lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Light Square

message: The current page names are:
;Adelaide Squares
*Victoria Square, Adelaide - Victoria Square is a dab page
*Light Square, Adelaide - move to Light Square
*Hindmarsh Square
*Hurtle Square, Adelaide - Hurtle Square is a redirect
*Whitmore Square, Adelaide - move to Whitmore Square
*Wellington Square, North Adelaide - Wellington Square is a dab page
;Adelaide Parks - refer to Adelaide Park Lands#Parks
*10: Park 10
*12: University Oval (Park 12), Adelaide - There is considerably more in Park 12 than University Oval
*13: Rundle Park 
*14: Rymill Park 
*16: Victoria Park, Adelaide - Victoria Park is a dab page
*26: Adelaide Oval - There is considerably more in Park 26 than Adelaide Oval
*27: Bonython Park - There is more in Park 27 than Bonython Park
*29: Brougham Place, North Adelaide (Park 29 is actually "Brougham Gardens" not "Broughham Place" - Both Brougham Gardens and Brougham Place are red links 
Personal opinion: It's a bit of a mess, isn't it! Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 12:06, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: For those interested,  relevant categories are :Category:Parks in Adelaide and :Category:Squares in Adelaide. Beware that streets open up a whole other issue, for every Australian city. This again emphasises the importance of forming a broader consensus for local articles. So, I propose terminating this discussion and reopening one at WP:AWNB to settle the matter. — cj | talk 14:28, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't see why we need to. This RM discussion should come to a conclusion based on the arguments made here that are supported by policy. Moving discussion to a centralised place, such as AWNB is a recipe for having the discussion diluted and dragged in a million different directions, the almost certain impossibility to come to a "consensus" that will satisfy everybody and the subsequent placement of the subject on the back-burner. RM discussions are much more likely to focus on the specific issues at hand, draw a more diverse set of views (it's the same old people at AWNB - I know, I am one!) and in time a trend at RM towards one preference or the other will become clear. Yes, using repeated RM discussions to come to a consensus will lead to some instability and (horrors!) some temporary loss of local consistency. But we are not consistent now - some classes of article are mandatorily disambiguated, others aren't and no real rationale for determining which method should be used has ever been articulated. Also, by allowing the guideline to reflect the (evolving) common practice as determined through RM rather than through a centralised discussion determining a statute-like decision, there is more chance that any consensus coming out of the RM process will have broad-based and long term support. -- Mattinbgn (talk) 22:58, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with Mattinbgn. Pdfpdf (talk) 05:19, 13 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: stocktake
Talk:Levallois-Perret

message: I've added the official blazon and the "logo" of the city, i've sent a mail to clarify their copyright status.
FiP Как вы думаете? 08:43, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The colours in the text did not match those in the image so I have amended them.----Felix Folio Secundus (talk) 08:52, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Blazon and Logo
Talk:Richmond High School (Richmond, California)

message: can somebody put in an image of the school?Cholga 00:55, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: image

message: the article still has structural and formating and gramitical and spelling errors, more bodty would be nice, poorly refernces, citations needed, correcrt citation for ==References=== section reference.Cholga 00:55, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: cleanup and copyedit

message: can somebody add more content to this article?Cholga 00:55, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: expansion

message: I have changed the importance rating from High to Mid, as the Richmond article better meets the Mid criteria of "Adds further depth, but not vital to encyclopedia", than the High criteria "Very much needed, even vital". -- Lissoy 20:50, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Importance assessment

message: I removed that because the sentence is highly POV.  saying it garners national attention from a single link by cnn is innacurate. Can't prove it has gained national attention with a single link  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pattsyaros (talk • contribs) 20:20, 2 November 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Added media since these are not professional opinions of actual psychologists rather members of the media who really have no business interpreting the bystander effect.Pattsyaros (talk) 21:00, 2 November 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: professionals have said it is possibly bystander effect.   its in the linked-to article   Richmondian (talk) 16:11, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: bystander effect

message: Aside from making grammar and tone changes, I've cleaned up this article of original research claims without citations and dead links. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 )  00:21, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copyeditor passing by
Talk:Eyesburn

message: There is no Vukasin Markovic in the member list, but when I go to "edit page" link, there he is, in the source... What's going on?
edit: Now I have fixed that :) 
AvramYU 09:02, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  One member missing 

message: If anyone wishes to improve this article, I suggest looking at the Pink Floyd featured article for a pretty good guideline for how to model this article. // Laughing Man 19:58, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Improvements 

message: reworking images... .maybe not fair to highlight the one album (most poorly rated), instead of other more notable ones.  So instead, moved down the logo and made it a little bigger.   Article flows nicer now I think. // laughing man 16:49, 25 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  images 
Talk:Zawisza the Black

message: Zawisza Czarny - he was probably known under another (German or Latin) name.
Xx236 09:31, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Might be. Any details? //Halibutt 10:48, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Alternate names

message: I am going to remove and/or de-focus the silly POV warring over ethnicities. The primary source cited by Matthead is certainly insufficient, by itself, to create any POV issue here or justify doubts about calling him a Pole, pure and simple. It's a catalogue of noble families of Poland, which merely claims that the family as a whole (the Sulima "genus") had some ultimate German background. But even if true, this might well have been centuries and multiple generations remote from this individual. Indeed, this page suggests that (according to one mid-19th-century heraldist), the coat of arms was "brought to Poland from Germany in 935[!] from the famed family of the Counts of Solms". (Although I doubt that dating, because that family is attested in Germany itself only from c.1100. Anyway, there are certainly more reliable sources out there about the history of that family.) In any case, I see no indication that any German connection was still relevant for the self-identification of this individual. Absent any findings in reliable secondary sources to the contrary, the guy is a Pole and his ethnicity is simply a non-issue. The remark in the Dlugosz catalogue might be relevant to an article about his family; I see no reason why we would even need to mention it here. Fut.Perf. ☼ 11:14, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Obsessive ethnicity POV-warring, again 

message: by his grandmother he was a Italian from Genua, but by his grant-grandmother he was a German, by his 5th grant-grandfather he was the prince of Mazovia Poland, in other words he was the grand-grand-grand-grandson of Kazimirus the Prince of Mazovia.Finkpal;  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Finkpal (talk • contribs) 15:29, 16 October 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  all depend
Talk:Foramen cecum (frontal bone)

message: Gray's lists it as Foramen cæcum, but several sites and articles refer to it as Foramen cecum. We'll need to agree on a general spelling... --Marcus 09:35, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Also, there are various types of foramina cæcum (e.g. f. caecum medullae oblongatae/linguae), would it be a good idea to incorporate all of them or just f. caecum ossis frontalis? (see infobox) --Marcus 19:36, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't have an opinion on the first point, but for the second one, I think it would be better for them to be on separate pages, moved Foramen cecum to Foramen cecum (frontal bone), and set up a new page at Foramen cecum to serve as disambiguation. (I'm curious, though, why these structures all have the same name. It appears that "cecum" comes from the Latin "caecus" for blind, so perhaps these were all "blind holes", that early anatomists couldn't clearly define.) --Arcadian 20:22, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Cecum or Cæcum?
Talk:For Whom the Bell Tolls (film)

message: *This was Ingrid Bergman's first technicolor film.
*Hemingway greatly disliked the film, due to the removal of the book's political content.
*Hemingway handpicked Cooper and Bergman for their roles.
*The movie is featured in the Star Trek: Enterprise episode Dear Doctor.
*Now, rights are held by Universal Pictures.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.61.174.35 (talk) 21:08, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Trivia

message: I'd think an Academy Award-winning film (and top film for the year) would merit more than a one sentence description of the plot. I'd add in a description from the novel entry but I'm sure that Hollywood changed aspects of the storyline. I'm going to add the plot summary from IMBd but it's not great and if any readers have actually seen this film, I'm sure you could improve upon it. 69.125.134.86 (talk) 20:05, 4 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Elaboration, anyone? 

message: they are mentioned in the book but not the movie, IMO this has to be edited out  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Greece666 (talk • contribs) 01:12, 8 September 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Falangists
Talk:Baltimore Convention Center

message: This page contains a copyrighted image from Google Earth (:Image:BaltimoreConventionCenter.jpg) which has been put up for deletion (screenshots of Google Maps/Google Earth aren't fair use). A new image will be needed. Zetawoof(ζ) 09:43, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
Talk:Cane Toads: An Unnatural History

message: I have seen part of the movie. Is it supposed to be hilarious? Does anybody have any information on what the producers intended?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tegrofi (talk • contribs) 21:50, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Humor 

message: Lots of apparently personal opinions in this article that reads more like a term paper or film review than an encyclopedic account of the film. The reference to other films by the director is and style of humor in The Office is pure opinion, off topic, and original synthesis or original research.  --Animalparty-- (talk) 19:21, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  multiple issues
Talk:Just-noticeable difference

message: We are looking for a scheme of the JND of Weber-Fechner. The explanation are very weel but a scheme will help all students or people to understand better, i think!
:I think this is a British English-American English problem for me, but what exactly do you mean by "the scheme of the JND of Weber-Fechner? SJS1971 12:54, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think he wants an example.--Filll 12:59, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

text: How about this for an example and reference on JND? http://webphysics.davidson.edu/faculty/dmb/soundRM/jnd/jnd.htmlhttp://webphysics.davidson.edu/faculty/dmb/soundRM/jnd/jnd.html - Cheers Mark Vincent Andmark (talk) 13:16, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Scheme

message: I think there is a problem with one of the references:
Booth, D.A., & Freeman, R.P.J. (1973). Discriminative measurement of feature integration. Acta Psychologica (Amsterdam).
I couldn't find this paper but I found this one:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0001-6918(93)90068-3 -Hadarl (talk) 20:42, 14 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Problematic reference
Talk:Stakeout (1987 film)

message: I am looking for the address of director Jim Kouf. Who can help me?
Bernie 09:57, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Jim Kouf address 
Talk:Abu Bakr ibn Umar

message: We will need to see the actual reference where it details his death. This sloppy unknown source is part of the problem for serious history seekers. I have just search Amazon all over the place and cannot find anything that say he was killed by a Serer king. Per R.S. and WP:SET, if someone as critical as Abu Bakr was killed then for the sake of history we will need to see more than an obscure source I cannot, or anyone cannot check.While it is not critical per policy WP:SOURCEACCESSthat I check it. I think for this BIG CLAIM we need the editor to do a R.S and verify its reliability. esp when i should see other mainstream accounts of the specifics of his death. In plain language why is only these sources provided saying this and others not? --Halqh حَلَقَة הלכהሐላቃህ (talk) 12:36, 20 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: In addition to the sources I previously cited in the Serer people article, here you can find relevant links will come back later:
*1.
*2. 
*3.
Amazon: (Gravrand) but not available.
*
*
There are so many sources.  This article is missing many issues. Will be back for for more.
Tamsier (talk) 14:10, 20 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Mr French Speaker, can you only put ref in English. God knows what they are saying in French.I want to see the actual text, even if you copy and paste it I will trust it.--Halqh حَلَقَة הלכהሐላቃህ (talk) 14:18, 20 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I am not being picky but i take African history as serious as White people take European History. As mentioned on the Almoravid page it would be good to know the primary sources of these source, (as a general interest).--Halqh حَلَقَة הלכהሐላቃህ (talk) 16:24, 20 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Death of Abu-Bakr 

message: If you do a quick internet search for Abu Bakr ibn Umar, you will find a more complete version of the picture that is currently in this article.  The full picture shows a seated person and on many websites the seated person is said to be Mansa Musa of Mali.  Some websites say that Abu Bakr is going to meet Mansa Musa.  The problem is Abu Bakr ibn Umar lived from 1056 to 1087 and Mansa Musa lived from 1280 to 1337.  Therefore, Abu Bakr ibn Umar could not have possibly rode to meet Mansa Musa. 
http://files.abovetopsecret.com/files/img/hu51929acb.jpg
Please review and provide your feedbackRod (talk) 15:22, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I have looked into this and that is why the caption says 'Possible' this debate came up before on the page Moors. I personally know it is not Ibn Umar but many RS say "could be"--Inayity (talk) 18:50, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Picture of Abu-Bakr near the lead 

message: Zenati-sanhaji (talk) 20:16, 7 June 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 00:47, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 7 June 2021
Talk:Portunus

message: I've created a disambiguation page for Lemaître, but the person this page wants to link to is probably not on it yet. Could someone add him? Piet 09:58, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Lemaître

message: I created an article for Portunus haanii, but it is not in the table of extant species in this article.  I'm not sure if it is a synonym of one of the existing listings or if it should be added to the list.  Any suggestions?  Deli nk (talk) 13:32, 1 April 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: This reference seems to suggest that P. petreus and P. haani (with only one 'i') are the same.  Deli nk (talk) 13:47, 1 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Portunus haanii
Talk:Magnificent Obsession (1954 film)

message: I am not surprised that Finley Peter Dunne wasn't credited for his work on this film, since he died in 1936. Could it be Dominick Dunne? I'll see what I can find out. Tex 16:08, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is it Dunne yet? 

message: Where it says:
Helen Phillips as Jane Wyman
etc.
Shouldn't it say 
Jane Wyman as Helen Phillips
or perhaps
Helen Phillips played by Jane Wyman
??? Is it a literal translation from some language other than English???
Ggeller (talk) 20:26, 9 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  What is with the Cast section? 

message: Hi! I'm trying to locate the Universal Studios Daily Minutes cited throughout the article's Production section (Reference # 3-9). Does anyone know what repository or database the author(s) used? I haven't been able to find any mention of the Daily Minutes outside this Magnificent Obsession entry. Any help would be most appreciated! Myles Mikulic (talk) 22:51, 18 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Universal Studios Daily Minutes
Talk:Pockets of resistance/Archive 1

message: O.k. I did mention that I had no idea how to categorize this document, but somehow 'United States military stub' just doesn't cut it.
Sfacets 10:02, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

message: The article starts by saying the term has been used in regard to the Iraq War, but there seems to be nothing about this in the article except the CNN link. Either the introduction should be changed (is the Iraq usage really of primary significance?) or the claim should be supported. -- Dhartung | Talk 06:51, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I would agree that the article needs work. Several days ago, I saw it on AfD and it consisted of the one-sentence lead (regarding the Iraq war) plus the CNN link. Much of what you see here was slapped together in the next 33 minutes, from my fading memory of a college class on the European theater of World War II. Shibumi2 appears to be an expert on the Pacific theater, and perhaps experts on other wars where "pockets of resistance" appeared would like to get involved. Anyway, it's wonderful that it got "DYK" recognition; and perhaps it may now get some attention from such experts. Dino 17:52, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I voted against it in the AFD, to be honest -- I don't feel it's well defined or notable enough of a term, especially given the salients etc. article we already have. It's certainly not as notable a term of art in Iraq as e.g. "dead-enders". It's also being used in quite different ways as a guerrilla insurgency has little tactical relationship to encircled infantry. (One could potentially write an entire essay on what this says about the Pentagon's approach vis-a-vis "fighting the last war" etc.!) Anyway, I'm inclined to remove the Iraq reference if the article isn't going to go into detail about it. --Dhartung | Talk 22:11, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Iraq?
Talk:Salizhan Sharipov

message: "He is also notable for having a prominant unibrow."
--How exactly is that notable? It's not like it's an accomplishment or something.
Anarchonihilist 22:56, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unibrow 

message: In the lead, he is described as an ethnic Uzbek, but in the section "Personal life", it is claimed that he is an ethnic Uyghur. If someone who is knowledgeable enough could look into that!  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.100.25.209 (talk) 12:20, 8 September 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Uzbek or Uyghur? 

message: The cited bibliography [1] does not contain any information regarding his ethnicity. Thus, it can not be said that he is Uzbek. My suggestion is to leave it blank until clear evidence provided. سادىق سېتىنىياز (talk) 17:06, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  No enough information to confirm he is Uzbek
Talk:Momzer

message: I am creating a stub. It is my hope that someone who is knowledgeable about Hebrew and the Talmud will contribute to this page.  Can you help with the references to tractates in the Talmud that discuss this?  In particluar, I hope that someone can tell the story in the Mishna about how a momzer who is a scholar is to be accorded more respect than a priest.
*Is momzer different from mamzer? --Arvedui 03:15, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
Talk:Durango, Spain

message: I have cleaned a lot this article, removed all the POV sentences and wikified and organized it.
I think it's fairly POV safe now.David 10:28, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: POV

message: Accoring to sources http://enciclopedia.us.es/index.php/Durango_(Vizcaya) and Bombing of Guernica the bombing of Durango was done earlier, but dind't cause MORE damage than the Gernika one, it was less extensive. The casualty number of Gernika is disputed, but is generally considered to be more important.
-------------------------------------
"but is generally considered to be more important."
a POV if ever I saw one... it is considered more important because Picasso painted a picture of the attack... a last minute change of plan from his original choice, for the Paris exhibition.
In fact when Gernika was bombed the civil war was considered by most historians to have been lost... (or won depending on how you look at it) and there is no question locally that more people perished in the Durango Bombing. The reason there was not such extensive damage to buildings in Durango as Gernika is becuase the town market in Durango was held under the extensive portico of the St Maria Church, that was the designated target for the German airforce. The Gernika market was spread out over a wider area. The target on both attacks was the market, the Gernika tree was not even a consideration. Of course if one chooses to evaluate the "sucess" of an attack by the the number of buildings destroyed rather than the people, then it looked worse in Gernika. What should be remembered is that Durango was a totally unexpected attack, Gernika was a surprise but not unexpected. Durango was also pounded by artillery. Durango continues to be the main focal point for anti-spainish resistance in the whole of Euskadi to this day thanks to this, if you don't believe me, check the stats for arrests of activists. -- -- Peta-x (talk) 17:37, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Durango vs. Gernika 

message: During the Spanish Civil War, Miguel Primo de Rivera went to Durango and opened the food market. This would have been rather difficult as he died in 1930!!!
164.11.124.27 (talk) 13:44, 23 December 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Primo de Rivero 

message: Interesting how the Etymology section is compeletely at odds with what the Spanish article [] has to say about it.
What it all seems to boil down to is that nobody really knows where the name comes from.
--GdB (talk) 12:06, 25 June 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Etymology