lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Gene knockout

message: References? 128.2.153.48 (talk) 22:06, 25 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: I conisider that knockout mice are an application of the concept of a gene knockout and should be included as a section in the Gene knockout article rather than stand as an article in their own right. --Username132 (talk) 11:34, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Both versions work, but to mee it seems logical letting the mice have their own article. // habj 15:02, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed Merge Between 'Gene knockout' and 'Knockout mice' 

message: Once genetic engineering becomes well developped, what is to stop people from doing planned extinctions on each other by inserting recessive knockout genes just like it is advocated for malaria carrying mosquitoes? --Sillybilly 08:26, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: On each other? Lack of technical expertise for one... Gene knockout isn't something you can do to your friends; it's applied when creating new individuals from the embryo stage. --Seans Potato Business 21:49, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  What is to stop people 

message: Is the term "conditional (sequence) deletion" equivalent to gene knock out?  
Certainly it is less commonly used than gene knockout. 
Should there be a redirect sign to this page then? 
What do people think? --Wuerzele (talk) 02:01, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  conditional deletion 

message: Hi, I am editing this article as part of a school assignment. I have a few proposed major changes that I will be implementing within the next few weeks unless anyone disagrees with any of the items mentioned below:
1) The entire paragraph beginning with "the directed creation of a KO begins with..." is almost word-for-word plagiarized (without citation), from "Gene Knockout Technology and It's Application" by Deepak Kumar Baranwal, Prakash Singh, Ramesh Kumar Singh,and Shashank Shekhar Solankey. I will remove this section and find another way to explain the concept.
2) There are newer methods for gene knockouts that are not represented here, including zinc fingers, TALENs, and CRISPR. I will add sections on these techniques.
3) The methods section seems unorganized to me. I propose to organize it with subheadings based on the different methods, including the ones I plan to add.
4) I may add to the uses section if I find any newer applications of the technology.
If anyone has any comments on these changes, please let me know. --Alv3307 (talk) 18:38, 27 March 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed Major Changes 

message: Hi, my name is Yasin. I'm a Molecular Biology master student and editing the page was given to me as an assignment for Recent Developments in Biotechnology (MLC501) in Uskudar University. Yasinay689 (talk) 09:56, 26 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recent Development In Biotechnology
Talk:Al Pacino

message: His real name is “Alfred James Pacino” not Alfredo. It says it on his arrest record if you search it and also in the biography “Al Pacino A life on A wire,” al also said it in an interview with the actors studio, 82.32.99.197 (talk) 14:18, 7 September 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, his arrest records say Alfred but his license says Alfredo. 2601:8C:8281:E8A0:8192:3DA8:2038:4758 (talk) 11:31, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit request  

message: The description of "partner" (2022-2023) makes it seem like he is no longer with producer Noor Alfallah, when it has already been confirmed by his representative that the two are still together.  
https://people.com/al-pacino-girlfriend-noor-alfallah-still-together-after-formalizing-custody-7966593 (talk) 13:20, 18 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Al Pacino and Noor Alfallah
Talk:Musical instrument classification

message: As a layman, I find the last paragraph of this article confusing.  Would the following re-write be correct?:  "Instruments can also be classified by common (not necessarily exclusive) usage; for example, signal instruments." Nisada 04:32, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Last Paragraph Confusion 

message: The topic paragraph of the Strings, Percussion, and Wind section says "there is a distinction made between wind instruments with a reed (woodwind instruments) and wind instruments where the air is set in motion directly by the lips (brass instruments)." 
This seems problematic in that it leaves no wiggle room for reedless woodwinds such as flutes and recorders. Spventi (talk) 03:41, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Where do flutes and recorders fit in? 

message: The United States Patent Office has a way, of course, of classifying musical instruments, and I like it the best, because it includes my favorite instrument, the plectrum piano. 208.54.85.149 (talk) 21:48, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: The Patent Office!

message: Hello , In May 2014 you added the comment "broad subject covering various classifications through history" to the multiple issues that needed to be dealt with for this article. I want to clean this article up and remove the box at the top, but I don't know what to do with that particular comment.  It is a broad subject, I agree, but one that I think is manageable because it doesn't go into depth in any area. I didn't have problems making it through the content but found it needing organization; a decent summary at the top will help with that. Beyond organization and a summary, the only thing I see to make it less broad would be to break it into pieces. I don't like this option, as it was useful to be able to scroll within the same document and compare they systems against one another. Do you have any specific concerns or points I can look at? Jacqke (talk) 12:08, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article labeled  broad subject covering various classifications through history" as if that is a problem 

message: There does not appear to be an citation or really any discussion of why that infographic is included on this page. I do not believe that this taxonomy is common or well-known in music classification. At the very minimum, there should be some sort of reference to where readers can learn more about this.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Achmorrison (talk • contribs) 19:18, 12 November 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Physical Organology infographic seems out of place 

message: ssification of instruments and there 2 examples 175.176.93.225 (talk) 05:16, 1 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  ssification of instruments and there 2 examples
Talk:Lahore

message: It is also called Lavapuram; son of Lord Rama(Lava) has ruled this kingdom then which is also extended to wards west where kush was ruling the other side 150.207.166.222 (talk) 00:17, 2 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  other names(at Ramayanam times) 

message: change:
	"As the capital of British Punjab, British colonialists made a lasting architectural impression on the city."
to:
    "As the capital of British Punjab, the city derived much of its architecture from British colonialists."
The existing grammar is incorrect. Since the subject of the sentence is "British colonialists", then this must also be the subject of the initial clause. So the sentence actually says that British colonialists are the capital of British Punjab - clearly not what was intended. 66.65.190.210 (talk) 21:05, 23 June 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Tollens (talk) 21:26, 23 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 23 June 2023 

message: Lahore has a GDP/PPP of 127 Billion USD not 84 Billion USD. Change 84 BILLION USD to 127 BILLION USD. https://investinpak.com/richest-city-in-pakistan/
Change GDP per Capita from 7550$ to 11545$.
As 
12700000000÷1100000
=11545.45≈11545
Muhammad Mahd (talk) 16:01, 22 November 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Can you find a more reliable source than some random listicle? Edward-Woodrow (talk) 23:13, 25 November 2023 (UTC)

text: Not done: The page's protection level has changed since this request was placed. Hyphenation Expert (talk) 18:12, 1 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 22 November 2023 

message: Capital is misspelled in the first line, change:
"Lahore (/ləˈhɔːr/ lə-HOR; Punjabi: لہور [ˈlɔ̀ːɾə̆]; Urdu: لاہور [laːˈɦɔːɾ] ⓘ) is the captial and largest city of the Pakistani province of Punjab."
to:
"Lahore (/ləˈhɔːr/ lə-HOR; Punjabi: لہور [ˈlɔ̀ːɾə̆]; Urdu: لاہور [laːˈɦɔːɾ] ⓘ) is the capital and largest city of the Pakistani province of Punjab." TokiSixskins (talk) 05:22, 30 November 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you. RegentsPark (comment) 16:33, 30 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 30 November 2023
Talk:Dynamic programming

message: The first paragraph of the second part and the article on algorithms states that dynamic programming is a
bottom-up approach, but later this article says dynamic programming may use bottom-up or top-down approaches.
--zeno 11:46, 9 Feb 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I've revised that section. It was very vague and somewhat incorrect. I hope there's less confusion now. Derrick Coetzee 20:18, 5 Oct 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Confusion 

message: I think this article suffers from bush-beating which is a common feature of computer language theory articles. If one closely examines the literature on DP, and compares it to algorithms for converting recursive programs into iterative (and thus, forgetful) programs, one will see a lot of overlap. The introduction here doesn't quite do the topic credit with words like 'paradigm' or 'optimization method'. It's an algorithm itself, and it operates on recursively defined data. That's concrete. You convert each sub-problem to also return its intermediates, then convert all sub-problems to re-usages of returned intermediates. Rinse and repeat. If the substructure is optimal, you get the optimum. 
DP should be a reliable device in your brain, but this article contributes greatly to the nebular thinking about it. This device is really important because it comprehensively solves a key problem and reminds people to observe limits of applicability. 184.19.20.241 (talk) 12:47, 1 October 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd also like to add that Bellman's equation (although possibly correct, hard to tell) is completely overloaded for the purpose and that optimal substructure is the correct condition for optimality of DP. Concerns about infinite problems are addressed by noting that DP can apply to both numerical and symbolic computations. When DP is applied to data that define symbolic terms, that's how you do it with infinite and continuous objects. 184.19.20.241 (talk) 13:11, 1 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Approach to this article
Talk:Super

message: Recently, in RC, I've been studying articles talking about 2 similar phrases that differ only in that one uses super and the other hyper. "Super" is Latin for "above" and "hyper" is Greek for "over". How are these terms interchangeable?? Any other pairs of prefixes of this kind?? 66.245.98.219 00:36, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Terminology (Super vs. Hyper) 

message: To User:Fastfission: You mean only the designs -- and not the bomb itself -- were called "The Super"? That's confusing. Anyways, there's no reference to "The Super" or "Super" at Nuclear weapon so I'm probably just gonna delete the reference here. Ewlyahoocom 08:11, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  H-Bomb and "The Super" 

message: Currently, this dismabiguation page links to superclass, another disambiguation page with only two links on it. That seems like a waste of a page, not to mention a hassle for anyone who has to go through the extra clicks. Is there any objection to just merging the content  of superclass here and making a redirect? 168.12.253.82 15:47, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Super vs. Superclass 

message: shouldn't that be the article title^^? Any takers? Randy6767 02:14, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  super (disambiguation) 

message: When talking about insurance, I once read 'super' and wondered what it is. When I read a reference article it turned out to be the Australian 'Superannuation' program. Is this worth to be included into the disambiguation article? --188.102.181.242 (talk) 10:30, 7 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Looking at wikt:super (I am not an Aussie), it says "(Australian, New Zealand, informal, uncountable) Short form of superannuation, the Australian/New Zealand retirement benefits or pension scheme." From that perspective, I'd say it can be added. – sgeureka t•c 10:57, 7 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Super short for 'Superannuation'? 

message: archive.is/4 RB9u OriginalSuperhuman Superman ReevesG.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:241:8801:50A0:3DD0:BA8C:F68F:599 (talk) 04:30, 12 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: ReevesG.
Talk:Common Era

message: As of this date, 2022-10-01, this article does not explain what BCE and CE actually mean. It's a history of the terms' usage, but the article assumes that people reading this article already understand what BCE and CE are. I was looking for a clear explanation of what BCE is -- how it is used, what that number means, how a given date is calculated, etc.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.220.233.223 (talk) 16:52, 1 October 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: It means the calendar era commonly used today. Do  and  not explain that sufficiently? --𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 21:08, 1 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: Yes, but what does it mean?

message: I've been cleaning up some very poorly written "citations" (like  [!]). There are plenty more to do, mañana.  But I'm concerned that the material I'm correcting reads to me like a WP:OR analysis of primary sources. "Earliest found" appears to be "the earliest that the contributing editor found. We really need to replace this with a secondary RS that makes the analysis. Anyone? 𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 20:33, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I have WP:WEASELed "is" to "may be". --𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 17:29, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Earliest found" aka Original research? 

message: * After cleaning out another "citation", I have decided to delete this, since it proves nothing either way:    If anyone disagrees, please explain. --𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 17:29, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Cleanup continues
Talk:California Institute of Technology

message: * The name of the current chair of the Board of Directors needs to be updated. :
* The previous chair, David Lee, has stepped down, and the new chair is David Thompson.:
* https://www.caltech.edu/about/news/david-lee-steps-down-as-chair-of-the-board-of-trustees:
Abenter (talk) 23:11, 3 December 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for making this request. This information seems to be unnecessary in the article so I've just removed it entirely. ElKevbo (talk) 01:31, 4 December 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  name of the Board's chair needs updating 

message: Curious whether trustee Charles W. Gates mentioned under History, Throop College, is the same Charles W. Gates with a Wikipedia article. Looks doubtful geographically and nobody else has linked it. The Gates (surname) is widespread.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:306:CD89:8710:359A:408:9444:BA15 (talk) 22:03, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: It is a different person, Charles Warner Gates (not Charles Winslow Gates) .  Antony–22 (talk⁄contribs) 02:38, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Charles W. Gates 

message: There is an RfC going on on whether the names the South Houses and North Houses at Caltech should be capitalized.  The question is whether these names are proper nouns, and whether the amount of sources capitalizing them is a "substantial majority".  Your comments and !votes are appreciated.  Antony–22 (talk⁄contribs) 03:49, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  RfC on capitalization of buildings 

message: After doing some research, I agree with ElKevbo that general mention of university prestige should be removed from the introduction of Wikipedia articles. Caltech's small size, however, speaks to its selectivity for which it's well-known. It's a feature of the research institution (not necessarily the university at the undergraduate level) and underlines all the institutional proceedings at Caltech per the article. I think this, at the very least, should remain. BorderlineRebel (talk) 14:16, 22 March 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I haven't argued that "general mention of university prestige should be removed from the introduction of Wikipedia articles." In alignment with current consensus, I object to the inclusion of material that makes claims of prestige based only on a Wikipedia editor's interpretation of ephemeral sources, particularly when this is a topic that is so well studied and documented by scholars and experts. ElKevbo (talk) 22:23, 22 March 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: ElKevbo I apologize for my misunderstanding. Check the page now. I'm really trying to give good information without suggesting prestige. The current intro doesn't suggest this. Let me know what you think! BorderlineRebel (talk) 01:13, 23 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Introduction 

message: Would San Andreas (film) count in any way? 149.20.252.132 (talk) 14:02, 28 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  In media and popular culture 

message: My apologies for a few seconds of erroneous changes, all reverted back. Please feel free to delete any track of the changes. K Kalan (talk) 02:41, 7 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Error
Talk:Djoser

message: * I have added the standard naming templates, as the image used was flagged as being possibly deleted (from 2004!). Markh 20:46, 25 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Names 

message: * Please can you provide up to date references for any additions – a 70 year old reference isn't exactly current. Also this is not an article about Imhotep Markh 17:02, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Imhotep Vs. Joseph 

message: The Ancient Egyptians didn't call their kings Pharaohs until well into the New Kingdom... over a thousand years later.  
Over a thousand years.
See the wiki entry Pharaoh.  It was a title in a letter to Aknenaten and only LATER than THIS became a title for a king.  Much later.
I do not believe it serves any good purpose to universally use the term Pharaoh as King.   It creates the impression that kings in the Old Kingdom were Pharaohs.  They were not.  It directly asserts that Zoser (Djoser) was Pharaoh.  He was not.
I think it should say "King."  
Maybe the word "Pharaoh" should be replaced with "King" but still link to "Pharaoh."
I don't know.
I won't change anything.
Hank01 22:09, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pharaoh 

message: does anyone have a better picture of the seated statue of djoser? --Hhityry Glewjtes Yojttj (talk) 22:20, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  pictures 

message: Anybody have an idea on when this man lived?  Nyttend (talk) 01:23, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dates 

message: The section titled "Djoser and Imhotep" claims Imhotep was Djoser's vizier. However, as far as I know, that was not one of the titles he held. "Chancellor" probably would be a better title of his to use here, but not "vizier". — al-Shimoni (talk) 06:12, 1 May 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vizier error 

message: A discussion is taking place to address the redirect :Pharoah dzoser. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 June 26#Pharoah dzoser until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.  1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 19:15, 26 June 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Pharoah dzoser" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]]
Talk:Orchid

message: The "ecology" section seems to imply that only the species of Orchidaceae that lack clorophyll are to be considered mycoheterotrophic, that's not the case. All orchids, at least as they germinate, are mycoheterotrophic, some lose the need to be as they grow (Orchis for example), others are mostly dependant on the symbiosis throughout their lives (most Cephalanthera), others are completely dependant, the latter being the category the article refers to.
I'd change it myself but my english is not the best and I'm new to editing Wikipedia Cardocca (talk) 20:16, 24 May 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Hello  I would be happy to add the statement "All orchids, at least as they germinate, are mycoheterotrophic...." if you would add a reference that I can access, here. Gderrin (talk) 21:35, 24 May 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you, this is freely accessible i believe. Cardocca (talk) 21:39, 6 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  All orchids are mycoheterotrophes 

message: Although old academic articles refer to some orchids as saprophytic, this is an obsolete term that should not be perpetuated in Wikipedia. There is no plant that directly consumes dead organic matter (saprophytic). Orchids are mycoheterotrophic. Some orchids depend on saprotrophic fungi. In these cases, the saprotrophic lifestyle is exercised by the fungus, not the plant. Further discussion on this incorrect terminology in the following article: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8137.1994.tb04272.x Flora and fauna man (talk) 12:43, 7 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  There are no saprophytic orchids 

message: How long do orchids live? 74.215.249.245 (talk) 21:01, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  lifespan of orchids 

message: The Page is Broken 2600:6C5C:6A00:2F2:3D6B:5C0F:4C4A:33DE (talk) 21:47, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for reporting this. Now fixed  Velella  Velella Talk   21:59, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fix the Page
Talk:John I, Duke of Brabant

message: Is the Battle of Woeringen listed here same as the Battle of Worringen listed on List of battles (alphabetical)? Ktsquare
----
The article says he was Duke of Lorraine, but he seems to be missing in the list Duke of Lorraine. Any hint? olivier 14:33, May 18, 2004 (UTC)
: See the second paragraph of Duke of Lorraine: only the dukes of Upper Lorraine are listed there. It might be better here to say that John was Duke of Lower Lorraine. Eugene van der Pijll 06:30, 19 May 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: According to the various language Wikipedias, he was:
::
Born In 	Year        	Died In   	Year      	Wiki
Leuven  	1252/1253   	Bar-le-Duc	3 May 1294	English
Brussels	1253        	Leuven    	3 May 1294	French
Leuven  	1254        	Bar-le-Duc	3 May 1294	Dutch
.       	1252 or 1253	.         	3 May 1294	German
Brussels	1254        	Antwerp   	3 May 1294	Esperanto
Brussels	1253        	Leuven    	3 May 1294	Portuguese
Brussels	1253        	Antwerp   	3 May 1294	Russian
Leuven  	1252/1253   	Leuven    	3 May 1294	Swedish
.       	1253        	.         	1294      	Japanese
More than enough discrepancies - two birthplaces, three death places, three versions of birth date. Only consistency is in death date. Has anyone a RELIABLE source for any of this? One almost certain inaccuracy in this English version is that he was wounded in an "encounter" at a marriage ceremony. It seems to have been a tournament at a marriage ceremony, and took place the previous year, on 12 Sept 1293. This happened at Bar-le-Duc, but it's unlikely he hung around there for 9 months waiting to die! Emeraude (talk) 15:38, 31 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Birth/death places/dates 

message: The article was marked as a Kingdom of France-related stub, but Brabant was never in France, but in the Holy Roman Empire. Could it be reclassified? Tom (talk) 09:43, 5 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Kingdom of France?
Talk:MC Ren

message: Yo Ren, tell em how it happened with you and cube when the cops pulled you over. They maced you and sat your and ice's asses on the curb. Searched your car and found nothing. So you got even with the most badass song known to man 128.12.196.53 (talk) 23:27, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Tell it like it is

message: It's the same description for both of them. I don't know which one is accurate or which page ripped off which, but it needs to be fixed.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.162.186.255 (talk) 08:07, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  The musical influences section is copy-pasted from Ice Cube's... 

message: How did he contribute to this album? He was an MC but did he also write lyrics? Thanks, Maikel (talk) 08:44, 17 September 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: NWA and the Posse