lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Fenske equation

message: I have just finished an extensive expansion and copy editing of this article as follows:
*I retained the original equations although I changed some of the notation to more common chemical engineering usage. 
*I moved one of the forms of the Fenske equation to a separate section since it is a form which was derived for use in gas chromatography and is not the original form derived by Fenske in 1932.
*I discussed the fact that the Fenske equation yields the minimum number of theoretical plates required to separate a binary feed by distillation when the distillation is performed at total reflux.
*I added a diagram of a fractionating column operating at total reflux to illustrate what that means.
*I added a mention that the reboiler is one of the theoretical plates.
*I added a mention and citation to the fact that the Fenske equation can be modified to also handle multi-component feeds.
*I have added documenting reference citations, using the , ,  method.  
*I added some external links to replace those which were used as documenting reference citations.
*I did quite a bit of Wikifying and copy editing.
I think the article is now fairly complete ... although I am sure others will add some edits. - mbeychok 00:46, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Expansion and copy editing of this article 

message: Is the naval reference applicable for counter-current or co-current systems?  
If no mention of liquid liquid extraction, I'll add a mention.
Bruce Schaller  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bruceschaller (talk • contribs) 00:18, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  US Naval Academy Reference??
Wikipedia talk:List of Wikipedian contradictions and paradoxes

message: Hilarious! - Ta bu shi da yu 07:46, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  

message: If one were to get topic banned from being put under active topic bans, the user affected by the topic ban would be in violation of the topic ban because the user is already under an active topic ban; the topic ban from having active topic bans. --UnforgivablyPotatoes (talk) 12:32, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  What if one were to be topic banned from having active topic bans? 

message: A fragment from wp:NOT#Wikipedia is not a manual, guidebook, textbook, or scientific journal says not to write it like a textbook;
----
:6. Textbooks and annotated texts. Wikipedia is an encyclopedic reference, not a textbook. The purpose of Wikipedia is to present facts, not to teach subject matter. It is not appropriate to create or edit articles that read as textbooks, 
::with leading questions and systematic problem solutions as examples. These belong on our sister projects, such as Wikibooks, Wikisource, and Wikiversity. Some kinds of examples, specifically those intended to inform rather than
::to instruct, may be appropriate for inclusion in a Wikipedia article.
----
Yet a fragment from WP:YOUNG#Working on articles does recommend that we should be writing Wikipedia articles like a textbook;
----
:*Language. Wikipedia is used by millions of people. Many of them are top business people, politicians, or university professors. The text you write in articles must be very formal. It can't be the kind of prose you see in your 
::favorite magazine or blog. Think of it like the language in your school textbooks. Don't worry too much though, because another user will probably edit out the rough edges for you.
----
So what? Should we write Wikipedia articles like textbooks or not? --UnforgivablyPotatoes (talk) 12:21, 22 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Should we write it like a textbook or not?
Talk:Flue gas

message: Would this be a useful link from here?  The article mentions Nox cleaning, but we don't have a DeNox article and there's no useful link in this article to any processes or methods. 71.236.26.74 (talk) 05:50, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Denitrification 

message: A section on 'composition' has recently been merged into the 'flue gas' article from
Where are the citations???  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.157.52.49 (talk) 17:26, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Composition of flue-gas emissions from fossil-fuel combustion
Talk:China-Japan Supermatches

message: In another source, I have read that they were only held 11 times... Could someone please clear this up?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.31.217.109 (talk) 15:40, 22 November 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: It's because the format of the first 11 times was completely different from the that of the rest. The first 11 times (1984-1996) used a knock-out format with 6 to 9 players on each side, while in the later games each side had 3 players for one-on-one matches.--Neo-Jay (talk) 20:58, 13 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Held 13 times?
Talk:William B. Caldwell IV

message: who do can i send the Generals new command photo to so that I can get this page updated Ntma (talk) 11:24, 22 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Command Photo 

message: I have come out of "retirement" from Wikipedia and plan to make some changes to this article.  My goal is to increase the credibility of this article, reorganize the existing content and cite  credible references for the information.  If you have any comments or concerns please contact me on my user talk page, I have outlined in my personal sandbox a rough draft (Note: this is my personal sandbox, do not make changes to this userpage, comments are welcomed on my user talk page in reference to this sandbox. -Signaleer (talk) 20:27, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: If anyone would like to make constructive changes on my sandbox page in reference to this article, please click the link that will take you to User:Signaleer/Sandbox/Caldwell for the sandbox for Lt. Gen. Caldwell.  Input would be most appreciated.  -Signaleer (talk) 19:04, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Updating the article 

message: These guys were NOT, I say again, NOT PSYOP. There are no PSYOP units assigned to or supporting CSTC-A. The lieutenant colonel involved is a military intelligence officer on assignment from the Texas National Guard who has some background in "information operations", which is NOT the same thing as psychological operations no matter how much some IO types think they are. 
There will be a lot more reliably sourced information besides Rolling Stones' hackery coming out about this shortly.74.193.234.233 (talk) 00:12, 25 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: In any case, I've now removed it twice, and I take it you support the removal.  Several editors have added it in, but since we are talking about an allegation that has not yet been investigated, we should keep all of this material over at 2009 congressional delegation to Afghanistan where it belongs as a proper subsection of Psychological Operations (United States).  BLP articles should be kept stable, especially when we have unproven allegations without evidence.  We should wait until the investigation has concluded to determine whether to add it here.  For the moment, I've placed a link in the see also, which I think is sufficient. Viriditas (talk) 23:30, 28 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rolling Stone "psy-ops" controversy 

message: Numerous edits claim that the incident at Dawood Hospital ended LTG Caldwell's career.  This is incorrect.  LTG Caldwell had already planned to retire around the time he assumed command of US Army North (early 2012).  He submitted his paperwork to retire in November 2012, and was selected by Georgia Military College in Feb 2013...months before the investigation was concluded. — Preceding unsigned comment added by CrispinBurke (talk • contribs)  00:04, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mischaracterization of Service
Talk:Jūdan (Go)

message: I suggest merging Hayago Meijin into this article. It was a predecessor competition of the Judan, and the article on it is poorly sourced and prtty rudimentary. If nobody objects, I will do the merge in a month's time, ie. Nov 21. Reyk YO! 05:54, 21 October 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Propose merge
Talk:Kisei (Go)

message: Should this template not be on this, and all the Kisei pages to link them in together.
I also think that a flow bo showing all the Kisei could be place at the bottom of each page.
Give it a week for comment? 
Cosnahang (talk) 10:11, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Template:GoBoardGame & Flow Box 
Talk:William S. Gray

message: I've cleaned up the correlations a bit by putting them in a table, but the correlations and elements in the Readability Variables Section do not match the primary source at all. For example, as written, the text states:
: Gray and Leary used five of the above variables, numbers 1, 5, 8, 15, and 17, to create a formula, which has a correlation of .645 
However there is no mention of any correlation at .645 between pages 137 and 139. The R=.645 is for the 8-element equation on page 134.
--Myqlarson (talk) 10:15, 27 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Primary sources
Talk:North American Masters Tournament (defunct)

message: Some links that might be useful are
*http://www.usgo.org/tournaments/NAMT/
*http://www.usgo.org/NAMT/index.html
*http://senseis.xmp.net/?NorthAmericanMastersTournament
*http://www.shaevel.com/go/aga.asp
Note that this tournament is no longer defunct--ZincBelief 10:16, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
Talk:Yongda Cup

message: There was a  which Yungtay Engineering Co., Ltd. of Tawian was a sponsor. Since Yungtay and Yongda was in fact referring to the same Chinese word but different romanization, is that something wrong in this article that wrongly refer to a PRC related cup? (Standard Chinese of PRC and spoken Chinese of Taiwan were in fact dialect) Matthew_hk tc 12:34, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Yungtay Cup]]
Category talk:Oil companies of Russia

message: This category includes all Russian natural gas companies, each of the dozen or so pages should be changed to :Category:Oil and gas companies of Russia, following the lead of the :Category:Oil and gas companies of the United Kingdom. --McTrixie 08:07, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There is separate :Category:Natural gas companies of Russia. Some of the companies are listed in both categories, some of only as oil companies, and some like Itera or Novatek only as gas companies. Beagel 20:24, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
Talk:Godokoro

message: Only this external link  is given as reference for this article. It is to a wiki site called Sensei's Library. I'm not sure if this one external link is reliable enough under the "Wikipedia's General Notability Guidelines" establish a stand-alone article for this one particular topic. "Self-published sources (online or paper)" does say that user-generated content may be used as a reliable sources if "with the exception of material on such sites that is labeled as originating from credentialed members of the sites' editorial staff, rather than users." It also says "Self-published material may sometimes be acceptable when its author is an established expert whose work in the relevant field has been published by reliable third-party publications." I'm not sure if either of those two conditions are satisfied in this particular case. Moreover, the "Sensei's Library" wiki may not even be acceptable for use as an external link because it seems to fall under Nos. 1, 11, 12, of WP:ELNO. I think this subject matter probably does have some merit, but not as a stand alone article. There is a much more fully developed article on the same subject matter on Japanese's Wikipedia. Perhaps some of those sources can be used here? If the "Sensei's Library" is unacceptable as a reliable source, it will have to be removed: That means the article will have nothing at all as source which puts it at risk of being nominated for deletion, right? Maybe this should be made into a stub per WP:STUBIFY or merged into something else? I am interested in hearing what other's have to say. Thanks in advance. - Marchjuly (talk) 01:34, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Does this satisfy WP:GNG?
Talk:Three crows

message: This article has various issues, most notably that it is a hodge-podge of
different meanings and types of meanings, including three crows as a
group of character in folklore and different uses of the phrase "three crows".
At a minimum the article should be structured to clearly differentiate into
categories of meanings.
Other issues include WP-internal referencing, an introduction which is only
semi-relevant, and lack of background information on the tales mentioned.
94.220.240.21 (talk) 16:55, 6 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Clean up
Talk:Case Closed/Archive 1

message: If this should be moved to "Case Closed", when should it be moved? WhisperToMe 02:45, 3 Oct 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: There's a few problems - 1. The British Manga release is Case Closed. 2. The American Manga release is Case Closed. 3. Case Closed still airs on the FUNimation Channel in the USA WhisperToMe 03:16, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  As for disambiguation with other "Case Closed"s... 1. I cannot find any other series with the title "Case Closed" - With the generic term, it can be at "Case closed" (capitalized as such) WhisperToMe 03:33, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I mean as a name of anything, not just Wikipedia articles. -- Ned Scott 03:40, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The generic term can be at "Case closed" - this should rectify the general anything. If another series or anything with the capitalization "Case Closed" arises, then move to "Case Closed (manga and anime series)" WhisperToMe 07:49, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not talking about confusion with other articles, I'm just saying the name "Case Closed" could easily be mistaken for a name of something else. It sounds like it could be the title for any given detective themed show.-- Ned Scott 00:31, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Moved to "Case Closed"? 

message: Today, conan1412 and others started a plan to change several character names in DC/CC-related article, namely, changing it from CC-from to DC-form.
Since the naming issue has not even been resolved, I propose any naming change from UTC 27 July 2006, 06:51 can be reverted as vandalism since that is not NPOV.
Samuel Curtis 09:51, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: [W]hen either of two styles is acceptable, it is inappropriate for a Wikipedia editor to change from one style to another unless there is some substantial reason for the change. For example, with respect to British spelling as opposed to American spelling, it would only be acceptable to change from American spelling to British spelling if the article concerned a British topic. Revert warring over optional styles is unacceptable; if the article uses colour rather than color, it would be wrong to switch simply to change styles, although editors should ensure that articles are internally consistent. If in doubt, defer to the style used by the first major contributor.
Thanks for User:Ned Scott for providing this. Samuel Curtis 11:27, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Stop It!!! 

message: This debate seems to have stalled. Can we have a decision please. If required, I suggest we opt for mediation to get this resolved. I think compelling arguments have been made, but it needs someone independent to evaluate them and help us come to a decision.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Mojo-chan (talk • contribs) 
:I would nominate this on WP:RM in 24 hours; I would be having an air trip soon. --Samuel CurtisShinichian-Hirokian-- TALK·CONTRIBS 15:12, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Decision please
Talk:Michael Savage

message: In the categories down the bottom, he's filed under "LGBT Jews". I know there's rumors, but is there any real evidence he's gay or bi? Cheers 101.98.188.118 (talk) 07:26, 4 May 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  LGBT? 

message: This keeps getting removed. Snooganssnoogans (talk) 19:54, 24 January 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: I've re-added it, with two WP:RS which specifically use the words "conspiracy theories" in their description of him. There are more RS to verify the description, but we don't want to WP:OVERCITE in the lead section. This could be expanded in the main body of the article: he's promoted Barack Obama citizenship conspiracy theories, white genocide conspiracy theory, linking :Christine Blasey Ford to the CIA and the :Steele dossier, etc. It's a reasonable description by WP standards. Freezer Bernie (talk) 06:46, 25 January 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is he a conspiracy theorist? 

message: Title says it all. Snooganssnoogans (talk) 19:54, 24 January 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Can someone fix the archiving? 

message: A quick overview of the article raises concerns about the neutrality of it, as well as the decision to declare it a "good article". The article is unnecessarily long, reads like an endorsement, and downplays the criticism of the subject and the controversies he's involved in, attributing all criticism, even when it comes from reliable sources, and generally feels like it borders on whitewashing. In addition, "consipracy theorist" seems to have been removed again, despite the claim being properly cited. 46.97.170.112 (talk) 10:40, 31 August 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Question about the article's neutrality
Talk:Canonical momentum

message: This page now redirects to Canonical coordinates. However, I believe this term is also used for the "classical" momentum mv, as opposed to e.g. the momentum Π = mv - e/c A of a particle in a magnetic field. Not sure if that should be here or elsewhere though, that's why I put it on the talk page. If anyone knows where to put this... --CompuChip 08:39, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
Talk:International Food Safety Network

message: Please see Talk:Food_safety for discussion on redirection from Food safety to this article. -Bodybasket210 08:56, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This redirection was removed as inappropriate. --Microbiojen 23:34, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Redirection

message: Why does the version keep getting reverted? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 74.114.173.83 (talk) 21:03, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This article now should be fine Benchapman 14:50, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Have edited for notability 

message: There is debate about the notability of Dr. Powell and whether there should be an article on him. It appears that the FSN is much more likely to be considered notable than its director. Some of the info about Dr. Powell is already in the FSN article; perhaps a bit more could be added, then delete the article on Dr. Powell.  Ward3001 23:27, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The Powell article seems to be mainly the work of one editor, so I don't think its edit history is a problem here. Xiner (talk, email) 23:58, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Proposed merge of [[Dr. Doug Powell]] into this article

message: In the absence of comments that support keeping the article, I have set the article on Dr. Powell to redirect to Food Safety Network. If anyone wishes to add a few more details about Dr. Powell on that page please do so.  Ward3001 23:54, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Redirect
Talk:History of Ladakh

message: whoever wrote the last paragraph about Ladakh is heavily biased towards Indian. the real history is, this region used to be controlled by Tibetan. then english stole the land away in 1830s. when chinese rule eventually restored in tibet, indian did the same thing as their master, unofficially invaded this land. this land should be chinese.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.64.32.232 (talk) 09:26, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
Talk:Brigadoom (Lexx Episode)

message: This article was already merged into the main list of Lexx episodes once, which doesn't make sense to me. Why purge a lot of content in favor of little capsule reviews, especially when plenty of other series have pages for individual episodes? This isn't a stray page here or there you're talking about dumping, this is many pages with a lot of content. A lot of work, in other words.Multiverse 09:04, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
Talk:La Vang

message: Wikipedia needs to remain neutral about issues like whether the Virgin Mary ever appeared in La Vang, so I added a link to the article in L'Osservatore Romano that Lê Xuân Nhuận cites at his website. – Minh Nguyễn (talk, contribs) 09:15, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article in ''L'Osservatore Romano''
Talk:Josif Dorfman

message: I moved the article back to Josif Dorfman, as this is the common and preferred English spelling of his name.  (See WP:ENGLISH.)  Both external links use Josif rather than Iossif.  Dorfman is known as a chess player, and FIDE, the world-wide governing body of chess, lists his name as "Josif D Dorfman".  This page, along with those of about a dozen other chess players, was mass renamed contrary to WP policy and guidelines.  Quale 17:28, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Josif Dorfman 

message: He was born in 1952, not 1953 - that informaction is absolutety correct, I gave it from IM Krzysztof Pytel, who knows J.Dorfman personally. pjahr 12:45, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Birth 
Talk:Eigenvalue algorithm

message: As a learner, it is good idea to merge them together. On the other hand, "algorithm" is not really an algorithm it should better rephrase as "calculation of eigenvalue"... —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 202.81.251.173 (talk) 09:22, 17 November 2006
I agree.  I just think there should be a way to merge discussion on a merger, just seems like a obvious thing to overlook. --ANONYMOUS COWARD0xC0DE 07:44, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge

message: There are characters used on this page that my browser (Firefox 1.5) does not display.  Shouldn't we be sticking to standard character sets? --jdege 11:37, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Character set

message: What is the computational complexity (in the big-O sense) of these eigenvalue algorithms? —Ben FrantzDale (talk) 18:10, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Computational complexity? 

message: In section "Advanced methods" the QR algorithm is mentioned two times. Is that how it should be?
Mortense (talk) 19:40, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  QR algorithm redundancy 

message: If the eigenvalues are imaginary, there is no chance that the "Power iteration algorithm" will converge to an eigenvector. I am making an obvious correction now (by saying the algorithm converges *on the condition* that there is a dominant eigenvalue). This is a very major issue, since for a matrix with real coefficients, if the eigenvalue of highest || is complex, then necessarily its complex conjugate is also an eigenvalue; the complex conjugate clearly is going to have the same magnitude of ||, so the "power iteration" algorithm is going to fail for this completely generic possibility.
This section needs considerably more work! Tition1 (talk) 01:22, 12 September 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: (Note that in practice the case of two conjugate eigenvalues is easily handled.  e.g. if you take two subsequent iterations, the vectors generally span the two conjugate eigenvectors so you can solve a small 2×2 eigenproblem with them to get the two eigenvalues and eigenvectors.  — Steven G. Johnson (talk) 01:16, 27 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  The section "Power iteration" is obviously wrong 

message: The claim that the eigenvalues of a tridiagonal matrix can be computed in O(n) time is highly dubious. It takes O(n) time just to evaluate the characteristic polynomial at one point, so even if hiding a large (but due to given precision fixed) number of bisections in the constant, you cannot bisect your way to all n separate eigenvalues just O(n) time. 
A recent paper () considers it to be fast to compute all eigenvalues in O(n \log n) time. 78.73.97.76 (talk) 20:57, 24 June 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tridiagonal eigenvalue complexity