lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Memory mapping

message: This article should probably also cover mapping files to a process's memory space, as in the Unix mmap syscall. Or perhaps create a disambiguation page here and discuss them in separate articles. -- intgr 11:19, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Mapping of files into memory

message: This article is not well named, and as intgr suggests, a change to a disambiguation page would be suitable as the concepts of memory mapping in relation to both files and I/O are already discussed (with some room for improvement) in their own sections; see memory mapped I/O and memory-mapped file. Moggie2002 11:11, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Suggested change to disambiguation page

message: The concept of "Memory Mapping" is designing the map of the addresses and deciding where, in this map, will be the RAM, the ROM or the I/O devices. Actually, the I/O devices have their own map nowadays. I recomend this article to be included in another one named "Decoding of Microprocessors". This article may explain ( more deeply ) how to connect the address and data buses to the different devices and what electronical elements you may use to manage that. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Alsolike (talk • contribs) 12:24, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Inclusion 

message: As a dab it fails as all are examples of a broad concept per WP:DABCONCEPT. The older version  may have some useful text for fleshing out, if there's concensus for fixing this bad dab. Widefox; talk 08:35, 1 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Dabconcept
Talk:Information and Communications University

message: I can't find any reliable references about Academics and Schools section. arthurhahn
: They're mentioned in the school website.  Is there any reason to suspect that such factual information was falsified? Saligron 14:50, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: References
Talk:Lotto Super 7

message: The prize structure must be wrong.  How can 5/7 numbers pay more than 6/7 numbers?  A decimal point got lost - I've seen this on other sites (sympatico's lottery information) so it a copying error.
:The figures are correct. Remember that this represents the share of the pool received by these winners. There are far more people who get 5/7 numbers than 6/7 (ratio is approximately 60:1), so the individual payouts are roughly 60:1 in favour of those who chose more correct numbers.
:For example, assuming a $20 million pool and 10 million tickets sold (and with winners exactly matching the probabilities listed), we get:
Match	Prize                               	Prize share  	Odds of Winning	# winners	Individual share
7/7  	Jackpot (Share of 73% of Pools Fund)	$14.6 million	1 in 62,891,499	1 or 0   	as applicable
6/7+ 	Share of 5% of Pools Fund           	$1 million   	1 in 8,984,649 	1        	$1 million
6/7  	Share of 5% of Pools Fund           	$1 million   	1 in 230,373   	43       	$23256
5/7  	Share of 17% of Pools Fund          	$3.4 million 	1 in 3,840     	2604     	$1305
4/7  	$10.00                              	$550,060     	1 in 181.8     	55006    	$10
3/7+ 	$10.00                              	$508,910     	1 in 196.5     	50891    	$10
3/7  	Free Play                           	N/A          	1 in 21.9      	456621   	N/A
:Does this clarify things? Mindmatrix 17:17, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
Category talk:Wikipedians who like Daria

message: The "User Daria" userbox was edited on 11 December 2006 to remove the image "Daria peek.jpg", a trademark of MTV, on the grounds of its not being allowed under Wikipedia's rules for "fair use" of images.
This called for reworking the userbox to remove the space for that image. It also called, as I saw it, for inserting the full name of the main character from Daria to make the userbox comprehensible. This made a change necessary, in turn, to the extent of the link to the main article on the series.
The person who apparently has done several thousand such image removals - as a hobby - has plausible reasoning for doing so. Yet this remains, to me, a marginal issue that could readily admit to a different view.
I will refrain from directly quoting William Shatner's appropriate three-word riposte to "Star Trek" fans in that famous "Saturday Night Live" skit. I'll simply maintain here that vigilantism, by whatever other name, remains vigilantism, and ends up being self-righteous - as well as strongly discouraging of others' participation in a project such as Wikipedia. Such changes, whether personal or through "bots," should be the province of legal staff, not of user crusades.
Greybird 11:41, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Khadija Ravat

message: It was reported that Khadija had pulled out but, either she didn't pull out at all or, by some strange coincidence, the person who replaced her happened to ALSO be called Khadija. Can we please have a discussion before this gets deleted. Although I'm not sure why I'm asking, as this never happens on wikipedia. Triangle e 11:43, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: If you disagree with a "prod" tag, all you have to do is remove it. Salad Days 22:05, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Really? wiki is SO weird. Some of these admin seem to do what they like. I woke up one morning and a page I was working on had been deleted over night! Triangle e 01:39, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Khadija Ravat did pull out, and yes, so far the anonymous person who replaced her has only been named as Khadijah. Is there any reason to keep this page? She was only noteworthy for the speech she was meant to give, so it's now only an outdated and incorrect article about a person who didn't do something. If we get some updated and correct info, it should probably just be added to this page. Deadflagblues 06:14, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: OK - so we think it's not the same person but another lady with a similar name. Maybe this page should be renamed so that, rather than it being a biography, it is a page outlining the events surrounding the Alternative Christmas Message speech. What do you think? Triangle e 15:23, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This page already has quite a bit of info about the alternative christmas message, but not much for this year yet...the text in this article would fit nicely into that one if it's updated and we can find out a bit more about what happened and why. I'll put up a proposed merge tag for now. Deadflagblues 19:25, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Very good idea. It WILL fit in very nicely indeed. I was trying to find a page for the Alternative Christmas Message on wiki but I was unable to find anything. We should also get a redirect from Alternative Christmas Message to that part of the article shown there. Triangle e 23:21, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

message: The merge has now taken place and this page will now be converted to a redirect page. Triangle e 14:07, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge
Talk:Alexander Wood (merchant)

message: "John Beverley Robinson called Wood the "Inspector General of private Accounts."
Yes, very funny indeed, but the scandal was in 1810, and John Beverley Robinson wasn't born until 1821. So, what kind of timeframe are we looking at here? Did Robinson actually say this, or has the remark simply been unwarrantedly atrributed to him? I have commented this sentence out until such time as this can be clarified. The remark is presented as though it was one that Robinson made at the time, which is clearly untrue. Kelisi (talk) 20:29, 16 December 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: The story clung to Wood pretty much for the rest of his life, so it's possible that Robinson was speaking years after the fact — or that somebody else's comment was wrongly attributed to him. Despite that, I agree with your decision to remove it from the article pending a proper source for it. Never mind. Per the Dictionary of Canadian Biography, we were simply linking to the wrong John Beverley Robinson in error; the mayor's father, Sir John Robinson, 1st Baronet, of Toronto, was born in 1791 and also has the middle name Beverley. Bearcat (talk) 17:46, 14 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  John Beverley Robinson's alleged remark 
Talk:Zhou Dan

message: http://www.equalityforum.com/2006/china.cfm 
70.249.216.117 (talk) 05:12, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Zhou Dan and his grassroot GLBT and AIDS efforts in China was honored as part of Equality Fourm 2006. 
Talk:Isaac Rojas

message: I believe one of his postings was as director of the Argentine Navy Academy (Escuela Naval Militar). I have seen the picture of a Navy officer who is receiving his sword from Isaac Rojas.
Saulo35 12:34, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Untitled 
Talk:Lower house

message: The First chamber should be merged into this article. Now there's a redirect from First Chamber (capital c) to here. The same with Second Chamber, but there the redirect has the lower C. --Hu Totya 12:37, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: But the First chamber article is about an upper house, isn’t it? Or am I missing something? —Ian Spackman 15:47, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah these articles were a bit of a mess. I corrected, merged and redirected all of them. --Cpt. Morgan (Reinoutr) 10:43, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merging 

message: "There are exceptions to this however, such as the Prime Minister of Japan, who is formally selected with the approval of both houses of the Diet."
:This is misleading, as my understanding is that should the two houses disagree, the Lower House decision is final. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.224.24.222 (talk) 12:09, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Misleading 

message: Are you sure that the "common attributes" aren't just the ones of the U.S. lower chamber?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.145.65.164 (talk) 15:49, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Common attributes 

message: Where do the terms "upper" and "lower" house originate from? --70.142.41.253 (talk) 23:46, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Etymology 

message: explain it inside the article  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.78.32.145 (talk) 14:56, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  what is a lower house 

message: This article is completely wrong. Except in the Netherlands, 'second chamber' means the upper house of a bicameral legislature. Wikipedia's own Bicameralism article reflects the correct usage.Alan (talk) 18:20, 7 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Correct usage of "second chamber" 

message: lower house 129.205.113.181 (talk) 20:55, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Notes on lower house
Talk:Elshan Moradi

message: Most sources I found for this person write the surname as "Moradiabadi" (e.g., FIDE and ChessGames , but the article writes "Moradi-Abadi" and its title is "Moradi". Which is best? -SpuriousQ 12:45, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Common name? 

message: I saw some  absurd information and removed it. But I wish to complain since I fear it will be added back by whomever included it originally.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.242.142.199 (talk) 17:05, 7 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  cleaning absurdity- 
Talk:Garter belts

message: This is admittedly just the beginning of an article on garter belts.  They were quite common in the 1950s through the 1960s, until pantyhose was introduced.  However, they began to have a revival in the 1970s when some women found them more practical and more comfortable.  They also had sex appeal and were often featured in adult magazines, adult films, and in exotic dancing performances.  There are a number of stores, catalogues, and websites selling garter belts today.  Sallyrob 12:53, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Leven Powell

message: This article was started using public domain information from the Biographical Directory of the United States Congress.  LarryQ 12:55, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: I believe it was the episcopal church in Middleburg that decided to spell his name “Leven”  after he died. 65.117.64.10 (talk) 09:09, 6 February 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  His name was spelled “Levin”.
Talk:Cat tree

message: I made this a redirect to Cat because the current article does not have any sources and does not have an encyclopaedic tone.  If sources can be provided, it could well be a useful article.  As it stands, and as far as I can see from a brief Google search, it cannot stand on its own as an article.  No Retreat No Surrender 12:56, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: All your points are legit, and should be covered by the various templates at the top of the page.  Otherwise, you should put the page up for deletion by the admins and not simply redirect the page.  The page for Cat does not cover this topic at all and therefor it's a bad redirect. Flamesplash 18:13, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: What's less useful?  A complete absence of an article or a redirect to a germane topic?  Is it really useful to have an empty page?  It's not very good, really, to write an article then demand that someone else reference it.  I'm going to replace the redirect.  If you disagree, I think listing it for deletion would be appropriate.  No Retreat No Surrender 23:57, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Again, the proper channel is to list the page for deletion not replace it with a redirect.  Since it bothers you so much I will try to dig up a reference for the page.  Your effort is appreciated, though perhaps better focused on trashier sections of wikipedia. Flamesplash 01:33, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Redirect

message: Undoubtedly! A cat tree provides essential physical and mental stimulation, encourages exercise through play, and serves as a safe, dedicated space for your cat to indulge in natural behaviors without negatively impacting your home furnishings.
Meet our enchanting range of cat trees – a paradisiacal blend of fun, relaxation, and exploration for your cat. Tailored to meet varied feline preferences, our cat trees offer a splendid combination of scratching posts, perches, and hideaways, ensuring your cat’s leisure and entertainment seamlessly blend into one delightful structure. BestCatRugs (talk) 09:50, 29 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is a Cat Tree Useful?
Talk:Sweetblood

message: Dreaco Vampires are said to be the only known living kind of vampires. They thirst for blood when they are mad, they like to have other people thirst off of there blood, and they enjoy watching people bleed. They are not killers by far. They do not hunt and kill and they do not have to have blood to survive. They crave blood, however, when they are angry. They can see what, when and what a person they are mad at is doing.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 167.142.154.27 (talk) 14:34, 4 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dreaco Vampires
Category talk:Locomotive parts

message: The name of this category should be changed to 'Locomotive Components' instead of simply 'parts'. - MakeChooChooGoNow 13:04, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: In my mind your suggested name and the current category name are synonymous and I would not object to the change (except for the capitalization because "locomotive components" is not a proper noun). But since I see no action taken on your suggestion in nine years, such as bringing it up at WT:TWP or WP:CFD, the name stays for now. Slambo (Speak) 14:52, 2 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Category name change
Talk:AFA

message: Could you please include The American Federation of Astrologers (AFA), located at 6535 S Rural Road, Tempe, AZ 85283, under your USA listings?  It was founded May 4, 1938 and is the oldest and largest astrological organization in the US, perhaps the world.  Their website is here:  https://www.astrologers.com/  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.15.102.104 (talk) 15:27, 14 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  The American Federation of Astrologers
Talk:AFC

message: A fast food outlet - similar to the famous KFC (Kentucky Friend Chicken).
It's in Wombwell, Barnsley.
It's mint to be honest, they do delivery's too.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Yellowtarn (talk • contribs) 21:41, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Please see WP:DAB. The content you've added isn't appropriate for a disambiguation page.  In general Disambiguation is required whenever, for a given word or phrase on which a reader might use the "Go button", there is more than one Wikipedia article to which that word or phrase might be expected to lead. In this situation there must be a way for the reader to navigate quickly from the page that appears on hitting "Go" to any of the other possible desired articles.. As there is no page for a fast food outlet in Wombwell, the DAB isn't required. Unusual? Quite TalkQu 21:51, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  American Friend Chicken 
Talk:1st Civil Affairs Group

message: There are quite a number of IP edits making reverts — back to abbreviated Wikilinks rather than full name.  With no edit summaries, there is no apparent reason, though it appears that they are simply reverting good edits.  I've added a short-term semi-protection for this article.  If you are unable to edit this article as a result of the semi-protect, either register and edit, or leave a note here.  Thanks. — ERcheck (talk) 13:52, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Various IP addresses are being used to make the same reversion — adding information on CWO2 D.T. Harrington.  Please use this talk page to discuss reasons why you think this addition should be kept.  If community consensus says to keep it, then it will be kept.  But, including an individual person's name just because they were a part of the unit is insufficient reason for keeping it. IPs making this edit will be blocked unless the edits are discussed.  Semi-protection of the page again to prevent such edits is the next step. — ERcheck (talk) 02:19, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Looks like vanity edits to me. —Kenyon (t·c) 00:43, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

text: BTW the IPs are all from the same ISP, Verizon. —Kenyon (t·c) 00:55, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Likely the same person.  — ERcheck (talk) 15:10, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  IP reverts 

message: The 3rd CAG and the 4th CAG are two parallel groups.  Their articles are not.  The History section of the 3rd CAG is unreferenced and does not have a neutral voice.  The commanding officers are named with unreferenced, comments about their contributions.  Unless there is clear documentation, I propose that the section be deleted until verifiable, encyclopedic information is available. — ERcheck (talk) 00:58, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unreferenced History section &mdash; details 

message: Due to continuous vandalism by anon editors, this article has been temporarily semi-protected.  If you have questions, reasons why this should be lifted earlier, please contact me.  — ERcheck (talk) 00:02, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protection

message: *Not include, unless a reliable 3d party source is included as to why this is significant for the history of the unit, I recommend not including info on CJTF-CM in the article.  IMHO, we should not include deployments of 1 or 2 Marines from a unit in its unit history unless there is a compelling reason to do so.  FieldMarine (talk) 18:41, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Reaching Consensus on CJTF-CM
Talk:Glenn Hegar

message: I noticed that you reverted my removal of the templates on the Glenn Hegar page.  However, you have made no attempt to explain why the templates are still needed.  You also did not attempt to make any edits to the page to fix whatever you believe is still wrong with the article.  You need to engage in a discussion on the talk page of the Glenn Hegar article instead of arbitrarily reverting the good faith edits of other editors.  I look forward to your explanations on that talk page.  You can review your unexplained edit here: Paris1127's unexplained edit to the Glenn Hegar article.Bing Norton 23:12, 14 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  COI 

message: I noticed that you reverted my removal of the templates on the Glenn Hegar page.  However, you have made no attempt to explain why the templates are still needed.  You also did not attempt to make any edits to the page to fix whatever you believe is still wrong with the article.  You need to engage in a discussion on the talk page of the Glenn Hegar article instead of arbitrarily reverting the good faith edits of other editors.  I look forward to your explanations on that talk page.  You can review your unexplained edit here: Paris1127's unexplained edit to the Glenn Hegar article.Bing Norton 23:12, 14 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Glenn Hegar]]
Talk:Andernach chess

message: From the second paragraph "...it has not yet become popular as a game-playing variant."  Does anyone play this?  It seems to me that it would be almost impossible to win and would only be of interest to problemists.  Bubba73 You talkin' to me? 03:41, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I doubt it is played. ECV and CECV contain many variants of chief interest to problem composers. Pritchard makes no attempt to categorize based on application, leaving as comments and observations. Ihardlythinkso (talk) 06:44, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  does anyone play this?
Talk:Dark chess

message: OK, so this game obviously expresses a concept of Fog of war, but as someone dutifully noted, it was choppily placed. So, can someone put this in? AkvoD3 16:22, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fog of War 

message: I can see a few possible ways pawn promotion can work.  Let A be the player who has just promoted a pawn, and B be the other player:
# promotions are not notified to B at all
# B is informed merely of the fact that A has promoted a pawn, and nothing more
# B is informed of what piece has been promoted to, but not where
# B is informed of where a promotion has occurred, but not to what piece
# B is informed of both the piece promoted to and the square on which it occurs.
# when A promotes a pawn, the piece is made visible for B's next turn, but if the square would have been visible anyway then there is no special indication (and so, in this scenario, B doesn't know whether the piece has just been created by promoting a pawn).
I play Dark Chess on ItsYourTurn, but can't remember a time when my opponent has promoted a pawn in order to know what happens.  Going by the information here, it must be either 2 or 3.  The interface shows which pieces each side has lost, but does it change to reflect what pieces a player doesn't have on the board when a pawn is promoted?  (If so, it would be interesting to see what happens when a player chooses to have a second queen or a third bishop, knight or rook.)  Or does it just remain as indicating the pieces as they came off the board (and the promotion being indicated in some other way)? — Smjg (talk) 16:34, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: It varies between servers. My personal taste is 1: if you can't see the square, you shouldn't be able to know what happens there. Double sharp (talk) 07:35, 23 September 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Promotion 

message: The game may have been named "Dark Chess", so, presumably, the article should be at Dark Chess rather than Dark chess. There is an external link to an article by one of the inventors , but it only mentions the name of the game in the title. However, it does refer to it as "Darkness Chess", so perhaps the article should be titled Darkness chess or Darkness Chess. Hyacinth (talk) 10:44, 18 June 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Both Pritchard encyclopedias have it as "Darkness Chess". --IHTS (talk) 13:05, 18 June 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Do you think it should be moved? Hyacinth (talk) 22:49, 25 June 2018 (UTC)

text: Is there some indication "Darkness chess" is more common? Otherwise, we could just make a redirect to this article. Banedon (talk) 23:30, 18 June 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Article title capitalization