lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Zelal Cola

message: The file :File:Soft Drink.svg, used on this page, has been deleted from Wikimedia Commons and re-uploaded at :File:Soft Drink.svg. It should be reviewed to determine if it is compliant with this project's non-free content policy, or else should be deleted and removed from this page. If no action is taken, it will be deleted after 7 days.  Commons fair use upload bot (talk) 21:25, 27 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fair use candidate from Commons: [[:File:Soft Drink.svg]] 

message: The file :File:Soft Drink.svg, used on this page, has been deleted from Wikimedia Commons and re-uploaded at :File:Soft Drink.svg. It should be reviewed to determine if it is compliant with this project's non-free content policy, or else should be deleted and removed from this page. If no action is taken, it will be deleted after 7 days.  Commons fair use upload bot (talk) 21:38, 27 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fair use candidate from Commons: [[:File:Soft Drink.svg]]
Talk:Sukhoi Su-80

message: Added some information but the article still needs a whole lot of work. - - Aerobird Target locked - Fox One! 03:28, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Expanding 
Talk:Helium flash

message: The Helium flash is something distinctly observable?  If so it may be desirable to be explicit about that, and add detail.   I'm no astronomer though.  Midgley 10:45, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Observable... 

message: There seems to be a problem with this article. It suggests that the helium flash is an explosive and cataclysmic event which it is not. In fact it can barely be seen on the surface of the star as the energy released in the rapid fusion goes to lift the electron degeneracy, not to blow away the surface of the star
Latest user on wiki 16:21, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: My understanding is that the event is explosive in that it results in a rapid rise in temperature and generates a shock wave. However, this shock wave is damped out by the surrounding massive outer atmosphere. It is explosive somewhat in the same sense as an underground nuclear test.—RJH (talk) 16:41, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

text: My textbooks indicate that it is invisible (by photons), and only have as consequence as to rapidly restructure the core, so that the core degeneracy is no more. Nothing in my books indicates that it will occur as a sudden luminosity increase event 15 Mya later, that can possibly be an erroneous interpretation of the text. But that doesn't deal with neutrinos. Rursus dixit. (mbork3!) 14:44, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I rewrote: the books claim it's invisible, so now the article claims so too. But is it, really? Have anyone accounted for sudden neutrino bursts? Rursus dixit. (mbork3!) 14:51, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll answer it myself: source [1] tells that the neutrino production/leakage is essential for the star not to disintegrate cataclysmically. Any hypothetical future neutrino telescope will observe the helium flash as it occurs. Rursus dixit. (mbork3!) 15:01, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

text: Cole and Deupree computed in about 1981-1984 that a core helium flash can cause nondisruptive mass loss:  , etc, while later computations dismiss such mass loss, f.ex. by Deupree in 1996  and Mocák et al. 2008: , . Lattanzio et al suggest an 1% luminosity increase: . Rursus dixit. (mbork3!) 18:32, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Visibility of the Helium flash 

message: Considering that this is an event that will occur in the Sun during its transition to the Red Giant stage, perhaps a section on how it will (theoretically) proceed? Just a suggestion.
101.118.138.52 (talk) 13:46, 14 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Relate to the Sun?
Talk:Thomas Taylor (neoplatonist)

message: TAYLOR, THOMAS (1758-1835).--Translator, _b._ in London and _ed._ at St.
Paul's School, devoted himself to the study of the classics and of
mathematics. After being a bank clerk he was appointed Assistant
Secretary to the Society for the encouragement of Arts, etc., in which
capacity he made many influential friends, who furnished the means for
publishing his various translations, which include works of Plato,
Aristotle, Proclus, Porphyry, Apuleius, etc. His aim indeed was the
translation of all the untranslated writings of the ancient Greek
philosophers.
BrainyBabe (talk) 07:34, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Full text of his entry in ''[[A Short Biographical Dictionary of English Literature]]'' (1910) by John W. Cousin
Talk:Sir John Lauder, 3rd Baronet

message: What exactly is this man's claim to notability?  The only inferred notability in the articles is an uncited assertion that he was "great esteemed" (by who?), and that he was made an "Honorary Burgess" of several places. Can anyone explain the significance of an Honorary Burgess? --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 11:32, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It is rare for someone of no notability whatsoever to be made an honourary burgess of so many cities. Burgesses can be hereditary and passed to sons. They can be new appointments by the City Council, but only if the individual concerned has done an apprenticeship with a burgess. Or they can be appointed a Burgess "by Act of Council" for good deeds and other considerations. Burgesses have a right to sit on council. David Lauder 13:36, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for the clarification. However, per WP:BIO, we don't usually consider local councillors to be notable ("Just being an elected local official does not guarantee notability"); does this really amount to much more than that? If it was so unusual for someone to be multiply made an honorary burgess, surely there is some indication of why? It seems to me that if you are right about the rarity of the appointment, the real question is why he was considered to merit these appointments? --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 14:18, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, it requires further research. The title is flagged as a stub. It needs building. David Lauder 14:39, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Notability
Talk:Sir Alexander Lauder, 4th Baronet

message: He appears to have been held in some esteem in Scotland, sufficient for the City Council's of both Glasgow and Aberdeen to invite him to become a Burgess of those cities. I could research him further but time is the problem and it is flagged as a stub, so maybe someone else could have a go? David Lauder 19:44, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Non primary Baronet and honorary recognition just months before his death by local councils. Even you as a Lauder must admit that he is on very shakey ground in terms of notabilty. regards--Vintagekits 20:03, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I am not of that family so don't know much about him, although living in Scotland they are a well-known family. Maybe the councils concerned (and himself) were not aware he was about to die! Maybe someone else could check him out further? David Lauder 20:07, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Fair enough, I will give it a while for someone to come up with something notable on him. regards--Vintagekits 20:09, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I too am happy to allow time for this article to be improved, but at the moment the article does not even make a claim of notability. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 11:37, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Modestly notable
Talk:Ringworld's Children

message: This article is nothing but spoilers.  I was looking for information on the order of the books in the series and I run into several spoilers.  I feel that the page should be either rewritten or marked for spoilers, but I am apparently not allowed to put a warning on the page.  The best solution is to rewrite the page, but as I am both new to editing Wikipedia and I have not yet read all the books in the series, I can not do this myself.  Perhaps I am just being difficult, but I do not feel that I am.  To me this is important.
There is some interesting information but it is not explained very well or written in such a way as to not reveal plot elements.  I realize this is considered classic fiction and therefore spoilers are supposedly not a big deal, however I do maintain that they should be written more tactfully.  I mean no disrespect, it is merely my opinion.
IndolentSpecies (talk) 04:47, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Spoilers 

message: Can someone please create a proper plot summary?  The existing plot summary is more like a literary analysis and contains nothing at all about the plot.Pmarshal (talk) 21:53, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  The plot summary is not a plot summary 

message: This novel contains more than just "casual" confirmation of the hyperspace monster idea.  The concept is initially presented as such, when the hindmost is seen to be neither shocked nor surprised when Tunesmith presents the idea in very vague and imprecise terms ("we find life everywhere...." or something similar). However the confirmation is more pronounced when the "comma shaped" object flies above the surface of the ringworld, while in hyperspace, and "eats" a comma shaped chunk of the Scrith wall, causing the nearby spill mountains to boil into space.  More than that, the author intentionally chose descriptive language like "gaping maw" for references to singularities in this, and later, in-universe publications.  Neglecting the explicit reference to the comma-shaped hyperspace monster eating part of the wall, the descriptive language and vague references by the characters is not "casual." Its "indirect" or "vague" or "nonspecific."  Casual suggests that the claim is made off-hand, as without further elaboration by the characters or by subsequent segments of the plot, suggesting that the concept was somehow assumed to be already established and therefore a piece of "common" or "casually known" knowledge.184.189.220.114 (talk) 18:06, 3 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  hyperspace creatures: Comma Shaped chunk of the wall eaten by monster = explicit, not casual.
Talk:Andrew Dick-Lauder

message: See From WP:NCNT#Other_non-royal_names#4:
:Baronets, as they hold hereditary titles, often for a large part of their lives, follow the same practice as hereditary peers and should have their title noted in the beginning of the article. The format is Sir John Smith, 17th Baronet. For the article title, this format should only be used when disambiguation is necessary; otherwise, the article should be located at John Smith. John Smith, 17th Baronet should never be used with the postfix and without the prefix.
I am moving this page.--padraig 11:47, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Moved

message: The implicit claim to notability in this article is merely that he was a baronet who changed his name.  That falls a long way short of WP:BIO, so I propose that this article be merged to Lauder Baronets. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 11:46, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Non-notable, propose merger
Talk:Sir Thomas Dick-Lauder, 9th Baronet

message: This article makes no assertion of notability in the lead para, and the only claims to notability which I can infer from reading it are that: a) he was a baronet, and b) he was a junior army oficer.  This falls well short of the notability thresholds of WP:BIO, so I propose that this article be merged to Lauder Baronets. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 12:00, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Do these Wikipedia notices  have no meaning? David Lauder 18:50, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: David, a stub tag indicates that an article is short and should be expanded. However, there is nothing here to indicate that this man is sufficiently notable for the article to be worth expanding.  If someone comes up with something much more signficant about this man than that he was a baronet and a junior army officer, then the article can be recreated, but for now it should be merged to Lauder Baronets. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 09:51, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Notability
Talk:Hyperbolic motion (relativity)

message: I'm not sure I understand the diagram in the article. It makes it appear as if the world lines of the accelerating particles are outside of the light cone??  (unless I'm missing something fundamental, which may be likely)
If the diagram is correct, then can someone explain what a particle at rest would look like within the diagram?
Dmitry Brant (talk) 13:25, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Diagram

message: It is not clear whether the author intended to define u as coordinate velocity or proper velocity, although I suspect the former.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.230.52.225 (talk) 21:24, 8 May 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: See the article on proper velocity. The default meaning, unless otherwise stated, is coordinate velocity. DonQuixote (talk) 00:20, 9 May 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  What is u? 

message: The last two latex formulas show parsing errors like this,
Failed to parse (unknown function "\begin"): \begin{array}{c|c} \begin{aligned}u(t) & =\frac{\alpha t}{\sqrt{1+\left(\frac{\alpha t}{c}\right)^{2}}}\\ & =c\tanh\left(\operatorname{arsinh}\frac{\alpha t}{c}\right)\\ x(t) & =\frac{c^{2}}{\alpha}\left(\sqrt{1+\left(\frac{\alpha t}{c}\right)^{2}}-1\right)\\ & =\frac{c^{2}}{\alpha}\left(\cosh\left(\operatorname{arsinh}\frac{\alpha t}{c}\right)-1\right)\\ c\tau(t) & =\frac{c^{2}}{\alpha}\ln\left(\sqrt{1+\left(\frac{\alpha t}{c}\right)^{2}}+\alpha t\right)\\ & =\frac{c^{2}}{\alpha}\operatorname{arsinh}\frac{\alpha t}{c} \end{aligned} & \begin{aligned}u(\tau) & =c\tanh\frac{\alpha\tau}{c}\\ \\ x(\tau) & =\frac{c^{2}}{\alpha}\left(\cosh\frac{\alpha\tau}{c}-1\right)\\ \\ ct(\tau) & =\frac{c^{2}}{\alpha}\sinh\frac{\alpha\tau}{c}\\ \\ \end{aligned} \end{array}
Could any one check and fix?--Almuhammedi (talk) 12:59, 4 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Parse failure
Talk:Ice Ih

message: Is it worthwhile to put space group and unit cell parameters? cell parameters are  a=b= 4.5212, c=7.3666 Å, 90 90 120 but I don't have a reference for that. And number of each kind of atom in the asymmetric unit?128.84.182.175 (talk) 13:48, 8 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Crystal parameters

message: Does anyone know a high precision determination of the melting point of ice Ih?
"high precision" as in 0.001 K resolution or something like that.Eheran (talk) 18:01, 28 May 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  exact melting point of ice Ih
Talk:Ideal solution

message: I would like to propose merging this article and Ideal mixture. The two articles appear to cover very similar topics.--GregRM 16:55, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge 

message: Once I got started, it was hard to resist reworking the page. Hopefully the result flows better and fixes the problems above. 84.92.241.186 (talk) 13:31, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rework 

message: In the section consecuences it says that every component of an ideal mix follows Rault's law but that is not completely wright one has to assume
the hypothesis that the vapor in equilibrium whith the liquid mixture is formed by ideal gasses. It is true that in practice this is taken for granted in many cases but I think it should be writen in a more precise form.Utanari (talk) 10:29, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  incorrection 

message: friends!
ARE water +HCl and water + H2SO4  NON-IDEAL SOLUTIONS? IF SO FORCE OF ATTRACTION BETWEEN UNDISSOCIATED MOLECULES OF HCl [OR H2SO4 IN SECOND CASE]AND WATER HAVE TO BE CONSIDERED.IS THIS UNDERSTANDING CORRECT?I MEAN ,EVEN BEFORE THE ACIDS DISSOCIATE IN TO IONS CONTRACTION IN VOLUME HAPPENS,RIGHT OR WRONG?
WHAT HAPPENS IF 10 mL OF WATER IS ADDED TO H2SO4 TAKEN AS SOLVET[SAY 90 mL]?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sarvodayaharish (talk • contribs) 20:03, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  example for non-ideal 

message: Is the ideality of this type of solution maintained over all temperature ranges?--5.2.200.163 (talk) 12:23, 11 July 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Not necessarily for real examples of almost ideal solutions. Of course if we postulate an unidentified ideal solution, it is assumed to be ideal at all temperatures. But a real example, say ethane and propane, is only approximately ideal, probably in the temperature range where both components are liquid. And the deviations can be larger at other T, say when one component becomes solid or supercritical. Dirac66 (talk) 19:44, 11 July 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Ideality at all temperatures can be called perfect ideality corresponding to a perfectly ideal solution. It is interesting to notice in this context that the electrode potential determinations involves the assumption that the electrode potential of the standard hydrogen electrode involving an ideal solution with hydrogen ion is zero at all temperatures equivalently to standard enthalpy of formation of hydrogen ion is also zero at all temperatures.--5.2.200.163 (talk) 12:35, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Temperature range of ideality
Talk:Instability strip

message: The strip doesn't look nearly vertical to me.  More vertical than horizontal, sure, but not nearly vertical. Jruderman (talk) 01:27, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The HR diagram is a poor representation, but in any case the angle of the instability strip depends on the horizontal and vertical scales used, so calling it nearly vertical is perhaps not for the best. Lithopsian (talk) 11:42, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

text: Yeah, it's not vertical at all. It angles significantly to the right, since the brighter variables in these groups are cooler. There are some actual vertical strips on the H-R plot (eg the LBV low-temp excursion zone at ~8000K) but this is not one of them. -- bornLoser (talk) 13:04, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Nearly vertical" 

message: There seems to be much confusion here.  I know nothing about white dwarfs so I had to do some research.  The "ZZ Ceti instability strip" is not the same instability strip as the one described here.  The reference provided seems like a very good reason not to study with SAO!  Coincidentally, the DAV instability strip lies near an extension of the classic instability strip, the DBV and DOV strips not so close.  They should all be treated separately, or at least very strongly differentiated from the classic instability strip.  I'm going to reduce mention of the pulsating white dwarfs to a quick aside in this article.  Someone with more knowledge can enlarge it, or perhaps produce a separate article.  Lithopsian (talk) 11:51, 24 February 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, the ZZ Ceti's, Beta Cepheids, and others are completely unrelated. I changed the wording of the introduction to make it a bit clearer that "instability strip" is ambiguous, since there's more than one region that goes by that name. Though when people say just "instability strip" they usually mean the one with the Cepheids in it, the others are important as well. Though i'm not sure whether they should have separate articles, sections on the H-R diagram article, etc. Some of these regions (eg the cepheid strip, horizontal branch, hayashi forbidden zone, H-D limit, LBV zones, etc) are clearly independent phenomena that deserve their own pages, but some (eg beta cepheid area) are just "places on the H-R diagram where X Y stars tend to be". -- bornLoser (talk) 13:14, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  ZZ Ceti Instability strip
Talk:Intensity interferometer

message: It remains entirely unclear what the exact mechanism of such an interferomter is. It is mentioned (at two different points in the text) that correlations of the intesity of two or more beams are used. Still it remains unclear how these correlations need to be processed. 134.91.141.39 (talk) 11:27, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  mechanism unclear
Talk:Ketty Lester

message: This article has been reverted to an earlier version as part of a large-scale clean-up project of multiple article copyright infringement.  Text entered in   duplicated at least in part material from . Other content added by this contributor may have been copied from other sources and has been removed in accordance with Wikipedia:Copyright violations. Earlier text must not be restored, unless it can be verified to be free of infringement. Content added by other contributors subsequent to the introduction of this material can be restored if it does not merge with this text to create a derivative work. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions must be deleted. Contributors may use sources as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that 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. ----Moonriddengirl (talk) 01:01, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Text now rewritten. Ghmyrtle (talk) 11:05, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Copyright problem
Talk:Interaction picture

message: User:Jess Riedel has proposed a grand merge today. The Devil is in the details, however, and it is hard to do it right.
A bit of reduplication can't hurt, cf. the table in this article, but the reader who wants to get a snap picture of this and not the other pictures should be able to come here, as opposed to a longer, turgid peroration on all three pictures, etc... This is best left for a QM text. In the real world, the three pictures have very different user communities and cultures, and trying to hit the hapless readers with a grand synthesis can only turn them off and send them elsewhere. Better than a merge, multiplexing and then reduplicating the information in a central spot as well may be preferable.   Cuzkatzimhut (talk) 23:06, 2 September 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: A centralized discussion would be easier to follow than one conducted four places.  User:Jess Riedel seems to have started one at Talk:Dynamical pictures (quantum mechanics).  Laura Scudder | talk 20:23, 3 September 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Inarguably so; this is how people are introduced to these pictures in all texts, and that centralized discussion deserves to be developed. My assumption is the reader here has already learned about changing pictures, but wants something more. My sense, however, is that, past such discussions, texts normally cop out, shrug all the good stuff off, and move on to better pastures, and students start scrounging footnotes in Landau and Lifschits, and wikipedia articles such as this one. It would be a pity to deprive them of it, in the interest of some central planning concept. I don't see the harm in reduplication: some of the better parts of WP run on it! The central discussion, linked as a "main article" link could also use the comparative table to help the students find their bearings there. But, at the end of the day, the student has to forget the "bad habits" and expectations of the other pictures when applying a specific one. Consider the mayhem they regularly unleash when they misapply this operator structure mapped to  the phase space formulation of QM  Cuzkatzimhut (talk) 23:34, 3 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Don't merge

message: [Complaint about lack of picture by TheCampaignForRealPhysics removed by user. To which C.Fred had replied:]
:Because it is not truly a picture of the concept, it does not belong at the top of the article. However, it's been moved down and recaptioned—in keeping with the other two articles. —C.Fred (talk) 19:41, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Good edits by C.Fred on all three pages with the pictures and descriptions of the protagonists. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TheCampaignForRealPhysics (talk • contribs) 19:51, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Same look and feel across the three related pages 

message: H_0 is used without being defined. Is H_0 the same as H_{0,S} throughout? 176.61.2.76 (talk) 07:23, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  <math>H_0</math>?