lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Fermentation theory

message: I've been looking at expanding the content of this article, since it is classified as a stub and has multiple issue markings that I believe I can work to remedy. I am planning on tidying up the lead and also adding in a new section devoted to the history of fermentation theories detailing both a theory from Justus Von Liebig (who came before Pasteur) and some of Pasteur's experiments and theories preceding his work on spontaneous generation. 
Jmalysa (talk)  —Preceding undated comment added 03:29, 13 February 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed Edits 

message: Bran4232,
So far this article seems to be coming along really well. I compared the most recent revision of the article to your first revision and it looks like you have added a good amount of information. Kudos! I see that you have used the first two article that pop up when you Google search “Fermentation Theory”. I also found an article on the Wiley online library on Fermentation and practical application. I have posted the pdf link below. If possible, it may be helpful to this page if you add a section on application and use this journal as a great source of information. I have not taken the time to read much of it but hopefully it is helpful! Also, maybe under the “What the theory is” section, describe the process of the theory or the process of spontaneous generation. I've also found a neat little diagram that its very basic for some readers. This diagram is located in the other link posted below. Just some suggestions of how to expand on the article or make it colorful. I hope this helps in some way, but overall a good article for the very little amount of information available. 
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/j.2050-0416.1932.tb05414.x/pdf
http://enlightenmentindividuals.weebly.com/germ-theory-of-fermentation.html
--OKRVA15 (talk) 03:41, 30 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Peer Review for User Bran4232 

message: Walkerc84
I agree with thelegend27.  I think if you can find the information that it would be good to add a section that goes into the detail of how the process works for the some of the different uses that you mentioned in last section.  Other than that, the article is a vast improvement.  The visuals are nice and not too overbearing, while the information is pertinent and very informative.
Walkerc84 (talk) 13:26, 8 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Peer Review
Talk:Spiros Vondas

message: I have opened a discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Fictional characters#Redirecting articles on %5Bmostly%5D minor The Wire characters about either redirecting this article to List of The Wire characters or turning it into a stub. If anyone is following this article I hope you can weigh in there. 61.18.156.43 (talk) 03:48, 9 April 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposal to redirect this article to [[List of The Wire characters]]
Talk:Social and Vocational Skills

message: I removed the "importance" tag since this seems to be a common school subject in Scotland. I added one source, more can be found via Google. 
However, the article needs expansion, for example it should explain what is actually taught in such courses.
Sorted as part of the Notability wikiproject. --B. Wolterding 15:02, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  notability established
Talk:Red Devils (Parachute Regiment)

message: This seems a strange phrase. What would be the alternative: that they were forced into it?? Incidentally, the last couple of sentences are teetering on the edge of POV; true they may be, but that doesn't make them encyclopedic. Loganberry (Talk) 01:53, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  "All volunteers"? 

message: I have to conclude from the picture and the mentioning of Aldershot that those are British Soldiers. I do not even know by now which branche they belong to. Please add in vital information like this. Thx.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Derrenfer (talk • contribs) 10:28, 6 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  'Categorization of the Red Devils'
Talk:James Dunlop

message: Some other links are:
the Australian Dictionary of Biography Online
http://www.adb.online.anu.edu.au/biogs/A010322b.htm
and
Astronomical and Meteorological Workers in New South Wales, 1778-1860
http://www.austehc.unimelb.edu.au/fam/1527.html
00:02, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: A temporary subpage at User:Polbot/fjc/James Dunlop was automatically created by a perl script, based on this article at the Biographical Directory of Federal Judges. The subpage should either be merged into this article, or moved and disambiguated. Polbot (talk) 19:44, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Bot-created subpage
Talk:Force-free magnetic field

message: Why is it written that \nabla\times\mathbf{B}=\alpha\mathbf{B} ? This is impossible mathematically.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Davidjonsson (talk • contribs) 11:35, 21 June 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: It is possible mathematically. See here. CoronalMassAffection (talk) 18:24, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  A vector can't be scaled to its curl
Talk:Geiger–Müller tube

message: The following comments copied from Talk:Alpha particle. Vsmith 14:29, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: The article has now been updated with additional diagrams and text. Alpha particles do penetrate the end window, but end window tubes are not the only ones in common use. The article has been expanded to cover the many types of tube and the different particle interactions. The article on the G-M counter has a link to the UK HSE site which describes the uses that GM tubes can be put to. The article on alpha particles contains much useful information including the Bragg curve and peak for alpha. Dougsim (talk) 12:08, 10 November 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Update 2012

message: Hi everyone.
The paragraph "Quenching and dead time"
features the sentence:
"This effectively causes a loss of counts at sufficiently high count rates and limits the G-M tube to a count rate of between 10^4 to 10^5 counts,[4] depending on its characteristic."
A rate is counts per time.
I can't just add "1/s" without consultion a source.
(Hope i'm using the discussion feature the right way - doing this the first time)
Regards,
Martin  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Orby1 (talk • contribs) 12:32, 27 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mistake needs correction (original source needed) 

message: Suggest change nav template to  - more appropriate than electronic devices. It will then be with the other rad detectors Dougsim (talk) 08:40, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Change nav template
Talk:Doreen Massey (geographer)

message: NOTE: There is a photo on Massey's profile at the Open University, which is linked at the bottom of the article. Eyedubya (talk) 11:32, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Photo

message: on the Open University, OpenSpace Research Centre website, if someone would like to incorporate/reference etc:
http://www.open.ac.uk/researchcentres/osrc/news/doreen-massey-1944-2016
Obituries may appear in due course as she only died on the 11th March 2016  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 146.90.142.186 (talk) 08:44, 13 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Announcement of death
Talk:Georgi–Glashow model

message: maybe a picture could help clear things up for the layman.
please understand that i have a good understanding of high school physics, like W=Fd kind of stuff, and past that i can't do the math;p
Z0wb13 (talk) 01:57, 23 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  picture, please:) 

message: I do not understand how gauge fields can be embedded explicitly using matrices. Maybe a short paragraph about it please? 42.61.226.67 (talk) 07:57, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  help
Talk:Gibbs algorithm

message: This page mentions two things: The Gibbs Algorithm and the Gibbs Distribution. In my opinion, both are important and should be separated. According to various Markov Random Field literature, the Gibbs distribution takes the form of:
 P(f) = Z^{-1} \times e^{-\frac{1}{T} U(f)} 
where
 Z = \sum_{f \in F} e^{-\frac{1}{T} U(f)} 
is a normalizing factor. T is a constant called the temperature, and U(f) is an energy function. For a specific choice of U(f), this leads to the (Gaussian) Normal_distribution.
Maybe the Gibbs distrubution should redirect to the Gibbs_measure (Unsigned, User:146.50.1.141, January 2007) 
:Now fixed. linas (talk) 21:16, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Gibbs measure

message: This article states that the Gibbs Algorithm is different from the Gibbs Sampler. But I encountered various interpretations of Markov Random Fields in terms of maximizing the Entropy, which is often defined as
 H = -\sum_i p_i \log p_i 
This makes the Gibbs algorithm probably a special case of Markov chain Monte Carlo iterations. For an interpretation of Markov Random Fields in terms of Entropy see for example here  op page 5/6. (Unsigned, User:146.50.1.141, January 2007)
---------
On a similar note the article states H is the 'average log probability'. The expression given (entropy) is the negative of that quantity. This makes the language about 'minimising the average log probability' confusing - since we should actually be maximising it. - Summary, I think there is a sign error.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.25.109.195 (talk) 11:54, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Gibbs Algorithm vs Gibbs Sampler
Talk:Gupta–Bleuler formalism

message: The external link at the bottom of the page (http://daarb.narod.ru/qed-eng.html) appears to be a link to original research and not particularly relevant to the page. I'll remove it. K igor k (talk) 07:06, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

message: If we include gauge covariance, we realize a photon can have three possible polarizations (two transverse and one longitudinal (i.e. parallel to the 4-momentum)). This is given by the restriction k\cdot \epsilon=0. However, the longitudinal component is merely unphysical gauge. While it would be nice to define a stricter restriction than the one given above which only leaves the two transverse components, it is easy to check that this can't be defined in a Lorentz covariant manner because what is transverse in one frame of reference isn't transverse anymore in another.
To resolve this difficulty, first look at the subspace with three polarizations. The sesquilinear form restricted to it is merely semidefinite, which is better than indefinite. In addition, the subspace with zero norm turns out to be none other than the gauge degrees of freedom. So, define the physical Hilbert space to be the quotient space of the three polarization subspace by its zero norm subspace. This space has a positive definite form, making it a true Hilbert space.
What is this in math? I can't understand it when it is expressed in everyday casual English without symbols or full description. The way it's written, it's more an evaluative summary for experts. 84.226.185.221 (talk) 13:29, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  What is this in math
Talk:Institute of Physics Michael Faraday Medal and Prize

message: The missing years for Guthrie Lectures did not have a lecture.  It is possible to see -- from the published lectures -- that Patrick Maynard Stuart Blackett is the 24th lecture, which corresponds to the list. I have added "no lecture" for the three years that did not have a lecture (but have not found any documentation for the fact that these years were skipped.)
Sdc870 (talk) 19:12, 4 April 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Removed Expand list|date=August 2008

message: Added some, but not all, external links to Guthrie Lectures that were published in the Proceedings of the Royal Society.  Undoubtedly more could be added.
Sdc870 (talk) 19:12, 4 April 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Should be possible to find additional published Guthrie lectures

message: The proper name is "Michael Faraday Medal and Prize".  In principle, the title of the page should change, as well as the disambiguation link (and a "redirect") for the diverse pages that already use "Faraday Medal and Prize").  (I do not know how to do these things -- so I hope that a knowledgeable person will help!) Sdc870 (talk) 19:19, 4 April 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Done.  Velella  Velella Talk   19:23, 4 April 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Page Title is Wrong
Talk:Rachel Pulido

message: Propose merging to Bill Oakley. This was previously AFDed, and a consensus was reached to merge. However, 10 years later, that was reverted. I'm tempted to revert and call it a day, but since that decision is now 13 years old, I've started a merge proposal. CLYDE TALK TO ME/STUFF DONE 03:40, 29 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merger proposal
Talk:David Sacks (writer)

message: "showrunning" maybe a noun jobtitle in tv-speak, but such jargon is not encyclopedic.  Faulty, nonparallel predication in bio section in run-on sentences does not even meet hs Eng comp standards.  I can't stop to fix these now.  If the gentle reader has the time and licks, please, be my guest.  rags (talk) 15:24, 13 February 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  jargon 

message: :The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
The result of the move request was: Moved (non-admin closure) >>> Extorc.talk 13:44, 30 May 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: David Sacks →  – Not the primary topic over David O. Sacks, who consistently has 10x the pageviews. Walt Yoder (talk) 02:47, 24 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 24 May 2023
Talk:HERA-B

message: I marked this as a stub as I think a lot can be learned from HERA-B and its alleged failure. Unfortunately no reference is given. Pkoppenb (talk) 10:48, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Stub

message: I suggest to add some information and updated references (including the one marked as missing). Changes are underlined.
 Redactrice at DESY (talk) 16:37, 2 November 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Done  PK650 (talk) 01:46, 12 December 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Editing suggestions 

message: * HERA
* H1
* ZEUS
* HERMES
 
:Category:Particle experiments
:Category:B physics
:Category:Particle physics
:Category:Experimental particle physics
Redactrice at DESY (talk) 16:39, 2 November 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  See also
Talk:Hidden subgroup problem

message: I recently came across this research paper that claims to solve this problem in the general case in polynomial time with a quantum computer.
If someone with more expertise could look at it, and if it's valid update the pages for cryptography schemes like some of the lattice problems that can be reduced to HSP to say they're not quantum secure, that would be neat 
Here's the arxiv paper: https://arxiv.org/abs/2204.03295 31.112.125.8 (talk) 18:47, 21 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  General quantum solution in polynomial time.
Talk:Homestake experiment

message: Would it be an idea to either update the article to SI-units, or include a conversion within paranthesises? I came here specifically because I needed to know how much perchloroethylene was used in the experiment. Being a European scientist I then had to find an external converter from gallons to cubic meters. It's my understanding (from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style_%28dates_and_numbers%29#Scientific_and_technical_units ) that SI units are generally to be used in articles regarding science, but not being an experienced editor I didn't want to make changes without checking first.
/Greger
85.235.1.129 (talk) 09:19, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Units 

message: "The first response from the scientific community was that either Bahcall or Davis had made a mistake."
:Surely not the whole scientific community? Years before (in 1967), Bruno Pontecorvo had written: 
::“From an observational point of view the ideal object is the sun. If the oscillation length is smaller than the radius of the sun region effectively producing neutrinos, direct oscillations will be smeared out and unobservable. The only effect on the earth’s surface would be that the flux of observable sun neutrinos must be two times smaller than the total (active and sterile) neutrino flux.” Ssscienccce  (talk) 11:54, 17 July 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  First response
Talk:Horrendous Space Kablooie

message: --CopyToWiktionaryBot (talk) 07:21, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  2007-11-30 Automated pywikipediabot message 

message: Please discuss here whether this article needs to be merged, and if so, where to merge it to.  For previous discussion of this, see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Horrendous Space Kablooie.  Keeper  |  76  |  Disclaimer 21:27, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Possible merge?
Talk:Static routing

message: I don't think the comment about RIP should be on this page.  RIP is not a static routing protocol.
72.130.101.76 (talk) 17:05, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I mean, what syntax is this?  "or X and when you using RIP to configure the router in rip mode".  Where's the verb?  I have tried for a minute to find some meaning on that phrase, and gave it up.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.60.146.241 (talk) 11:57, August 30, 2007 (UTC) 
I think that windows xp is more widespread OS and analogous examples should have been given how to configure static routes there. (route command). Linux also have similar capabilities (maybe even more extensive). -Yyy (talk) 14:40, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

message: All this may be true and correct.
It just means exactly NOTHING. Instead of some VERY SPECIFIC and thus absolutely useless to the real world Cisco commands, a generic explanation in plain English should be provided. This is WIKIPEDIA and NOT Cisco Network Academy!  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.70.177.64 (talk) 08:30, 10 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gobbledygook
Talk:Hyperspace (book)

message: Could someone say how many higher dimensions there may be? Apart from higher "spatial" dimensions (eg tesseract, 4-cube, 4-sphere, 5-cube etc. upto Hilbert space[infinite dimensions]), are there higher non-spatial dimensions? If so, what types? Does he speak about these in the book?Yottamaster (talk) 16:44, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I own this book. The dimensions discussed are spatial (plus the temporal dimension). Dimensions beyond the 3 spatial and 1 temporal are theoretical, existing in theoretical physics only. There's no actual proof of any of these additional dimensions. Incidentally, this sort of question is not really appropriate. Article talk pages are for addressing how to improve the article, not for discussing the subject. -- Scjessey (talk) 19:25, 14 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  How many higher dimensions and what types?
Talk:Immittance

message: --CopyToWiktionaryBot 02:55, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  2007-02-7 Automated pywikipediabot message 

message: Is the Relationships among Immittance Values section really relevant? or should it go? --catslash (talk) 23:05, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Relationships among immittance values
Talk:Port of Dubuque

message: I am starting this page on the Port of Dubuque; it has so much happening that it deserves an article of its own now! I know a great deal about the Port/Ice Harbor area, so I think this provides a good summary of what's happening there, although it changes rather frequently. DBQer 00:55, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

message: I think the sentence about the new Mississippi River Bridge is incredibly misleading and should be removed.  While preliminary engineering and environmental assessments may have been done, the project is probably closer to 20+ years from happening.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.43.6.35 (talk) 18:36, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Julien Dubuque Bridge
Talk:Inelastic scattering

message: The definition given is the correct one for chemistry and condensed matter, but not for particle physics. In particle physics you will call it elastic scattering even if the incident and the scattered particle has different energy. It is only inelastic if the total energy of the particles involved in the scattering process is not conserved, for example if there is pair-production or annihilations.
Example: From the chemistry point of view, Compton scattering is an inelastic process, because the photon loses (gains) energy when it scatter on the electron, but from the particle physics point of view (or terminologi) it is called an elastic process, because the total energi is conserved.
130.225.29.254 (talk) 14:06, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Different terminologies
Talk:Institute for High Energy Physics

message: In the Bugorski article itself dosages for the accident are given in Grays - following from Talk page:
"The radiation dose quoted should be in Gray, or more correctly, Sievert. The rad (radiation absorbed dose) is an archaic measurement discouraged by the SI group. The Sievert is the dose equivalent in living tissue - it's discussed on Wikipedia [...]"
- so we should do that here too, right? Infojunkie23 (talk) 03:37, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Dosage Units
Talk:My Screw Up

message: I've tried to reduce the original research in the "Homage to The Sixth Sense" section.  I've rewritten it to try and simply summarize what is presented in the episode, and not synthesize conclusions.  I suspect it still needs work -- one can become blind to OR after spending time with primary source material.
There are a few things which I very intentionally removed, and I wanted to note why:
"Before J.D. is dismissed by Dr. Cox, he is seen standing at Mr. Taylor's bed." It's not the same actor.  As noted above, the easiest way to tell is by looking for facial hair.  Mr. Taylor (the wheelchair patient with the irregular heart beat) had no mustache; the patient in the bed does.
"Elliot looks at Cox curiously ... unaware of Ben's presence".  On my first viewing, I supposed this was just because Ben dropped his act when she turned around.  This was getting too close to original analysis for my taste.
The entire second-to-last paragraph: Aside from containing uncited analysis, it duplicated previously mentioned material.
The "nature of Ben's postmortem appearances" part.  As it said, this is never explained.  It might be Cox is having the breakdown mentioned, it might be a benign figment of his imagination, or it might be just another one of the show's frequent use of visual poetic license.  Without some kind of source, anything we say on this is speculation.
Respectfully submitted, 
—DragonHawk (talk|hist) 02:41, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removing original research 

message: While researching the current college fad of playing "Gay Chicken," I found | a reference that suggests this episode may be the first recorded incidence of "Gay Chicken" on TV, and maybe one of the first recorded references to the game ever. I haven't seen the episode itself, though there is a clip of the scene on YouTube. Can anyone confirm that this clip is indeed from this episode, and if so, have there been other references to the fad in the series? 
If this episode is the source of the game, this probably should be indicated in the "cultural references" section. kevyn (talk) 22:32, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes it was in this episode, and no, there haven't been any other references to it in the show as far as I can remember--Jac16888Talk 00:55, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks! I appreciate the info. kevyn (talk) 06:16, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Gay Chicken?
Talk:Sayyid Syeed

message: This page is almost entirely a copy and paste job from the ISNA biography page, and needs original wording. The subject, Sayyid M. Syeed, is a prominent individual that does, indeed, warrant a wikipresence, but this page needs extensive refinement. --RumiNationZ 19:25, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Questionable Sources