lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Smithsonian Institution

message: How about affiliated institutions like Blackhawk Museum in Danville, California, where the Smithsonian's Tucker automobile is parked?  Ortolan88
----
Needs a section on the associated record label of historical and cultural recordings of world music.  heidimo  15:06, 9 Mar 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: In 2005 Smithsonian Press folded owing to financial and administrative ineptitude.  Most authors (including me) were told nothing of the impending collapse, and some had to approach their congressmen to obtain the barest of facts. Thousands of unsold books were remaindered with no possibility of authors recovering royalties on those volumes.  Clearly the regents and congress were asleep at the switch, and apparently there has been no accountability at any level.  Lacking further contacts in the DC area, I cannot pursue the matter but it should be addressed in this article.  How a government-funded business goes broke should make illuminating reading.
B. Tillman, May 2007
:How is this "Smithsonian Press" different from the Smithsonian Institution Scholarly Press which per the web page seems to be going strong?--2606:A000:131D:4413:AD7B:3D15:F242:D462 (talk) 20:56, 28 December 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Smithsonian Press

message: As I understand it, the Smithsonian has a document that gives suggested usage for museums. I was told about this by a (non-Smithsoniam) museum curator regarding the units for jet engine thrust.  It might be that it is only available to museum curators, but I suspect not. I am interested in it, as it might also be useful for some questions related to WP pages, though not necessarily this one.  I don't even know what to call it, which complicates doing a web search. Gah4 (talk) 10:19, 19 April 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  museum guide
Talk:Seinfeld

message: It might be more helpful if the streaming section headings are listed by country rather than by streaming service? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aswiseman (talk • contribs) 21:54, 25 May 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Home Media 

message: It appears the first two items in the Notes section are identical. Can these be merged into one? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aswiseman (talk • contribs) 21:59, 25 May 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: I went ahead and merged these notes, as well as attempting to clean up the clunky wording. Could still be clearer, though, and this info still needs a source to cite. Mkcaldwell (talk) 18:14, 24 January 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Notes 

message: The article makes no mention of the show being part of NBC's "Must-See TV" line-up, or of the fairly significant crossovers with other, unrelated series, such as the revelation that Paul Reiser's character in Mad About You previously rented the apartment that Kramer later moves into after him, right across the hall from Jerry Seinfeld's apartment. rowley (talk) 00:51, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cross-overs? 

message: "The in-show character is a mild germophobe"
Isn't that spelled germanophobe?? 46.188.167.218 (talk) 13:22, 29 September 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: No? If you're afraid of germs then you're a germophobe. ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 13:23, 29 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Germanophobe 

message: The redirect 'feld has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at  until a consensus is reached.  estar8806 (talk) ★ 22:53, 16 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  "[[:'feld]]" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]]
Talk:Integration by parts

message: :An alternative notation has the advantage that the factors of the original expression are identified as f and g
Why is that an advantage?  It seems arbitrary to say it's better to call them f and g than to call them u and v. Michael Hardy 00:27, 15 Nov 2003 (UTC)
replies: text: That's not what I meant. The "classic" notation tells you what to do when you are integrating "f(x)g'(x)". The "alternative" integrates "f(x)g(x)". See? -- Tarquin 18:58, 15 Nov 2003 (UTC)
thread_title:  (Untitled section) 

message: I am in strong doubt about most of the given names for the tabular form of repeated integration by parts. Especially, I have a hard time to assume that this film title is really given in the cited reference. Purgy (talk) 17:18, 29 July 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: For now I consider this as settled. Purgy (talk) 07:05, 30 July 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Naming of tabular form 

message: There's a strange math formatting glitch occurring on this page, though only on the desktop version, with a wide page. The formatting for "dv = v'(x)dx" in the third paragraph mysteriously has the second v rotated 90 degrees counter-clockwise, as well as mirrored (I think). Worth noting is that this doesn't show up on the mobile version, neither in the app or on en.m.wikipedia.org, and it disappears when the window is made narrower. I would attempt to fix it, but I'm personally entirely clueless on why this occurs
On further inspection, there are lots of occurrences of this glitch on this page, seemingly at random. There's more twisted vs, but I've also spotted at least one x, and even a prime.
TerraDOOM (talk) 06:21, 7 October 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Weird formatting glitch on the desktop version
Talk:Fundamental theorem of calculus

message: The statement of the first part says that f is uniformly continuous.  But the proof does not prove that f is uniformly continuous.  The proof doesn't prove that f is continuous at all. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:449:8400:242f:add9:abd3:3ad7:ca75 (talk • contribs) 13:50, 2 August 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: "f is uniformly continuous" is a statement and thus does not need to be proved. It is a supposition for the proof that follows. If a function is NOT continuous, then the proof does not apply. 149.32.192.38 (talk) 21:55, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proof of the first part 

message: I'm wondering whether the article has the order of the Fundamental Theorems of Calculus reversed... several sources (https://math.stackexchange.com/questions/3635636/confused-about-the-fundamental-theorem-of-calculus, or Calculus, 11th edition by Larson and Edwards, to name a few) state that the First Fundamental Theorem of Calculus gives int:a-->b (f(x))=F(b)-F(a), while the Second Fundamental Theorem of Calculus states that d/dx (int:a-->x (f(t))dt) = f(x). This seems to go against the naming used in this article. Apologies for the lack of proper mathematical notation in this post. PeterRet (talk) 06:57, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Order of theorems 

message: In the section "Proof of the first part", there is a line saying "the latter equality resulting from the basic properties of integrals and the additivity of areas.". I am not aware of any Wikipedia page which lists basic properties of integrals. Also, the properties which are being used should be mentioned. 183.83.216.129 (talk) 11:53, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Further Explanation Required
Talk:Character

message: Why is it being reported that the Greek etymon is "caracter", with no "h"?  "Ch" is the conventional way of transliterating the Greek letter known to us who speak English as "chi".   -- Mike Hardy
==Removed etymology==
:The word originates from the Greek word  via the Latin word character, an instrument for marking or graving.
per WP:NOT —Wahoofive (talk) 16:25, 30 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Etymology question

message: character (word) (originally character (sign)), appears to have been created earlier this year in an attempt to establish an article that encompasses several general uses of the word character. However, it seems to be little more than a combined wiktionary entry / disambiguation page masquerading as an article. There is already a character disambiguation page which adequately directs readers to the many character-related articles on Wikipedia, and character (word) offers nothing over this other than being a bit more explicit in how it goes about saying that the word character gets used in all these different ways.
I was going to nominate the character (word) for outright deletion due to redundancy, but it appears policy is to instead suggest a merge in this kind of situation. Therefore, I'm suggesting that the content of character (word) be reduced to a bare minimum and merged into both character (this disambig page) and the Wiktionary entry for character. —mjb (talk) 03:20, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't know what exactly you're suggesting to merge, but the disambig page shouldn't contain paragraphs of information. If the (word) article contains links to articles that could be referred to as just "character", those links should be included on the dab page with a brief phrase of description, but nothing else. I have no objection to the (word) article being deleted, as it does seem to be essentially a redundant dab page. Propaniac (talk) 20:39, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge proposal

message: hw can we measure one's character?
what is the meaning of character?
Characters  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.121.16.151 (talk) 06:58, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  character... 

message: What on EARTH is this?!?!?! This age is SOOOO Rubbish! Somebody fix it PLEASE - somebody must care that I don't have a decent explanation of character!  This isn't going to get me one is it?
*I've fixed the page, it looks like someone just copied a load of crap from some website, getting rid of the make up of the text, either way it doesn't belong on a disambiguation page. Feyre (talk) 01:52, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  PLEASE
Talk:Aeroplane

message: Well, I decided to be WP:BOLD and implement what I saw as the best interests of the encyclopedia and its readers, and what was largely supported by the germane comments to my poorly-framed question just above. In a nutshell, I moved much of the material formerly at Fixed-wing aircraft to this page, and rewrote that article as a summary article after the fashion of its cousin Rotary-wing aircraft.
This benefits the readers because now we actually have an article about planes, just as we do about helicopters, gliders, and kites. We also have a concise summary article about fixed-wing craft, the same way we do about rotary-wing craft. 
As for the title, I picked "Aeroplane" because from what I can tell, that was the original title of the article oh so many years ago. I think we're all mature enough to handle an article at a title we're unfamiliar with. Please see Color, Aluminium, and Maize. I think even those who would prefer "Airplane" agree that "Aeroplane" is better - and more accurate - than "fixed-wing aircraft". Because that's really the issue - while all planes are fixed-wing aircraft, not all fixed-wing aircraft are planes. The whole purpose of an encyclopedia is to provide accurate, non-misleading information. Now we do. I obviously expect this to be controversial. But I also firmly believe that this is the will of the community, and that we now have a better encyclopedia. Dohn joe (talk) 01:09, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article reconfiguration 
Talk:Gasoline engine

message: This article needs to redirect to internal combustion engine. While I recognize that diesel and other engines are IC engines that are not also gasoline engines, there's nothing here that is different or valuable.  --User:Tysto
:Agreed, I was rather surprised that this was a separate article.  I put the  on the article, in case anyone wants to discuss it more first.  --Interiot 15:39, 16 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Redirect
Talk:Timaeus (historian)

message: Having read the source and a number of other sources on this historian, I can confirm that in fact this source is superior to any other sources one might cite for this subject. It contains and consolidates within itself all other English sources on the subject, and quite a few more besides, and reviews them in relation to each other. It would not improve this article to cite additional sources.
68.37.237.100 (talk) 04:09, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Source 

message: Which is the correct form, Τιμαῖος, as is written now, or Τίμαιος, as in the name of the Greek article and as is said in the Wikidata page and the Polish article? Liadmalone (talk) 00:08, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Transcription
Talk:Caecilius of Calacte

message: An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Of Calacte Caecilius. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so.  -- Tavix (talk) 20:28, 15 December 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Of Calacte Caecilius" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]]
Talk:Black people

message: This may sound stupid but I have crossed countless people who have called themselves black althought they physically look white. So that made me ask:
Can a person who looks white but has black people in their bloodline be labeled “black?” 80.200.150.84 (talk) 11:16, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: As our article makes entirely clear, 'Blackness' is ultimately a social construct. What constitutes 'looking black' (or 'looking white') varies from place to place, and time to time. It is routinely contested. Attempts to divide humanity with its complex patterns of diversity into simplistic binary categories are rooted in the realms of politics, not science. And to be more specific with regards to your question, there have been contexts where having any 'black people in your bloodline' made you 'black' in the eyes of (white) social norms, regardless of appearance, and regardless of any own personal identification: see the so-called one-drop rule in the United States. 'Appearance' is but a small part of what society constructs its arbitrary racial categories from. AndyTheGrump (talk) 13:05, 9 September 2023 (UTC)

text: What's the difference of black people and African people 2601:2C3:C77E:F3D0:645C:7CEC:508:FBE9 (talk) 23:58, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Black, White Or Both 

message: Black also includes the Indigenous people of India as Well as The original Dravidian speakers of india. This is non inclusive and must be changed immediately. 
Also need to add the Indigenous People of India and Dravidian people onto the page Under South Asia 2600:1702:3C80:9850:D1AB:E63E:8D0C:454 (talk) 16:04, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. The Herald (Benison) (talk) 17:08, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 7 January 2024 

message: In 1950, the Apartheid government of South Africa introduced the Population Registration Act No.30 which effectively forced the Xhosa people and other nations organic to the land to be registered under the National Socialist system into either one of four categories, Black, White, Colored and Asian. 
This Act effectively alienated the Xhosa people from their collective identity as a nation unto themselves and forced the label "Black African" on them as a social and legal status. 
This Act not only alienated the Xhosa from their collective identity but also from their resources and property as well with the implementation of the Black Codes from the 1913 Black's land Act and Groups Areas Act. 
This has been the cause of cultural erosion in this community and has prevented the redressing of many injustices that were committed against the Xhosa people. Benjamin knox (talk) 23:34, 22 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Black as a Social class  in South Africa
Talk:Demographics of Japan

message: The last update of historic population is wrong. It should include all people in the country and not only the japanese.
I suggest to go back to the previous figures Toto88888888 (talk) 12:10, 23 April 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Issue population 

message: The Historical Population section is weirdly (if not badly) worded.  The 4th paragraph is the worst, but the entire section is not in chronological order and the theme is jumping around. 45.62.186.36 (talk) 00:32, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Make an account and do it! Tweedle (talk) 12:24, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Historical Population - rewrite? 

message: In the Vital Statistics table, the figure for live births in 2023 gives as a source a CNN article (!) which actually quotes a different figure. 51.6.197.190 (talk) 14:07, 13 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Quoted figure not in linked reference 

message: Why is 127,557,000 marked in blue? Chaptagai (talk) 20:59, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vital Statistics
Talk:Dirk Diggler

message: Is it really necessary to have a separate entry for a fictional character in a movie?  Sixtus LXVI 04:31, 17 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: An anon editor restored the article and I guess no one noticed.  I've returned it to a redirect. -Verdatum (talk) 15:28, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Untitled comments 

message: Why is there a redirect for Eddie Adams (actor)? There really is an actor out there named Eddie Adams: http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1022481/ - it's making articles that refer to him (and should be a red link since there's no article on him yet) come here....plange 22:06, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: removed redirect and created stub --plange 22:56, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Redirect? 

message: You should write the in-world not real-life age.For example age:tenage-middle 20's(movie).Or just not write it at all. He is not a real-life character he is totaly fictious(though based on John Holmes)  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.124.51.178 (talk) 04:56, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  AGE
Talk:Great Expectations

message: The edit by Joombi are slightly better, subject to correcting for British style. Rwood128 (talk) 11:57, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recent edits 

message: Hope everyone's well. Reread the article today and had some thoughts. Jotting them down while I remember.
* tighten the prose
* verify references support the text that cites them. Definitely a long-term project.
* use any unused references to expand the article (which were translated and copied from the French-language Wikipedia article, possibly the version that was promoted to GA or FA there)
* change the publication schedule table into a plain list
* Combine the § Novels influenced by... and § Adaptations into a § Legacy section?
* Trim and proseify § Adaptations, use proper subsection headings instead of bold (WP:PSEUDOHEAD)
* Update article with more recent literary analysis and criticism. For example, expanding on or responding to postcolonialist readings, feminist analysis, analysis through an economic lens (capitalism and its influences?).
Most of these are overarching, ongoing, long-term tasks. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 11:55, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Big long-term tasks 

message: Section about pips sister after the attack;
"Mrs Joe changes and becomes kindhearted after the attack"
Does she? I think she has serious brain damage... 82.17.47.75 (talk) 19:09, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Seems like a weird thing to say? 

message: The title was borrowed from Philip Sidney's sonnet sequence Astrophil and Stella:
21
Your words, my firend, (right healthful caustics) blame
 My young mind marr'd, whom Love doth windlass so,
 That mine own writings like bad servants show
 My wits, quick in vain thoughts, in virtue lame;
 That Plato I read for nought, but if he tame
 Such doltish gyres; that to my birth I owe
 Nobler desires, lest else that friendly foe,
 Great Expectation, were a train of shame.
 For since mad March great promise made of me,
 If now the May of my years much decline,
 What can be hoped my harvest time will be?
 Sure you say well, "Your wisdom's golden mine,
 Dig deep with learning's spade." Now tell me this,
 Hath this world aught so fair as Stella is? Eroica (talk) 10:53, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Title
Talk:613 commandments

message: Does the proper spelling of  really contain a quotation mark? Hairy Dude (talk) 15:43, 27 August 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: In Hebrew yes. The "quotation mark" is not a quotation mark, but an indication of an acronym. Debresser (talk) 02:26, 28 August 2020 (UTC)
replies: text:  Apologies, I thought it looked out of place, because it sticks up above the x-height. At some point it was actually a straight quotation mark ("). But checking it closely, it is in fact U+5F4 HEBREW PUNCTUATION GERSHAYIM. Hairy Dude (talk) 12:39, 28 August 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Spelling 

message: Can the 2 tables be modified? Have to go back to the editor who posted the lists? 
Can the lists be displayed in a table with columns and search/sort/filter capability? Riskit 4 a biskit (talk) 20:25, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Add do’s/dont’s/temple indicators to the listings 

message: At The mitzvah to write a Torah scroll, the article states The mitzvah to write a Torah scroll (Hebrew: מצוות כתיבת ספר תורה) is the last mitzvah of the 613 Jewish commandments., while this article lists this mitzvah as second to last, with Not to drink wine poured in service to idols as the last, or Not to retain her for servitude after having sexual relations with her in the list labeled Typical Order.  57.135.233.22 (talk) 07:54, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  The mitzvah to write a Torah scroll 

message: You quoted an English Bible translation, and I don't think that's a good source for a Jewish tradition. I think a change here needs a better source, a Jewish one. Rsk6400 (talk) 19:00, 23 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Daughter of father's wife
Talk:Hans Heinrich Thyssen-Bornemisza

message: While the research is impressive and the effort appreciated, this and related articles are accumulating too much genealogical information in violation of WP:NOT. The information should be cut by at least half, and integrated with other biographical information in a more encyclopedic format. Lethiere (talk) 19:17, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Genealogy

message: Contradicting sources: according to the New York Times , his birthday was 13 April 1921, and he died 27 April 2002. What is right? --FordPrefect42 (talk) 09:42, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dates of birth and death 

message: Who is the she mentioned ? -- Beardo (talk) 21:37, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Assets dispute
Talk:Written Chinese

message: An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect :中文 and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 April 12#中文 until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.  CrazyBoy826 02:39, 12 April 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  "中文" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]] 

message: This section seems to conflate the scope of this article with that of Chinese characters and Chinese family of scripts—I've already removed its summary in the lead. While mention in passing is unavoidable and proper, I think the section should be mostly removed. Remsense诉 00:55, 18 February 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, it does seem to be off-topic. Kanguole 10:25, 18 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Inclusion of "Other languages" section