lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Xisuthrus

message: Unless there are objections, I will redirect this to Utnapishtim soon. It uses obsolete spellings (now universally Ziusudra, which is already a redirect) and non-Mesopotamian identifications ("Chronos"?), and at least part of it may well be a copyvio. (I am unable to verify this at the moment, but the source text seems to be Dundes, Alan (ed) (1988). The Flood Myth. Berkeley : University of California Press. ISBN 0520059735.)
:I see I had a slight misunderstanding here: the source for this is of Greek derivation, hence the spelling. I'll add content here for now, but in the future it really ought to be merged. TCC (talk) (contribs) 01:51, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I disagree. Utnapishtim is plainly just Ziusudra rendered into Akkadian; the names mean the same thing. They're exactly the same character even if the name does not appear in this form in the Sumerian king list. I'd support retitling Utnapishtim to Ziusudra however, since the latter is the "original" and therefore I feel ought to be given primacy. I'm afraid that "Utnapishtim" is rather better known, though, so I have little hope of support for a move. TCC (talk) (contribs) 06:17, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

text: I'll open a move discussion on Talk:Utnapishtim then. TCC (talk) (contribs) 05:08, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Delete content
Talk:SM4 (cipher)

message: This is not true. The SMS4 algorithm is published on website of Chinese cryptography deparment. Go to check the following website and change your wrong argument.
http://www.oscca.gov.cn/UpFile/200621016423197990.pdf
: what, exactly, is not true? Funkyj 07:12, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Talk

message: There is a WAPI page. Why is this information here also? The Register article is not referenced. Anyone have any problems with eliminating the 2 sentences that start with "According to an article on The Register..." and "One thing that sets the WAPI proposal apart..." because neither statement have anything to do with the SMS4 algorithm? Hughesjp (talk) 12:56, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  WAPI 

message: Is anyone trying to crack this algorithm?  Weaknesses?  Strengths?  Etc.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bluefoxicy (talk • contribs) 12:51, August 28, 2007 (UTC) 
There has been one attack on a weak version of the algorithm. This is already in the external links. There are no known attacks on the full algorithm. Hughesjp (talk) 12:52, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cracking 

message: This is now known as SM4 (presumably to match SM2 and SM3)
See "SM4 block cipher algorithm, formerly known as SMS4, the State Cryptography Administration issued it on March 21, 2012"
http://www1.cnnic.cn/ScientificResearch/LeadingEdge/soea/sm4/201312/t20131204_43351.htm  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.88.158.246 (talk) 16:58, 11 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Name of algorithm
Talk:Fort Nisqually

message: ==Untitled==
The fort's website (at http://www.fortnisqually.org/history.html) states that the purchase price was $650,000.  I know not which is correct. (edited in hindsight to note that LwoodY2K posted this).
:I'll send an e-mail off to my boss and see which one he prefers (I work there BTW). -- Dragoonmac - If there was a problem yo I'll solve it 01:51, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Yeah, I've volunteered there but never learned the specific price.  Noticed the differences in the pages and, well, that's why the comment is up there. LwoodY2K 10:11, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There may be an answer to that on Fur Trading Posts in the Okanagan and Similkameen from the Royal BC Museum's Living Landscapes project; the article on Colville or Shepherd had some mention of Nisqually.....Skookum1 (talk) 17:17, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Purchase Price?

message: The fort's website (at http://www.fortnisqually.org/history.html) states that the purchase price was $650,000.  I know not which is correct. (edited in hindsight to note that LwoodY2K posted this).
:I'll send an e-mail off to my boss and see which one he prefers (I work there BTW). -- Dragoonmac - If there was a problem yo I'll solve it 01:51, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Yeah, I've volunteered there but never learned the specific price.  Noticed the differences in the pages and, well, that's why the comment is up there. LwoodY2K 10:11, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There may be an answer to that on Fur Trading Posts in the Okanagan and Similkameen from the Royal BC Museum's Living Landscapes project; the article on Colville or Shepherd had some mention of Nisqually.....Skookum1 (talk) 17:17, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Personas of The Undertaker

message: I would agree with all these personas or incarnations, whatever you want to call them, apart from the last two. I feel "American Bad Ass" (May 2000 - December 2001) and "Big Evil" (December 2001 - November 2003) can be separated into two separate personas. Even though they were based around the same Badass human side of the Undertaker, I think majority of 'Taker fans recognise a differentiation between the two. Also, the current persona, which WWE have dubbed "Original Deadman" is more widely known as the "Hybrid" by most Undertaker fans, I feel that is a better name for it rather than "Reincarnation".
I haven't changed anything because I don't feel it is my place to, but thought I would post this information here for the author to take these points on board. -- Luke Edhouse 01:48, 1 April 2006
:I think American Badass and Big Evil are the same. All he changed was his hair and his status from face to heel. L2K 03:10, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

message: I think that says it. It should be cleaned up. L2K 03:08, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Serious Grammar Problems 

message: The storyline culminating from the American Badass & Phenom is confusing its saying he was buried alive by Randy Orton with help from Kane & Big Show.  He got Buried Alive at Survivor Series by Vince with help from Kane.  He returned at WM XX.  Then he got burned in a casket again this time by Orton & Orton Jr. at No Mercy.  He came back from that at Survivor Series after Orton won for Team SmackDown!  May someone please fix this?Rollinman 23:52, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section. 
The result of the proposal was
there is no consensus about whether or not to merge the pages. The Hybrid 04:10, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: ABA & Phenom

message: :Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *Support or *Oppose, then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons.
*Support, Davnel03 10:38, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Survey

message: I went ahead and closed the debate at Talk:The Undertaker and merged the nicknames, music, and taunts to this page. For now, I just listed it at the bottom. I think the best course of action is to incorporate the information under the subheaders of the gimmicks they match up to. I'll leave that job for someone else though, as I'm not exactly sure about most of them. Nikki311 14:51, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merged info from [[The Undertaker]] 

message: I think that says it allSimonKSK (talk) 01:56, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Uh, why? His entrance themes are listed on his main page (The Undertaker). –LAX 02:50, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Put in his entrance themes!!
Talk:Peter Menegazzo

message: This article states Menegazzo was 60 in 2004, so birth year would be c1944. agapetos_angel 01:50, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
Talk:5 Kanal

message: I realize in Ukraine it is known as 5 Kanal.  I've chosen to enter it as Kanal 5, as per the other examples of Kanal 5 on wikipedia.  I am not opposed to moving it to 5 Kanal, if others agree so! --Yakym 01:51, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Kudos for the article! Long overdue. --Irpen 02:59, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Comment
Talk:Algebraic extension

message: I believe Extension (Algebra) should be merged into the main topic Algebraic extension. I know that an extension and an algebraic extension are different things, but it would help those reading algebraic extension, if they knew what an extension was first, and simply linking it at the end of the piddly Extension_(Algebra) is more of a "Would you like to know more?" than a "See also." IMHO. Sim 01:58, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Suppose that f(X) = X^n + b_{n-1} X^{n-1} + \ldots + b_0 is the minimal polynomial for a over K (we can safely assume that it's monic). Then a^n + b_{n-1} a^{n-1} + \ldots + b_0 = 0, so if you move the constant term over and factor out an a, you get a(a^{n-1} + b_{n-1} a^{n-2} + \ldots + b_1) = -b_0. Since K is a field, -b_0 has a multiplicative inverse, so in particular, a(a^{n-1} + b_{n-1} a^{n-2} + \ldots + b_1)(-b_0)^{-1} = 1. Thus that big ugly thing in the parentheses and that negative-b-naught-inverse is a's multiplicative inverse. HTH - if you have questions, feel free to stick them on my talk page. Druiffic (talk) 07:36, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: The article states: "Q[π] and Q[e] are fields but π and e are transcendental over Q." But Q[π] and Q[e] are isomorphic to the ring of polynomials Q[x], hence they are not fields. Danneks (talk) 07:59, 23 February 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: . D.Lazard (talk) 09:16, 23 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Transcendental numbers
Talk:Let It Come Down (Spiritualized album)

message: *This puppy needs an image of the album cover. Eyeball kid 01:59, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: the orchestra played a pretty big part in the sound of this album, which one was it?
Inzy 02:16, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  which orchestra? 

message: Really ? i'm not sure of this....  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 171.24.233.21 (talk) 08:18, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Symhonyc Rock and Gospel Style ??
Talk:Carlos Drummond de Andrade

message: This page needs some work, to iron out things like "a speech fluent in elegance and truth about the surrounding, many times quotidian, world, with a fluidity of thought" (whatever that means). And is "rancid" being used with an understanding of what the word actually means? Chris k 02:09, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: I wonder if the Portuguese Drummond family is related to the Scottish one?
--195.137.93.171 (talk) 23:33, 27 August 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Drummond?  

message: I have no opinion as to whether or not it's appropriate to include Drummond de Andrade within categories like "Brazilian communists," but there is some evidence that he was a CP member at one time. For example:
"Moderates, including Mário de Andrade and Rodrigo Melo Franco de Andrade, and future Communist Party members, including Oscar Niemeyer, Carlos Drummond de Andrade, and Cândido Portinari, accepted employment or commissions..." (Full text at https://books.google.com/books?id=Cv6dynKbcKAC&pg=PP105&dq=%22drummond+de+andrade%22+%22communist+party%22&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwixwoiWg7TeAhUOTN8KHVl1BbYQ6AEIKjAA#v=onepage&q=%22drummond%20de%20andrade%22%20%22communist%20party%22&f=false) 850 C (talk) 20:28, 1 November 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Communist?"
Talk:Television in Ukraine

message: Should UT1 not be on this list? --Yakym 02:14, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Shouldn't all this be called List of television channels in Ukraine :)? If someone particularly meant to address language of broadcating than the list is ambiguous: all of them are bilingual. Ukrained 20:39, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: inclusion criteria
Talk:Structure of the Royal Australian Air Force

message: IN the table of Army equivilents it is missing a Division?  eg. Section, Platoon, Company, Battalion, Brigade, DIVISION, Corps, Army etc.
Well the question is where does it fit in?
We know that an Air Force equals an Army, and a Brigade equals a Group.  The Air Force only has one formation (Command) between them whislt the Army has two (Corps and Division).
I can't find a definitive answer on the internet - this is open for discussion.
Justinbrett 07:59, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Table

message: Would there be any objections to restructuring this article along the lines of the (recently updated) official RAAF structure on its website here? (with locations and equipment added) While the current table format looks nice, it's a pain to edit and is a disincentive to keeping this list up to date. It's also totally unsourced, and contains unnecessary information such as the full name and abbreviation of each unit. Nick-D (talk) 08:54, 15 August 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: I've no issues with that proposal, sounds fine to me. Anotherclown (talk) 23:26, 15 August 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed restructure
Talk:Ranks of the Royal Australian Air Force

message: Are the rank codes for the non-commissioned ranks accurate? he WO1/WOFF is classified as an E8 whereas the British ranks of the same name would be OR9/E9. --LONDON 09:08, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

message: A new position is to be created comparable to that of the SEAC to the US and UK and will sit above the three service Warrant Officers.  Also not sure if this will be a E10 rank or created as E11 on the Defence HR system.  No details yet on what the Insignia will look like or if the title will change to something like Warrant Officer of the Australian Defence Force (WO-ADF) to follow current trend or Senior Enlisted Advisor to the CDF (SEAC-A) Hawkeyebasil (talk) 03:26, 13 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  New Position - ADF SENIOR ENLISTED LEADER
Talk:RAAF Base Amberley

message: Climate?  Is this really relevent information for this article?  Justinbrett 05:09, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

message: number 6 is actually an f-111 training group, and number 1 is the operationally deployable squadron, 6 isn't techinacally an air combat group, it is more of a squad for the new pilots who are going throught f-111 conversion/familirisation training. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 124.187.40.170 (talk) 15:23, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  six squad
Talk:RAAF Base Richmond

message: Since I am not that great at editing wikipedia, I will leave it to you guys to add.
There is a semi-underground operations building located opposite the airbase on the corner of cuppitts lane and percival st in the grounds of a plant nursery. It was put into use in 1943 and was utilised by the RAAF for operatonal purposes. It was accessable by path from the base to the bunker. It was decomissioned shortly after ww2 and the land and bunker sold back to its original owner in the 1950s. The bunker remained in excellent condition until the mid 1960s when it was burnt out by an unknown arsonist. The bunker today remains empty except the original toilet, air conditioning unit and some light shutters.
A VHF/DF semi-underground buidling was located in the university of western sydney clardon paddocks near "Rickabys creek paddocks". The history of this bunker isnt to well known  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.237.17.99 (talk) 10:31, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I could do it if you want but I need to provide a reference so the article doesn't get deleted. I also would need to know what the actuall base was called. Reply here if poss - User talk: Adam.J.W.C.. Cheers_Ad@m.J.W.C. (talk) 02:31, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bunkers 

message: Ian, I think 35 Sqn is also back at RIC, see the last couple of lines. Lexysexy (talk) 04:46, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Tks mate, heh, bit ironic that I forgot to add that tidbit here since I was the last person to edit the 35Sqn article... Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 05:33, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: 35 Sqn
Talk:A View from the Gallery

message: Apparently people either love or hate this episode.  For me it is one of my favorites.  The episode is a vehicle for developing various threads of the overall story arc (more about the telepaths, for one thing, more about the love between Delenn and whats-zis-name, for another).  But the recurring theme in the episode is just these two guys, doing their jobs.  
I mean, it's this humongous space station with aliens, space ships, intriques, things that go zoom and things that go boom, but somebody has to keep the elevators running and the hall carpets clean.  Oh, and after the battles are over and the space-jockeys are in the bar cheering their victories, somebody has to clean the walls of ... fluids.
This show was a huzzah for the guys that keep the place running.
:Shenme 02:46, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's a MacGuffin, which is to say "nothing to see here, move along". I read it as part and parcel of the self-referentiality of the episode.  "What does this thing do?" matched with "What are we doing here?"  Shenme (talk) 05:12, 30 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Love it, hate it - it's just a job, but we appreciate yah!
Talk:The Sky Is Crying (album)

message: Please move this to "The Sky Is Crying" (capital "Is") in accordance with the title's usual capitalization. I'm too new to do so. I'll fix other links as necessary.
I'm not adding the category "Posthumous albums" because to me this implies that the album was under development as a regular studio album, then someone died...
And finally, how could this amazing album not be here already?! :-) Outriggr 02:49, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No, that's not what 'posthumous' means. It simply means issued after death. This is a compilation assembled by his brother and the record company and is certainly not an album SRV himself would ever have issued (although the tracks might and probably would have been utilized in another way.) 50.111.8.66 (talk) 03:34, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fixes and listing 

message: Discogs is apparently going by Wiki and classifying this item as a Compilation. It is not a compilation. If author would read liner notes on the release, in 2nd paragraph it states, "Only one title (in a markedly different form) appeared on any of the group's albums."
This is a posthumous studio album of previously unreleased tracks. Mossinterest (talk) 04:39, 19 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Format Is Incorrect
Talk:Smouldering

message: Thanks to Pseudomonas for reminding me to mention that I am the author of the thesis where the orginal text is taken from. And more to come with time. Grein 16:26, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: The third and fourth sections in particular need some attention to grammar usage and Wikipedia style.  However, I can't be arsed to do it myself at the moment, so I've added the copyedit template. --Darkwind (talk) 17:45, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Grammar and style 

message: Well, I have done my best to clean up this page as well as I can but I am still not quite happy with it so the template is still there. Have fun trying. SuperVic1 20:30, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Grammar and style
Talk:RAAF Gingin

message: I'm pretty sure the name is Gin Gin - this research note from the APH library uses that, this tender does,  this planning document, a book on RAAF Pearce and there's a news story and  anecdotal evidence as well. TRS-80 (talk) 16:08, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gin Gin not Gingin
Talk:Dine Alone Records

message: Seems like the influences section is stolen from somewhere else.
The influences section is from Dine Alone's MySpace account and simply states what Dine Alone says its influences are; there is no reason that there should be a problem with this section as it should be regarded as a quotation - it obviously needed to be copied from some source, be it straight from someones mouth or on Dine Alone's official blog, which should be sufficient. jerkmonkee 01:13, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The issue is the content; NOT where it was drawn from. See wikipedia is not a soapbox for more information. Folajimi 01:32, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Calling Dine Alone bands "Emo" is pretty subjective. I suggest removing that descriptor. 199.212.71.159 (talk) 05:40, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Genre 

message: The edit I am reverting has numerous problems: it relies way too much on primary sources for the parts of it that are sourced at all; it contains too many peacock phrases and other promotional language (including "has become a hotbed of genre-spanning sub-labels, artists and releases", "boasts a roster that includes such notable award-winning artists", "continues to remain on the forefront of digital media", etc.); and overall it is just not encyclopedic in tone, and some of it is barely relevant.  Please address, or at least respond to, these concerns before trying to re-add this material to the article. —Darkwind (talk) 03:51, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay, rather than revert warring, I've just taken out the worst of the material.  At least it's mostly encyclopedic in tone now and doesn't sound like it came from the liner notes of an album. —Darkwind (talk) 05:47, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
replies: text:  No need for that tone - still learning here. Can we meet in the middle on keeping information about Bedlam Music Management, as it has huge ties to Dine Alone and the history of the company? I will work on finding more secondary sources about Bedlam's affiliation to Dine Alone. It would also be ideal to keep information about One Big Silence, however, I know there isn't any information available online about the sublabel. Jocelynnrennie (talk) 03:46, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
replies: text:  This is all I can gather on Bedlam based on a simple Google search. I'll continue digging tomorrow: http://www.bmi.com/news/entry/industry_spotlight_bedlam_music_management, http://amusicblogyea.com/2014/08/18/gimme-your-answers-beyond-the-stage-an-interview-w-joel-carriere-founder-and-president-of-dine-alone-records, http://cmw.net/conference/highlights/  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jocelynnrennie (talk • contribs) 03:53, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  COI/promotional edits