lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Matthias Castrén

message: The article says:
 Castren was born at Tervola, in the parish of Kemi in Finland, on the 20th of November (December 2, 1813). 
Does anybody know which is right? Was there a different Finnish calendar or something? Maybe he was a born-again Christian? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 143.238.244.181 (talk • contribs) 07:47, October 19, 2005  (UTC)  
The difference between the Finnish calendar (Gregorian) and the Russian calendar (Julian) was two weeks. Hence, 20th Nov (Russian) is 2nd Dec (Finnish). Finland was a part of the Russian Empire between 1809-1917.128.214.100.224 (talk) 18:46, 12 February 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: New International Encyclopedia claims that he "...died May 7, 1852, from exhaustion - a martyr to science."  
He has traveled "...as far east as China and as far north as the Arctic Ocean."  Superslum 12:20, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Year of his death
Talk:Foster, Victoria

message: Foster's is a popular brand of beer. There is also the obscure concept of: 'Foster's fleas make you sneeze'
This article is about the town in Gippsland, not Foster's Lager or Foster's Group which as far as I know have nothing to do with the town. --Scott Davis Talk 06:31, 20 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Julie Gardner

message: Does anyone know what the protocol is for succession boxes?  Should we put Piers Wenger as Gardner's successor as Head of Drama, BBC Wales, or should we leave that box blank until he actually takes the position? —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 00:01, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The latter, I think. Pawnkingthree (talk) 21:25, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, leave it blank. Although a year after the above discussion nothing has changed, we shouldn't jump the gun and add someone prematurely; Gardner is still in charge for some months yet. 23skidoo (talk) 13:44, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Succession box
Wikipedia talk:Copyright problems/2005 October 19

message: User:SlimVirgin's contribution of images has all been copyrighted ones. While she admits their source, I'm afraid it's still copyvio. She has claimed fair use for this and 100s of images when she clearly knows it's not applicable for all.
Case 1: Photos of personalities that are copyright. Her contention: They are fair use since she can't get them. My reasoning: They are images of people who are relatively obscure; for if they were really well known one can get a freely licenced photo. She claims that these users "know it's being used" here. It's only her word upon which I've lost faith. She refuses to get permission for she knows that they'll be deleted. A case of hyping up people to gain publicity for that person?
Case 2: Animal abuses photos are her majority. If she wanted to showcase animal torture she could be content with a few ones and duplicate the images across similar articles given the fact that they are all copyrighted. But she refuses again and wants the whole collection of the copyrighted websites claiming that they are "educational" and that the images have no commercial value. The commerical value point is debatable since if PETA and similar groups didn't get those photos, they wouldn't have obtained publicity or media coverage that in turn led to greater funding for them. These images were and (I suspect still are commercial value) to them. If these organizations don't feel it's of commercial value then they should release them under free licence. Also note that none of her images are of reduced quality. She has misued the spirit of fair use and probably feels its "fair for her to use".
Case 3: She has also uploaded images without sources and has somehow managed to keep them here. A few is ok, but until I dug up her image contributions it wasn't apparent. Further she has engaged in what Wikipedia calls avoidant vandalism i.e. retagging and removing my previous entries for October 17 in copyright problems. Unfortunately she's an admin and so seems bent upon getting her own way. Sadly she just might, as all this is breaking my back. :| Idleguy 07:28, 19 October 2005 (UTC)
Talk:Teachings of Opus Dei

message: I made an NPOV tag, because the article contains lots of unattributed explanations what this teaching means and why it is ok - this is opinion which needs to be attributed correctly for NPOV. Also critique regarding certain teachings should be included. --Irmgard 07:30, 19 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  NPOV Tag 

message: I checked the reference and quote: The reference is not Rodriguez but May who refers often to Rodriguez but not at this point (he does, in the sentence before referring to "intrinsic goodness of the material world" which is not the same subject). The linking to Vatican II is not referenced by May and the quote is not about the teachings of Opus Dei but from Lumen Gentium and does not refer to Opus Dei, so it is somewhat off-topic here. I added the correct reference and reworded the para to sum up what the reference says - I also moved it to the bottom, as its actual content does not warrant a top position. --Irmgard 20:56, 20 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vatican II 
Talk:Eivør (singer)

message: Does anyone know how to pronounce Eivør Pálsdóttir? If the article mentions that the English way of saying her name is odd, it would make sense to include the "correct" Faroese.
:Someone could record a .ogg file.
:Jens Persson (130.242.128.85 00:56, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No. ℚuackor 16:17, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  It's a Faroese not an Icelandic or Swedish name, therefore 'ø' is correct. The pronunciation is close to ay-vur, can't be bothered to write it out in IPA but I think that's a reasonable approximation. 128.243.220.42 (talk) 15:41, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: ... is Sædis, as the article states. So can you confirm that in Faroese, Icelandic given names ending in '-ís' would end in '-is' in this language? Just to make sure it's not a typo. And yes, I AM aware of the fact that Icelandic and Faroese is not the same thing. (Cf. :is:S%C3%A6d%C3%ADs as well as Herdís, a similar name.) -andy 77.191.198.179 (talk) 18:27, 9 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Her mother's given name 
Talk:Teamstergate

message: "Teamstergate" only gets 21 unique hits. When we say that the "media" called the "scandal" by this name, who in the media are we talking about? Apparently a very small section. Was there a more popular name? It's hard to call even egregious wrong-doing a scandal if it never became widely known. -Willmcw 08:07, 19 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Kyabetsu Tarō

message: This article has been kept following this AFD debate. Sjakkalle (Check!) 08:13, 19 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Untitled 
Talk:United Democratic Front (Malawi)

message: There are two other UDFs with Wikipedia articles (in South Africa and Namibia). Shouldn't this be a disambig, with this article moved to United Democratic Front (Malawi) --Taejo | Talk 08:16, 19 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Cross-validation (statistics)

message: The article makes the following claim:
:\begin{align}
\text{MSE} &= \frac 1 n \sum_{i=1}^n (y_i - \hat{y}_i)^2 = \frac 1 n \sum_{i=1}^n (y_i - a - \boldsymbol\beta^T \mathbf{x}_i)^2\\&= \frac{1}{n}\sum_{i=1}^n (y_i - a - \beta_1x_{i1} - \dots - \beta_px_{ip})^2
\end{align}
If the model is correctly specified, it can be shown under mild assumptions that the expected value of the MSE for the training set is (n − p − 1)/(n + p + 1) < 1 times the expected value of the MSE for the validation set (the expected value is taken over the distribution of training sets).
The text cites Trippa et al. (2015) specifically about the bias factor (n-p-1) / (n+p+1). However, the paper does not seem to contain any discussion of this bias factor for OLS. Is there an algebraic proof available for OLS?
Based on a simple simulation, the claim seems to be true.
chery (talk) 16:32, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Claim about OLS' downward bias in the expected MSE 

message: Is there another paper describing this method? The cited paper doesn't even call it "swap sampling" 24.13.125.183 (talk) 00:57, 15 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Swap sampling" 

message: In "Motivation", the article says/defines cross-validation as: " If an independent sample of validation data is taken from the same population as the training data, it will generally turn out that the model does not fit the validation data as well as it fits the training data." 
What if instead, an independent sample of validation data is taken from a different population as the training data? 
It seems like a bad choice of syntax for that sentence. Eigenvoid (talk) 13:24, 18 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unclear definition of cross validation 

message: In the chapter "k*l-fold cross-validation", in the sentence: "The inner training sets are used to fit model parameters, while the outer test set is used as a validation set to provide an unbiased evaluation of the model fit." the text "outer test set" shouldn't be changed into "inner test set" since this is the validation of the fit of the model parameters? Cadoraghese (talk) 14:58, 30 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Outer test set
Talk:Lexical functional grammar

message: This is not a good explanation.
Its target audience appears to be those who already know quite a bit about the current way of studying languages amongst the "intelligentsia".
However, while one can explain an engine to a mechanic very succinctly; the rest of us would be baffled by the terminology, even if we could otherwise grapes the concepts.
I believe Wikipedia is intended to inform the public, not become a private enrichment for the initiated.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.114.248.239 (talk) 17:25, 30 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Quality Issues
Talk:Lie group/Archive

message: What about mentioning Killing and Cartan's classification of all possible compact simple Lie algebras? (i.e. the classical groups SU(N), SO(N), and Sp(N), and the exceptional algebras G2, F4, E6, E7, and E8.) -- CYD
Yup, that's important. Maybe it fits better on Lie algebra though? AxelBoldt, Monday, May 27, 2002
This statement mentioned in the article: "If we require that the Lie group be simply connected, then the global structure is determined by its Lie algebra: for every finite dimensional Lie algebra g over F there is a unique (up to isomorphism) simply connected Lie group G with g as Lie algebra."  is this really true?  shouldn't we also require that the Lie group be compact and semisimple, for this to hold?  like for example, don't Spin(n) and Spin(p,q) have the same Lie algebra (where p+q=n)?  only Spin(n) is compact and semisimple, and the other isn't.Lethe 05:05, 9 Mar 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, I think it is true. Spin(p+q) and Spin(p,q) have different real Lie algebras. However, if you complexify you obtain isomorphic complex Lie algebras which tells you that Spin(p+q;C) and Spin(p,q;C) are isomorphic complex Lie groups. -- Fropuff 05:37, 2004 Mar 9 (UTC)
That's correct. In broad terms complexifying the Lie algebra loses information about the group, but simplifies the algebra. 
Charles Matthews 10:23, 9 Mar 2004 (UTC)
Talk:Potassium bromate

message: The use of potassium bromate is proven to be used safely in the malting of barley under certain conditions perscribed in Title 21 CFR Ch.I (4-1-05 Edition) section 172.730. Mention of this regulation in the article would be helpful to people wanting to know how Potassium Bromate is used as a food additive. 
Here is the link to the CFR code book: http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2422/01apr20051500/edocket.access.gpo.gov/cfr_2005/aprqtr/21cfr172.730.htm
Taraniscain 23:05, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mentioning of the Code of Federal Regulations on Pottasium Bromate as a Food Additive 

message: This would be useful information, especially in light of the 2014 study that proved that bromine is essential to producing collagen and thus is essential for life. Encyclopedant (talk) 06:05, 3 February 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  How much is used in flour?
Talk:The Producers

message: The bot that retrofitted the heading "Untitled" at  13:36, 12 July 2010‎ admittedly has done the service of reminding negligent colleagues that talk contribs are more effective, and more addressable, when they follow a heading that hints at what aspect of the article is under discussion; sadly bots are weak at sussing out the meanings of contribs.--Jerzy•t 05:56, 10 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Where does this take place in? 1940s? 1950s? OR 1960s? --PJ Pete
*The original film had a contemporary setting (i.e. 1968).  Oddly, the much later musical had a retro setting in the 50s, presumably so it could excise the "dated" material about hippies.--Pharos 06:24, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  (Time setting)
Talk:List of storms named Yuri

message: Yes, another one. This one remained over the open waters, and though it reached a high intensity, it could easily be said in the seasonal article once I create it. Hurricanehink 04:22, 5 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merger 

message: Someone re-started this and added some more information, but the storm was still a very non-notable storm. The storm did nothing, and what little information was there in the impact was moved to the season article. I propse it be merged... again. Hurricanehink 17:22, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Are you kidding?!?!. this is one of the famous Pacific typhoons of the 20th century! (if you been watching National Geographic) Against Merge Storm05 17:47, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Nope. How is this famous? You walk around your hometown and ask a bunch of random people if they've heard of it. Most of them are probably going to say no. $36 million is pitiful by most basins' standards. The storm didn't do much more than have a cool name and look bad ass. -- §HurricaneERIC§Damagesarchive 02:08, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Completely agreed. $36 million is very low, and the storm caused an "unknown" amount of deaths. Storm05, how is this famous? Hurricanehink 05:06, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It was famous for those storm surge shots taken by a storm chaser who was nearly got wiped out by the storm surge he's filming, just look on the internet you'll know what im talking. Storm05 13:58, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: But storm surge obviously isn't limited to this one storm. While it is interesting, it isn't notable, and doesn't justify the article's existance. Such trivia would be great addition if the storm was notable for something else, but $36 million and no deaths means this will probably get merged. At least, that is my vote. Hurricanehink 15:00, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I only know of two significantly famous stormchaser videos: The video of a house frame falling into the surf during Typhoon Omar and the audio of Hurricane Hugo taken in a hallway that established the classic hurricane howl. I've seen videos from Yuri, but I don't think any are that famous. -- §HurricaneERIC§Damagesarchive 23:31, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

text: Support Merge. This storm was not notable for anything that it actually did. --Coredesat 11:45, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I, Eric Brown, hereby pronounce the defendant, Yuri the Badass, guilty of non-notability and sentence it to death by beheading. [raises axe] ;) -- §HurricaneERIC§Damagesarchive 00:31, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Re merge?
Talk:List of leaders of the Republic of China

message: Wikipedia:History standards for China-related articles states, "The romanization of Chinese characters of all the following issue should always be Hanyu Pinyin (or pinyin in shorthand) unless some other representations were established and have been widely accepted." Historical writing post-2000 seems to be widely using pinyin place names. While people may be *mistakenly* believe that there is a name change, it is unappropriate for us to further that notion by writings such as "Peking (later Peiping, now Beijing)". There has been no name change. There is only been a change in romanization. the name in English used in the past is irrelevant if it is not being used now, except in the cases of organizational names. This should be discussed further at Wikipedia talk:History standards for China-related articles or Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style (China-related articles). --Jiang 10:00, 19 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks Jiang. While I don't entirely agree, there's no reason not to comply with the current standards. — Instantnood 10:09, 19 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Romanization
Talk:Linearised Einstein field equations

message: Ok, this is yucky , I know - hence the tags. ---Mpatel  (talk) 10:01, 19 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: For the cleanup tag, what is "yucky" about the article in terms of Manual of Style? I think it looks OK for the tag to be removed. Barkeep Chat | $ 19:02, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

message: I'm not sure why we have separate articles on Linearized Gravity and Linearised Einstein field equations; any reason not to merge them? Geoffrey.landis (talk) 16:04, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge with Linearized Gravity article?
Talk:Brachiator

message: I would question the opinions about which primates should be included under the category of brachiators.  I am currently taking a course on human evolution with Biruté Galdikas, and both her lecture material and the course text (Humankind emerging, 8th ed) firmly classify orangutans and most other great apes as brachiators.  In addition, the primary reason claimed for the development of brachiation as a method of mobility is size (weight).  For a small 4 ounce monkey, running around on top of branches on all fours is easy.  Once you start to exceed a certain weight, balance becomes far more difficult, and it simply becomes easier to swing underneath branches with your arms.
Humans, at least according to Galdikas, are still anatomically brachiators.  The only traits we seem to have lost are the extremely long arms and the upper body musculature.  Our skeletal structure is still very well adapted to swinging around branches.
(later, by another author)
This is a terrible stub for many reasons but especially because of this: brachiators 'by design'? That term should never appear in an evolutionary biology context.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.164.121.151 (talk) 19:43, 4 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Brachiators
Talk:Cash crop

message: I've reverted an edit that removed the article's see also section, categories and interwiki link. The edit added the following content, which may be worth adding back to the article if it can be appropriately sourced:
:Some cash crops in times of slavery were cotton, indigo, and rice. Often times planters would send cash crops on ships to places thay could get the most money from, or would trade the cash crops for things thay needed, like animal supplies or common house old items.
--Muchness 17:57, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Removed content

message: Faith Sione is the cool est person EVER  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 110.33.79.55 (talk) 07:24, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  in my s.social book 

message: Including it under the heading "by country" appears to suggest that it is. I dunno how best to fix this though, can someone take a look? Thanks. – Arms & Hearts (talk) 09:57, 19 November 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Africa isn't a country 

message: Considering the amount of countries that aren't anglocentric, how would we fit them all the different countries with their cash crops in? 
Funkyman99 (talk) 23:51, 7 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lots of countries 

message: Why 196.191.53.41 (talk) 08:55, 27 November 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Crop 

message: Given that in developed countries no one is a subsistence farmer and every crop is produced for sale, then singling out individual crops, like, for example, in the Australia entry, is absurd. Shouldn't every crop grown be listed as a "cash crop"?
You can see here that lentils are not significant enough to make this list of cash crops in Australia, whereas the entry implies some significance.
Other developed nations are similar. XabqEfdg (talk) 08:08, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cash crops in developed countries
Talk:Chester Cathedral Choir

message: What actually are the facts here? The choir's website, and the cathedral's website are equally unclear. 
The facts as I can discover them are 
:6 paid layclerks who are all music professionals 
:boy choristers from local schools
:girl choristers ditto 
:Nave Choir- a group of adults who volunteer their services. 
:Website claims 10 choral services per week.... but i didn't manage to count ten 
:Choir sings at 10 services per week..... the term "Choir" implies that the men and boys all sing at ten services per week. This seems really unlikely, particularly as the boys are not schooled on the site. Five or six services is about all that is usual for the choristers. 
:Does it mean that the boys sing five and the girls sing five? 
:Do the lay clerks sing ten services a week?
:Or does it mean that there are ten sung services, which is quite different to ten choral services? 
Can someone who is really sure of the facts sort this out? Amandajm (talk) 10:34, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Query
Talk:Tim Healy (politician)

message: There is an interesting suggestion in Tim Pat Coogan's book on Michael Collins that Healy may have been a long standing British agent code-named Thorpe: and that Michael Collins' near unmasking of the identity of Thorpe may have played some part in Collins' death. Coogan does not come to any definite conclusion on this suggestion: but certain aspects of Healy's career would make much more sense if he had been a British Agent. Is there any more evidence available on this point?
[This unsigned comment was moved from the article to the talk page by Vilcxjo 11:02, 19 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: However Healy's memoirs published in the 1920s openly stated that he was a visitor to 10 Downing Street in 1919-20, as well as being a moderate Sinn Féin supporter. While there's always plenty to speculate on, nothing he said would have influenced events, and it seems he admired Collins in 1922 and had no obvious reason to see him dead. Nor did the British, at that time.86.46.221.236 (talk) 12:41, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Healy as British Agent?

message: The writer of the article fails to support his/her view that Healy was "brilliant". Like many others, I can think of very many adjectives to describe Tim Healy. "Brilliant" is not one of them.El Gringo 05:00, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: "Brilliant"

message: This article lists very few sources.MarkHarper1 (talk) 01:14, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  SOURCES 

message: Questions at Talk:Great Seal of the Irish Free State#Tim Healy's private seal jnestorius(talk) 12:19, 16 October 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Private seal
Talk:Narni

message: Rather than cardinal Gil Alvarez De Albornoz, just Cardinal Albornoz, with one fewer distracting link: anyone who feels the need to look at an article cardinal in this connection will also, a fortiori, need to look at Albornoz; and the Albornoz article links to the article cardinal. In general, there's starting to be too many pointless links in the articles (like linking English every time it is stated what some foreign-language term is in English....) Bill 11:29, 19 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Link(s) to "Cardinal Albornoz"