lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Investiture of the Gods

message: This term appears only on this page and in the subsidiary pages. There is no definition. Either it means a form of god (oriental gods equate to ancient occidental heroes, such as Hercules or Siegfried ; ancient occidental gods, such as Poseidon, equate to a partitioning of the Tao : for him, it was command of water, horses, and earthquakes, coupled with the fates of only fathering monstrous children and failing to achieve the status of top god) or somebody with magic powers whose mechanism is taken for granted (how come they all walk up walls and leap across buildings ?) No doubt the DC Comics firm holds a strong grip on the character name SUPERMAN, and it can't be used. But what is the Chinese term, and what are its mythological terms or limitations ? 
Now I've come across the anime (from a manga) "Locke the Superman" - a twentieth-century Japanese invention, but which uses Kanji (Hanzi) for the term translated as Superman : Chô-jin. This means it comes from a Chinese original term. What is the connection ; in any case the Japanese derivatives should be included. (Had it been successful in the U.S., the term Superman would have been changed.) 4.154.255.147 (talk) 23:15, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: It refers to the Chinese term Junzi. Rupert Loup (talk) 00:20, 19 August 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Superiormen ?

message: I have found in Goodreads and Amazon another translation, with another title: "Creation of the Gods". I think it is the same.
--Filoberto (talk) 08:11, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Other editions 

message: Creations of Daji seems to be a non-notable subset of the content of this work, and hence is best discussed on this page, perhaps as a separate section. Klbrain (talk) 13:00, 27 January 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Klbrain (talk) 09:58, 11 April 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge proposal
Talk:Eva Macapagal

message: Could someone please work on this article? It's so biased it's making me sick. It sounds like something that was copied and pasted from the palace website or something.
--Unknown 18:36, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I totally agree. Might even be eligible for AfD as it stands now. Unreferenced, POV and WP:NOR. Shrumster 13:25, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Can't nominate it for deletion as notability is not the issue. It isn't a copyvio as far as I can tell. Needs some sources and a neutrality check, so tagged. If there aren't any sources, then we might be able to take this to the wider audience at AFD. MER-C 08:59, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: NPOV issues

message: Are there any sources indicating that she was a medical doctor?
http://www.macapagal.com/gma/biography/index.php GMA's website indicates that Dr. Macapagal indeed used the title "doctor". However, her field isn't specified.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.121.17.91 (talk) 01:35, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Doctor?
Talk:Quantum Fourier transform

message: This page is to me lacking an explanation of how the quantum fourier transform is in practice built up out of a combination of Hadamard and controlled rotation gates, a good explanation can be found at  sbandrews 18:37, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I noticed that too about the minus sign, here and in other QFT papers, perhaps it is just a covention amongst QFT researchers, as it will (i think) still give a fourier transform, just with the coefficients reflected about k=0, if it *is* a convention it would be worth referring to it in the article sbandrews (t) 05:37, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

message: An account called Dev.qkit has added three references in the article to their website, along with some terrible low resolution gifs of their product. I have removed them. They are not even constructive to the article. I hope they do not come back.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2610:148:1F02:7000:72BF:18D6:948:D41B (talk) 02:27, 7 October 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Advertisement 

message: Shouldn't the second wire have the transformations H, R_2, R_3, ... R_{n-1}? The diagram makes it seems like it doesn't continue after R_2.
--132.69.202.250 (talk) 17:58, 7 February 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Circuit 

message: Is the matrix for the Inverse QFT the same as the "forward" QFT, just with negative exponents? Just asking for clarification if I interpreted the notation correctly - I find the matrix form easier to read than the summation formula.
Abinmorth (talk) 02:38, 5 October 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Inverse QFT 

message: As further improvements are made, please attach inline references to help the reader figure out what content is cited to which source.  Thank you. Jehochman Talk 11:04, 19 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  More footnotes 

message: It is not clear to me why the number of amplitudes is 2^n, for a general DFT the number of operations required is only n^2. UrielSeptim (talk) 07:38, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Numer of amplitudes in the discrete Fourier transform 

message: # In the definition of the Fourier transform I wouldn't use n for the index in the \Sigma, as n is already denoting the number of bits.
# There is an error in the definition of the R_n gates: the definition does not depend on n. I believe the correct definition should have R_n(2,2) = e^2\pi*i / 2^n
# Also, again, I wouldn't use n for the indexing of the R_n's.
Doobiefletzet (talk) 13:37, 30 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Some problems
Talk:Taoism in Korea

message: The article downplays the influence of Taoism far too much -- true, as a form of organized/state /personal religion ( as practiced in Vietnam ) it's invisible and utterly non existent in Korea -- but, as an undercurrent in Korean thought and world view, Taosim is very central , ever present and very much a part of the psyche. True, it's far less noticebale than the more inflexible, conservative Confucianism that features in their society -- but Taoism is still a very central part of the Korean holistic-shamanistic vision of the world.
Anyone care to rewrite?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rutherfordlad (talk • contribs) 01:08, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: The first reference is to a well-known seller of printed Wikipedia articles.  I'm not an expert in the subject so have no realistic way of evaluating the things attributed to that reference - that little early writing on Taoism survives (seems unlikely from what else I've read, but depends what you think "writing on Taoism" is); Goguryeo enthusiasm lasted only one generation; Baekje didn't notice Taoism; Sinseon Sasang was influenced by Taoism; the Hwarang were influenced by Taoism; Buddhism swamped Taoism during Goryeo; Taoism was suppressed in 1592; few Taoists are found in Korea today.  Well, OK, that last is clearly true from other sources, at least if you expect "Taoists" to self-identify as such.  But the rest?
Without the things attributed to this non-reference, the article collapses into a summary of its second, and only real, reference.
Joe Bernstein   <joe@sfbooks.com>
108.179.172.222 (talk) 01:43, 21 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  The article is broken:  one of its only two references is Wikipedia itself 

message: There are numerous problems with this article, but here is an incontrovertible contradiction.
The article section titled "Three Kingdoms period" has its first sentence:
 Taoism first arrived in Korea in 624. Emperor Gaozu, the founder of China's Tang dynasty, sent a Taoist preacher and literature, Laozi and Zhuangzi, to the Goguryeo kingdom.
Emperor Gaozu, who reigned in the 7th century CE, could not have sent Laozi and Zhuangzi, both well before the 5th century BCE, over a thousand years of difference. This makes no sense and this section has no sources. I recommend removing it because of its utter unreliability.
Nowayhaze (talk) 21:10, 13 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gaozu and Laozi and Zhuangzi
Talk:Order of Saint Charles

message: Dear Dreamafter,
You seem to have written most of the article on the "Order of Saint Charles" of Monaco.
I believe that it is full of mistakes.
* The grand Officer does not wear two "awards". These are not awards in their own right. They are the star and the badge, or cross, of the order.
* The chest riband is not the "traditional" way to wear an order. It is nowadays common, in the past necklets, ribbons tied around he neck and collars were used.
* The crosses and stars of the order are not "tainted silver"! The are made of silver or gilded silver. 
* The badge of an order is not the same as a medal. A medal is round or oval and it is usually the lowest grade in an order. The knights wear a cross or badge.
In America everything is called "medal", but phaleristic literature distinghuises between stars, badges (the Legion d'Honneur has a jewel that is not a cros, it is therefore called a badge) and crosses.
Faithfully yours,
Robert Prummel
Robert Prummel (talk) 16:46, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  The right words 

message: The "thinner laurel wreath" may be attributed to the jeweller. Through the years different jewellers have made badges that vary a little. It is not necessarilly a unique aspect of the cross of an Officer.
My refference book states that the only difference between the insignia of an Officer and that of a Knight is the rosette on the ribbon.
Robert Prummel (talk) 18:11, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Laurel wreath
Talk:Orders, decorations, and medals of the Philippines

message: Congratulations! This article has now reached #1 on the list of articles containing the most non-free images with a whopping 47 non-free images! Amazing! :) Of course, it all has to go per WP:NFLISTS. --Hammersoft (talk) 20:29, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Made #1 on the list of articles using the most non-free content 

message: Where does the Pamana ng Pilipino presidential award fit in?
It has recipients including:
* Jhett Tolentino, 2017
* Guillermo Capati, 2016
* Mary Jane Alvero, 2012
* Rico Hizon, 2008
* Adolovni Acosta, 2006
* Pacita Abad, 2001
It would be good to be able to move the above into the article, but where?  Aoziwe (talk) 10:46, 4 March 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pamana ng Pilipino
Talk:Submission (combat sports)

message: There should also be a note about a technical submission. Technical submissions result when the fighter is placed in a submission hold and has sustained injury and deemed no longer fit to fight.  --71.192.88.79 18:43, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: This article is titled "Submission (combat sport)" which makes it sound like a sport but then the clarification in brackets, depending on the context also referred to as a "tap out" or "tapping out", makes it sound like a wrestling or MMA maneuver.  I'm confused ... if it's a move then there's already an article for that:
* Submission wrestling
If it's sport then that's already covered as well:
* Submission hold
Hutcher (talk) 05:30, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  What is this article? 

message: "The submission is commonly performed by clearly tapping the floor or the opponent with the hand or sometimes with the foot, to signal the opponent and possibly the referee of the submission." Isn't it the one who taps who gets submitted, and therefore it's the other one who makes the submission on him? —Kri (talk) 19:02, 30 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Who is it really that makes the submission?
Talk:Lingbao School

message: #Well-written. The prose is mostly engaging and provides excellent detail. The only real flaw is that the lede could be written more concisely. It seems a bit long for the article.
#Factually accurate and verifiable. Everything seems well-sourced and follows sources well. The present flaw is that it needs a wider variety of sources. It is currently built from a very limited set of references. I would prefer to see a wider variety to ensure accuracy and neutral point of view. That is not to say the article is inaccurate or biased, but rather a greater pool of references helps to verify accuracy and neutrality.
#Broad in coverage. This article certainly covers all the bases. However, I would like to see a bit more information about its place in history and impact on modern branches of Daoism. I would also like to see more information about Lingbao beliefs and systems of thought.
#Neutral. For the most part, a very balanced presentation of the topic. Occasionally, it seems as though a bias or loaded description comes through. A good example is the beginning of rebirth section. It mentions that the borrowing of Buddhist ideas was "often clumsy and betrayed the Lingbao Daoists' poor understanding of Buddhism". This comes across as a bit polemic. It is not a pervasive problem, but we must be careful about such descriptions. It should be rephrased in a more neutral fashion or attributed as the opinion of a particular author or school of thought. If it is the dominant view of available references, it would be preferably mentioned as such and backed by multiple examples, or preferably a secondary source noting the dominant thought. 
#Stable. No problems here.
#Images. The article could possibly use another image or two, but it's not needed. The images used are well-chosen and well-placed.
Summary: Pass. The article has room for improvement, but clearly fits the criteria of a good article. Despite the criticisms I raise, the current version of the article is well-structured and well-written, making it relatively easy to improve and expand. This article is informative and an excellent example of good writing. Good work! Vassyana 04:15, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  GA Review (Pass) 

message: I've rewritten
:While the Lingbao School no longer exists as a distinct teaching, its influence on Daoism remains to the present day, most importantly in how it helped integrate Buddhist and Daoist practices together.
as
:While the Lingbao School no longer exists as a distinct teaching, its influence on Daoism remains, most importantly in its help to combine Buddhist and Daoist practices.
I'm sure that the earlier version is awkward. I'm equally sure that the new version is wrong. Could some knowledgable person please fix this? Thanks. Morenoodles (talk) 09:55, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Lingering influence
Talk:Neidan

message: This is immortal claim is indeed *claimed*.  That's what the micro-cosmic orbit is for.  Whether or not it accomplishes this is another question.
Therefore, it seems we need to disambiguate what we mean here by "dubious."  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.118.23.40 (talk) 15:40, 23 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: "the micro-cosmic orbit leads to immortality" is considered "dubious"?

message: In the article it's stated that one is born with a certain amount of Jin that can never be increased. This is only partially true. It is the case that one is born with a certain amount of jin, and that the goal is mainly to conserve one's finite jin, as it becomes diminished through various activities. However, the literature clearly states that one can in fact absorb jin in certain circumstances if the proper exercises and disciplines are practiced. I don't have time to do a thorough edit on this topic, but I'd love to see it remedied, as this is a little-known and quite interesting subject. I'll edit it in the future if no one cares to bear the torch.
On a side note this article is quite hard to find; I've read through most of the Taoism articles over the past few weeks and haven't come across any links to Neidan (where there should be references to it in everything from the page on Qi to the page on Carl Jung). It'd vastly help the quality of this article if someone were to link to it, at the very least, from other Taoism-related articles; we might find an influx of editors to this topic if it were more accessible. Thanks and God bless  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.77.230.254 (talk) 03:46, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Jin
Talk:Heidi (god)

message: Because otherwise, the article needs moving to the English translation (Northern Emperor) or the Mandarin form (Beidi) of his name.
Also, to what extent is this god different from Xuan Wu? If they're the same diety, the pages should be merged or this page should more fully explain the ways in which his Cantonese cult is distinct from his general following. — LlywelynII 05:04, 14 October 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: So, is this god only worshipped in this form in Guangdong?
Talk:John Yates (police officer)

message: Why has he suddenly been suspended?  Was it because he refused to take the flak for a certain person who used to hold high public office? 79.70.232.130 (talk) 14:27, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Scapegoat? 
Talk:Functional endoscopic sinus surgery

message: Edited for layout and style. Exdmd 18:54, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Initial edit

message: This article needs several improvements. First, there is no clear statement upfront as to what this surgery actually does? It sounds like its purpose is to dilate passages in the sinuses to facilitate drainage, but this is not stated in the article. Second, the majority of the article is written at a high reading level using complex terminology, making it inaccessible to younger or less educated readers. Both problems can be solved simply by adding a few sentences in the beginning of the article explaining what the surgery entails and why it is done. 74.85.70.177 (talk) 23:31, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Improvements needed

message: A Computed Tomography (CT)Navigation system is a tool that is used by surgeons to better correlate intra-operative anatomy with pre-operative CT imaging. A computer is used to identify the the 3-dimensional location of the a probe tip placed within the patient's nose or sinuses. This allows surgeons to correlate their endoscope view with the patients pre-operative imaging thereby telling the surgeon what neighboring structures are located next ot his/her probe or instruments. Bleeding and  nasal anatomic variants can alter a surgeon's view of landmarks through the endoscope. Hence, CT-navigation assistance in sinus surgery is used with the intention of improving identification of structures and avoid damage to vital structures such as the brain and eyes.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ggomez113 (talk • contribs) 21:52, 22 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  The use of CT-Navigation in Endoscopic Sinus Surgery
Talk:Kelvinbridge subway station

message: There were a couple of references to a picture in the text which does not appear to be the current picture in the article (it would imply an external shot of the Bridge and station), so I have removed them for now. Dunarc (talk) 20:20, 9 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Picture references 

message: Transactions of the Institution of Engineers and Shipbuilders in Scotland Volume 39 page 132 lists Buchanan Street as the deepest.©Geni (talk) 18:33, 22 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Are we sure its actually the deepest?
Talk:Hillhead subway station

message: I made quite a few edits here and tried to get it to more than a stub, hopefully I haven't completely destroyed the article! JoshuaJohnLee talk softly, please 03:15, 20 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edits 
Talk:Oregon Route 242

message: Much of this article appears to be copied, word-for-word, from the following webpage: http://www.oregon.gov/ODOT/HWY/REGION4/pages/mckenzie_pass_project/mckenzie_pass_project.aspx
I am new to Wikipedia, but it was my understanding that articles were supposed to be original content as opposed to being copied word-for-word from elsewhere on the internet.JessicaFaith84 (talk) 01:28, 26 May 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes it looks like that was pasted into the article in December. I've removed it. Thanks for pointing it out! Valfontis (talk) 16:21, 26 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Plagiarism
Talk:Royal Canadian Mint Olympic coins

message: An introduction needs to be added to the article. I may add one in the next few days. Feel free to help The World 01:48, 7 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Introduction

message: Came here to see which coins to look out for, only to find the section a complete mess. 76.71.19.114 (talk) 02:44, 31 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vancouver Olympics section
Talk:Royal Canadian Mint numismatic coins (1900–1999)

message: For some reasons, numismatic one cents were removed from this page. The numismatic one cents may be a small group but are important. The goal of this article is to be the one stop resource for RCM Numismatic coins. Please keep this on the page. Maple Leaf 17:41, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: I heard on the radio about a huge, multi-kilogram gold coin being struck by the RCM. Anyword on it? -Will Beback · † · 04:57, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Big coin

message: As this article was so huge, I split this article into two articles. This article now features coins only from the 20th Century while the new article features all coins from the 2000's. Please refer to Royal Canadian Mint Numismatic Coins (2000's) for anything in the 21st Century. Maple Leaf 14:37, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: New Article

message: Like its sister Royal Canadian Mint Numismatic Coins (2000's) this article is probably too immature to qualify for B class rating on the quality scale.  While better developed than the sister article, I think it still does not meet the 6 B-Class Criteria .  Likewise, I will place a request for assessment .  Please don't take this as a criticism of the quality or quantity of work that has gone into these pages to date! --Whoosit (talk) 20:12, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: B Class Rating

message: There's an apparent error here. It says that the issue prices listed are for "two-coin set", but none of these were issued in two-coin sets, but in four coin sets. Furthermore, at least in the case of the 1999 Cata of Canada releases, they were issued in a) a four-coin box set, b) individually mounted in plastic coin holders on shrinkwrapped display cards, and c) individually as loose coins, all at different prices. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ʕ(Õلō)ˀ  Contribs. 01:59, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Discovering Nature Series
Talk:Hitler: Speeches and Proclamations

message: Why is this 4 volume set so hugely expensive?!  According to Amazon.com, this 4 volume set costs just over $800.00 U.S. dollars!  $800 for only 4 books?! What is going on here?  I realize that these 4 volumes comprise over 3,000 pages total, but $800 for only 4 books is far too excessive.  Hitler was of course a vile and murderous pig, but if someone is very interested in the history of WWII or Nazi Germany these books are basically required reading (and only decent college/university libraries even bother to carry them). It's almost like the publisher is actually trying to prevent these books from being sold/read by charging 7-10 times what they are actually worth. How can simple paper, ink, and glue cost so much? --172.164.80.216 14:26, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why so expensive? 

message: Is there a book where i can find the speeches of Goebbels?
--79.212.24.193 (talk) 00:25, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Goebbels: Speeches and Proclamations?
Talk:King's Theatre, Glasgow

message: The article has been cleaned up somewhat recently, would it be possible for someone to reconsider the tagging the page currently has?.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.210.58.2 (talk) 16:14, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Reconsider Tagging

message: This article is tageed as possibly not neutral. Can anyone explain the reasoning of this as I can find no discussion? Adamcobb 19:28, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I tagged it as not NPOV, meant to do the reasoning and then got distracted and forgot. Basically there are a lot of peacock terms, and it's written from a fairly 'oh it's a brilliant theatre' POV - this may well be the case, but it needs to be objective. It's also fairly chatty in parts. Will2710 22:32, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I came across this while browsing, saw the tags, so have been bold and had a go at a rewrite to remove many of the peacock words and to make it more NPOV. Hope I've not upset anyone - perhaps the tags can be removed? Comments welcome. Smalljim 17:01, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Neutrality Dispute?