lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Equation solving

message: line 8 seems very strange (incorrect even), with a's on the left and x's  on the right; how was this really meant to be ? 
Below the bold section title 'solution set' there is an invitation to the link 'solution set';  this seems not quite sensefull  at that location
: Whoops! Fixed line 8. Thanks Dysprosia 22:32, 19 Mar 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Line 8 

message: Where can I find solving fractional expression equations? This (equations with algebraic expressions in the denominator) is an Algebra II topic. 
I have a merger algorithm to combine fractions from Vedic Mathematics. Larry R. Holmgren 05:46, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fractional Expression Equations 

message: I recently ran across this interesting video on what appears to be a NEW method to solve ANY quadratic equation which I think is interesting: youtube/ZBalWWHYFQc
This guy, Po-Shen Loh, is a professor (PhD) of mathematics at Carnegie Mellon University so "not a crackpot" apparently. I also went to his website (www.poshenloh.com) where there is another video in which he explains the process in much more detail including all the underlying logic and foundational knowledge required to think about the process: youtube/XKBX0r3J-9Y
If the claims in this video are correct (and I have no reason to doubt it at this time) then Po-Shen Loh has discovered something both elementary and foundational that has apparently eluded discovery for a long time due to its utterly simple nature. You might say this was a method hiding in plain sight.
He mentions on his website that he subsequently was informed that another person apparently discovered almost (but not quite) the exact same idea in 1989 but even 1989 is rather recent in the entire history of algebra so again I think it is interesting it has taken so long for somebody to discover this particular method.
172.88.130.119 (talk) 13:44, 16 December 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: It wouldn't be an appropriate addition to this article as it only works on quadratic equations and isn't even a particularly common method for solving them, and so it isn't important enough to be in this broad article. I also believe the videos exaggerate how important the finding is, which is one reason for the policy of WP:SECONDARY. A more plausible reason that it "eluded discovery" is that nobody was looking for it - there are already methods to solve quadratic equations that work every time so this isn't important to mathematicians at all. Worth a mention on Po-Shen Loh due to its potential utility in teaching (as it feels less arbitrary than other methods) but here it is irrelevant. TWM03 (talk) 14:07, 23 July 2021 (UTC)
replies: text:  It eluded discovery because it was already considered as a well known or obvious variant.  I don't think it ever fails to work, as it's another way to organize completing the square and gives the same end result. Sesquivalent (talk) 23:24, 14 September 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Po-Shen Loh: A different method to solve any quadratic equation ...
Talk:Ignorant native

message: The "ignorant native" might be a figure in someone's parable or allegory, but such a rhetorical trope is in no way an element of theology, Christian, heretical or otherwise. Wetman 22:24, 19 Mar 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: How this bizarre page got ignored for a couple of years is a true mystery. The term "ignorant native" appears to be entirely a fabrication of the original editor, appears nowhere in LDS theology, and doesn't belong on Wikipedia. Twenty-four hours to see whether ANYONE objects. Then it's going buh-bye.The Editrix 14:13, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
Talk:Soroca

message: Which King Stephen is this?  Stephen I of Hungary died in 1038.  RickK | Talk 22:25, 19 Mar 2004 (UTC)
Wikipedia talk:Subpages

message: I wish to create a subpage for The National Arts Club. Based on what I've read it seems that feature could be turned off. Is there a way I can turn it on?
I've read a few articles about subpages and I'm a little confused about what is allowed and where it is allowed. Any help would be appreciated  -thanks! Susan21w (talk) 14:54, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: "subpage" here refers to a specific software feature for pages with a slash in the title like "National Arts Club/Members". This software feature is disabled for articles and cannot be enabled. It's possible to create a second article about National Arts Club like "List of members of the National Arts Club" but it wouldn't be classified as a subpage. It's a small article. Couldn't you just expand it? It's difficult to create an article satsfying Wikipedia requirements like Wikipedia:Notability. I recommend Wikipedia:Articles for creation if you want to try. PrimeHunter (talk) 17:58, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for your reply. I'll see if I can just add another paragraph as you suggested. Susan21w (talk) 19:06, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Creating subpage for existing Wikipedia  

message: Would like some input from the watchers of this page. There was an unrelated page move at Talk:United Kingdom general election, 1832–33#Requested move 18 October 2018 which was using subpages to store article information. It seems I'm the only one that has raised this issue there, so would like to know if this is a valid use-case or not. Note that the discussion has also branched off to Talk:List_of_MPs_elected_in_the_United_Kingdom_general_election,_1832–33#Use_of_subpages so pick where-ever you want to comment. (unrelated note, could this talk page be archived? It's pretty long with discussions from 2005) --Gonnym (talk) 07:12, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Need input on a group of subpages for one article 

message: Hi Tejal here need permission to publish my change made in articles with given citations and image.
whatever I'm editing and publish has an solid proof and no fake or copyright information is given. Teju98 (talk) 05:28, 18 July 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: This is not the place for this request.  Continue the discussion on your talk page.  RudolfRed (talk) 05:41, 18 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 18 July 2023
Talk:Battle of Alexandria (1801)

message: This is both superficial and inaccurate.
JF42 (talk) 14:03, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Superficial and inaccurate 

message: The reference to the 28th Regiment engaging enemy to the rear of the battalion is incorrectly placed in the timeline. This was not in relation to the  column of infantry the penetrated between the front and rear wings of the 42nd  but the subsequent cavalry attack. I shall move the reference  accordingly.
JF42 (talk) 05:31, 8 October 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  28th Regt and cavalry attack
Talk:Gordian I

message: "During the reign of Alexander Severus, Gordian (who was by then in his late seventies) threw the lots to the dangerous honours of government in Africa."? --AW 15:21, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Anyone? --AW (talk) 23:22, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I suspect it should read "drew the lots for the dangerous honours of government in Africa." During the Principate, unlike the imperial provinces which had governors appointed by the emperor, the senatorial provinces were allocated governors through the drawing of lots. Of course, I am confused just why the proconsular governorship of Africa was described as a dangerous honor - it was only dangerous to Gordian I because he rebelled against Maximinus Thrax. I shall correct this in the next few days, when I put together appropriate sources and citations for Gordian I. Oatley2112 (talk) 10:47, 13 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  What does this line mean? 

message: "...received Roman citizenship under the triumvir Mark Antony, or one of his daughters"
So one of Mark Antony's daughters ruled Rome? Interesting! 2A02:AA1:104D:1981:3DD8:A176:D71A:B9DA (talk) 21:48, 18 December 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: You do not need to rule Rome to grant Roman citizenship. Ancient Roman freedmen after manumission gained political rights and often assumed the family name of their previous owner. Dimadick (talk) 08:50, 19 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rome under Mark Antony's daughters
Talk:Gordian II

message: The side bar says that he was the successor of Alexander Severus.  Is there a reason that it isn't Maximinus Thrax? Molinari (talk) 16:32, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The sidebar is wrong - it should be Maximinus Thrax. Oatley2112 (talk) 09:59, 14 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Successor of Alexander? 

message: This line doesn't make sense
His praenomen and nomen Marcus Antonius suggest that his paternal ancestors received Roman citizenship under the Triumvir Mark Antony, or one of his daughters, during the late Roman Republic.
unless it means citizenship might have been conferred by a daughter of Mark Anthony or during the triumvirate of a daughter of Mark Anthony. --Peter Grey (talk) 15:56, 22 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Who's daughters 
Talk:De Beers

message: What is the point of mentioning that Oppenheimer was Jewish? Neither religion nor ethnicity of any other player in the De Beers saga is mentioned. How do we explain this? Why is it noteworthy? Ordinarily I fully understand the motivation of those identifying someone as Jewish out of context. I think the same is true here. Removed. Paul Beardsell (talk) 01:48, 8 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Jewish 

message: The article does not mention the convict labour used by de beers, starting in 1884. I checked the archived discussion, and saw some mention of it. As far as I can understand it was taken down, most probably due to the questionable 10000 number. I think it is an important topic to be mentioned hence I found a trustworthy publication on the topic: "Convict labour, industrialists and the state in the US South and South Africa, 1870–1930" William H. Worger 2006 Journal of Southern African Studies Vol 30, Pages 63-86. https://doi.org/10.1080/0305707042000223942 Relevant part from the paper:
The references presented for this paragraph are from first-hand sources i.e. "the Memorandum of Agreement between De Beers and the colonial government" and the "superintendent reports of the De Beers Convict Station." I wanted to put the details here before editing because I am a non-user and there might be other considerations. But I honestly believe that there should be a section about this also using other sources which exist in the form of books. e.g. Stones of Contention: A History of Africa’s Diamonds, Todd Cleveland; South Africa's City of Diamonds: Mine Workers and Monopoly Capitalism in Kimberley, 1867-1895, William H. Worger
85.53.252.8 (talk) 17:12, 29 December 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Prison Labour 

message: Sky laser process 
Bhavesh Dobariya 
Surat. India 103.251.59.78 (talk) 10:28, 8 April 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Diamonds cutting
Talk:List of Polish divisions in World War II

message: I think this list should be divided into several sections:
* Polish divisions in September 1939
* Polish underground army (Armia Krajowa)
* Polish divisions in western countries (England, France, North Africa, Italy)
* Polish divisions in Soviet Union
---
We need to distinguish somehow between various Polish divisions that had the same numbers: 3rd InfDiv (1939, Poland); 3rd InfDiv (1940, France); 3rd InfDiv (1940s North Africa/Italy??);
Well, we could do it the same way I did on the polish page - all the 1st divions that shared the same traditions are listed separately, but share the same article (1 Dywizja Piechoty Legionów, 1 Dywizja Grenadierów) while the rest (1 DP im. Tadeusza Kosciuszki) are listed separately and are distinct.Halibutt 11:44, 20 Mar 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Notes
Talk:Command (computing)

message: 69.40.17.163 (talk) 03:21, 9 October 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I think the formatting on Adverb is incorrect anyway - bolding should be reserved for the title of the article and italics should be used for emphasis. In any case, adverb isn't that comparable to command (computing)... Dysprosia 21:38, 22 Mar 2004 (UTC)

text: That should probably be under command line interface, not here. Dysprosia 09:21, 18 May 2004 (UTC)

message: give me 10000000000 mass  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.40.17.163 (talk) 03:22, 9 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  agar.io
Talk:Ancalagon

message: Doesn't Gandalf say that Ancalagon could have destroyed one of the 9 rings with his fire? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Meelar (talk • contribs).
:He says that the dragonfire might destroy a Ring of Power, but not even Ancalagon could destroy the One Ring. Ausir 01:01, 20 Mar 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Domoic acid

message: Is domoic acid responsible for most forms of ASP, or only some?  Mentioning red tides suggests it is produced mainly by dinoflagellates, but information on the web links it mainly to diatoms.
Red tides and red algae are not synonymous. Red tides are so named for their visual appearance (reflectance) red algae are so named for their photochemistry (absorbance), these are opposite uses of the same adjective.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.123.41.42 (talk) 21:14, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Comparing the structure of domoic acid shown on this page, there is no information on the configuration of the chiral center at the CH-COOH group (should be (R)), and also the first double bond in the side chain is shown as (E) - which is wrong - instead of (Z). see: 
-- Krakatit (talk) 15:53, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

message: Even at 1/100 the level toxic to nerves, demoic acid appears to be toxic to the kidneys.
"Posted: 07 Feb 2014 05:36 AM PST
Domoic acid accumulates in seafood and is toxic to the brain. Research indicates that the toxin damages kidneys at concentrations that are 100 times lower than what causes neurological effects." 
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/02/140206155248.htm
dcebr 13:24, 8 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  1/100th amount toxic to nerves is toxic to kidneys 

message: The article says 20 mg / kg tissue, but that figure does not make any sense. The source says part per million, could someone change it?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.18.38.178 (talk) 02:26, 5 February 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Federal limit 

message: A news article came out and claimed seals are attacking people because of this chemical from algae blooms. I'm unsure if people think this source and speculation is worth adding.
Source JackW2 (talk) 05:16, 1 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Questionable History Section Addition
Talk:Hawaiian pizza

message: please let me edit im Italian 135.180.29.34 (talk) 19:39, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: this is not the right page to request additional user rights. You may reopen this request with the specific changes to be made and someone may add them for you, or if you have an account, you can wait until you are autoconfirmed and edit the page yourself. JTP (talk • contribs) 19:56, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 7 November 2023 

message: Pizza dough is not 1 ingredience. It's a collection of ingredience. 188.113.95.213 (talk) 08:27, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: It would not be helpful in the context of this article about a specific type of pizza to list of individual components of pizza dough, eg flour water yeast salt or whatever. What the reader needs to know is what makes this distinctive from otehr pizzas. Ponsonby100 (talk) 09:39, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: So write "contains" instead of "ingredients" or write the ingredients of the pizza dough in it's own paragraf under the "ingredients". 188.113.95.213 (talk) 10:58, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: No. Ponsonby100 (talk) 12:26, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Then delete the whole wikipedia page about the Hawaiian pizza. 188.113.95.213 (talk) 13:36, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Not an ingrediens 

message: “Hawaiian” pizza  or “Hawaiian pizza” 2603:9001:7C00:CBB:291C:B2B2:1283:98EE (talk) 02:17, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Despite it being an affront to good taste, it still is technically a pizza, though yes it's not Hawaiian in the slightest. LilianaUwU (talk / contributions) 12:34, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Suggest quotes over hawaiian
Talk:Duklja

message: Why is Duklja said to be south Slavic state and not Serbian, when even in the Wiki article about Duklja founding and rulling dinasty it is clearly stated that it was Serbian?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vojislavljevi%C4%87_dynasty
Also, by the time that Duklja was formed as a state, ethnicities in that part of the Balkans were already formed and there was no South Slavic ethnicity.
Is it a crime to say the truth or it is some kind of conspiracy to remove as much of Serbian name from Balkans history as you can, something that I've been noticing a lot lately? 109.93.105.223 (talk) 05:14, 23 August 2021 (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. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 09:11, 24 August 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: That's interesting because, for the longest time, this article used to clearly state the fact that Duklja was a Serbian medieval state, until it was changed in 2021, and with zero citations. Not sure what kind of kangaroo encyclopedia you're trying to run, but it would be a good idea to at least abide by your own rules. So, what you should ask is who and why changed the article from its original form and why they have locked it afterward to prevent anyone from correcting their change, which, again, has no citation. Never mind the fact that the OP is completely right in telling you that "south Slavic" is nor was it ever an ethnicity. So I think you know exactly what's going on here and are just acting the ignoramus. 178.221.64.252 (talk) 02:02, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: At the very least, you should just remove the "south Slavic" part and have it say "...was a medieval state," for now, until the article is returned to its original, correct form. In it's current state the article just looks ridiculous and clearly implies that whoever changed it had an agenda or just a general aversion to the word "Serbian." 178.221.64.252 (talk) 02:07, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 23 August 2021 

message: The current map is generally terrible. It's a known fact that Kotor was ceded to Duklja by Tsar Samuel who lived way before this. And there's no evidence to suggest that the Soli region was Byzantine. It is more likely that it was ruled by Duklja, as the Byzantines could realistically be unable to maintain the region. Petarrc13 (talk) 17:54, 16 August 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  The map provided for the Wikipedia page.
Talk:Benjamin Harrison V

message: While the reverts of your edits appear to be warranted, I encourage you to use this talk page to raise and discuss your suggestions.Hoppyh (talk) 14:44, 4 July 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  {{ping|Meanmemescorrecting}} 

message: @Hoppyh: The most notable fact regarding Harrison is that he is a Founding Father. Thus, IMO, the article should lead with this. The next most important fact is related, his signing of the  Declaration of Independence.
As it stood, the use of "as well as" for a connector with the Continental Association is a poor choice because the Declaration comes off as an after-thought, as less important - as, oh, by they way - when it is the primary reason Harrison qualifies for "founderhood".
Finally, mentioning his being Founding Father at the end struck me as putting the horse well after the cart. On that note, being a colonial legislator and having a tradition of namesakes are trivialities, at best of secondary interest.
That's my "say". I would appreciate hearing yours. Thanks. Allreet (talk) 02:56, 23 September 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: I appreciate your thoughts and understand your take on the emphasis. I do believe the tradition of legislative work in the family is important. If you’d like to make changes to the lead, by all means feel free. Hoppyh (talk) 12:02, 23 September 2022 (UTC)

text: What is important is that he was a member of a political dynasty, and that he was socially well-connected. I find the status of a "Founding Father" to be marginally significant trivia, as most Founding Fathers were obscure figures. Dimadick (talk) 13:08, 23 September 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: @Hoppyh and @Dimadick: I'll try another revision keeping both your points in mind. If I go astray, edit accordingly, though my hope is to avoid another revert. Thanks for the feedback Allreet (talk) 01:41, 24 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Changes to the lead 

message: The Virginia Society Daughters of the American Colonists erected a memorial in 1972 with Col. Benjamin Harrison V’s date of birth as incorrectly written as 13 Dec 1730, which was actually the date of birth of his wife, Elizabeth Bassett. His date of birth in all historical records is 24 April 1726. Amseeberg (talk) 02:28, 14 January 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Typo, his date of birth was 5 April 1726. Sorry, my fingers slipped typing. Amseeberg (talk) 02:31, 14 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Col. Benjamin Harrison V’s date of birth (5 Apr 1726) was incorrectly written as 13 Dec 1730 on Memorial created in 1972
Talk:Alex Jones

message: The let's review portion of this article is entirely inappropriate and violates the first two lines of the page's header:
* This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Alex Jones article.
* This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
71.74.165.166 (talk) 22:43, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: It is there because of the huge number of editors who come here to say Alex Jones is real news. We can point to it instead of repeating everything over and over again. O3000, Ret. (talk) 22:48, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: I get that some sort of boilerplate message is warranted  - but the tone and verbage seems highly inflammatory and against the manual of style. 71.74.165.166 (talk) 23:21, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: MOS is for articles. O3000, Ret. (talk) 23:24, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: I won't argue semantics. MoS may very well indeed govern articles but WP:TALK definitely discusses what behavior is acceptable and what is not. 71.74.165.166 (talk) 01:24, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: WP:TALK does indeed discuss that, but I see nothing unacceptable here. You won't find any rule against sarcasm. MrOllie (talk) 01:30, 14 February 2024 (UTC)

text: Peter Ustinov said: "Comedy is simply a funny way of being serious." IMO, humor is of great value in difficult articles -- and in difficult situations IRL. Sarcasm is a strong form of humor. But it has its uses. How else do you deal with a constant demand that utter nonsense is real news? Does the section you are referencing contain sarcasm? Yes. But how else can you explain to some folk that that which is promulgated is just beyond what anyone can value as news? O3000, Ret. (talk) 01:53, 14 February 2024 (UTC)

text: Seem valid to me. Slatersteven (talk) 11:00, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Let's review Wikipedia policy, shall we? 

message: It says that Gary Allen wrote "None Dare Call it Treason." I believe this is incorrect. 2600:6C4E:7003:800:E4A6:8C73:655C:4FF2 (talk) 04:34, 25 February 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Huh? "Treason" isn't used anywhere in the article, but None Dare Call it Conspiracy is, and that book is definitely written by Allen. 9yz (talk) 09:11, 25 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Alex Jones Page