lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Optical computer

message: This article restrict photonic computing to non-linear optics. There are researchs(and patents) on the field dealing with interference and holograms, wich should be mentioned. --vininim 03:29, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Interference photonic 

message: I don't even know how to edit this article. Wikipedia is a general encyclopedia. It was with difficulty I managed to understand the first sentence. Much of the rest of the article is beyond me. This is not an introduction to the subject. It needs to be simplified. A lot. --Pigman (talk • contribs) 00:42, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Still, it does appear to make some degree of sense. While it seems to be from a personal viewpoint it does go about explaining aspects of the topic quite well. It may sound specialized but then there are many high class articles that do the same. It's the degree with which the sophistication can be adequately explained that matters. I think it's clear enough but then my background may have something to do with it. Zuracech lordum 08:40, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Exceptionally Unclear and Specialized

message: This is more of a self-reminder. I'll work on this during the weekend to see if I can clean it up a bit. Maybe not add new info, but sort what we have into categories. Ghostalker
*Well, that looks a bit better. I added some sections, and wrote up a proper intro to the topic. The material that was on there was either written by someone who works in the research field, or it was copied from another source. I lay fiber optic lines for a living and I barely understood half the stuff that was in the article. I DID NOT delete the original work however, I saved it in a hidden note on the page so someone else can look it over. It seems way too advanced for the common user to understand, but I don't want to delete comprehensive information on here. My sources have been included at the bottom of the page, and I gave credit to the Dr's speech towards the top. This is an important article, so I'm glad I gave it a kick-start towards one day being a featured article. I'll work on it more when I get the time. Ghostalker 19:38, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It would be more helpful to make specific suggestions and comments about what specific changes you think should, or should not be made to the article, rather than to generalize about Wikipedians (see WP:NPA).  I hope you will continue to contribute to make this article better. Clement Cherlin 09:04, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Work 

message: just a horrible article —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.140.5.249 (talk) 05:07, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  glaring inaccuracies
Talk:Preston Smith

message: That the deceased Preston Smith is any more deserving of description in Wikipedia than the currently serving Preston Smith cannot be logically demonstrated.  Although I am certain that the deceased Preston Smith was a fine person with many relatives and friends anxious to secure his place in history, he was nonetheless a minor figure.  The currently serving Preston Smith is an up and coming Christian Right politician who may have as much long term political influence as did Julian Bond in the Civil Rights Movement.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.20.28.21 (talk) 21:50, 13 June 2004 (UTC)
Talk:Island hopping

message: The last sentence says some Japanese soldiers stayed on some islands for years after the end of the war, unaware it ended. Can this be verified at all, sicne it seems weird to have them so isolated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kaiser matias (talk • contribs) 05:49, 7 November 2005
:Yes. There are some cases of this that were only resolved recently.  .  --Doug (talk) 20:14, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fought for years after? 

message: Cleaned up (see timestamp). → J@red  01:07, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cleanup 

message: Christopher Columbus didnt name the Carribean Islands did he? I dont remember learning that in school, someone needs to look into that... —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 75.199.247.42 (talk) 01:35, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  did you notice the last sentences? 

message: i deleted it. you can thank me later 4.249.45.148 16:00, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: thanks Dushan Jugum (talk) 06:29, 20 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  minor vandalism 

message: I would like to turn Island Hopping into a redirect to Oceanic dispersal. As shown on this page the two are near synonyms. There is still a lot of room on the Oceanic dispersal page should anyone wish to make an Island Hopping subsection one day. Dushan Jugum (talk) 06:55, 20 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge with Oceanic dispersal
Talk:Police Academy (franchise)

message: this says winslow was the only cast member to reprise role for the series,but the graph shows otherwise..........what gives?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.193.61.243 (talk) 09:12, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Good point.  Have clarified.  Rob Sinden (talk) 08:59, 13 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: It appears we have fixed it by removing the graph. Pity. They are usually very helpful. 155.213.224.59 (talk) 16:05, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Winslow
Talk:Communications in the Vatican City

message: Discussion concluded and article kept on June 13, 2004
====Communications in the Vatican City====
* Information doesnt merrit it's own page.  Put into Vatican City page. Saopaulo1
** You can do that.  Merge the info and put #REDIRECT Vatican City into the above page and it will create a redirect. Ditto with one below. Dunc_Harris|☺ 11:50, 4 Jun 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Old discussion from [[Wikipedia:Votes for deletion|Votes for deletion]]

message: * Information doesnt merrit it's own page.  Put into Vatican City page. Saopaulo1
** You can do that.  Merge the info and put #REDIRECT Vatican City into the above page and it will create a redirect. Ditto with one below. Dunc_Harris|☺ 11:50, 4 Jun 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Communications in the Vatican City]]
Talk:American Pool Checkers

message: I don't think it's a good idea to have the long list of pool checkers champions in the article. What does everyone else think? Eric119 02:41, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Champions listing

message: I'm not any kind of expert, but it seems to me that the discussion of the rules presented here is not quite correct--or is at least ambiguous on key points.  This is based on my reading of the rules at pages such as this.  I don't feel qualified to make any changes, but I present the following:
1. The article reads "a piece may move both forward and backward,"  but I do not think this is generally the case.  A piece may capture backwards, but may only move forward on a non-capturing move, yes?
2. The article also states "a king can jump any number of squares forward and backward as long as one square is empty past the opponent," which is true if the king is making a capturing move, but neglects completely the non-capturing move of a king.  My understanding is that a king may move as a Chess bishop--any number of spaces in a straight-line diagonal--without making a capture.  (This is, of course, only possible if no capturing moves are available, since captures are still compulsory).
3. Lastly, and of some significance, no mention is made of the fact that a checker can not promote to a king by simply touching the back rank--it must end its move there, which is impossible if a further (backwards) capture is available to it after landing on the back rank.
Thoughts?--158.111.5.34 (talk) 13:39, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Uncertainty about rules
Talk:Pioneer program

message: I've removed a whole lot of redundant redirects in this article, so I'll list them here:
===Able space probes===
*Able 1
*Able 2
*Able 3
===Pioneer 6, 7, 8 and 9===
*Pioneer A
*Pioneer B
*Pioneer C
*Pioneer D
*Pioneer E
*Maybe the numbered missions as well.
===Pioneer Venus project===
*Pioneer Venus Orbiter AKA Pioneer Venus 1
*Pioneer Venus Multiprobe AKA Pioneer Venus 2
*Pioneer Venus Probe 1
*Pioneer Venus Probe 2
*Pioneer Venus Probe 3
*Pioneer Venus Probe 4
JamesHoadley 17:23, 3 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Unlinked redirects in the Pioneer program

message: *Pioneer Venus Orbiter AKA Pioneer Venus 1
*Pioneer Venus Multiprobe AKA Pioneer Venus 2
*Pioneer Venus Probe 1
*Pioneer Venus Probe 2
*Pioneer Venus Probe 3
*Pioneer Venus Probe 4
JamesHoadley 17:23, 3 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Pioneer Venus project]]
Talk:Spreadeagle (position)

message: From VfD:
* Dicdef; maybe if there were a discussion of police forces that use it, regulations of, etc., but defining it (with an eye toward bdsm) is just lexical.Geogre 17:21, 13 Jun 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Nice picture, but is it a spreadeagle?  The arms aren't exactly stretched out. 81.153.43.82 15:34, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Her arms are spread far enough to qualify.  She clearly can't bring her hands down below her shoulders. Johntex\talk 16:42, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: A straight-armed picture would probably illustrate spreadeagle better, though nice pic anyway! 213.78.77.161 20:30, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wrong picture? 

message: Must a person be supine to be in a spreadeagle?  The list of sex positions implies that one could also be prone.  --Strait 17:50, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Quite right, and I have amended the article.  The dictionary definition is "held or secured with the arms and legs stretched out, originally especially to be flogged"; nothing about which way you're facing.  I agree with the comment above that the picture isn't really a spreadeagle as the arms aren't stretched out - but it's a nice picture.--Taxwoman 12:01, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Supine?
Talk:Ottawa River (Auglaize River tributary)

message: There appear to be two Ottawa rivers in Ohio. This one, a tributary af the Auglaize, and the other near Toledo, that flows into Lake Erie at the Maumee Bay and arises in Michigan (which is how I happened to find this--I clicked a link on the list of Michigan rivers and was about to add the Michigan rivers category to this when I stopped to wonder how a tributary of the Auglaize could be a Michigan river). 
Possible names: Ottawa River (Auglaize River) and Ottawa River (Lake Erie). Any other ideas? Or should we just describe both in this article? older≠wiser 02:04, 14 Jun 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Amanda Burton

message: Alternatively, she may also have been born on October 10, 1956 (according to http://www.imdb.com ). The date I used is from the BBC website. <KF> 02:14, 14 Jun 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Who are the Burtons in Australia?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Millbanks (talk • contribs) 17:31, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Australian Burtons

message: We originally had her being born on 8 January 1957, but in 2005 we changed it to 10 October 1956, because IMDB et al show this date.  Some sources acknowledge the 1957 date appears in various places.  My question is, how do we know which one is correct, and is IMDB the final arbiter for the accuracy of such matters?  Should we also be acknowledging that some sources prefer the 1957 date, and say why we prefer the 1956 one?  --  JackofOz (talk) 07:46, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Birthdate

message: For someone as famous as Amanda this has to be the smallest wiki page ever!  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.234.132.134 (talk) 21:27, 18 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Limited information 

message: Please do not make edits contradicting WP:DERRY, or else first gain consensus on this talk page for such a change. --Hobbes Goodyear (talk) 03:19, 2 February 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  City of birth
Talk:Friedrich Georg Wilhelm von Struve

message: It is hard to accept, as the article appears to, that Struve was anticipated by Bessel in the measurement of stellar parallax.  Rather--I forbear from providing the footnoted dates--Struve's preliminary announcement of the parallax of alpha Lyrae inspired Bessel to come out with a better-documented (NOT more accurate) parallax for 61 Cygni some months later.
Simply put, Struve was the first to measure stellar parallax.
:Most authoritative sources give Bessel credit as the first.
:Some say that Thomas Henderson got his results for Alpha Centauri early, but didn't have the confidence to publish them.  According to seds.org, Struve's result was less accurate than Bessel's .  Not surprising, since Vega is much farther away than 61 Cygni so the parallax is harder to measure to the same percentage accuracy.
:Bessel was the first to publish an acceptably accurate non-preliminary result (within 10%), and for this reason he is usually given credit as the first.  But most sources mention Struve and Henderson's parallel efforts in passing.
:One source seems to say that Struve had a preliminary result that was surprisingly accurate, but then published a final result that was quite a bit off. 
Question about this:   The Vega page and this page are contradictory about this.    On the Vega page it says:
"The distance to Vega can be determined by measuring its parallax shift against the background stars as the Earth orbits the Sun. The first person to publish a star's parallax was Friedrich G. W. von Struve, when he announced a value of 0.125 arcseconds (0.125″) for Vega. Friedrich Bessel was skeptical about Struve's data, and, when Bessel published a parallax of 0.314″ for the star system 61 Cygni, Struve revised his value for Vega's parallax to nearly double the original estimate. This change cast further doubt on Struve's data. Thus most astronomers at the time, including Struve, credited Bessel with the first published parallax result. However, Struve's initial result was actually close to the currently accepted value of 0.129″, as determined by the Hipparcos astrometry satellite."
Is this discrepancy real, because historians of science really do not know.  Or is there an answer?   Either way, this page should probably say so.  
If anyone out there knows, especially if you have a nice reference, it would be a small edit to make this clear.   It is a really interesting story!  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jwkeohane (talk • contribs) 17:43, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: -- Curps 03:34, 14 Jun 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Struve or Bessel?

message: While Struve lived and worked long time in Tartu/Dorpat and Pulkovo, his nationality is definitely ethnic german. In the factbox of the article his nationality is claimed to baltic german, but that is incorrect. Most probably the cited author did not made the difference or just described Struve's scientific work together real baltic german (i.e. originating from Estonian-Latvian-Lithuanian region) researchers.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tonisee (talk • contribs) 12:24, 17 July 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Nationality of Struve
Talk:John Bell (Tennessee politician)

message: An anonymous user recently transformed the John Bell article into an article about the Bishop of Worcester. I moved the article to John Bell (Bishop of Worcester) and created this article. 
Here is the edit history from the other article prior to the anonymous user's edits:
(cur) (last)  19:02, 11 May 2004 207.69.7.240 
(cur) (last)  14:20, 11 May 2004 207.69.32.38
(cur) (last)  14:01, 11 May 2004 207.69.1.22 
(cur) (last)  13:57, 11 May 2004 207.69.1.22 
(cur) (last)  02:18, 15 Mar 2004 Cyrius m (typo) 
(cur) (last)  17:15, 9 Feb 2004 Maximus Rex m (Reverted edits by 152.163.252.225 to last version by Ahoerstemeier) 
(cur) (last)  17:14, 9 Feb 2004 152.163.252.225 
(cur) (last)  17:13, 9 Feb 2004 Ahoerstemeier m (Reverted edits by 152.163.252.225 to last version by Infrogmation) 
(cur) (last)  17:13, 9 Feb 2004 152.163.252.225 
(cur) (last)  17:12, 9 Feb 2004 152.163.252.225 
(cur) (last)  13:34, 3 Jan 2004 Infrogmation 
(cur) (last)  13:00, 3 Jan 2004 152.163.252.225 (John Bell of the Constitutional Convention Party won 13% of the vote in the election of 1860) 
older≠wiser 02:48, 14 Jun 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: The last line of the "Presidential Candidacy" section makes no sense, for Lincoln won the state of California....  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.51.212.95 (talk) 16:14, 14 May 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: It was uncited anyway, so I got rid of it.  BrineStans (talk) 04:06, 15 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Presidential Candidacy
Talk:USS Abraham Lincoln (CVN-72)

message: USS ABRAHAM LINCOLN no longer holds the record for longest time at sea. the USS NIMITZ now holds it with 321 days at sea, it set the record during 2020 during the covid epidemic 57.140.28.10 (talk) 03:32, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  USS ABRAHAM LINCOLN no longer holds the record for longest time at sea.
Talk:Drug legalization

message: I think this page and any useful content should be merged into War on Drugs. Tuf-Kat 03:09, Jun 14, 2004 (UTC)
:That's a good idea. I'll mark it so that to be done. Guanaco 04:24, 14 Jun 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. - Defunkt 07:48, 14 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Talk:Sigrid the Haughty

message: So, uh both this woman and Gunhilda are claimed to be mothers of Canute the Great? One of them was the surrogate mother, perhaps? :-) Stan 03:10, 14 Jun 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Nope, we just don't know for sure which one was his mother. Either that one or the other. Szopen 09:06, 14 Jun 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Then they should at least reference each other - I found each by a randomly different path. Stan 06:02, 15 Jun 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: The article now says that Gunhilda was a pseudonym.  How do we get that ? -- Beardo 05:01, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's because historians are as confused about her as you :) Szopen 07:17, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Sigrid the Haughty?

message: When an article in Svenskt Biografiskt Lexikon states that Sigrid is an apocryphal queen, this cannot be just brushed aside by writing "one author says she is apocryphal", with Berig's assertion "I know two recent sources who say otherwise". That does not make it Berig 2 - Kuiper 1. SBL is an authoritative source. The articles are reviews of the scholarly literature, with references. The authors are experts in their field. The idea of a normal encyclopedia is to reflect this kind of literature, without giving undue weight to minority standpoints. But Berig does not like the conclusion in SBL, and is pushing an antiquated POV. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 15:00, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Why do you claim that it is an "antiquated POV" that she may have been historical? Are you really honest, here?--Berig (talk) 15:05, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Apocryphal 

message: I have attempted a significant rearrangement and rewrite, intended to separate and clarify the distinctions among the legendary Sigrid, the historical record, and the reconstructions deriving from these. As it read before, they were so intermixed that the discinctions were blurred (or erroneous, misattributing legend or hypothesis as history).  This is a first draft, and I would encourage rephrasing and expansion, but it is important to retain the distinctions regarding the nature of the information (saga, chronicle, and modern hypotheses). Agricolae (talk) 20:50, 20 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rewrite 

message: Why does Świętosława redirect here instead of Gunhild of Wenden?--The Emperor's New Spy (talk) 21:36, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Świętosława
Talk:Natural horn

message: The picture at the end of the article does not contain a natural horn; please remove.
Baccherini (talk) 22:32, 2 March 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Photos 

message: The "Hand stopping technique" section covers at least three, maybe four techniques, and never says why these techniques are required. I suggest a re-write. We should open with a sentence or two about valves and why a horn with no valves can't play a complete chromatic scale. Then we should discuss the three (four?) techniques used to get around this.
The first and third paragraphs are repetitive and should be combined. The first lists crooking (which hasn't been explained yet), bending, and hand-stopping. The third lists "modulating the lip tension" (is this the same as bending?), "switching the crooks" (I assume this is "crooking" but we should say so), and hand-stopping. These paragraphs should be combined, without the list. There should be a few words about why we need both bending and hand-stopping, since they seem (from our descriptions) to do the same thing. GA-RT-22 (talk) 23:24, 13 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Poor organization
Talk:Vin Diesel

message: The article states Diesel has never met his father but there are numerous pictures online proving this is false. 2601:603:1400:A:6586:7ACF:5CF2:52C0 (talk) 19:20, 10 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vin Diesel Has met his father 

message: I think there should be a separate Filmography page like with every other actor. GamerKlim9716 (talk) 20:44, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Filmography  

message: The reference (numbered 9 as of 25 April, 2024) that states he refers to himself "of ambiguous ethnicity" is not a valid link.  Khayes1003 (talk) 01:43, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ref 9 Not Available
Talk:Macleay River

message: WHAT ABOUT A PICTURE OR A DIAGRAM???????/
—Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.54.206.159 (talk • contribs) 
What about limiting your use of capital letters and question marks? If you have a picture or diagram, feel free to add it.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 144.131.142.131 (talk) 06:48, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Article layout and content

message: Are there any paddlers out there who would like to write about their experiences touring and camping along the Macleay river?
Craig Turner  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 110.20.38.3 (talk) 21:26, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Canoe/kayak the Macleay River
Category talk:Liberal parties

message: Ought the Australian liberals be listed here?  They started out as a liberal party, didn't they? john k 06:08, 14 Jun 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Libertarians should not be a subcategory, I think.  Although libertarianism shares traits with classical liberalism, I think the differences between them and actual liberal parties are large enough that they are not merely a subset.  As to "conservative liberals" or "classical liberals," I would agree that the term "conservative liberal" is not particularly in common use.  I have heard the term "Liberal-Conservative" used - for instance to describe the Octobrists in Tsarist Russia.  On the other hand, I think that "free market liberal" is even weaker - were the National Liberals in Germany to be distinguished from the Progressives by their commitment to the free market?  No, they were distinguished by their greater jingoism, and by their greater adherence to the interests of Germany's cartelized big industry.  Personally, I prefer "left liberal" and "right liberal," as that is fairly simple, and usually clear enough when there is more than one liberal party in a single country.  If there is only one liberal party in a country, I think we should avoid subcategorizing it, and just explain what it was.  That is to say, the National Liberals and their successors the German People's Party were "right liberals," the Progressives and their successors the DDP were "left liberals", but the FDP is just "liberals," since there isn't another liberal party for them to compete against. john k 00:34, 6 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Talk:Luigi Denza

message: ----
Moved over here from the main article:
What? I mean, is this supposed to make sense? --Merovingian 05:29, Dec 22, 2003 (UTC)
Is this gentleman related to his near namesake on the List of Mayors of Hampstead Jackiespeel (talk) 22:49, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

message: I suggest to include the music files at right.Anythingyouwant (talk) 05:59, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  More music