lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:OllyDbg

message: If you pay for the program you can take the source code, see documentation.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.58.205.98 (talk) 18:10, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

message: The whole section needs a source/citation. In the current state it's just someone's personal beliefs.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Timonczesq (talk • contribs) 17:58, 30 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reverse Engineering 

message: does anyone know about the relationship between ollydbg and immunity debugger, which seems to be a fork?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.244.23.60 (talk) 20:03, 1 July 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Immunity debugger
Talk:Tippe top

message: I added a picture of a tippe top I happen to own, but a nicer tippe top would be preferable.--Gellender 14:44, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: I have read that Landau and other were the first to explain the behaviour of this type of top. could someone please add some more information, im looking but i havent yet found any. i vaguely remember (perhaps from one of feynman's lectures/books) an anecdote about landau and another soviet physicist being intrigued by the tippe top and eventually developing new methods with which to analyse it. so i think this article is of higher importance than is currently stated.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 138.25.80.73 (talk) 12:25, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: The first reference: Bou-Rabee, Nawaf; Jerrold E. Marsden; and Louis A. Romero (2008). "Dissipation-Induced Heteroclinic Orbits in Tippe Tops" is contradictory. A heteroclinic orbit is a trajectory which connects two saddle equilibria. But they speak about only one saddle and a stable equilibrium. John Illado (talk) 13:21, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Has anybody investigated (theoretically or experimentally) the effects of varying the length of the stem, or the amount of truncation of the spherical body, or slight variations from a spherical to an ellipsoidal (prolate or oblate) body shape? It would be interesting to know the parametric limits at which the tippe top inversion no longer occurs, and the top becomes an ordinary one.  Reify-tech (talk) 15:52, 9 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Different design parameters
Talk:Repeatability

message: Currently these definitions can be seen on Wikipedia and to me (as only half-knowledgeable on this subject) they seem very much alike.
Reproducibility is the closeness of the agreement between the results of measurements of the same measurand carried out with same methodology described in the corresponding scientific evidence.
Repeatability is the closeness of the agreement between the results of successive measurements of the same measurand carried out under the same conditions of measurement.
On the Reproducibility page later is specified "Reproducibility is one component of the precision of a measurement or test method. The other component is repeatability which is the degree of agreement of tests or measurements on replicate specimens by the same observer in the same laboratory. Both repeatability and reproducibility are usually reported as a standard deviation. A reproducibility limit is the value below which the difference between two test results obtained under reproducibility conditions may be expected to occur with a probability of approximately 0.95 (95%).[7]"
On the Repeatability page later is specified "An attribute agreement analysis is designed to simultaneously evaluate the impact of repeatability and reproducibility on accuracy. It allows the analyst to examine the responses from multiple reviewers as they look at several scenarios multiple times. It produces statistics that evaluate the ability of the appraisers to agree with themselves (repeatability), with each other (reproducibility), and with a known master or correct value (overall accuracy) for each characteristic – over and over again.[7] --Bernburgerin (talk) 09:33, 19 July 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: What is the difference between Reproducibility and Repeatability?
Talk:South Portland, Maine

message: I've noticed that there is no mention of the Long Creek Youth Development Center (formerly the Maine Youth Center) anywhere in this article. It certainly deserves at least a sentence or two. 
—BMRR (talk) 17:22, 14 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Long Creek Youth Development Center 

message: The 19:12, 22 December 2008 64.135.128.68 version of this article is translated into Chinese Wikipedia.--Wing (talk) 20:06, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Translation into Chinese Wikipedia 

message: The usage and primary topic of South Portland is under discussion, see talk:South Portland -- 70.51.200.96 (talk) 08:16, 6 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: "South Portland"

message: I've archived the talk page of the deleted disambiguation page South Portland (disambiguation), including the WP:RM discussion that led to the deletion, at Talk:South Portland, Maine/Archive 1.--Cúchullain t/c 01:00, 16 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Disambiguation page archives
Talk:Income splitting

message: Please have a citation at each point rather then saying that all the references are listed. The point about unreferenced material is that you don't know where it came from. With this article, all I can see is a mass of text and two links at the bottom. I can't tell what came from where. As such, please put footnotes or something to indicate where the material came from. -- User_talk:I ate jelly -- 14:51, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  regarding references 

message: Very politically biased article, with claims of "rhetoric" and sexism. Think someone should clean this up?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.92.50.181 (talk) 04:51, 13 September 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with this sentiment, and thus obviously not much has changed in the two years since this comment was made. 2620:101:F000:700:8CC2:676B:75D7:35A1 (talk) 17:41, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

text: Still extremely biased. Discussions of the sexist implications of this practice should be included in the article, but not as part of the introduction. It should be a subsection.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.157.35.100 (talk) 23:40, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

text: Why does Wikipedia allow such biased articles to even exist? Shouldn't this article be either cleaned up promptly or be removed entirely? It does not do the reputation of Wikipedia any good to have such a biased article in the database.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.50.181.200 (talk) 17:58, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

text: This article sounds like a feminist rant.  Wxyz773 (talk) 18:21, 12 February 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. I have re-written the introductory paragraph. --D'Andria (talk) 21:47, 10 December 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rather charged language, you think? 

message: There is nothing wrong with the article, "Do egalitarian societies boost fertility?" itself. In fact, it is very good and I am happy that I got the chance to read it. However, it does not back up the claim that "Declining fertility rates in countries that subsidize patriarchal/maternalist marriage and rebounding fertility rates in countries that shift their policies to recognizing equal parental responsibility are also a factor in many countries abandoning fictional income splitting for tax measurement." From the information in the article, one could infer that income splitting props up the traditionalist family structure at the expense of the egalitarian one and delays the u-shaped recovery of fertility rates, but the article does not say anything in particular about countries deciding to abandon income splitting because of its fertility effects nor does it say anything about marriage or taxation.
Commonwealth927 (talk) 23:48, 12 March 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Problems with endnote 4
Talk:J. J. Lankes

message: Thanks for your additions.  However, please try to follow standard formats for links and for citations.  Also, please list references for the information you are adding.  Thanks again.  VirginiaProp 14:53, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Anonymous User
Talk:Perry Ellis International

message: This currently reads very much like a corporate brochure, not an encyclopedia article. The company is clearly notable (unless this is a giant hoax, which i doubt) but the articel needs significant improvement, and a more balanced treatment. DES (talk) 14:57, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: The entire "Company history" section was copied directly from the 'Company history' page on http://www.pery.com/. I have removed the section. This was a large enough copyvio that, per our copyright policy I could have simply deleted the artilce, but I didn't want to do that. However, pleasae understand that it is absolutely not acceptsble to simply paste in copied content in this way. DES (talk) 19:29, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Copyright issues
Talk:Wharfedale

message: , regarding the clarification tag, to me the sentence makes sense, but I appreciate that it may not be as clear as I imagine it to be. Could you please explain what the problem is, so that I can correct it? Thanks and regards. The joy of all things (talk) 07:37, 6 January 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Can't argue with that, you make a compelling point. Have made a change, is that any better? The joy of all things (talk) 14:51, 6 January 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, looks fine :)   ---Ehrenkater (talk) 15:01, 6 January 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Ta - regards. The joy of all things (talk) 15:21, 6 January 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Clarification
Talk:The Enigma of Japanese Power

message: I have removed the following from the "Criticsm" section:
Ōnuma Yasuaki, a University of Tokyo law professor, commented that "It is expected that someone become frustrated if he can't speak Japanese even after staying in Japan for more than decades."
Not only does that quote need some attribution (I can find none), I don't understand what it's suppose to mean or what it contributes to the section.
"In fact, the book was written by the author for a Japanese audience, "Japanese system which does not make people happy" (Ningen wo Kouhukunishinai nihonnno shisutem) became a bestseller in Japan as a critique of Japanese society."
Again, I don't understand what that means. If anyone can clarity the above, please do. 
--gilgongo (talk) 23:07, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Unclear Sentences Removed

message: Somebody added a POV tag to this article in July, but I've removed it since neither they nor anyone else appears to have initiated any discussion on the matter. I don't see any obvious POV issues here. --gilgongo (talk) 20:47, 18 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: POV Tag Removed
Talk:Kirti Mandir, Vadodara

message: I am using the information available on site as a referance on this page. Is it not allowed? How do you say it is copyright information. It is a information available on public site and it a free general knowledge... 
Do you mean, I should not use the same wordings or sentences? Bracknell, 16:15, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Copyright material?
Talk:Thirty-Six Immortals of Poetry

message: Kintō's 36 female poetry immortals is completely wrong. Kintō didn't live to see the Kamakura period, and most of those listed lived before the Kamakura period. This is not a list composed by Kintō. --Pagony (talk) 17:05, 29 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: If columns really are needed, let's at least use the col-begin / col-break / col-end templates, instead of coding ugly tables. —Quasirandom (talk) 20:26, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Formatting 

message: While I like the translation "Thirty-six Poetry Immortals", can we find a reliable source for it? Rokkasen could just as easily be "Six Poetry Immortals", but it isn't. The two references already in the article are both Japanese and so don't provide a justification for the title; the English-language EL specifically says "Thirty-six Immortal Poets". I think the WP:UE and WP:MJ both provide leeway to use an English translation, but preferably one used in reliable sources.
Additionally, on a quick Google search, I found that "Thirty-six Immortals of Poetry" may be a more common name, and "Thirty-six Immortal Poets" more common still. I don't like the latter, since it reverses the adjective-noun dynamic that is present in Japanese (they are not poets who are immortal, their brilliant poetry makes them like Daoist Immortals; they are also the Thirty-six Immortals of Poetry, not thirty-six poets who are among those poets who are immortal), but are we allowed to disregard the following:
"Thirty-six Poetry Immortals" -- 27 on Google Books, 5 on Google Scholar
"Thirty-six Immortals of Poetry" -- 90 on Google Books, 3 on Google Scholar
"Thirty-six Immortal Poets" -- 1,520 on Google Books, 36 on Google Scholar
elvenscout742 (talk) 01:31, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Title 

message: I suggest splitting this article into three - Thirty-six Immortals of Poetry, Thirty-six Female Immortals of Poetry and New Thirty-six Immortals of Poetry, per Spanish or French example. --Teukros (talk) 14:12, 12 January 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Don't like that idea. The later ones are deliberate and obvious allusions to Kinto, and splitting the article would break that. This article should be expanded to cover all of the 三十六歌仙s. Also, did you mean "per Spanish, as opposed to French, example"? Fr.wiki follows the same pattern as en.wiki currently does. Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 16:21, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Splitting suggestion
Talk:ISO/IEC 9126

message: SQuaRE (ISO 25000) is not a tailored view for COTS software but the replacement of ISO 9126. It includes a modified version of 9126. This information can be found in the public accessibe parts of ISO 25000.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.186.209.61 (talk) 21:54, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  SQuaRE 

message: Propose renaming article to new standard ISO/IEC 25010 and restructuring accordingly.David Condrey (talk) 04:29, 23 July 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd oppose this. 9126 is still in use, partly because it has been used so often in the past, partly because 25010 is so much bigger. So information specific to 9126 should be in Wikipedia. Perhaps an article combining information about the two would be a good option. Rp (talk) 08:10, 23 July 2014 (UTC)

text: It would be very useful if Wikipedia could cover the new standard ISO/IEC 25010:2011 - it's now 3 years old, so to have no real information on it is a big oversight. Ianhowlett (talk) 12:37, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

text: Yes, it would be better to rename the article and restructure it or otherwise make a new article for the new standard. The current situation redirecting the new standard to this page is confusing. 192.167.140.20 (talk) 14:20, 11 December 2015 (UTC)

text: Five years on from the above, I feel it is well beyond time to reverse the primary and redirected pages... Andrew D Banks (talk) 12:38, 22 December 2020 (UTC)

text: I suggest we add a new page for the standard ISO/IEC 25010 (already existing in Dutch), and then refer from the ISO 9126 page. Anyone against this? Martin Op 't Land (talk) 12:48, 14 October 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Update to new standard
Talk:Thaumatin

message: The Complete Amino-Acid Sequence of the Sweet Protein Thaumatin I
Ramanuja B. IYENGAR, Petrus SMITS, Frans VAN DER OUDERAA, Hendrik VAN DER WEL, Johan VAN BROUWERSHAVEN, Peter RAVESTEIN, Gerard RICHTERS, Pieter D. VAN WASSENAAR
European Journal of Biochemistry
Volume 96, Issue 1, pages 193–204, May 1979
says The protein consists of a single polypeptide chain of 207 residues.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.224.196.40 (talk) 22:45, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: thaumatin the protein

message: A citation is needed for the claim, that thaumatin is heat- and pH-stable. The german version describes thaumatin as not usable for cooking due to heat instability.--Prunus persica (talk) 14:57, 18 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Heat- and pH-stability
Talk:Rokkasen

message: This is simply a notification that I am endeavoring to expand this article from a stub into a full article. At the time of writing this comment, the article has not been edited in 6 months so I do not believe that another editor will endeavor to do the same in the week or two I take to update it. But I thought it would be prudent to broadcast my intentions and to let it be known that the work in progress will be visible on my sandbox page while I work on it if there is any desire to give feedback. Kurtishanlon (talk) 21:28, 31 January 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: This is an update that I have finished the full article and will now be importing it piece by piece from my sandbox to the article page. Kurtishanlon (talk) 16:24, 20 March 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article expanding
Talk:U.S. Route 6 in Rhode Island

message: I downgraded the article from B to C. The prose needs to be more organized to flow better and needs use additional referencing. The junction list also appears to be incomplete. As such, it is not quite the higher standard of B-Class (i.e. not almost ready for GAN). --LJ (talk) 22:42, 15 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: rating

message: I merged U.S. Route 6A (Rhode Island) into a new section of this article. This is consistent with USRD's Notability Guideline for special routes, as well as the drive to reduce stub articles. US 6A can be split out of this article in the future if reasonably expanded. --LJ (talk) 22:42, 15 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: US 6A merged
Talk:Tables of the mountain peaks of North America

message: I think this should be "moved" to List of Mountain peaks in North America
:The Wikipedia:Lists guidelines recommend that list articles be confined to a single simple list.  This article contains 4 sortable tables and a photo gallery.  --Buaidh 02:57, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: And it's 240k long and kills my connection trying to load - not everyone in the world reads Wikipedia from a T3 connection and this is 7.5 times over the recommended 32k limit - and needs more text (which means more k's). How you do it is up to you - but I'd remove the gallery, flesh out the text some and keep perhaps one or two of the better mountain shots to break up the tables (which are monotonous reading). It all looks great now and with a bit of work this could easily become a featured list. Nice work. Cheers, Paxse 08:57, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

text: This article has been shortened to three tables and 183 kilobytes.  I don't think it would be a good idea to split it up.  What do you think?  --Buaidh (talk) 21:50, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Change suggestion

message: I have shortened this article and moved it to Mountain peaks of North America.
I have also created three new articles:
#Highest mountain peaks of North America
#Most prominent mountain peaks of North America
#Most isolated mountain peaks of North America
--Buaidh (talk) 17:58, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Move
Talk:St Macartan's College

message: The top half of this page is nothing but a one-sided piece of propaganda. It is not impartial, and refers on numerous occasions to itself in the first person. Every sentence is its own piece of manipulated 'information', and there are basic errors on the page, such as the translation of the school motto, 'Fortis et fidelis' being referred to in English as 'Strength and Faith', when it is in fact 'Strong and Faithful', softening the religious insinuations of the original attempted translation. Any attempt to correct this error is immediately met with a change back to the original.
"Our school complements the efforts of parents and parishes in the fostering of a living faith."
Should faith be 'fostered' in a modern culturally diverse school, and which faith is it which is to be fostered? Should students not be educated on the topic of religion and faith, instead of having it implanted upon them? Maybe this is the true goal of the school, but the wording does not do this justice. Above is a rigid statement that does not do the school justice in any form, and possibly makes the positive goals of the school seem less positive than they actually are. Surely the fact that the statement can be construed as being exclusionary is enough to re-phrase it, or at least allow it to be re-phrased?
The academics section could be expanded to do the school justice in terms of results, rankings, and the progress of former students. One wonders why the section reverts to the bare and basic line that currently exists, when the school has much more to offer than that.
The student Council section is an exercise in self-indulgence and stands out to someone who knows the way the council actually operates, and the reason why it is even there.
The sports section is poorly represented as well. It has not even been up-dated to include the MacRory final of 2007.
In my personal view, the top section was written by a teacher in the school, most likely a priest, who has laced it with religious insinuations that poorly represent the school on this site, with the remainder being neglected, when it is in fact much more important in terms of how the school is judged by a reader. Not the most important of matters, but still, the page is poorly formed and yet will not take to alterations. Another example of the stoic attitudes that have done nobody any favours over the years.
___________
That was someone else who didn't sign their name. I have undid the editing the last editor did - please see this page before further vandalisation. Cavanagd 17:08, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Sebastian Bleisch

message: Nowhere in the article does it say that Bleisch is gay, though it's implied.  And there's no reference.  Can someone find such an animal? -- SatyrTN (talk | contribs) 15:31, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I have provided added information now which elucidates this aspect. __meco 16:44, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gay?
Talk:Three-letter abbreviation

message: This page, "Talk:Three-letter abbreviation", should not be used for any further discussion, as the corresponding page is now a redirect.
Previous discussion can also be found at Talk:Three-letter acronym, another talk page corresponding to a redirect page.
Please add any current discussions only to:
* Talk:TLA to discuss the current disambiguation page
* Talk:Three letter acronym to discuss that page and related issues.  PamD 12:14, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

message: So let's see if I've got this right:
* Move "main" page from "Three-letter abbreviation" to "Three letter acronym". 
* Proof-read the new "Three letter acronym" to make sure it reflects the "new reality".
* Change everything (except TLA, tla and Three letter acronym) to have them redirect to "Three letter acronym".
* Add something to Talk:Three letter acronym saying something about how/why things have evolved to the current state of affairs.
* Move the contents of TLA (disambiguation) into TLA, and then change tla and TLA (disambiguation) to redirect to TLA. Change Talk:TLA as appropriate.
Yes? No?
If yes, then is there any reason not to go ahead and do it?
(I believe there exists some sort of "notification" process, but I'm not familiar with it. Are you?)
If no, please enlighten me.
(I'm really disappointed I can't convince you to make TLA the main page, but don't worry, I'm a big boy, I can live with the disappointment. ;-) ) Pdfpdf 09:30, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: When you say "Copy the contents" I hope you mean "Use Move" - that way the history of the page remains accessible, and all this discussion too.  Actually, that said, I'll do it now.  (I have 99 jobs I ought to be doing this morning, but...). PamD 09:42, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

text: It turns out to be non-trivial, because there is edit history on the redirect page.  We need to do it using the "controversial moves" procedure at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requested_moves#Requesting_potentially_controversial_moves and I really ought to be doing other things now so haven't time - I leave it to you, or will have a go later perhaps!  Cheers PamD 09:58, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Shift the "main" page from "Three-letter abbreviation" to "Three letter acronym"