lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Four Winds (EP)

message: i removed the "expected future album" tag, seeing as how this album is already out, i found it unnessecary. i hope this is satisfactory. 67.158.156.1 08:49, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, thank you for being bold and removing it. Have a nice day. :) W3stfa11/Talk to me 03:49, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

text: SongMeanings is one place where you can discuss this. –Pomte 01:28, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Irreversible process

message: A reference was recently added to this article using the Cite DOI template. The citation bot tried to expand the citation, but could not access the specified DOI. Please check that the DOI doi:10.1393/ncb/i2006-10035-8 has been correctly entered.  If the DOI is correct, it is possible that it has not yet been entered into the CrossRef database.  Please  complete the reference by hand here. 
The script that left this message was unable to track down the user who added the citation; it may be prudent to alert them to this message.  Thanks, Citation bot 2 (talk) 10:16, 30 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reference to broken DOI 

message: Is there any interest for a brief quotation of refereed papers on  R. M. Santilli's studies of irreversibility via the Lie-admissible coverings of Lie's formulations? If so, I can provide a few references for consideration. Note that these studies occurred at the level of mechanics and are now under study at the level of thermodynamics as well. Cheers. Zkurko, November 26, 2013.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zkurko (talk • contribs) 18:35, 27 November 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lie-admissible treatment of irreversibility
Talk:Isothermal titration calorimetry

message: "ITC is a quantitative technique that can directly measure the binding affinity (Ka), enthalpy changes (ΔH), and binding stoichiometry (n) of the interaction between two or more molecules in solution."
I'm not sure it's fair to call these direct measurements.  It's fairly uncontroversial to obtain them from ITC, but the instrument is basically just a calorimeter.  The only primary data obtained is heat change/flow (ie enthalpy).  Just because the software that runs the instrument reports these three things up front doesn't mean they're being directly measured. I know it may sound like a semantic argument, but the way it's written now it makes it sound like they're direct measurements. I(q) = User(q)·Talk(q) 21:44, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, only the reaction enthalpy is measured directly. Kbuessow (talk) 10:28, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Measured directly? 

message: The figure suggests that the slope of the curve corresponds to the Ka value. That can't be true. I am also not sure that the 'midpoint' exactly corresponds to the stoichiometry. These labels are misleading because Ka and stoichiometry are determined in a completely different way. The are derived by curve fitting the whole thermogram according to the law of mass action.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kbuessow (talk • contribs) 10:35, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Figure ITC thermogram
Talk:Stuck River (Washington)

message: If I read this correctly, the Stuck River is now completely part of the White river? Perhaps we should merge the two articles? --Measure 00:47, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes the entire Stuck is now the White River's last reach before joining the Puyallup River.  On lots of maps the words "Stuck River" are still printed along the White River in this reach.  It does seem as if the info on the Stuck River could easily just be part of the White River page. Pfly 01:34, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

message: The White has taken over the course of the Stuck, but the Stuck is still referenced in place names and legal descriptions, so it might still deserve its own article, however brief.  Many popular maps still call the river the White River north of the county line and the Stuck River south of the county line, e.g. Thomas Guide maps, and King County still uses Stuck River in the name of one of the flood control levies on the southern White River. Jmputnam 04:35, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Stuck still legally distinct in some ways 

message: I found and added two sources that say the name comes from an Indian source. I left in the claim that it came from the community of "Stuck" even though it seems dubious. One of the sources I found indicating an Indian origin is from the same website that the "community of Stuck" claim is sourced to (the Whilte River Journal). Usually communities are named after rivers rather than the other way around. I think the community of Stuck was named after the river and Dave Sprau in his article jumped to a false conclusion (unless by community he meant one of the Indian villages, but it doesn't read that way). But without more information I am not positive, so I left it in and added the words "probably" and "possibly" to the two claims. I also took out a recently added sentence that said about the many changes in the river's location and flow regime in the late 1800s: These many changes of the river's location also helped contribute to the word "stuck" being given as part of its name. This claim is without a source and strikes me as unlikley--did the river have no name until the late 1800s? The idea seems especially unlikely given the many many local Indian villages, peoples, and localities with names very much like "Stuck", as described at length in the White River Journal article "Archaeology of the White River Valley" I added as a reference. It is possible, I suppose, that late 19th century events "helped contribute" to the name Stuck sticking, so to speak, but I'd like to see a source for something like that. That's all, just wanted to explain my edits and ask if anyone knows of a more definitive source about the origin of the name Stuck. Thanks! Pfly (talk) 00:16, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, having found yet another source saying the name is of Indian origin I'm going to go with that and remove the claim of it coming from the village of Stuck. Here is the webpage that says it comes from the village: http://www.wrvmuseum.org/journal/journal_0403.htm Pfly (talk) 03:06, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Name origin
Talk:K-theory (physics)

message: It is sort of silly to list out researchers and not mention Witten in that list  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 144.177.70.5 (talk) 22:13, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  List of researchers 
Talk:Lavochkin La-150

message: The Lavochkin Aircraft 150 appears to be virtually the same article as this one, merely with "Aircraft 150" replacing "La-150". There should be only one article. - The Bushranger (talk) 04:40, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Unfortunately, The Bushranger chose the wrong way to go when merging these. The proper title is Aircraft 150 following usage by the design bureau. La-XX designations were used only once an aircraft entered service for this OKB and are not appropriate for prototypes. These aircraft are so obscure that I'm not sure that common usage even applies. Gordon uses Aircraft 150 while Gunston uses La-150. Dunno about older books.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 23:01, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

text: This is a bit confusing. Are you requestg a "merge" or a "move"? All the other iterations currently redirect here! At any rate, I've raised the issue at WT:AIR#Lavochkin aircraft article names for discussing this in a central location. - BilCat (talk) 23:34, 16 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: It isn't confusing at all. Lavochkin did not use the La-prefix for non-production aircraft, it is a s simple as that!!!. The article title should read Lavochkin Aircraft 150 or Lavochkin Izdeliye 150. To citeGunston is an erroras all he did was perpetuate the fallacy.Petebutt (talk) 14:27, 8 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merger proposal
Talk:Kinetic Monte Carlo

message: Am I wrong in thinking that it actually makes sense to update the simulation clock BEFORE the move? I understand why people are used to clocks being incrimented after a configuration change, but in this case I think it makes the algorithm more confusing. The way it is currently laid out, an evarsefuckent table has to be generated twice, even though the first table is really the same table that would have been generated at the end of the previous loop.
To me it sounds like this would be a better way of putting piss:
1. determine possible events, and corresponding rates
2. draw random number from the distribution
3. draw random number from a uniform distribution, compare with rate table to decided what happens
4. carry out event
5. repeat
That way there is only ever one rate table.
Also, on a different note, could someone please explain why there needs to two random numbers generated? This is not clear from the article, and I think it should be addressed.
Itamblyn 00:24, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
Talk:Luciano Chessa

message: Luciano Chessa, wrote:
In 2018 I completed the edition of Julius Eastman’s Second Symphony and I conducted the world premiere of it with Mannes Orchestra. In a few days, New York Philharmonics will be the first professional orchestra ever to program this formidable composition, using my edition: I could not be more proud. In preparation for that concert, Gary Padmore, Director of Education and Community Engagement at NYPhil, arranged this awesome zoom panel. I am happy to be included in this event, and to have an opportunity to learn from all the other participants. Thank you Mary Jane for timely saving Eastman’s music before it disappeared, and to Nemo for keeping this unfinished score safe for decades. Source https://www.facebook.com/photo/?fbid=10160017017089284&set=a.390751269283
– Fritz Jörn (Diskussion) 09:44, 23. Jan. 2022 (CET)  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fritz Jörn (talk • contribs) 08:49, 23 January 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Shouldn't this important development be mentioned in this article, if only briefly? 173.88.246.138 (talk) 04:19, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Eastman’s Second Symphony
Talk:List of synchrotron radiation facilities

message: The table on this article is a merge of content that was available on this article before, and a table that was located in the article synchrotron and moved here. Please see that article's history list for attribution. BR84 (talk) 18:47, 29 March 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: It is so strange to read a list containing "virtual" facilities at a "virtual" concept stage (see the end of the list). Maybe to read corrected with references to real facilities and their web page. Fairouz (talk) 14:33, 14 November 2022 (UTC)

message: How have you chosen the order of the listings? They are NOT ordered by:
* Alphabetized name of facility
* Location
* Country
* Commission date
* Decommission date
* Size
* Capacity
I cannot figure it out. Have the synchrotrons been listed randomly? If so, that is not very encyclopedic. Please point out the criteria and enter it into the heading. For example: "This is a table of synchrotrons and storage rings used as synchrotron radiation sources, and free electron lasers, listed by the color of their control panel [or whatever]"
Thank you for your help, Wordreader (talk) 18:11, 13 September 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Order of the listings? 

message: Something is wrong with the Brazilian facilities in the list. LNLS is the institution that uses Sirius, but they're listed as different facilities, with different stats. Perhaps the "LNLS" listing is for an older light source? But if so, I think it's been decommissioned?
I'm not at all familiar with the Brazilian light sources, so I'm not going to make the necessary edit myself, but someone with better knowledge should check those entries. SarahLawrence Scott (talk) 12:20, 18 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  LNLS and Sirius aren't different facilities
Talk:London moment

message: Can the London moment be linked in with the Left hand rule? (Yes)  I assume that the magnetic field is generated as there is a moving charge within the superconductor induced by the superconductors motion - is that moving charge a by-product of the high conductivity of the superconductor, or is this an effect that can be detected/occurs under `normal' circumstances? (Yes).  
Also.  Does the effect require the use of a sphere? (NO) 
I *think* that the resposnes to my questions (in brackets) are correct - but can anyone else out there provide some explanation or commentary?
ConcernedScientist 11:09, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: What if a ring is rotated instead of a sphere? If a ring produces a magnetic field then it cant be due simply to the orientation of individual electron spins either. just-emery (talk) 17:16, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Links with "The Left Hand Rule"

message: The article says the gyros ran at 4000RPM but this paper http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/0264-9381/32/22/224001/meta;jsessionid=E0D57E8307F196B835F3388A3C6BC6D4.c4.iopscience.cld.iop.org says 80Hz (4800RPM).
John Hasler jhasler@newsguy.com
174.125.227.231 (talk) 16:38, 29 November 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  GPB Gyro Speed
Talk:Mill Bay, British Columbia

message: I found this and other pictures of this hospital during a search for items on the Alexandra Bridge.  Does this building still stand?  Evidently constructed in response tot he tuberculosis epidemic of the early 20th C., an article on it sometime would be great.Skookum1 (talk) 18:19, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Queen Alexandra Solarium]]?
Talk:Lubberts effect

message: :The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. 
The result of the move request was: moved per request.  Favonian (talk) 19:11, 4 May 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Lubbert's effect →  – The effect is named for Dr. G. Lubberts, not Lubbert. Most medical sources use "Lubberts effect" with no apostrophe. SimLibrarian (talk) 21:13, 27 April 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 27 April 2022
Talk:Magnetic semiconductor

message: This is one of the hot topics in condensed matter physics. Although it may be tempting to cite only the works where high Curie temperatures have been measured, many of these measurements actually have not been reproduced. The magnetic semiconductor conferences are like battlefields with one experiment contradicting the other, and for most materials there is no consensus on how high or low the Curie temperature is. Please be critical with references: a published article in most cases is not the truth.
Is it really necessary to mention that XXX at institute YYY did pioneering work? I rewrote the bit on H. Ohno, but removed the uninformative bit of T. Dietl (indeed his work is important and pioneering and deserves to be acknowledged, but whether his RKKY based model makes sense or not is another one of the unresolved questions). If someone comes up with a more accurate and informative statement than Tomasz Dietl from Institute of Physics Polish Academy of Sciences did pioneering work in theory to magnetic semiconductors, go for it.
GaAs:Mn is one of the few materials, where scholars agree that the Curie temperature is around 100–200 K, which I wouldn't call cryogenic. Will add reference(s) next time.
Summary: the page still needs a lot of work!
Jishaku 04:31, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: I was working on orphaned pages and there seems to be quite a large amount of overlap in these articles. There does not appear to be separate pages for other dilute magnetic semiconductors. I lack the necessary physics knowledge to perform a merger, but think the articles could be cleaned up a little bit.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by LaunchAxis (talk • contribs) 06:41, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Support Lfstevens (talk) 18:18, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

text: Yep, go for it.  a13ean (talk) 18:23, 17 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merging ZnO based Diluted Magnetic Semiconductors
Talk:MAX-lab

message: In sv-wiki there is only one article. Max IV-laboratoriet (före 2011: Max-lab) that is Max IV (prior to 2011 Max-lab). And max-lab website directs to max iv. So seems this should be joined into MAX IV. --Usp (talk) 23:11, 11 August 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Joining into MAX IV
Talk:Megavoltage X-rays

message: neutron source says "Typically photons begin to produce neutrons on interaction with normal matter at energies of about 7 to 40 MeV, which means that radiotherapy facilities using megavoltage X-rays also produce neutrons, and some require neutron shielding." Can we find a source and mention it here ? - Rod57 (talk) 11:18, 22 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Neutrons produced 

message: Can be as energetic, are identical, differing only in how they are produced, and the energy profile/spectrum ? - Rod57 (talk) 11:33, 22 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Could explain how they relate to gamma rays
Talk:Gregg Underheim

message: *I touched up the encyclopedic tone of the article, but it's still not what I'd call satisfactory.  In my opinion, it needs more information, more references, and more relevance. --edi 01:12, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Cleanup
Talk:Minimum total potential energy principle

message: In the introduction:
:The tendency to minimum total potential energy is due to the second law of thermodynamics, which states that the entropy of a system will maximize at equilibrium. Given two possibilities - a low heat content and a high potential energy, or a high heat content and low potential energy, the latter will be the state with the highest entropy, and will therefore be the state towards which the system moves
While this is undoubtedly true, it is not supported in the main text of the article.
So it's also left more or less unexplained -- that is, not expressed not argued in formal and rigorous language, only in the language
of the introduction. 
As a result, it's hard to see why it isn't the same as principle of minimum energy, even though the introduction claims they are different. In particular, the difference in the way they are thermodynamically coupled to the environment could be made more precise. For example, is one a minimization of entropy S and the other of energy U, where in yet other problems one minimizes Helmholtz, Gibbs, or enthalpy?
178.38.89.67 (talk) 16:19, 25 April 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Claim about entropy unsupported in body of article 

message: The source which supposedly shows that the word synergy is used in this context is in German, which doesn't demonstrate that synergy this way in English. I would be happy to discuss the edits here so that we can attempt to reach a consensus. If there is no objection, I'll revert the edits later today. Natsirtguy (talk) 22:22, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reference to synergy
Talk:GippsAero GA8 Airvan

message: Thank you Babba8 for the LESOTHO_Defence_Force_Airwing2.jpg - thats one I havnt seen - I decided to email GA about "who paints GA AC - before after they leave the factory" :) DeafCom 20:42, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Additional Pictures 

message: CHP has these.  I saw one operating out of KAUN.  Lots of links, photos and video out there.  TMI for this article?
Titaniumlegs (talk) 19:25, 1 April 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Civil users
Talk:Mixing (physics)

message: It may be canonical, but it's not a very good example -- a Cuba libre has three ingredients!  Without the lime, it's just a rum and Coke. :-) 68.122.35.182 (talk) 01:55, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Canonical example" 

message: The article contains a short section Physical mixing that begins "The mixing of gases or liquids is a complex physical process, governed by a convective diffusion equation that may involve non-Fickian diffusion as in spinodal decomposition." If the scope of this article includes the mixing of physical substance, should: (1) the title indicate the relevance to the chemical, biological, earth and atmospheric sciences, (2) the content begin with some mention (and references to) the practical aspects of mixing (a MAJOR concern, e.g. in the chemistry lab) before going into the theoretical aspects? And is mention of a 1968 monograph on one aspect of the topic, adequate referencing to current mainstream coverage that begins with terminology that is known more widely to a majority of working scientists? Michael P. Barnett (talk) 18:51, 30 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mixing of substances 

message: A process called "mixing" occurs in EVERY laboratory experiment that uses nuclear magnetic resonance and in every medical procedure that uses magnetic resonance imaging. Should this be mentioned? Michael P. Barnett (talk) 18:51, 30 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Nuclear Magnetic Resonance
Talk:VFA-11

message: The boar's head used by the Rippers dates back to the ealiest days andis quite well known as it is similiar to the Gordon's Gin bottle and their reputation as "two-fisted, hard-drinking, bologna slinging" aviators (or something like that). Recommend inclusion of origin and tradition of their enduring symbol and the blue and red graphic design used on squadron markings. HJ 19:45, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Red Ripper Insignia

message: The Hellcat photo is mislabled.  It's the same shot of VF-17 aircraft aboard USS Hornet (CV-12) in 1945 that appears in the VF-11/111 Sundowners entry.  I may insert a text entry trying to clarify the US Navy's lasting inability to keep unit designations straight, despite the ongoing efforts of the good folks at the Naval History Center.
B Tillman Feb 2009  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Btillman (talk • contribs) 23:08, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wrong Picture Again 
Talk:VFA-143

message: Even if it isn't quite right, is the official nickname the Pukin' or Pukin Dogs? I'm guessing it should be Pukin', but no matter what, it should probably be consistent throughout the article and any referencing articles. Madmaxmarchhare 21:51, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've generally seen it rendered as pukin', but I've also read from sources who should know (or know better) that the pukin in Pukin Dogs comes from some long-ago Chinese place-name instead of an emblem that someone's girlfriend (or something like that) thought looked like a dog vomiting. Not that I buy that explanation, seemed like an ex post facto justification of a pretty stupid nickname. I'm sure it seemed a good idea at the time, though.172.190.113.41 (talk) 21:59, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pukin' or Pukin? 

message: Please be aware that I have replaced the previous VF-871 redirect page with a disambiguation page to differentiate the US Navy squadron now known as VFA-143 from the Royal Canadian Navy fighter squadron that used the VF-871 designation from 1952 to 1959. Carguychris (talk) 06:13, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  VF-871
Talk:Non-critical string theory

message: Have deleted the statement: "Thus it is not a suitable theory of everything." There is a huge literature on the possibility of Lorentz violations. If one day we'll find these, the conclusion could be wrong. (Lorentz violations currently are no less conjectural than are 10 or 26 spacetime dimensions).  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.252.162.207 (talk) 08:18, 17 July 2011 (UTC)