lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Cryptosystem

message: :[edit diff -- intgr [talk] 18:50, 3 December 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Deleted content 

message: Hi and welcome. This is a good article to start from, but even when editing not very good articles, it's best to do it as incremental changes, rather than a complete rewrite like you did.
Note that the fact alone that some content is unsourced isn't reason to remove it. If the article has survived in this current form for years, without anyone challenging it (e.g. by using  template, removing or creating a discussion), then it represents an implicit consensus. If you have a reason to suspect it then that can be a reason to boldly remove it or slap a tag on it.
In particular, I think the old paragraph involving "Therefore, the term "cryptosystem" is most often used when the key generation algorithm is important" is an important point about the actual usage of the word, in my experience "cryptosystem" is overwhelmingly used for systems that involve more complex key generation: asymmetric algorithms. Also I found the old explanation easier to understand in layman terms. A problem is that the "Formal definition" section does not talk about key generation, I don't know how to address that.
Removing the rest I agree with, I haven't seen anything to support the statements about "cryptographic system" in literature.
There were also some style issues, most importantly involving a missing lead section. -- intgr [talk] 18:42, 3 December 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rewrite
Wikipedia talk:Historical archive/Imported pictures/Images from Amazon.com

message: All known images from Amazon.com have been delinked from their respective articles, and have had their desscription page changed to  and a link to the source of the image. Regarding Redickulous, mentioned above but not an image from Amazon.com, and am seeking to contact Slick Idiot more directly, which would provide us a similar resolution image of 'Dicknitty' (also on their webpage) if they allow its use. Crackshoe 23:25, 11 Mar 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: State of images in question

message: So... it looks like this debate has fizzled a while ago.  It looks like Amazon isn't claiming any copyright on its images of covers, the covers themselves are categorized under Fair Use, so what's stopping folks from re-uploading like mad?  I'd start doing it myself, since I'm interested in adding book-covers to wikipedia articles about authors... but I'm nervous since no one else has done so.  Can someone tell me if I'm missing something here?  Thanks!   Schwael 09:55, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: No.  Go nuts.  Amazon has no legal claim to the scans of works that they do not own the copyright to, because scans cannot be independently copyrighted.  Even if this were not true, they have precluded themselves from any kind of infringement action by expressly disclaiming that they own any copyrights in the scans.  Postdlf 00:20, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  More Current Discussion 

message: Rather than relying on what's linking to the template, why don't we have a category to which images tagged as  can be automatically added? └ UkPaolo/talk┐ 10:39, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Category?
Talk:Leigham

message: My text from my site at http://www.manorpark.plus.com
:Have wikified the text (made it more into the style preferred at wikipedia).  If there is anything I've missed out from your information, feel free to add it, but please don't copy and paste large swathes of information, and don't sign the article. -- Graham  :) | Talk 17:26, 24 Mar 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: He Gone missing bobbi 2A00:23C5:4F0C:5100:9D3B:CF8E:B6F0:FF (talk) 14:36, 14 December 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Plymouth
Talk:The Path to the Nest of Spiders

message: This does not appear to be a candidate for speedy deletion.  If you think this sould be deleted, add it to Wikipedia:Votes for deletion - Texture 23:26, 10 Mar 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Removed from speedy deletions and moved to current location: previous title was wrong.  Wikified and  tag added, this article is now a good start. -- Graham  :) 00:47, 11 Mar 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:John Scott Russell

message: What is the source for this guy's own words?  Can we have a reference on the article please? -- Graham  :) 00:38, 11 Mar 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Attached now -- Jim 01:07, 11 Mar 2004 (UTC)
replies: text:  Excellent, thanks. -- Graham  :) 01:09, 11 Mar 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Why the move? I've only ever heard of him discussed as John Scott Russell. I can't see any discussion of this anywhere. Pterre (talk) 22:39, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: to my mind John Scott Russell is more specific than John Russell (Engineer), herego I would advise a fallback. signed:Donan Raven (talk) 19:26, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree and have moved it back. Such moves should only be made after discussion.  A side effect is that John Russell (engineer) now links to the page. Chris55 (talk) 12:15, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Page move from John Scott Russell to John Russell (Engineer)
Talk:Eckmann–Hilton argument

message: I made a few things a bit more understandable, hopefully. I'm no expert in algebra, so if I made any mathematical mistakes, apologies and change them. I still find the second half of the article a bit difficult to follow, to be honest. The first half is much better. Two points/questions: first, boldface is normally only used for article titles at the beginning or for emphasis of definitions, not to emphasise a phrase or sentence. Second, I'm not sure why all the magma defs need to be in quotes? I know these are usually defined for more specific structures (subcategories of Mag), but would the reader pick up the meaning from context? Revolver 00:42, 11 Mar 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: This article does not even state the argument concisely and neither gives a proof of it (not that it's hard). The section on the "non-monoidal case" seems overly technical. What do you think about a complete rewrite? I don't want to offend anyone, just trying to be bold: WP:BB - Saibot2 11:32, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  a complete mess.... 

message: This theorem has a very nice "visual" proof, which is equivalent to the one in the article but much easier to follow (and makes the connexion to higher homotopy groups more obvious). I've written  two versions of this proof. Version 2 is less ugly than version 1, but I'd like someone to de-uglify it even more before adding it to the article. Cocaineninja (talk) 18:08, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Visual proof 

message: The fact that monoid objects in the category of monoids are just commutative monoids is often said to be a restatement of the Eckmann-Hilton theorem, but the version of the theorem stated in this article is much more general. It implies that a unital magma object in the category of unital magmas is a commutative monoid. In fact, even this statement is less general, since it assumes that both units are equal. Cocaineninja (talk) 18:28, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Monoid objects in the category of monoids
Talk:New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures

message: A recently removed edit added that "Appendix C4 of the 2013 edition cites 134 versions in various languages that use the Divine Name in one form or another in their main text." Actually, that appendix only appears in the 2015—2019 Study edition, and the claim that all 134 use the so-called 'divine name' "in the main text" is also incorrect, as some only mention inclusion in footnotes, references or commentaries. Aside from these errors, the statement was presented in the article to suggest support for the NWT's frequent use of 'Jehovah' in the New Testament but for almost all of the translations listed, the appendix only says "some verses" or "various verses" of the other works use 'some form of the divine name',
without indicating how many or which ones. Hence, even if properly cited, the statement as used in the article would be misleading.--Jeffro77 (talk) 06:55, 15 February 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  'Appendix C4'
Talk:George Graham

message: This page is linked to George Graham (1928-1957) scottish football chief executive.It's the wrong george graham.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.97.192.250 (talk) 10:55, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  bad link 

message: Weirdly I stumbled across this article on George's birthday after checking out Bargeddie. My question is, should the full playing stats be added? I know 11v11 isn't 100% trusted but in this case it looks pretty comprehensive, and seems a waste to have the table there but half filled? But I don't want to add it all only to be reverted if the source isn't deemed reliable... Crowsus (talk) 00:07, 1 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Add full stats?  
Talk:Timeline of the 2000 Fijian coup d'état

message: I don't mean to make an issue out of it (Fiji coup of 2000), but isn't it a standard rule of English writing that TITLES are supposed to be capitalized (except for articles prepositions, and conjunctions)?  I am, after all, an English teacher.  I am very much aware that multitudes of pages on Wikipedia do not conform to this practice, but any page that I edit will be made to conform to it, unless there is a clear Wikipedia policy to the contrary.  Is there?  I'll leave this alone for a day or two to see what others have to say, before making up my mind.Davidcannon 01:20, 11 Mar 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:List of extraterrestrials in fiction by type

message: Awesome article, lousy picture..  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.250.140.219 (talk) 19:13, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

message: War of the Worlds Martians were not humanoid.  Not sure where they should go. --JG
:It depends how far you're prepared to push "humanoid"; Wells's Martians were supposedly the highly-evolved form of a humanoid species. (As a matter of fact, the description of the Martians is based on an article Wells had written about what the human race will develop into after another few millennia of technological development. The article even gets name-checked in the novel, although the narrator is a bit sarcastic about it and neglects to mention who it was by.) --Paul A 01:40, 15 Mar 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: ...and to be pedantic, definitely-humanoid Martians do get mentioned in The War of the Worlds: see the description in the twenty-second chapter of what the invaders packed to eat during their trip to Earth... --Paul A 02:01, 15 Mar 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Older discussion

message: I recently have been catching up on the television show Earth 2 and was wondering where to put Terrians and Grendlers (both alien races encountered in the show).  During one of the episodes, the doctor Julia, analyzes Terrian cellular material and says that it's like nothing she's seen before- organic, mineral, etc.  It was like a "little bit of everything."  The show didn't specifically address Grendler physiology or origin, other than making note of their incredible strength, anti-septic like saliva, and obsessive desire to gather and trade.  Anyway, I wanted to add them to the list but decided I'd better bring in some backup because if I was wrong it could take quite a while before anyone else caught it.  Thanks. Mrobviousjosh 05:36, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  New Additions 

message: At Talk:List of extraterrestrials in fiction#Merge. Thanks. -- Quiddity (talk) 20:55, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge discussion

message: On 6 February, 2008 user 68.252.240.191 added the constellations Gemini, Virgo, and Libra to the Humanoid extraterrestrials section and Sagittarius to the Centaurs section.  No "work", such as "ancient mythology" or "zodiac" was provided with these entries.  I propose that these entries be removed as they do not match the definition of extraterrestrials that is used in the rest of this list.-- Thinking of England (talk) 11:04, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I've just removed them.  --  Thinking of England (talk) 01:52, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Constellations
Talk:Caciocavallo

message: Acording to this article (http://aas.bf.uni-lj.si/zootehnika/84-2004/PDF/84-2004-1-11-15.pdf) "The origin of the name kachkaval can be found in the language of the people who most 
probably brought kachkaval to the Balkan Peninsula from where it spread further. In the Tzintzar language the word ˝kač˝ means cheese." and "According to the historical material (Pejić, 1956), it can be most certainly presumed that the manufacturing of cheese was brought to the Balkan Peninsula by nomadic tribes from the East. Later, the manufacturing of this cheese was brought to Italy and from there to Britain during the period of Julius Caesar. In Britain, the technology of making cheese has been adapted to climatic conditions and leading to the development of the technology for Cheddar cheese production." which contradicts the informations written in the wikipedia article. It seems more logical too because the italian name "cacciocavallo"  doesn't have anything to do with cheese. The page about cacciocavallo is also wrong saying "The Italian name of the cheese caciocavallo means "Cheese on horseback" and it is sometimes thought that it was originally made from mare's milk, although there appears to be no historical evidence for this. More likely, the name derives from the fact that the curd is left to dry by placing it 'a cavallo', i.e. straddling, upon a horizontal stick or branch. [See, inter alia, [1].]" (comment posted on the kachkaval page).  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.206.249.51 (talk) 13:48, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Origin of the name 

message: Merge with Kashkaval? 46.117.97.217 (talk) 20:32, 28 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge with Kashkaval?
Talk:Oak Park, Michigan

message: I edited the comment about 8 Mile to be more factually accurate, but does it even belong?
--AviDrissman 01:36, 11 Mar 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: I have (again) removed the reference to an alumnus named Adoplh Mongo who it is claimed is an outspoken political consultant. This is because I can find no reference to any such person. If such a person genuinely was an outspoken political consultant (and one that is prominent enough to be included in the article), there would surely be at least a single refrence to them in a reliable third party source. 
Before restoring this alleged person to the page, please provide a source or reference to justify their notability. Thanks. Euryalus 03:06, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Adoplh Mongo? 

message: This section as written would be more appropriate for a page on the Oak Park School District.  The city of Oak Park is served by three public school districts, Oak Park, Berkley and Ferndale.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.81.0.20 (talk) 18:14, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Education 
MediaWiki talk:Uctop

message: "Top" seems rather cryptic to me, I had no idea what it meant and had to ask. Elsewhere the current revision is referred to as "current" or "cur", would it not make sense to do so here too? Or how about "latest", "unchanged" or "unedited"? -- Tom- 01:47, 11 Mar 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: It sure is an issue with Wikipedia, but not an important one. I only found out what "top" meant a few months ago; it never really troubled me up until then... - Mark 01:49, 11 Mar 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I do care, so I was happy to see that someone had changed the message and I took the new suggestion to make it default on MediaWiki: gerrit:58049, still to be approved. --Nemo 05:26, 8 April 2013 (UTC)
Talk:Teuta/Archive 1

message: Something's wrong with the article, Teuta wasn't 3 years old when she died!!
:You are right, that was a bit confusing. Those are the years that she was in power. Dori | Talk 03:09, Mar 11, 2004 (UTC)
Teuta is a very famous Albanian name to this day, This clearly proves that illyians are the present day Albanians
Teuta was the one bigeer queen. She is the most famous queen
I like very much the name TEUTA.
She was born on the island of Vis, in present day Croatia. Back then the island was known as Issa.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.242.146.103 (talk) 03:32, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Comments

message: :She was in Rhizon or Scodra?, the article is confused.Megistias (talk) 13:06, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Rhizon was her Throne thus capital and Scodra her military base aka pirate lair Megistias (talk) 13:10, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  CApital city
Talk:World Dance Council

message: In 1997 it was granted the status of an associate member of IDSF. But in 2002 WD&DSC offers the associate status to IDSF. Does anybody know what's the history between them (besides natural issues of competition)? Mikkalai 03:58, 11 Mar 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Good question indeed! Article now addresses this issue to some extent. Macdonald-ross (talk) 19:00, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Question 
Talk:Edward B. Titchener

message: This is the best way I could explain structuralism to someone who knew little about psychology whoever edits the page see if you can keep my explaination I think its pretty good all things considered.
GrazingshipIV 04:09, Mar 11, 2004 (UTC)
Perhaps it should be noted that Titchener changed his views in the latter part of his life (according to my text book).  However, I do not have a direct citation. SiriusAlphaCMa 06:16, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: I think this article should contain fully his laws of attention and a little bit more on structuralism. Structuralism one of the big things he is remembered for. While it definitely would not supplant the structuralism page, I think it would enrich the reader's experience. Mckayreedmoore (talk) 01:36, 4 May 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Going more in-depth on his ideas

message: I added a citation for the assertion that Margaret Washburn was the first woman to get a PhD in Psychology. Mckayreedmoore (talk) 18:48, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Citations
Talk:Algeciras Conference

message: William II (emperor of Germany) was annoyed at Britain's and France's alliance and was trying to test it by unnecessarily bringing up the Morocco issue. The conference merely made Britain and France closer and left Germany unfulfilled and starting to look like a bully.
"During the conference, the British sailed their North Sea Navy to the Strait of Gibraltar, which was also where their Mediterranean Navy was stationed. The purpose for doing this was to intimidate Germany." Does anyone know where I can find this information outside of wikipedia?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.94.11.39 (talk) 02:26, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

message: This fairly extensive section has no references whatsoever.
- Zulu Kane (talk) 15:12, 4 May 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Uhm ..the History Learning site does refer to the The Algeciras Conference of 1906 as does the Maurice Rouvier article.  I'm not sure how authoritive it is. JRPG (talk) 12:25, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Background
Talk:Mu of Balhae

message: "Japan welcomed them as..." suffices. --Nanshu 04:32, 11 Mar 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Oiler

message: This page should not redirect to the hockey team. All the links to it concern the use of the term as a naval vessel. -- Decumanus 04:54, 11 Mar 2004 (UTC)

message: is that supposed to be in here? 84.191.227.228 (talk) 18:11, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ph.D. student at Arizona State University
Talk:Russian Armed Forces

message: I created a table of ranks for Comparative military ranks, but as things turned out, it wasn't needed there, so I tried moving it here. Only there already is a table here. But this table is different (and somewhat messier)) than mine. I haven't replaced the table here yet because it contains information which my table does not.
I hope the two can be reconsiled soon and then moved here. I will do this if nobody else is up to the task.
--Oceanhahn 09:09, 12 Sep 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  New Table of Ranks 

message: Under the History section under Quick Facts, I think wikilinks to List of Wars involving Russia, List of Wars involving the Soviet Union, and List of Battles involving the Russian Federation should be provided, as this would provide better resources to the reader and be more consistent with other armed forces articles (the Soviet Union one is debatable), I would give the display text as follows: Wars involving Russia; Wars involving the Soviet Union; Battles involving the Russian Federation. Respectively. I'm far from having the permissions to edit the Introduction, so this is also a request for someone with the permissions to do so if this is found to be suitable.  Isz Chepewéssin (talk) 08:23, 25 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Quick Facts: History 

message: Russia hasn’t drafted anyone in December. False information that needs to be removed. Russia has mandatory military service like Israel and South Korea. Yasarhossain07 (talk) 04:46, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Conscription isn’t draft.
Talk:Two-stage-to-orbit

message: I think the history section should be removed as it is because it hase nothing to to with the topic of this article. While the 14th-century Chinese rockted was a two stage rocket, it did not archive orbit, and therefor is not a two-stage-to-orbit rocket. 78.94.53.130 (talk) 09:29, 17 January 2018 (UTC)
replies: text:  As you added this text, I would like to hear your view on whether this should stay in the article or not. 78.94.53.130 (talk) 10:56, 18 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  History-section 

message: Used twice but not defined. D=Dual ? (to allow TSTO for Triple?)  Propose changing to TSTO. - Rod57 (talk) 08:49, 16 July 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  What is DSTO 

message: Would Falcon 9 (not Heavy, seeing heavy would be more of a 3STO) and Blue Origin be considered as (partial) Reusable TSTO? George Leung (talk) 06:24, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Reusable launch system