lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Virago (Star Wars)

message: I'm the one who originally suggested merging this article with List of Star Wars starfighters, however I changed my mind due to remembering Xizor had a modified Star Viper and any known specifications relate only to his ship.  This article should probably stay how it is. 71.113.159.109 05:30, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

message: This article jumps from Star Vipers to the Skyhook Battle to Dash going into hiding and should be cleaned up.  I'm considering replacing it with the one on Wookieepedia because I think that one is well written and then anyone can edit it from that if they want. Reignfire 22:16, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Replacing this article 

message: The official name of Xizor's Star Viper is Virago (as seen here: http://www.starwars.com/databank/starship/virago/index.html) and I think the title should be changed to: Virago (Star Wars). Reignfire 22:16, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Renaming this article
Talk:Indian nationalism/Archive 2

message: ::CiteCop 08:07, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Square root 

message: ::CiteCop 08:07, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Algebra 

message: ::CiteCop 08:07, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Check this out . Indians discoved Zero some 100 years before the Babylonians Syiem 12:27, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Zero 

message: Who is the more credible authority on the history of mathematics:
*A prize-winning science journalist with an M.S. in mathematics from Yale and a mathematician who taught at Harvard
or
*magic crystal lady
CiteCop 22:41, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Poll 

message: 
I request the removal of the following code because the references cited do not verify the text.*The Ancient Indian town of Taxila was home to the Takshashila University, is regarded by many historians as the world's oldest university.


John Marshall explicitly mentions the possibility of Taxila being the oldest university.
</ref>
John Marshall, the second source cited, contains references to centers of learning that were not only contemporaneous with Taxila, but had characteristics of a university such as legal personality and campuses, characteristics which Taxila lacked.
Appendix B of the same work is a discussion of whether Taxila ought to be considered a university at all.
Nowhere in Taxila does Marshall "explicitly mention the possibility of Taxila being the oldest university."
In 1965, Professor Altekar, who literally wrote the book on Education in Ancient India, writes,
The word "university" does not even merit an entry in the index of Romila Thapar's Aśoka and the Decline of the Mauryas. Thapar writes merely that TaxilaIn other words, neither of the sources cited verifies the text "The Ancient Indian town of Taxila was home to the Takshashila University, is regarded by many historians as the world's oldest university. John Marshall explicitly mentions the possibility of Taxila being the oldest university." Not only does John Marshall not "explicitly mention the possibility of Taxila being the oldest university," his work contains a discussion of whether Taxila should be considered a university at all.
Because neither of the sources cited verifies the text in question—one in fact calls it into question and a third, uncited source outright contradicts it—the text should be removed.CiteCop 20:16, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Point made quite thoroughly. Hornplease 22:09, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It certainly needs a complete rewrite, if not outright removal. Hornplease 22:09, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree... I don't understand the nature of that one section except to present a skewed view of history... no survey has ever shown that Indian people as a majority believ in those ideas... Kennethtennyson 12:41, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Protected edit request
Talk:Monster House (video game)

message: As its mentioned, this game its based onn the moive,so i think that the game's plot could use a little redaction modification. Now it looks like whoever wrote the plot just finished playing the game an hour ago.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Drumerwritter (talk • contribs) 04:39, 16 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Game plot 

message: Should the "Monsters" and "Plot" sections be entirely removed?    Adotchar| reply here 23:47, 23 November 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi , I appreciate you starting a RfC for this, but I'm afraid that's unnecessary, as you're completely correct. A plot section should be a summary, not an in-depth description (see WP:PLOT). A plot section is informative of course, but not in excruciating detail. I've WP:TNT'ed. A list of in-game monsters is WP:GAMEGUIDE material. For a gameplay section, a sentence could give an example of an enemy or two, but not like this. soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 12:37, 24 November 2017 (UTC)

text: Okay. I'm removing the RFC tag.  Adotchar| reply here 17:20, 24 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Request for Comment 

message: *Support It takes up the majority of the page, is unsourced, and provides no real encyclopedic value.  Adotchar| reply here 01:09, 24 November 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi , I appreciate you starting a RfC for this, but I'm afraid that's unnecessary, as you're completely correct. A plot section should be a summary, not an in-depth description (see WP:PLOT). A plot section is informative of course, but not in excruciating detail. I've WP:TNT'ed. A list of in-game monsters is WP:GAMEGUIDE material. For a gameplay section, a sentence could give an example of an enemy or two, but not like this. soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 12:37, 24 November 2017 (UTC)

text: Okay. I'm removing the RFC tag.  Adotchar| reply here 17:20, 24 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Survey
Talk:Thymine dimer

message: I think the diagram may be wrong.  Shouldn't the double bonds disappear between the 4 and 5 carbons?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.94.176.22 (talk) 03:35, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Diagram

message: I have notes from a class that say that after a day in the sun, the average person has 10,000 thymidine dimers per square inch of exposed skin. I don't have a reference for that info, but I think it would be useful in the article. Ninjatacoshell 03:14, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  DNA damage
Talk:Chromatid

message: this page is about chromatids and not about telomeres, so I suggest deleting some of the sentences in the first paragraph and leave only the description of chromatid.
Question: It is a tongue twister but I am very serious: 
If a Dyad is a pair of sister chromatids but a chromatid is only such if it’s joined to another by a centromere, then at anaphase there would be 4 sister chromosomes per pole, right?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.211.25.48 (talk) 10:42, 29 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Chromatid]] 

message: This term is used elsewhere than just in reference to chromosomes.  It should be a more general article, with a subsection on chromosomes (or a link to a chromosome page, as suggested before).  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.126.15.135 (talk) 15:23, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[more general]] 

message: ...by starting it off with a definition and/or explanation of what a chromatid is, rather than what it does? I came here from another Wikipedia article about chromosome transposons, hoping to find out what a "chromatid" is, but I'm still uncertain. Of course, I'm not very smart, so it might just be me.Theodore Rigley 16:39, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Could somebody who knows this subject improve this article.... 

message: the problem is that chromatid is the same as daughter dsDNA molecule, but a ds in a particular state
this is not made crystal clear, and therefore leads to confusion
In most cells, DNA is in a double strand (ds) form; we call each piece of DNA in a cell a chromosome. When the cell divides, the DNA is replicated into two identical ds DNA chromosomes. However, during replication, we call the two chromosomes chromatids
no ???
during replication  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:192:4701:BE80:E9A1:660F:D55A:1C65 (talk) 01:19, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: comment from a PhD, molecular biology

message: "A chromatid (Greek khrōmat- 'color' + -id) is one copy of a newly copied chromosome which is still joined to the original chromosome by a single centromere."
This is a wrong saying. Chromosomes are essentially DNA molecules with attached histone. After duplicating, each of the two DNA molecules have half of the original one. Neither is "original" nor "newly copied".  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Togira Ikonoka 123 (talk • contribs) 02:03, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wrong phrasing
Talk:Mr. Wrestling II

message: http://slamwrestling.net/index.php/2020/06/10/mr-wrestling-ii-johnny-walker-dies/
"It wasn’t all heroic, though. On August 8, 1953, Walker was one of nine suspects arrested in connection to the rape of a 15-year-old girl in Hawaii, at Sandy Beach. Walker was 18 at the time, and worked at a service station in Waikiki. According to the Hawaii Criminal Justice Data Center, Walker’s disposition was July 27, 1955, and for the rest of his life he was a registered sex offender wherever he lived."
Obligal (talk) 07:21, 12 June 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Source on gang rape
Talk:Goblet cell

message: I know that these kinds of cells are present in molluscs, but this article (as currently written) treats them as though they only exist in humans.  I do not know how many other groups have them— surely someone must!  KDS4444 (talk) 08:45, 12 July 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: @ this article is written in generic form and makes reference to humans twice in text, both instances using the human intestine as an example of the function of goblet cells. I think it is up to you to prove this assertion and, if you feel the article is indeed human centric, WP:LIGHTBULB, I invite you to help fix the problem that you are seeing. For now, I am removing the tag. --Tom (LT) (talk) 10:00, 31 October 2017 (UTC)

text: I agree. This article only refers to goblet cells of vertebrates. I know that goblet cells in the guts of silkworms have been a favourite object of experimental investigation, as they are infected by economically important viruses and are a convenient model system. Like User:KDS4444, I can identify an omission, but that doesn't put me in a position to write a survey of the subject. William Avery (talk) 13:31, 31 October 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: But what all of this DOES tell us is that this article DOES still read from an anthropocentric perspectivce, and that the tag should probably remain here until this has indeed been fixed someone, not until someone decides that other people should fix it but not me.  The tag was created so that it could remain there until that time (i.e., until someone who DOES know more about these cells in their general experience) can write the article from a non-human-centric position.  The tag was not created in order to invite those with no experience in this type of cell to attempt to fix it, because most of us right-out do not HAVE the correct experience to do so— until someone comes along to can, this tag needs to stay in place, no?  As it reads now (and as it read before I first placed the tag), a person reading this will be led to believe that only humans have them... Unless this is fixed by an expert, or found to be untrue.  The burden of incorporating that info into this article is placed on the person wanting to remove this tag, and if you have removed the tag without addressing the problem, then the tag needs to go back for now, yes?  And I will now do this, and will ask anyone in the future to consider this before removing the tag a second time.  Thank you!  KDS4444 (talk) 02:15, 2 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Non-humans?
Talk:Revelation principle

message: The current formulation is not particularly helpful because it doen not say what "associated" or "corresponds" actually means. What properties does the "corresponding associated" mechanism have in regard to the original one? 130.149.95.149 (talk) 12:00, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Formulation 

message: Hi there,
I know you don't accept unpublished material or speculation, but since I can't think about the subject further unless I first dump my processing to memory in some way, I will just share here and accept that it may be forgotten:
It is a corollary of the Revelation Principle that where "simply knowing the solution exists is enough", that information - disclosed within a closed system of truth-telling mechanisms - is able to spread outside that (seemingly) closed system, simply by virtue of the absence of difference, between mechanisms outside that closed system - over which that closed system has (direct) control(, that is, control by virtue of the information those mechanisms, under the control of that closed system, need (which hence creates a system of direct control)).
In other words, you can tell what you might be thinking, simply by looking in a mirror; not that you are (actively) thinking what you see, but simply that you cannot be (passively) thinking anything else (meaning you cannot alternatively redefine your active and passive thinking (and trick yourself), with respect to whatever it is that you will eventually reveal (as a result of looking in the mirror) - ...which being revealed, will be neither more or less than what is both in the mirror, and (existent) outside it(, short of returning a null value, a void reflection)).
If you are thinking this is unclear, even now, it may be that the whole article needs to be rewritten, as the two statements - of the principle and this, which I imagine to be its corollary - sound basically identical to me. I admit I have two guilty pleasures, in this: one, that you may take it seriously; two, that you may remember that it was a believer who attempted to tell it to you (if the truth in itself does not convict you, you may consider it irrelevant!).  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.161.50.116 (talk) 05:47, 16 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Revelation Principle Corollary
Talk:Indian nationalism/Archive 3

message: ::CiteCop 08:07, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Square root 

message: ::CiteCop 08:07, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Algebra 

message: ::CiteCop 08:07, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Check this out . Indians discoved Zero some 100 years before the Babylonians Syiem 12:27, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Zero 

message: Who is the more credible authority on the history of mathematics:
*A prize-winning science journalist with an M.S. in mathematics from Yale and a mathematician who taught at Harvard
or
*magic crystal lady
CiteCop 22:41, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Poll 

message: 
I request the removal of the following code because the references cited do not verify the text.*The Ancient Indian town of Taxila was home to the Takshashila University, is regarded by many historians as the world's oldest university.


John Marshall explicitly mentions the possibility of Taxila being the oldest university.
</ref>
John Marshall, the second source cited, contains references to centers of learning that were not only contemporaneous with Taxila, but had characteristics of a university such as legal personality and campuses, characteristics which Taxila lacked.
Appendix B of the same work is a discussion of whether Taxila ought to be considered a university at all.
Nowhere in Taxila does Marshall "explicitly mention the possibility of Taxila being the oldest university."
In 1965, Professor Altekar, who literally wrote the book on Education in Ancient India, writes,
The word "university" does not even merit an entry in the index of Romila Thapar's Aśoka and the Decline of the Mauryas. Thapar writes merely that TaxilaIn other words, neither of the sources cited verifies the text "The Ancient Indian town of Taxila was home to the Takshashila University, is regarded by many historians as the world's oldest university. John Marshall explicitly mentions the possibility of Taxila being the oldest university." Not only does John Marshall not "explicitly mention the possibility of Taxila being the oldest university," his work contains a discussion of whether Taxila should be considered a university at all.
Because neither of the sources cited verifies the text in question—one in fact calls it into question and a third, uncited source outright contradicts it—the text should be removed.CiteCop 20:16, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Point made quite thoroughly. Hornplease 22:09, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It certainly needs a complete rewrite, if not outright removal. Hornplease 22:09, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree... I don't understand the nature of that one section except to present a skewed view of history... no survey has ever shown that Indian people as a majority believ in those ideas... Kennethtennyson 12:41, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Protected edit request
Talk:Bitburg Airport

message: This page seems to be mostly about the history of the 36th FBW rather than the Bitburg Air Base in particular.  Maps would add greatly to this article.
—Preceding unsigned comment added by Medains (talk • contribs) 07:55, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Comment 
Talk:Sack of Rome (455)

message: The article starts by saying, "The sack of 455 was the second of three sacks of Rome" - wasn't it the third - 1. 390 BC by Brennus, 2. 410, 3. 455? Maybe it was meant in more "modern" times, whereas the Brennus one was semi-mythical? Cornelius (talk) 03:41, 14 September 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Second sack of Rome? 

message: can we stick to one version of geiseric's name, whichever is the preferred?
duncanrmi (talk) 04:15, 27 June 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  just for the sake of readability
Talk:To Live & Die in L.A. (song)

message: The tags were put up because there's no references and there's weasel words.  Someone familiar with the topic fix it up please--71.200.61.10 06:21, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Removed POV and POV tag. I hope it is now acceptable. --Ted87 16:54, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: NPOV

message: How could the video have been shot on September 22, 1996, if Tupac died on September 13, 1996? DrAndrewWinters (talk) 22:49, 25 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dates and Logic
Talk:The Doll Family

message: This article really needs to be rewritten. So much of it is a directly plagiarism from the "Prodigies" source cited at the end of the article (but the text is not quoted at all). (unsigned comment by User:24.27.19.156 )
:Can you give an example of plagiarism please.  I've read through both biographies and the writing is quite different although the facts - obviously - are the same. Rossrs 09:02, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Plagiarism

message: Here is your proof of plagiarism (plagiarism is crediting oneself rather than the real author) and proof of copyright infringement (copyright infringement is illegal and unauthorized copying):
Wikipedia:
"When the Ringling train shows ended in 1956, the Dolls started touring with the Christiani Circus, living in a trailer they pulled behind their car. The Dolls found this to be an unacceptable situation, so in 1958 they jointly retired."
Prodigies by James G. Mundie:
 
"When the Ringling train shows ended in 1956, the Doll's started touring with the Christiani Circus, living in a trailer they pulled behind their car. The Doll's found this to be an unacceptable situation, so in 1958 they jointly retired."
All Images and Text (c) James G. Mundie 2003 - 2010
http://www.missioncreep.com/mundie/gallery/little/little11.htm
The plagiarising copyright infringement was added on 23:27, 9 December 2005‎ by user Blumoon531.
70.36.137.226 (talk) 06:09, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Copyright violations have now been removed. Thank you for bringing this to our attention. -- Dianna (talk) 07:13, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Plagiarism proof and copyright infringement proof as if any of the pirates at Wikipedia cared
Talk:HorrorPops

message: Horrorpops → HorrorPops – They use the mixed case name ProveIt (talk) 06:39, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: * Support - The cover of the album Bring it on! and all over the official website--Zilog z80 18:54, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Requested move

message: http://www.melkweg.nl/mmbase/images/6683 —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 58.105.54.43 (talk) 07:57, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: A dead link, but using the internet archive reveals an obviously copyrighted image. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 04:12, 13 February 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  This is a good picture... if someone can upload it to this page... 

message: Guys, this is much too informal. It sounds like a teen mag, not an encyclopedia! x.x
Toyboxmonster (talk) 21:47, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm concerned that the bulk of the timeline appears to have been copied directly from http://www.democrazy.be/?page=act&id=362&dem003=6ef3f18a0f144c2b3f42750406d8441c in this edit. That would explain the non-encylopedic style. --David Edgar (talk) 17:52, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  structure 
Talk:Yalkaparidon

message: I don't suppose anyone would object to moving this page to the name Yalkaparidon? "Thingodonta" is not a formal name, and Yalkaparidon turns up 85 results on Google Scholar to "Thingodonta"'s 16, so the formal name Yalkaparidon is also the more widely used name. Ornithopsis (talk) 22:00, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: I can't do the move, so it seems a formal WP:move request has to be made so an admin can do it. While we're at it, the two species articles are nearly identical and should be merged into the genus article... FunkMonk (talk) 19:41, 21 November 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article name change to ''Yalkaparidon''
Talk:List of Odonata species of India

message: Image:GreenDamselWyn2.jpg|From Wayanad
Shyamal 06:40, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Unidentified odonates from India
Talk:Behavioral and Brain Sciences

message: I moved the IF to the beginning of the article, and put the history further down to shorten the lead. 
However, expansion of this journal's methods is likely warranted. By its nature, in multiple fields, it is highly influential and notable.
The most notable paper of this journal is the WEIRD paper published by Henrich, discussed here: Psychology#WEIRD_bias. Drthorgithecorgi (talk) 21:48, 5 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Moving impact factor to the lead, moving journal description- add more?
Talk:Psychological Review

message: I copied a list of links to full text Psychological Review articles from the Psychology Wiki.  I'm not sure if it is appropriate for a Wikipedia article, so if it's not, by all means delete the added info. Personally though, this list of Psychological Review articles seems to me to be potentially very useful for Wikipedia readers. EPM (talk) 16:20, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I do not think it is really relevant. This is an encyclopedia not a list of free accesible articles. I have also rerated the article to low, however important is a journal (and this one no doubt is very important) I do not feel they are really important when compared to theories, authors... --Garrondo (talk) 08:27, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Links to full texts appropriate?
Template talk:Cognitive

message: I would like to change the image of the brain to one that isn't just of the physical structure of the brain, as that's a misrepresentation of what cog psych is about. I would change it myself (but I don't know how to edit images or templates and would rather not break it. 
As an alternative image, I would suggest this image: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Noun_Brain_Nithinan_2452319.svg. For the alt text, the image could be described as "4 puzzle pieces which together resemble a brain. Each piece has a dotted line to an icon. The top left has a speech bubble; the top right has a light bulb; the bottom left has a heart; and the bottom right has an eye."  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Xurizuri (talk • contribs) 08:20, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Change of image?