lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Johannes Nicolaus Brønsted

message: What's going on with this guy's name? Is that a zero in there? 
Can someone clear this up for those three of us who want to know? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.255.15.9 (talk • contribs) 
:It's not a zero, but the letter Ø, which is used in the Danish, the Faroese and the Norwegian alphabet. In this case it is pronounced similarly to the vowel in the English word "bird". Hemmingsen 12:22, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: In my Chemistry book, it's written as Brönsted. Anyone? 60.241.159.158 04:53, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It is not uncommon for English texts to replace ø with o, ö or oe as non-Scandinavian keyboards haven't got an ø-key, but I've never seen a Danish text spell his name any other way than Brønsted, so I'm fairly certain it's the correct spelling. Ö is rarely used in Danish names. Hemmingsen 06:21, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: His Name
Talk:Emblem of the Armenian Soviet Socialist Republic

message: I think the person who makes all these emblems is an artist, they are truly the best on the internet. I personally would really like to see this same emblem of Armenian SSR but with the word " Հանրապետություն " spelled as it was from 1940 to 1966.
Thank you.
 Theworker'shand (talk) 14:59, 28 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  1940 - 1966 Emblem of Armenian SSR
Talk:Grazing incidence diffraction

message: Much of the prior content was also in SXRD, and was also not general; there are many other techniques which are also grazing incidence diffraction. It now links to these where there are existing pages, a cite or two when not. At some stage I might add the basics of reflection diffraction that are common to all of these. Ldm1954 (talk) 13:54, 17 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Update from Stub
Talk:Bethe ansatz

message: I think the discussion section is lacking in clarity, it's really hard to follow as there seems to be sentences taken from books or articles without citation or the necessary context.
In particular, the paragraph simply starts with: The ground state is a Fermi sphere. 
The ground state of what?
This is followed by: Periodic boundary conditions lead to the Bethe ansatz equations.
Periodic boundary conditions on what?
It sort of sounds like it's taken from a discussion on a particular system or class of systems, it would be useful if it was clarified in the text what exactly one is talking about here.
Bricksprovidecoal (talk) 18:03, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm thinking of reworking this article at some point due to these examples you've given which lack (a) explanation and (b) sources in the absence of explanation. The system discussed is most likely the Heisenberg spin chain which is the prototypical system for which the Bethe ansatz is used, in which case the ground state is a tensor product of spin up states which could reasonably be referred to as a Fermi sphere (although I haven't seen this usage anywhere else), and boundary conditions come from the fact the (N+1)th and 1st copies of the 1-particle Hilbert spaces are identified. Zephyr the west wind (talk) 08:11, 8 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ground state of what?
Talk:OTR-23 Oka

message: Max range of this system was 480 km with 9M714V missile but INF treaty demanded destruction of systems with 500 to 5.500 km range.
So obviously the reason was different.
89.176.48.138 00:34, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It was eliminated by the INF Treaty but not because of its technical limitations. I have added some information on this, with references. --Mr.98 (talk) 16:02, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Eliminated due to INF treaty ?
Talk:RBU-1000

message: This article starts off with a strong introduction, but the main body of the article is simply a list or two. A couple more paragraphs of information would greatly help this article. --Cremepuff222 (talk, review me!)  01:06, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Re-format, expansion 

message: Hey, I'm a super new editor, but I just discovered that the only linked source on this article has had its domain expire, so the article needs new sources.
SomewhatSpurious (talk) 23:45, 6 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Source issue
Talk:Electroweak epoch

message: I don't agree that a citation is needed specifically for this. The lifetimes of the W and Z bosons is known to be short (see, for example, their individual articles); it's like requiring a citation for the statement "water is moist".216.70.243.82 (talk) 01:48, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Citation needed for W and Z decay? 

message: The article claims the Higgs Boson (as if we knew there was only one of them, which we don't) has been "demonstrated". That is just simply false. The LHC has determined that a particle which MAY BE the Higgs Boson (or a Higgs Boson)  exists at an energy of ~126 GeV/c². As of January 2017, work is on-going to confirm that this particle has the properties that a Higgs particle must have. Until there is more information all we can reasonably say it that this particle "may be" or "is consistent with being" the Higgs particle.40.142.190.212 (talk) 16:49, 24 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article is just plain wrong 

message: Print 49.145.0.170 (talk) 13:35, 25 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Physical science
Talk:RPG-16

message: was not main weapon in afganistan, nor was it adapted by the "soviet red army", just by the airborne troops the VDV. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 62.248.159.240 (talk) 11:10, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The warhead does project out the front of the launch tube. There are plenty of photographs of loaded RPG-16s available showing this. Acorn897 (talk) 19:45, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  The weapon 
Talk:IBM PC DOS

message: "Windows used a cooperative method to share the CPU through the entire life of Windows 1.0 - Millennium"
: That's not correct: Windows 95 to Millennium used preemptive multitasking.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.132.235.147 (talk) 16:20, 17 September 2019 (UTC)
replies: text:  It's more complicated than that either. But since this article is about PC DOS, not specifics of the multitasking in Windows, I just removed the whole sentence. --Matthiaspaul (talk) 10:02, 31 January 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cooperative mode multitasking
Talk:Grand unification epoch

message: It says in the article that the four fundamental forces were unfied during the GU epoch.  I thought gravity had separated at the end of the Planck era, and the remaining 3 were still unified until the storng force split off at the end of the GU.  I'll look into this further and will change article if need be.24.21.139.41 13:26, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Gravity

message: This article does not emphasize enough that grand unification and the grand unification epoch are relatively speculative hypotheses Aknochel (talk) 10:23, 13 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Hypothetical
Talk:Shebbear College

message: * Update Headmasters and dates
* Complete History of the College
* Add Present Day section with description of the current college including extracurricular activities
* Add information about College associations/sister schools etc.
* Add 'In the News' section with any newsworthy information
* Are there any other Old Shebbearians of note?
* Sourcing various statements
And anything else you can help with, of course! --Graydj 15:06, 7 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: To do

message: Both of the biographies by Dean King and Nikolai Tolstoy say that he did not attend the school. Some of his brothers and father and uncles did. The B&N reference leads to an empty page. Dabbler (talk) 03:19, 15 August 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I think you have misread the obituary. Nowhere does it state that O'Brian himself attended Shebbear, just that his brothers did. For example "His treatment of the elder children, sent away to school, upset O'Brian particularly, ..." and "Patrick grew up in Hampstead, but his mother's death from cancer in 1920 precipitated a rift between his father and Patrick's older brothers and sisters, who blamed him for allowing their mother to bear a ninth child at the age of nearly 50.   The boys were also upset at being left to languish, even during the holidays, in the austere environment of their school, Shebbear College, near Torrington in Devon, which had been founded by a group of Bible Christians." (my emphasis in both cases).  Both biographies state that he was partially schooled in Lewes at a day school and partially self educated by extensive reading while too sickly to attend school. Dabbler (talk) 12:46, 19 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Patrick O'Brian
Talk:RPG-27

message: I've deleted a link to this ROSOBORONEXPORT pdf: http://www.rusarm.ru/cataloque/lanforces_cataloque.htm
Let me know if you think it should be included in the external links. Smile4Chomsky (talk) 12:41, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Erroneous Link 

message: What year is this? is it in current circulation, or testing? there is no date on this page for people to know whether or not this is old/new/future equipmentAlbert Cruz 05:07, 6 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  date 
Talk:RPG-22

message: Produced since 1985, this weapon remains in use today.It is a little bigger and stronger than M72-LAW.The problem of this weapon is more linked, to the fall of former Soviet Union , than anything else.Agre22 (talk) 00:09, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: A great weapon

message: This needs to be updated. All it is talking about are terrorist actions. There is absolutely no mention of its use in military combat. Gune (talk) 08:08, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Use Section
Talk:Fierz identity

message: Someone should please add some actual Fierz identities here. Eventually they can be organized in some useful way. 
Also I think it would be good if the proofs could also be included or at least a link to the proofs, because that would be useful for alot of students!
C9 (talk) 06:30, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Add the identities!

message: This article definitely needs work. The bilinears S,V,T,A,P are not even defined in the article! 86.139.104.184 (talk) 11:08, 17 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Needs work!
Talk:S-8 (rocket)

message: The tandem HEAT on the table has the same penetration as the normal HEAT,there would be no point in having a tandem if it does the same damage as a normal HEAT.
Dudtz 11/8/06 7:56 PM ET
:Versus RHA - I'm sure the single and double HEAT warheads do the same damage, however versus armour protected by ERA, the single HEAT warhead would do almost no damage, where as the double HEAT warhead would do about the same damage (perhaps a little less). Megapixie 01:24, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tandem HEAT
Talk:SUSAT

message: I've seen a 1988 dated L9 SUSAT that's been re-marked L16A1. It has a crosshair style graticule, as opposed to the typical needle type. That aside, it's identical to the L9 in every way. If this is a known production variant it might be worth including in the main article, but I really don't know enough about them to make a good job of it. Mongoosander (talk) 22:59, 28 October 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  L9 re-marked as L16A1 

message: One thing; the "unit" in "Sight Unit Small Arms" is presumably just the word unit. But the earlier EM2 also had a UNIT sight, apparently made by RJ Beck of London; the same design appeared on the early X8E2 FN FAL, which was eventually adopted as the L1A1. Forgotten Weapons has a scan of the manual which identifies it as a UNIT sight, but no amount of Googling reveals what UNIT stood for (Something Something Infantry Telescope?). Is SUSAT in fact therefore an acronym for "Sight, UNIT, Small Arms"? -Ashley Pomeroy (talk) 17:32, 2 November 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: No, it isn't. The UNIT sight used a completely different principle and was never adopted. The U in SUSAT just stands for Unit, as did the U in the earlier SUIT. Fahrenheit666 (talk) 14:29, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Name
Talk:Staring array

message: The article states that the Javelin Anti-Tank missile uses a staring array, this is not true. The Javelin uses a scanned array. Thanks199.46.245.234 19:00, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Staring Array 

message: Would the CCD in a normal digital camera also be considered a Focal Plane Array? The definition appears to imply so, but the rest of the article is concerned only with IR-sensitive chips. --Ildottoreverde (talk) 11:08, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lack of clarity 

message: The principal difference between a staring array and other FPAs is that the staring array is two-dimensional and does not move, either in its assembly or relative to the subject of imaging. 
Much of the discussion in the article pertains to thermographic and optical sensing technology as it applies to all FPAs, scanning, staring, or otherwise, and would be better presented elsewhere.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.69.88.134 (talk) 14:40, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge with FPA
Talk:SUBROC

message: "Subroc was not strictly an anti-submarine weapon ..... etc"
Could the author supply some means of verifying this statement that conflicts with the opening statement that Subroc WAS an anti-submarine weapon? From my reading of the Scientific American article and others, it is difficult to reconcile the claim of its intended use as a means to attack a Soviet surface battlefleet. If that were true, then SUBROC would be extremly vulnerable to Soviet countermeasures, especially after warhead separation and a lengthy, slow descent by parachute to splashdown. In that scenario almost any half-decent anti-air weapon would be capable of damaging the warhead beyond any possibility of it detonating. Several more suitable weapons are available in the NATO arsenal to deal with a surface battlefleet scenario. I'd welcome comments and clarification. That is why the relevant parts are highlighted with "citation needed" notices. Brian.Burnell 23:25, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Citations
Talk:Type 69 RPG

message: It seems that there is a conflict about unsourced sections of this page. Please use this talk page to discuss about it. Personally, I would say that unsourced information should be removed from the page, per Wikipedia:Verifiability.--Le Petit Chat (talk) 11:35, 30 August 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unsourced content
Talk:Welrod

message: According to Paul Dubrunfaut, (Keeper of Firearms; Royal Belgium Military Museum), from the Military Channel documentary series "Secret War", episode Deadliest Design (2012); for the Welrod unit in their collection, from the Belgian resistance:
: Magazine capacity = 7 (not 6 or 8)
: Ammunition = "765 Browning" (7.65 mm)
Sorry, I don't know how/if to cite a TV documentary. 74.60.29.141 (talk) 19:10, 10 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  A different Welrod used by the Belgians? 

message: While a Welrod is seen in the film Layer Cake (2004) it isn't used to kill anyone. It is merely seen on display.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.228.26.249 (talk) 22:50, 20 June 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Exactly. It's also unreliably sourced and violates WP:POPCULTURE and Wikipedia:WikiProject Firearms#Pop culture. I have removed it again. Woodroar (talk) 00:32, 21 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Layer Cake Reference 

message: it is my understanding that the differences are dependent on how far away the sensor is, room size, and environmental factors like temperature, altitude etc.  Perhaps I can source a normal decibel level for the rounds.  Not sure how you wanna resolve the contradictory info.  - MTWEmperor (talk • contribs) 05:05, 1 February 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: The sources state 1 meter, 5 meters, and 10 feet distances, and in different directions, so is a "contradictory" template really applicable - shouldn't the article just mention the differences in metering? Also, the comparison "about as loud as a present-day passenger car" is pretty useless, comparing a very short sound with a steady one. (Hohum @) 15:01, 1 February 2019 (UTC)
replies: text:  Adding the necessary clarification to the article body would, naturally, obviate the need for the tag. That's sort of the point of putting it there. Thanks. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 21:50, 2 February 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Contradicting decibels
Talk:Treaty of Wallingford

message: * Keat-Rohan "Bretons and Normans of England" p. 75 (1992) - which says "which led to his acceptance as Stphen's heir in the Treaty of Winchester (once known as the Treaty of Wallingford)"...
* Patterson "Anarchy in England" p. 198 "treaty of winchester"
* Wiley Online Library - "Treaty of Winchester"
* JSTOR - Leedom "The English Settlement of 1153"
* Dalton "Churchmen and the Promotion of Peace in King Stephen's Reign" 
* Brown "A List of Castles" p. 250 - "Treaty of Winchester in 1153"
: And more to come. Ealdgyth (talk) 23:34, 27 March 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Ealdgyth (talk) 23:53, 27 March 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sources... 

message: It appears this is now known as the "Treaty of Winchester". If no one objects in the next week or so, I'll move it to that name (which is already a redirect here). Ealdgyth (talk) 15:59, 7 April 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Name...
Talk:Supersaw

message: Everything you will find if you google "phase desync" 9and you won't find much) originates from the same guy who started this article. I'm not really sure what to do about it though. Saleen7 15:16, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

message: I proposed the merge to Roland JP-8000.  IMO, while the Supersaw wave is somewhat important in the synth enthusiast and trance production microcultures, it does not warrant its own article, especially with all of the appearant original research in this article and overall lack of quality.--Hypergeometric2F1(a,b,c,x) 09:44, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge, lack of quality, etc
Talk:Aviadvigatel PS-90

message: Comment: What has ETOPS got to do with noise? Someone needs to reword that paragraph!  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.66.25.217 (talk) 17:55, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Dear Sirs,
Please, note that the engine marked PS-90 has never been existed. It was marked as PS-90A from the very beginning. In support of this you can turn to the articles about the PS-90A in the annual issues of the recognized Jane’s aviation encyclopedia for the years of 80-90-s. In addition, we use the information of the engine manufacturer; see the Aviadvigatel’s edition Engine-Building Design Bureau. 50 years. History Pages, 1989, the article From M-25 to PS-90A. See also the Aviadvigatel’s website about the PS-90A engine (http://www.avid.ru/eng/products/civil/ps-90a/). 
Based on the above the PS-90 title shall be changed to PS-90A, i.e. the false subject shall be removed from the encyclopedia. As the renaming I have tried to make the last time was rejected, please, give me advice what shall I do in such situation. 
Yours sincerely,  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Solovei777 (talk • contribs) 09:18, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I support the move to PS-90A, as all engine variants mentioned in the current PS-90 article follow the code PS-90A.. --Túrelio (talk) 09:02, 22 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Engine name 

message: Their used to be a run down on the PS-90A2 variant, but that seems to have been removed. 211.30.4.224 (talk) 08:47, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: I have reverted the edit that removed a large amount of cited text, to remove it again would need to be discussed here. Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 10:13, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  PS-90A2 missing
Talk:Charles F. Bryan

message: I propose a name change/move from Charles Faulkner Bryan to Charles F. Bryan, see Wikipedia:Naming conventionsTrade2tradewell 15:17, 7 October 2006 (UTC)
Talk:9M123 Khrizantema

message: 9M127 Khrizantema ? Is this the 9M123 Khrizantema ?--122.16.162.80 04:59, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry, some mistake. Moving to proper name. CP/M comm |Wikipedia Neutrality Project| 11:45, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  What is ..? 
Talk:Saul Karath

message: Anyone mind telling me why this guy has his own article and most main party members don't? 151.201.5.230 00:26, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: What the...?

message: This article is poorly written. I don't even knew this character existed, so could the original author fix this page? (ManoGalinha 21:03, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: And Cleanup!
Talk:Heckler & Koch AG36

message: Its used with these weapons (our standard ones) by the british army  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.36.93.46 (talk) 15:48, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: SA80/L85A2

message: UGL is an integral part of warfare and as a result it should be treated as a seperate article.
Topics could include how UGLs fix onto weapons and different types of munition.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.80.66.254 (talk) 11:44, 8 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  UGL Should not be redirected 
Talk:Gus Rosenberg

message: Where does the statement that the Lionheart was the first LVAD to be implanted in the US come from? I cannot see the Lionheart mentioned in the FDA list of approved VADs (http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/devicesatfda/index.cfm), though trials were approved in 2001. The first VAD to be approved by the FDA was Heartmate VE LVAS which was approved in 1994, before the Lionheart had even been approved for clinical trials in the US.
OK now I understand. The thing that is original about the LionHeart is that it uses transcutaneous induction to power and control the device rather than percutaneous cables that pass through the skin. It is certainly not the first LVAD to be implanted in a US patient and its manufacturer does not claim that it is.
I would be happy to remove my Factual Accuracy Flag if someone were to edit the article accordingly.(Majurawombat 03:44, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Glitch (astronomy)

message: Could a glitch be caused by a complete resurfacing of the surface of the neutron star? It would explain both the glitch and the gradual recovery. Just granpa (talk) 09:09, 15 April 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: What do you mean by "resurfacing"? Jim77742 (talk) 12:22, 4 January 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Complete resurfacing of the surface of the neutron star 

message: Can we get graphs showing the glitches?  http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-iarticle_query?bibcode=1981ApJ...249..687D&db_key=AST&page_ind=1&plate_select=NO&data_type=GIF&type=SCREEN_GIF&classic=YES fig 1 or doi:10.1038/222228a0 figures, etc. — Omegatron (talk) 16:55, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Picture
Talk:Visas Marr

message: This page mentions that Visas can fall in love with a male hero in the "Possible Ending" section, however, it mentions this again in the "Romance" section, shouldn't one of them be taken out? 74.193.120.225 03:31, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Love 

message: Unlike the Nihilus article, I have litte to defend this article, she has an action figure, and the story "Unseen, Unheard" is told from her point of view, but beyond that, no, nothing. This article will likly get deleted. BassxForte 00:04, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Deletion
Talk:Air-to-Air Stinger

message: There is no such thing as an "AIM-92", its just a FIM-92 fired from helicopters. The page should be deleted and relevant info moved to the main Stinger page. I have never seen a single manual refer to Air To Air Stinger as "AIM-92"MandolinMagi (talk) 21:07, 29 August 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge?
Talk:AMOS

message: "The AMOS fires GPS-guided rounds at a maximum rate of fire of 26 rounds per minute": This sentence could be changed to note that rounds itself are not GPS guided, but the mortar system itself gets it's position information from GPS.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.217.248.10 (talk) 13:18, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: True. But I don't think it's worth of mentioning with contemporary weapons systems. So I just took it away. Sobody can add it there if sees it relevant. --J. Sketter (talk) 21:44, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Slight word-ordering issue