lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Glicko rating system

message: Base it off of the glicko-2 paper that is linked in the references. I was attempting to do it off of the algo specified in the wiki article, but a lot of important details are left out. Also glicko two has lots of improvements.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.134.137.71 (talk) 18:55, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, thanks for mentioning this. the article is very brief and has left important parts out. i personally also struggeled with this until i found the paper 240F:79:57A:1:582F:1D39:8023:2850 (talk) 06:22, 30 July 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Good message. I do t know why this wasn’t highlighted in the article Fewcada (talk) 11:58, 30 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: If you are developing code based on this...

message: Some relevant links   SunCreator (talk) 23:40, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Additional sources

message: The article states that "Both Glicko and Glicko-2 rating systems are under public domain". Is this a meaningful statement? Glicko is just a series of mathematical formulas, and mathematical formulas are not subject to copyright. JakubMarian (talk) 21:39, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Dr. Mark Glickman patented Glicko-2 and attempted to license its use. After that did not work out he moved it to the public domain. Source: Dr Mark Glickman on the Perpetual Chess Podcast, EP 249, ~minute 34. https://www.perpetualchesspod.com/new-blog/2021/10/26/episode-249-dr-mark-glickman 4.31.102.58 (talk) 22:20, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Public domain 

message: In the first step, if a player played in the previous rating period, should t be 0 or should it be 1? --Twixter (talk) 18:58, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Evidently it's 1 because if it were zero, RD would not change and "If several games have occurred within one rating period, the method treats them as having happened simultaneously." Earnstein (talk) 19:30, 17 March 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  About the value of t 

message: Quoting from Glickman's pdf, "One practical problem with the Glicko system is that when a player competes very frequently,his/her rating stops changing appreciably which reflects that the RD is very small.  This may sometimes  prevent  a  player’s  rating  from  changing  substantially  when  the  player  is  truly improving.  I would therefore recommend that an RD never drop below a threshold value,such as 30, so that ratings can change appreciably even in a relatively short time."
This being the case, perhaps the formula in step 3 should be
RD'=\max\left(30,\sqrt{\left(\frac{1}{RD^2}+\frac{1}{d^2}\right)^{-1}}\right)
--Twixter (talk) 21:46, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: thanks for shedding light on this!!! 240F:79:57A:1:582F:1D39:8023:2850 (talk) 06:23, 30 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Introducing a lower limit for RD in step 3? 

message: its just doubling the required work 240F:79:57A:1:E022:A35A:5F86:5653 (talk) 05:05, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why is it d² written as 1/some values but only used as 1/d? that seems to  be just doubling the work
Talk:Hippogonal

message: I've only ever seen the term "hippogonal" used synonymously with "knightwise", that is, moving (1,2). The knight is thus a hippogonal leaper, the mao a hippogonal lame (blockable) leaper, the nightrider a hippogonal rider, etc., but the camel, a (1,3) piece, is not hippogonal at all. The link to CV.org's Piececlopedia seems to agree with me. I've seen "oblique" used for any (n,m) where 0<n<m, but is the use of "hippogonal" with that meaning documented anywhere but in Wikipedia? — Gwalla | Talk 23:46, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Any (n,m) direction? 

message: Please make my added pronunciation of hippogonal into Wikipedian form.
Qwertyxp2000 (talk) 07:26, 21 September 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wikipedian pronunciation
Talk:Human chess

message: Wizard's chess could be added to this article perhaps. ChessCreator (talk) 15:02, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

message: I've located some accounts of 19th Century Human Chess matches. The matches were performed in theaters.Graham1973 (talk) 13:44, 11 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: @Graham1973. Alr but if I could ask who moves the chess pieces? JanWithoutAPlan (talk) 22:05, 1 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: 19th Century History

message: "Piece captures are represented by choreographed fights that determine whether the piece is actually taken or not." How would this work? If a piece moves onto another pieces square, it's captured. It's completely deterministic, the stage fight wouldn't deliver the capture information, the piece's movement would. For example, if a pawn moves to another pawn's square, and they have a stage fight, the moving pawn should always win. So what is there to determine? Are the rules of the variant of Human Chess being talked about somehow different from Inanimate Chess? Minorfixaccount (talk) 06:30, 17 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Something's Fishy

message: I've done some brutal editing in the link section; everything that related to cosplay chess was either dead, of questionable relevance or a decade old. I replaced them with the first con page I could find that had both an in-game picture and an explanation of the concept. If anyone can find something better, that isn't just a list of requirements for people applying to play, please add it! I also thought it was worth adding a gameplay video, the one I used is pretty entertaining and seems typical to this non-expert. 
82.24.207.246 (talk) 10:25, 13 April 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cosplay chess links
Talk:Knight's graph

message: The table claims the girth of this graph is 4 if n >= 3 and m >= 5. This a bit weird: the definition is fully symmetric in m and n, so why would the condition not also be symmetric?  Anyway the condition does hold if n >= 5 and m >= 3, and also when n >= 4 and m >= 4. A better way of stating it is simply that the girth is infinity when n or m is less than 3 and 4 when n+m >= 8. For completeness we could also say that the girth is 6 when n+m=7 and 8 when n+m=6. --Saforrest (talk) 10:01, 7 December 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Girth condition
Talk:The longest moremover without obtrusive units

message: Apparently, the longest moremover regardless is the 271 mover given here.  However, I note that neither light squared bishop in that puzzle is on f1, so while one needs definitely to be the result of a promotion, there are no obtrusive units per se in that puzzle.  This is per the current content in Chess problem regarding obtrusive units.  Thus, I think this article may benefit from a rename, but it is not clear to me what the best name should be, since I am no expert on compositional themes and terms.  
Comments? Baccyak4H (Yak!) 14:45, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  obtrusive units
Talk:World Federation for Chess Composition

message: Although I understand, why somebody can think about the article as a list, but it is not even in this moment. 
The article defines PCCC, names its duties, gives a list (the longest one) of its sessions in the past and mentions some other points. If you have a look at articles in :Category:List-Class_chess_articles, they are all intended as lists and named as such (with one further exception). 
On the other hand, this article surely can be improved both regarding style and content, I would welcome any contribution, but it is definitely not a list. --Ruziklan (talk) 07:53, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Yea, I was a bit doubtful. It's main contents seems to be a list of meetings locations. I can see it's not intended to be a list. SunCreator (talk) 11:53, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  A list? 

message: This article's title doesn't make grammatical sense. It should be moved to FIDE Permanent Commission for Chess Compositions or somthing like that.Pawnkingthree (talk) 08:40, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: But this is exactly the name of the Commission as also its official page says. --Ruziklan (talk) 10:51, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Is it not just an (inaccurate) translation from another language?Pawnkingthree (talk) 12:07, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually it is possible that the name was formed as English translation of a French name, as from historical note given at jubilee session one can deduce that initially the language officially used in bulletin had been French. But the current Statutes of PCCC style the commission as Permanent Commission of the FIDE for Chess Compositions. --Ruziklan (talk) 12:40, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Title is ungrammatical 

message: In their October 2010 congress folks of PCCC did take a new name, as an independent federation: World Federation for Chess Composition (WFCC). --J. Sketter (talk) 11:02, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  PCCC -> WFCC
Talk:Pocket Fritz

message: There are various reasons why the article might be merged into the main Fritz article: lack of demarcation; low importance; and size are article are reasons that immediately come to light.  However some reasons to not merge it into the Fritz article are: the product is fundamentally different from the PC-based version; it is of relative importance against other PDA-based chess software; and size of article should not mandate merging where the subject matter is clearly demarcated.  Therefore in the strength of both points of view, I believe that the article should be merged into a generic PDA-based chess software article.  -Preceding unsigned comment added by 120.18.180.193 (talk) 03:35, 20 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Originating Author's Opinion (Damien Sticklen) 
Talk:2006–07 Australian cricket season

message: What would people think of splitting this article into:
*Pura Cup season 2006-07
*Ford Ranger One Day Cup season 2006-07
*KFC Twenty20 Big Bash season 2006-07
*Australia national cricket team in 2006-07
etc.?
I'm linking the seasons in KFC Twenty20 Big Bash#Winners_and_runners-up and there isn't even a dedicated section in this article that I can link to as all matches are in one list. -- Chuq (talk) 08:21, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Splitting article
Talk:Rest of the world in sports and games

message: :Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *Support or *Oppose, then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's policy on article titles.
*Support daftly meaningless title at present. In ictu oculi (talk) 08:43, 21 August 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: edit conflict In ictu oculi - You know stuff!  Any thoughts on rulings related to the use of quotation marks.  In this case I think that a title such as "Rest of the world" in sports and games would make good sense.  GregKaye 09:15, 21 August 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Don't know I'm afraid. In ictu oculi (talk) 10:03, 21 August 2015 (UTC)

text: *If we did that, we would probably have others who would argue that the move should then be reverted per WP:PRECISE. The proposed option is a more WP:NATURALDAB option. Steel1943 (talk) 14:56, 21 August 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: *But it is naturally disambiguating the article from a concept that doesn't exist.  —  AjaxSmack  16:24, 22 August 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: *...What a conundrum... Steel1943 (talk) 16:30, 22 August 2015 (UTC)

text: I also fail to see what the actual confusion is too. The article has existed since 2003 and is only now an issue? What other primary use(s) of "Rest of the world" are there? If there are others outside of sport, they can be handled by a hatnote/dab page. Lugnuts Dick Laurent is dead 16:27, 22 August 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree but gratuitous addition of text in titles to "disambiguate" is a growing fad.  I suppose I'm getting into the spirit, too.  —  AjaxSmack  16:35, 22 August 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: This is not just for disambiguation, this is for WP:PRECISION, since the current title is insufficient to describe the topic accurately. And the term "rest of the world" actually is used in the real world in contexts other than sports and games. -- 67.70.32.190 (talk) 04:29, 23 August 2015 (UTC)

text: "Rest of the world" is simply far too generic to be about sports, games, or any other singular field of interest. If anything, "rest of the world" should be either a disambiguation page, or an article about the view of one geographical or ethnic entity towards, you know, all the others in the world. JIP | Talk 18:58, 23 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Survey
Talk:Seriesmover

message: It seems that seriesreflexmate and serieshelpmate are really the same thing.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.235.35.157 (talk) 14:57, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: No. In series reflex mate the series playing side (White) is obliged to mate if he could, therefore besides preparing mating position for Black he also has to avoid gaining such possibility for himself. --Ruziklan (talk) 18:18, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  sh# and sr# 

message: Some of these terms (e.g. "seriesreflexmate") do not appear on the Web at all, except in Wikipedia and sites that copy its contents. Verification is badly needed. 86.164.23.31 (talk) 01:17, 15 March 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dubious article
Talk:Software for handling chess problems

message: The important and probably fastest matesolver engine Chest (and ChestUCI) is missing on this page. I leave it to native english speakers, to add this information to the article, thanks.
ChestUCI, conversion by F.Huber
Chest, by H.Marxen
--80.121.30.231 (talk) 18:15, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Chest info added, though with a different home page, as the old one doesn't work anymore. Don't know how Marxen's UCI and Huber's UCI differ -- add more info if required ... Athulin (talk) 14:26, 1 October 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:XICS

message: So, is this article saying that if you have an X interface to any internet chess server, then that interface is called a 'XICS'? That is, is this page simply a definition of an acronym?
Or is it saying that there's a piece of software named 'XICS' that in fact connects to any internet chess server? This claim seems unlikely, unless 'internet chess server' is narrowed down to chess servers implementing a particular protocol named the 'Internet Chess Server' protocol.
Paul Murray (talk) 03:42, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Definition
Talk:Linutop

message: I did supress the category "Thin Client" because Linutop is not a Thin Client.
It's a small computer without internal hard drive, but can work like any othercomputer with a external drive like USB key or USB hard drive. Lbervas 08:21, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I would say Linutop is a Hybrid client.--Kozuch (talk) 18:56, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Thin client designation 

message: What does it mean by "a computer w/ no moving parts"? #Peteturtle 17:54, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It means that there are no parts that are moving during normal operation. Most computers have at least two things with moving parts: a hardware drive and a fan. Moving parts wear out, so the absence of moving parts improves reliability. Furthermore, hard drives are sensitive to mechanical shocks and vibrations. The absence of hard drives allows the computer to be used in places that a hard drive would be damaged in. 75.185.66.16 14:55, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  No moving parts? 

message: Any update since May?  +sj + 02:17, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  "will be" ? 

message: From the photo, it does not appear to have a display, but "top" in the word "Linutop" makes it sound akin to "laptop", and AFAIK all laptops have displays.  It would be helpful to mention what is intended in terms of display.  E.g., does it have a graphics card for an external display?  -- DBooth (talk) 17:09, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  No display? Please explain! 
Talk:Law of Louisiana

message: Citation 21, http://www.civilco.de/, is dead, and the wayback link: https://web.archive.org/web/20060810050211/http://civilco.de/, is some kind of Islamist critique of the 9/11 commission report? The word Louisiana doesn't appear once in the page.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.193.17.166 (talk) 16:35, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

message: I got redirected here from "Louisiana Civil Code" but I'm not sure why.  The Louisiana Civil Code has a history and importance that is separate and distinct from the very general subject of "Louisiana law."  I just don't understand the logic of the Wikipedians... --Economy1 12:35, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: We often redirect topics that we expect to be expanded into articles later. The consensus is that a redirect is better than nothing. James500 (talk) 07:01, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Now there is an article Louisiana Civil Code. Regards, --Fadesga (talk) 11:35, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Louisiana law vs. Louisiana Civil Code

message: the same phrase is used three times.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.228.115.215 (talk) 07:30, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, no, not really.  The Yiannopoulos article, particularly paragraphs 22 through 25, describes a scholarly dispute about whether the Louisiana Civil Code of 1808 was mostly French or mostly Spanish.  Yiannopoulos does not take one side or the other.  The current wording of this article is consistent with the facts presented in paragraph 22 of this article.  --Lockley (talk) 07:27, 29 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: way to repeditive
Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Spoken Wikipedia/Template guidelines/Archive 1

message: So for this tag , would we just include the filename for the FIRST file in the series? Ckamaeleon 11:29, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think that's how it is being done for now. -SCEhardT 15:51, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Partitioned Files
Talk:Scottish Gliding Association

message: It is unclear how the Scottish Gliding Association and the Scottish Gliding Union are connected. I have posted the information below to a deletion discussion for this article.
*Keep - but it may need either merging with or better distinguishing from the Scottish Gliding Union. I've found and added a lot of references from the 1930s onwards to the founding of the Scottish Gliding Association. I'm sure it's notable. However - although initially it was called the Scottish Gliding Association, somewhere along the line, probably in the late 1930s, the name seems to have been changed to the Scottish Gliding Union. Pretty sure these are the same two organisations to begin with as the later accounts of the founding of the Union match the contemporary accounts of the founding of the Association. They also seem to share the same sites, at least some of the time. One or both of them is also referred to occasionally as the Scottish Gliding Club or the National Club, just to make things more confusing. However, we now have an article on each and they have separate websites - Scottish Gliding Centre, yet another name for the Scottish Gliding Union, and Scottish Gliding Association. Unless anyone in on this discussion can unpick what the difference is, I would suggest getting in touch with the two groups and asking if they can clarify their earlier relationship to each other. There is a book, The Scottish Gliding Union, A History: 1934-2008, which ought to help. I do not understand why the current version of the article refers to the SGA being formed in 1986, when newspaper coverage suggests it was already a fairly mature organisation. Possibly it was relaunched or separated off from the SGU at this time. Anyway - certainly notable from the coverage I've found and added, and I'm sure there is more out there in histories of gliding or biographies of some of the Scottish pioneers of gliding. Tacyarg (talk) 00:15, 27 January 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Scottish Gliding Union]]
Talk:The Girl in the Café

message: I really doubt one of the sentences included in the article. It states (without no source...):
The reviews, however, were generally negative.
Well, generally, as far as I know after some research, there is more positive reviews on the Internet than the negative. Actually, I have found just one negative review:  and a lot of positive (not including these written by fans): , , , , , , , , , , , . So I think the beggining of the "Critical reception" section needs to be changed (I'll suggest changing/deleting the sentence I mentioned above) or some sources for that information need to be found. If nobody minds, I change it after 18:00 (UTC). Andrij Kursetsky ⊗ 10:47, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Changed, I hope in a good way. Andrij Kursetsky ⊗ 19:15, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=The_Girl_in_the_Caf%C3%A9&diff=141789455&oldid=141667135 Vandalism] 

message: I just watched the DVD yesterday.  I believe the Overview is wrong on several points.
1.  he falls in love.  I did not interpret his romantic involvement as love.  I believe they seemed to be on that trajectory, but had not reached the point of "being in love".
2.  she confronts the prime minister.  In three different scenes she becomes confrontational (maybe more?) One with the Chancellor, Once with the Prime minister (and the German Prime Minister(?)) and once at dinner with the entire G-8.
3.  he realizes she was right.  First he had been working for *years* on this very issue, there was no realization of her "rightness".  Second, I do NOT think he agreed with her approach.  There was one scene where he becomes aggressive with the Chancellor, but had he agreed with her approach he certainly would have "kept his powder dry" until he had the opportunity to pursuade the entire G-8 or at least the Prime Minister.
Some of this is debatable, I know, but I think the claims of "in love" "confrontation of (solely) the Prime Minister" and "her being 'right'" are at least not clear.69.40.241.198 (talk) 23:12, 21 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Overview