lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Pseudoscience

message: I have removed the line about Paul Feyerabend under ===Criticism of the term===, because the cited source does not criticize the term, or even say anything about it.  A quick search indicates that the entire book contains exactly one instance of the word pseudoscience, in the preface, when he says that Kuhn's terminology has "turned up in various forms of pseudoscience".  Feyerabend using the term without comment does not make sense as a source to support a claim that he criticized the term, and the question of the dividing line between Science (e.g., physics) and Non-science (e.g., theology) does not make really sense for an article that is neither about science nor about non-science nor about the dividing line between the two.  I have wondered whether it might have been added primarily as a coatrack for the quotation in the note, which is about a different source.  If someone feels strongly about Wikipedia including that information, I suggest that you move it to an article like Demarcation problem instead. WhatamIdoing (talk) 04:00, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Feyerabend 

message: is this pseudoscience? It cannot be tested  repeated, falsified, it uses statistics but averaging averages leads to anything. Is it a sort of primitive sacrifice religion? 2A00:23C6:F680:2C01:D843:9A0C:FCCA:F08 (talk) 19:56, 10 March 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: No. And see WP:NOTAFORUM. HiLo48 (talk) 22:19, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

text: Climate change denial is pseudoscience. --Hob Gadling (talk) 13:43, 11 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Climate science 

message: — Assignment last updated by Sj4452 (talk) 01:44, 14 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: Research Process and Methodology - SP24 - Sect 201 - Thu
Talk:Parthenon

message: I have been looking over this article and making edits where they appear to be needed, especially in terms of organization. It seems that there is a fair amount of information that is either repeated too frequently in different sections or does not apply to the topic of a specific section. An example would be the inclusion of the building's use as a treasury for the Delian League under "Sculptures." 
I also would strongly urge switching of dates from the outdated "AD/BC" to "CE/BCE" to reflect current usage. I can make those changes over time as I encounter them. CuriosumScriptor (talk) 16:53, 23 July 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: No you can't, without a clear consensus from a discussion here, see WP:ERA. It may be your opinion that BC is "outdated", but many disagree - don't count on getting consensus for such a proposal. I for one would oppose. Johnbod (talk) 16:07, 24 July 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, you went ahead anyway, which I've reverted. This is a clear breach of policy; please don't repeat it, here or elsewhere. There were also far too many era indications. I would suggest getting the lead into 4 paras, per WP:LEAD, and moving the rather over-complicated "etymology" section much lower, with a sentence or two in the lead. Johnbod (talk) 03:16, 29 July 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: The etymology section has become a bizarre and irrelevant hobby horse. We know the name Parthenon was a later nickname that caught on, harping on about it tells us very little about the building except to the extent that the usage of the term overlaps with the opisthodomos problem. The whole section could be dealt with briefly in a footnote. I'm actually doing some reading on this and am tempted to write a revision of the article, but promise nothing.Twospoonfuls (εἰπέ) 10:40, 29 July 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Harsh but fair! Johnbod (talk) 13:12, 29 July 2022 (UTC)

text: Fair enough - so what are the pros and cons of either format, in others' opinions? CuriosumScriptor (talk) 18:29, 2 August 2022 (UTC)

text: I think I would also phrase it as less of an opinion than more of an academic standard. What are the reasons for keeping AD/BC? I'm not being snarky - I really would like to know. CuriosumScriptor (talk) 18:32, 2 August 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: See some of the many lengthy talk page proposal discussions on this - not sure I can remember any names at the moment. One reason is that great numbers of our readers don't understand it. Perhaps that's their fault for not being American graduates. It's your opinion that it is the "academic standard" and that we should follow this. Johnbod (talk) 20:46, 2 August 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Organization of ideas; CE/BCE 

message: Not clear, to me anyway, what this means.  Some explanation would be nice. 2607:FEA8:E0DF:5AB0:B486:9DE3:A630:D67B (talk) 23:59, 15 July 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Template nonsense - removed. Johnbod (talk) 03:19, 16 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  "(aged partially 2133–2134)"
Talk:Pope Alexander I

message: When did we start this Pope+name convention?
-----
See MichaelTinkler (this morning, U.S.A. EST, someone put in a buncha Pope Alexanders.  I'm kinda convinced, but confused enough about how the various systems are supposed to/going to work that I'm just going to edit entries and say to hell with the nomenclature until it shakes itself out.  MichaelTinkler
----
I used the convention when Wikifying the EB11 article titles, because it was a good way to disambiguate Pope Alexander from various Kings Alexander, Pope Anastasius from Emperor Anastasius, etc.  It's also a common English idiom (i.e., people generally do say "Pope John Paul II").  --LDC
----
I think this is an excellent idea, myself.  There's definitely an ambiguity/namespace problem when it comes to people referred to by just one name, particularly royalty. --LMS
----
Agree as well: probably "most people" would use the title automatically (especially when the names are fairly common) in searching etc.
Do any of the other Popes (the various Patriarchs going by that title) share common names with the Popes of Rome (using this term for clarity in this context)?
Jackiespeel 18:43, 21 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Is it correct to say that he died in "Rome, Italy"? Rome wasn't part of Italy in the second century.—♦♦ SʘʘTHING(Я) 08:43, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Place of death

message: Where are the "definitive" dates being gotten from, if they are not the dates in the Annuario Pontifico? john k (talk) 02:56, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  dates not in ''Annuario Pontifico'' 

message: If you search on Yahoo for "Pope Alexander I", it has a brief blurb citing wikipedia.org and says
Born 	10 January 1975
This of course is wrong -- by 1900 years.
It seems that the way the date is formatted in Wikipedia is confusing Yahoo's bots into thinking 75 is the last two digits of a four digit year, but it's not.
If you can figure out how to change the Wikipedia article so that Yahoo doesn't screw up, that would be good.
Or contact someone at Yahoo and have them fix it on their end.
47.139.41.108 (talk) 16:49, 27 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reverse Y2K-type Technical problem with Yahoo misreporting what this article says -- please fix if you know how 

message: What is the source for his date of birth (given in the infobox as "10 January 75" and in the lead as "c. 75–80)? It seems highly unlikely to me that history has identified the specific date of his birth.  Even identifying a specific year can be difficult.  If we can't identify a reliable source to verify a date or even a year, then it should get pulled from the article. – Archer1234 (talk) 14:44, 9 October 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, changed. The usual infobox-filler nonsense. Even the Catholic Encyclopedia doesn't attempt a date. Johnbod (talk) 15:38, 9 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Date of birth
Wikipedia talk:Public domain resources/Archive 2

message: The Library of Congress Country Studies is free to use, but I have a question about the images. For example, here is a photo with the text "Courtesy Embassy of Finland, Washington". Does this mean that I cannot use this photo, or is it non-copyrighted although it is originally from the embassy of Finland? Den fjättrade ankan 15:18, 24 Nov 2003 (UTC)
thread_title: Images on Library of Congress Country Studies

message: If  is true (please make it a link), it should be added to the article.
:I don't think it's true. See Wikipedia talk:Copyrights, and note that there's also the identical . Lupo 10:50, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Soviet pre-1973 

message: As the Web transcriber of a large public-domain dictionary of some usefulness (Smith's Dictionary of Greek and Roman Antiquities) I wanted to add it to the list of History sources in the public domain. I went thru the hoops, then got a message that the edit wouldn't take prolly because it included a link to "h-i-s-t-o-r-y-o-f-n-a-t-i-o-n-s.n-e-t", which is banned.
Fair 'nuff — except that that "h-i-s-t-o-r-y-o-f-n-a-t-i-o-n-s.n-e-t" item was in the existing list; I didn't add it.
# Have I done something wrong? If so, what should I do?
# Has "h-i-s-t-o-r-y-o-f-n-a-t-i-o-n-s.n-e-t" snuck in under the wire somehow, i.e., does it need to be deleted from the existing list?
Bill 13:37, 7 Oct 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Spam prevented edit
Talk:Programmer

message: This statement was tagged in the article since March 2011. It followed the statement "Programming is widely considered a profession". I am moving it here to preserve it, in case anyone wants to find some sources and restore it. (I didn't find any sources that said it isn't a profession.)
: "(although some authorities disagree on the grounds that only careers with legal licensing requirements count as a profession)."
Lightbreather (talk) Lightbreather (talk) 19:38, 2 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Some" disagree that programming is a profession 

message: Market changes in Nepal:
According to data published on 2023, the Bureau of Labor Statistics reports employment of developer-related jobs is expected to grow by 25% from 2021 to 2031 — in their words, “much faster than average.” The high demand for programmers and developers is driven by the increasing importance of technology in our lives and a skills gap in the job market. Probie33 (talk) 03:11, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Pinchme123 (talk) 03:56, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 27 August 2023 

message: Variable is process to making a value of any word. 
For eg- r = d 
        Print("r") 
So when we run our code result is d because r value is d  
Thanks for watching
:Hello, this is a talk page about the Wikipedia article, not a general forum for questions about programming. ChaotıċEnby(t · c) 11:44, 26 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Python variable  

message: If a programmer is "person who creates computer programs" then Ada Lovelace was not one as she only wrote part of a program. Suggest: A programmer is one who authors code.
Second paragraph was added but not integrated with the first. Duplication.
Third paragraph opens a floodgate of which languages to include ... people has adding more over time. Just link to computer language.
Programming is a skill. Software developer and software engineer are titles ... or roles or something ... not really skills. I guess programmer could be a title too, but generally not. Consider the CEO saying: we need to hire a lawyer. The person hired would be a lawyer, but their title would not be "lawyer".
 
In summary, the lede needs a re-write. Stevebroshar (talk) 15:38, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lede needs work 

message: Bye 96.237.116.212 (talk) 18:44, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  How do you make videos of it
Talk:Photon

message: Under the heading 'annihilation' it would be useful to explain when four or six (or 2n) photons would be produced.  The received wisdom seems to invariably prefer 'two', but in 3-dimensional space, six - mutually at rightangles - seems an obvious choice.  If there were four they'd need to be in the same plane, but we'd then need to address the question of what their polarization and the angle of that plane should be; (if we were really struggling we'd no doubt dismiss that as 'random').  Also, traditionally photons don't interact in the absence of an electric charge but I understand that exceptionally they can, usually if one is a very high energy ɤ and the other of much lower energy. Assuming that this is the case, it might be helpful to confirm that. It might also be useful to explain when axions can be produced (if such esoteric items exist!). Paul Renshaw (talk) 15:16, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: If you want to ask questions about a topic, not the article, then the reference desk is a better place. All numbers except 1 are possible in an annihilation reaction. The outcome is random, 2 photons is by far the most common case. Four photons don't have to be in the same plane. There is no reason why 6 should be common, or what would be special about right angles in this context. Photon-photon interactions get more likely with higher photon energies, that applies to both photons (technically: with a higher center of mass energy).  --mfb (talk) 19:33, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Re: 'Random questions it might be worthwhile to answer'
Talk:Proportional representation

message: The link to "Handbook of Electoral System Choice" yields a 404 error page. Here is another source for a PDF version: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/220007280_Handbook_of_Electoral_System_Choice
There are other choices available, too. Thank you for your time, Wordreader (talk) 03:40, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: The "Handbook..." is under External Links. Wordreader (talk) 03:44, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Viable link to "Handbook of Electoral System Choice". 

message: The final results may not be protional, Northern Ireland Assembly has 90 seats, the TUV in the 2022 Northern Ireland Assembly election, had 7.6% vote share but just above 1% by winning 1 seat and losing 5 
90×7.6%=6
1÷90=1.11111%
Sinn Fein gain an extra seat
90×29%=26
27÷90=30%
DUP
90×21.3%=19
25÷90=27.77777%
2018 Bavarian State Election 205 seats
CSU 
205×37.2%=76
85÷205=41.46%
Green
205×17.6%=36
38÷205=18.5%
2021 Baden Wurttenburg state election 154 seats
Green 
154×32.6%=50
58÷154=37.6
CDU
154×24.1%=37
42÷154=27.27% Japhes5005 (talk) 15:09, 20 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Accuary 

message: Introduction, the article reads: 
The essence of such systems is that all votes cast - or almost all votes cast - contribute to the result and are effectively used to help elect someone ...
Effective has two different meanings - actually and having the effect of. It is unclear that "actually" is what is meant.
 
PR is such that all votes cast - or almost all votes cast - contribute to the result and are actually used to help elect someone. 68.150.222.51 (talk) 02:48, 11 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  votes actually used to elect someone 

message: the table does not match the text nearby
the table says Italy is  PR list while the text says it is parallel voting and definitely not PR. 68.150.222.51 (talk) 04:22, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Coalitions
Talk:Prism

message: The following link was recently removed:
:PRISM was the RISC processor used in Apollo DN10000 systems
It was partly added to avoid confusion between DEC PRISM (which basically never existed) and Apollo PRISM (which did). There ought to be enough material to write a good article on the subject... but unfortunately, I haven't been able to find much on the web. --StuartBrady 21:08, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Apollo PRISM 

message: what about http://www.prism-profiling.com
84.59.185.74 (talk) 10:50, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Normally, dab pages only have links to existing wikipedia articles. That method doesn't have an article, and it doesn't seem notable enough to have its own article. --Enric Naval (talk) 01:57, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  team method: profiling 

message: While I understand "Multi Channel Publishing" may fall into the broad category of media, Publishing Requirements for Industry Standard Metadata is a specification. Hence the move from Media and entertainment to Computing and software. —Shelley V. Adams 15:53, 28 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  PRISM (metadata vocabulary) 

message: In my opinion, prism (optics) is the primary meaning and should have this page title.  The disambiguation page should be moved to prism (disambiguation).  Does anyone disagree? SpinningSpark 23:19, 11 May 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Since no one commented, I have moved the page. SpinningSpark 07:01, 16 June 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree (after the event) . Widefox; talk 16:00, 17 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Primary topic 

message: I removed these from the See also section:
* Prism: Light the Way, a two-dimensional puzzle video game
* Tidal prism, the volume of water in an area between high and low tide
The first is not ambiguous, and not relevant enough to be in the See also section.
The second is either ambiguous or is  not relevant enough to be in the See also section. I went with the latter but am open to an argument that it is ambiguous and belongs in the body of the page. Srleffler (talk) 02:02, 19 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removed from See also
Talk:Palestine (region)

message: It's 2024, we need to change the tense of that statement and/or verify whether or not the prediction came true. Polishedrelish (talk) 04:19, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Gaza's population is expected to increase to 2.1 million people in 2020" outadedness 

message: Is the current main image really the best option, as opposed to, say, a medieval map showing Palestine? For me it seems to overemphasize the 20th century mandatory Palestine delineation, while the green lines are frankly a little bit hard to understand. Also, this is specifically not an article about the occupied territories, so why are those also on the map? I suspect that for a lot of newcomers this makes it altogether more muddling and confusing than a more simple image might. I'm not convinced this means it performs as the lead image (as what one expects to see for this topic, as in other tertiary sources) particularly well. Iskandar323 (talk) 14:13, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think it is possible to understand the green lines from the information given. Zerotalk 15:27, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Glad I'm not the only one. Iskandar323 (talk) 15:28, 28 April 2024 (UTC)

text: Note also that :File:Historical boundaries of Palestine (plain).svg has colorblind accessibility issues. Wracking talk! 21:13, 30 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Main image 

message: in the main article - it is defined as a country and not a political entity. can someone change it in the top section Gsgdd (talk) 03:28, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  change state of Palestine from political entity to country  

message: The map is inaccurate for the british mandate of Palestine. It should include Transjordan. 173.178.44.232 (talk) 12:31, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: because...? Sean.hoyland (talk) 13:01, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Map
Talk:Palestinian Christians

message: I made the map of "the holy sites of Jesus Christ in Palestine and the places living Palestinian Christians" and "the Old City and surroundings of Jerusalem", but I don't have edit permission.


If anyone has edit permission, I would appreciate it if you could post this map on this page.--Obendorf (talk) 22:56, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Map of Palestine and the Old City of Jerusalem 

message: In the article it says "Christians are called Nasrani (the Arabic word Nazarene) or Masihi (a derivative of Arabic word Masih, meaning "Messiah")." 
First, Nazarene is not the Arabic word as the article seems to claim. Second, it should be linked to Nazarene (sect). If someone can volunteer to check the offline source for clarification on this. For a better spelling of Nasrani I suggest it should be "Naṣrani" with a dot below the "s". 197.60.30.66 (talk) 21:09, 25 November 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fix wrong links 

message: The first line defines Palestinian Christians as , but I would have thought they were, and the article elsewhere seems to treat them as, Palestinians who are Christians. The lead sentence is certainly recentist, but I don't know enough about citizenship of the State of Palestine to touch it. Srnec (talk) 13:53, 20 July 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Opening 

message: The Arab Orthodox Movement is a newly created article that probably deserves a dedicated subsection here. Makeandtoss (talk) 10:10, 9 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Arab Orthodox Movement

message: The line for Issa Al-Issa, founder of Filastin newspaper, cites its founding as in "Jaffa, Palestine" in 1909. In 1909 Jaffa was part of the Ottoman Empire, and it was part of the Sanjak of Jerusalem, also called the Mutasarrifate of Jerusalem. There was no "Palestine" region, administratively or legally, at that time. This is analogous to citing "Charleston, Appalachia" rather than "Charleston, West Virginia" or "Charleston, WV, USA". It should be edited to reflect this: "Jaffa, Ottoman Empire", or "Jaffa, Mutasarrifate of Jerusalem" to be accurate. 77.69.132.122 (talk) 15:41, 13 October 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Palestine was not the name of a formal political division, but it was the informal name of the region. In English writing of the time, it is hard to find anything else. Zerotalk 00:33, 14 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  error in Notable Palestinians/journalists 

message: considering the IDF being more lenient with the Christians, I would say it isn't true. My village fully Christian and in the Galilee was massacred and expelled. Massacre of Ilabun 185.53.41.59 (talk) 00:24, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Errors in article 

message: (1935-2003) Edward Wadie Said was a Palestinian American academic of Christian Palestinian descent. He was a founder of post-colonial studies and a professor of literature at Columbia University. Born in Jerusalem, Said’s memoir ‘Out of Place’ reveals how his early life influenced his books ‘Orientalism’ and ‘Culture and Imperialism’. 7atar (talk) 16:39, 1 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edward Said should be added to the list of notable Palestinian Christians
Talk:Parasitic computing

message: J.Murali--I have no complaints about the article :-) but generally speaking, we don't sign our articles here.  The reason for this is that this tends to discourage other people from working on articles, and indeed as other people contribute significantly to an article, it becomes inaccurate to put just one name at the bottom of the article.  I didn't remove your name, out of respect. --LMS
The Nature article on checksum violation is broken.  Does this article reside at a different URL now, or should it simple be removed?  Terron 20:11, 16 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: I would like to notify editors who would like to re-add the removed section or write about related topics/events that this article's topic isn't about stealing computing power in general. The relevant article about cryptocurrency mining malware is probably Cryptojacking. Janhrach (talk) 16:11, 8 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  A section on cryptocurrency mining malware was removed