them, please make it known, otherwise they should be removed from the section.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.52.45.142 (talk) 17:38, 24 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Chrysi Avyi and Hrisi Avgi

message: In the ICTY accusations section, the first and last accusation listed (locking large groups of people in a small boiler room) sound extremely similar. It sounds like they might be two separate accounts of the same incident. If they are, they should be merged. If they are not, they should both be described in more detail to avoid confusion.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 169.229.100.16 (talk) 01:50, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Repetition or clarity issue

message: There are no evidence that Serbian Volunteer Guard fought at Kosovo and Metohija. The unit was disbanded when SAO Eastern Slavonia, Baranja and Western Syrmia demilitarized, as the SVG was part of 11th Eastern Slavonia corps, which had to withdrawn to FRY. Until then soem members of SVG have become members of new-formed Special operations unit (JSO) of State security service. Arkan has ordered to former members of guard to join Yugoslav army in 1999. but there was no guard as formation since April 1996. Kos93 (talk) 22:26, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text:  Yes, it was unsupported and has been removed. 23 editor (talk) 20:32, 16 May 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Kosovo
Talk:American Cruise Lines

message: *"CRUISE LINE OFFICES." Miami Herald. February 7, 1988. 2J Travel. says:
** The HQ is at "1 Marine Park, Haddam, Conn. 06438"
*Brochure: http://americancruiselines.com/brochure/acl_11-11.pdf
WhisperToMe (talk) 08:48, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: I'm removing the American Glory from the list of ships.  She is no longer listed on ACL's website; but I don't know when she was retired.   Elsquared (talk) 06:29, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  removing vessel from list 

message: Looking to take a cruise 2601:2C5:8480:CB90:D09E:B52B:4D52:B6FB (talk) 00:59, 14 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cruise information  

message: Under Coastal cruise ships, the American Constellation is listed twice.  One of them should be the American Constitution, so I'll be making the correction.  Elsquared67 (talk) 01:00, 20 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  correction re: fleet list
Talk:Soul surfer

message: I've added the syn tag for the following statement: Before the colonisation and westernisation of the Hawaiian islands the Hawaiians viewed surfing as a spiritual pursuit, they prayed over the trees from which they carved their boards, erected surfing temples, chanted for surf and appear to have viewed surfing as a religious practice.  Unless you have a reliable source realted to this content and soul surfing, it is original research. —Viriditas | Talk 00:57, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: OR synthesis
Talk:Otto Ackermann (conductor)

message: Romania did not adopt the Gregorian calendar till 1911.  So, was "18 October 1909" in the old Julian calendar (= 31 October 1909 Gregorian), or has it already been converted to Gregorian (= 5 October Julian)?  --  Jack of Oz  ... speak! ...  11:09, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Calendar used in birth date
Talk:The Eternal Road (opera)

message: The link to the "Article by Leon Botstein at the American Symphony Orchestra website" from the footnote doesn't work. Jack Waugh (talk) 11:43, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Easily corrected. Viva-Verdi (talk) 14:02, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Broken Link
Talk:DaT scan

message: Was not given iodine. Also, the injection was given in a vein, in my hand. If it’s injected in your arm, it’s not going to disperse, where it needs to. It has to go in a vein. 98.23.35.73 (talk) 07:16, 22 January 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Iodine tablets
Talk:Frederick Hatfield

message: He never really squatted that much!!!  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.15.127.253 (talk) 15:38, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Imperial Majesty Cruise Line

message: The warning box in this article caught my attention. There are a number of references on the Internet to questionable business practices of organizations that may have "no legal connection to" this cruise line, but certainly seem to be in a business relationship with it. "Criticism" sections in Wikipedia articles are quite common. Does this article deserve one so that these criticisms can get a fair treatment? --Freeinfo (talk) 05:29, 28 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd say that if you can write a criticism section utilising sources that fill WP:Verifiability and write it in a dispassionate manner, go for it. I believe the warning box was put up due to constant additions of biased and completely unsourced additions. If there is a well-documented problem with the associates of the line, then it should at least be mentioned. Care should be taken so that the "criticism" does not overshadow the other contant of the article. — Kjet (talk · contribs) 11:08, 28 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Criticisms? 
Talk:Charles Friant

message: There exists vintage film of Charles Fraint singing - is it possible to upload this footage?  What are the rules for this?  Please do let me know if I am allowed to do this.  Thank you.Felixthehamster (talk) 10:35, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:RadioJoyAlukkas.com

message: ----
Article created as per WP:ADS to be included in Category:Internet radio. This is not for blatant advertising or promoting the radio. This radio is widely getting more media attention WP:NOTE. Please check the references (mentioned) and a google search also provides sufficient evidences about the service (see this also). This is for entertainment, not any business promotion. Thank you. --Avinesh Jose (talk) 09:37, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
Talk:Southern Unionist

message: "Scalawag" is the more general term and is used for the post 1965 period. Most wartime unionists (but not all) became Scalawags, as did many wartime Confederates.  The article (in sections I deleted) stated that people like General Longstreet--Lee's #2 general--was a "unionist" who supported the Union not the Confederacy!!! What nonsense. Longsreet was a leading Scalawag and leading Confederate both.  The term "scalawag" is standard in scholarly and popular books and reference books, and "Southern unionist" is confined to wartime.Rjensen (talk) 09:39, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: How are the terms "Southern Unionist", "Union Loyalist", "Southern Loyalist", and "Lincoln Loyalists" distinguished from each other?  In my reading I have found they all seem to be used very similarly.  I was considering creating a new article "Loyalist (American Civil War)", until I saw this article.  Should they be one article, or do they warrant separate articles?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by MissionInn.Jim (talk • contribs) 21:56, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Related Terms 

message: The opening sentence states that "Southern Unionists were people living in the Southern United States", but the article on the Southern United States is imprecise as to which states are included.  Is it accurate to say that "Southern Unioinists" lived in the Confederate States of America?  If so, I propose using "Confederate States of America" rather than "Southern United States" to more precisely identify who the Southern Unionists were.  Another possibility is to say they lived in one of the 11 secessioninst states.  Please see the entry I placed on the Loyalist (disambiguation) page. --MissionInn.Jim (talk) 22:23, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Residency of Southern Unionists 

message: I suggest that we find, list, and put all the Southern Unionists in a category to see who was who during the Civil War, which side they were on, and where they lived. Like Sam Houston, Gen. George Thomas, Adm. David Farragut, and Maj. Robertson. You see what I mean? 24.250.59.162 (talk) 19:20, 7 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Category and lists 

message: Kentucky geographically is and was a Southern State. The Union soldiers from Kentucky called themselves Southern Unionist. They never considered themselves as Northerners, but Unionist. Their diaries and letters makes this very clear. They did not like or use the term "Yankee" for themselves. 67.140.144.83 (talk) 16:18, 26 October 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Kentucky were Southern Unionist 

message: Is the non-inclusion of George Henry Thomas the most glaring omission?
Montalban (talk) 13:23, 20 June 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Added.  Bms4880 (talk) 20:24, 20 June 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  George Henry Thomas
Talk:Premier Cruise Lines

message: WTF?! I tried revert a simple edit and it wiped out the article. Thanks to Nv8200p for restoring it. -- Donald Albury 14:23, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  revert 

message: The ships were prefixed by Premier as "StarShip" or "Star/Ship", not "Steam Ship". Neither the StarShip Atlantic nor StarShip Majestic were Steam Ships (SS); they were Motor Vessels (MV). Dstroma (talk) 23:58, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  StarShip / Steam Ship 

message: A likely sockpuppet (see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Premier Cruises) continues to re-insert unsourced content that fails WP:NPOV.  While the article does need updating, promotional wording and removal of valid refs is not the right way to go about it.  The changes should be discussed here at this point, so the community can weigh-in on them.  Note: the sock has already had on account blocked for his actions. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 18:47, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  revised content
Talk:Characters in Hamlet

message: With regard to some of the {cn}s on this page, check out footnote 1. AndyJones (talk) 14:05, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks. They are partly there as a naide-memoire to meself. There's some good material in Arden that I'll probably include in due course. --ROGER DAVIES talk 14:35, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Q1 Names 

message: Just thought I'd mention him. AndyJones (talk) 13:51, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Fortinbras]] 

message: I've not made this edit, bcause I see the comment: ===Barnardo and Francisco=== . However it seems to me there are a few errors in this bit, most significantly that Francisco is absent when the sentries tell Horatio about the Ghost. "He is the first sees the ghost" (sic) of Marcellus strikes me as misleading too since, for all we know, Barnardo may have seen him first on previous occasions.
:Marcellus, Barnardo and Francisco are sentries at Elsinore. Francisco gives up his watch to Barnardo in the opening lines of the play, and it is Barnardo and Marcellus, who first alert Horatio to the appearance of King Hamlet's Ghost.Hamlet 1.1 & 1.2 Marcellus is the most prominent of the three. Hamlet 1.1, 1.2 & 1.4 The role was played by Anthony Quayle in Olivier's version and by Jack Lemmon in Branagh's.
Re the above.  I have amended this section of the main article slightly.  Let me know if there is anything else that needs changing.  The Please do not edit refers to the name of the section, not the contents of it--TimothyJacobson (talk) 02:26, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I notice smatprt has removed the comment about "Marcellus is the most prominent of the three".  I agree with all the other cuts he made (re the movies etc) but, as per the citation, Marcellus is the one of the three who has the most lines, and appears in the most scenes.  So, unless I hear otherwise within th enext few days, I'll restore that line--TimothyJacobson (talk) 01:26, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Barnardo, Francisco and Marcellus
Talk:Martyn Poliakoff

message: http://royalsociety.org/news/Professor-Martyn-Poliakoff--Foreign-Secretary/
..."responsible for overseeing the Society’s international business."
Final vote will be held on July 11th of this year, but he is the only candidate on the ballot. He will be taking over the responsibility from Professor Lorna Ann Casselton, who has held it since 2006.
--Mooreshire (talk) 17:42, 20 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Prof. Poliakoff to be named new Foreign Secretary for the Royal Society. 

message: I feel like details of his children should not be in this page, since intrusive into their lives.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hughperkins (talk • contribs) 23:51, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Personal Life 