lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Davisson–Germer experiment

message: I would like to comment that the essential conclusion of this article is actually wrong according to Davissons and Germers original articles. Since Davisson and Germer worked with low energy elektron diffraction, LEED, it is not possible to use the Bragg equation in the way given in the article. This is due to the  wavelength dependent refraction index of the nickel crystal.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by A.Silverstone (talk • contribs) 13:57, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: This comment was right; I have corrected it. In fact the Bragg equation is never right for electron diffraction, at best close. Ldm1954 (talk) 22:18, 17 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Comment 

message: Some (at least superficial) description of the experiment should appear in the introductory paragraph.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.48.183.24 (talk) 01:04, 15 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Comment 

message: Check if the image is alright.
It addresses the points in bold from the text taken from the article:
The experiment consisted of firing an electron beam from an electron gun directed to a piece of nickel crystal at normal incidence (i.e. perpendicular to the surface of the crystal). The experiment included an electron gun consisting of a heated filament that released thermally excited electrons, which were then accelerated through a potential difference giving them a certain amount of kinetic energy towards the nickel crystal. To avoid collisions of the electrons with other molecules on their way towards the surface, the experiment was conducted in a vacuum chamber. To measure the number of electrons that were scattered at different angles, an electron detector that could be moved on an arc path about the crystal was used. The detector was designed to accept only elastically scattered electrons.
 Roshan220195 (talk) 20:51, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Looks good to me.  Go ahead and add it.  --ChetvornoTALK 21:51, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Looks like no-one has objected, and I agree that it illustrates what is described. I have removed the reqdiagram tag. Egmason (talk) 09:18, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Image
Talk:Schrödinger–Newton equation

message: In my opinion there is no point in mentioning a "classical mass density" ρ in the Poisson equation.
As long as Ψ is considered a one-particle wave-function the very idea of the SN equation is that the probability density is the (active gravitational) mass density. The point particle as such has a mass m. There is no point in introducting some sort of "smearing" of this mass. From a physical point of view ρ has no interpretation.
On the other hand, if you consider Ψ to be the center-of-mass wave-function of a many-particle system, the mass density ρ is of course meaningful describing the particle distribution but in this case first of all the SN equation is only approximately right in certain limits. More important it does not take the form given here, where ρ and the absolute-value-squared of Ψ are considered at the same point, but rather one where the convolution of ρ and the absolute-value-squared of Ψ act as a source in the Poisson equation.
· 78.12.159.251 (talk) 21:33, 16 February 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Considered done with my review Xaggi (talk) 10:00, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  ρ in the Poisson equation makes no sense 

message: The equation is referred to also as Schrödinger-Newton equations, Newton-Schrödinger equations etc. but since Penrose, who first used named it in his 1998 paper, used the name "Schrödinger-Newton equation" I would suggest this as the main name. Xaggi (talk) 08:23, 4 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Name of the equation 

message: Sooo.... there are recent experiments where micro-mechanical cantilevers (like the kind used in automotive airbag triggers) are placed into cavities with the walls sufficiently conductive that one can trap photons in the cavity, and couple the cantilever to the photon.  There's some kind of entanglement witness one can construct, to show that the photon really is entangled with the cantilever.  I forget how it works ... one looks at some microwave sideband coming out of the cavity.  Lets assume the experiment is correct ... is this violating the Penrose collapse condition, given that the cantilevers are (many?) trillions of atoms in mass? Or are the cantilevers still smaller than a Plank mass?  The displacement of them is also quite large, I imagine ... covering this experimental configuration in this article would seem like a really important thing, as these are maybe the largest objects placed in a superposition... 14.0.224.248 (talk) 13:24, 5 September 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  cantilever superpositions?
Talk:Continuum limit

message: In the continuum limit, the discrete random walk becomes the Wiener process, which has a fractal nature. The trajectory of a particle in Brownian motion, as the term is commonly understood, is more like a polygonal path. So what is the "true" Brownian motion referred to intended to mean?  --Lambiam 12:09, 5 December 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  "True" Brownian motion 

message: "A lattice model [having some property] corresponds to finding [a property] of the model." This sentence does not make sense. Mathematical models do not correspond to activities of studying them. Without further explanation or reference, the whole section is useless to the reader.  --Lambiam 12:18, 5 December 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Application in quantum field theory
Talk:John Rowlands (RAF officer)

message: @Abraham, B.S. reverted this edit because "knighthood is formally part of Rowland's name."  I do not dispute that, however, the guidance at MOS:BOLD "is to highlight the first occurrence of the article's title word or phrase in the lead section."  I removed boldface from "sir" because it is not part of "the article's title word or phrase." ~TPW 15:30, 31 January 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi. I note that MOS:BOLD says: "The most common use of boldface is to highlight the first occurrence of the article's title word or phrase in the lead section." That is, it is most common for the article's title word to be bolded, not that it must be. Cheers, Abraham, B.S. (talk) 20:41, 31 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  use of bold
Talk:Kovalam

message: Is it just me, or should parts of the text belong be shifted to wikitravel? --Soman 14:22, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

message: Kovalam beach why famous 136.185.213.172 (talk) 16:27, 30 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Kovalam beach
Talk:Crossing (physics)

message: Hi, I just stumbled over those q_i explaining the momentum conservation. The text doesn't say what q_i actually is. Assuming we're just looking at one vertex (e.g. a photon with momentum p interacting with an electron with incoming momentum k_i and outgoing momentum k'_i (here you could take i=1)) momentum conservation would require p=k_i-k'_i=:q_i. In  this interpretation q_i is the momentum transfer. I admit this is not a complete process since a single vertex is nonsense in the QED regime, but we could have taken \phi^3-theory. 
The other thing I was thinking of is to set q_i = k_i bearing in mind to use the right algebraic signs. This would mean to take all external legs of a diagram (apart from p) and naming their momentum q_i or k_i.
Maybe some of the experts could comment on this? I'm just a poor dumb experimental physicist, so I won't change the article myself ;-) Thank you.   — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.130.189.9 (talk) 17:15, 19 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unclear Notation 

message: Crossing is not a symmetry, it's an analytic continuation.Likebox (talk) 16:33, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Not a Symmetry
Talk:Rehoboth Carpenter family

message: I just added sentence "Three Carpenter family houses in Rehoboth are listed on the U.S. National Register of Historic Places:  Christopher Carpenter House, Col. Thomas Carpenter III House, and Carpenter House."  Please feel free to revise or remove.
The articles about the 3 NRHP-listed houses are currently very short stubs, based just on minimal information in the National Register's NRIS database.  Much more information, probably including biographical information about Carpenter family members who lived in them, is available in the NRHP nomination documents.  These are available for free upon request to the National Register.  You just need to send a request by email to nr_reference (at) nps.gov.  If the documents are available in scanned form, they will be emailed to you, otherwise they'll send a hard copy by postal mail.  Hopefully this might be helpful, for persons interested here to improve this article and/or to improve the 3 NRHP articles. --doncram (talk) 15:25, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: The Thomas Carpenter one was covered in HABS. --doncram (talk) 16:10, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: NRHP info

message: Hello. Yesterday evening I tried to put into the article something very interesting about how and why the Carpenters may have been lured to America, namely due to the romantic relationship between the eventual governor Wm Bradford, and the Carpenter cousin Alexander Carpenter's daughter Alice. DOCUMENTED BY A LETTER AMOS B. CARPENTER HAD FROM WILLIAM BRADFORD TO ALEXANDER CARPENTER.  Interesting, to say the least... I don't know what happened, why it was pulled down.  Can somebody help me 'help the article'.. to do it properly? THANK YOU. Christopher Carpenter Ceamescarpenter (talk) 18:47, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Responded to on users talk page. Jrcrin001 (talk) 18:17, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Alexander Carpenter's brood on the Anne. 'ours' on the Bevis.. and the lure of the new world.. apart from religion: a big fish contact here. 

message: The note for John Carpenter states that he was christened in 1626. This means it is likely he would have been born in 1626. However, the Bevis manifest states four children ages 10 and under. If John was born in 1626, this would have made him 12. Is it possible there is a John I and a John II (like Samuel)? I'm working on transcribing a family tree given to me by a relative in the 1980's. I don't know what her sources are, but I feel that so far her information has been fairly accurate. She states that John (the one that would have been on Bevis) was born circa 1628 and died May 23,1695, husband of Hannah, father of Samuel born 1666 in New York. 99.156.135.206 (talk) 15:26, 11 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  John Carpenter, passenger on Bevis? 

message: Both Wm1 & Wm2 are listed as marrying Abigail Briant. Same woman for both husbands, different women same name? PLS explain.75.172.97.140 (talk) 02:33, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  ? md to Abigail Briant 
Talk:Lodi Gardens

message: Note:  Project Banner with Delhi workgroup parameters was added to this article talk page because the article falls under :Category:Delhi or its subcategories. Should you feel this addition is inappropriate , please undo my changes and update/remove the relavent categories to the article -- Amartyabag  TALK2ME 04:03, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[WP:INDIA]] Banner/Delhi Addition 

message: It is written in the description plate at the site that Bara Gumbad was a tomb. Correction to be made in article--Vssun (talk) 15:51, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bara Gumbad 

message: The correct name as given in the references appears to be "Lodhi Gardens", not "Lodi Gardens". William Leadford (talk) 18:46, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why is this article called "Lodhi Gardens"? 

message: What sense does this make:
"Another tomb within theppppppppppp gardens is that of Sikander Lodi, which is similar to Mohammed Shah's tomb, though without the chhatris, it was built by his son Ibrahim Lodi in 1517, the last of Sultan of Delhi from Lodi dynasty, as he was defeated by Babur, First battle of Panipat in 1526, this laying the foundation of the Mughal Empire. His tomb is often mistaken to be the Sheesh Gumbad, and is actually situated in near the tehsil office in Panipat, close to the Dargah of Sufi saint Bu Ali Shah Qalandar. It is a simple rectangular structure on a high platform approached by a flight of steps. The tomb was renovated by the British, and an inscription mentioning Ibrahim Lodi's defeat at the hands of Babur and the renovation was included in 1866.Tomb of Ibrahim LodiIbrahim Lodi's Tomb"
This seems to say first that Sikander Lodi's tomb is in Lodi gardens and then that it is in Panipat, Haryana. --Sarabseth (talk) 15:29, 5 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Content of "History" section 
Talk:Psycho House

message: The book didn't receive much critical acclaim as did Bloch's first Psycho installment.
:Confusing statement. Does it mean that the original Psycho novel (published in advance of the film) did  -  or did not  -  achieve acclaim on first publication? Valetude (talk) 00:46, 20 March 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Acclaim
Template talk:Tpv5

message: Could an admin add  to the template (obviously in a <noinclude> section)? Several other templates on  have them, and it'd be nice to have this sort of standardized. EVula 17:50, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. —[admin] Pathoschild 18:20, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Excellent, thank you. EVula 18:37, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit to template
Talk:Lakshmi Vilas Palace, Vadodara

message: India's first car is bought by maharaja gaekwad  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 49.15.164.248 (talk) 07:44, 26 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Can i add references to this article? Dongar Kathorekar (talk) 15:53, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Improving this page
Talk:Weinberg angle

message: Does the expression, the 'running' of the angle, refer to renormalisation? If so should we link to it? --Michael C. Price talk 01:17, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes. linas (talk) 19:06, 18 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Running

message: I think a nontechnical introductory paragraph would be sufficient, leaving the rest of the article as it is. Is 'weak mixing angle' the same as the general term 'mixing angle', i.e. for all particles? Lostart (talk) 02:09, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: "Mixing angle" is a general term which refer to any rotation angle that links the "base states" (for lack of a better word) of something into the eignenstates of something. The Cabbibo angle is another such mixing angle, but it's never referred to as the "weak mixing angle" (indeed the Cabbibo angle is a quark mixing angle). Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 08:12, 6 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Technical

message: Should it be call Weinberg-Salam Angle? Since Salam also had contributed. It would be appropriate to move this page as Weinberg-Salam Angle. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ironboy11 (talk • contribs) 
:No one calls it the Weinberg–Salam angle, so the answer to that question is no. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 07:50, 6 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: The modern name is "weak mixing angle", so W!, as stated. Old timers learned it from Weinberg's paper and so have referred it as such forever, without confusion; especially since it was originally introduced by Glashow, instead, in 1961, at the very least. It's best to stick to mainstream usage. Cuzkatzimhut (talk) 19:19, 4 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Name

message: Could someone explain the meaning of g' in two words if it is not the strong charge. The mere refer to SU(2) and U(1) doesn't tell me anything. Ra-raisch (talk) 18:26, 4 August 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: I corrected the "strong". The hypercharge U(1) has absolutely, resolutely, finally, nothing to do with the strong/color coupling....  What explanation would you have in mind? I'l throw in a link to Weak hypercharge. Basically, what e is to the photon field Aμ 'before' the advent of the SM, so in the mid 60s, g' is to the Bμ field... Cuzkatzimhut (talk) 18:42, 4 August 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: thanks, that is splendid now. Ra-raisch (talk) 18:48, 4 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  g' 

message: Is the Z Boson the same as the Z0 Boson indicated in this article?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.40.48.159 (talk) 02:50, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes it is. The 0 represents that the Z boson has neutral charge. Datolo12 (talk) 08:58, 16 March 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Z and Z0
Talk:Mehrangarh Fort

message: Note:  Project Banner with Rajasthan workgroup parameters was added to this article talk page because the article  falls under :Category:Rajasthan or its subcategories. Should you feel this addition is inappropriate , please undo my changes and update/remove the relavent categories to the article --  TinuCherian     (Wanna Talk?)   - 07:32, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: [[WP:INDIA]] Banner/Rajasthan workgroup Addition 

message: looking at the article, the photograph of mehrangarh fort with the zipline seems to have a few issues:
# the authenticity of the image (IMHO it looks p'shopped, the line seems to go 'down' to the fort but there's no higher point in jodhpur)
# relevance of the image to the article
# no up to the standard
i would like to either replace the image with a better image or remove it altogether. welcome for a discussion...
--ksheer 05:15, 17 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Issue with Mehragarh Fort image with the zipline 

message: I am a photographer and I very recently did a very extensive photo series on the Mehrangarh Fort. The link is http://animeshray.com/mehrangarh-fort-i-exterior/. Do you think it will be appropriate to add this to the External Link section?--Wikiaray22 (talk) 06:12, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: No - If you want to add images then do it properly rather than using Wikipedia to drive traffic to your own website.  See WP:donating copyrighted material for how you can do this. noq (talk) 12:50, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for your great insight.--Wikiaray22 (talk) 19:23, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Can this site be added to external links?
Talk:List of Loonatics Unleashed characters

message: Is Pierre Le Pew's name a reference to Pierrot Le Fou, an episode of the show Cowboy Bebop?   Because it seems to be.
76.189.99.150 07:09, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: I just find it kind of strange that Rev would be mentioned between Ace and Lexi. I guess there`s no need to change it, but since Lexi`s second-in-command, and Rev is established as a character duo with Tech, wouldn`t it make more sense to place Lexi right after Ace and not also Rev? 
It just seems like some obsessed fan was trying to make Rev out to be more popular than Lexi or something. Again, there`s no real need to change the character listing, but it just bugs me a little. I could go right out and change it myself, but I`d like to know why Rev`s position was changed in the first place. 
Also...why was Lexi mentioned as having a girlish personality? So she made two comments about looks. So did Duck. Does that mean he has a girlish personality? --Crossfire 7 21:57, December 17, 2006 (UTC)(Signature edited for clarity)
:Actually, Duck does do a lot of effeminate things in the show, consider that like Lexi he was also fawning over the pets. At the same time he moons over Zidavia a lot so *shrug* As for Rev, I actually think Tech should come before him (Slam can go at the end). DD was technically made team leader temporarily I think so having him after Lexi is okay. Tech honestly seems like the real team leader, it'd be awesome if he could go first but I guess it should be Ace. Should Zidavia also be listed with the 6 of them? Tyciol 22:14, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Rev`s position... and effeminateness

message: We should definately add that if something ever is found out about it. I posted the same inquiry about Wile E. Coyote. Tyciol 22:14, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Tech's initial 'E.'

message: Could someone please post some links to the fanfics mentioned on the main page? I'd love to read some of them, especially "Valentine Pursuits" :)
Aviedit 07:43, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fanfics question
Talk:Mughal garden

message: charbagh structures in buddhist structures in Sigiriya a thousand years earlier shows that they were present in india/south asia much before persian gardening designs were implemented by the mughals, i think this arena needs better research, regards. 175.137.72.188 (talk) 17:42, 22 February 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  charbagh 

message: Sorry, but what you are attempting makes frankly no sense. 1) "Mughal Garden" simply refers to the gardens made by Mughals, its not anything specific. 2) They also don't only exist in India per the article. 3) See also WP:COMMON NAME - "Amrit Udyaan" is certainly not used in English, let alone its sources. 4) The source talks about the Rashtrapati Bhavan garden (a single garden) which is being renamed "Amir Udyaan". HistoryofIran (talk) 13:15, 28 January 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Also, why are you editing through several accounts/IPs?    --HistoryofIran (talk) 13:25, 28 January 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Now it's up to 6 new IPs/accounts   , and still no reply here. --HistoryofIran (talk) 15:02, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

text: I'm not buying it. Care to explain why multiple random accounts/IPs are still aiding you in your edit warring?  --HistoryofIran (talk) 11:55, 29 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Name
Talk:Murud-Janjira

message: In the history chapter something is wrong as Malik Ambar is mentioned two times - once in the 15th century then in the 17th century. renowned Malik Ambar, general and politian, born in Harrar, Ethiopia, lived in the 17th century.--Tervlugt (talk) 20:45, 2 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Genealogical research about Malik Ambar background is the key to solve the confusion. as far as i know the famous one served Ahmednagar. but some mention Malik Ambar twice helped the Mughals. i too were suspicious about different malik AmbarAhendra (talk) 15:18, 3 March 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Someone has corrected it, since your comment. Wisdood (talk) 18:30, 3 August 2023 (UTC)
Talk:Muthyala Maduvu

message: One or more portions of this article duplicated other source(s). The material was copied from: http://www.travelagentbangalore.com/bangalore-tours.html. Infringing material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.) For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you.  Minimac (talk) 10:18, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: In further detail, the copyrighted content was added in this edit and hasn't been blanked or removed by anyone since it appeared. Minimac (talk) 10:18, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copyright problem removed