lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:GDSII

message: What are the alternatives to GDSII? I know that IBM accepts IC layout files in a format called GL1 or GL/1. Are there others? --HelgeStenstrom 09:21, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Alternative formats 

message: Is it really true that Cadence owns the GDSII format? If so, there should be an external reference to them, because they has the most accurate information on the file format. --HelgeStenstrom 09:24, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Format ownership and external references 

message: I thought that GDSII contained only 2-D data. If that's the case, the 3-D image in the article is deceptive. It should be replaced, or a clarification should be added. --HelgeStenstrom 09:26, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  3D view 

message: I removed part of the OASIS text format, since it was biased.
"It has been claimed that the OASIS format is between 10 to 50 times more efficient than GDSII."
This is IMHO a highly biased statement. We have written a GDS-II file optimizer that uses smart combinations of AREF an SREF, to search for regularity (not necessarily orthogonal), together with grid searches. When these files were than gzipped as well, the compressed files also reached factors up to roughly 30 times for complex (analogue) chip layouts. It should perform much better on digital circuits, with eg memory banks, which have lots more regularity.
The reference should compare like with like. An optimized OASIS generator should be compared with an optimized GDS-II file.
"Unlike GDSII, OASIS allows to store geometries as shape arrays."
As said, GDS-II has the AREF and SREF command.
"and does not exhibit intrinsic limitations such as the 32 bit coordinate space."
Based on a smallest dimension of 1nm, 32 bit allows you to draw a chip of 16 square meters. So where is the limitation in practice?
The highest compression ratios are also only possible on 16-bit or 24-bit integers of OASIS.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.132.19.10 (talk) 22:22, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removed biased OASIS info 
Talk:Set packing

message: I am very astonished that this NP hard problem can be solved in a complexity in O(\sqrt{|S|}), could you show us the proof of what you say?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.66.124.6 (talk) 09:23, August 29, 2007 (UTC) 
:I agree, there should be at least a reference to the paper mentioning the approximation algorithm. --Erel Segal (talk) 13:08, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

message: This example is terribly convoluted. Could we get one that contributes to understanding the problem, rather than confuses the reader even more? 76.104.24.220 (talk) 22:37, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Added a simpler example. What do you think? --Erel Segal (talk) 08:50, 9 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Example 

message: In the "Integer linear program formulation" section, what is c(S)? It seems redundant. --109.67.198.87 (talk) 06:40, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Fixed. --Erel Segal (talk) 13:07, 8 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  What is c(s)? 

message: The article says that Independent set (graph theory) is a special case of set packing. But it seems to me that these problems are equivalent - there is a bidirectional one-to-one reduction between them (see: http://cs.stackexchange.com/questions/18736/equivalence-of-independent-set-and-set-packing ). Is this correct? --Erel Segal (talk) 13:08, 8 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Independent Set vs. Set Packing 

message: There are cut-offs possible in the weighted set packing problem that are not possible in the corresponding weighted independent set problem. See https://cs.stackexchange.com/q/86848/83094 for an example. I think that this must be clarified, since people who need to actually solve instances of the weighted packing problem optimally would not do any good by using a weighted independent set solver.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mgoldenbe (talk • contribs) 19:47, 16 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Independent set is equivalent in complexity terms, but not in terms of computation effort needed to solve.
Talk:Monistic idealism

message: I have tried to clean up the page a fair bit but I think we need another expert who is a proponent of the ideals of monistic idealism. I have put down a few unbiased statements about physics because that is my field of expertise. Amit Goswami seems to be an expert in this field so maybe he could add some information. Although, the article already contains a very long quote of his and I am concerned of bias. I would also strongly suggest a name change to capitalize both words. Edmonds Jan 2011  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.14.255.124 (talk) 22:20, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: This page needs a lot of work

message: If there are no objections, I'll move for this article to be merged into Idealism and its specific contents deleted or transferred to more specific and substantive pages within the week. -Silence (talk) 07:59, 24 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge
Talk:North Queensferry

message: North Queensferry has a lot in common with South Queensferry. They are both called "Queensferry" by people in the surrounding area. Which one you're referring to depends on which side of the river you're on. They're often both called simply "the ferry" for the same reason.
North Queensferry has two seperate parts connected together. "Up the hill" is everything that isn't down by the shore. The flatter area near the shore is "doon the hill". The actual hill itself has only one single track road and is incredibly steep. 195.153.45.54 09:36, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [Untitled]

message: The photograph labelled as of the Town Pier is actually of the Railway Pier, until 1964 the terminus of the cross-passage foot passenger and vehicle ferry from Hawes Pier, (South) Queensferry.  The Town Pier of North Queensferry is at the foot of Main Street and is out of the photo to the right. (See Ordnance Survey "Street Atlas Edinburgh & East Central Scotland".) Jamjarface (talk) 22:25, 13 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Town Pier Photograph 
Talk:Emarketing

message: (this message also left on Talk:Internet marketing
I think we have a replication issue with Internet marketing - similar / ambiguous term & taxonomy. Can I suggest we need to merge content again & re-collate, BUT leave Redirects in place within the combined (extant) taxonomy. This way readers can still find their way from alternative words to the same meaningful documents, but within the preferred wiki tag (url) structure.--Rjcain 09:43, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge with [[Internet marketing]]
Talk:Bedroom farce

message: is a farce certainly, but not a bedroom farce.--RichardVeryard 09:47, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The episodes "The Wedding Party" (Fawlty Towers) and "The Psychiatrist" (Fawlty Towers) are bedroom farces. --DB1729 (talk) 06:19, 25 April 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Fawlty Towers]]

message: Someone care to explain what this means? Literally slamming doors?Cls14 (talk) 16:05, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I would assume so. It's about characters going in and out of the set quickly with just the right timing to create humour. ZayZayEM (talk) 03:01, 3 June 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: I am fairly certain "slamming doors" as used in this case is used as an allusion to a situation in which a couple (who are romantically/sexually involved) has an argument, which leads to one of them storming out of the room and slamming the door in anger. (Please confirm or refute my opinion). In any case, this phrase is ambiguous, and should probably be changed to something more explicit. IDWChen (talk) 02:20, 26 February 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Slamming doors
Talk:Interstate 75 in Tennessee

message: Why hte list is list as not compliant. I don't see anything wrong; to me it looks like proper format.--Freewayguy Msg USC 02:30, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Exit list 

message: What further needs cleanup on this article? RJFJR (talk) 16:15, 5 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Cleanup
Talk:Hewlett & Blondeau

message: This is an automated message regarding an image used on this page. The image :File:AW F.K.3.jpg, found on :Hewlett & Blondeau, has been nominated for deletion because it does not meet Wikipedia image policy. Please see the image description page for more details. If this message was sent in error (that is, the image is not up for deletion, or was left on the wrong talk page), please contact this bot's operator.  STBotI (talk) 14:43, 28 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: An image on this page may be deleted
Talk:Long Branch Police Department (New Jersey)

message: I've linked this article to the LawEnforcement Project and the New Jersey project. I've also placed a stub expansion request as well as a picture of the Long Branch PD seal. There isn't much information I can get offhand about this department, but since it is in my area I will research it some more and hopefully greatly expand this article in the future. --- Rebel3986 03:26, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Starting work
Talk:Extant literature

message: The term 'extant' is frequently used on articles about missing TV shows, particularly Doctor Who. Is it worth broadening this article to mention that? --MartinUK 10:11, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: [Untitled]

message: The definition given seems to be limited to manuscripts and quotations - do published works for which the manuscript is not found count as "extant"? --Random832 (contribs) 19:43, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: As far as my understanding goes, "extant" is only a fancy way of saying "at least one copy exists". Should this be on Wictionary instead of here? --Stephan Schulz (talk) 13:41, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  odd
Talk:North Oscura Peak

message: * This article was originally copied from the UNITED STATES AIR FORCE NORTH OSCURA PEAK FACT SHEET, a work of an agency of the United States government, which is therefore in the public domain. Contact the Air Force Research Laboratory, Office of Public Affairs, 3550 Aberdeen Avenue S.E., Kirtland AFB NM for details.
:moved from article page Kevin 10:14, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Original article attribution
Talk:Hittite cuneiform

message: I stuck the toospecialized and cleanup-jargon tags to the article, as well as a technical here, as it is really illegible for anyone not deeply into this. Also, the unicode tag isn't used, rendering the page on most computers illegible because of all the squares. Jalwikip 10:17, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: cuneiform is linked right from the first sencence, and I cannot imagine why anyone would try to read this who has not previously read all of cuneiform and Hittite language, carefully. You don't go and try reading Banach–Tarski paradox without first being familiar with axiom of choice, either. That said, I don't doubt it can be improved. This is little more than a quick writeup: . Concerning Unicode, no amount of tagging will help if you don't have a cuneiform font installed on your system. See here. --dab (𒁳) 11:30, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Need rewrite 

message: The font used here is Akkadian, not Hittite. Does Wikipedia really want to present this type of misinformation about an important ancient language?Johundhar (talk) 19:26, 28 December 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Font problems

message: Are the abbreviations C and V (V, CV, VC, CVC) always consonant and vowel? 
What is HZL? Hethitisches Zeichenlexikon? Does that mean Hittite-writing/Hittite-table(s) character lexicon? 
Misty MH (talk) 02:20, 25 June 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Abbreviations HZL, CV, VC, CVC, V 

message: I don't exactly have a conflict of interest, but I feel uncomfortable just deleting lots of information that people worked hard on, even though it is inaccurate. What do I do?Johundhar (talk) 03:51, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: If the issue is the font, then there is no reason to delete the text itself, because it is a presentation issue, not an issue with the data. If it is possible to use wiki markup to deliver a web font for Hittite, that would be ideal, and should be done. But if not, the choice of font is unfortunately up to the user’s machine, not up to the article. Serentty (talk) 21:44, 1 August 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for the info. Shows how very little I know about web font issues.Johundhar (talk) 12:37, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title: Wrong Font
Talk:Palmerstown

message: Somebody had an entry for an old railway station in Palmerstown. I removed this because it doesn't refer to the Palmerstown in Dublin 20, it's a different place altogether. There's never been a railway anywhere near Palmerstown although the Dublin-Lucan tramway did pass along the old Lucan Road.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.129.64.244 (talk) 16:03, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rail 

message: Anybody know why, and when, this unusual name was given to this part of Dublin? What was its name before this? 86.44.43.208 (talk) 02:03, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Name?

message: There is a civil parish of the same name called Palmerstown, Fingal. Should this parish be disambiguated to "Palmerstown, South Dublin"? Laurel Lodged (talk) 19:02, 23 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Need to disambig 

message: I edited the population to most recent census data. According to CSO, there are two divisions which both incorporate Palmerstown (Palmerston West, Palmerston Village) and both have been added. Is this fair? Stormy clouds (talk) 15:57, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: So long as you provide a Reliable source for the statistics such as the appropriate CSO links. ww2censor (talk) 22:02, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Population 

message: I wish to pre-emptively refute this claim: 
*Ciaran D'Arcy "Palmerstown wins back ‘W’ as council approves name change" The Irish Times 13 Jan 2015:
*:Traditionally referred to as Palmerstown, the area had, unbeknownst to locals, officially carried the moniker of Palmerston after an ordnance survey of 1863 sought to name it after a British lord of the same title.
* of Ireland 1841 Report p.356 lists under Uppercross Barony the parish "Palmerston P." containing the town "Palmerston T."
Note that it may still be true that the Ordnance Survey's decision to plump for spelling "Palmerston" was influenced by the received spelling for the title Viscount Palmerston (it was often the case that evidence from local landowners got more weight than evidence from locals of lower status) but the decision must have been taken before Sheet 17 of the first edition six-inch map of Dublin was published on 24 November 1843. jnestorius(talk) 15:45, 8 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Spelling not changed  in 1863
Talk:Introduction to Metaphysics (essay)

message: Martin Heidegger, the German, 20th century philosopher, taught a lecture class called "Introduction to Metaphysics" in 1935 that was he published in 1953 (1959 in the states) and was given a new translation and a new release in 2000.  It's considered a fairly important work and I was pretty surprised to find no link to any page for that work anywhere here.  Someone should make a page for it.  Fermentor (talk) 00:25, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Heidegger
Talk:Earnings before interest, taxes, and amortization

message: Who can say (and link) something useful about EBITAE?
If I google it it turns up in a few reference sites (mostly variants of one another) and a surprisingly limited number of mainly dutch-based companies: Buhrmann, Getronics, Wessanen.
Why would that be?
PJTraill 10:31, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Other terms

message: The last paragraph of this article might benefit from a realistic discussion about the advantages and disadvantage of valuing by EBITA versus EBITA -- and who potentially wins and loses from either, and how.
--Aboudaqn (talk) 22:52, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Why EBITA over EBITDA?
Talk:Camel Club

message: I don't think "He is killed at the end of Stone Cold" should be on this page.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.208.110.32 (talk) 18:10, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Spoiler
Talk:Catherine Feeny

message: At the moment this wiki article looks like a stub.
--kikumbob 10:42, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Category talk:Wikipedia articles incorporating text from Shetlopedia

message: Having looked through many of the pages that use this template, most of them copy the pages in their entirety from the Shetlopedia.com website.  Surely it would be better to reference the Shetlopedia website, rather than just copying the pages entirely.  Otherwise Shetlopedia will just be replicated on Wikipedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.129.111.126 (talk) 
:It depends on what gives the best information to readers. Over time, more content can be added, but it is better to have a good article to start off with. Lurker (said · done) 11:17, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

message: I started a discussion about Shetlopedia copyright at Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard#Shetlopedia. Mushroom (Talk) 17:03, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've replied on the copyright problems page. Lurker (said · done) 09:54, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Copyright
Talk:EMD 265

message: In comparison to the common 351 CI (5.8 L) Ford V8,  with a 4.0 in. bore, 3.5 in. stroke, this engine has more than twice the bore size, more than 3 times the stroke. When using the industry standard to calculate an engines total cubic inch displacement  would equal 16030 CI (262.6 l)
;3.14 x R2 x stroke x # of cyl. 
(R2 = ½ cylinder bore, x ½ cylinder bore.)
Wasn't sure if this information was suitable for the article but posted it here just in case someone was really interested.
:--DP67 (talk/contribs) 01:05, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  That's Impressive! 

message: The latest ad in Railway Age confirms that EMD has re-branded the 265 engine as the 1010 engine to reflect the cu in displacement instead of the bore diameter. I suggest that the article be renamed to reflect this.Sturmovik (talk) 16:27, 16 September 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Please explain why if both engines are part of the same family.  The 265 has a 1010cu in displacement, but was given a metric designation. The 1010J is an improved version of the 265(1010)H.  This is consistent with the 567A->567B->567C->567D and 645E->645F evolutions.  Finally neither page has enough information to stand on their own.  The H block was a failure with all US examples scrapped.  Combining the 1010 engines together will make for a better user experience.Sturmovik (talk) 18:00, 13 November 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  EMD 265 Engine Rebranded 1010 Engine
Talk:Simple English Wiktionary

message: The content of this article, upon creation, was copied from Simple English Wikipedia. For licensing purposes, I also copy the history of that article from this page to here:
    * (cur) (last)  12:45, 14 August 2007 Eptalon (Talk | changes) m (668 bytes) (Reverted edits by GoBoyz (talk) to last version by Creol) (undo)
    * (cur) (last) 12:39, 14 August 2007 GoBoyz (Talk | changes) (67 bytes) (undo)
    * (cur) (last) 12:38, 14 August 2007 GoBoyz (Talk | changes) (6 bytes) (Replacing page with 'ladida') (undo)
    * (cur) (last) 12:36, 14 August 2007 GoBoyz (Talk | changes) (771 bytes) (undo)
    * (cur) (last) 12:35, 14 August 2007 GoBoyz (Talk | changes) (713 bytes) (undo)
    * (cur) (last) 13:07, 25 June 2007 Creol (Talk | changes) m (668 bytes) (Revert to revision 400007 dated 2007-05-02 04:18:52 by W7bot using popups) (undo)
    * (cur) (last) 12:52, 25 June 2007 201.236.208.6 (Talk) (2,094 bytes) (Dear Sir/Madam:) (undo)
    * (cur) (last) 04:18, 2 May 2007 W7bot (Talk | changes) m (668 bytes) (BOT formating "Other websites" section) (undo)
    * (cur) (last) 03:04, 3 April 2007 W7bot (Talk | changes) m (BOT formating "External links" section) (undo)
    * (cur) (last) 09:55, 9 January 2007 Creol (Talk | changes) m (cat) (undo)
    * (cur) (last) 19:20, 8 January 2007 J Di (Talk | changes) (added Wikimedia Foundation to the text) (undo)
    * (cur) (last) 19:19, 8 January 2007 J Di (Talk | changes) m (stub) (undo)
    * (cur) (last) 19:19, 8 January 2007 J Di (Talk | changes) (most of this was repeating the obvious and/or unnecessary) (undo)
    * (cur) (last) 19:08, 8 January 2007 J Di (Talk | changes) (infobox) (undo)
    * (cur) (last) 18:53, 8 January 2007 J Di (Talk | changes) (link) (undo)
    * (cur) (last) 18:52, 8 January 2007 J Di (Talk | changes) (revert, Wikipedia:Simple English Dictionary doesn't even mention Simple English Wiktionary) (undo)
    * (cur) (last) 05:37, 25 June 2006 Netoholic (Talk | changes) (Revert. this "article" is self -promotion of a nearly-dead project. Far less notable than things we usually delete.) (undo)
    * (cur) (last) 10:05, 24 June 2006 Archer7 (Talk | changes) (rvt - sister project redirected) (undo)
    * (cur) (last) 17:11, 26 May 2006 Netoholic (Talk | changes) (#redirect Wikipedia:Simple English Dictionary) (undo)
    * (cur) (last) 02:25, 20 May 2006 Cromwellt (Talk | changes) (created short description)
huji—TALK 10:49, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
Talk:Nonreflexive relation

message: I've redirected this page to reflexive relation. This is a no-content page with no sources or substance. Apologies in my edit summary, I said "set" when I meant "relation" (although a relation often defined as a set). I was sort of brain-dead I suppose. --Cheeser1 02:49, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  redirect
Talk:SEPTA Route 23

message: Streetcar enthusiasts want the Route 23 returned to streetcar service, but the very extended target dates in the article show that this is unlikely to actually happen, unlike the Route 15, which has even had a new spur extended to the Sugarhouse Casino. I changed the article phrasing to past tense, but of course it can be changed back if a real prospect of streetcar service appears. --DThomsen8 (talk) 21:36, 20 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Past tense
Talk:Buckypaper

message: In line with WP:SOAP I have edited the first paragraph to remove a reference to a specific research group.Azo bob 10:55, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Removal of advertising

message: In the background information, there is too much about buckminsterfullerene, which is mainly irrelevant, and not enough about the discovery by Sumio Iijima of nanotubes. I propose that this section is completely re-written to shift the emphasis towards nanotubes. I wanted to gauge opinion before attempting this.Azo bob 10:55, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Re-writing of the background section

message: um, which? These do not have the same conductivity, copper is a conductor, silicon is a semiconductor. I know this is a citation from an article, but it isn't logical.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.189.65.98 (talk) 16:14, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Likewise for Steel or Brass on thermal conductivity, Brass is about 4x that of steel.  What is worse is below in the application section it implies that the thermal conductivity is extraordinary which neither steel or brass are. -- nicklinn (talk / contribs)  02:15, 27 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: "conducts electricity like silicon or copper"
Talk:FMK-3 submachine gun

message: Just curious, but what is this weapon's relevance to the PM-63 RAK? They seem to share quite a few characteristics. (118.210.18.136 (talk) 12:30, 11 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  PM-63 RAK 
Talk:Information manipulation theory

message: The following is from my user page:
Patche99z- please stop editing my page on Information Manipulation Theory for about a week.
:Okay - I was just trying to help, and to learn. By the way, you should put comments like this on my discussion page, not my user page, and sign it with four ~ signs. Patche99z 11:10, 29 August 2007 (UTC)