lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Data haven

message: I'm not so sure about the origin of the term that is listed here.. I recall the term being used in the first few chapters of Count Zero by William Gibson (when Turner is taken to an oil rig in international waters, it is said that it was once used as a data haven), and that book was released in 1986, three years before Bruce Sterling's book. Can anyone confirm if I am wrong? --Anticrash 14:36, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Like many other European countries, Germany censors "hate speech", especially, like France, most anything pertaining to Nazism. While this is understandable given the history of these countries, it still constitutes censorship. - Tzaquiel 21:10, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Origin of the Term

message: The article claims that HavenCo is not hosted on Sealand anymore. Can anyone provide a reference? Wmahan. 00:21, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I removed the claim. Wmahan. 15:55, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: HavenCo

message: Does there exist any data havens today? which are them?
:The article mentioned Havenco. Then there are various companies providing "offshore" hosting like . I think these are mostly used to get around US laws on things like gambling or as tax havens or corporate havens. Anonymous networks like Tor and I2P aim to provide havens in a more P2P-like manner. Wmahan. 15:55, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Existing data havens? 

message: Imagine putting a data haven on a satellite or space station up in the space with satellite link.
:OK. It'd be low-bandwidth, hard to access, expensive, fragile, and probably could be DOSed easily. --Gwern  (contribs) 22:51 10 March 2007 (GMT)
:Maybe not low-bandwidth. But yeah, it could be easily destroyed by any modern country and thus not worth the trouble of putting it into space in the first place... and maintenance/upgrades would be a bitch. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 66.71.40.121 (talk) 07:18, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: But you could put anything on there, as there's be no rules, as space has no website laws1  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fivexthethird (talk • contribs) 03:10, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Space
Talk:List of sailing frigates of the United States Navy

message: I removed the "fighting directions" claim, as no such order was given. Luck, the size and skill of crews, and weather conditions were all additional complicating factors that made a simple comparison of the gun size and scantling thickness meaningless, and the British Admiralty knew that. Sloops have deliberately attacked heavy-frigates and won, given the right conditions, and it would be take the initiative away from captains. Additionally, he vast majority of battles in that area were one-on-one. For example, the USS Chesapeake was defeated in a mutually sought battle against the HMS Shannon Therealhazel 01:25, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The fighting instruction in question referred to the American 44s, not to the smaller Chesapeake, etc.  It's substantiated in Canney's Sailing Warships of the US Navy. That said, it doesn't seem relevant here. --Columbia clipper (talk) 00:43, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Royal Navy fighting directions
Talk:Adelaide

message: I don't understand why both are being used in this article. Calle Widmann (talk) 09:13, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tarndanya vs Tarntanya
Talk:Transformer

message: How can we calculate the power consumption of transformer itself?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 114.29.229.115 (talk) 04:36, 17 May 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Power consumption of Transformer 

message: Referring to Ideal transformer equations, it is at best misleading to show that 'and for an isolation transformer a = 1'; saying so is true only as far as it goes. It is like a stopped clock that is right twice a day. An isolation transformer is a two-winding transformer that often has a turns ratio a = 1 and is not an autotransformer. But an isolation transformer can also be step-up type or step-down type. Cblambert (talk) 20:08, 29 January 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Isolating transformer's turns ratio 'a' is not necessarily always a =1 

message: I suggest we specify that equatations are time-variant and are derived for the AC. AXONOV (talk) ⚑ 20:37, 23 July 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ideal transformer equations 

message: In the "Laminated steel core" section of the Wikipedia Transformer page the photograph reads "Laminated core transformer showing edge of laminations at top of photo". The picture is of a Shell type transformer. This is a confusion point as some will take it that it is a core type when it is not. I suggest changing either the photo out or changing the description to either. A shell core type transformer or in the description to "Laminated Shell transformer showing edge of laminations at top of photo". 69.201.21.27 (talk) 16:34, 3 October 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Core has a dual meaning.  It is type of transformer construction.  The magnetic material is also called the core whether the transformer is shell type or core type. Constant314 (talk) 19:58, 3 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Confusing label on Laminated steel core photo
Talk:Tokyo Bay

message: it is right to say the "west coast" which is intended to mean the westside of the bay, not the west coast of the land. Please have it corrected if it is wrong.
Desktoptetsu 08:50 12 Jul 2003 (UTC)
:Good point. Modded. Sekicho 01:41, Feb 27, 2004 (UTC)
----
How big is Tokyo Bay? (In other words, what is its area?)
===Development===
To what extent has the size and shape of the bay been changed over the years, through the reclamation of land and dredging of channels for the creation of the several seaports ringing the bay?JWut89LA (talk) 23:52, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: I wonder whether 

message: To what extent has the size and shape of the bay been changed over the years, through the reclamation of land and dredging of channels for the creation of the several seaports ringing the bay?JWut89LA (talk) 23:52, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Development
Talk:Field ion microscope

message: Someone may add this link:
http://physics.unipune.ernet.in/~fem/ Slicky 08:32, May 17, 2005 (UTC)
Corrected linkFitzaubrey 18:16, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Comment

message: :"The curvature of the surface near the tip causes a natural magnification..."
What does that mean??  
I think that sentence may need some clarification. 
69.139.198.89 21:11, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Hrm.

message: I think this should be flagged for experts to look at.  I am having trouble believing this is real.  If those are atoms in the picture, then what is the reddish "liquid"?  Why do some of the "atoms" seem to be joined into an elongated structure while the majority of them seem to be granular?  If this is a structure with a single atom at it's tip, why does it look like a large sphere with dimples in it?  What about the Heisenberg uncertainty principle for measuring the very tiny?  Are the granules electron clouds then? 66.75.41.52 01:17, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The FIM is real.  If, for some reason, you don't find J. Chem. Phys. a reputable enough source (!?!), then you can look at any of the other papers on Field Ion Microscopy.   As per the caption, "The lighter colored elongated features are traces captured as atoms moved during the imaging process."  The "dimples" you see are crystallographic poles.  Fig. 6 of the J. Chem. Phys. article is a schematic of the tip.  FIM is no longer the only technique which offers sub-nanometer resolution and Heisenberg doesn't forbid this kind of instrumentation.  It is a common exercise in physics classes to plug numbers into HUP & find that, because atoms are relatively massive (compared to, say, electrons), their positions can be determined rather precisely. --Karnesky 06:36, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you.  Us programmers don't get into materials sciences very much. Also, I lack a subscription to the J. Chem. Phys. and am not allowed to read the article online.  66.75.41.52 19:43, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: I am skeptical
Talk:Hazard ratio

message: For non-statistitions an interpretive example of how one would use a real hazard ratio would be helpful.
210.11.82.152 22:12, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I too would like to see an example used to clarify. I just glanced at the paper cited in the article Ratio in Clinical Trials. Perhaps an example could be taken from this paper? I also scanned the same article for use of the expression of hazard as a limit and did not see it. Note that the denominator in the expression tends toward zero. Johnfravolda (talk) 15:38, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  example 

message: Rate ratios and hazard ratios are different names for the same quantity. I propose merging the rate ratio page to this one.
--Gak (talk) 16:20, 18 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Merger proposal

message: I have added a paragraph to the lede that attempts to explain what the Hazard Ratio in a scientific paper might mean, in ordinary non-technical words.  I am not a statistician (which is why I went to Wikipedia to find out what a Hazard Ratio is) and I hope that this explanation can be a start at making this article more useful to non-specialists.
I encourage specialists to correct the explanation, or simplify it, or improve it.  But please, don't turn it into technical language that would make it useless to lay readers of encyclopedias.  
I picked the cited sentence because I happened to be reading it and wondering what it meant.  If you can find a simpler sentence to explain, or if its subject (Covid vaccination) is too controversial for this unrelated article, by all means, replace it with a better example.  -- Gnuish (talk) 01:53, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  New translation of a sample scientific paper's use of "HR" into lay English added to article's intro
Talk:Intellectual worker

message: The term "knowledge worker" has been used for about 30 years, since first introduced by Drucker (1974?)  It is the commonly recognized term in the knowledge management literature.  Although Machlup first described the knowledge sector of the US economy in 1962, he did not use the term knowledge worker.  I must admit that I have never heard the terms "brain worker" or "intellectual worker" before this discussion.  If there is any merging to be done, the latter terms should be added as subsets of "knowledge worker", not the other way around.Albert Simard 18:36, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: As the eminent 20th-century Russian-American philosopher Ayn Rand proved, it is not man's muscle but man's mind that is the fundamental source of all wealth. Kurt Weber 21:23, 11 September 2005 (UTC)

message: Moved to Talk:Knowledge worker#Merge proposal. Ewlyahoocom 04:41, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge with Knowledge worker
Talk:United States Green Parties

message: Removed from article:
"This is mainly owing to the campaigning and voting systems of that nation which are heavily weaighed in favor of the Democratic and Republican parties due to their size, as well as the failure of Green Party candidates to get very many votes. Most American Greens support election reform as the appropriate avenue for addressing this skewed system."
I don't think the lead paragraph needs to get into speculation into the systematic causes of the party's lack of success. Others may disagree. Regardless, Nat Krause's addition "as well as the failure ... to get very many votes" is totally superfluous -- it basically amounts to saying that the party does not win elections because it does not win enough votes. Absent fraud, that's always why candidates lose elections. RadicalSubversiv E 20:19, 21 Oct 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, you're right, that addition on my part was not very well considered.  My point was that the reason Greens are not elected is not necessarily because of the election system, but it's better to simply not worry about discussing this in the intro. - Nat Krause 23:10, 21 Oct 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why Greens do not hold higher office
Talk:Sikorsky

message: This disambig page doesn't seem to be in-scope for wikiproject spaceflight. Was there a rationale for that? (sdsds - talk) 03:54, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Lunar crater? Or is that outside scope? WP Moon?  TREKphiler hit me ♠  17:11, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  I hope no potential contributors were driven away by the preceding ... uh, mind-f***. (I almost spent time explaining why Dabs all belong to WP:Wikiproject Disambiguation, but very rarely have enuf overlap with other ones to make membership useful...  “Ya could look it up”, maybe ... but don’t bother! —user:JerzyA 10:10, 27 June 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Out of Wikiproject spaceflight scope 

message: Please do not move the DAB page without discussion, and by cut-and-paste move, especially. without attribution. Sikorsky Aircraft received nearly twice the page views of Igor over the past year, and that's not enough to make the company the primary topic either. As for splitting off the Sikorski DAB page, this has all been covered at Sikorsky for over 15 years, thus has de facto consensus, and so ought to be discussed beforehand. Thanks. BilCat (talk) 20:33, 14 November 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you for the explanation. Now it makes sense. I agree this must be discussed. However the article Sikorski has nothing to do with this. I wrote a completely new, referenced, article about a polish surname. I callenge uyou to point whetre you see cut-and-pase move'. Lembit Staan (talk) 20:44, 14 November 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok, you wrote some new material, but it's still redundant to what was at Sikorsky, especially the list of names. I'm not opposing that change per se, but it needs to be part of the overall discussion first so other editors can discuss it. BilCat (talk) 20:47, 14 November 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: There is nothing redundant. Sikorsky lede is unreferenced nonsense. The list of names is not copyrightable, you know that "phonebook" defense, right?  My article Sikorski is  about a Polish surname. Sikorsky comes from Russian langauge and in fact it is overwhelmingly unique: all "otheruses" are associated with one and the same person. Lembit Staan (talk) 20:54, 14 November 2020 (UTC)

text: I will call for the disussion tomorrow, I am busy with other thins now. Lembit Staan (talk) 20:55, 14 November 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Primary topic and cut/paste moves 

message: A list of people named Sikorski is in here and in there. Either merge the articles or scrap them here. Rp (talk) 09:07, 27 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  List of Sikorskis
Talk:Super Dimensional Fortress

message: Is there a history or something behind name "Super Dimensional Fortress"? What is it's origin? What does it mean?
Actually, I've been dying to know for years. <g>
If someone happens to know, maybe it'd be an idea to add it..
Belgarat 21:56 12 Jul 2003 (UTC)
:It's almost certainly from the Macross/Robotech anime, but absent official acknowledgment I'm hesitant to put it in the main entry.
::I haven't logged in here for a while, sorry.  ^_^  Let's see... The original title of the show was supposed to be Battle City Megaroad.  That's a joke - Megaroad, because they're on a long journey, and megaload, because they're hauling an entire city and they have Japanese accents.  It was meant to be a bit more lighthearted than the final result.  Ideas for the series got kicked around, and the original studio that was working on it, the Uizu Corporation, dissolved in 1981, dumping into Srudio Nue's laps, who were interested in harder SF, and the name got changed to SDF Macross.  The "Macross" bit was somehow derived from Shakespeare, but I don't have the sources handy to back that up.  The rest of what I've written largely came from Robotech Art 1, ISBN 0-89865-412-2.
:::I've put the derivation in now, because according to the SDF FAQ , the original BBS was "a Japanese Anime SIG", and "known as the SDF-1" - pretty firmly linking it to The Super Dimension Fortress Macross in my mind. Or rather, "IMO", since that way I get to add another TLA or two ;-) -- IMSoP 08:58, 21 Mar 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: A few quick corrections on the above description of the origin of The Super Dimension Fortress Macross. The original studio was Studio Nue from the very beginning; Wiz Corporation (not Uizu) was just the sponsor. Wiz went through financial trouble during pre-production, and Big West stepped in as the sponsor. The project did incorporate more "hard" science fiction as an indirect result of this new sponsorship. (Wiz wanted to capitalize on parodying such anime works as Space Battleship Yamato and Mobile Suit Gundam.) —Egan Loo 02:59, 30 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Talk:David

message: We should be on the clear on this issue by now, and significant article such as this should be edited by following WP:LEADIMAGE and WP:PORTRAIT. ౪ Santa ౪99° 07:52, 9 October 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: WP:PORTRAIT is an essay and goes against a long-standing consensus to include an infobox image here. StAnselm (talk) 14:16, 9 October 2023 (UTC)

text: As far as I can see (perhaps I missed something in the archives), the only discussion of this that has ever taken place consisted of someone proposing Michelangelo's David and someone else saying "I don't want to look at a naked man"... which isn't really a discussion. The more well-known imaginary image would be better in my opinion, but it ought to be a portrait, e.g. :File:%27David%27_by_Michelangelo_FI_Acca_JBS_084.jpg, not a full body shot. Furius (talk) 19:09, 9 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Follow clear guidelines 

message: In the Biblical account - Family section, Abigail is described as Nabaal's wife, but this is misleading since it implies adultery or biandry. Given David's famous foible, changing to "widow" would better clarify the matter.
Apologies if this approach is inappropriate. I am a very casual user. Throody Shrelfe (talk) 15:38, 21 October 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Good pickup. StAnselm (talk) 15:48, 21 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Small edit: Nabaal's widow 

message: I am requesting that we use other interpretations of historical biblical images. The ubiquitous Caucasian images are outdated and even offensive in some communities. I would like to change that first image to this:
Jcarney79 (talk) 12:57, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: Most images are copyrighted and not usable on Wikipedia, as we only use fair use images (like album covers) when there is no non-copyrighted version available. Wikimedia Commons contains free-use images, so try looking around in commons:Category:David (Biblical figure) and its subcategories. QuietCicada  chirp 14:23, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 14 February 2024 

message: As the topic says, and Abimelech was the king of Shechem, he was a king in Israel, but wasn't king of the United Kingdom of Israel. Sahar Huri (talk) 15:11, 1 April 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Abimelech is irrelevant. David succeded his brother-in-law Ish-bosheth, following the assassination of Ish-bosheth. Dimadick (talk) 06:38, 2 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wasn't david the second king of the United Kindom of Israel?
Talk:Dike

message: I've remade the 'Dyke' and 'Dike' pages back into a single page (instead of two disambig pages with bad links) is that the intention of disambig pages is to point people to the correct page. Part of this, and especially in this case, is that where there are multiple options on spelling for the same word then it is best practice to bring them together rather than requiring users to click between "see also" links or duplicating the links on each page which will, over time, separate. In this case there were even cases of the same target page having different links from each page rather than the same one! --Vamp:Willow 08:41, 2 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Consolidation
Talk:Jesse (biblical figure)

message: They could be a chance someone could be out there with a new stuff. I mean the game has not not been released yet.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.176.197.219 (talk) 22:18, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  It Doesn't Have To Be This Way 

message: (moved to here for readability Rursus dixit. (mbork3!) 13:25, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Headline text 

message: "Evidently (from 1 Samuel 16) Jesse had more sons than these seven, and ... " What is the basis for this statement?  Does 1Sam 16 v 10 suggest that there were seven sons in addition to all those named?  If so, it might be likely that Jesse had more than one wife and that David grew up in a polygamous household (which might explain certain aspects of his own later life). Douglasson (talk) 10:43, 25 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Jesse's Sons 

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. (closed by non-admin page mover) 🐶 EpicPupper (he/him | talk) 03:00, 13 April 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: * Note: I would not object terrible to making Jesse (given name) the primary topic either, but I think it's a pretty close call. BD2412 T 21:28, 5 April 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 5 April 2022
Talk:4004 BC

message: Why the redirect?  I think this article should have been left as it was.  That IS Bishop Ussher's date, it's a historical fact (that he said it, not that the creation occured then).  RickK 01:57 13 Jul 2003 (UTC)
:The bit about Ussher belongs either on the year in question (specifically on October 23), or not under any date. I'd be tempted to go with something like "alleged creation of the universe, according to Bishop Ussher and put the rest of it in an article about that person. Or we could go with the scientific consensus and not put it under the year, only in an article about Ussher: that's not a fact about the year 4004 BC, it's a guess that's off by approximately 13.5 billion years. Vicki Rosenzweig 03:15 13 Jul 2003 (UTC)
::One solution would be to add a redirect hatnote to Ussher chronology at the top of 5th millennium BC, which I've done. -- œ™ 03:08, 7 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Ussher chronology
Talk:IDEO

message: I think this section should be it's own article, or removed completely because Wikipedia is not a list of links (WP:NOT#MIRROR). And why is it that someone claiming to be a part owner in MIDI  has removed that company from this list? --Ronz 16:42, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I propose removal.  If someone wants to put together a separate article listing such companies, I'm glad to help. --Ronz 16:23, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Removed. I think Category:Industrial design firms is enough. --Ronz 16:59, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Similar firms

message: I agreed with the flags on the article and removed a large amount of self promotional language and non referenced claims that read like a brochure. Happy to discuss this with anyone concerned. Goalloverhere (talk) 01:12, 17 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Deletion of material on June 16, 2013 

message: They were founded in 1991, but worked on "Apple's first mouse" which was released in 1984. Something needs fixing or clarifying.  Chriswaterguy talk 02:54, 30 November 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Seemingly contradictory info: Mouse and founding date