lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Lumen

message: Cell biology. What about lumen as the inner part of some (or all?) cell membranes?—Preceding unsigned comment added by  203.181.18.224 (talk • contribs) 06:36, April 28, 2005
:You want Lumen (anatomy).--Srleffler 03:09, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Cell biology

message: lumen: Unidad de medida del flujo luminoso.
Flujo luminoso: cantidad de energía luminosa emitida por un foco luminoso en la unidad de tiempo ponderada según la curva de sensibilidad del ojo humano.
Debería usarse como medida del flujo el watio, sin embargo en la práctica se usa el lúmen, siendo 1 watio-luz=683 lúmenes.
La explicación completa es más compleja, teniendo que remitirse a la ponderación según la curva de sensibilidad del ojo, de esta manera, se define por convenio que un haz monocromático de un watio de potencia, de longitud de onda 555nm proporciona un flujo luminoso de 683 lúmenes. 
De esta manera, sirva de ejemplo, una haz monocromático de longitud de onda 680 nm ( aprox. rojo ) de un watio de potencia, proporciona del orden de diez veces menos flujo luminoso (lumenes) que el haz monocromático de un watio de 555 nm.
Se debe destacar que el lumen es una unidad derivada de la candela, aunque cabe la posibilidad de que se redefina para pasar a ser unidad principal del SI.—Preceding unsigned comment added by  81.0.49.221 (talk • contribs) 17:36, February 26, 2004
:You might get more response to your comments on the version of Wikipedia in your language. This is the English Wikipedia.--Srleffler 15:46, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Spanish comments

message: I reverted a link change today from Thylakoid lumen to Thylakoid. The former redirects to the latter. Thylakoid lumen is the correct link, because the Thylakoid article covers three distinct but related things: the thylakoid, and its component parts the thylakoid membrane and the thylakoid lumen. "Thylakoid lumen" is ambiguous with "lumen"; "thylakoid" is not. If the mere fact that this was a redirect was a factor in the decision to change the link, see WP:NOTBROKEN.--Srleffler (talk) 07:31, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Thylakoid lumen
Wikipedia talk:Requests for arbitration/Irismeister

message: ::Irismeister, I imagine that you could create a section at the bottom of Wikipedia:Matter of Irismeister evidence and add any information you feel the arbitration committee should be aware of there.
::Note, Irismeister is confusing the number of edits listed on his watchpage with his user contributions.  He has made nearly 1000 edits on the English Wikipedia.  fabiform | talk 19:12, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Perhaps irismeister would care to put links to the insults mentioned above. That way the arbitrators can see the crimes in full. theresa knott 22:57, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Also, Irismeister if you want help with the arbitration process, you should ask the Wikipedia:Association of Members' Advocates.  :)  fabiform | talk 00:39, 25 Feb 2004 (UTC)

text: For those curious, the phrase "Timeo Danaos et dona ferentes..." means "I fear the Greeks even when they come bearing gifts." and comes from Virgil's Aeneid. The analogy seems a little disingenuous to me, since Kingturtle's advice was solicited by Irismeister -  - MykReeve 14:33, 12 Mar 2004 (UTC)

message: C. The arbitration committee reserves the right to subsequently apply an edit throttle to Irismeister, should such a feature be made available by the MediaWiki developers.
* For:
* Against:
*#Fred Bauder 12:26, Mar 23, 2004 (UTC)
* Abstain:
*#Camembert 03:49, 24 Mar 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Withdrawn (since I suggested it in the first place) Martin 14:11, 28 Mar 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  removed
Talk:Raisa Gorbacheva

message: I redirected "Raisa Gorbacheva" here ("Raisa Gorbachev"), as that was copy and pasted from the pre-existing "Raisa Gorbachev", and all articles link to "Gorbachev". If it is decided that "Gorbacheva" or something else is the more proper name for the article, please do a proper move and fix the redirects to the right page. -- Infrogmation 00:04, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: If Gorbachev's page is not Gorbachov, then this should be Gorbacheva, not Gorbachova. --Simfan34 (talk) 19:58, 12 April 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gorbacheva/Gorbachova  

message: 1. What is the basis for saying she was first lady?
2. "She was one of the few wives of a communist party leader to have a high public profile of her own." Really? What about Nadezhda Krupskaya, Nina Petrovna Khrushcheva, Jiang Qing, Elena Ceaușescu, Kim Jong-suk, Kim Sung-ae, Margot Honecker etc?--Jack Upland (talk) 06:01, 3 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  First lady?
Talk:Base

message: I would query the last definition of base (eg military) as a place needing support. My understanding of such a base is that of a starting point, somewhere that provides the support, somewhere from which expeditions etc. set out. This would tie in with the other meanings of base, eg of a triangle etc. or the starting point of a numbering system etc. 81.174.133.85 00:48, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Does this page really need so many defintions?  I mean, really, how many people would look up "base" for the base of an isoceles triangle, or a logarithm?  Wouldn't most people just go straight there?  These two meanings (as examples) don't even have their own article - as there is nothing to write about them.  So, should these redundant definitions be scrubbed? Neonumbers 11:16, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I came here looking for the base of a logarithm because I would really like to know what the base of a logarithm is. Is the base used in a logarithm the same base as a radix? Jecowa 21:17, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think I figured it out; it's the same as an exponential base, right? Jecowa 21:59, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Necessity of definitions 

message: I'm not sure if this is relevant to Wikipedia, but I personally think base as form of amphetamine should be added to this list, linking to the relevant article. Elynnia 14:47, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Base: the drug

message: Here's yet another possible use of the word base that I thought would surely be on this page... the base guitair.  Just a suggestion.  --leahtwosaints 19:37, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: See Bass and Bass guitar. Simon12 (talk) 03:06, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Base Guitair
Talk:Radical feminism

message: — Assignment last updated by Youvegotmayell (talk) 06:36, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: Fall 2023 HIST 401

message: — Assignment last updated by Bbalicia (talk) 00:45, 11 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: Gender and Technoculture 320-01

message: — Assignment last updated by ACHorwitz (talk) 22:30, 10 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: Gender and Technoculture 320-03
Talk:Cancellation property

message: I wouldn't worry about slight overlap between articles, provided it's only slight.  -- The Anome 02:36, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)

message: This article may be a bit difficult for a non-mathematician to understand. Perhaps it would be good to either
*add a short introduction (what does 'cancel' mean in mathematics, plus easy example like \frac{ab}{ac}=\frac{b}{c} a,b,c real and nonzero), or
*use this information to create a separate 'easy' article about canellation?
I added a link here from derivative, and there is a risk that non-mathematicians will follow that link. --Erik 18:53, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Simpler explanation of 'cancel'? 

message: It was the "1, 2, 5" bit that muddled me.  I'm sorry.  --VKokielov 13:39, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  :) 

message: I suspect this to be a syntax error:
* so a set monomorphism but as it is a set endomorphism it is a set section,
so is a set monomorphism but as it is a set endomorphism it is a set section,
Otherwise I can't make sense of this sentence. In any case, it would be desirable to split this sentence in few shorter ones. It's hard to follow the thought of the author otherwise. 109.64.130.179 (talk) 18:08, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: None of the claims about this injective function from x to a*x being different sorts of homomorphisms are correct, which could be part of  why they didn't make any sense. I removed the references to different types of homomorphisms, since although it is possible, there is no guarantee some arbitrary permutation of a magma will preserve its algebraic structure. I added the citation for a book that gives these interpretations. DonaldLflr (talk) 22:26, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Possibly a syntax error in "Interpretation" section
Talk:Winged Victory of Samothrace

message: The difficulty lies in the fact that in the 2nd and 3rd centuries BCE Chrimas1 (talk) 13:59, 3 September 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Good catch. Fixed. Twospoonfuls (εἰπέ) 14:19, 3 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  This sentence stops in the middle: 

message: Victory is not the correct name 45.58.95.248 (talk) 14:35, 1 June 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  The correct name is Nike not Victory.
Talk:Compliance

message: Excellent disambiguation page! Bensaccount 02:51, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)

message: Comply is a natural fit as a redirect to compliance. Please create article comply as redirect with text:
#REDIRECT Compliance
--Penbat (talk) 21:01, 31 August 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: The page comply is not protected, nor is compliance so there is no need to request an edit, you can do it yourself. SpinningSpark 21:34, 31 August 2016 (UTC)

text: Wikipedia is not a dictionary would apply though.  I don't think a redirect is needed. -- Dane2007 talk  03:15, 1 September 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested edit
Talk:The Sandman: The Doll's House

message: The words "sleeping sickness" in this page link to a page about trypanosoma brucei, a tropical disease spread by the bite of a fly. However, AIUI the epidemic used in the plot of Sandman was a real event, and that was an outbreak of encephalitis lethargica. I think the link should go there instead. Marnanel 03:00, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I have corrected the link here and at The Sandman (DC Comics Modern Age) -- but is there any particular reason you couldn't have done it yourself? --Paul A 04:55, 2 Mar 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: I feel like some kind of moron to reassess the article I was working on, but I decided to put the matter of reassessment into my own hands. It isn't cited very well, but the other sections are okay. MwNNrules (talk) 17:03, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Reassessment Evaluation

message: I've created a proposal to reorganize the Sandman articles by story arc instead of by trade paperback. My full proposal and discussion on the issue can be found at Talk:The Sandman (Vertigo)#Reorganize storylines.--Marcus Brute (talk) 00:11, 27 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Reorganize storylines
Talk:Pikachu

message: https://www.polygon.com/platform/amp/pokemon/23517302/pokemon-ash-ketchum-retired-protagonist-anime-game
Add content on concept section that Pikachu doesnt appear anymore in the 2023 new pokemon season. it isnt that OP
 2001:4455:688:5F00:E096:7C6F:D50B:3C3C (talk) 13:19, 23 December 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done for now: It's unclear what this has to do with the concept section: Perhaps you meant the appearances section? Either way, Ash's Pikachu and the entire Pikachu species are different things, in the fiction.   casualdejekyll 18:43, 24 December 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Tagging @2001:4455:688:5F00:E096:7C6F:D50B:3C3C casualdejekyll 18:43, 24 December 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 23 December 2022 

message: The redirect P1k@chu has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at  until a consensus is reached.  Hey man im josh (talk) 14:29, 11 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  "[[:P1k@chu]]" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]] 

message: let people edit. GRDAS (talk) 13:26, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 24 April 2024
Talk:Human brain

message: Please help me on these subject 2A03:2880:20FF:8:0:0:FACE:B00C (talk) 05:34, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Physics , Chemistry and Biology , Maths 

message: I've updated the "three" in "The cerebrum, brainstem, cerebellum, and spinal cord are covered by three membranes called meninges" to "four" using this ref from the below item recently featured in 2023 in science:
Scientists report the discovery of an unknown thin membrane meningeal layer in brain anatomy, the SLYM, that likely plays a role in CSF functions and is both  that monitor the brain for infection and inflammation.
* University press release: 
I hope that's okay. There may be more places to add info on/from this study, possibly including in this article and at Cerebrospinal fluid (e.g. in #Regulation). Moreover, it may be good if info on this in Meninges was more detailed or overhauled.
However, somebody else should make any further due updates and quite likely this should wait until there is a review on this(?) If so, please revisit this issue once a review is out; if brief info is due before, please add it.
 Prototyperspective (talk) 22:01, 26 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Update of meningeal layers 

message: I just added a sentence "Brain structures that are not on the midplane exist in pairs, so there are for example two hippocampi and two amygdalae." Could someone put in some more information on this point? Which organs exist as a pair, and which do not? Also, apparently some parts are single, but symmetrical, such as the thalamus. Eric Kvaalen (talk) 17:12, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: It's really more a matter of bilateral symmetry than of pairing. Regions of the cortex are not functionally symmetrical, either. --Tryptofish (talk) 17:42, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Pairing

message: This essay is a chapter in a book, not a journal article. I don't know how to fix the citation style. LovelyOliveGreen (talk) 20:56, 21 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Citation of Kathryn M. Olesko
Talk:Monk (character class)

message: Are these Final Fantasy-related articles going to be mentioned on votes for deletion or cleanup, or are they just going to be swept under the rug? Others include: 
# Beast Master
# Black Belt (character class)
# Black Knight
# Blue Mage
# Defender (character class)
# Dragoner
# Red Wizard
# Summoner
# White wizard
--Mrwojo 04:03, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)
Talk:Aridisol

message: What is arid soil? 43.247.41.158 (talk) 15:33, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  In relate with soil
Talk:Germinal (novel)

message: Hi, I made a minor change to the wording: I got rid of the bit about a "fit of anarchist fervor" because it doesn't make sense.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.165.166.72 (talk) 23:07, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: The claim that Germinal is considered one of the most important (or best, I can’t remember the phrasing) novels in the French tradition is far too vague. Does this refer to the quite French tradition which Zola wrote in, which was naturalism? In this case this should be made abundantly clear for readers of this page, and will also provide contextual information on the author.
If it is meant to suggest the more expansive “French tradition” as in all works written in French (or something similar).. well.. one should provide evidence that it is really regarded as such. 
I’ll change it to the former for now. 135.180.162.171 (talk) 13:59, 17 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  beginning is unclear
Wikipedia talk:Federal Standard 1037C terms/computer programming terms

message: As it is, this is more a list of computer programming topics than a glossary. --Mrwojo 05:13, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)

message: I've moved this from Glossary of computer programming terms. When/if it becomes more glossary-like, it can be moved back. - dcljr 23:40, 17 Sep 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Moved
Talk:Chown

message: The chown of AT&T System V Unix permitted any user to chown their own files, just as it permitted any user to chmod their own files.  This was considered entirely normal and proper.  This article should not presume that all versions of chown limit usage to root, or imply that such a limit is natural.
* The claim "Because chown modifies permissions, it usually requires root privilege to run" is a false explanation, as chmod also "modifies permissions", but chmod has always worked for non-root users working with their own files.  If the article wants to justify the root-only behavior, it will need a better explanation.  (I have not edited the article because I do not agree with, and do not wish to justify, that behavior.)
* The earlier Bell Labs Seventh Edition Unix did not permit non-root users to chown their own files, but the reason was to simplify a planned disk-space accounting package that was never actually developed.  In 2011, it's laughable that a user's ability to manage his own files would be permanently restricted based on the possibility that he might be billed for disk space rental on his own Linux personal computer.
* AT&T System III permitted ordinary users to chown their own files.
* Berkeley Unix reinstated the root-only restriction, but for reasons which are obscure, and which may again be related to disk space accounting, as BSD was the version which introduced disk quotas.  If anyone can find the true rationale documented, from a reliable Berkeley source, it would be a useful reference for this article.
* POSIX makes the root/non-root behavior configurable via parameter POSIX_CHOWN_RESTRICTED.
There have been multiple changes in chown / multiple versions of chown since Bell Labs Unix, affecting details such as the form of user and group names it accepts or whether it follows symbolic links.  If anyone has the time and inclination, a table of chown behavior vs. Unix/Linux flavor would be a nice addition.  206.205.52.162 (talk) 22:19, 9 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Variations

message: Is there really a need to have an image of a terminal viewing the manual page for chown? SteveJothen 16:22, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I removed the image. -- Unixguy (talk) 18:41, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Image

message: chown -R us base = All your base is belong to us. Nice.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.212.19.37 (talk) 02:04, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Cute
Talk:Proof that e is irrational

message: See Definitions of the exponential function.
Brianjd 07:44, Jul 26, 2004 (UTC)
how do u used e= a/b to change e= sum to infinity of the series 1/n! to x= b!(e-sum from 0 to b of 1/n!)?
The statement 'Since this continued fraction is infinite and every rational number has a terminating continued fraction, e is irrational' is not logically sound. We need a reason why the fact that this object (e) has property 1 (an infinite continued fraction representation) prevents it from having property 2 (a terminating continued fraction representation) and thus from belonging to set in question (the rationals). There seems to be a tacit assumption that continued fraction representations of real numbers are unique, or that, if they are not, at least all the continued fractions representations of the same real number are of the same type (either all terminating or all infinite). This assumption may be correct for the case at hand (the continued fractions representations of a real number), but without this knowledge, the logical argument is incomplete.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:546:C400:2F70:7998:5E6B:2009:A0DF (talk) 16:29, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Proofs of the equivalence of the definitions of ''e''

message: Shouldn't we prove also that x < 1? It's straightforward, but I think it should be there for the sake of completeness
I don't see how it's straightforward at all. I see nothing from this proof that implies that x < 1. Can someone explain?  
All I can see is that b must be greater than 1 since e isn't an integer. That shows that x < 1, but it doesn't seem very rigorous.
—Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.182.194.195 (talk) 12:34, 14 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: In the formula x=sum b!/n!, the ith term is less than 1/2i, so the whole sum is less than 1/2+1/4+1/8+...=1. —David Eppstein (talk) 17:31, 14 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  x < 1
Talk:Vasili IV of Russia

message: Why is it not mentioned in the article? 
Also, the article mentions that "in 1610, he was deposed by his former adherents Princes Vorotynsky and Mstislavsky, and made a monk". If so, how could he pay homage to Sigismund III Vasa as a Russian Czar on 29 October 1611?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Danvolodar (talk • contribs) 16:55, 26 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Russian Homage

message: hmm..how one can die when he is already dead? ;_) (pls rephrase the last sentence..)
User:Ghirlandajo should justify his changes not me.--Emax 08:00, Jan 12, 2005 (UTC)
: And why is that? Are you special in some way? You made the dubious changes, please justify them. --Gene s 08:19, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I engage in reverts of incorrect information, because and only when I truly believe it is incorrect. Sometimes I have a difficulty using Talk pages (when I run out of coins in an internet cafe) and sometimes I forget the edit summaries. Mea Culpa. Space Cadet 08:42, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Okay, was Vasya IV the last Rurikid Tsar, or was it Feodor I? THe pages on the two Tsars and the Rurik dyanasty all conflict.--ChadThomson 07:33, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Feodor was the last Rurikid tsar from the legitimate House of Moscow. Vasily IV was also a Rurikid, but he was not chosen by people and his legitimacy was not backed up by tradition. --Ghirlandajo 07:38, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Conflict

message: Normally it's romanised as Vasily (my preference) or Vasiliy.  Vasili is wrong.  This needs admin intervention.  --  Jack of Oz  ... speak! ...  22:51, 7 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Further to the above, how could he have been born Vasily Ivanovich Shuisky, but become Tsar Vasili?  This utter inconsistency in romanisation is very telling.  --  Jack of Oz  ... speak! ...  18:49, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Vasili?

message: According to the article False Dmitry I
...many of the noble families exiled by Godunov - such as the Shuiskys, Golitsins and Romanovs - were granted his [False Dmitry] grace and allowed to return back to Moscow
However this article mentions no such thing. Instead we have
...[Shuisky] went to Uglich to inquire into the cause of the death of the Tsarevich Dmitry Ivanovich... Shuisky reported that it was a case of suicide... On the death of Boris... Shuisky went back upon his own words in order to gain favour with the pretender False Dmitriy I
Suggesting that Shuisky remained loyal to Godunov until the later's death.
What is correct?
Top.Squark (talk) 19:49, 21 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Exiled by Boris Godunov? 

message: Can someone add something about his wives and two daughters in the article?--Queen Elizabeth II's Little Spy (talk) 05:55, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Family