lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Black body

message: Would it be more accurate to say black holes redshift light travelling from close to their event horizon, since light passing close to the black hole can still curve back to the observer? A star collapsing into a black hole will seem to slow down and settle around its schwarzschild radius and effectively become redshifted until we cannot detect any light coming from its surface, though light arguably will get emitted from its surface just above the event horizon indefinitely as observed from a safe distance. Since this is not the main topic of this article, I am unsure whether such nitpicking is really necessary, nevertheless the fact that black holes emit radiation can be entirely derived without ever mentioning events on or past the horizon, while a classical black hole which absorbs all and reflects none would not emit thermal radiation. 85.31.132.229 (talk) 18:49, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Black hole absorbs all and reflects none 

message: At the time of writing this comment, the Black Holes section has a formula that drops the following error (in the Brave browser, running on macOS Big Sur):
Failed to parse (SVG (MathML can be enabled via browser plugin): Invalid response ("Math extension cannot connect to Restbase.") from server "/mathoid/local/v1/":): {\displaystyle T=\frac {\hbar c^3}{8\pi Gk_\text{B}M} \ ,}
I'm not familiar enough with MathML or the <math> tag to be of any help, and my only hope is that someone who follows this page (or has it on their watchlist) is able to check it and correct the error.
Feel free to remove this message once the issue is fixed. — Gwyneth Llewelyn (talk) 19:17, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Math error? 

message: The page for band emission could be easily slotted in to this article under Idealizations, though I don't know if there's enough there to warrant its own subheading or if it could be added under a heading like: Band emissions with justification of why measuring the emissions over a specific spectral band is useful. Reconrabbit (talk) 19:02, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Space to include [[band emission]]
Talk:ISBN

message: Change the establishment date from 1970 to 1967, as this is the more accurate date. My source is "https://www.archwaypublishing.com/en/faq/10-things-you-should-know-about-isbn" Guano islands (talk) 02:01, 21 November 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Changed date and added reference. Lewcm Talk to me! 22:06, 21 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 21 November 2023 

message: Please remove these phrases:
 will each have a different ISBN.
 will each have a different ISBN assigned to it.
and replace them with:
 must each have a different ISBN.
 must each have a different ISBN assigned to it.
#1 is a lede summary dependent on #2, which relies on a source that says that each edition "shall be assigned" a different ISBN.  Sometimes, publishers don't comply and don't assign separate ISBNs to different editions, so "will" is wrong, but "must" isn't affected by non-compliance. 123.51.107.94 (talk) 00:55, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: I think "must" is better wording. In the document, "shall" is a pretty bad word for them to use as it can mean either "must" or "will" (thesaurus.com says they're synonyms.) Coulomb1 (talk) 02:15, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 29 January 2024 

message: Currently the article has a function `CheckISBN()` written in C that returns the error syndrome. However, it expects the input to be `int const digits[10]`, which is quite nonsensical and to the least impractical. Bytes would be more appropriate for digits -- where would you find an ISBN coded as array of ten 32-bit integers? It would be easy to allow to scan a string of bytes that might indifferently be UTF-8 or integer digits. I suggest the following code:
 def CheckISBN(digits: Iterable) -> int:
     """Return ISBN error syndrome, zero for a valid ISBN, non-zero for an invalid one.
     Items in 'digits' that can't be cast to integer are ignored."""
     c = t = s = u = 0
     for d in digits:
         try:
             if c&1: u += int(d)    # for 13-digit ISBN
             t += int(d); s += t; c += 1
         except ValueError: pass    # ignore non-digits like spaces, '-', ...
     if c == 10: return s % 11
     if c != 13: raise ValueError(f"Expected 10 or 13 digits, got {c}.")
     return (t+2*u) % 10
If the C implementation is to be retained, one could use `t += digits[i] & 15` to convert ASCII digits to integers. As explained earlier, the argument should be `char digits[10]` to use bytes or characters rather than 32-bit integers. — MFH:Talk 17:31, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: I disagree. That just obfuscates the straightforward algorithm. KISS principle ToraNeko (talk) ToraNeko (talk) 10:32, 31 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  checking for valid ISBN
Talk:Smart car

message: For stuff about the lowercase smart car see: http://www.smart.com/
— Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.137.57.25 (talk • contribs) 06:55, 31 July 2002 (UTC)
replies: text: Hotlorp, by that argument, you are entitled to tell Apple their product is Ipod, not iPod, and Iphone, not iPhone. Similarly, DEC had a product known as the microVAX, not Microvax. Jackytar 17:40, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Agree that intelligent car should be merged with this article but, as this article is more substantial and includes some referencing at least, suggest this article becomes the lead with intelligent car text embedded and sourced by a redirect. Thoughts? Dick G 08:42, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge with [[intelligent car]]

message: The "Automated Automobile" article does not exist in Wikipedia and so needs to be created to capture ALL this material in one single location.  The material is disorganized and frgmented -- so any interested person who can spare a few WEEKS should tackle this.
Q. When one speaks of "smart car", "driverless car", "intelligent car", etc, etc, what are we talking about ?
A. We are talking about the totally automated automobile.
Terms like "smart", "driverless", "intelligent" are all "cutsey" terms out of popular magazines which do NOT advance understanding, but rather cloud the subject, making it seem more outlandish than it is, which is, of course, not at all.  
Such vehicles will operate nicely on existing infrastructure, mixing well with manually driven vehicles -- which concept is the key to their gradual introduction.  The catch is, each one will contain a little "automated traffic cop" looking for infractions by manually driven vehicles, summoning the patrol when it finds and photographs one.  This feature will make everyone act very politely among them !
— Preceding unsigned comment added by 162.42.87.105 (talk • contribs) 02:20, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge '''ALL''' "automated automobile" articles under Automated Automobile

message: This article is simply a redundant version of "Smart (Automobile)" and truly needs to be merged.
agomulka (talk) 18:48, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: This article is about the concept of a car which is ‘smart’, while that one is about a make of car which is named ‘smart’. There isn’t any overlap in the subject matter. David Arthur (talk) 22:36, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge with Smart (Automobile) 

message: Smart car is too similar and confusing with the  smart car. Also no cited reason to call "smart car" instead of "intelligent car".  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mr. jones999 (talk • contribs) 17:47, 4 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Move to Intelligent car
Talk:Limit

message: Infinity represents the unlimited medium in which observers can create plurality of units, either identical (space) or each unit different, (time). Magnitude, manifested as space or time, has nothing to do with the infinite medium, apart from accommodating it, because magnitude arises out of the observation of the created units. It is the observer who creates this reality in the static medium of infinity. He does it by creating basic organization in the infinite medium and then by placing the limit in some position of that basic organization. 92.24.37.44. Every unit is the result of limitation of the infinite medium. The limit is the boundary between inside-outside, between existence-non existence and between the observer and that which he observes. By creating a unit, out of and in the infinite medium, the observer becomes conscious of his own existence in the 'now'. His consciousness allows him to observe, by comparison, other independent units. Being unlimited the medium gives the observer complete freedom of creating and observing various realities. KK (78.146.62.42 (talk) 13:55, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Limit in the infinity
Talk:Perciformes

message: I'd like to add a definition for the Espada fish (an ugly brute of which I'm rather fond).  I know it is one of the Perciformes and apparently belongs to the family Trichiuridae, being one of the class of Actinopterygii (ray-finned fishes)  However, I can't fathom out where to put a link.
Here, for what it's worth is my proposed stub.  Maybe someone else can fathom it out!
Family: Trichiuridae (Cutlassfishes), subfamily: Aphanopodinae
Class: Actinopterygii (ray-finned fishes)
Order: Perciformes (perch-like fish)
Species:
Aphanopus Carbo - Espada Preta or Black Scabbardfish: The body of the fish is entirely black and it is shaped like the scabbard of a sword.  It is a predator with sharp teeth and can grow to over a metre in length and 2 kilograms in weight.  The espada lives in deep water between 200 and 1,700 metres below sea level.  The espada is only commercially fished off the shores of Madeira but has also been discovered in seas around Southern Ireland, Japan,  North Africa, Portugal, and the Canary Islands.
External link: 
http://madeiraisland.com/eng/madeira/articles/espada_fish/
http://www.fishbase.org/Summary/SpeciesSummary.cfm?genusname=Aphanopus&speciesname=carbo
-----
Is it really proper to call a member of this group a Perciforme?  Perciformes is Latin, and doesn't necessarily singularize in this manner.  Google comes up with some hits, but suggests Perciform is a better option.  And personally, when the common name is just a cheap anglicization of the Latin name, I'd rather stick with the latter, especially in cases like this where it will be more widely recognized.
Valid point on the "e" -- I will change it. Perciform can be linked by adding an es to the outside of the double bracket. Then one can simply say that such and such is a perciform instead of having to say that such and such is a member of the Perciformes. --mav
-----
There is written Belontiidae (gouramies) and Osphronemidae (giant gouramies) but Osphronemidae links to gouramies. 
I am not an expert in latin but something must be wrong here.
--User:Kaczor
:You're behind the times :-) - Ralf Britz in 2001 apparently made the case for demoting Belontiidae to subfamily Belontiinae of Osphronemidae. See  for the citation; both ITIS and FishBase follow Britz now, so we should just go along. Stan 02:37, 30 Sep 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Definition

message: I've just nominated the sailfish article as Science Collaboration of the Week. Please visit Wikipedia:Science collaboration of the week and vote for the article. Thanks. - Samsara contrib talk 08:18, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sailfish nominated for SCOTW
Talk:Home Army

message: Preserving here by providing this link. My rationale was: "book review by a non-expert is not a suitable source; see: Talk:Tadeusz Piotrowski (sociologist)#Citation to Judith Olsak-Glass, Sarmatian Review." -- K.e.coffman (talk) 08:12, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  March 2023 edit 

message: please change "Polish red-and-white flag" to "Polish white-and-red flag" under the actual picture of the flag. There is a difference. Thanks. Tulip an (talk) 23:02, 27 March 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Question: What is the difference? Lightoil (talk) 10:03, 28 March 2023 (UTC)

text: Not done for now: As far as I know, there's no WP:MOS guidance on this, and the current version reads more smoothly to me. Let me know if I'm missing something! Actualcpscm (talk) 10:10, 28 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 27 March 2023 

message: The title on the bottom of the poster says literally "Polski Komitet Wyzwolenia Narodowego". 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polish_Committee_of_National_Liberation
The eagle on the banner does not have a crown and was used in Polish People's Army, not in the AK 
https://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orze%C5%82_wojskowy_wz._43
Home Army was always using eagles with crowns, proof:
https://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plik:Band_of_Polish_Home_Army_(Armia_Krajowa).PNG
https://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plik:Zniwiarz1.jpg
https://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plik:Orzel_AK.jpg
Please move this poster to the page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polish_Committee_of_National_Liberation and remove it from that one with Home Army RebeKacz (talk) 15:28, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: @RebeKacz Removed from here. You should be able to add it yourself to to the other article, no? Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 16:13, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  The poster "Poles to arms!" used in the article is from PKWN (Polish Committee of National Liberation - Polski Komitet Wyzwolenia Narodowego), not from Ak (Home Army); PKWN was Soviet-backed communists executive governing authority, functioning in opposition to the London-based Home Army 

message: It's Armed Resistance UNION (Związek). 5.173.50.171 (talk) 11:46, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  "earlier Związek Walki Zbrojnej (Armed Resistance) "
Talk:Corpus linguistics

message: Here are some sites on Corpus. But I am not sure whether they are useful.
 http://www.tu-chemnitz.de/phil/english/chairs/linguist/independent/kursmaterialien/language_computers/whatis.htm
 http://www.cambridge.org/elt/corpus/what_is_a_corpus.htm
 http://www.tlumaczenia-angielski.info/linguistics/corpus.htm 
Verycuriousboy (talk) 14:41, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Some sites on Corpus 
Talk:Edinburgh

message: The article uses the "Scottish council populations" () template, both in infobox and in the text. The source provided for this information is:
https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/populationandmigration/populationestimates/articles/demographyandmigrationdatacontent/2022-11-02#demography-unrounded-population-estimates
However, the population estimates for the S12000036 council area cannot be retrieved from this website, therefore, cannot be verified. My edit removing this piece of information from the article was reverted. I'm asking for help with finding the real source and the real population estimate Giacomini12 (talk) 11:26, 9 October 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Citation source is on this page: Template:Scottish_council_populations. However, the citation link no longer seems to include Scotland and Northern Ireland. According to this site https://www.nrscotland.gov.uk/files/statistics/council-area-data-sheets/city-of-edinburgh-council-profile.html#Tables, 518,500 is the 2018 population estimate, whereas 526,470 is the 2021 estimate. The numbers and the citation given in Template:Scottish_council_populations should be updated with data from this page https://www.nrscotland.gov.uk/statistics-and-data/statistics/statistics-by-theme/population/population-estimates/mid-year-population-estimates/population-estimates-time-series-data (https://www.nrscotland.gov.uk/files//statistics/population-estimates/mid-21/mid-year-pop-est-21-time-series-data.xlsx) 185.107.14.2 (talk) 22:48, 10 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Council area population 

message: I noticed that a contributor has changed the lead section of the Liverpool article just recently. The Liverpool lead section now only includes Liverpool's local authority population and the population of the official city region. Having looked at the Birmingham Leeds and Edinburgh articles, I notice that their lead sections make reference to the wider metropolitan area. 
To quote the Birmingham article lead section: "The wider metropolitan area has a population of 4.3 million, making it the largest outside of London." The citation is worldpopulationreview.com
To quote the Leeds article: "The city is part of the fourth-largest built-up area by population in the United Kingdom, West Yorkshire Built-up Area, with a 2011 census population of 1.7 million" The citation is ONS Census 2011. The WY Built-up Area is out of date and is not calculated any more. But I am wondering if this needs to be in the lead section as an editor has removed mention of Liverpool metropolitan area from its lead section. 
To quote the Edinburgh lead section, "The wider metropolitan area has a population of 912,490." The citation is OECD.
I am sure there are many many examples on wiki where city articles make reference to a wider 'urban region' or metropolitan area.
Should we be aiming for consistency in these articles? I have also started an RfC on the Leeds, Birmingham and Liverpool articles. Liverpolitan1980 (talk) 10:40, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title: RfC: Should the metro or urban region population be in the lead?
Talk:Calorie

message: The sentence below was removed because is its dubious, and the only reference given is an URL with no title that is now dead:
"However, it is the convention not to use the calorie without specifying the value in Joules for universal clarity.http://www.ch.ic.ac.uk/local/organic/t5.html
This may be a recommendation by some teachers, books, or official bodies; but it does not seem to be a convention AFAIK.  The scientists who still use kcal do not seem to care about it; and presumably those who care will use only joules. --Jorge Stolfi (talk) 04:51, 24 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sentence removed: dead-link ref 

message: This edit replaced this  
The factors used to convert calories to joules are numerically equivalent to expressions of the specific heat capacity of water in joules per gram or per kilogram.
with this.
The factor used to convert calories to joules is equivalent to the specific heat capacity of water expressed in joules per Kelvin per gram or per kilogram.
*The word "kelvin" should be lower case.
*There are in fact various different factors depending on the temperature.
*It is a numerical equivalence. The conversion factor is ~4.2 J/cal (kJ/kcal or kJ/Cal) but this is one. The specific heat capacity of water is not one it's ~4.2 J/(K·g). The number is the same but the units are not.
Jimp 09:34, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Conversion factors & the specific heat capacity of water

message: Some time ago, I corrected the article, setting the International Steam Table calorie (1956) exactly equal to 1.163 mWh, by merely replacing the wavy equal sign "≈"  with the regular "=" sign.  This pleasant feature may be the reason why it is the calorie preferred by dieters, as kilocalorie:  
        1 Cal = 1.163Wh.
So Russ Rowlett in his former UNC tables of constants.  This may have been the shortest possible Wikipedia edit, ever...!!   hgwb 12:25, 11 March 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:   The One & Only Calorie With An Exact kWh Equivalent 

message: My observation is that in the US the kilocalorie is officially preferred (e.g. in product labelling), whereas in Australia there is an official preference for the kilojoule (although the kilocalorie is still widely used, especially due to the pervasive US influence on Australian culture and businesses.) I think some discussion of national differences in the use of energy units (at least in the field of food, exercise and nutrition) would be a valuable addition to the article. SJK (talk) 09:47, 28 May 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  National differences 

message: In the European Union
# the official unit is joule
# calorie may be on the label (only) in addition. In this case, "calorie" is always the small calorie, i.e. 4.1868 J. This has been fixed by EU law in 1971 (). Hence 4186.8 J is "kcal" and only "kcal" -- Wassermaus (talk) 20:55, 3 July 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Calorie = 4.1868 J in the EU
Talk:American Broadcasting Company

message: I miss this show!!!!
I need Season 8!
Thank you!! 2601:143:500:2660:4015:97AD:15CB:3B7C (talk) 19:00, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: I love Michael Strahan!!! We need Pyramid for $100,000! 2601:143:500:2660:4015:97AD:15CB:3B7C (talk) 19:02, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  100,000 Pyramid
Talk:Lockheed Martin F-22 Raptor

message: Hello! I just wanted to take a moment and explain why I believe that F-22 works better than ATF when describing how many fighters were initially going to be purchased. I understand that saying that they were planning to purchase ATFs makes more technical sense, but I think that may confuse readers a little bit, and that F-22, while not technically accurate, more effectively conveys the information. Cheers! Googleguy007 (talk) 16:02, 16 May 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I tend to agree. Personally, I prefer to avoid acronyms whenever possible, but especially when they are easily mistaken for other acronyms, because that's like throwing a monkey wrench into the works. It's not much more difficult to just spell them out. In this case, the most common use for "ATF" is for "automatic transmission fluid", which doesn't belong in an article about planes. The second most common use is for the Bureau of "Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms". I can't remember what the term stands for in this article, and I suspect many other readers will have the same problem, hence the monkey wrench. I'd either spell it out, or, if the context allows, replace it with F-22 as Googleguy suggests. Zaereth (talk) 02:12, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm a bit more specific on the context that "ATF" is used vice "F-22". I would choose "ATF" when it's in the context of USAF program statements and procurement plans before the EMD downselect between the F-22 and F-23 in April 1991, and "F-22" for anything after that. Steve7c8 (talk) 10:22, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

text: Acronym obscurity aside both are also different aircrafts more so than the usual difference. The ATF had different placement of the intakes due to obviously different speed goals among others. So they shouldn't be viewed as one and the same to begin with. Mightyname (talk) 15:29, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

text: * Advanced Tactical Fighter (AFT) was the program to procure a new fighter and had program requirements such as planned acquisition numbers well before the selection was made. Actual procurement plans for the F-22 after selection is another matter. -Fnlayson (talk) 16:39, 12 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Use of F-22 over ATF 

message: The article says the top speed is mach 2.24, which it claims is 1500mph. Mach 2.24 is 1726mph. 1500mph is mach 1.95. 173.61.188.71 (talk) 13:31, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: The Mach number is related to speed and altitude. The speed of sound decreases with altitude. See also WP:MACH-NUMBER. -Fnlayson (talk) 17:03, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mach numbers 

message: Surely this page can accommodate one photo of the YF-22 for comparison? It might also be prudent to add a picture of the YF-23. Schierbecker (talk) 03:30, 13 March 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Why? They already have photos in their respective articles, YF-22 and YF-23. Why would we need them in this article? Zaereth (talk) 04:52, 13 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  No YF-22 image?