lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Von Neumann entropy

message: I think the definition of concavity should include a requirement that \sum_i \lambda_i = 1, but I'm not 100% sure.  See, for example Alfred Wehrl, Reviews of Modern Physics,50,2,1978. Njerseyguy (talk) 05:55, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Of, of course.  Just choose a single non-zero \lambda > 1.  Then it's easy to see that the formula doesn't hold.  I've put in the condition. Njerseyguy (talk) 07:30, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Concavity 

message: The two references I found use ln as the definition, so I made the article consistent with that. However, there is some indication that some authors use base-2 logarithm instead. Someone should confirm that in a reference and then the article can state that both alternatives are in use. --Steve (talk) 20:22, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Base of logarithm 

message: Von Neumann predates Shannon.
Shouldn't we say Shannon entropy is an extension of von Neumann entropy to information theory?
--D昌양 (Talk) 21:02, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Extension to Shannon? 

message: I believe the upper bound for the entropy to be incorrect, it should be in my opinion ln(N) instead of N/e. I have confirmed in another website that it is indeed the case and so I will proceed to change it. I will redact it if I am mistaken. 2001:8A0:FF83:400:4C4D:5949:922C:78B2 (talk) 20:49, 18 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Upper bound of the entropy 

message: The sentence about Kiefer does not seem to accurately reflect what's in the references [9,10] and what's written under the main Wikipedia article about Strong subadditivity of quantum entropy:
"J. Kiefer proved a peripherally related convexity result in 1959, which is a corollary of an operator Schwarz inequality proved by E.H.Lieb and M.B.Ruskai. However, these results are comparatively simple, and the proofs do not use the results of Lieb's 1973 paper on convex and concave trace functionals. It was this paper that provided the mathematical basis of the proof of SSA by Lieb and Ruskai. The extension from a Hilbert space setting to a von Neumann algebra setting, where states are not given by density matrices, was done by Narnhofer and Thirring." Request for correction (talk) 15:28, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Strong subadditivity of quantum entropy
Talk:Wide-angle X-ray scattering

message: What techniques have replaced WAXS?
90.194.203.28 (talk) 10:18, 5 October 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Out of favour for what? 

message: The page is largely incorrect.  But more than that, once corrected it would add little to the short statement on the page "X-ray scattering techniques".  I suggest deletion.
Comments on the content: 
Wide-angle X-ray scattering (WAXS) is often distinguished  from Wide-angle X-ray diffraction (WAXD) in that WAXS is scattering from disordered materials, and WAXD is scattering from crystals.
This article starts by saying 
 "Wide-angle X-ray scattering (WAXS) or wide-angle X-ray diffraction (WAXD)[1] is an X-ray-diffraction[2] technique that is often used to determine the crystalline structure of polymers".
The only references are to X-ray diffraction papers, not scattering.
WAXS is not limited to polymers, it is used to study liquids of all sorts.  The determination of crystalline structure relates to WAXD 
 "Wide-angle X-ray scattering is the same technique as small-angle X-ray scattering (SAXS)"  
this is misleading.  Because the experimental and data analysis techniques are so different they are not the same.   One might as well say it is the same as SANS
 "a somewhat out-of-favor technique for the determination of degree of crystallinity of polymer samples". 
Determination of crystallinity depends on comparing areas of broad (liquid-like) peaks with areas of sharp (crystalline) peaks.  So it could be described using WAXS or WAXD.  The result is simply called 'X-ray crsytallinity' to compare to thermal analysis or density measurement. So not a good example specifically for WAXS
 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Clavipes (talk • contribs) 01:37, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is this page necessary?
Talk:Widom scaling

message: what is \eta and \nu ?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.191.212.224 (talk) 12:16, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

message: Benjamin Widom, yes? The article doesn't say. I have neither expertise nor sources at hand. --Ajm475du (talk) 15:22, 16 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Eponym
Talk:Wiggler (synchrotron)

message: In the diagram the Halbach arrays are aligned so that the strong field side is facing away from the e beam, and the weak field side is facing towards. Is this correct - and if so, why is it like this? 81.145.240.117 07:51, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No, the strong side of the array faces the beam, in the diagram, and that´s what it is supposed to look like. The side on which the poles are closer to another is where the field lines are denser, the strong side. --129.13.72.198 (talk) 16:29, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Question 

message: There is no medium to start lasing, and all radiation is emitted in the same direction of the electron beam anyway! These mirrors in FEL´s appear in many places, but nobody has been able to explain why they´re necessary. --Maxus96 (talk) 11:38, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Paraphrase of Saldin et al, "The Physics of Free Electron Lasers": There are two main types of undulators (and thus wigglers), ones where the electron beam amplifies an external EM signal or those where the radiation comes from the electron beam fluctuations which are then magnified by using mirrors (which also restricts the modes as well). IRWolfie- (talk) 15:33, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why mirrors?
Talk:Black Mama White Mama

message: This needs a total rewrite, it's very much not in a neutral, NPOV, encyclopedic tone... for example:
:"Of course being a Women In Prision flick, we're not 10 minutes into the film before we get at least one good ogle at all the leading ladies naughty bits in a communal shower sequence. Being the troublemakers that they are, Pam and Karen get thrown into The Oven (topless, of course) to sweat out the day under the blazing sun"
Not the right tone at all. Xmoogle (talk) 18:10, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: This article changed enormously in this one edit by an IP. Googling for the text doesn't show it up, but it sure smells of copyvio to me. Anyone have any encyclopedias of exploitation movies on their bookshelves? If so, look up this movie in it. Morenoodles (talk) 08:09, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Copyvio?
Talk:Carleton H. Wright

message: Greetings Wikipedians! I removed the entire See Also section because it consisted solely of this link, which didn't work: Portal|Biography|United States Navy|World War I|World War II.
Despite searching I couldn't find a link of that description. Regards, BuzzWeiser196 (talk) 13:53, 30 November 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  See Also section deleted
Talk:Ilyushin Il-14

message: According to this site a crashed Il-14 can be seen at coordinates 67°40'16.57"S 45°49'37.27"E (Google Maps). Background given by the site: 
On 2nd January 1979 an Aeroflot Ilyushin Il-14 suffered engine failure not long after take off from the Soviet Antarctic station Molodyozhnaya. 4 of the 7 passengers on the flight died.
Anyone able to confirm this? --Lennier1 (talk) 13:59, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Antarctica Crash Site 
Talk:X-ray spectroscopy

message: Does this thing need merging with Wavelength dispersive X-ray spectroscopy? From the contents, it seems like is it mainly aimed at wavelength-dispersive x-ray spectroscopy in its current form (from a quick glance, that is - I don't have more time to look at it for the moment).
Another alternative is if this article is generalised so as to summarise both wavelength and Energy dispersive X-ray spectroscopy. I think that could be preferable, but then this will become quite a different article.
Any opinions? Beryllium-9 (talk) 14:37, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merging? 

message: It looks like the article is a failure, because one of the main terms here: "X-ray emission spectroscopy" was used incorrectly.
Somebody to improve it?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vniizht (talk • contribs) 03:24, 31 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  What is X-ray emission spectroscopy??? 

message: As in the Alpha Particle X-Ray Spectrometers on Mars rovers (multiple Mars rovers) or the Alpha Proton X-Ray Spectrometer on Sojourner.
I wanted to know how an alpha particle can create x rays, but this article doesn't mention it. 
Tim 121.200.4.8 (talk) 05:29, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  What about alpha radiation creating x-rays for spectroscopy?
Talk:Ilyushin

message: Born2flie: Merge Aviation Industries Ilyushin into this article. Stub article is directly related to this article and may not survive on its own, while it would improve this article. --03:51, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Support - Aerobird 13:48, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

text: Support - Andyo2000 03:47, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

text: Support - TheQuandry 02:34, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge 

message: Sergey Vladimirovich Ilyushin started the design bureau only, and that at the direction of the Soviet government.  He left the design bureau and died long before the break up of the Soviet Union.  The Russian government decided to carry on the name of the design bureau into a new company as stated in the article.  As the head of a design bureau, he would have had to have been a dedicated communist or Stalin would never have let him lead a design bureau.  Ilyushin would probably be appalled at what happened to the Soviet Union and the design bureau he started.  Do not treat the Soviet era design bureaus as regular corporation because communists, and Stalin in particular, did not believe in private ownership of manufacturing concerns or just about any other private enterprise. 2600:1700:A9B0:527F:9D95:44C9:60CC:1DB7 (talk) 07:30, 9 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sergey Vladimirovich Ilyushin started the design bureau ONLY!
Talk:Vitamin A

message: A few comments about this edit. 1) The USDA FoodData Central database continues to be updated (October 2021) and expanded, accounting for new values for the same sources used in the table over years. The values change as more samples and similar sources are analyzed, an ongoing USDA process as the US food supply expands. 2) To check and update data, I browsed through 45 pages of the food source rankings from high to lower contents - a tedious process - as there are hundreds of old revised and new sources in the database, so it is impractical to use the database to find individual sources with the updated data. It's more practical to use the links to go to the nutrition table of individual foods, which may be updated or not. 3) The list of high and low vitamin A foods is subjective. Who still uses cod liver oil as a vitamin A source (was common 60+ years ago), or why should we list spirulina as having little vitamin A? Presenting a representative range of commonly consumed foods in high->low content for the general encyclopedia user is something we should briefly discuss here. 4) I placed a [source] notice for the sentence, "Vitamin A content in animal-sourced foods derives from retinol, while in plant-sourced foods, it derives from beta-carotene and beta-cryptoxanthin which are converted to retinol in the body." 5) We should have a clarifying note beside or under the table about the RAE used as the measurement in the header. Vitamin A may be expressed in IU, ug, or RAE, so is readily a confusing presentation for the general user. Zefr (talk) 18:33, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that historic-only and exotic foods do not belong in this table. In all of the sources tables in vitamin articles, the pattern is generally high to low for commonly consumed foods, including those identified in lay literature as good sources (examples: liver, carrots, sweet potatoes...). The current list was recently shorted from ~30 to 13 entries. I would favor enlarging to 24-30 (as three columns) to be able to show that foods, even those consumed in large quantities (bread, pasta, rice, potatoes, corn) are poor sources. The use of US USDA data tables as a definitive source is problematic, especially when one looks 'behind the curtain' to learn that a value in the 2021 version is present because seven samples were analyzed 17 years ago, but there does not appear to be an alternative. David notMD (talk) 20:16, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Divided to separate tables for retinol and beta-carotene. A combined table (replaced) used RAEs, but the real-time conversion of carotenoids to retinol depends on the body's retinol status.David notMD (talk) 11:55, 6 February 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sources revision 

message: I found difficilties interpreting the article due to unit inconsistency: sometimes values are given in μg RAE, and sometimes in IU. Would you mind if I put additional number of IU unit in additional to μg RAE everywhere when μg RAE data is given without an IU, so that we have the IU values as a common denominator? Maxim Masiutin (talk) 01:58, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unit inconsistency
Talk:Ilyushin Il-114

message: Dmitry Rogozin, Deputy Prime Minister of Russia is discussing restarting production in Samara, Russia. -- Petri Krohn (talk) 07:14, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: That sounds like a political statement in the first place - not surprising from a politician. You did well to not post it on the article page. Regards, Jan olieslagers (talk) 11:46, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Restart of production? 

message: The CASA 3000 is mentioned but this aircraft was never built, not even as a prototype. Is it really relevant to mention it even if it never actually existed? Gentleman wiki (talk) 02:00, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: You are right. Since it is based on this aircraft it should be under "related development" so I have moved it there instead. - Ahunt (talk) 03:17, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Aircraft of comparable role, configuration and era 
Talk:Meyzeek Middle School

message: I appreciate the effort newcomers are making on this article, but listing stuff really of interest only to current students is not proper for Wikipedia. By this I mean listings of the current teachers, for the most part. This is really more the domain of the school webpage, sites like "Rate my Professors", etc. See the Louisville articles like Presentation Academy and duPont Manual Magnet High School as well as the only high school featured article I know of, Stuyvesant High School for general examples of what is and isn't approprate to include in articles. Thanks. --W.marsh 22:37, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Will this Meyzeek article contain only basic background information about our school? What about a list of recent academic & sports related accomplishments? That never really makes it to the school's own website... Asdfghjklminch 07:16, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Content
Talk:Serbsky Center

message: Article says nothing except the fact that Moscow Serbsky Institute is related in dubious ways to human rights abuse.
1. It's not the institute, but specific people working in it are responsible for some deeds. Support the opposite with specific sources.
2. Article doesn't describe that Moscow Serbsky Institute is renowned internationally by collegues in psychiatry for its part in research and advancement of psychiatry.
Vlad fedorov 04:44, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This is just a stub. If you disgree with anything, you are very welcome to improve this article by adding more information with references.Biophys 05:10, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I have seen your changes. Do you still think this article is POV?Biophys 21:04, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

text: Yeah it's all the same. I mean so much time had passed and article wasn't expanded and still consists of, at best, critics only. It's a stub as it's creator says.--Oleg Str (talk) 11:53, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Bias

message: This article does not read well. I suspect it was written primarily by people who's first language is not English. As such it does need a fair bit of tidying.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 163.164.17.17 (talk) 14:49, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Poor language 
Talk:Chelsea College of Arts

message: I removed the tag, since in my opinion this article simply relates the history and unique contribution of Chelsea. More links would be helpful (always) WalterCharlie1989 (talk) 17:05, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Advertising 

message: "During this period, Chelsea had the highest enrolment of fine art students in any school of its kind in the country, producing many notable artists such as Ossip Zadkine, Mark Gertler, and Paul Nash."
I removed this - no evidence for highest enrolment, and Zadkine died in 1946, Gertler in 1939 and Nash in 1967 - long before the days of Chelsea School of Art. WalterCharlie1989 (talk) 17:11, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Alumni
Talk:All Music Guide to Jazz

message: I have moved this article to All Music Guide to Jazz (which had been its previous name).  I think "The Definitive Guide to Jazz" is unnecessary, as per WP:NC-BK#Subtitles. Furthermore, the subtitle has changed with every edition: the first edition was subtitled "the Best CDs, Albums & Tapes"; I'm not sure if the second edition had one; the third edition was subtitled "the Experts' Guide to the Best Jazz Recordings" and the fourth edition "The Definitive Guide to Jazz" (hence the current naming of this article).  Presumably this article is about the entire series and not just the fourth edition.  Similarly, The Penguin Guide to Jazz has had different subtitles throughout its various editions, but the Wikipedia article is simply named The Penguin Guide to Jazz.  Thanks, -- Gyrofrog  (talk) 14:43, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Moved page
Talk:The Dog (Seinfeld)

message: I think the dog's bark is Larry David, not sure where we could confirm this. --Cody.Pope 04:50, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Ha, I did a little digging and it says here, that Tom Williams did the voice.  --Cody.Pope 04:56, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Tom Williams?  Which Tom Williams?  The hockey player or the rugby player? --Captain Infinity (talk) 00:11, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

text: Looks like I wasn't the only one who thought that Larry David did the barking. Thank you for clearing that up!  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.52.212.232 (talk) 20:12, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Dog's Bark
Talk:Chris Funk

message: *The Decemberists
*Knock-knock
*Flash Hawk Parlor Ensemble
*Washingtonian Magazine Interview: Chris Funk of The Decemberists
*Scene Missing Magazine Interviews Chris Funk
*Urban Pollution Interview with lead guitarist Chris Funk
Above are all the references that were dumped into the external links section of the article. They don't belong there. Please integrate them into the article. Thank you. --Leahtwosaints (talk) 11:30, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  References to use in article
Talk:FaceGen

message: The wikipedia has articals about Poser and other software that is similiar.  I'm not certain why I got the notability warning.  I see facegen mentioned in the Elder_Scrolls_IV:_Oblivion wikipedia page, so I'm sure many would like to know what it is.  I'm hoping someone will make a complete list of all face generating software somewhere.
Anyway, I got that warning a few seconds after starting the page, and before I had done all my editing on it.  Perhaps it was because I only had one referance, that the official webpage.  I now have two.
I'm surprised its only been in one sucessful game so far.  Its been out for years apparently.  I guess me creating a catagory to list all the sucessful games its been used in is kind of rediculous now, since I find just one game mentioned on their website or elsewhere.
Dream Focus 05:01, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: "Cynical (Talk | contribs) (Rewrote, stubified, rm notability notice (being used in a multiformat game of the year makes it notable, whether it meets WP:SOFT or not))"
:I'm glad someone else agrees with me that it is notable enough to make a page about.  I appreciate the work, but you eliminated a valuable link to information about it, and mention of its use in police work.  I've rewritten it to make it a bit clearer, hopefully, and put the link back, only this time directly to the video interview with the company spokesman, not the page it was listed at with other things. Dream Focus 00:52, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  recent edits 

message: Would it be relevant to this artical to mention how another company is trying to trick people into buying its product instead?
I emailed what I found to the FaceGen people and got this response:
"Hi Thomas, thanks for the note. Facial Studio is not related to us
and we'll be addressing this keyword abuse in the near future."
Best wishes,
|        Andrew Beatty,
|        Singular Inversions Inc.
|        www.FaceGen.com
Thought that might be good trivia or something.  Not sure.
Dream Focus 01:12, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Scammers trying to sell similiar named product, misleading web addresses, etc. 

message: FaceGen isn't only used in video games. FaceGen has been used, and is being used, in psychology experiments on beauty, facial expressions, etc. --Marshmello 20:05, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Used in psychology... 

message: The interview link no longer works.  It was in May of 2006 that the Discovery Channel's Daily Planet covered FaceGen in an interview called "What's in a face"  Their archives on their new site only goes back to September, months after the detailed interview.  If anyone finds it, or another interview, please link to it.  Dream Focus 20:01, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Interview no longer where it was.
Talk:Ike Leggett

message: You don't have any pictures. Also, use more references (existing ones are okay) in the lead and the first two sections. In order to reuse a ref, you give it a name. Look at current good articles for examples. —Disavian (talk/contribs) 23:15, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Just a side note, images are not necessary for GA status, and references are not needed in the lead section, as long as the information there is verified in the body of the article.  But references are mandatory elsewhere, and necessary in the lead if it is unique to that section.--Esprit15d  (talk ¤ contribs) 18:35, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: There used to be pictures...I guess they were deleted? SUBWAYguy 21:34, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Failed GA

message: There is no mention of any of the mistakes or controversies created (in part or in whole) by Leggett. For example, this page should mention:
* Secret sweetheart deal with MSI Soccer for the Brickyard Road property.
* $65,225 personal bathroom for his office suite for claimed security reasons while at the same time eliminating security/safety jobs.
* Problem-plagued over-budget two-years late Silver Spring Transit Center
* Support for $4M subsidy to Costco
and so on.
The only time "controversy" is mentioned is put Leggett in a good light as in "Leggett took the lead on a number of controversial issues." Much of the text reads like a campaign document - as opinion, not fact and is judgmental, opinionated, biased, etc. and violates wikipedia's neutral point of view requirements. Most of the article fails in this regard. This article should be rewritten to be impartial and objective. All statements must be verifiable with a citation for a published reliable source. 
Donlibes (talk) 03:58, 31 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: POV

message: http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/local/Leggett-threatens-10-percent-cut-to-MontCo-fire-department-1123342-104379108.html
I'd love to see someone write something up for this. 130.85.218.243 (talk) 17:53, 6 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fire Dept. Cuts? 