lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Royal Institution Christmas Lectures

message: The listing for the 2007 lectures links to Hugh Montgomery.  That page describes him as a US mathematician, now teaching at the University of Michigan.  However, the Royal Institution web site describes the lecturer as a "diver, skydiver, high-altitude mountaineer and intensive care doctor".  These sound unlikely to be the same individual.  Any thoughts?  — Anbaric (talk) 15:13, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  2007 lectures 

message: I've tried and failed to find sources for the lecture titles prior to 1966 before they were regularly televised. From what I've been able to establish, a lot of this information has been lost in the mists of time - even the RI don't have complete records. To avoid having loads of blanks in the table, I've split it between 1825 to 1965 and then 1966 to date. BurmeseCatMan (talk) 13:54, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lecture titles and table split 

message: The 2017 RI lectures have been announced; http://www.rigb.org/christmas-lectures/2017-the-language-of-life
--SnowmanJames (talk) 08:57, 30 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  2017 Lectures 

message: Why does this article say that Michael Faraday initiated the Royal Institution Christmas lectures, and then put John Millington as the person who gave the first of the series of lectures?Vorbee (talk) 09:04, 24 November 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Michael Faraday
Talk:The Crime Club

message: The pertinant policy is WP:EL. Commercial links are disallowed. The first link was a big in-your-face ad. Regardless of any other content, it can therefore not be linked to. The second link was a blog. Linking to blogs is also specifically disallowed. Sorry, guys. —Hanuman Das 04:56, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Links

message: There is no need to merge this article as there is plenty of precedent for imprints to have their own. See Target Books for just one precedent. 23skidoo 12:46, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Oppose merger
Talk:Vicente Sánchez

message: I suggest that this is changed: "...if they want him America has to pay 5 Million"  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.71.176.221 (talk) 06:59, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Five million WHAT? 
Talk:Sebastián Soria

message: Are you sure he's born in 1988? at http://www.afcasiancup.com they say he's born 8/11/1983, so he's 24 yers old. What's the truth? Gigiomarchese 19:18, 09 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: By the normal rules of Spanish Language surnames, the paternal surname is the first, and is the one given when only one of the two apellidos are stated.  This article is inconsistent: the Infobox contradicts the article title as to the surname that this player uses.  This needs addressing.  Kevin McE 00:01, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: He was listed as Sebastián Quintana. Matthew_hk tc 01:15, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Where was he listed thus?  There is one reference on the article and that is in Arabic.  There is still a contradiction between the top of the Infobox and the title of the article.  If he is, against all tradition, knon by his other's urname, an explanation as to how that came about would be useful.  Kevin McE 23:12, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: In the Qatari league, they always call him Sebastian Soria. --MK 09:02, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

text: In AFC site , he listed as Sebastián Quintana. Matthew_hk tc 14:10, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

text: I believe he went by Soria when playing in Uruguay, however, the AFC registrations seem to always use Quintana. Perhaps we should list him as Sebastian Soria Quintana to be safe? Jogurney 16:57, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: On further review, the FIFA site lists him as Soria.  I think Soria is most appropriate. Jogurney 17:04, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Soria or Quintana? 
Talk:Semiclassical gravity

message: Unfortunately, the phrase "semiclassical gravity" is easily confused with "the semiclassical approximation" in quantum gravity.
The latter refers to using a WKB-like approximation when solving the Wheeler-DeWitt equation. This is not the same as Semiclassical gravity! For this reason, I removed the reference
* Claus Kiefer, "The semiclassical approximation to quantum gravity." Eprint arXiv:gr-qc/9312015.
This may be controversial, so I noted it in the talk page. Discussion is welcome :)
--Pqnelson (talk) 21:44, 14 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  References (Beware!)
Talk:COinS

message: Is the terminology "latent URL" as opposed to "static URL", or am I misunderstanding? — Omegatron 05:04, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: A latent URL is an "unactivated" OpenURL--one with no resolver.  It shouldn't be used instead of static in that context, as I was trying to use "static URL" to refer to an OpenURL that has been bound to one particular resolver--an "activated" OpenURL.  I don't know if there is better terminology for this.... --Karnesky 05:45, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I meant "is COinS a latent URL, as opposed to a static URL?" — Omegatron 00:58, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes.  Originally, that was basically the only purpose--to provide a standardized latent OpenURL (and some earlier proposals involved less client-side processing to "activate" the URLs (not enclosed in spans, no need to split/separate/process tags--literally just the OpenURL CO without the URL to the resolver).  With the processing & with other applications for COinS metadata (such as reference management), I don't know how much this should be stressed.  It might be worth a mention. --Karnesky 01:10, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  It should certainly be explained.  History, rationale, etc. — Omegatron 01:31, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Latent vs static URL

message: We should mention the problems brought up by this post, though we need to put more neutral and "advantages" content first. — Omegatron 00:53, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Problems 

message: "The Context Object (“CO” in COinS) is the technical name for the part of an OpenURL that describes the item somebody wants to find." — Omegatron 05:40, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  ContextObjects are a part of openurl 

message: Wikipedia seems to have removed COinS support, as of November 2012. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template_talk:Citation/core#Removing_COINS_metadata -- 80.168.173.68 (talk) 11:00, 19 November 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: This change is most likely temporary.  Further, Wikipedia uses COinS on 'Cite this page', book sources, and other cases, e.g.  or Special:BookSources/978-1-880124-61-1. --Karnesky (talk) 13:12, 19 November 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wikipedia does not use COinS anymore 

message: Some sample HTML demonstrating COinS would be very helpful. -- Beland (talk) 16:26, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Example needed 

message: 100000 conins 185.190.132.3 (talk) 17:54, 22 February 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Conins
Talk:SO(10)

message: Please link/provide references to the original papers, review articles and books where this is discussed! That would be more useful to me and other physicists than the summary written here, and it is Wikipedia policy. C9 (talk) 09:32, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Please Reference 

message: The article at Pati–Salam model links here as SO(10) unification model.  I feel this nomenclature is much clearer than the existing (confusing) title.  It helps separate out some of the confusion related to the model not being SO(10), without being overly verbose.  Further, doesn't perpetuate the notion that the physics interpretation of SO(10) is somehow different than the mathematical notion.  Specifically, it is a model that embeds SO(10) within a spin representation.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.247.173.205 (talk) 20:44, 1 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Please rename
Talk:Soft Matter (journal)

message: I have removed "first immediacy index of 1.022 is the highest value for any interdisciplinary journal publishing primary research in its field" except for the first five words. The immediacy factor can be verified, but what is its field? The immediacy factor is 5th in the field "MATERIALS SCIENCE, MULTIDISCIPLINARY". --Bduke 00:29, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Immediacy index
Talk:Bush School (Washington)

message: I used to go to this school. Unfortunately, the school is very much what its reputation is among the other private high schools. Kids who come from wealthy families who aren't in the smartest realm go here, and those who are quiet and want a very small school setting go here. I consider myself a fairly quiet person, and there were kids at this school who rarely talked, if ever. It's definitely a good school for middle school and elementary school, but not somewhere I would recommend for high school unless you prefer a quiet school setting that is very much sheltered.   —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fosteriana (talk • contribs) 01:52, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: What does this have to do with the article on the school? Lukobe (talk) 06:28, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  Fixed. skeptical scientist (talk) 00:54, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  School Opinions
Talk:Sound energy flux

message: wateva i really dont know that wat r u talking about..........i also agree
This page has probably been subject to vandalism. It makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. I'd mark this page for deletion and link it to sound intensity but I don't know how :) sorry!
:I agree. Adamd1008 (talk) 23:52, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Edit: I've undone the vandalism. Adamd1008 (talk) 23:55, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vandalism 
Talk:Martin PBM Mariner

message: When did the USN retire all of it's PBM's?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by AVKent882 (talk • contribs) 01:20, 7 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: When Did The US Retire All of the PBM's?
Talk:Specific activity

message: The introduction suggests that the article may be "too technical for some readers"
I can think of only one useful clarification. The algebraic expression given for the quantity at time t is no doubt incomprehensible to readers with no knowledge of the relevant algebra, although it is admirably clear to those familiar with exponential functions.
Perhaps it should be preceded with "The half life T1/2 of an isotope is the length of time at which half of a given quantity has decayed into another isotope, usually of a different element"DaveyHume (talk) 23:51, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Hi, would it be possible to add the corresponding particle emitted in the table of activity for specific nuclei? (If possible, even the energy but if it can be script-scraped that would be easier.) Thx ~~  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1700:57AA:1910:6C98:95D9:4CF:8614 (talk) 04:12, 12 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Activty Data
Talk:Surface power density

message: I've read that cell phones aren't allowed to output more than 2 watt/kg. I don't understand what that means. The reason I searched for the "w/kg article" was to find this out. So an example would be useful , what w/kg really means. Anyway if there is no reply , maybe I'll do some research in the future and add to this article an example section. Logictheo 10:15, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: See specific absorption rate. Markus Kuhn 21:05, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Specific power: 2 watt/kg cell phone or mobile phone limit "SAR" 

message: I've always associated "specific ___" with a quantity per unit mass, as in specific volume (volume per unit mass: (m3/kg)), specific energy/energy-to-weight ratio (energy per unit mass: (J/kg)), specific power/power-to-weight ratio (power per unit mass: (W/kg)), etc. It seems as though calling this specific power is either a mistake, or it's a poor choice of terminology, even though the citation seems to have a reputable source (nist.gov: National Institute of Standards and Technology; note: the citation is vague/incomplete, so I wasn't able to find the information cited).  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bfoshizzle1 (talk • contribs) 02:44, 2 November 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Specific power"
Talk:Spin ice

message: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/8307804.stm
I think this is relevant.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.122.71.250 (talk) 00:17, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Magnetricity 

message: Please see here for what I propose! Chris 21:48, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed reorganisation 

message: The article twice mentions the difficulty of making single pure ice crystals, but fails to explain the reasons. Could someone amplify a little? Kay Dekker (talk) 20:18, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Difficulty of making ice crystals
Talk:Receptor-mediated endocytosis

message: "The combination of lipids with proteins makes cholesterol more soluble in plasma, but the complexes are unable to diffuse through cell membranes. INSTEAD, they must be brought into cells by receptor-mediated endocytosis." The apoproteins in the complexes are specific for membrane receptors in different tissues. " (Dee Unglaub Silverthorn 4th Edition).  128.54.46.31 05:21, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Posted. It's reasonably easy to follow but the image page has a more detailed description. --Ianml (talk) 02:07, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: The

message: These:
*
*
* 
were once listed as WP:General references in the article.  Anything currently uncited might be attributable to them.  WhatamIdoing (talk) 01:00, 19 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Refs

message: Yes 180.222.141.60 (talk) 17:09, 5 February 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Biology
Talk:Russell Doern

message: Russell Doern hosted a talk show on television just before his suicide. What station was it on? It was heavily mentioned in Kubasa in a Glass. --PsychoJason 05:20, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: PsychoJason, According to the Winnipeg Free Press of January 7, 1987, Doern hosted a series called "Personalities" on cable channel 11, which was available west of the Red River. https://newspaperarchive.com/winnipeg-free-press-jan-07-1987-p-20/ 
Bellczar (talk) 02:52, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Stationary phase approximation

message: How did the dependency of F(\omega) change into F(\omega_{dom})?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.144.162.128 (talk) 20:19, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The whole article seems very muddled. I suggest a major rewrite. Shall we start by agreeing on some primary or secondary sources that we think exemplify the method? Billlion (talk) 17:57, 9 May 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Question about the example 

message: The first mention of the functions f or g occurs in the first sentence of the section titled Formula, as follows:
"Letting \Sigma denote the set of critical points of the function f (i.e. points where \nabla f =0), under the assumption that g is either compactly supported or has exponential decay, and that all critical points are nondegenerate (i.e. \det(\mathrm{Hess}(f(x_0)))\neq 0 for x_0 \in \Sigma) we have the following asymptotic formula, as k\to \infty:
:\int_{\mathbb{R}^n}g(x)e^{ikf(x)} dx=\sum_{x_0\in \Sigma} e^{ik f(x_0)}|\det({\mathrm{Hess}}(f(x_0)))|^{-1/2}e^{\frac{i\pi}{4} \mathrm{sgn}(\mathrm{Hess}(f(x_0)))}(2\pi/k)^{n/2}g(x_0)+o(k^{-n/2})."
It is essential that when a function is referred to in Wikipedia, readers do not need to guess what the domain and codomain of the function are, or what kind of function it is (continuous, differentiable, continuously differentiable, etc.).
I hope that someone with at least minimal writing skills who is familiar with this subject can fix this. 2601:200:C082:2EA0:E14D:BE82:EC0D:1CD5 (talk) 04:43, 15 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Truly terrible writing
Wikipedia talk:Requests for arbitration/Sex tourism/Evidence

message: I want to file for a few immediate injunctions, but I'm not sure where to stick them. Right now they're on Workshop, but re-reading the stuff I'm thinking maybe I'm not supposed to post there.
Also, is there a place for my Checkuser request? I'd rather ask here because I've not asked for Checkuser before, and don't want to start a new SP case. — edgarde 22:51, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Your injunctions are in the right place on the workshop page.  It's a matter of whether the arbitrators want to put them to a vote or not.  You can list your checkuser request on the workshop page under motions and requests from the parties. Thatcher131 23:04, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you twice. Very helpful! — edgarde 23:08, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Where to put injunction requests? 

message: Because my evidence includes non-diff HTTP links, I tried a different format here: User:Edgarde/sandbox
External links are numbered like normal[, but diffs look like diff.
Question: is this a terrible idea? It's not the prescribed format, and I figure it probably breaks something. But if it appears helpful, I can introduce it to /Evidence. — edgarde 06:17, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Diff format
Talk:Stochastic cooling

message: i'm not sure that the paragraph, about why it's called "stochastic cooling" is really correct. Surely it's "stochastic cooling" because the beam is cooled due to the inherently stochastic momentum transfer between dimensions (x,y,z) from hard-body collisions.
also, i believe stochastic cooling was first demonstrated using the intersecting storage rings connected to the proton synchrotron, NOT the super proton synchrotron. See http://library.cern.ch/archives/isad/isaisr.html where it mentions it was tested in the ISR in 1965. The SPS didn't come online until 1976  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.148.59.188 (talk) 18:31, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

message: near the bottom there is a link to "buncher" which redirects to animal testing. when you search that page for buncher, it takes you to illegal animal collecting activities. I dont believe illegal animal collecting activities are involved in the manipulation of particles.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.225.103.35 (talk) 22:37, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  problem
Talk:Sura Ionospheric Heating Facility

message: Just removed the sentence saying that the output power of the American HAARP facility would be much lower. This is wrong, because it was comparing the ERP power of Sura (several MW) with the real power of HAARP (a bit more than 3 MW in its full version). ERP is just a theoretical figure that takes the effect of the antennas in account. Antifumo (talk) 09:38, 12 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Output power of the American HAARP facility
Talk:Trio élégiaque No. 2 (Rachmaninoff)

message: Should there be an accent on the E in Elegiaque?  In his first trio it is lacking in the title and page, but on this one, an accent appear in the page but not title.
:I don't know.  In small case there is obviously an accent, but don't know the guidelines and official french spelling for uppercase. (n.b. please sign your comments). Dr. Friendly 20:21, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: written on 5 October and completed on 15 December 1893  - I presume this means it was started on 5 October.   Even so, this was a couple of weeks before Tchaikovsky's unexpected death, so either (a) the date is wrong or (b) he started it then, only adding the dedication after he heard about Tchaikovsky dying.  Anyone know?  --  JackofOz (talk) 03:47, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Dates of composition
Talk:Venus Versus Virus

message: How does this classify as yuri? The only thing in the series remotely close to that classification is the opening theme of the anime. --76.179.48.84 (talk) 13:19, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: If you would like, please read the attached reference by Seven Seas stating that the manga has some yuri elements : Without a doubt, Venus Versus Virus is a shounen yuri manga. There is no explicit yuri content in the manga, but the pages are full of subtext.--十八 21:22, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I think it's more like yuri by proxy. Lucia touches Sumire but this never results in anything more. I read the page linked, but it's never explicitly stated they develop an actual sexual relationship; it's presumed by others. Just because she (Sumire) blushes furiously doesn't say much that it's true yuri. Also, Sumire being the 'weaker' of the two (really, just sort of confused and scared at first!), she would hide behind the person who could defend her: Lucia. It's only natural to seek the protection of a stronger person, right? I wouldn't say subtext could really lead to something being specifically branded/labelled a certain way. Spookeh (talk) 09:02, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Yuri 

message: If anyone wants to write a reception section, here are a bunch of reviews that were in the "Links" section and that I've found:
(Manga:)
* 365 Days of Manga, Day 169: Venus Versus Virus
* DVD Verdict Review - Venus Versus Virus
* Venus Versus Virus Manga, Volume 1 (English)
* Newtype USA, volume 1
* Mania, volume 1
* Mania, volume 4
* Advanced Media Network, volume 1
* Active Anime, volume 4
{Anime:)
* Okazu anime review
* Anime News Network, DVD 1 - Outbreak
* Advanced Media Network, DVD 1
* Mania, DVD 1
* Mania, DVD 2
* Mania, DVD 3
MayumiTsuji (talk) 17:19, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reception links
Talk:Bloggie

message: Removing delete proposal, as the Bloggies - as web content - do meet the following criteria:
The content itself has been the subject of multiple non-trivial published works whose source is independent of the site itself.
This criterion includes published works in all forms, such as newspaper and magazine articles, books, television documentaries, and published reports by consumer watchdog organizations...''
Note that the Bloggies have been covered by articles from the BBC and the Washington Post among others.
I see someone else has nominated this for delete.  I don't know what more needs to be said: the topic clearly meets the requirements
for inclusion, as documented above and in the links embedded in the article.  If anything, what this article needs is to be expanded
and additional information included.  Something I will try to do as I have free time available.--Sprhodes 02:01, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Deletion Proposal 

message: This article seems redundant of blog award, and indeed, anything that can be found on this article can be found there as well.  cacophony 05:04, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Why not merge the Bloggie related content into this page, and turn the blog award page into a disambiguation page also summarizing blog awards not notable enough to merit their own page? Glowimperial 01:27, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

text: Also - maybe this pages' content should be moved to the more appropriate heading Weblog Awards and then this page should become a redirect to that page. Glowimperial 01:30, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Redundancy
Talk:Three-jet event

message: Should it be a separate article? Incnis Mrsi (talk) 18:31, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think so. It just describes a minor property of this topic. Also, it's written like a subsection already. dude❶❽❶❽ (talk) 04:19, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

text: At least it should be rewritten. For example one of the cited paper (the PLUTO one) does not mention this angle at all, they worked with the $x_1$ distribution. I guess this whole section is rather about the spin-1 property of gluons. Maybe it should be named rather by that.. "Deduction of further gluon properties from three jet events". Or just skip the title at all. Since the whole three jet thing is about gluons and its properties. Anonymmaus (talk)  —Preceding undated comment added 21:46, 20 December 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Ellis–Karliner angle]] 

message: Kudos to the writers of this article.  There are plenty of places to make common errors with wp:hyphen and wp:numeral, but I didn't see any!  Bubba73 You talkin' to me? 05:31, 20 November 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Kudos