lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Interstate 170 (Maryland)

message: Please see comments left at Talk:Interstate 170 (Maryland)/Comments. --TMF Let's Go Mets - Stats 03:55, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Assessment

message: I reverted the recently added material because it implied that the entire length of the built highway was slated to be demolished.  This is not the case, to the best of my knowledge.  Right now the demolition under way is only affecting the area at the far west of the stretch that has never been open to traffic (replacing it w/a parking lot that will serve the West Baltimore MARC station).  Planners would love to rip the whole thing up but as far as I understand it there are no concrete plans to rip up the stretch that people actually drive on yet. --Jfruh (talk) 15:32, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Again, the entire highway is NOT being removed -- only the stub end that never was used by traffic. See here. --Jfruh (talk) 14:23, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Demolition 

message: I added mention of this nickname for the highway in the lead.  As my edit description says, almost everyone here in Baltimore calls it that, used in news stories, discussions about what to do about it, and colloquial everyday speech, so I believe its mention is very necessary.  —Onore Baka Sama(speak | stalk) 16:20, 4 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Highway to Nowhere
Talk:Enterprise portals

message: I feel the redirection of this page to Enterprise information portal is improper.  EIP is a term used predominately by BEA systems, makers of WebLogic (a brand of portal).  Other similiar portal products use "enterprise portal" or simply "portal".  Cverlo 22:18, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

message: Oh wow, this page is worse than Enterprise information portal.  Have a look over there, maybe we can just replace them into a single page? Jussen 03:54, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Wow, this sucks too
Talk:List of United Kingdom commemorative stamps

message: Looking at the page, I think it needs a bit more detail and the list converted into tables, to make it all more presentable.
I have made a start converting the list into tables.
ColinBoylett 22:23, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Tables needed

message: This page covers almost similar ground to List of British postage stamps. I think this should be merged into that other page. Raichu2 (talk) 01:21, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Merged with List of British postage stamps
Talk:Sunbittern

message: The spelling of the family and genus name is based on Illiger, 1811: Eurypyga. Dumont, in 1821, changed the spelling to Eurypiga, but such "unjustified emendations" are not recognized under the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature. If someone has specific arguments why Illiger's spelling (the original) should not have precedence, then and only then should the alternative spelling be used. If someone knows exactly why the spelling "Eurypigidae" has come into recent use, then maybe that should be included in the article, to prevent future attempts to change the spelling in the article and related pages. If it simply appeared without justification in a published classification (e.g., the Sibley-Monroe list), that alone is not evidence that it is the correct spelling. Dyanega 22:24, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Spelling

message: Why doesn't the article mention the distribution of this bird?76.123.203.164 (talk) 01:17, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Distribution?
Talk:Corieltauvi

message: Inscription evidence discovered about twenty years ago (as mentioned in the article), suggests the correct form of this tribal name is Corieltauvi (currently a redirect). This is now generally accepted and Coritani is only used in older works. The key articles on the subject are Tomlin's 'Roman Leicester, a Corrigendum: For Coritani should we read Corieltauvi?' in Transactions of the Leicester Archaeological & Historical Society 48 and 'Non Coritani sed Corieltauvi' in the Antiquaries' Journal 63 (both 1983) Walgamanus 22:26, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Rather to my surprise, this does seem to be correct. The new discoveries, however, should be the first paragraph of the article. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 22:34, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Page moved, cheers. -GTBacchus(talk) 21:53, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Requested move
Talk:Estadio Olímpico Universitario

message: The information found at The Tragedy of the Tunnel 29 needs a lot of work, but I believe it would make an interesting addition to this article should verifiable references be found to accompany the information.  The The Tragedy of the Tunnel 29 article should then be deleted, concurrent with the merging of its information into this article. --Thisisbossi 22:35, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Merging [[The Tragedy of the Tunnel 29]] into this article

message: The article currently claims that "American architect Frank Lloyd Wright called it "the most important building in the modern America". This needs explaining (it has already caused a problem at the Mexico City page). Why did Wright say that? If the place has architectural merit then the article should explain why. What does the source actually say? It is from a PhD thesis somewhere, so it isn't exactly easy to check (or even verify). Does anyone know? Moonraker12 (talk) 22:22, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dubious
Talk:Small Claims (film)

message: Does "two young mums" refer literally to their being mothers, or is that slang for "professional women" as in the BBC detective shows where they say "yes mum" to the female boss?
Długosz (talk) 16:42, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Not internationally understandable language 

message: I have yet to understand how the title is related to the show.  :) 2600:1700:1480:1030:6D8E:D6FC:E5BD:7DD4 (talk) 22:59, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Show's title
Talk:Paul Sheehan (journalist)

message: A quick search reveals that the para from which this sentence is taken, is lifted entirely from his book publishers' bio of him. Whether it is true or not, and whether it is attributed or not, it's surely not up to encyclopedia standards to just recycle word-for-word commercial bios. And sorry, no, I haven't been bold (read 'interested') enough to just re-write it myself.
(My quick search reveals that Paul Sheehan's work has indeed appeared in the New Yorker: a grand total of once, in February 1996. A 3-page piece on his collection of crack vials. The following link may require subscription: http://archives.newyorker.com/?i=1996-02-12#folio=058). Have my football-playing skills featured on the MCG, if I kicked my ball out there once at the end of a match? 121.44.113.178 (talk) 13:29, 11 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  'His writing has appeared in...'
Talk:Colorado counties

message: The Wikipedia:List guideline recommends that stand-alone list articles be used to display simple lists of information and navigation links to detailed articles.  The guideline recommends against using tables in list articles.  Lists should be kept simple and annotation should generally be limited to Wikipedia:Footnotes.
In 2002, 50 list articles of U.S. counties by state were created to expedite the creation of articles about every county (or county equivalent) in the United States.  These 50 county list articles originally contained nothing more than a simple list of every county in each state (see the original list of counties in Colorado).  Subsequently, some of these county list articles have been embellished beyond usefulness, while others have remained simple functional lists.
I recommend that the list of counties in Colorado be restored to a simple list of Colorado counties (as recommended by the Wikipedia:List guideline), and any further elaboration be placed in the general article Colorado counties.  Your thoughts?  --15:33, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry, that horse left the barn a long time ago. For a "simple list of Colorado counties" see :Category:Colorado counties. Nobody will ever be able to embellish that into mutiple complicated sortable tables of data. – Wbm1058 (talk) 19:19, 25 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Colorado counties]] and the [[list of counties in Colorado]]

message: The two lists are basically the same; the List of counties in Colorado article is just a historic-based list, while the Colorado counties article is a statistical list. Epicgenius(give him tirade • check out damage)  23:16, 24 September 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: See Talk:List of counties in Colorado#Merger proposal. This page ("Colorado counties") is the odd one out; all states have "List of counties in X" pages. —Gordon P. Hemsley→✉ 12:13, 25 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed merge with [[List of counties in Colorado]]
Talk:Hollywood

message: This page has become involved in the content disputes that are in progress at Runaway production, and Hollywood North. I'm not sure how to handle this, and I'm not willing to tie up a page by perpetuating an edit war. If anyone has any suggestions, please contribute. Thanks. --Ckatzchatspy 22:46, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: One thing's for sure: citations should never be put on disambiguation pages. It just looks bizarre. Carson 06:25, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've made a huge cleanup to this page. Possibly sufficient to remove the cleanup tag? --Quiddity 20:30, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  This page 

message: *  Hollywood was incorporated as a municipality in 1903. Among the town ordinances was one prohibiting the sale of liquor except by pharmacists and one outlawing the driving of cattle through the streets in herds of more than two hundred. In 1904, a new trolley car track running from Los Angeles to Hollywood up Prospect Avenue was opened. The system was called "the Hollywood Boulevard." It cut travel time to and from Los Angeles drastically.
69420^
*  By 1910, because of an ongoing struggle to secure an adequate water supply, the townsmen voted for Hollywood to be annexed into the City of Los Angeles, as the water system of the growing city had opened the Los Angeles Aqueduct and was piping water down from the Owens River in the Owens Valley. Another reason for the vote was that Hollywood could have access to drainage through Los Angeles´ sewer system.
*  With annexation, the name of Prospect Avenue was changed to Hollywood Boulevard and all the street numbers in the new district changed.  For example, 100 Prospect Avenue, at Vermont Avenue, became 6400 Hollywood Boulevard; and 100 Cahuenga Boulevard, at Hollywood Boulevard, changed to 1700 Cahuenga Boulevard.
*  The Hollywood District (originally Hollyrood, after the Scottish Holyrood) is a neighborhood of NE Portland, Oregon renamed for its historic 1920s era Hollywood Theatre.
I do, hereby, demand some  reason,  purpose,  justification,  logic, why this title should be assigned to some whatever in  Oregon.
I can justify why it should not be:
* It is not the oldest.
* It is not the most well known.
 hopiakuta  Please do  sign  your  signature  on your  message.  %7e%7e   Thank You. - 18:40, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[ Hollywood District ]] 

message: An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect :Hollywood Goes Green and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 March 20#Hollywood Goes Green until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.  Plantdrew (talk) 20:38, 20 March 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Hollywood Goes Green" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]] 
Talk:Gyula Y. Katona

message: I think it's worth questioning whether Gyula Y. is sufficiently notable for a WP page; it's not yet as clear-cut as it is for his father Gyula O. H. Katona. So let me explain my reasoning for creating the page:
# He has a reasonable number of reasonably-well-cited research publications. Perhaps not enough yet to pass WP:PROF but enough that one can call him a successful mathematician.
# His three textbook publications are to my mind an unusually large number, enough (together with the research) that I think he does pass WP:PROF.
# Being part of a successful parent-child mathematician team (as with, say, the Bernoullis, or the Königs, or the Kuperbergs) is I think inherently notable.
# The main reason I added him: having two Hungarian combinatorialists named Gyula Katona is very confusing. Enough so that I got information from the two of them mixed up when trying to create the page that ended up describing his father. I think having separate WP pages on both of them can serve a useful encyclopedic purpose, in clarifying the situation and thereby helping others avoid the same confusion.
—David Eppstein 22:51, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Notability
Talk:Houhai

message: This page should be merged with Shichahai, which is the other name of Houhai.
:I disagree. Houhai and Shichahai are not synonymous. Shichaihai is a area consisting of several lakes, of which one is possibly Houhai (not according to the article). Poeloq 15:32, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Tony Jones (news journalist)

message: It's nice to have a picture for the article, so I'm going to add a picture from the ABC.net.au website. All I found in the Wikimedia Commons was a bunch of photos of Malaysia by a different guy with the same name. Hopefully, there will be no copyright infringement, there is certainly none intended, just trying to make the article better. Sotuman (talk) 16:55, 25 January 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: If the photograph comes from ABC.net.au website then it is almost certainly copyrighted. Theroadislong (talk) 17:42, 25 January 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Picture

message: It reads like a conservative dredging for evidence. Most of the items are not even political. Views on climate change for example are not political in themselves. Neither are comments about the trial of Pell. The story about Bernadi seems hardly relevant, it's just one of countless skirmishes and events on the show. The Q&A review speaks more about Tony Abbott's views and intent to subvert debate. The paragraph about America makes hardly any sense at all. Religion and philosophy is not political, praise for Hitchens...? It's all such a cherry picked concoction of events in some kind of attempt at making a case. Frional Leeman (talk) 07:06, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Political views section is dubious 

message: Hamish McDonald did not last long at all in the Q&A job. He has since returned to commercial TV. They rotated people for maybe a year and now Stan Grant has taken on Q&A. 2001:8003:A070:7F00:503D:283:EFB4:DB9C (talk) 10:36, 6 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Outdated
Talk:Sundance Kid

message: I don't think the reference given for the speculation that Sundance lived until 1936 is credible. Janemansfield74 (talk) 04:52, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: "after Cassidy was released from prisonn". Cassidy. --Ian Dalziel (talk) 21:37, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: New to sections?

message: Erm...Wouldn't his verified involvement in shootouts be known, having been verified, while his involvement in other shootouts be unknown?  Reluctant to touch the sentence myself, since I'm not completely positive that the intent is to say "it is unknown what other shootouts he was involved in." 76.119.235.42 (talk) 22:06, 30 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  "his verified involvement in shootouts is unknown"? 

message: Josiah's (born Jeseiah) father was Conrad Langenbach from Germany, born 1755, who came to the U.S. as indentured servant.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2003:C0:DF11:DD00:2C0D:3B5F:39D9:73AB (talk) 09:01, 27 June 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Longabaugh 

message: I added the phrase "most historians believe" to the passage about their death in Bolivia, because it is popularly disputed and not conclusively proven. This should probably be rewritten to make it a little clearer that most actual historians think it unlikely that it wasn't those two, while still mentioning the dispute, given how many people believe it. Not really sure how to write such a thing though Jonathan FarnhamJ 17:45, 25 July 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: I think we really need to understand that most of what we know about Butch and Sundance comes from a movie, really well scripted by William Goldman who won an Oscar for it, and that many have since romanticized the lives of Butch/Sundance, including that they actually escaped justice to live on incognito, as many would like to fantasize because they love stories of immortalized men who "beat the system." look, it's a great movie, one of my favorites, but ... it's a movie. soibangla (talk) 09:31, 27 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title: Disputed death
Talk:Benny's Video

message: So far, this article is in the midst of development. The analysis is original work, as is the plot summary.
Tgkohn 22:59, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

message: The plot section makes no sense and appears to be incomplete.  The first paragraph is barely readable and the second paragraph starts randomly mentioning a dead body which had not been described earlier.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.161.215.147 (talk) 01:59, 14 February 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Because of the nonsensical plot, I reverted the page to a lengthy (but sensible) version. Feel free to shorten it, but let's not make it impossible to understand.73.135.55.13 (talk) 22:52, 10 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Plot Section 

message: I removed the analysis section as it came off to me as a personal essay. If there is to be such a section, it should be sourced by reviews or published essays.--CyberGhostface (talk) 03:44, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Analysis 

message: Moved from the article to here. Maybe some links can supply RS for the article: Lugnuts (talk) 13:06, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Further reading
Talk:A*mazing

message: This should still be a start class as the coverage is not broad yet.  The coverage is very much on what you would have seen on the show, but very little about its production, people involved, reasons for creation or demise, what time slot and stations was it on, was it every shown outside Australia?  Also the references are very light on.  IMDB is not very authoriative,  so you should be able to find some better references to prove the show existed, or to confirm the details. Graeme Bartlett 02:31, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: How about newspapers from the period?  Or the Grundy web site? Without a reliable reference it could be proposed for deletion. Graeme Bartlett 21:35, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: rating

message: http://www.acma.gov.au/webwr/aba/tv/content/requirements/australian/documents/compl_00.pdf
According to the Australian Communications & Media Authority, they're Nine seasons of this show. Did they make more than one season per year? MrTwig (talk) 10:19, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Nine seasons

message: Tetris Attack was one of the games that is not listed, but I don’t feel like I should make the edit right now. 159.196.225.230 (talk) 07:42, 27 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tetris Attack was featured amongst the games
Talk:Military Order of Saint James of the Sword

message: You moved this page without consensus. In English, this is the Order of Saint James of the Sword. I don't care what it's called in the native Portuguese. This is English-language Wikipedia. Please go to WP:RM#TR to have this moved back. Chris Troutman (talk) 04:21, 24 December 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Your concept is wrong. There is no consensus as you're the only editor that thought moving the page was a good idea. This is English-language Wikipedia and the source material (in English) doesn't use the term Santiago. Because of you an admin will have to make the move. You can request it at WP:RM. Chris Troutman (talk) 04:51, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

text: That's not a bad idea. It's insufficiently referenced and needs work. The difference is, I'd post on the talk page first to ask if anyone has a problem with moving it. Because this article exists we'd have to decide what name would be best. Again, this is based on the source material and I haven't read the material because the citations are so few. I'd have to do research. Anyway, I hope you've learned a lesson about WP:BRD. Chris Troutman (talk) 16:01, 24 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Page move against consensus 

message: :Order of Santiago of the Sword →  – Because my concept is wrong,there is no consensus and this is English-language and source material (in English) doesn't use the term Santiago wikipedia. Torontino (talk) 05:16, 24 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 24 December 2016
Talk:Biography (TV program)

message: Provided ratings for article.  Basics seem to be covered to raise it from stub to start class.  Longevity and breadth of program seem to warrant mid-level importance, but feel free to change. JimVC3 (talk) 00:10, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Assessment Ratings 

message: There is a clip from the Pope Pius XII biography, which is apparently part of the early 1960s series hosted by Mike Wallace.  My music web site already had a from-memory arrangement of that Biography theme.  But who are the people in the display at the start of the show?  I think I know who 4 of those 6 are:
Top, from left: FDR, Babe Ruth, Winston Churchill
Bottom, from left: unknown man, Albert Einstein, unknown woman  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.63.16.82 (talk) 17:09, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: IT's def Gandhi, but I'm unsure about the Garbo one. It's not a great likeness. 73.175.166.88 (talk) 00:09, 28 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  new Youtube posting, apparently prompted by death of Mike Wallace 

message: Years and channels jump around a bit in the article.
Infobox shows "A&E (1987-2006, 2017-)  Bio Channel/FYI (2006-)"
Since A&E created The Biography Channel in 1999, wouldn't this series have moved to its namesake channel in 1999? They may have kept showing on A&E, but would expect the "home" channel would be its namesake channel.
Also, article shows conflicting information for the original run, giving both "1961-1964" and "1961-1963". Help! Jmg38 (talk) 04:14, 25 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Which channel? Which years? 

message: Any suggestions for how this article can be improved? Levivich (talk) 23:59, 20 November 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ways to improve this article? 

message: I didn't know such a template existed. 9999% of the time, citations go begging. Anyway, I don't think 48 cites is too much or otherwise of concern so I'm deleting the template. Allreet (talk) 14:20, 3 March 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Excessive citations...removing template
Talk:Fitzsimons Army Medical Center

message: Does anyone rember the fresh air treatment of the people with TB at the hospital in the summer of 1950? I recieved treatment for an eye problem at the hospital at that time. Up on the roof they used to place the recovering personel with lung problems on streachers and prop them upside down to drain the lungs. I have tole several people about this but as uet noone believes me. Can anyone help with any information or if they observed this as I did. JB. (jburch1828@aol.com)  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.190.130.114 (talk) 02:23, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Freah Air Treatment 

message: Does anyone know if patient's records were taken anywhere and saved, or were they just thrown away or burned? Perhaps names of Administrators, or someone, around time of closure could be helpful? UnderEducatedGeezer (talk) 00:32, 16 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Were patient's records retained anywhere?
Talk:Lake Bangweulu

message: Lake and swamps form one system physically, ecologically and in the eyes of the inhabitants. I have therefore copied the information from the Bangweulu Wetlands page here under the heading Bangweulu Swamps, which is the name in widest circulation (in the plural form not singular 'swamp'), and I've asked the administrator for a redirect from that page to here.Rexparry sydney 23:24, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Lake Bangweulu and Bangweulu Swamps are one system