lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Essential patent

message: The expression "essential patent" dates at least back to 1995. See "Tension and Synergism Between Standards and Intellectual Property" OR Smoot - StandardView, 1995: http://faculty.haas.berkeley.edu/shapiro/thicket.pdf --Edcolins 18:21, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Fair enough.  Feel free to change.--Nowa 20:18, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Done... This does not mean I know where the term comes from.. --Edcolins 20:27, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It looks good.--Nowa 11:53, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Coined by .. 

message: I am not a patent lawyer... but could this not be merged into Reasonable and non-discriminatory licensing. If not then surely the difference should be spelt out in the body of the article. This article titled Standards-Essential Patents and FRAND Licensing seems to imply that the overlap is considerably, if not actually being the same. PeterEastern (talk) 18:27, 17 March 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I would prefer to keep them separate, since the concepts are different, although indeed related (in the sense that a RAND license probably only makes sense in relation to an essential patent). --Edcolins (talk) 20:14, 17 March 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rand/Frand 

message: :The following comment by Bgmitchener has been moved from User talk:Edcolins. And I have added line spaces for readability. --Edcolins (talk) 13:26, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you, @Bgmitchener. It seems to me that most of the sources you listed, if not all of them, are primary sources. However, according to our WP:RS content guideline, "[w]hen available, academic and peer-reviewed publications, scholarly monographs, and textbooks are usually the most reliable sources" (WP:SOURCETYPES). In other words, secondary sources are preferred (WP:SCHOLARSHIP). Edcolins (talk) 16:17, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I will look for those too but for the most recent developments there are not yet many academic sources because the European Commission's proposal is only six months old. Thanks for letting me know about the preference for secondary sources. Bmitchener (talk) 08:58, 8 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  (''Discussion moved from [[User talk:Edcolins]]'') The Wikipedia entry on standard patents is very thin..
Talk:Christina Lamb

message: For much publication data see Talk:Malala Yousafzai#Memoir publication data.
--P64 (talk) 01:59, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  I am Malala 
Talk:Christine Johnson (actress)

message: There may be a free photo of her (an ad with no copyright marking -- see similar image :File:Kitty Kallen.jpg) on page 78 of this magazine.  The photos are unlabeled, however, and I don't know what she looked like well enough to determine if one of them is her. Editors here may want to investigate. Calliopejen1 (talk) 17:02, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Photo 
Talk:Christine King

message: Shouldn't this article address the subject's personal life, at least her prior relationship and child with American actor and producer Peter Krause?
72.28.176.168 (talk) 02:30, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: New section72.28.176.168 (talk) 02:31, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Personal life 

message: I don't think that the historian Christine E. King, born in 1944, is the mother of Peter Krauses son born in 2001. Unfortunaltely, a correction of the article was undone because I didn't provide reliable references for removing that mistake.
Just a photo comparison:
http://pixgood.com/christine-king-peter-krause.html
vs 
http://www.staffs.ac.uk/events/graduation/2011/honoraries/christine_king/index.jsp
cheers.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.56.61.214 (talk) 16:24, 7 November 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Obvious mistake 

message: This doesn't meet the notability standards. Can someone please add in anything notable? Annesobal (talk) 20:12, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Notability
Talk:Hugh the Chanter

message: This is apparently a real person. See this search. -- Flyguy649 talk contribs 18:35, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Why, if the Oxford Dictionary of National Biography lists him as Hugh the Chanter, and practically every book I have on my shelves lists him the same way, is he under Hugh Sottovagina? Surely there is a reason. Ealdgyth | Talk 01:18, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I suppose someone thought that was a funnier name.--Bedivere (talk) 13:25, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  OED - "Hugh the Chanter  [Hugh the Chantor, Hugh Sottovagina] (d. c.1140), historian, may have had family origins in Flanders or Picardy, a suggestion supported by the other name by which he was known, Sottovagina (Sottewain in the vernacular), evidently a nickname meaning ‘foolish (or absurd) scabbard’. It was an unusual name, which Hugh shared with a number of individuals associated with York. Thomas Sottovagina and his brother Ernulf, for instance, both York canons, occurring from the 1120s to the 1150s, may have been Hugh's nephews or sons." Parrot of Doom (talk) 08:34, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Name
Talk:Jacques Cartier (disambiguation)

message: Each of these entries that gets an article should be copied to the accompanying Dab (and in many cases cleaned up per MoSDab), and struck thru on this talk page.--Jerzy•t 06:01, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removed RedLink entries 

message: The usage and naming of Jacques Cartier Provincial Park is under discussion, see talk:Jacques Cartier Provincial Park -- 67.70.35.44 (talk) 07:06, 20 December 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Jacques Cartier Provincial Park
Talk:Hampton Roads Transportation Accountability Commission

message: There needs to be a section on the controversy surrounding the HRTA.  Specifically, the dubious Constitutionality of the HRTA and the unelected nature of it's members clasing with the principle of "No Taxation without Representation".  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.160.129.166 (talk) 23:47, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

message: I have concerns that the above comments are to some degree inaccurate and also seem to be anti-authority POV. Please note:  
*1. There has been nothing ruled unconstitutional about either the new Northern Virginia authority, or by effect of law, the HRTA themselves. 
*2. The planned funding methods, with various taxes to be levied by the authorities, and not be either the local governments and/or the General Assembly, were ruled to be unlawful and unconstitutional, as their non-elected leaders (in their roles with the authorities) cannot levy taxes. So, currently, the authorities exist without a source of funds. 
*3. No localities have been asked for any funding for either authority, so the comment that "several of the cities are refusing funding" is incorrect.
*4. The local politicians are working to address a major flaw, which was the fact that the Peninsula area felt shortchanged that a major problem to many of its citizens, relief on the HRBT, had not been adressed at all. Recent news reports from multiple sources indicate that resolving that omission may go a long way to bringing those communities back into the fold of togetherness in trying to find solutions that everyone can live with. 
*5. Since when is a Topix online bulletin board an appropriate source to cite for Wikipedia? How about the news media and articles which are quoting officials for better sources. 
*6. This whole situation is very complicated. I do not mean to infer any deliberate attempt to distort, but let's be careful to stay accurate as things develop. 
Respectfully, Mark in Historic Triangle of Virginia (talk) 13:57, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Update and clarification
File talk:Windows Family Tree.png

message: * No mention of Windows/286 or Windows/386
* Windows for Workgroups 3.1 not listed
* There was no Windows 95 OSR3. There was an OSR2.1, however.
* It's not clear what this picture is say about NT editions. NT 3.1 had just plain Windows NT and Windows NT Advanced Server. NT 3.5 changed these to Workstation and Server. NT 4.0 add Server Enterprise Edition, which evolved into 2000 Advanced Server.
* No Tablet PC mention
* Media Center 2003 does not come with SP2. In fact, SP2 changes MCE 2003 to MCE 2004.
* No Media Center 2004 mention
* XP SP2 is not based on Server 2003. XP x64 is, though.
* Vista is based on Server 2003. More specifically Vista is based on pre-release Server 2003 SP1, which is a cross of Server 2003 and XP SP2.
There's no sense in listing XP SP2 anyway, since there are no other SPs listed. Josh 18:42, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Inaccuracies

message: Server 2003 should be violet, not blue.  The NT series is blue -- with no distinction between server and workstation.  The XP series is violet.  And Server 2003 is in the XP series. — Lawrence King (talk) 03:17, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wrong color 

message: Vista is based on Windows Server 2003, not XP (First innaccuracies section seems to know more about this than I do).
XP, Vista, etc. aren't based on Windows 98/Me/etc. They're based on NT and should be blue. SteveSims 21:46, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Inaccuracies Oct. 7, 2007
Talk:Clifford Lynch

message: Question Tarachand jaipal (talk) 07:23, 19 September 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Maths
Talk:Heinkel He 51

message: Think :Image:000608082.jpg/:Image:Bulgarian Heinkel He 51.jpg might be a Heinkel He 51. /Lokal_Profil 01:33, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes - that appears to be a He51. Good spot.Nigel Ish (talk) 11:44, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Switched arount the images so that the "normal" plane is in the infobox and the seaplane is later in the article. /Lokal_Profil 00:57, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

text: Also the german article seems to have some images. /Lokal_Profil 01:34, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Image 

message: I took out the Brewster Buffalo, and put in the Boeing P-12 and also the Boeing P-26 Peashooter instead.
My reasoning is that both were Army models primarily, and produced in numbers. The P-12 is the closest aircraft to the He 51 in Configuration, but the P-26 is a little closer in terms of Era. (The USA was a leader in aircraft throughout this era.) However, the specifications and armament of the P-26 are very similar to the He 51, plus the fixed gear and open cockpit make it an advanced bi-plane in everything but the double wing!
What I wanted to bring up here is that the US Navy had a number of candidates that would fit in nicely here, like the Grumman F2F and Grumman F3F, both 1930's biplanes with the innovation of retractable gear – but they were Navy – and the numbers produced are nothing like those for the P-12.
BUT ANOTHER CONSIDERATION IS THAT THE HE 51 USED A LIQUID COOLED ENGINE!!
The US Army Air Corps purchased in the 1930's the P-6 Hawk, a late 1920's biplane that saw constant engine up-grades, and the Berliner-Joyce P-16. Both of these used liquid cooled aircraft engines, like the He 51. However, they did not see the production numbers like the radial engine aircraft of the era.
So, when we look at comparable aircraft, should we focus on the engine Type (liquid cooled, or Radial air cooled?), or the Specifications (biplane, speed, guns, bombs), or the Era (date, war usage, etc.)?
Bit of a conundrum, I know. This was a period of rapid development and constant adjustment in aircraft.
I must say, after looking at this for a while, perhaps stressing the fact that it was a liquid cooled engine might be one of the most important characteristics, and the one most worth comparing. But if so, it must be noted somewhere as the prime criteria for selection.
Alternately, we could make TWO sections here, one for comparable aircraft with liquid cooled engines, and the other for comparable aircraft with radial air cooled engines?
James
202.44.215.80 (talk) 08:16, 2 November 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Aircraft of comparable role, configuration, and era
Talk:Coralie Trinh Thi

message: There is misunderstanding, which one is proper: April 11, or November 4? --Крушевљанин Иван (talk) 01:51, 3 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proper date of birth 
Talk:Firby, Hambleton

message: Although the decision at this AfD was "merge," I've created a redirect, because there really wasn't much left in the article to bring over here. The final version is here , in case anyone wants to chase down any other details. Joyous! | Talk 04:06, 8 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Firby (surname)]]
Talk:Criminaloid

message: This article seems to be little more than a couple of dictionary definitions. It needs a lot more references to research findings in the field of criminology that explore and define the term with more clarity and confirm its notability. While the concept appears interesting, I am wondering if it would be better to merge this article into the one about Crime under the Criminal section. Alternatively, it could be merged into a section about the typology of criminals in the Italian school of criminology article, where Cesare Lombroso's findings are discussed. However, the fact there is a choice in this matter suggests this is not a clear cut decision and needs some discussion about what options are available. - Cameron Dewe (talk) 23:26, 31 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Compare with Criminal and Crime
Talk:Alligator pepper

message: This article needs some extension. Any Afromomum sp. is liable to be sold as 'alligator pepper' when the dried husk is left on the seed because they all have the pattern of bumps on their seeds under most circumstances. Spice expert Cary  Cairncross has observed this for Nigerian A.granum-paradisi, sold as grains of paradise when seeds, as alligator pepper when in the pod. There is also a species sold as 'sweet alligator pepper' (possibly A.citratum) that has absolutely no bite at all and a strong lemony taste and aroma.206.47.113.54 (talk) 19:09, 6 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  additional species separation needed 

message: Not when exported to the western world.
Maarten van Thiel  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.212.84.2 (talk) 15:24, 12 August 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  alligator pepper is sold as the entire pod
Talk:Sioux Empire Fair

message: The following coordinate fixes are needed for the Sioux Empire Fair's address. The Sioux Empire Fair is located on the W.H.Lyon Fairgrounds at 100 N Lyon Blvd. Sioux Falls SD 57107
—SEFair (talk) 14:37, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: That's what the coordinates currently in the article indicate. Specifically, they indicate a location roughly corresponding to the label "Grandstand" on this map at the fair's Web site, which seems roughly in the center of the fairground. I'm not sure what problem you're seeing, but the coordinates are correct. Deor (talk) 14:55, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Coordinate error
Talk:Angular diameter distance

message: I'm proposing to merge the article Angular size redshift relation into this one as a separate section, because it's an aspect of the same subject and I think both 'articles' would be improved by being together on the same page.  Let me know what you think. Cosmo0 19:02, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Proposed merge from angular size redshift relation

message: The plot of angular distance in megaparsecs has a correct "reference plot" and incorrect "your plot" which uses H/H0 = (density parameters) instead of H/H0 = (density parameters)^1/2. Speno35 (talk) 06:49, 3 May 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Graph contains incorrect plot

message: Images and or diagrams of the object at a distance illustrating that formula, and the expanding universe effect would make these concepts much clearer to most of our readers who don't deal well with formulae. — Lentower (talk) 16:42, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: I was going to say xkcd's CC licensed so permission already exists. But the footer (on xkcd's desktop site) says it's licensed under CC-BY-NC 2.5, whereas Wikimedia Commons's licensing page indicates that CC BY-NC isn't accepted. Maybe Wikipedia itself has somewhat looser licensing requirements for images (e.g., "fair use"), but that still has to pass relevance. Personally, I find the heavy layering in the comic too confusing for it to be worth using, but I guess you can try contacting Munroe via social media links in the header or the email address in the licensing page. 66.210.249.135 (talk) 10:42, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Images and/or Diagrams needed 

message: These xkcd graphics lead me to this article.  If someone could get the author to allow use here, it be a large win for this article.  , xkcd is much clearer than the text & formulae in this article. — Lentower (talk) 16:59, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: I was going to say xkcd's CC licensed so permission already exists. But the footer (on xkcd's desktop site) says it's licensed under CC-BY-NC 2.5, whereas Wikimedia Commons's licensing page indicates that CC BY-NC isn't accepted. Maybe Wikipedia itself has somewhat looser licensing requirements for images (e.g., "fair use"), but that still has to pass relevance. Personally, I find the heavy layering in the comic too confusing for it to be worth using, but I guess you can try contacting Munroe via social media links in the header or the email address in the licensing page. 66.210.249.135 (talk) 10:42, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: xkcd Graphics of Angular Diameter Turnaround
Talk:Piper guineense

message: Removed (piquantness) and quotes around heat.  Everyone will understand what the word heat means in this context, piquant just seems pedantic.  The word piquant simply isn't used outside of food science.  I could just as easily make a case for writing, "piquant" (transient receptor potential cation channel subfamily V member 1 activator causing false sensation of burning), since that's more correct than either word, but the perception is of heat, same as hot peppers and via the same mechanism, and now we've just switched to an even more specialized scientific term to describe something redundantly.  The slightly later phrase "spicy, pungent" was changed is being changed to just "pungent" without quotes, as common usage of this word indicates smell more often than taste.  The next parenthesized pair, '"soup" (stew)'  was sort of the opposite.  The first paragraph already calls it stew without clarifying that stew and soup are somewhat different, and this didn't add to readability.  
Finally, the posted oil content in the first paragraph doesn't make sense.  I've tagged with a citation needed while I try to find a formal analysis that proves it.  One disproof has already been found in which apiole made up 1.4% of Piper guineense and the three other compounds in that particular sentence were not.  It probably belongs in a chemistry subsection of the article rather than the lede, anyway. They Terk Err Jerbs (talk) 13:22, 15 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Use in cuisine 

message: I'm working on a table of plants used as herbs and/or spices ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Table_of_plants_used_as_herbs_or_spices ), and one piece of data I'm trying to collect is the general form factor of the source plant, including whether it's an annual or a perennial.  This information is not presently available on this page, if anyone has it, I'd appreciate an add (or even an edit of my table with a cite).  Tamtrible (talk) 16:33, 1 October 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is it a perennial?...
Template talk:Bluebell Railway

message: Layout of East Grinstead (Bluebell Railway) station lines can be seen this this planning application.  David Bailey (talk) 11:37, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  East Grinstead (Bluebell Railway) station lines 

message: On the map of the line should be added Holywell Waterworks between Freshfield Halt and Bluebell Halt. It opened around 1962 and had a short operating life of only a few years.[[Steamybrian2 (talk) 12:22, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Holywell Waterworks Halt
Talk:Martin-Baker MB 2

message: Article reassessed and graded as start class. --dashiellx (talk) 12:57, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Tag & Assess 2008 
Talk:Dan Markel

message: After giving the matter some thought, I modified Chosenlink's edit changing my original statement that Prof. Markel and Prof. Adelson were involved in "divorce" proceedings.  I agree a more accurate statement would have been for me to say they were involved in "post divorce" proceedings.  But Chosenlink stated that Markel and his ex-wife were involved in a "custody battle" and cited to a CNN article.  While the cited article does, indeed, refer to Adelson as Markel's ex-wife, it makes no mention of a "custody battle."  "Custody" is rarely--although admittedly sometimes--an issue in Florida dissolution of marriage cases.  Parents are most often given "joint custody" with the issue of "primary physical residence" being contested by the parties.  In this case, there were several issues involved in addition to the question of the children's primary physical residence, and those additional issues are referred to in the Miami Herald article I cited.  I did retain Chosenlink's correct reference to Adelson as being Markel's "ex-wife." As always, I invite Chosenlink and others to use this Talk Page to share their viewpoint as to the issue. Modern Ha Sofer (talk) 15:59, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: It's been suggested at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wendi Adelson that the content of this article is not fully in accordance with our BLP policy. That's not an area where I have any great expertise or experience, but it does seem to me that, for example, the content added with  is negative in tone, about living people, and based on speculation or suspicion rather than solid fact. Much of the content here was copied to :Wendi Adelson and :Charles Adelson, both of which are now at AfD. If there's agreement here that the recently-added content is inappropriate, a possible solution would be roll back to  of the page, and then clean that up (remove the uncited content etc). Thoughts, anyone? Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 09:56, 25 February 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: – almost a week has passed, there's been no objection. The article now needs a good deal of cleaning up. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 22:52, 3 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Possible BLP violations? 

message: It seems like it might work better that way given the lack of biographical information and strong focus on his murder. The majority of the article is about the investigation and trial of his murderers and the after effects. The entirety of the article (~10% of it?) that focuses on Markel's biographical information could easily be converted into a subsection of a larger article about the circumstances of his murder. 2600:4040:254D:9700:AC74:2F71:791B:81BA (talk) 04:09, 15 November 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Fair question; the trick is that his murder was newsworthy because of the prominence of his legal scholarship and his position. I think in an ideal world there would be more analysis of the substance and impact of his scholarship. Sha-Zeditor (talk) 20:56, 16 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  should this article be converted to something like "the murder of Dan Markel" ?