lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Great Seattle Fire

message: The footnotes don't seem to refer anywhere. --Lukobe 05:52, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Never mind, somebody removed them without explaining why. I've restored them. --Lukobe 05:52, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: There is a very circumstantial description of the firefighting efforts in Murray Morgan's Skid Road (1951, 1960, and I believe there was a later edition). Whoever is working on the article might want to get hold of a copy; they'd find a lot to add. - Jmabel | Talk 05:36, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Murray Morgan 

message: James Warren's The Day Seattle Burned is likely the best single recent source for information on the fire and the aftermath.  Information on rebuilding is found in Ochsner and Andersen's book, Distant Corner. Chesterct (talk) 23:28, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sources 

message: Was it really that great?208.119.114.20 (talk) 19:02, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Greatness 

message: Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: https://web.archive.org/web/20080511204619/http://content.lib.washington.edu/extras/seattle-fire.html. Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.)
For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, and, if allowed under fair use, may copy sentences and phrases, provided they are included in quotation marks and referenced properly. The material may also be rewritten, providing it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Therefore, such paraphrased portions must provide their source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you.  Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 12:39, 5 July 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copyright problem removed 

message: In the paragraph Reconstruction and recovery the first paragraph is missing a citation, and I do think there should be at least one in every paragraph. Kikic123 (talk) 15:29, 17 October 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Citation
Talk:Variety Girl

message: DeForest Kelley is not actually even mentioned on the movie poster attached to the article. Does he actually "star" in this film, or just appear in it? Blocsrich (talk) 09:47, 8 April 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Does DeForest Kelley star? 

message: The cameos should be listed in order by last name. in the 21st century listing them by "importance" is ridiculous cos so many in Gen Z have no idea who these people are. sadly enough.
100.15.117.34 (talk) 02:39, 24 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  disorganized
Wikipedia talk:Requests for adminship/BlackJack

message: Edit count as of 22:02, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

message: Candidate - Not answering is highly unlikely to affect your RfA and if you do wish to reply an acceptable answer would be Old enough to be an admin or 0-100 yrs. This question is the subject of much discussion at WT:RFA. --Kind Regards - Heligoland  |  Talk |  Contribs 19:21, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Age question
Talk:Great Fire of New York (1776)

message: This article notes that the British made some efforts to fight the fire.  Has anything been written about what effect this had on the ongoing battle with the Continental forces?  We know Washington escaped, I can't help but wonder if this was a factor.  If so, it would be a welcome addition to this article, which already has a section on the effect on British occupation.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.73.140.230 (talk) 14:08, 31 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Effect on battle 

message: The previous coordinates in this article pointed into what was the water at the time. The tip of Manhattan has grown through landfill in the intervening years. Abductive (reasoning) 15:15, 21 September 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Coordinates 

message: Several citations mention "Chester" without giving any information but the page number. Could it be "hidden" somehow? Can someone provide the reference, or should these be flagged as "citation needed"? Humphrey Tribble (talk) 21:57, 18 August 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Missing Reference to Chester
Talk:Farragut Square

message: I don't get the last sentence.  "a few starlings...but mostly for pigeons."--Patrickneil 22:03, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Starlings?

message: I used to work on Farragut Square, and I've rewritten the sentence on the streets, adding a reference that agrees with my memory of the street names. Doctor Whom 17:15, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Names of streets bordering square
Talk:South East Asia Command

message: This is grossly POV. The Chindits and their commander were and remain highly controversial, with all regular force commanders from Slim on down claiming they were a resource guzzling liability. Some Wingate partisans however considered them superb. Whatever the truth of the matter stating matter-of-factly that: The most successful force was the Chindits under Wingate, is untenable. especially given that the claim is based on some deadlink. I Accordingly delete both the claim and the internet link to nowhere. Soz101 (talk) 22:44, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  The most successful force was the Chindits under Wingate? 

message: This is grossly POV. The Chindits and their commander were and remain highly controversial, with all regular force commanders from Slim on down claiming they were a resource guzzling liability. Some Wingate partisans however considered them superb. Whatever the truth of the matter stating matter-of-factly that: The most successful force was the Chindits under Wingate, is untenable. especially given that the claim is based on some deadlink. I Accordingly delete both the claim and the internet link to nowhere. Soz101 (talk) 22:44, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  The most successful force was the Chindits under Wingate? 
Talk:Binary pulsar

message: The article says: "A binary pulsar is a pulsar with a binary companion, often another pulsar, white dwarf or neutron star." There is only one binary pulsar hose companion is a pulsar. This is from The Universe, on the History Channel. 
141.156.47.30 (talk) 15:03, 31 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: But what is meant is that it is often one of the three.  I'll change the wording.    LouScheffer (talk) 22:12, 31 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article wording
Talk:G41

message: *G41 → Gewehr 41 —(Discuss)—  —Aldis90 22:08, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: I respectfully request permission to create a disambiguation page for "G41" and rename the G41 rifle page "Gewehr 41".  There is an Imperial German torpedo boat SMS G41 and a Royal Navy destroyer HMS Panther (G41) which both have G41 in their names, in addition to the HK G41 rifle discussed previously. I will post this same message on the Talk pages of each of the WikiUsers listed on this discussion page. Pen of bushido 13:56, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Definitely agree with this. --Aldis90  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Aldis90 (talk • contribs) 02:24, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Hearing no dissent I'm moving forward. Pen of bushido 23:00, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Revisit the issue of Disambiguation Page

message: G41 should be a disambig page for Gewehr 41 and the HK G41.
:Hi. I created this article, and I agree. Originally, this redirected to G43. However, anyone who owns/has fired a G41 and a G43, knows that they are completely different guns.  Let's go ahead and move article to Gewehr 41, and add the G41 to the weapons box at the bottom. user:Pzg Ratzinger
::The HK G41 was a project that didn't pan out well.  I don't think there needs to be a disambig page, just a disambig statement for people to go to the HK G41 page (if there is one) if that's what they were looking for.  I'll go ahead and add the disambig statement and create the page now as I see no objection.--Asams10 23:33, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Done.  No need to have a separate, confusing disambig page.--Asams10 23:50, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Disambig page?
Talk:St Mary's Isle Priory

message: I propose moving this page to 'St. Mary's Isle, Galloway'.  The Isle is referenced in USS Ranger (1777) and Elijah Hall, but I don't think it's notable enough for a page all of it's own.  It was also the home of the Earls of Selkirk for some time.  William Lidderdale, who resolved the 1889 Barings crisis, also had family from here - Crosbiesmith 22:12, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: St. Mary's Isle, Galloway
Talk:Boltzmann factor

message: The image is broken.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Falc0n2600 (talk • contribs) 04:11, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

message: I felt the article could do with a little tidy, and I have added a derivation. Brings up the point that there is no page for the Gibbs factor - the "extension" of the B factor.  I decided that the first equation didn't really explain what the Boltzmann factor was, so I included the probability formula. 94.193.2.213 (talk) 03:23, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Derivation added

message: The Boltzmann constant is described as:
:\beta = \frac{1}{k_BT}
whereas Boltzmann's Constant is:
:k_B
This appears to be inconsistent. Unless the first usage is widespread, I would suggest removing it, or at least discussing the discrepency. I am not an expert here, but the places I looked did not use the first form. Drevicko (talk) 10:05, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unclear use of "Boltzamm constant"
Talk:Born rigidity

message: From the Ehrenfest paradox it's clear that this isn't a valid relativistic model of rigidity, but Wikipedia doesn't explain any updated version.  It stands to reason that an object under intense acceleration (as in Ehrenfest's relativistically rotating cylinder) should have some extreme alteration in how its chemical bonds work.  The virtual electrons mediating Coulomb's law can't go back and forth - they have to go back and sideways, forth and sideways to counter the constant acceleration, don't they? Wnt (talk) 17:10, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Updated versions? 

message: I've expanded this article, including a list of possible Born rigid motions as given by Herglotz, Kottler, Lemaitre, etc..--D.H (talk) 14:47, 18 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Expanded
Talk:Bose gas

message: The parameter $\alpha$ is introduced in the formulas and it is stated that it equals 3/2 for a massive Bose gas in a box. However, there is no hint, what this quantity is precisely and what other values it can take etc. --EbbeSand (talk) 14:20, 7 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, there is a hint. Immediately following the introduction of alpha there is a link to the gas in a box article. The derivation of the value 3/2 is given in this article. It is not a simple thing, but it is not hidden or ignored either. PAR (talk) 16:03, 7 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  The value of alpha
Talk:Adam Wiltzie

message: This article survived an Articles for Deletion debate. The discussion can be found here. -Docg 22:18, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Articles for Deletion debate
Talk:Beat (drink)

message: The file :File:Soft Drink.svg, used on this page, has been deleted from Wikimedia Commons and re-uploaded at :File:Soft Drink.svg. It should be reviewed to determine if it is compliant with this project's non-free content policy, or else should be deleted and removed from this page. If no action is taken, it will be deleted after 7 days.  Commons fair use upload bot (talk) 21:39, 27 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fair use candidate from Commons: [[:File:Soft Drink.svg]]
Talk:Deer Island Waste Water Treatment Plant

message: Jardine is not a wastewater treatment plant, it is a drinking water treatment plant.  pretty different in many important ways.
:Jardine doesn't seem related to Deer Island. There is no discussion of the relationship between the two in the footnotes or on the linked-to sites. If that is the case, why randomly link to two articles on something unrelated in Chicago?!--Ami in CH (talk) 15:15, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Comment

message: Seems out of place - this is an article on the waste treatment facility, not the island itself.  Should be in its own article, or at least its own heading  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.197.82.153 (talk) 17:37, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Last Paragraph on History of Deer Island

message: I'm having trouble finding a source that mentions specifically which communities are served by the facility. If anyone knows where to find that information, I think a map would be useful. starsandwhales (talk) 17:18, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Which 43 communities?
Talk:Joe David Brown

message: My grandmother, Addie Ozina Gibson Gourley, lived across the alley from Joe David Brown in East Lake, Birmingha, Alabama.  She baked him hot cookies when he was only a small barefoot dirty little boy.  He loved her; and she him.  Almost all his characters refer to "Addie" or to one of her children, Paul, Jim, Elizabeth, Amy, or my mother, Francis, or to my father's (Paul Gourley) second wife, Effie (See short story written in Saturday Evening Post or Look).  He often referred to Birmingham's Village Creek in which we all played in East Lake and also referred to Barrett Elementary School where we all attended in East Lake.  I wish I could locate more of his short stories.  I have a copy of "Addie Pray."
--------
You might be interested to know that your grandmother's name lives on through the descendants of Joe David Brown.  Two of his granddaughters named their daughters Addie.  It's become one of our family names.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.241.82.132 (talk) 03:48, 19 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Untitled 

message: Is this book his?
http://www.amazon.com/The-Hippies-Joe-David-BROWN/dp/B000E8PR9W
NotYourFathersOldsmobile (talk) 08:20, 7 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Hippies 

message: Plagiarism. The entire plot of Paper Moon was stolen from a 1949 book by Margery Allingham called More work for the undertakers. In the penguin edition, it’s on page 131. The description is of a woman who reads obituary notices and the goes round to the relatives of the dead person to say that they’d commissioned a bible on which money was owing and which was then paid by the surviving relative. This is exactly the plot of paper moon derived from the novel by this guy. 2A00:23C8:8315:F501:3484:6A8E:B0C0:520E (talk) 19:52, 1 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Plagiarism
Talk:Canadian Light Source

message: There are a lot of unsourced statements in this article. There must be a ton of stuff in the scientific literature - will see what I can find.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by MuppetLabTech (talk • contribs) 02:06, 15 July 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Have removed the no citations tag. Have added many citations and will continue to do so. It still needs a fair bit of work but feel that the tag is no longer appropriate MuppetLabTech (talk) 20:06, 15 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unsourced statements 

message: There are a lot of photos on the CLS's official Flickr site - all of them CC-BY-SA. Am raiding them for uploads to the commons and use in this article MuppetLabTech (talk) 18:08, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: The Flickr site is http://www.flickr.com/photos/clsresoff/ btw MuppetLabTech (talk) 18:09, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Photos 

message: ArthurDent 42 121 (talk) 19:54, 12 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  COI disclosure
Talk:Miles Fitzalan-Howard, 17th Duke of Norfolk

message: Article reassessed and graded as start class. --dashiellx (talk) 19:48, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Tag & Assess 2008 
Talk:Carbon detonation

message: Regarding the Robin S edit on 4 May 2007: the edit comment says "comparison with deflagration irrelevant as there is no speed of sound in space to use as a reference point."  This rationale is mistaken; according to the Wikipedia "Speed of sound" article, "sound is a vibration that travels through an elastic medium as a wave."  The medium cited in the Carbon Detonation article is not space; it is the material of which the core of the star is made: mostly carbon in this case.
The article on Deflagration explains that deflagration is combustion propagating subsonically - i.e., slower than kinetic waves would move through the medium (be it star core or terrestrial atmosphere or seawater or whatever), whereas detonation is combustion at supersonic speeds in that medium that "propagates through shock compression."
In other words, carbon detonation is an explosion of the carbon in the star's core, and it wouldn't hurt to explain the "detonation" concept in this Carbon Detonation article.  Memetics (talk) 08:57, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Remark 

message: I'm skeptical about the proposed merge. There is very little here that is not already presented in more detail on the Type Ia supernova article, and the latter is better sourced. A redirect would serve about as well.—RJH (talk) 18:04, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Regarding the proposed merge 

message: Currently the article says 
   If the companion supplies enough matter to the dead star, ...
The term "dead star" isn't defined in the article. I'm not expert here, but I think the author intends it to be a synonym for "white dwarf." In any case, the sentence doesn't read well in its present state. Oaklandguy (talk) 03:29, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  "dead star"?  my guess is, an edit is needed here
Talk:Edward, 2nd Duke of York

message: I have removed this " who was of Jewish descent. Peggy K. Liss, "Isabel the Queen," New York: Oxford University Press, 1992, p. 165; James Reston, Jr. "Dogs of God," New York:  Doubleday, p. 18", referring to Maria de Padilla because her page makes no mention of any Jewish ancestry, and even if she were, thrusting that fact into Edward's page smacks of trying to make a point, not pure encyclopædia-building.  I've put it here, though, in case i am disagreed with. Cheers, Lindsay 23:32, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Ancestry

message: It hardly matters - but in fact no circumstances of his death are given in Shakespeare's play, merely the fact.
Rogersansom (talk) 12:44, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: His death,in Shakespeare

message: 9/10 men-at-arms on the French side, and all of the English, fought on foot.  Therefore, it makes precious little sense to say Edward was unhorsed and unable to stand.  Thoughts?
99.50.119.143 (talk) 18:31, 12 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Description of his death is seriously flawed. 

message: It seems the title of the page should be changed to 'Edward, 2nd Duke of York' or 'Edward of Langley, 2nd Duke of York'.
According to Cokayne in The Complete Peerage, Vol XII, Part II, p. 900, the only support for the modern assertion that Edward was styled 'of Norwich' is found in a French chronicle, and Cokayne suggests that the phrase 'de Norwik' found therein is a corruption or faulty reading of 'Deverwik', the usual French rendering for the phrase 'of York' at the time.
The older edition of the Dictionary of National Biography apparently adopted the reading of this French chronicle, but the revised article in the online ODNB, written by Rosemary Horrox, adopts Cokayne's view. Horrox writes:
::The Monk of Evesham styles him Edward of Langley. The appellation Edward of Norwich (‘de norwik’) is probably a misreading of ‘d'everwick’ (of York), the appellation regularly used during his father's lifetime.
Comments? NinaGreen (talk) 22:19, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Change of page title?
Talk:Portable audio player

message: "MP3 files generally don't have better sound quality: normal compact discs play at 1411kbps, whereas MP3 files can only play at 800kbps."
-lossy compression NEVER has better sound quality, in some rare cases it may have the same quality
-bitrate is not an indicator for quality (compare, for example, ADPCM with MP3)
-max bitrate for mp3 that every device must support according to the standard is 320kbps (see MP3)
I'll try to fix this part, others are encouraged to improve my edits ;) Balou 22:31, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
Talk:The U

message: Why doesn't this automatically direct to Miami Hurricanes football, since it is by far the most popular entity known as "The U," but allow for a link to the disambiguation page? --Mcmachete 22:33, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: "The U" is so general and can used to refer to any university that it would be inappropriate to use it exclusively for one university (let alone one university football program).  While fans and alumni of the Hurricanes may think Miami's football program is the "most popular" use of "the U", Wikipedia reflects the entire world in English.  We might as well have The airport redirect to O'Hare International Airport.  -Acjelen 00:33, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That's ridiculous, but I'll let it go. --Mcmachete 20:54, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Juraj Križanić

message: as of 1/3/09 all dates facts that need to be sourced on this page come from source 2. I'm not sure how often I'm supposed to indicate the source, but if anyone knows how any help would be appreciated.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.7.66.52 (talk) 13:36, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: help with sourcing
Talk:Howard Junior Brown

message: When categorizing this article (You can help!!) I noticed that the text seems to be duplicated from this site. The site is licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License so it shouldn't be an issue but I thought it would be appropriate to give credit where it's due.  The article still needs to be improved and formatted to wikipedia standards and checked for point of view issues. That is all. Stardust8212 01:36, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Text source
Talk:Greatsword

message: Needs more wiki.  Mathiastck 22:40, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

message: Tbh, this should just redirect to Zweihänder. --84.26.78.183 (talk) 14:02, 25 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: "Tbh", you're wrong, as you'd know if you'd bothered to read the whole article.  "Greatsword" is a hazy distinction that includes several different types of swords, including the Zweihander/Bihander.  "Zweihander" is a specific type of Renaissance war sword used to dismantle pike squares, and various ceremonial swords derived from its size and appearance.  Oakeshott, in particular, would completely disagree with you, and would complain that the Zweihander and Longsword should be expunged from the Greatsword article.  Clear your throat elsewhere. 12.233.146.130 (talk) 23:19, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ehm.