lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:K7

message: in various latin languages, cassette is often written as 'K7'
for example in french. the letter k: ca the number 7: sette
for example in the francophone world, you would see K7 written on the window of any record shop,
meaning they sell cassette tapes, as well as lp's or cd's
 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.227.158.153 (talk) 05:34, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  K7 is a way to spell cassette
Talk:Karl Marx

message: Moses Mordecai Levi, otherwise known as Karl Heinrich Marx (May 5, 1818-March 14, 1883) was a German-Jewish philosopher, economist, historian, revolutionary, and journalist from Trier, Germany. Prism Steno Book (talk) 12:06, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. — Urro[talk][edits] ⋮  13:43, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 19 March 2024 

message: Little to nothing about the personal character or contradictions of Marx as a human being. Seems one sided. Not looking for character assassination but a more balanced view. Redonefifty (talk) 21:48, 14 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Critiques of Marx as a person. 

message: Karl Marx was born on 5 May 1818 to Heinrich Marx and Henriette Pressburg. He was born at Brückengasse 664 in Trier, an ancient city then part of the Kingdom of Prussia's Province of the Lower Rhine.[15] Marx's family was originally non-religious Jewish but had converted formally to Christianity before his birth ("Death"). His maternal grandfather was a Dutch rabbi, while his paternal line had supplied Trier's rabbis since 1723, a role taken by his grandfather Meier Halevi Marx.[16] His father, as a child known as Herschel, was the first in the line to receive a secular education. He became a lawyer with a comfortably upper middle class income and the family owned a number of Moselle vineyards, in addition to his income as an attorney. Prior to his son's birth and after the abrogation of Jewish emancipation in the Rhineland,[17] Herschel converted from Judaism to join the state Evangelical Church of Prussia, taking on the German forename Heinrich over the Yiddish Herschel.[18] The Maelstorm 40K (talk) 12:15, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Charliehdb (talk) 12:18, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 6 May 2024
Talk:Khazars

message: This is just a prediction, it would need further research, but I propose that the word Khazar came from the Persian word 'hezâr', or one of the variants, meaning one thousand. Therefore, I propose that it took the meaning of 'great' in Khazar, where the Khazar Khaganate simply means the Great Khaganate. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:EmilePersaud 14:06, 1 February 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: You may be right but we need WP:RS Andre🚐 16:01, 1 February 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Of course and in the future I will see what I can find. My theory is backed up by the spread of that Persian root, from Hungarian  to Nepali . I also checked the wikipedia topic article of Hazar, and it says that in Turkish, they call the Khazars as Hazar, strengthening my theory. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:EmilePersaud 13:00, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

text: "Róna-Tas connects qasar with Kesar, the Pahlavi transcription of the Roman title Caesar." I'm almost certain that this explanation is folk etymology, though. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:EmilePersaud 13:18, 6 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  The meaning of Khazar 

message: I've retained the addition of text re the  Chuvash. An initial look over the text does not inspire confidence as to its use as an RS. It lies wholly outside international scholarship on the Khazars, lacks documentary rigour  sourced, and the publication venue is obscure. The material added throws no light on the topic, and the idea of a popular beloief of origins among the Chuvash is neither here nor there (and it is not clear from pp1-2 where this comes from).Nishidani (talk) 22:26, 30 April 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Given that the highly probable is now clarified, I've reverted the page to the state before these intrusive sock disturbances. Feel welcome to repatch in any intermediate edits that actually improved the earlier text we must start from again.Nishidani (talk) 09:34, 1 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Salmin 

message: The latter based upon the assertion of the Persian historian Istakhri the Khazar language was different from any other known tongue. However, he contradicts himself by linking the Khazar language to the Bulgar language, which is known to be a part of the Oghur Turkic group.
*The sentence is garbled, the latter ('latter' means one of two whereas the antecdents are three; in a new sentence it is not clear what is being referred to: thirdly there is no source used for asserting, if that is what the editor wants to put over, that  Istakhri 'contradicted himself'). In short some sentence has been fudged up without attending to the sources already existing. It should be removed.Nishidani (talk) 10:40, 3 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Garbled English and WP:OR 

message: The map used in the infobox is in what seems to be German, I think it would make sense to use an English version since this is an English page. EldritchEmpress (talk) 16:24, 12 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Translating the infobox map
Talk:Linnaean taxonomy

message: One can read "linked together to construct a phylogeny. This is largely what is meant by the term 'Linnaean taxonomy'" (under section "Alternatives"). I consider that the word "This" (in "phylogeny. This is largely") needs a clarification.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.238.112.155 (talk) 12:41, 5 September 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  clarification needed about alternatives 

message: with cladistics this could be considered outdated 2800:2145:B400:56A:7820:394C:C043:83D5 (talk) 19:35, 27 April 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Absolutely not. Trivially, even under the PhyloCode, species are named using Linnaean binomials, but more significantly, all the major taxonomic databases use multiple Linnaean ranks – just follow the links in the taxonbars in any article about an extant taxon. Peter coxhead (talk) 13:14, 28 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Potentially obsolote?
Talk:Linguistics

message: I believe this section could benefit from editing. The first sentence, while correct, might be difficult to understand for readers with little knowledge of linguistics and language varieties. I think the first sentence of this section should be more of a definition of the concept. Here is a suggested edit: “Language can take many forms based upon various factors such as geographic region, social group, or context. Language is constantly adapting and changing, leading us to language varieties. We can observe these varieties through dialects, registers, accents, dialects, and more." On another note, this page references the process of language genesis, which is not defined. The term was linked to a Wikipedia article that no longer exists.  OhHeckYeah (talk) 20:56, 27 October 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I think this whole section is not well placed in the main overview article on the field of linguistics. While "language varieties" is an interesting topic in its own right, it is not a subfield of linguistics per se. Linguistics certainly encompasses the study of language varieties, and almost every subfield will touch on them, but they don't need a section in what should be a short and sweet overview article. Mundart (talk) 17:17, 23 December 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Indeed, especially since sociolinguistics already gets its own section (albeit one that could use a tad more meat, maybe) Remsense留 17:49, 23 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Language varieties  

message: Perhaps a section discussing dead languages and how they contribute to modern-day linguistics could be helpful?-Ririnchu (talk) 00:44, 20 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dead Languages 

message: — Assignment last updated by Lindseybean28 (talk) 21:25, 9 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: College Composition II

message: — Assignment last updated by Markovya (talk) 21:36, 20 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: Linguistics in the Digital Age

message: @Clickbait67, just added a new section Dead Languages. Is this new section even appropriate. If so, considering the focus of the newly added section deals with the information on the change of linguistics over time, might it be more fitting to rename it  Historical linguistics, with the link to the main article. Since Historical linguistics focuses on the study of language change over time, including the reconstruction of ancient languages and their features. Pinging @Remsense, @Benlittlewiki for what they think. StarkReport (talk) 17:29, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Aye, we have a historical linguistics section (it's the first one, just about!) Remsense诉 17:37, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Yikes, I can't believe it completely slipped my memory. StarkReport (talk) 17:41, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removal of a newly added section.
Talk:Larry Sanger

message: I don't understand this newly-added quote: "One thing that I would have done, could have done, and should have done right away would be to create a process whereby articles were approved by experts."
But then, it would have exactly the same "biases" he complains about: against lunatic charlatans and against wacky Republican fantasies. So, he does not seem very consistent. Maybe the quote is out of context? --Hob Gadling (talk) 15:57, 16 December 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Hmmm ... if articles were approved by experts then Wikipedia might qualify as a reliable source! 2001:8003:70F5:2400:3CA1:B224:8640:8140 (talk) 19:49, 2 February 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: You want articles approved by experts? Cos this is what happens when you have articles approved by experts... BastunĖġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ! 00:13, 3 February 2023 (UTC)

text: I don't think it's being taken out of context. As the article mentions, Sanger created another wiki project called Citizendium, which had the goal of having all of its articles approved by experts. However, many of these "experts" turned out to be pseudoscience-pushing cranks with questionable credentials. I think we can safely assume that if he was still actively involved with the project, any articles on election fraud would have to be approved by the World's Leading Experts on the subject, Dinesh D'Souza and Mike Lindell. Partofthemachine (talk) 21:25, 2 April 2023 (UTC)
replies: text:  Sanger would consider their POV the right one. -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 02:58, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Experts 

message: Presently, the article claims that Sanger is agnostic. This appears to no longer be true. The statement is well-sourced with three citations, yet these citations are at least three years old, and in the most recent, Sanger expressed openness to religion.
More recently, in March 2023, Sanger posted to his website an article indicating deep Bible study habits. The article itself does not confirm a change in religion, but outlinks to a Telegram chatroom where his Christian belief is explicitly stated.
Perhaps a better source is needed, but at the very least, it seems the current article content is incorrect. Doughbo (talk) 17:34, 30 June 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: An update may be needed depending on what the explicitly stated belief actually says. I don't see any conflict with being agnostic and studying the Bible or expressing an openness to religion. It doesn't say he's an atheist. --Onorem (talk) 18:23, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

text: I think you meant to link to Telegram (software). Partofthemachine (talk) 03:01, 10 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Personal Life and Religion
Talk:Lee Harvey Oswald

message: In the section of the Edwin Walker assassination attempt, the article correctly lists the price of the Carcano rifle of $19.95 + $1.50 shipping, as supported by the citation from https://www.archives.gov/research/jfk/warren-commission-report/appendix-14.html. The issue is that on the image next to this paragraph, there is associated text that says it was $29.95, which is actually the price of a Smith & Wesson revolver, also mentioned in the paragraph. The change I'd like made is just to correct this text.
 MStaynor (talk) 03:48, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: , though I have to say I find the caption quite odd. It seems like the price is a reasonable fact to include in the body. The caption could cover all sorts of things, but I'd probably pick "used to assassinate JFK" over "cost $19.95". Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 03:54, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 10 February 2024
Talk:Lysator

message: :Image:Lysator.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
— Κaiba 23:49, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Lysator.png
Talk:L. Ron Hubbard

message: This reference does not link to a source. A source for the claim that Jung had used an electropsychometer/e-meter "famously" is neither found on Jung's Wikipedia page nor the page for the 'electropsychometer/e-meter', so a link to some source is warranted. Eli.stroud (talk) 22:01, 10 October 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: This is the citation which says simply "Jung 1906". I tried to identify what it is supposed to be, but it looks like there are several letters by Jung in 1906. This citation was added by Feoffer in this edit.  maybe you can recall, and can pad out that citation.  ▶ I am Grorp ◀  01:29, 11 October 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for the ping! Added the full 1906/7 source and also added Urban's 2011 citation of Jung. Feoffer (talk) 02:52, 11 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reference 122 [at time of posting] 

message: Some registered user should clarify in the article lead that Mary Sue Whipp was Hubbard's *third* wife, as his first is introduced above her, and 2nd skipped.  All that needs to happen is adding the word "third" before Mary Sue's name. 2601:196:180:DC0:F479:CAFC:EAC9:CB1F (talk) 16:12, 15 December 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think that would work as well as you think it might. If we said "One of the indicted was Hubbard's third wife Mary Sue Hubbard; he himself was named an unindicted co-conspirator." then it sounds like he was divorced from her at the time. They were still married. If you were introducing Mary Sue in the article, you might say "Mary Sue, Hubbard's third wife". But this sentence isn't really introducing Mary Sue; it's introducing indictments... to someone near to him. "Thirdness" is introduced in the infobox (top right) and in the body of the article. There's no need to mention it in the lead. Just my opinion.    ▶ I am Grorp ◀  03:46, 16 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Clarifying lead text 

message: Under Life, In the dianetics era, 3rd paragraph. Second instance of “Hubbard” has an extra b in the word. Giggittygoose (talk) 23:14, 17 December 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks. Liu1126 (talk) 23:18, 17 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 17 December 2023
Talk:Limestone

message: I added a new section related to the scarcity of limestone. I put it as a sub topic to uses as it was more closely related to the construction aspect. However, I also wondered about having it placed under occurrence.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Annawood2 (talk • contribs) 20:19, 18 March 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: "Scarcity" is a human economic concept. I think where you put it is fine. --Kent G. Budge (talk) 20:57, 18 March 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Where should the section Scarcity be added? 

message: Limestone is a common type of carbonate sedimentary rock. It is composed mostly of the minerals calcite and aragonite, which are different crystal forms of calcium carbonate (CaCO
3
). Limestone forms when these minerals precipitate out of water containing dissolved calcium. This can take place through both biological and nonbiological processes, though biological processes have likely been more important for the last 540 million years.[1] Limestone often contains fossils, and these provide scientists with information on ancient environments and on the evolution of life.[2] 2409:4072:E90:77CD:7E02:5556:765E:427 (talk) 09:28, 28 November 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mineral resources 

message: How to bake with limestone 203.59.98.191 (talk) 11:34, 31 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cooking
Talk:Lattice (mathematics)

message: The first definition has been standard at least since the 1930s and probably since Dedekind worked on lattice theory in the 19th century; though he may not
have used that name.  -- JanHidders
----
The definition is given as:
* A least upperbound of V is an element x in L such that 
** for all y in V it holds that y <= x, and
** for all z in L it holds that if z <= v for all v in V then x <= z.
* A greatest lowerbound of V is an element x in S such that
** for all y in V it holds that x <= y, and
** for all z in L it holds that if v <= z for all v in V then z <= x.
Isn't the first inequality in the second subbullet under both of the main bullets backwards?  Shouldn't it be v <= z in the first case and z <= v in the second case, rather than vice versa?
:Yup.
----
Aren't finitely generated subgroups of Rn or Cn also called lattices? I wonder if they are related to the order-lattices. --AxelBoldt
Discrete subgroups, rather than finitely-generated subgroups, I think.  E.g., <1,π> is a finitely generated subgroup of R, but it isn't a lattice. They aren't related to the type of lattice described in the current article. I was going to add a mention of them yesterday, but I couldn't think of anything much to write.
Zundark, 2001-08-20
I see. Maybe Minkowski's theorem about the number of lattice points in a convex set could be linked. --AxelBoldt
The new material science definition seems to be the same as a discrete subgroup. --AxelBoldt
Yes. I think what we should do is to add the discrete subgroup definition, and then modify the materials science definition to mention that this is a special case of one of the mathematical definitions. --Zundark, 2001-08-21
----
I added some basic material to the order-theoretic side of lattices (filters, ideals, join-irreducibility, ...). I also tried to improve the structure of the page by giving some subsection-headings and moving the category/morphism part upwards (it did not seem to fit elsewhere and is quite basic anyway).
Considering the huge size of the lattice theory part, it might be a good thing to have a disambiguation page for the four notions in this article and put up a new page called lattice theory or lattice (order theory). -- Markus (no login), 2003-09-22
:Yes, we probably should split the page. We need to change all the links first, however. We already have a redirect called lattice theory, so we can start changing links to point to it. I was going to start doing this, but I think I should wait to make sure that everyone agrees that "lattice theory" is the best name for the new article (because I don't want to have to change them all a second time). --Zundark 22:18, 22 Sep 2003 (UTC)

message: What is Xmas doing on the Lattice page?  Jon Awbrey 15:54, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Xmas?
Talk:Lake Tana

message: I'm going to change this from a redirect to its own article. Dembea is the region north of Tana (in modern day Amhara region, pre-1996 Begemder), while Begemder was actually the area east of lake Tana in older times (comprising Begemder, Dembea, Wolkait, and other NW territories pre-1996).
Yom 21:37, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Dembea

message: I'm not ganna change anything, because i havnt dont much editing on the site but, If wanted i can do some reasearch on the real formation if no one minds me taking out silly references to mythology  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.234.88.83 (talk) 22:34, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for catching this. Somebody did a silly edit a few days ago. The information was already there, so you don't have to do any research. Landroving Linguist (talk) 18:46, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

text: I don't mind 41.210.159.40 (talk) 13:30, 11 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Noah's flood? 
Talk:Leonhard Euler

message: The third paragraph of the lead states: "Euler is credited for popularizing ... the letter i to express the imaginary unit sqrt(-1)"
Would this not be more accurately re-worded to something along the lines of "popularizing ... the letter i, the imaginary unit whose square is -1"? Ediniast (talk) 06:44, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: He popularized THE USE OF the letter i for this mathematical purpose. Saying that "he popularized the letter i" without including the "to denote" part that our lead currently includes makes no sense because it was already a popular letter in the orthography of many languages. And saying "the letter i, the imaginary unit..." also makes no sense: a letter is a notation for a mathematical value, not the value itself. And it is the notation that we are crediting him for popularizing, not its value. —David Eppstein (talk) 06:49, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I wasn't entirely clear, I apologize I meant "Euler is credited for popularizing ... the letter i, the imaginary unit whose square is -1" and got lazy writing it out, my comment was more on the nature of i being defined as a number whose square is negative one, rather than i being equal to negative one. Ediniast (talk) 06:55, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: "The imaginary unit \sqrt{-1}" is a correct description of i. It is an imaginary unit, and among the two imaginary units is the one identified by the principal branch of the complex square root function, the branch denoted by the square root notation. "The imaginary unit whose square is -1" is an ambiguous and inaccurate description of i. There are two imaginary units whose square is –1, so the use of the definite article is not justified. —David Eppstein (talk) 07:25, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Square root of -1 in lead 

message: The correct pronunciation is shown in phonetic symbols (IPA) and in an English approximation.  The two do not appear to match.  This is also true in the footnote, which explains how not to pronounce the name.  I believe that the English approximations of the correct and incorrect pronunciations have been switched. Cctimar (talk) 19:29, 17 April 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: There was some vandalism to this part of the article today. Maybe you saw it in its vandalized state. —David Eppstein (talk) 20:33, 17 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pronunciation of name 

message: How is his most important work not mentioned here??? 79.106.203.40 (talk) 09:03, 9 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hollow Earth