lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Category talk:Education in Washington (state)

message: The decision was to KEEP this category.
* :Category:Education_in_Washington -> :Category:Washington_public_education
:Keep—intended as a parent for not only :Category:Washington public education, but also :Category:Universities and colleges in Washington.  Allows these to be grouped together under the state category, as well as in :Category:United States education by state.  This format can apply to all state categories.  Postdlf 00:36, 19 Sep 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Is this ever going to have more than two members?  If not, I think these two should be listed directly in :Category:Washington, and have "United States universities and colleges by state" and "United States public education by state".  Can anyone name a few articles that might go here? -- Beland 06:17, 4 Oct 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: As we gain more content on state government and law, I'm sure we will eventually have articles on state departments of education, for one, not to mention notable private schools that are obviously neither universities nor public education.  Check out :Category:Education in Hawaii to see how a state-level education parent category can be used.  Postdlf 14:45, 11 Oct 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Archived discussion on deletion
Talk:Facets (album)

message: The introduction states that "an expanded two-disc version [was released] in 2003."  Then a track-listing is given for a "2004 reissue".  Which was it?
:My single disk CD (unfortunately not to hand for label details) has all 18 tracks listed as being on the 2 CD “expanded” edition… Don’t know which came out first, or if they were produced for different markets, but they both circulated in the U.K. Jock123 (talk) 21:44, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Small Date Discrepency 

message: The picture used on the page is of the CD cover - the actual original album is to be found in a plain brown sleeve, with a paper label attached to the middle of it, carrying the legend ‘“Facets” by Jim Croce’. Jock123 (talk) 22:02, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cover art picture 

message: "Hard Hearted Hannah (The Vamp of Milton Ager, Jack Yellen, Savannah)"... really?
I always thought it was just "Hard Hearted Hannah (The Vamp of Savannah)".  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.89.176.249 (talk) 02:53, 21 February 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Song title
Talk:Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

message: Some parts of this page appear to have been taken verbatim from the SJC's "About" page.  I'm not fully aware of the procedure for bringing this to someone's attention.  Any thoughts?  Sahasrahla 01:23, Oct 28, 2004 (UTC)
   State Rep. Lori Ehrlich is the State Representative for the Massachusetts 8th Essex District and is a vocal opponent of a new power plant being constructed in Salem.  It was announced in December of 2013 that the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court will hear the case on whether not to build or build the new plant in March of 2014.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 186.66.69.225 (talk) 01:48, 22 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Drafts have been seeded for the following missing Justices of the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court (many of whom also held other state offices, or played other parts in the history of the state):
Any improvements to these would be appreciated. Cheers! bd2412 T 11:19, 30 October 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Drafts for missing Justices of the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Talk:Hit (baseball)

message: According to the scoring rules, reaching on catcher's interference or because of obstruction do not result in the crediting of base hits.  Catcher's interference counts as no time at bat and no hit for the batter, and an error on the catcher.  Obstruction that allows the batter to reach first base is also no time at bat and no hit, and it's an error against the fielder who obstructs.
You are correct that a hit is credited when a batter reaches first and another runner is hit by the batted ball, putting that runner out for interference.
I'm deleting reference to catcher's inteference and obstruction. CharlieZeb 01:43, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: You're right...us umpires don't often crack open rule 10!  Thanks for the correction.  --Locarno 13:54, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Catcher's interference

message: I added Rose as the lead image, followed by Ichiro. While this is a huge controversy, I did not add it to the Major League hits page; rather, this is in the same fashion as see in the "home run" article, which features an image of both Barry Bonds and Sadaharu Oh. Not trying to spark a debate, I think this does the article justice like the home run article. Thechased (talk) 01:19, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rose, Ichiro
Talk:Z100

message: I nominated the article 96.1 KZEL for deletion.  It is a radio station in Eugene.  The consensus of users was that that article was not worthy of deletion.  If that is ture of 96.1 KZEL, it is probably true of this article also.  Of course, I think both should be deleted, but that's not the opinion of the community.  •→Iñgólemo←• 02:39, 2004 Oct 28 (UTC)
:Z-100 does meet the standard of notability, at least in my opinion. It's one of the top stations in New York City. Personally, I think most radio stations should be included. Rhobite 02:49, Oct 28, 2004 (UTC)
http://www.iheart.com/#/live/1469/?autoplay=true  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.54.83.186 (talk) 16:30, 14 November 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Comments

message: The usage of  is under discussion, see Talk:WHTZ -- 76.65.128.222 (talk) 05:27, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: "{{noredirect|Z100}}"
Talk:Spontaneous emission

message: How do they know it's nonradiative? lysdexia 02:55, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Nonradiative

message: The following was recently added by MuthuKutty (talk • contribs):
The closest match I can find is the Smith-Purcell effect, which is completely different. The effect described does occur, but may be misnamed. References? --Christopher Thomas 02:22, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Purcell effect

message: Shouldn't the formula for the rate of spontaneous emission in terms of the dipole moment have n^2 rather than n in the numerator? I'm pretty sure it does; if so can someone (else) fix it please.   Interferometrist (talk) 16:51, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mistake in formula
Talk:Rogers Locomotive and Machine Works

message: I just removed the following from the table of preserved locomotives:
:  Was never owned by Nashville, Chattanooga & St Louis.  Was built new for the Prescott & Arizona Central as their #3.  Sold to Sierra Railway #3 in 1897.  Presently owned by State of California at Railtown 1897 State Historic Park, at the old Sierra Railway shops in Jamestown, California, part of the California State Railroad Museum.
:Signed - Kyle K. Wyatt - Curator of History & Technology, California State Railroad Museum.
I will integrate this into the article text shortly, but wanted to move it out of the table to fix the formatting.  Slambo (Speak) 11:52, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Here's a web link relative to the same --Lordkinbote 15:33, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Way cool.  Integrated the reference and sent a note of thanks to the original contributor via the CSRM website.  Slambo (Speak) 16:20, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Comments on preservation 
Talk:Indianapolis Colts

message: I don't feel that this section provides any significant content for the article as a whole and is largely insignificant given the history of the franchise and the lack of similar sections for other NFL teams.  Barring any objections, I will be deleting this section in the coming days.  MrJ567 (talk) 03:52, 27 March 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Delete Section Regarding Anthem Protest 

message: The Colts NFL championship in '68 which was followed by a loss to the Jets in III is counted as a league championship in the right hand column, but the Vikings NFL championship in '69 which was followed by a loss to the Chiefs in IV is not counted. These are identical situations, so one needs to be changed. I would lean towards the Colts one being changed from 5 to 4.2601:240:8480:3BC0:603B:A8BF:3BF9:BEB1 (talk) 06:43, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. The Colts page as stated is incorrect. Also, the pages for the Kansas City Chiefs, Las Vegas Raiders, and, as noted, the Minnesota Vikings all correctly count the number of league championships. That is, they do not count as a league championship a season in which they lost the AFL/NFL Super Bowl Championship game.  Let's wait a while for comments, and depending on the comments, make the change. Ambient182 (talk) 16:02, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: The problem is that the Baltimore Colts and the Indianapolis Colts are separate teams with the same logo and nickname, but with different histories.  The page for the Indianapolis franchise shouldn’t count the Baltimore Colts championships as their own. 71.114.123.162 (talk) 02:17, 4 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Inconsistency in counting league championships 

message: I read that Mike Jansen, the long time stadium announcer for the Lucas Oil Stadium and Colts game announcer, was fired early in the 2022-23 season. The article still lists him as the current announcer. See: https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/nfl/fired-colts-announcer-s-super-bowl-ring-will-be-auctioned-saturday-current-bid-7-000/ar-AA14g7Nz?ocid=winp1taskbar&cvid=3546ad9bb1904c95b4858e4d71fade01&rc=1 Indyhotdog (talk) 17:36, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Stadium announcer 

message: The redirect Jamal Woods has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at  until a consensus is reached.  Debartolo2917 (talk) 23:31, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  "[[:Jamal Woods]]" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]] 

message: The Indianapolis franchise was founded on March 29, 1984. 71.114.123.162 (talk) 02:15, 4 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wrong founding date
Talk:Magic point

message: It's my opinion that this article is an unnessisary stub. The basics are covered in the mana article, and It might be better to add the information in this article to the 'mana in fiction' section of the mana article, and then redirect Magic points to that article. I did this on my own, and it was undone by someone who disagreed, so I thought I would open it up for discussion. CB Droege 04:19, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)

message: It says Paper Mario, and Paper Mario: TTYD are informal sequels, shouldn't they be spiritual sequels?--66.233.13.77 02:46, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  What? INFORMAL SEQUEL! 

message: It would be nice to have a section on where the various ideas for magic points first appeared. Like what game was the first to use the word "mana" and where did its creators get the idea? from mythology or from fantasy books which also only started using the term relatively recently (in the last 30 years). 121.44.212.152 (talk) 06:18, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Origin 

message: Somebody try to change this article to "Mana Point". seriously? Mana is just one of alternate name of "Magic Point" or MP use in Blizzard's games. why you want to change it to "Mana Point". Are you a WoW troll or something? Romangelo (talk) 23:52, 30 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Magic Point is the real original 

message: In Magic: The Gathering, a notable trading card game, mana can be of various colors, and is generated on the fly when it is needed (usually by using terrains), rather than a limited resource that is depleted as spells are cast.
Each spell or ability that uses mana also states what color the mana needs to be. For example a creature may have a summon cost of 2 green mana, and 3 of any color. When the player wishes to summon said creature, he has to generate a total of 5 mana, at least 2 of which need to be green.
I think this is an interesting system to mention as it adds an extra layer to the otherwise linear "spend mana to do this" system, and makes it just as important to ensure that you have the correct mana available as it is to ensure that you have enough.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.83.178.100 (talk) 11:31, 21 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Worth mentioning alternate systems?
Talk:Topological sorting

message: This article currently contains this sentence:
:Topological orderings are also closely related to the concept of a linear extension of a partial order in mathematics.
Well, duhh, of course, that's obvious. The question is: how do topological orderings differ from linear extensions? Is there any difference at all?  Perhaps topological sorting is defined only for finite sets/dags/orders, while linear extensions are more general, defined for infinite sets/dags/orders? Is there anything else, besides this finite/countable divide? 67.198.37.16 (talk) 17:25, 26 February 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Topological orderings are derived from directed acyclic graphs. Linear extensions are derived from partially ordered sets. Those are two different kinds of objects, and are not even in a one-to-one relation with each other (many different DAGs might correspond to a single partial order). I don't think finiteness or generality comes into it. But also it's a disciplinary divide: if you talk to a computer scientist, they will probably know what topological sorting is but not what a linear extension is, and if you talk to a mathematician it's the opposite. —David Eppstein (talk) 17:37, 26 February 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Relation to linear extension? 

message: The name "topological sorting" strongly suggests a connection with the mathematical subject of topology; yet such a connection is neither acknowledged nor disclaimed anywhere in the article. (Nor, for that matter, is it addressed in the topology article.) I would appreciate it if somebody who understands the origin of the term "topological sorting" (in particular, whether it has anything to do with topology) could shed some light on this, preferably in the text of the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.0.200.174 (talk • contribs) 
:See http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/30659/why-is-topological-sorting-topological — the likely origin is in the meaning of "topology" that refers to the connectivity structure of a network, not to topology as a branch of mathematics. But without a reliable source we can't add anything to the article, and cstheory.stackexchange.com is not a reliable source. —David Eppstein (talk) 02:40, 20 March 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: "Graph topology" refers to the connectivity of a graph, just as geometric topology refers to the connectivity of manifolds and solids. A topological sort takes a partial ordering and generates a total ordering such that all the arrows still point in one direction, so in a sense it is a total ordering embedding that preserves the (ordered) topology of the graph.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.60.126.246 (talk) 02:27, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Relationship to topology?
Talk:Un-Led-Ed

message: I love Dread Zep, but this is written as a fan page. It's language and tone is totally inappropriate for an encyclopedia article. PurpleChez Oct 1 2009  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 146.145.63.66 (talk) 13:28, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Fan page

message: Was Jack Royerton really the studio host for this recording? The statement about Royerton was added by an anonymous IP (possibly Royerton himself) who has a history of tagging articles with unsourced claims relating to him (see this thread at COIN for more info). Might be wise to check the original album (I would, but I don't own it) to see if Royerton is actually mentioned in it or if the claim that he was the studio host is a hoax. LonelyBoy2012 (talk) 03:47, 27 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Jack Royerton? 

message: Since this is an encyclopedia article I think it would be appropriate to list the members by their real names also. It would make the article feel less like a fan article and give the reader the members actual names. Thoughts?
Also, there is some inconsistency between this article and the one on DZ. Here it is Fresh Cheese 'n' Cheese and in the DZ article it is simply Fresh Cheese. Which is correct?THX1136 (talk) 16:22, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Real names
Talk:Jayapura

message: If Jaya means "victory", what does "pura" mean? --Menchi 03:27, 14 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Etymology 

message: The map at Image:New guinea named.PNG shows Jayapura as a dot on the Northern coast. Maybe it belongs in the article. Lou Sander 03:54, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Include a map? 

message: The author seems to have confused daily sunshine hours with average day length. This comfiguration with extreme rainfall and continuous sunshine is obviously incorrect. Sunshime hours should be removed. Vieaut (talk) 23:42, 14 November 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Climate Table
Talk:Apparent weight

message: I see that "apparent weight" is now the "force the body exerts on whatever it rests on". Does everyone agree that this is identical to the second definition of Weight, which is "the force an object exerts on a scale, and is equal to the force required to support it"? 81.159.109.119 (talk) 13:00, 24 December 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: It's not the same. Weight is the force a body exerts due to gravity. Apparent weight is the changed force that a body exerts when an upward or downward force affects a body. It is extremely important in various fields of study, including fluid mechanics and the physics of space (near weightlessness). SilverserenC 19:11, 24 December 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: The definition of weight that I quoted from the article Weight also varies when an upward or downward force affects the body. The article explains as much. It also explains that  "This force measured by force-scales is the same as what some other sources term the object's 'apparent weight'". I ask again, what, if anything, is the difference? Give a specific instance when "force the body exerts on whatever it rests on" is not the same as "the force required to support it". 
81.159.109.119 (talk) 20:23, 24 December 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: When the body is undergoing acceleration. e.g. in elevator accelerating downward. Nobody Ent (Gerardw) 20:55, 24 December 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: The force required to support it (by the elevator) is still the same as the force it exerts (on the elevator). 86.181.174.116 (talk) 03:01, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: But the elevator isn't supporting the body -- it's only partially supporting it. Nobody Ent 22:02, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: [Sorry, I have deleted my attempted replies because I have really lost track of the argument after all this time.] 86.160.223.137 (talk) 23:14, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

text: The force required to support it is something completely different. The name for that is the normal force. SilverserenC 21:13, 24 December 2011 (UTC)

text: I think the second Weight definition is in the context of how the weight quantity is measured. Apparent weight is ... well, it depends. Which is why I haven't been a fan of this article. Nobody Ent (Gerardw) 20:55, 24 December 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: It would probably be better to focus on the particle aspects of apparent weight (and potentially near weightlessness), as those are the parts of it that are wholly different from everything else. SilverserenC 21:13, 24 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Identical to "weight"?
Talk:Go Simpsonic with The Simpsons

message: How can this album be considered to be of the "opera" or "musique concrete" genres? – PeeJay 20:26, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Genre? 

message: It looks like some of the longer song titles under the "Track Listing" heading are abbreviated. Could someone change that so all of the song titles are fully written out? I'd do it myself but I don't really have the time to look them up, I gotta get back to doing homework. Thanks. 96.65.73.66 (talk) 17:45, 24 April 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Song Titles 

message: I know it’s only a coincidence since this album came out in 1999, but it’s still kind of awkwardly funny that they made the word “Simpsonic” look like that. 2604:2D80:6984:3800:0:0:0:121B (talk) 14:53, 28 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Triple parentheses]]
Talk:Silver Legion of America

message: Why is there no mention of Leon Lewis, the work of the likes of Steven J Ross (Hitler in Los Angeles) and Laura D Rosenzweig Hollywood’s Spies, and so on? And of the sabotage of a number of ammunition plants, and so on? Earnulf Gery (talk) 12:18, 18 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Leon Lewis
Talk:Intensification of the class struggle under socialism

message: From Stalin's report "О недостатках партийной работы и мерах ликвидации троцкистских и иных двурушников" ("On the drawbacks of Party work and measures of liquidaion of Trotskyite and other kinds of double-dealers") at the Februry-March 1937 Plenum of TseKa VKP(b).
Необходимо разбить и отбросить прочь гнилую теорию о том, что с каждым нашим продвижением вперед классовая борьба у нас должна будто бы все более и более затухать, что по мере наших успехов классовый враг становится будто бы все более и более ручным. Это – не только гнилая теория, но и опасная теория, ибо она усыпляет наших людей, заводит их в капкан, а классовому врагу дает возможность оправиться для борьбы с советской властью. Наоборот, чем больше будем продвигаться вперед, чем больше будем иметь успехов, тем больше будут озлобляться остатки разбитых эксплуататорских классов, тем скорее будут они идти на более острые формы борьбы, тем больше они будут пакостить советскому государству, тем больше они будут хвататься за самые отчаянные средства борьбы как последние средства обреченных. Mikkalai 06:18, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: There is something wrong with the phase... Mikkalai 16:34, 12 Nov 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  untitled 
Wikipedia talk:Requests for adminship/ScudLee

message: #Definitely. Good, solid admin material.  +sj+ 06:35, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)

message: I removed the following support vote because it is way too late to vote now. I'm not sure he's even active anymore. Tuf-Kat 00:57, 7 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Late support
Talk:Lust for Life (Iggy Pop album)

message: Post-punk this CD? --88.9.13.124 (talk) 16:15, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

message: This sentence is ambiguous and needs to be clarified:
"The Lust for Life sessions took place soon after the release of The Idiot and completion of a tour in support of the album in 1977, either in late April and early May or in June, according to various sources."
I take it the tour was in support of The Idiot, rather than some fund-raising tour in support of Lust for Life? This is open to possible confusion.
Does "either in late April and early May or in June" refer to the LfL sessions or the tour mentioned?
Regarding the uncertain date of the tour, the best thing is to state what we know: "in the first half of the year", and use the footnotes to state the contradiction between sources.
The PopDoc 14:37, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Production section 