lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:PAAMS

message: Seriously? 68.47.21.164 (talk) 16:21, 20 April 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: The Royal Navy now uses a system called Shared Infrastructure: https://www.savetheroyalnavy.org/next-generation-computing-technology-for-the-royal-navy/ For consoles that are isolated and not connected to any network, then it doesn't really matter what operating system you use. And if the software was designed to run on Windows 2000, then that's the operating system that has to be used.
The FREMM frigates use different combat systems for the different nationalities: Naval Group's Setis for France and Leonardo's Athena for Italy.  While they will no doubt have elements in common with PAAMS, they are different.  FREMM was intended to be more cost effective than Horizon, so they are probably cheaper.  Better, as good, who knows?Old Vorlon (talk) 16:44, 29 January 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Windows 2000? 

message: I find it interesting with all the editing going on but not one word is being discussed on the talk page.
--82.212.94.9 (talk) 16:28, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Let's talk about PAAM's article 

message: Would it be possible to make an anti-ship variant of the Aster 15 or Aster 30 missile (or both)? Royal Navy surface ships currently lack a decent anti-ship missile and it's going to be some time before we get Type 26s with LRASM.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.25.65.57 (talk) 20:38, 7 March 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Could Aster missiles be modified so they could be used as anti-ship missiles?
Talk:Hatfield and the North

message: IIRC, they also provided the backing band for Mike Oldfield's live performances of Tubular Bells in 1973?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 176.27.235.55 (talk) 02:56, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mike Oldfield's backing band 

message: On this album (released summer 2017), there is a short track called "Popmaster" (a quiz on BBC Radio 2) in which a contestant is asked to name 3 songs by "Hatfield and the North". The contestant is clearly unable to name any tracks by this band (which is quite funny IMO)  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.37.55.201 (talk) 10:31, 8 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Saint Etienne's Home Counties 
Talk:National Health

message: Re this large revert, this is because it was "Block evasion by User:Uss7777, using IPs from Poland" and not because it was incorrect in any way? It looked quite useful. Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 22:09, 29 August 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Line-ups
Talk:Thomas Simpson Crawford

message: I note that there have been two Australian politicians named Thomas Crawford (see  for details).  This Thomas Crawford was a NSW Legislative Assembly member who ran for Lang at the 1910 federal election while the other Thomas Crawford, who will be listed under Thomas Crawford (Australian politician), was a senator for over twenty years.  --Roisterer 15:43, 7 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  The two Thomas Crawfords
Talk:Pedersen device

message: Article reassessed and graded as start class. --dashiellx (talk) 19:42, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Tag & Assess 2008 

message: A quick google search yields references that consistently capitalize the word, "Device". See these: , , .  Moving page. --Nukes4Tots (talk) 18:27, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Device" should be capitalized.
Talk:Channelling (physics)

message: This is a British vs. American spelling question. Wikipedia guidelines say stick with one spelling per article. Both spellings are widely used and accepted in online physics articles. I'm switching this article text to "channelling" simply because that is the article title.
--Jimsg (talk) 02:23, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  double L channelling vs single L channeling
Talk:Fracton

message: "A fracton is a collective quantized vibration on a substrate with a fractal structure."
I think that's the most confusing grammatically correct sentence I've ever read.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.161.104.6 (talk) 03:47, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

message: This article is overwhelmingly jargon. If you are not a physicist already conversant with the subject it makes no sense whatsoever. Our most accomplished physicist, Richard Feynman (a great teacher himself) once said that if you could not explain something such that a sophomore could understand it, it's because you don't understand it yourself.  Basically, he was saying that regardless of the complexity of a subject, even in such an abstruse field as physics, fundamental concepts can be expressed in a manner comprehensible even to the intelligent layman. Respectfully, I feel the article should be recast with a view that this is an encyclopedia for the general public, not a textbook of physics.Cd195 (talk) 19:28, 29 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Complexity
Talk:Neil Murray (British musician)

message: 'Murray demoed all songs on The Scorpions' hugely successful album Love At First Sting (1984)' Have we a confirming link? I thought it was widely believed to have been Jimmy Bain (with Bobby Rondinelli drumming). Al  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.160.61.169 (talk) 00:22, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Lots of material useful for this article in this new Rolling Stone interview. Bondegezou (talk) 09:51, 3 September 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  New source
Talk:PL-12

message: The information in this article is full of big errors.  Sd-10 is not manufactered by Pakistan Heavy Industries Taxila. Its manufactured by China. The selling stories of Pakistan denying its sale are also false. Please somebody put the correct information here about Sd-10.
Also AV Week May 7, 2007 says the PL-12 is a two pulse solid rocket and not a dual thrust.Mangogirl2 12:57, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

message: The new PL-12 active guided air-launched anti-aircraft missile uses the radar and data link from Russia's very capable Vympel R-77[2], combined with a Chinese missile motor. The resulting combination has a greater range than the Russian missile, and a fire-and-forget active guidance capability comparable to the modern U.S. AIM-120 AMRAAM.
At first, the statement says seeker & datalink from Russian. Then turn to say "guidance capability comparable to the modern U.S. AIM-120 AMRAAM" which tries to allude that the AMRAAM has a better guidance in compare to AA-12, and therefore the "comparable" PL-12 is upside to AA-12? ChowHui 00:11, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Antinomy 

message: http://chinese-military-aviation.blogspot.com/p/missiles-iii.html
72.183.155.139 (talk) 13:38, 10 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  PL- 12G
Talk:Saegheh (rocket)

message: The article title says one thing, the text says another. Which is correct?
207.172.87.49 11:37, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: fixed 👍 Streamline8988 (talk) 23:53, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: Anti-Tank or Anti-Personnel?
Talk:Tandem-charge

message: How much time is in between the two explosions? 75.155.102.10 (talk) 19:19, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Less than 500 miliseconds. http://www.google.com/patents/US7493861  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.46.210.190 (talk) 15:07, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Time between the two explosions 

message: Should be the noun phrase "Tandem charge", not the adjectival "Tandem-charge". Nurg (talk) 06:36, 19 May 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: Article title
Talk:Valmet M76

message: I'm having a difficult time finding any references to the M76, just several sources that say this weapon IS the Rk 62, but the M76 is a commercial SAKO-Valmet designation. If I can't find anything stating that this is somekind of variant of evolutionary design, the article willbe merged with the Rk 62. Unless someone can list the difference between the two types. Koalorka (talk) 02:35, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Valmet M76 was manufacturers commercial name for the rifle, both full- and semiautomatic models. FDF used rifle as 762 RK 62 76, according FDF:s "Rynnäkkökiväärin käsikirja" http://www.puolustusvoimat.fi/wcm/6b0c4800411e751fa6b6efe364705c96/rynnakkokivaarinkasikirja.pdf?MOD=AJPERES  --91.153.20.206 (talk) 00:29, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: The article establishes that the M76 has a 5.56 variant. It then later goes on to say that the Galil uses the 5.56 caliber as well, and then implies that it's somehow better because of that. Also, the 5.56 isn't obsolete at all. Rynky (talk) 23:20, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Contradictory statements
Talk:Valmet M82

message: Hi, I just edited this post.  I discovered this weapon in the v1.13 mod of JA2 (highly recommended!) and I thought I'd add this reference in the appropriate section.  Unfortunately there does not seem to be official recognition of this rifle in the game except on an old forum to-do list but I guarantee it's there.  I thought it was worthy of mention considering this articles negative depiction of the rifle and it's relative power in the game.  I think the mod may have a bit of a Finnish slant to it because this gun is supreme.
I think this would be a cool addition to the article and I hope my addition is acceptable.  The reference is somewhat weak but I'm unsure how to cite the actual in-game information.  It is stored in an accessible file on the HD.
First post to Wiki, thx y'all.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.71.141.40 (talk) 23:12, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  JA2 v1.13 Ref Note 
Talk:Denel Y3 AGL

message: the weight of the system by itself is higher than the weight of the system + tripod? I am unsure if that is an error, maybe the tripod weight listed is the tripod by itself not added? Not sure to correct it or not. Nathanielfirst (talk) 17:03, 24 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Weight listed in side panel under specifications is wrong?
Talk:Sting Ray (torpedo)

message: The appropriate infobox is  -MBK004 02:38, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Infobox?

message: "Experiments using buoyancy-propelled torpedoes "
What is a buoyancy-propelled torpedo? It is not obvious in context, and Google doesn't turn up anything cogent. The closest hit I found was a normal fuel-burning torp who's fuel tanks filled with air and slowly brought it to the surface. That would seem suitable for test units, but I would hesitate to call that "buoyancy-propelled". Maury Markowitz (talk) 17:26, 31 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  What is this?
Talk:She's Been Away

message: The location used for the 'institution' shots was St. Bernard's Hospital  in Southall, Middlesex. It included the hospital Ballroom and the hospital driveway on their way home. Although renovation work was going on at the time of filming, much of it is still very recognizable today.--Aspro 15:55, 7 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Institutuin location
Talk:Roland (missile)

message: No mention of the US and it's short usage? --Gadget850 ( Ed) 00:52, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  US 

message: Isn't the SA-6 a comparable mobile missle system? What about other mobile missle systems? Bachcell (talk) 16:46, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Comparable Soviet systems? 
Template talk:Islam-bio-stub

message: There's a word notable on this stub, that I think is unnecessary, because it goes without saying that all wikipedia articles should be notable. How 'bout removing it?Feureau 15:56, 7 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: notable

message: Please remove the link to 'biography' (which is just an ordinary dictionary word, per WP:OVERLINK), and 'Islam', which will be repeating a link in any article in which this template appears. Colonies Chris (talk) 17:24, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Because there are several similar requests open, I have started a discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Stub sorting#Possible overlinking in bio stubs. If there is consensus there for the changes (or at least no objections), then they can all be done together. --RL0919 (talk) 16:45, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  Partly done: Per the discussion, I have unlinked the word 'biographical'. If a consensus develops for removing other links, please submit a new edit request with a link to the relevant discussion. --RL0919 (talk) 20:15, 9 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unlink request
Talk:RARDEN

message: As far as I remember it RARDEN actually stands for:
Royal Armaments Research & Development, ENfield. Ian Dunster 14:10, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've heard that - I also note that some don't use all caps but have "Rarden" as for Sten GraemeLeggett 15:18, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

text: I also often see it as "Rarden" and have been told that it's not an acronym.Jrssr5 20:22, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  It may be a made up name, rather than an acronym. However, the EN would have come from the RSAF Enfield and RARD may have come from RARDE - Royal Armament Research and Development Establishment.Pyrotec 20:37, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

message: Is it RARDEN or Rarden? Is it both? Currently, both are used very inconsistently here and elsewhere. TaintedMustard (talk) 02:11, 21 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proper name
Talk:Novator KS-172

message: Is this missile used by any country now? Nafis Fuad Ayon (talk) 12:02, 17 March 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is this still active ?
Talk:MATADOR

message: I've just finished reading this stub article, and noted that one of its sections is called Other Singapore-designed weapons. Although its contents are quite interesting, I believe that it has no place in this article as AFAIK none of the weapons listed in it (which even includes a ship!) is directly related to the subject of this article (the Matador LAW). In my opinion, that list should be in a wikiarticle of it own, entirely devoted to "Singapore-designed weapons".  
Hence, unless anyone reasonably opposes, I'll remove the mentioned section and place the info that it contains in a separate article (includoing in it also the Matador).  Kind regards, DPdH (talk) 04:20, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I've turned the unwieldy list into a navbox  instead. I think this might form the skeleton around which, to write a new article - Singapore's military-industrial complex. --Rifleman 82 (talk) 05:09, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Inadequacy of section "Other Singapore-designed weapons" in this article. 

message: Ukraine's internally recognized borders include Crimea. There's no reason whatsoever to show Crimea as not Ukraine.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Monfera (talk • contribs) 21:27, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ukraine/Crimea on the map
Talk:M576 40 mm grenade

message: Is this page about the M576 Grenade round or the 40mm grenade launchers in general.  This page needs serious cleanup.  Ultratone85 02:51, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Needs Work

message: The referenced article states that this round holds 27 pellets of 000 buckshot--NOT #4--big size difference, and as noted in the article a 12 gauge (much, much smaller than a 40mm--which is 1.2 gauge) has 27 pellets of #4, which ultimately makes no sense.67.101.119.99 (talk) 21:23, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The shot cup of the 40mm Multi-Projectile rounds is very small relative to the size of the cartridge case.  In the unadopted version, there is only a single layer of shot.  In the adopted version, the shot cup is a small capsule centered in a large sabot.  We've discussed this in depth in another talk page, Talk:United_States_40_mm_grenades.  --D.E. Watters (talk) 22:43, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Shot Type Inaccuracy 

message: The US Army manual "TM 43-0001-28" dated 28 April 1994 quotes the "filler and weight" for the M576 as "20 metal pellets, 24g" on Pg 6-34.  I take this to mean that the total weight of all 20 pellets together is 24 grams.  This would work out to 1.2 grams per pellet.  
This is very close to the US Navy manual "NAVSEA SW010-AD-GTP-010 Small Arms and Special Warfare Ammunition" dated 18 May 2004.
    5-2.6. Cartridge, 40 Millimeter, Multiple Projectile, M576 (B534).
    5-2.6.2. Description. The cartridge is 2.5 inches (6.35 centimeters) long and weighs approximately 1,882.46 grains (122 grams). It is a fixed round of ammunition consisting of an MP assembly and a cartridge case assembly. The projectile contains a polyethylene sabot carrier with a center cavity that contains a plastic pellet cup filled with twenty 20-grain (1.30-gram) lead pellets and covered by a snap-on cap. The cartridge case contains a 2.87 grain (186 milligram), M2 propellant charge and a .45 caliber percussion primer. It is green with white stenciled identification markings. 
Individual lead alloys might explain the weight difference, as could rounding errors in English to Metric unit conversions.
D.E. Watters (talk) 01:35, 28 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pellet weight confusion
Talk:Crushed ice

message: : This should probably be merged with ice cubes as a "type" Hobophobe 22:22, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Support - too little info at present to merit an article. Templates added to both pages. JMiall 23:14, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Support per JMiall. Tadpole9(talk • contribs) 23:13, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

message: I'm pretty sure that "ice chips" are the same thing as "crushed ice", so this information can be in the same section. WhatamIdoing (talk) 05:09, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: User:WhatamIdoing, Crushed ice is a Template:R to section, so are you proposing a pagemove? 2601:5CC:8300:A7F0:1139:1313:E2B3:1E31 (talk) 18:40, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: No, I think that Ice chips should be merged into the same section that Crushed ice redirects to (i.e., into Ice cube#Crushed ice). WhatamIdoing (talk) 18:51, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: So the merge target is in fact Ice cube rather than Crushed ice, correct? 2601:5CC:8300:A7F0:1139:1313:E2B3:1E31 (talk) 18:58, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: The proposed merge is in fact to Ice cube#Crushed ice specifically, rather than elsewhere in the Ice cube article. WhatamIdoing (talk) 07:28, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for clarifying, and I see the tags have now been fixed to point to that section. 2601:5CC:8300:A7F0:F816:65A2:CED2:454D (talk) 17:48, 11 February 2024 (UTC)

text:  Klbrain (talk) 10:20, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed merge of [[Ice chips]] into [[Crushed ice]]
Talk:Lee–Metford

message: Could you stop posting the picture of the CLLE Mk I? It is not a Lee Metford, no matter what the misspelt museum label says.141.152.50.101 23:03, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I visited the Lithgow Small Arms Museum recently photographed an MLM on display there; so now the photo is definitely of the correct rifle! --Commander Zulu 13:30, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Incorrect picture?

message: It's not really correct to say the P1913 wasn't "successful."  The outbreak of WWI meant that Britain couldn't rationally change ammunition to the new .276 cartridge, so the P1913 rechambered in good old .303 became the P1914, hundreds of thousands of which were issued (all made in America under UK contracts).  When the USA entered the war the same rifle was rechambered again, for .30-06, and as the M1917 over two million were produced: far more doughboys carried Enfields than M1903 Springfields. The P13/14/17 was a very good rifle, combining the SMLE's speed with accuracy on a par with the Mauser or Springfield.  Unfortunately it was also rather heavy, which made it unpopular with the troops.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Solicitr (talk • contribs) 15:21, 28 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  replacement/P1913
Talk:Lanchester submachine gun

message: I would like to point out that only one section of the entire article has any citations. 
Thanks.
--71.54.131.86 (talk) 00:10, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  References 

message: Since the Lanchester is British, shouldn't the type be machine carbine rather than submachine gun (an American term)? --Naaman Brown (talk) 20:20, 20 February 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Type
Talk:Holman Projector

message: I've seen several web sources (    that largely wrote the weapon off as worse than useless with no actual aircraft ever having been shot down. I notice that some of the sources are immediate post war reports, which I would imagine contain a certain amount of "overclaiming". Can we track down more specifically the claimed shoot downs - it might be possible to match it with German loss records and with what else might have been in the area at the time. Megapixie 01:14, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Number of aircraft downed?

message: It seems surprising to me that the weapon was not deployed to Home Guard units especially at the coast where a dual role as bird scarer and for quickly lobbing dozens of mills bombs onto beaches might have been very useful. Was it a victim of inter-service rivalry? Gaius Cornelius (talk) 13:56, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Use on land

message: The articles tells about the use in Navy. But the merchanters, the merchant ship working for the war effort, arent mentioned, but surely some were equipped. Most of them had some weapons abourd with time.
My example from which I do know about the existence of Holman, is the Polish s/s Kroman (1912-1946) captain Dybek, using among other, a Holman projector - probably the MK2.  However, it may be so using the Holman on merchanters wasnt common - the Kroman was an unusual merchanter, widely called a miniature merchanter cruiser.  The crew managed to gather a 6 pounder 57mm AA cannon, lotsa of machine guns, this Holman mentioned, and with time also several 20mm Oerlikons. AND lotsa of ammo, using all these weapons heavily at every occasion, both sailing in coast convoys, and when sailing alone through the Atlantic./StefanZ78.69.228.145 (talk) 16:08, 24 February 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Use by Merchantmen
Talk:Gryazev-Shipunov GSh-30-2

message: The values given for these parameters of the 30x165 (not 30x164) AO-18 ammunition aren't quite correct: 
they presumably refer to the more powerful loadings in service with the Russian army and navy, e.g. in air defence weapons like the 2S6 Tunguska AAA. 
For aircraft guns like the GSh-30-2, weaker loadings are used, with projectile weights from 386-404 g, and muzzle velocities of 880-890 m/s.
It also seems rather contradictory to claim that "Weight and muzzle velocity are classified", and then list them in the specifications. In fact the information is readily availabe in printed and online sources. 
Textor (talk) 02:56, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Muzzle Velocity, Projectile Weight, and Classified  Information
Talk:AGM-45 Shrike

message: It's referred to in this article later on, and this page is linked from the Falkland's War "Operation Black Buck" page.
Ganpati23 (talk) 14:25, 24 October 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Where does it say Israel was the only user? - BilCat (talk) 19:48, 24 October 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  How can Israel be the only other user when the UK used it in the Falklands?