lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:1 E+6 m²

message: "#  A cube of this area has a size of 408 m."  What part of such a cube measures 1 square kilometer and what part is 408 meteres?
: my guesss is that it's surface area, and my calcultor confirms that:
* 1km^2  - surface area
* 1/6 = 0.1666 - surface area of each side
* 0.408 = sq root of 0.166 , hence side of the cube
I like the square kilometer equivalence subsection to the comparisons list. This would be a useful format to use for the other orders of mag articles whenever a useful unit falls within their range. --mav
What does "E6" stand for? -Branddobbe 00:50, Mar 13, 2004 (UTC)
Suggest this page be removed.  The E6 notation means a million in FORTRAN, but C tends to use the lower case "e" and, anyway, the page seems to be mostly silliness.
Pdn 05:38, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: The source was found for
:"km²" means square kilometre and not kilo–square metre. For example, 3 km² is equal to 3 000 000 m² and not to 3000 m² (nor even 9 000 000 m²). Thus, in the case of an area, the SI prefixes provide steps of a factor one million instead of one thousand
Eagle  talk 22:47, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Source Found 

message: Why not write "1 km²"?  That is the more likely search term, surely.  Either that or explain the E thing.  There are several of these 1 E+-n pages on Wiki and none of them explain the obscure scientific term.  I took me quite a while to figure out what on earth it meant on the 1 E+4 m² page which I accessed from How to edit a page (under superscripts).  Jubilee♫clipman 23:03, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Why the weird name?
Talk:Winter wheat

message: What species it this talking about? Aaadddaaammm 03:48, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Species? 

message: This article does not use scientific terminology such as variety, and instead it uses "type".  So is winter wheat a variety, or a type?
: (it seems you commented some time in 2011, so this is probably a thread necro) Informally, winter wheat is both a set of varieties (or types - I'm not sure what the correct botanical term is in this context) (which all have in common the winter trait) and a way of growing facultative and obligate winter wheats. However, it seems like this error has since been corrected. Ellenor2000 (talk) 03:17, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  No Scientific Terminology 

message: The lead currently states, "Classification into spring or winter wheat is common and traditionally refers to the season during which the crop is grown in the Northern Hemisphere." Mention of the northern hemisphere here seems to be a red herring -- surely, the classification refers to the season in the location where the wheat is planted? Isn't winter wheat in the southern hemisphere planted during the southern hemisphere's autumn/winter? The whole point of naming it after the season rather than the part of the calendar year is that the same term can be used both sides of the equator. Dricherby (talk) 14:01, 2 January 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: A version of this issue seems to still exist, and in my edit to add that Chile (a wheat exporter) is in the Southern hemisphere, I have not, to my regret, corrected it. It does seem to carry over the fact that winter wheat is planted over the winter to yield in late spring, regardless of location, though. Ellenor2000 (talk) 03:11, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Northern hemisphere" red herring
Talk:Guoyu

message: I intenionally used Zhuyin instead of Pinyin as a page talking about Guoyu should deserve a exception from the mandatory wikipedian Pinyin convention rule. -- Ktsquare June 21 2002
Wareware, go to , search 國語 on 二十五史, and examine what it means other than a classical writing. --Nanshu 03:41, 30 Sep 2004 (UTC)

message: The following is both factually and gramatically puzzling:
: Guoyu in the sense of national language was coined in Japan (kokugo in Japanese) and then was loaned into Chinese.
Care to explain? Fuzheado | Talk 04:20, 30 Sep 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Strange edit 

message: Nanshu, also your edit comment ("never heard? That's because you are ignorant.") is in violation of Wikipedia:No personal attacks, so whether it's unfamiliarity with the policy or the English language, please stop.   Fuzheado | Talk 04:27, 30 Sep 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Personal insults
Talk:English Channel

message: One would think that the French name of a part of the sea between England and France should be mentioned in the first paragraph of its article, especially when the English name is "The English Channel"... 123popos123 (talk) 21:06, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
replies: text:  You dont just do this because you want to? You need refs and sources and a consensus. The whole world calls it the English Channel, no-one apart from a small part of france use the french name. If you want to make this it goes as a small addion much lower down in the article once you have correct sources and reached consensus  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A00:23C4:22D:CA01:389A:812D:CBD:83B (talk) 16:49, 28 October 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Your comment is so funny I suspect that you are trying to troll. A little part of France uses it... Which part uses English Channel? That would be interesting to know your sources. Besides this, in the neighboring countries, I thought it was Ärmelkanal, Manica, Mànega, Mancha... Very weird ways to say English Channel IMHO. Birdie (talk) 13:36, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  English name / French name 

message: There’s a Shakespeare quote at the top of human history. It doesn’t seem relevant to anything else, and it does not feel very professional to me. Lettuce Spice (talk) 15:27, 23 November 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: You're right. I've commented it out (so that if someone else can justify it here and write an explanation about it in the appropriate place, it's still there waiting). Bazza (talk) 20:09, 23 November 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is the Shakespeare quote necessary? 

message: The link is no longer valid Tc1632 (talk) 20:37, 23 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Note 25
Talk:Timeline of materials technology

message: Copyright Permission to modify and distribute this and other timelines originally developed by Niel Brandt have been granted to wikipedia. 
See Talk:Timeline of transportation technology
I was under the impression that iron smelting was first developed in Africa.  Was I mistaken?--Polyparadigm 08:11, 26 Feb 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: when was it first invented  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.190.74.191 (talk) 22:56, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  technology 

message: Hi,
AFAIK the transition from single material (hand axes of stone) to composite material tools is considered some sort of technological watershed.
In general, though, should there be a place for tech related to fibre? Fiber can be used for cloth (woven or feltet), and rope. Rope can be used for bowstrings, fishing lines, nets, leashes, harnesses, rigging, cranes ... unless all of this is so pre-historic that it would be difficult to accomodate?
Speaking of Savile Row, there is of course the 13th century invention of the button, now indispensable for clothing. A minor detail, though. 
T — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.89.219.147 (talk) 01:05, 26 September 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Try and try again - Fiber tech
Talk:Timeline of microscope technology

message: Copyright Permission to modify and distribute this and other timelines originally developed by Niel Brandt have been granted to wikipedia. 
See Talk:Timeline of transportation technology
----hi
I changed the date of the first electron microscope from 1932 to 1931, because Ruska himself says that's when he built it - see . --Camembert
----
It would have been interesting to get some quantitative measure of the development of microscopy, e.g. what kind of magnification factor one was able to get through various improvements over time. Does that make sense? (I've just started learning about the subject, so I'm probably wrong.) Mortene 11:44, 2 Jan 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: 1848-they are the bomb yo!  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.229.235.94 (talk) 15:11, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  microscopes 

message: What about the invention of Scanning Electron Microscope? I think it should be mentioned.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.46.220.176 (talk) 19:19, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  SEM 

message: There's no way Rife can be omitted from an article about history of microscopy. Smithsonian published his work. He was able to view viruses before the time of electron microscopy with his Universal Microscope.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.77.222.167 (talk) 15:18, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Where's Royal Raymond Rife 

message: What makes a microscope "compound"? Is it just multi-element optics, as opposed to a magnifying glass? —Ben FrantzDale (talk) 18:30, 9 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Compound microscope? 

message: Current article says 167 BCE water microscopes were used in China citing Ref 2. However, in Ref 2 to David Bardell's article on the invention of the microscope, there's no mention of China.   
:It comes up in sources, a Chow-Foo dynasty microscope water lens, but its a "possible", not a fact, and the current description is off by 2000 years. Fountains of Bryn Mawr (talk) 14:58, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Chinese water microscope unfounded
Talk:Timeline of rocket and missile technology

message: Copyright Permission to modify and distribute this and other timelines originally developed by Niel Brandt have been granted to wikipedia. 
See Talk:Timeline of transportation technology
---
I removed several satellites which are covered on that list and I think don't represent advances in rocket technology. I wonder if Pioneer 10 should go too. Rmhermen 02:18, Dec 13, 2003 (UTC)
:I guess this article should also cover, as the title indicates, advances in missile technology (mostly thinking of military missiles, I must admit); for now, the coverage seems only to be of space rocket relevance.  But perhaps this bias comes from the article being a relatively new one?  BTW, I second Rmhermen's opinion of the Pioneer 10 item. --Wernher 02:27, 13 Dec 2003 (UTC)
thread_title: Niel Brandt copyright permissions

message: Steam rocket is not the real rocket. It just revolve around its bearing and could not fly.
So it is not proper to categorize this thing as a rocket.
Steam rocket is only a fanciful name of an ancient Steam Engine.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.120.237.31 (talk) 05:14, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: 2009:  Steam rocket

message: I'd have to recommend removing many mentions of spaceflight in this article. Shouldn't the launching of Sputnik on an ICBM-based rocket be enough here? There is no need to start mentioning private spaceships, ion drives (not rockets), US launches if Russia did it first, ISS-related items, etc. I feel that about two-thirds of the entries after 1957 should be removed. Thoughts? MattFromOntario (talk) 02:21, 11 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: 2012

message: : "USSR launches rocket to moon (US-Newsreel picture is of a V2 Rocket in White Sands, New Mexico), 1959." Martinevans123 (talk) 17:55, 15 July 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  1959 Russian rocket hits moon 

message: The timeline gives the year of first launch as 1956. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PGM-17_Thor#Phase_I_test_launches gives the first launch as 1957, however. 1956 is when engine tests commenced. NelC (talk) 23:43, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  First launch of the PGM-17 Thor
Talk:Low-temperature technology timeline

message: Surely von Guericke was preceded by Evangelista Torricelli in 1643? While Torricelli did not invent a pump, he did demonstrate production of a vacuum.  Was von Guericke aware of Torricelli's work?  If not, what inspired him to build and demonstrate his pump? Moletrouser (talk) 14:37, 20 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: First Artificial Vacuum?

message: "Method of increasing the intensity of electrical oscillations" circa 1906.
Tesla did lose a lot of early work in the lab fire, maybe this was why?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.81.159.173 (talk) 05:44, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  No mention of Tesla 

message: From the Wikipedia page on the topic of absolute zero, the world record may be outdated on this page.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by EloquentMosquito (talk • contribs) 00:17, 8 December 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Outdated World Record
Talk:Timeline of electromagnetism and classical optics

message: I added this then I found out its from a Peusdo-Aristotle but I am unsure of the date. *350 BC The earliest written evidence of a camera obscura is found in Aristotle's description of a device in 350 BC in Problemata" (Patti, 1993). Aristotle's apparatus contained a dark chamber that had a single small hole to allow for sunlight to enter. With this device, he made observations of the sun. He noted that no matter what shape the hole was, it would still display the sun correctly as a round object. Another observation that he made was that when the distance between the aperture (the tiny hole) and the surface with the image increased, the image would become amplified.  Many attribute the invention of the camera obscura to Aristotle. He also rejected the vision theory of Plato of light rays emitted from the eyes.J8079s (talk) 23:36, 29 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  removed 

message: I am having considerable trouble in understanding why Hauksbee is there with Du Fay. It couldn't be Francis Hauksbee the elder who was long dead. And I'm not seeing anything about Francis Hauksbee the younger that would justify the inclusion. Charles Matthews (talk) 19:55, 21 May 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hauksbee and 1737 

message: An IP user proposed a merger of Timeline of electromagnetic theory but never started a discussion. I think there are two good reasons for merging them. First, Timeline of electromagnetic theory is a misnomer, since there are more articles on experiments than theory. Second, there is so much overlap between the lists that there is little point in maintaining them separately. If the list gets too bulky, a split between electromagnetism and optics might be appropriate. RockMagnetist(talk) 00:30, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed and  Klbrain (talk) 14:08, 25 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merger proposal
Talk:Timeline of gravitational physics and relativity

message: Note: Copyright Permission to modify and distribute this and other timelines originally developed by Niel Brandt have been granted to wikipedia. 
See Talk:Timeline of transportation technology
----
A lot of this article appears to be gibberish, specifically the additions of Revision 07:56, 2004 Feb 19. For example, the Tolver Preston bit is decidedly kooky. I am not a historian of physics, tho, so I'll leave it untouched. Just voicing my concern.
Xerxes 23:37, 2004 Mar 16 (UTC)
:Basically those contributions from that anon editor were anti-Einstein stuff probably taken from a single website  about Einstein being a plagiarist. The contributions listed in the timeline may in fact have merit, but as stated, they are probably far too generalized and simplified to be accurate. The person who added them to the timeline didn't bother to create a single biography article or describe any of the particular achievements in the links they created. Certainly there overlooked accomplishments in physics, but it is very easy for disgruntled people (with whatever particular agenda who are usually not physicists) to say "so and so invented this, really" when in fact they may have come close or suggested it, without really elaborating  a coherent theory, or any other reasons. I'm not interested in researching this, as I'm a physicist, and not a science historian, but without more nuanced descriptions, these things do not belong on the timeline in my opinion, and are misleading. -- Decumanus 01:08, 17 Mar 2004 (UTC)

message: Leading experts on general relativity like Clifford Martin Will and Steve Carlip say that Formalont and Kopeikin misinterpreted the results of their measurements. See speed of gravity. Therefore I deleted the Formalont/Kopeikin passage. --D.H 08:25, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Speed of gravity
Talk:Timeline of black hole physics

message: Copyright Permission to modify and distribute this and other timelines originally developed by Niel Brandt have been granted to wikipedia. 
See Talk:Timeline of transportation technology
----
Where's the fecund universes theory of Lee Smolin ?  That's about black holes.
----
This page should include the date that John Wheeler coined the term "black hole." I'd add it, if I knew it. --Carl 08:40, 26 Mar 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Done.  Note that it was in a public lecture, 29 December 1967, so some sources may give the publication date of 1968. (http://www2.phys.canterbury.ac.nz/kerrfest/timeline.html) Davepape 15:18, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

message: According to the main black holes article, David Finkelstein discovered the causality boundary nature of the Schw. Radius in 1958. Have amended accordingly. 188.220.171.33 (talk) 19:05, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Finkelstein?
Talk:Taiwanese Hokkien

message: "Taiwanese" is essentially the same dialect as the Min Nan dialect spoken in southern Fujian province. There are only few minor differences the spoken accents, but it should be considered the same language (just like British English and American English). The reason why there are two different names for the same language is because of the political status between People's Republic of China and Republic of China. However, since this is an article on a language, there is no reason why it should be influenced by politics. I suggest combining both articles and call it Min Nan, because of the origin of this language. AquaExecution — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.69.255.205 (talk) 06:04:16, 10 April 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Move this article under Min Nan 

message: Deleted the comment exaggerating the minor variation between Minnan in Taiwan and Minnan in Southern Fujian because of a few Japanese loanwords to the effect of the revolutionary discrepancy between modern English and old Anglo-saxon speech due to the influence of the Normans.
--—Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.121.215.56 (talk)  19:39:57, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Not a different language from Min-nan 

message: The Japanese character (as used in this article) バ renders as pa for me, the character パ.  I don't know if this was a user error or on my end, however when I go to edit the page to fix the problem...the correct character displays.
Just to clarify, the character renders as pa in the article and ba in the edit.
— Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.192.56.164 (talk) 04:46:21, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rendering Problem? 

message: The official language in Republic of China (common known as Taiwan) is Mandarin, not Taiwanese Hokkien.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wegettruth (talk • contribs) 16:29, 10 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Official language
Talk:American Pie (song)

message: Mr. McLean puts it quite simply right here in the quote already on the page:
"Sorry to leave you all on your own like this but long ago I realized that songwriters should make their statements and move on, maintaining a dignified silence."  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.212.225.248 (talk) 13:29, 26 May 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: How is this related to the development of the article? —Indian:BIO · [ ChitChat ] 13:55, 26 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  You can remove all the warnings, bells, whistles, etc. from this article 

message: *Here —Indian:BIO [ ChitChat ] 04:14, 4 March 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Billboard article

message: What does
  Full "See the USA in Your Chevrolet" lyrics for Dinah Shore on "The Dinah Shore Chevy Show" (1956–1961)
have to do with "American Pie"?  I say, nothing.98.149.97.245 (talk) 21:26, 10 May 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: And I don't really see how "... a photograph of Mick Jagger in costume at the Altamont Free Concert with a Hells Angel member in the background" is any more relevant. One of the most contrived rhymes in modern pop music, of course. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:55, 10 May 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Chevrolet 

message: This interview article expands on the lyric content. I'm not putting it into the article at this time because it seems incomplete to me, which may be intentional due to the impending release of other media mentioned in the article, plus revelations like this tend to be dubious; this particular one looks legit but I'd like a review from other editors. Mapsax (talk) 02:55, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Further lyric meaning 

message: The dozens of sets of parenthesis may make the reader miss the parens that open but don't close, and vice versa.  Does anyone have the patience to straighten it all out?  I would recommend a printout, or at least a laptop.  Trying to sort it out on my phone is giving me a headache
Matza Pizza (talk) 13:27, 24 August 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: I think I got it sorted out. –CWenger (^ • @) 22:03, 25 August 2021 (UTC)
replies: text:  I apologize for my rather lengthy delay in responding. Thank you for working on this, and thank you for letting me know.
Matza Pizza (talk) 12:24, 17 September 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Parenthesis to nowhere 

message: This article contains this phrase:
:many of the lyrics, only a portion of which were included in the finished recording
What are the other lyrics, which weren't included in the finished recording? 173.88.246.138 (talk) 02:47, 1 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  What are the rest of the lyrics?
Talk:Allergy

message: It would seem appropriate to include a brief mention of the association between caesarian section deliveries and allergic disorders, which is well documented in the relevant scientific literature (e.g. Renz-Polster H, David MR, Buist AS, Vollmer WM, O'Connor EA, Frazier EA, Wall MA. Caesarean section delivery and the risk of allergic disorders in childhood. Clin Exp Allergy. 2005 Nov;35(11):1466-72. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2222.2005.02356.x. PMID: 16297144.)  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:587:1227:D1F4:EC12:4B5F:672F:D28C (talk) 11:33, 16 March 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Caesarean section delivery and the risk of allergic disorders in childhood 

message: Editors of this page might consider including "idiosyncracies", which is what allergies were called in 1870.  Sources on archive.org and newspapers.com .  Also, there could be more attention to cerebral allergies, a problem that is underdiagnosed, resulting in the abuse of persons with psychiatric sequelae, including brain fog, depression, anxiety, learning and behavioral disabilities. When such patients are not identified, practitioners risk causing preventable harm. Liquidvisual (talk) 17:18, 17 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Idiosyncracies 

message: The testing section should include a discussion on intradermal dilution testing and modified quantitative testing. Prophylax (talk) 17:44, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Details regarding controls, wheal size, and interpretation were added to the skin prick testing section. Prophylax (talk) 18:00, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Testing 

message: Should there be a section discussing alternative medicine treatment for allergy (eg, herbal, traditional Chinese medicine)? Prophylax (talk) 20:28, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Alternative medicine 

message: Best treatment for contact allergens. Wash!!!!! Shower preferably. Get rid of the allergen. Never gets mentioned. So frustrating. 106.69.198.45 (talk) 23:32, 5 June 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Washing