lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Ronnie Day

message: I have removed material from  that does not comply with our policy on the biographies of living persons. Material in a biography must always be referenced from reliable sources, particularly negative material. Negative material that does not comply with that must be immediately removed. Note that the removal does not imply that the information is either true or false.
Please do not reinsert this material unless you can provide reliable citations, and can ensure it is written in a neutral tone. Please review the relevant policies before editing in this regard. Editors should note that failure to follow this policy may result in the removal of editing privileges.--Doc 15:16, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  BLP concerns 

message: I believe there is now justification to remove the tag which expresses concern about this article's notability: (1) Day is signed to The Militia Group, an indie label that has a number of other notable bands/artists. (2) He has received national airplay on MTV, as mentioned in the article. (3) Variety has an article about the new TV show in production, The Ronnie Day Project.  Any objections? --Paul Erik 05:45, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree...so no objections.  =)  Jumping cheese Cont@ct 07:44, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removal of notability tag
Talk:Shelby Farms

message: this line bothers me "It is located in Shelby County, Tennessee just east of Memphis, TN."
I'm pretty sure shelby farms is part of the city of Memphis. Barcode 15:17, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: location

message: It used to be the one reason to go- had a great rifle range. We'd go up from Ole Miss, hit the Memphis gun show, and go test our new acquisitions all in the same day.WiseguyThreeOne (talk) 18:12, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  What year did the shooting range close?
Talk:BKL singularity

message: I made a general plan of this article according to the original BKL paper. Comments and suggestions welcome. --Lantonov (talk) 15:29, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Stub to start 

message: The bulk of the text for this article is now in place. It is rather long: 115 kb. The aim is to shorten it twofold: 50-60 kb. The following stages are:
#Copy most of the text to Wikibooks by transwiki'ing
#Move in 2 opposite directions:
##Compress text in Wikipedia to 50-60 kb by taking out most of the math and replacing it with words. Also make text accessible to general reader by easing on terminology and adding up to 4-5 pictures.
##Expand text in Wikibooks by including intermediate calculations, proofs, and program code for the most intensive computations. --Lantonov (talk) 14:25, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Text completion

message: I think that Garfinkle's paper 
needs to be cited and properly inserted into the article. It gives a numerical proof of correctness of BKL scenario.--Pra1998 (talk) 12:42, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Garfinkle 

message: There is an error in Figure 1 which I need to correct. Can you spot it? Lantonov (talk) 09:28, 25 June 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Error in figure 1
Talk:Yaqut al-Hamawi

message: However, I don't know, it was a headache to get parenthesis working right with bits of r-t-l and bits of l-t-r. So I just put each on its own line. --Djihed 18:46, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Arabic name included, please wiki format 

message: Useful material might be found at http://www.muslimheritage.com/topics/default.cfm?articleID=694 - but that site is copyright, so do not copy it here like Alhazin did. His additions had to be reverted as WP:COPYVIO. - Fayenatic (talk) 14:45, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Possible source

message: This article is incomplete. It only references works by al-Hamawi that are available in European languages. One of his most interesting works, Thamarat al-Awrak is only available in Arabic but should be listed here. This is a link to an place it can be purchased: https://www.almaktabah.com/detail.php?product_code=81708  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:3F:E679:CF00:512C:F670:35A8:2FB7 (talk) 01:08, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Not all al-Hamawi's work is referenced 

message: "Yaqout al-Hamwi" shows up frequently in Arab online sources and now also on enWiki (see Marid Castle). Is it 
#a mistake
#a dialectal variant
#the correct transliteration of the Classical Arabic pronunciation?
If 3, then pls modify article. The title should remain as is if it reflects the common English transliteration, but the phonetically correct one should be added in bold.
If 1 or 2 are the case, they should be mentioned as such, and the Yaqout al-Hamwi redirect provided with the appropriate tag. Thank you. Arminden (talk) 12:10, 30 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is Hamwi a correct transliteration?
Talk:Ya'qubi

message: Date is all f'd upp, just look at the Islamic dating of 898 and tell me the source just made up the AH year... --Striver 15:28, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: According Enciclopaedya of Islam was born in Baghdad amb was àrab. Deceased not before 905.--95.17.89.240 (talk) 17:08, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Berber? 

message: It seems as if Johann Gildemeister wrote about him in Zeitschrift des Deutschen Palästina-Vereins, see 86ff. German-readers needed! Huldra (talk) 21:20, 7 March 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  German-readers needed
Talk:Boyer–Lindquist coordinates

message: can anyone explain how Q is transverted to a length, since in the article about natural units this is not mentioned. Ra-raisch (talk) 22:32, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: done in the article about natural units. Ra-raisch (talk) 00:38, 1 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  ...Q all have units of length
Talk:Cutler J. Cleveland

message: The main article is close to being an autobiography, banned in Wikipedia.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.139.53.54 (talk) 11:48, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Note 
Talk:Cauchy horizon

message: There seems to be a logical gap at "As this happens infinitely many times while approaching the horizon..." The article doesn't explain why this would happen infinitely many times.--76.167.77.165 (talk) 13:41, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The article no longer says this. Answer is, I guess, periodic boundary conditions. The Penrose diagram tiles -- just repeats over and over. 67.198.37.17 (talk) 18:55, 18 April 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: logical gap

message: Apparently two GR-mathematicians have disproved the strong cosmic censorship conjecture, replacing it with (paraphrasing, possibly unfaithfully) "the manifold on the other side of the Cauchy horizon isn't smooth enough" to address Einstein's equations for GR beyond the horizon.  Secondary source:
https://www.quantamagazine.org/mathematicians-disprove-conjecture-made-to-save-black-holes-20180517/?fbclid=IwAR3EOTiCd2u9dp-JzX3N_XWsSfpScE7zDVcN9wG3zwnUV1sVaeTII0NDDL4
This presumably warrants an update to this page (by someone who knows more about Cauchy horizons) – Eddy. 84.212.155.77 (talk) 14:52, 4 January 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Yep. What I saw was something about 5-D black holes, and diff-eq's no longer being integrable after the Cauchy horizon. I guess this can be rephrased as being "no longer smooth". The paper I saw actually constructed an explicit, naked (ring) singularity in 5D, so not only "disproved it" but constructed an explicit example. Of course, we live in a 4D world, not 5D. 67.198.37.16 (talk) 05:49, 23 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Strong Cosmic Censorship over-turned 

message: I have a reasonable grounding in physics, and could hardly understand a word of this. There's no point in an article that can only be understood by those who already know all about it.
Suggest a parallel (and longer) article at say undergraduate level. GrahamRounce (talk) 18:53, 22 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Comprehensibility
Talk:Cauchy surface

message: I think the definition you give here of D^+(\mathcal{S}) is wrong. Def: given \mathcal{M} Lorentzian manifold, D^+(\mathcal{S}):=\{p\in \mathcal{M} \text{ such that } \forall \text{ past directed, non-spacelike curve from } p \text{ intersects } \mathcal{S}\}. Hawking-Ellis, page 201
151.49.212.151 (talk) 16:12, 4 December 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I think what you wrote is correct and what the article says is correct. What you wrote is better and clearer than the article, which is unclear and garbled. Someone should fix this. The article is also garbled about "inextensible"; that needs fixing too. So it goes. 67.198.37.16 (talk) 07:50, 18 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Bad definition

message: Maybe start with uninteresting(?) example: first 'everywhere at 1PM', next 'everywhere at local noon', then get more technical. (or, 1PM -> 7AM and local noon -> sunrise, since 'local noon' is less familiar) --2607:FEA8:86DC:80E0:0:0:0:D2E4 (talk) 17:10, 10 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  informal version
Talk:2006–07 Euroleague

message: Would it not be a good idea to mention in the introduction what sport this relates to? I'd never heard of this league, and it's not until the very final external link that it becomes clear that it's basketball! -- Arwel (talk) 15:33, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, I'll add to the intro, do you think a summary of each gameweek would be useful? Andrius 15:43, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I have to say I've no particular axe to grind as I don't follow the sport - but if someone's prepared to do a summary each week, why not? -- Arwel (talk) 15:49, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, for now it seems like I'm the only person updating this and I can attempt it. Added some more information (most importantly informing people about the sport). Andrius 16:13, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: A bit more detail?

message: I wonder if the editors here would agree using  on this page? --Howard the Duck 04:48, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  {{tl|basketballbox}} 
Talk:Kong (band)

message: Well, I'm not sure how and why that "speedy deletion" template got put up within 10 minutes of the page's creation, or what the reasoning is behind its presence, but if you're going to delete this page, you might as well go after my Sea of Green page as well because it's even shorter than this one.  They're called STUBS, people. Filter1987 15:33, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Coordinate time

message: TAI is a coordinate time scale used to define UTC.  Should we mention that here? Martin Hogbin (talk) 08:43, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  TAI 

message: Is the Coordinate time of JPL Horizons the same discussed here? Can that be discussed if so or not ? 121.247.254.42 (talk) 23:53, 25 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: This article is about the general subject of 'coordinate time'.  There are many different coordinate times in use. As far as I can tell the 'coordinate time' used by JPL is based on their own coordinate system.  The JPL site says that it is always within 0.002 sec of Terrestrial Time. Martin Hogbin (talk) 17:47, 26 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  CT vs UTC 

message: The 'introduction' section below the box isn't an introduction. It reads like a continuation of the opening. The second section below the box is more like an introduction.
173.25.54.191 (talk) 05:32, 11 December 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I shifted the sections, ok now? Maschen (talk) 08:58, 11 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Introduction?
Talk:Cosmological perturbation theory

message: I have proposed that this page be merged with Primordial fluctuations - the pages cover very similar topics. Absolutelypuremilk (talk) 10:44, 15 August 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Closing, given the opposition and no support over 18 months. Klbrain (talk) 22:23, 31 March 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge with Primordial fluctuations
Talk:Norbert Burgmüller

message: Is opus 5 (described on the label of the MDG recording (with the piano concerto, and a completion, I gather, of the second symphony) as Overture for orchestra, op. 5 : for the opera Dionys, F major, in F major or minor? Schissel | Sound the Note! 15:39, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
Talk:Einstein manifold

message: I would like to propose a section discussing how Einstein metrics behave by dimension, maybe something like:
*2-dimensions -- Einstein metrics are constant curvature metrics -- so every closed surface has one.
*3-dimensions -- Einstein metrics are constant curvature metrics -- so it is not difficult to tell if a 3-manifold admits an Einstein metric
*4-dimensions -- Einstein metrics need not have constant sectional curvature (e.g. CP^2 with Fubini-Study metric).  Some discussion on obstructions, including Hitchin-Thorpe inequality.
*5-dimension and higher -- what little is known  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jjauregui (talk • contribs) 17:53, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dimension discussion 

message: Please add the Einstein constant for the complex protective space.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.187.102.66 (talk) 13:34, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Done 67.198.37.16 (talk) 05:57, 7 May 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  CP(n)

message: What is the difference? As stated, the metric of an Einstein manifold can have an arbitrary signature. If that were all, then the Lorentz manifold would be a special case of the Einstein manifold? I'm going to guess that it isn't this way: I'm guessing that the manifolds of Einstein–Cartan theory are Lorentz manifolds, but not Einstein manifolds, since there is not only curvature, but also torsion. Could an expert please clarify this (with reference in the article)? Thanks a lot!--Ernsts (talk) 22:19, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Lorentzian refers to the signature of the metric (-+++). Einstein requires the curvature to be proportional to the metric. These are not related to each other. In particular there are Lorentzian metrics which are not Einstein and Einstein metrics which are not Lorentzian. In general relativity one searches for Lorentzian Einstein metrics, and in Riemannian geometry one searches for Riemannian Einstein metrics, and so on. Tazerenix (talk) 08:14, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Einstein and Lorentz Manifold
Talk:Extremal black hole

message: The article isn't about it, but we should mention the observational facts as a reference (also facts are important).  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:587:4104:B0C1:800F:A5C:F7B3:305F (talk) 19:45, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Make paragraph or page: smallest black hole in astronomy
Talk:Gillian B. Loeb

message: Was he named after Jeph Loeb? 71.127.205.76 01:21, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

message: Per #407 and Catwoman Year One Annual, he was immediately replaced by Peter Grogan.
Enda80 15:45, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Peter Grogan

message: I deleted the Superherobox tag as the character is not a superhero. Noclevername 03:35, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Boxless

message: Why does he have a woman's name?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.16.252.154 (talk) 20:36, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Because Gillian is not exclusively a woman's name. - Jack Sebastian (talk) 17:58, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
replies: text:  @Jack Sebastian: To be honest, I know that names such as Evelyn, Jocelyn, Vivian and Shirley (in Britain), Anne (France many centuries ago), and Florence (in Ireland), have been men's names but are relatively rare these days. Other names can be male or female: Leslie, Robin, Dana, etc. But I have never heard of Gillian being a man's man. Is there any real-life male who was given this name at birth? Just curious. Quis separabit? 03:02, 10 December 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: No idea. I am guessing that either Frank Miller knows a male Gillian. I've read that its a somewhat common name in Sweden for dudes. No need to overthink it, though. - Jack Sebastian (talk) 05:02, 10 December 2015 (UTC)
replies: text:  I know. Like I said, just curious. Quis separabit? 06:27, 10 December 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: "Gillian?"
Talk:Hans Kmoch

message: removing reference to that tourney, since Kmoch was 2nd-3rd in preliminary round only, but he was 7th-8th in final round, so in overall standing he was outside of the podium: 1st Alekhine, 2nd-3rd Steiner and Nimzowitsch. Mauropetrolo (talk) 10:47, 18 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Kecskemét 1927

message: The article lists him as being in the :Category:Jewish chess players.  I seem to recall reading an article in which Kmoch asserted, or at least implied, that he himself was not Jewish, but his wife was, which was why they got out of Europe in the 1930s.  Anybody got a primary reference one way or the other? -- Bill-on-the-Hill 15:47, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think you could be thinking of this: http://www.chesscafe.com/text/kmoch05.txt, written by Kmoch, where Alekhine in an anti-Jewish rant questions Kmochs ability to be objective in the 1935 World Championship match, referring to Kmoch's Jewish wife. --Tba66 (talk) 12:39, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

text: Kmoch was not Jewish.  I knew him personally. His wife was. Abenr (talk) 05:43, 7 May 2012 (UTC)
replies: text:  Kmoch was Catholic until his wedding, when he became confessionless.--Suessmayr (talk) 08:44, 28 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Jewish?

message: Should the article have a reference to his composition of the Immortal Overprotection Game (http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1334664)? If it's for lack of references, it's listed in Raymond Keene's book on Nimzowitsch, "Master of Planning".  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.58.155.129 (talk) 07:11, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Immortal Overprotection Game
Talk:Morgawr (folklore)

message: I am well aware that this article is unformatted, incomplete and possibly biased (I can't spot my own bias, can I?). Please alter and improve! Totnesmartin 16:22, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: here's an interesting find... Doc shiels discussing how to set up a sea-serpent hoax in Falmouth Bay.  Have we been had? Totnesmartin 20:48, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hoax? 

message: I have upgraded the WP:PARA classifcation rating for the article, based on concurrence Totnesmartin's own estimation. Any arguments on why the article should be returned to previous grading, or even classed higher, should be placed in this section. --Chr.K. 07:28, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Classification

message: Why does british big cats link from here? - this cryptid is clearly marine. Also, although clearly this Shiels fellow has been setting some things up, why is the article (and therefore the whole myth) listed as a hoax and debunked within 3/5 categories? Anything pre-1976 isn't associated with Shiels and the most recent 3 'sightings' have no connection to him either. I say we take this off the "Debunked" list and keep the dream alive... ;)  —Preceding unsigned comment added by FloreatAntiquaDomus (talk • contribs) 03:47, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Point. We can keep the hoax category, because there was hoaxing in the seventies...debunked? Doesn't look like it, except to the "some of it's debunked, therefore all of it is" crowd. Totnesmartin (talk) 19:14, 17 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Links and Categories 

message: This is yet another article where cryptozoology has come to dominate the article to the point where it's unclear if a folk tradition exists beneath the cryptozoologist monster-hunting. Obviously, per WP:FRINGE and WP:PSEUDOSCIENCE, this isn't good. Are there non-self published sources that discusses this figure outside of a pseudoscientific context? If there's a genuine tradition beneath this and not just gotta-catch-em-all approach cooked up by internet cryptozoologists, then the article needs to be moved and rewritten. :bloodofox: (talk) 06:00, 6 January 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: The subject is firmly established as folklore. Sources  and  and  and  should get you started. - LuckyLouie (talk) 01:35, 7 January 2017 (UTC)

text: OK, I've done the suggested rewrite using the sources above, and moved the page from Morgawr (cryptid) to Morgawr (folklore). You can use my edits as a starting template for other cryptozoology-infested articles with similar problems. Regards, - LuckyLouie (talk) 19:00, 7 January 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for taking the time to do that. I know it's a pain to disentangle these. :bloodofox: (talk) 00:40, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cryptozoology Pseudoscience or Folklore?
Talk:Georges Sagnac

message: What is the correct pronunciation of 'Sagnac'? LorenzoB (talk) 04:55, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Pronunciation
Talk:Global Lorentz covariance

message: Unblanked since the article contained information.--Michael C. Price talk 09:41, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I have restored the redirect to Lorentz covariance, since I don't really see what information is in this article that is not already in the other. If you think otherwise it might be better to added that information to that more extensive article rather than have it in this two liner. (TimothyRias (talk) 13:27, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Unblanked
Talk:Armed Madhouse

message: Do not think this article should be deleted, but expanded upon. Removed empty sections that were merely chapter headings and one that contained points of view. Enb14 02:40, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think it should be deleted, either. However, nor do I have anything to add, as I assume you do not. The article is too short and contains no informative details about the book itself. There must be someone out there who's read the book and knows what they're looking for when writing information about it. I have, nevertheless, added a link which points to an interview with Greg Palast about the book. Adam 13:43, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Do not delete
Talk:Miss Italia

message: Fixed grammar and sentence structure of article. Ms. Landau 15:57, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

message: In the wikipedia page for Miss Italia, it is stated that Marisa Jossa was crowned Miss Italia in the year 1959, however in the wikipedia page for Maria Grazia Buccella it is also stated that she won the title of Miss Italia in 1959. IiPhantom (talk) 02:02, 5 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Contradiction in wikipage for Miss Italia 1959
Talk:David Hill (Oregon politician)

message: Close to B class; just a little smoothing of the prose and clarifications would do the trick. -Pete (talk) 02:51, 22 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article quality 
Talk:Bone Hard Zaggin' (EP)

message: I removed the link about downloading the songs on this EP.  I didn't consider it advertising, but I do see how it is inappropriate for this page.--PlanetSurfer 17:15, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Blatant Advertising" 

message: This EP should be considered notable for the following reasons:
* Girl Talk is a notable artist with write-ups in Rolling Stone and Pitchfork Media 
* It does more than just provide a track-listing and album cover, it provides a list of samples used in the tracks on the EP, which people would find informative.
--PlanetSurfer 18:07, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Notable EP by Notable Artist 

message: In LC and Lo there is a sample that comes in at 0:04 that is not listed, someone should find this out!  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.192.136.204 (talk) 04:29, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Missing Samples 