lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Operation Spring Awakening

message: Why the wrong name, not Operation Frühlingserwachen?
:--137.248.1.11 02:48, 7 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Name

message: Not sure if this is where I'm supposed to post this but I noticed that in the Soviet counterattack and subsequent operations section this appeared:
"By 15 April 1945, the remnant of the German 2nd Panzer Army were south of Graz in the Maribor area. They faced the Soviet 57th Army and the Bulgarian First Army. Between 25 April and 4 March, the 2nd Panzer Army was badly bloodied by both armies near Nagykanizsa."
Obviously, "between 25 April and 4 March" must be a typo since March comes before April and the operation in the article kicked off on 6 Mar 1945. The correct date has to be 4 May considering the war was over on 7 May. If someone knows the correct date for sure please correct my correction to the obvious typo.
Richardmunson1984 (talk) 14:34, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Change to typo in the date 

message: The soviet casualties figures are quite different in Krivosheyev' work. The Balaton defensive operation (6-15.3.45): 8492 irrecoverable, 24407 sanitary, 32899 overall. Also, total strength of 3th Ukrainan Front was 465000, not 865000 (I wonder where from these figures are taken). German casualties also seem too high, but I can't check them.
http://rus-sky.com/history/library/w/w06.htm#_Toc536603358
Olvegg (talk) 21:05, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, that was obviously vandalism by 83.250.245.27. I correct the german figures too. Olvegg (talk) 21:18, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Casualties 

message: Tanks casualties on German side (31 tanks) seems to be complete bullshit, since Zepp himself his tank army was reduced "to six tanks".  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:2698:6C22:9EE1:F00F:DF30:62FD:C93D (talk) 02:00, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tank Casualties 

message: - Why use Számvéber and Frieser? Krivosheyev is better.
- 407 tanks. Not tanks and selfpropelled guns?
- Order of battle, Mechanized Corps. "The Tanks Brigades would hold a single tank regiment while the Tank Brigade would hold 3 Battalions. Each Tank Regiment would hold 35 tanks, while the Tank Brigade's 3 Battalions would hold a total of 65 tanks" Confusion between Tank and Mechanized Brigade?
Maja33_NL
:Számvéber is among the best accurate.(KIENGIR (talk) 11:41, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Strength,Casualties and losses - German offensive 

message: I have never heard of the Wehrmacht's 44. Infanterie-Division being designated as a volksgrenadier division. "Das Ende am Plattensee", a history of 44ID in Spring Awakening, which was written by the commander of 2nd battalion, Grenadier Regiment 132, 44ID, makes absolutely no mention of the 44th being designated as a volksgrenadier division, and neither does the Wikipedia article on the 44ID: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/44th_Infantry_Division_(Wehrmacht) Why is it referenced as such in the Spring Awakening article? WriterReiter (talk) 03:38, 11 February 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  44ID as a Volksgrenadier Division?
Talk:Observable universe

message: Is it right to say that the earth has an observable universe? Isn't it rather the case that each identifiable region of spacetime has a unique observable universe centered on it? EDMM2 (talk) 17:31, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  What actually is at the center of the observable universe? 

message: How can we say that the observable universe is ball shaped if we can't tell exactly what shape has the Universe? 79.186.242.134 (talk) 12:29, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  shape
Talk:U.S. Route 31

message: Not to be a stick in the mud, but this appears to be a cut and paste from answers.com.  See http://www.answers.com/topic/u-s-route-31.  Not sure if this is allowed here.  Not sure if Answers.com is (C) or not.  Bgrainger 00:19, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: ALT 72 is being promoted because it is a major junction.  Just because the mother highway is a few miles north doesn't make the alternate route any less important.  Besides more traffic is funneled down ALT 72 each day than US 72 between Huntsville and Athens does.  Both are MAJOR junctions with US 31.  If one of the two (US 72 or ALT 72) had to be kept, the obvious choice would be ALT 72, it handles much much more traffic.  AlaGuy 03:33, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Promotion of ALT 72

message: Okay first I think it should only have the Interstates listed in it if it gets under 10.  If not then only the 10 to 90 should be listed.  Another thing is I am thinking of moving a good portion of this page to a US Route 31 in Michigan page.  If anybody objects let me stress that a good portion right now is up to freeway standards along with another portion up to highway standards at least in the state of Michigan.  In anycase I may work on this wednesday to friday depending if my brain wants to function.  --Mihsfbstadium 13:53, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It's rather unclear what you're even talking about here. Is there any way you could clarify your cryptic statements? Thanks. CBessert 08:35, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Clean up needs 

message: Can be found under the redirect at Draft:U.S. Route 31 in Tennessee Legacypac (talk) 04:27, 10 October 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  A pretty much complete spin off
Talk:Marià Fortuny

message: This should be renamed to Mariano Fortuny, the best known name of the artist. But an article with this name already exists, referred to his son Mariano, a fashion designer. I think useful to rename the son's article, a less relevant artist.--Joan sense nick 03:01, 7 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: It is better not to rename the son's article, as he is better known.  Also, is the name of this painter really correct?  Elsewhere I've seen him listed as Mariano Fortuny y Marsal. Crypticfirefly 20:31, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Maybe this can answer your question:
http://www.artcyclopedia.com/artists/fortuny_y_marsal_mariano.html
Mariano Fortuny y Marsal
[Spanish Painter, 1838-1874]
• Also known as:   Mariano Fortuny I
Mariano Fortuny Marsal
Mariano Fortuny y Carbó —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Brianshapiro (talk • contribs) 04:16, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  son is better known 
Talk:Romilda Vane

message: Should Romilda really have her own page?  I don't think so.  My thought is to change Gryffindors in Harry Potter's Year to Minor Gryffindor Characters, but I don't know how.  Anyone else have any ideas? --Kam Tonnes 03:01, 7 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Don't worry she won't for much longer. Only Major characters should have there own page, the problem is there are so many characters and so many ways to list them that its not clear where to put a lot of characters, like should they be under 'minor teachers' or 'minor members of the order' etc. there are alot of possibilities and it still to be worked out. Personally I believe we should start at list of harry potter characters page and sort it out so that each character is listed once. Then under each group have a minor ???? type characters page for all minor characters of that type (since there are way to many for a normal minor page). The majority of characters with there own page are minor.--Dacium 08:38, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

message: To Minor Gryffindors, clearly she is minor character. However some people are of opionion that Minor Gryffindors is only for characters in Harry's year. Where else can she go?--Dacium 03:27, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I suggest you bring it up at the Minor Gryffindors talkpage. If everyone there agrees to a shift in article criteria, then she'll obviously go in there. If not, discussion as to where she can go will be required. Michaelsanders 00:14, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: There was no discussion anywhere and another user merged after the merge suggestion was completely ignored for weeks. Perhaps you should stop stiffling people from being bold as the community reaction was non existant. As another side note: this page must be retained for the GDFL.--Dacium 22:43, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge required
Talk:Mariano Fortuny (designer)

message: This should be renamed to Mariano Fortuny y De Madrazo, to disambiguate with painter Mariano Fortuny, his father. --Joan sense nick 03:04, 7 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: So, is this a picture of Fortuny? What evidence do we have that it is? – I see none, and the supposed source is a permanently dead link. If it's provably a picture of him, we have a much better-quality version of it at :File:Sebastianutti, Guglielmo (1825-1881) - Anonimo.jpg. But if the image is really by Sebastianutti, it must have been taken before his death in 1881, but the man in the picture seems to be considerably more than ten years old. I suggest that we remove the image until and unless convincing proof is forthcoming. Ping , who uploaded the Sebastianutti image and may be able to help sort this out. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 21:21, 30 July 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is this a picture of Fortuny?
Talk:U.S. Route 231

message: US 231 in Tennessee is not the same as US 31E.  231 at Lebanon, Tennessee is approximately 25 miles east of 31E.  Someone with a specific reference to this fact other than personal knowledge needs to correct this.  (Would the Tennessee Official Highway Map 2010 suffice?)
75.204.213.127 (talk) 15:50, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: According to the state map, US 31E and US 231 overlap for the last 15 miles or so.  That being said, the blurb about Tennessee is written backwards. –Fredddie™ 16:15, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I just fixed it, but nevertheless, there should be separate pages for U.S. Route 231 in Alabama, U.S. Route 231 in Kentucky, and serious expansion for U.S. Route 231 in Tennessee. I saw in the 2015 Rand McNally Road Atlas that a large portion of US 231 overlaps Tennessee State Route 10, maybe that could be added. ---------User:DanTD (talk)  13:08, 15 June 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  231 in Tennessee 

message: Bannered routes of U.S. Route 231 should be split from this article for two reasons; 1)Other bannered routes besides the two that were shown existed, and 2)This really isn't formatted correctly. ---------User:DanTD (talk)  20:56, 15 June 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: UPDATE - I decided to move it anyhow. Anything that needs to be added and fixed, I'll either take care of myself or let someone else take care of. ---------User:DanTD (talk)  14:13, 3 August 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Splitting Bannered routes of U.S. Route 231
Talk:Zipping (computer science)

message: Nevermind if you could not understand the notations because nobody understands those compact math definition at all
:I think some (technically) oriented people would understand it better if it was explained in terms of [regular expressions]. I think I'm right, although the formula given looks a bit odd or off.  (What does "n" have to do with anything?) I'm assuming "#" is taken to be the null string. The convolution of the words  and, fish, be in regex form is
:(a|f|b)(n|i|e)(d|s|)(|h|)
:thus some words formed from this are "andh", "bish", "beh" (be#h => beh), "an", "aid", etc.
:BTW, all this is memory from my formal language theory class a few years ago, so take warning. Root4(one) 20:28, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

message: In the context of functions, I have never heard of or read the expression to map into. I know map to and maps that are onto (that's surjectivity), but not map into. Is that correct usage? --84.177.81.254 (talk) 17:19, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Don Knuth uses the phrase a mapping from a set into the nonnegative integers (TAOCP Vol. II, 3rd. Ed., p. 694), so perhaps it's ok to use to map into as well. --84.177.86.232 (talk) 17:35, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  to map into? 

message: The one thing thats not even referred to is "Why would someone do this?"
From what I can tell, there are "n" variables containing strings, and the number of characters in the longest string is "m". A table of n * m characters is formed. Each row in the table is one of the original words, with the blank spaces at the end being replaced with non-printing, or control, characters (represented by #'s). This table is then partitioned into different strings, on a column-by-column basis. 
i.e. - where the words are "a, an, and"
the table is
*a##
*an#
*and
The first column is: aaa, the second is #nn, and the third is ##d.195.59.43.240 (talk) 12:16, 7 September 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: It doesn't have to be strings. For example, if you have a list of names and a list of corresponding phone numbers, you can use a convolution to generate a dictionary/hashtable from the two lists, mapping the names to the numbers. Equinox ◑ 12:03, 9 November 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Someone needs to put it into plain language 

message: As of .NET 4, LINQ supports a Zip method. This is available in C# and presumably the various other .NET languages. Equinox ◑ 12:03, 9 November 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  .NET missing from language comparison 

message: So this sounds like a matrix transpose, I'm not sure where we're getting the name convolution from.
Ethanpet113 (talk) 02:40, 22 January 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  This sounds suspiciously like transposition 

message: A discussion is taking place to address the redirect :Convolution (formal languages). The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 November 27#Convolution (formal languages) until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.  Macrakis (talk) 17:01, 27 November 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Convolution (formal languages)" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]]
Talk:List of Book of Mormon people

message: Article merged: See old talk-page here --Descartes1979 (talk) 07:01, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: I suggest the following --
* Prophets -- bold font
* Rulers -- italic font
* Prophet Rulers -- bold italic font
* BofM writers -- underline
--andersonpd 19:24, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Formatting

message: I think I've got all the entries in place. Some are still missing dates, etc.
I split off the groups to a separate article since this one was so big.
--andersonpd 21:07, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Mission Accomplished!

message: How about standardizing the Table of Contents?  OneWeirdDude 03:25, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Table of Contents? 

message: I am copying our merger discussion from the page Persons in the Book of Mormon to this page, since the other talk page will be archived.  I just want to be clear what was happening without people having to follow the archive links to figure it out. --Descartes1979 (talk) 07:00, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge Proposal 

message: There were 5 people that I could not easily merge from Persons in the Book of Mormon because of the succession boxes associated with them.  Please comment on how we should include the boxes (if at all).  They are given below for preservation (since we are changing Persons in the Book of Mormon to a redirect. --Descartes1979 (talk) 06:46, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merging Succession Boxes 

message: What evidence do you have that Seezoram was a Gadiaton robber?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.127.153.236 (talk) 04:07, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Seezoram

message: It may be too late now, but I would have preferred that the name of the merged article contain the word "persons" rather than "people."  I notice that there are no groups of people included in this article; should it? Leon7 (talk) 15:50, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article name 

message: Now that we have combined the two lists, I think we could use an article for each of the people in the list.  This would solve the problem of the succession boxes above.  This is obviously from a splittist philosophy, and maybe a mergist will come along and disagree. --Descartes1979 (talk) 21:42, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Individual Articles for each Book of Mormon person? (The Splittist in me speaking) 

message: A list of People in the Bible, who are mentioned in the book of Mormon would be helpful. 74.75.91.82 (talk) 20:10, 28 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  List of Bible people mentioned in Book of Mormon
Talk:U.S. Route 431

message: For future reference: Was rerouted around Central City KY in 2008 AASHO October 2008 meeting.
US 431 does not intersect with US 231 near Owensboro. They miss each other by about 2 miles along Bypass US 60. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.80.14.198 (talk) 07:36, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Musée Picasso

message: Much of the information I have added to this page was taken from the Musee Picasso Visitor's Guide, published by the Reunion des Musees Nationaux, 2004 LLP 03:41, 7 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: [Untitled]
Talk:Saint Andrew's School (California)

message: I've noticed the qualified name of this school was changed, and the change reverted.  I have suggested at Wikipedia talk:Schools#Sidetrack: School article names, we have a friendly discussion, and vote on a final rule for schools in general, to avoid name reverts.  --rob 03:41, 7 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: About the name

message: I think now that's its removed, it should stay removed.  It really doesn't say much.  If there was one main high schools kids went to after, I would definately name it, but listing so many gives no practical information. (I'm going by the assumption that getting admitted into a high school is as easy in Saratoga as it is in Calgary, as we're not talking about going from a High School into Harvard or Yale here).  --rob 07:36, 7 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  About the "Matriculation" section that was removed 

message: I was a student at this school for 3 years so I know much about it. How do I cite that?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by AlexChien4963 (talk • contribs) 07:52, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  How do I cite my experience? 

message: How do you upload images? I have a lot of pics of the school.  I really want to know. I already tried the tutorials but they did not work.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.103.129.126 (talk) 16:24, 25 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Help Needed
Talk:Invisible Man

message: The article states that the 1,369 light bulbs are "symbolic", but not actually what they're symbolic of. 124.169.190.109 (talk) 05:12, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: 1369 "symbolism"

message: Reference 4 is the 1952 book, but is used to verify a statement about the thirty year anniversary edition. Not sure how many editions have the intro, but the point is that the source is incorrect. 
Reference 10 is also the book. ??? Not sure if that's even a problem considering the weirdness of reference four. Anyways, it's used twice and the first use quotes a line from the introduction that occurs after the part the second use is talking about. So that bit is not in order, and subsequently fundamentally wrong due to its nature of tracking a thought process.
Magnus Puer (sermo) 03:28, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Reference Shenanigans

message: In 2014 The New York Times printed a piece claiming that Obama took IM as model for one of his books, so I thought this would be notable enough for the lead. However I cannot provide the link with this Phone. But the item is linked as the last item of the External links at Benito Cereno. Hope that someone could copy that link to the note here, otherwise it will have to wait until Friday. MackyBeth
: In case anybody wants to know, the source is Greg Granding's essay listed in note 5. MackyBeth (talk) 21:28, 2 June 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Influence on Obama's book 

message: Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: http://www.sparknotes.com/lit/invisibleman/summary.html. Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.)
For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, and, if allowed under fair use, may copy sentences and phrases, provided they are included in quotation marks and referenced properly. The material may also be rewritten, providing it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Therefore, such paraphrased portions must provide their source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you.  /~huesatlum/ 22:43, 9 August 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copyright problem removed 

message: Currently the source of one fact in background is written out as [12]. I have no idea if the current 12 is the 12 desired. Anyone know the proper source and can fix this? Thmazing (talk) 18:20, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  [12]
Talk:Darwin (disambiguation)

message: See Talk:Darwin for some discussion of what to have Darwin be. As I see it, there are currently only two options:
#Move Darwin (disambiguation) to Darwin. There's no point having the "(disambiguation)" tag when the "Darwin" page itself is nothing but a redirect to here. It's extraneous, inefficient step-adding. When the page itself is a disambig, it doesn't need a disambiguation parenthetical clause added; that's just for when we can't use the main page, Darwin in this case.
#Change Darwin to redirect to Charles Darwin, and link to the disambiguation page at the top of Charles Darwin.
I favor the second option, and if there's strong opposition to going ahead with that option, I'd like to hear some reasons not to do that, rather than just hearing "there's been consensus for a long time..." That just means that no one's bothered to try changing anything in a long time. Doesn't mean it shouldn't be changed. Anyway, whichever option we choose, clearly the current one doesn't make any sense, so I'll be satisfied whichever of the two we choose, and pleased if we choose the second. But clearly we need to discuss this a bit first. So let's do that now. -Silence 03:45, 7 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Option 1 carried out.--Commander Keane 08:58, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Hm. OK, good enough! Thanks for the help. -Silence 11:33, 10 January 2006 (UTC)