lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Lloyd's algorithm

message: Lloyd's method is identical to the k-means algorithm.  Oddly, the k-means article says the method "converges very quickly in practice", while this one says "the algorithm converges slowly".  — Jeﬀ Erickson ✍ 04:30, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: LLoyd's algorithm is the most popular method to find an approximate solution to the k-means problem. --178.2.54.39 (talk) 06:26, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

message: Coming from the article on Smoothed analysis, I was quite surprised that Lloyd's algorithm is given as an example there, but the result cannot be found here. As I am no expert in either k-means nor smoothed analysis, I don't feel comfortable to judge whether the result is in fact worth mentioning (or still up-to-date). Maybe someone with more expertise can make this decision and throw some light on the complexity of Lloyd's algorithm? 2A02:8109:1A3F:F5B4:0:0:0:215A (talk) 09:55, 13 December 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: I think the smoothed analysis reference is inaccurate and that the reference doesn't really refer to Lloyd's algorithm, as described here, but rather to the algorithm at k-means clustering#Standard algorithm (naive k-means), which is very similar and which the linked article also calls Lloyd's algorithm. The difference is that the clusters here are geometric regions and that the algorithm repeatedly replaces each center by the centroid of its region, while the clusters at the linked article and the JACM reference are sets of points and that the algorithm repeatedly replaces each center by the average of its assigned points. In the context of smoothed analysis this makes an important difference, because the smoothing part is something that can be applied to sets of points but not really directly to geometric regions. So probably the link to Lloyd's algorithm at the smoothed analysis article should be changed to point to the k-means version of Lloyd's algorithm, not to the continuous version described at this article. —David Eppstein (talk) 17:25, 13 December 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Good catch, that was an error on my part. I changed it. Shuiberts (talk) 13:37, 14 December 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Performance 

message: .
 Tauboss (talk) 12:15, 7 August 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  References
Talk:Lovespoon

message: I have reverted back to the non-commercial link.  If you wish to replace with the commercial link can you please explain why? --NeilN 21:46, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Added King's below Cadwyn's so both are on there now --NeilN 18:00, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've removed two dead external links from this page and added two new links. A link to welsh-lovespoons.co.uk has been deleted from this page in the past as it is a 'commercial website'. Please note that the pages linked to are information pages containing the most comphrehensive further reading online regarding Welsh lovespoons, and although the site does also sell Welsh lovespoons, these are information pages, and I hope you will all agree that the aim of these pages is information. There is no reference to purchasing lovespoons in the text body. There are links in the reference section of this page to other websites who are both commercial and information based so this shouldn't be an issue. --Hedd gwynfor (talk) 11:15, 15 March 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: If it links to a specific reference then commercial websites can be used if referenced in the text. But external links should never use commercial websites as it appears to be endorsement. See WP:EL. Thanks. FruitMonkey (talk) 21:12, 15 March 2016 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thank you, I have followed your instructiuons above and included a link to a page with a lot more info regarding symbols as a reference. The info on this page has been taken from 3 different sources with full reference to these sources also included on the page. --Hedd gwynfor (talk) 11:19, 29 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External Link 

message: The caption for the image says the lovespoon includes a wheel, but it looks more like a Celtic cross. Is this really a wheel symbol?
--81.98.100.51 (talk) 02:46, 18 February 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is it really a wheel? 

message: The claims that love spoons are not used as functional spoons and that couples ate from linked spoons should include citations. Beegeeyee (talk) 11:26, 5 October 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  citations needed?
Talk:Mantegna Tarocchi

message: This article will eventually need to be completely overhauled. The images from the E Series and S Series books were never cards (until modern times that is). These were copy books for artists and craftsmen. The images were copied and borrowed by many artists, including Dürer. There is no evidence whatsoever that they were ever used as cards, as a game, or for any other purpose other than as images in an artists' copy book. — Parsa (talk) 01:48, 19 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: On the contrary all the evidence is that they were designed as up-market educational aids for children, as the article clearly says, following Zucker and Lwevinson. At least one set includes gold highlights, which would be odd in a set of artists' patterns. Johnbod (talk) 01:35, 20 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Erroneous Content and Title
Talk:Metalcut

message: The whole printing category is a bit messy and this stub seems appropriate as a section for the (not-yet-existing) history section of relief print Thoughts? —Parhamr (talk)
:I think the different techniques should have their own pages, but of course a history section in the relief print article would be welcome, although the history is essentially disjointed. The history of printmaking jumps around between relief & intaglio techniques, so I don't think a big focus on relief prints as a specific subject is very encyclopedic. We already have old master print, printmaking etc. What we don't have are histories of 19th & 20th century printmaking.  Johnbod (talk) 22:55, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge proposal 
Talk:Dante Tiñga

message: I noticed there is no wikilink to the actual Philippines article. I tried to figure out where to put one, but there's no obvious spot. Anyone have any ideas? Tan    39 02:18, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Link to [[Philippines]]

message: I added controversy, with the full text of the Per Curiam S. C. decision to balance the very short article, since, bios of justices must contain sections of controversies if supported by verifiable sources. The mere fact that the Justice was cleared, still, the fact remains that he was accused by the lawyer of bribery. Hence, it remains a controversy which must be added to make the bio neutral and not just one-sided.--Florentino floro (talk) 07:22, 30 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: This so-called controversy does not balance the article, quite the contrary, it un-balances it. Precisely because the article is short, inclusion makes this contrtoversy seem like the most important event in his life. It is surely not the case. There is also no context given about whether or not we should think the charges were justified. This is a clear violation of BLP. He was cleared of the charges. To improve this short article, notable events in his life could be included, other positions he has held. But shortness is not an excuse to for muckraking. xschm (talk) 22:03, 30 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Controversy 
Talk:Metamorphosis III

message: Sorry to undo what was obviously an enthusiastic piece of research, but 1) the coverage was WP:UNDUE, effectively turning this into a chess article (WP:COATRACK) with a small amount of art history as introduction; 2) it was very poorly cited, most of it giving the impression it came from nowhere, but on inspection the image had a ref which seems to have been the sole source for all of the material, and it was to a blog by someone called Nikolaas Verhulst. This person does not have a Wikipedia article, and a look on the web doesn't give the impression this is a notable art historian, so the general rule is that blogs do not meet WP:RS. If a better source mentions the chess "puzzle" then a one-sentence mention might be appropriate, with that better citation. Otherwise, the material probably doesn't count as encyclopedic. Chiswick Chap (talk) 20:51, 7 November 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Undue and unreliable coverage of chess
Talk:Daphne Park

message: : NOTHING about her being a murderer?   — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.174.191.14 (talk) 13:23, 29 April 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Of Patrice Lumumba or of Dag Hammarskjöld? --87.170.192.165 (talk) 19:24, 9 May 2019 (UTC)
Talk:Mosaic gold

message: Apparently so named bcz used as pigment or material in mosaics??? It's in :Cat:Mosaic, which should be rendered less cryptic by someone who has (in contrast to me) some idea what they're talking abt. --Jerzy•t 17:37, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It got its name for the old antisemitic stereotype. "Fake gold made by jews." --Pjacobi (talk) 08:56, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cat tag 

message: http://www.gutenbergdigital.de/gudi/eframes/  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fmd123 (talk • contribs) 23:16, 2 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Interesting link for medieval mosaic gold recipe aka arum musicum.
Talk:Darcy Frey

message: I flagged a couple of calims that require sources (from a review, for example). I also think there may be a better phrase than "bolster the cornerstone." For one thing, i don;t see how you bolster a cornerstone, but then I'm not an engineer. Approximate Vicinity 14:00, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sources/metaphors
Talk:Nancy Graves

message: The National Gallery of Art, Washington has her date of birth December 23, 1940. Rncooper (talk) 20:44, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: This is very odd. The bio at the Nancy Graves Foundation gives 1939 as her birth date: . But the Smithsonian gives 1940: . I don't know what the explanation is. If you change it, would you mind noting the discrepancy in the article, fixing links to Nancy Graves (such as "1939 in art", and creating links from the proper pages, like "1940 in art"? MdArtLover (talk) 15:22, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Naples yellow

message: Wiberg says its Pb3(SbO4)2. In a 2008  paper on the X-Ray analysis of a van Gogh painting (doi: 10.1021/ac800965g) the formula of Naples yellow is given initially as  Pb2Sb2O7 but later as Pb(SbO3)2.Pb3(Sb3O4)2. The last formula is chemical nonsense the oxidation states do not stack up, and is probably a misprint of Pb3(SbO4)2. When and if I get to the bottom of this I will correct the article.Axiosaurus (talk) 14:51, 26 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Chemical composition of Naples yellow. 

message: — Assignment last updated by Landryla (talk) 15:29, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: A History of Color
Talk:Here We Go Round the Mulberry Bush (film)

message: Since most of what I wrote under this heading concerned the song, not the film, I moved it to Talk:Here We Go Round the Mulberry Bush.  The split now is completed, and all links from en:wikipedia to the original article distributed to the adequate one. JoergenB 10:58, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article move, spit, redirection? 

message: Does anyone know why this film is never shown on TV and has never been released on DVD? Saintmesmin (talk) 09:31, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I have only ever seen it on television (I wasn't old enough to see it on first release) and it's on TCM now. Tasty monster (=TS ) 22:12, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  DVD 

message: Starring
Barry Evans
Judy Geeson
Angela Scoular 
Theresa Fry
Sheila White
Adrienne Posta
Diane Keen
Christopher Timothy 2A02:C7C:E07D:100:B80C:6ECC:4655:E9F5 (talk) 18:27, 11 December 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cast
Talk:Tricoloured horse

message: I have not been able to find any mention of this word except in Wikipedia itself (and derivative sources).  It does not occur in my copy of the full Oxford English Dictionary (1972), nor in any horse book I can find.  I've never heard it used in Britain.
I suspect it is a neologism by extension from skewbald, but perhaps used in very limited circles or not at all.  Could it be a spoof or a joke-word?
Does anyone have any evidence for real use of this word – and if so, by whom?--Richard New Forest 09:32, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I actually agree, I have never heard of it either, and I have dozens of books that define the other two terms.  It's either totally archaic, or a neologism or a joke.  (Some version claims it's a archaic version, but I sure have never heard of it until here, either, but not being a BI expert, I let it go)   I vote that we move this article to a new name called "Tri-Coloured" or whatever the correct hyphenation, capitalization and spelling should be, and remove the term Oddbald entirely and replace it with the new article name in the other places it occurs. You want to do it or shall I?? Montanabw(talk) 01:58, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Sounds good to me.  Let's leave it for a bit and see if anyone else chips in, and then if no contrary evidence turns up, do it.  "Tricoloured" might not be right on its own, as we need to avoid a Tricolor disambig, and Tricolour, for flags.  Also tricolour for black-and-tan-and-white dogs, which does not have a page now, but might acquire one.  "Tricoloured (horse)"?.--Richard New Forest 08:42, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Maybe dig through your books and see what the most common terminology is in the UK (one word or two, hypenated, etc.  The use of "Color (horse)" is pretty common usage in the color articles. Montanabw(talk) 16:40, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

text: "Calico" is not a typical word used to describe bay pintos in the US; it is occasionally seen colloquially.  but this issue has been dead for 8 years now.  Montanabw(talk) 23:55, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Existence of word?
Talk:Washington State Penitentiary

message: I added the street address into this page. Mostly because I think it's rather fascinating that the prison is located at 1313 N. 13th Street. 59.115.176.181 08:51, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Street address

message: These inmates are notable and should be added here
* Joseph McEnroe. Convicted murderer in the 2007 Carnation murders.
 
−	
* William Earl Talbott II. Perpetrator of the murders of Jay Cook and Tanya Van Cuylenborg, and the first case in history to go to trial by jury and achieve a conviction due to genetic genealogy.
 
−	
* Christopher Monfort. Convicted in the October 31, 2009 murder of police officer Timothy Brenton. Died at Walla Walla in January 2017.Seattle cop killer Christopher Monfort died of drug overdose | The Seattle Times--Barbaro Reyes Cho (talk) 09:04, 22 February 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Notable Inmates  

message: Allen Christopher Ivanov the Mukilteo Shooter is imprisoned here according to this source.https://www.heraldnet.com/news/wrongful-death-suit-over-mukilteo-triple-murder-is-settled/ 2601:206:380:4F40:B44A:88D8:F271:DBF9 (talk) 03:58, 12 September 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: , using my own wording as the request did not provide usable text. Thank you!  ASUKITE 13:26, 12 September 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 12 September 2021
Talk:Opus sectile

message: Are all the unsourced bits from Liz James's article? Arminden (talk) 07:22, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Source(s)?
Talk:Dario Venitucci

message: DAREUS PERSARUM REX  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.54.250.119 (talk) 15:34, 2 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mythology 
Talk:Daris Swindler

message: This article looks to have been lifted, with small changes, from the obituary in the Seattle Times:
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/obituaries/2004089762_swindlerobit24m.html
Perm Dude (talk) 17:15, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  plagarized? 
Talk:Overo

message: In the process of editing this article, the question of whether frame overo "causes" lethal white syndrome keeps popping up.  Basically people on one side say it does, and other people are equally adamant that it doesn't.  All the genetics articles to date go so far as to state that frame overo is "associated" with LWS and that it only appears in horses that carry frame in their pedigrees.  It clearly does appear in foals with parents who do not visibly appear frame.  However, I cannot find any scientific articles stating that frame overo "causes" LWS.  Maybe a geneticist can explain how the EDNRB links to frame patterning and LWS.  It is counterintuitive that if frame overo is a dominant yet LWS foals are born to parents without frame phenotype, including solids, then LWS is acting like a recessive.   As this is a very serious issue, particularly because some people are deliberately breeding LWS carriers to produce frame overo and calling it the "overo test," it is important that the facts are as accurate as possible.  Therefore, please provide footnotes to each statement added and discuss any material that is a source of disagreement here before editing.  I do not have all the answers but am very interested in getting to the bottom of the question.  Montanabw(talk) 20:52, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Frame and Lethal White

message: Because sabino exists in breeds other than paints, and in breeds that won't register "pintos," this section needs to be kept to a minimum, with detail explained in the sabino horse article.  Montanabw(talk) 22:16, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Sabino

message: Because many breeds besides the American Paint Horse have overo patterning, be careful to distinguish sources, this article isn't about Paints, it's about overo coloring and, to the extent it can be explained in plain English, the genetics.  Montanabw(talk) 22:16, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Paint and pinto
Talk:Paper folding

message: 09:43, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

message: Scrub that last one - factor of 1,000 out. My bad and my apologies.....  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.155.79.113 (talk) 15:29, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Big fold 

message: I think the page should be turned into a disambiguation page which just refers to the various crafts of paper folding. There doesn't seem to be an overall topic of paper folding.
The seven fold limit which is only content here is something that is already covered in Mathematics of paper folding. I'll set up a separate article Seven fold limit and merge the stuff from the mathematics article and this into it. That way it'll be easier to refer to from either and I think it is a separate topic. It is pretty trivial but it's notable and that's what mainly matters for Wikipedia.  Dmcq (talk) 15:33, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually there's already an article Britney Gallivan which deals with the seven fold limit properly Dmcq (talk) 16:00, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Turn into a disambiguation page

message: The more I look into the history and modern uses of paper folding, the more I find that it is referenced as origami - even technological uses which have nothing to do with the Japanese art are referred to in some literature as forms of origami. Perhaps paper folding should redirect there, with a hatnote to other forms. bd2412 T 03:05, 2 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: That's what I said to you. Paper folding could be a reasonable topic except origami deals with most of it. The thing that is missing is an article on paper craft or art which would be one step up and would also make a good topic. With something like that any vestige of a reason for this being an article as opposed to a disambiguation page would disappear. Dmcq (talk) 03:26, 2 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Then why not redirect to origami, which will contain the answers that probably 99% of users/linkers are seeking, with a hatnote to Paper folding (disambiguation)? bd2412 T 03:46, 2 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: 99% is probably a bit of an exaggeration but I guess it would be the target for the large majority, so yes that would work out well I think. Origami already has a small disambiguation page but pointing to a paper folding disambiguation page as well would probably be some help even to people who came direct from origami. How about the idea of a paper craft/paper art article?, it would be a biggie project but I think it could prove very popular and could tie in a lot of stuff. Dmcq (talk) 04:10, 2 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree completely, and will gladly help out with it. Paper craft currently redirects to Paper model, which is too narrow to be the proper redirect target of so broad a term. I will move the current content of this page to Paper craft, restore the disambig page at Paper folding (disambiguation), redirect this title to Origami and put the appropriate hatnote there. bd2412 T 04:13, 2 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Primary topic
Talk:Photozincography

message: Same topic: the other article title uses an industry nickname. --Old Moonraker 18:59, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Articles merged. Biscuittin (talk) 21:47, 21 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks --Old Moonraker (talk) 15:37, 22 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Incorporating [[Zinco]] into this article.
Talk:Smith & Wesson Model 686

message: hi, I saw this on impact guns and it doesn't fit any of the descriptions of the models on this page I posted this here because I thought we might have left out a model
http://www.impactguns.com/store/022188131161.html  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.115.79.222 (talk) 06:05, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  unspecified model 

message: In reading other articles and sources about this model, as well in the sidebar box on this site, there are references to different "dash" versions, such as 686-1, 686-2, etc.  Anybody have a reference as to what these variants mean?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.254.23.234 (talk) 05:17, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  dash variants? 

message: Available in .38 Super? I'm unaware of .38 Super Colt ever being used as a revolver round, let alone in a Smith.  TREKphiler hit me ♠  15:01, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The Webley-Fosbury revolver was chambered in .38 Auto, the dimensionally identical round to the .38 Super.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ana Nim (talk • contribs) 17:17, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

text: The .38 Super 686 and 627 were Performance Center models if I remember correctly.  They used moon clips, and were aimed at ICORE and IDPA competitors.  They are both listed in the Standard Catalog of Smith & Wesson 3rd Edition. D.E. Watters (talk) 06:18, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Major caliber?
Talk:It's Nice Up North

message: In trying to find this film at IMDb (which it isn't) I came across another documentary entitled 
Its Grim Up North made in 2005 and directed by  Pip Banyard. Is this film in any way a reaction to that one and should this be noted on the article page? Thanks in advance for any info that you can add. MarnetteD | Talk 19:56, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The film's title is a play on the phrase "It's Grim Up North", which certainly predates that 2005 film by a long way, but I have no idea where it originates from.--86.140.49.181 12:00, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It's probably not on IMDb as it did not get a full theatrical release and has not been shown on TV yet.Tony Corsini 10:43, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Question
Talk:Popular print

message: I'm curious - on prints with a lot of lettering, such as the 1482 "Ages of Man" one shown, were the letters added using moveable type, or were they really all carved as part of the woodcut?  It seems an awful lot of tiny letters to carve, especially in relief!  Does anyone know?   Wombat140 (talk) 20:39, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: See blockbook, or indeed Woodblock printing. But by that date they were indeed moveable type, I'd imagine.  That worked very easily with woodcut, & they could be mixed in the same frame if needed. Johnbod (talk) 22:25, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  How were the letters done?