lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Lake Alexandrina (South Australia)

message: The satellite image in the lead is very pixelated, blurry and of generally low quality. It needs a replacement. Dodgedbullet (talk) 05:53, 6 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Poor lead image 
Talk:History of spamming

message: There is a reference to an earlier spam email as being 1971 (and apparently referenced in Wired, although I cannot confirm this) at: http://www.multicians.org/thvv/mail-history.html Watman 11:25, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Earlier electronic spam (1971)?

message: I notice that the Spam (electronic)'s section on the history of spamming appears to be longer and more complete than this article.  Maybe more of the discussion there should be moved here? Wrs1864 04:02, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Move more discussion from Spam (electronic) to this article?

message: I'm proposing we merge the Gary Thuerk article into this one.  As noted in both articles he was the world's first spammer.  Although the incident is notable, that does not make him notable.  When a person is responsible for a single event or news item of lasting notability, yet the person himself is remembered less than the incident, we usually make the article about the incident and not the person.  That puts the focus in the right place, and helps avoid WP:BLP problems.  We could just retitle the article to the "DEC spamming incident" or something like that, but the article is a mini-stub and doesn't really stand on its own.  I'm not sure there's enough there, although considering Brad Templeton wrote a book about it, maybe someone could expand it into a real article.  Unless that happens it's probably more useful just to merge it in here as a paragraph in the history of spamming.  Wikidemo (talk) 16:01, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: merge I agree with this reasoning.  Wrs1864 (talk) 17:59, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge of Gary Thuerk 

message: I have removed the WikiProject tag, as this article is either a redirect or deleted. If you oppose, please restore the tag. Thank you, fahadsadah (talk,contribs) 16:03, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wikiproject Computing
Talk:Patrick Hadley

message: Nearly all the biographical details seem to be stolen from John France's page on the 
composer at musicweb-international.com has Mr.France been notified????
If this is the case, then all the information ought to be re-written. Should the borrowed text not be removed as soon as possible it will be deleted -User:Gruesome Pet — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gruesome Pet (talk • contribs) 18:29, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Information Source
Talk:Packet Switch Stream

message: There were three InterStream gateways on PSS. InterStream 1 was the gateway to the Telex network allowing the sending and receiving of Telexs by PSS subscribers. The Telex network  was made to look like an X.25 network with a DNIC of 2348. Another was an ISDN packet mode interface which ran on a GEC 4000 series minicomputer, but I believe it was only made available to some customers. I cannot remember what the third InterStream gateway was, although I did know some ~15 years ago. They were called InterSteam 1, InterStream 2, and InterStream 3, but apart from InterStream 1, I also can't remember anymore which was which. 81.187.74.206 15:29, 21 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  InterStream Gateways 

message: The word Baud is sometimes over-used.  The definition of Baud is the number of elements transmitted to line per second and a 9.6 kbit/s modem is in fact a 2400 baud device.  Each element of data sent to line is a Quadbit (4 bits) and hence the 4:1 ratio.  Better to just say kbit/s anyway; and 2 Mbit/s for the Primary rate.  Finally, it was always BT house style to use KiloStream and MegaStream as the product name for the link provided.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.133.248.105 (talk) 20:05, 30 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  use of Baud
Talk:Packet crafting

message: How can this stub be rated as B class article???  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Digimanpk (talk • contribs) 19:07, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Sort of a "Duh" situation.  Changed.  Also gave it low importance. ~ Amory (talk) 19:48, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
Talk:Service control point

message: * External Link is broken --151.207.242.4 (talk) 20:38, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:VLAN Management Policy Server

message: I removed this prose from the article:
:Although the MAC address can be manipulated quite easily, it is still legitimate to use VMPS as a security tool.  It is indeed better to have some control of what devices are present on a network, than simply allowing every device full network connectivity.
Because this particular point is quite debatable. Regardless, it's not cited, and it's not with in the scope of this article either. Triddle 20:20, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  False sense of security?
Talk:Wire protocol

message: What is the difference between a wire protocol and other application layer protocols?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.67.101.147 (talk) 09:04, 11 October 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm confused too and have started a discussion at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Computing/Computer_networking_task_force#Wire_protocol ~Kvng (talk) 14:46, 4 September 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Whats?
Talk:Cheeger constant (graph theory)

message: Cheeger first appeared in the context of Riemannian manifolds, as a key ingredient of Cheeger's inequality. According to MathSciNet, Riemannian geometry context is still at least as common as the graph theoretic context. Then why does this article completely ignore it? Would it make sense to rename it "Cheeger constant (graph theory)" to make room for the real Cheeger constant? Arcfrk (talk) 10:52, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  What about Riemannian geometry?
Talk:Network computing

message: As discussed on Talk:Network computer I find this article problematical. The first citation is a dead link, and the second one never mentions the term. It fails to mention Network Computing Devices nor the publications named Network Computing nor the network computer (or perhaps thin client). I propose changing this into a redirect to distributed computing which describes the field and general technique, then add some body text mentioning all the related terms. 
I found an archive of the first citation and it also does not mention "network computing", just cloud. So I will move that info there - it has been two years of complaint tags after all. W Nowicki (talk) 23:43, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I would redirect the term to Computer network, job done. Or change it to a disambiguation page and have distributed computing, cloud computing and computer network as links as it could mean any of those things. Mattg82 (talk) 22:17, 21 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Redirect or merge?
Talk:Schwagstock 29

message: I have a concern that the subject of this article may not be notable.  I've been unable to find any wikipedia notability criteria for individual concerts, but the precedent for concert-tours states that "Shows and tours of bands should be listed in the band article, not in a separate article".  I can only assume that the criteria for a single show would be even more restrictive.  Hundreds of concerts happen every day around the world, and having an attendance of 7,500 people does not in itself make this show notable.  What else is notable about this concert? johnpseudo 18:24, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I propose this be redirected to Schwagstock.  johnpseudo 18:27, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree after reading into the subject.  I have looked at some other pages like the Bonnaroo page and I'll attempt to model the Schwagstock page in that fashion. Runderwo 16:30, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

text: You can go ahead and delete this page now, I merged its contents into the main Schwagstock page.Runderwo 20:33, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Notability
Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Basque/Archive 1

message: :The discussion below took actually place in my user talk page (User talk:Sugaar) in 4-6 November 2006 but it is relevant as historical reference in the project talk page, so it has been copy-pasted here. --Sugaar 18:24, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

message: Honestly, no idea yet. I started thinking in a Portal but a Wikiproject also makes some sense. Please discuss. --Sugaar 09:51, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You might also want to consider the noticeboard model. See Romanian Wikipedians' notice board for a good example. - Jmabel | Talk 21:21, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Broken link, Jmabel. And my search on Romanian Wikipedians gave no results either. :( --Sugaar 21:30, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: What's more correct? A Wikiproject or a Portal? Or both?

message: Wikipedia:WikiProject Basque
I have also moved the Portal project page to a subpage of this WikiProject: Wikipedia:WikiProject Basque/Basque Portal (draft).
Please, let's move the discussion there. I'll copy-paste the above discussion as an archive page of the Wikiproject talk page ("Archive 0" probably) and, after some cautionary time, I'll archive it here also. 
Please help me wikifying the project page: categories, directories, etc. Thanks. --Sugaar 18:18, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  WikiProject created
Talk:Ardmore, South Dakota

message: http://www.osti.gov/energycitations/product.biblio.jsp?osti_id=5959990  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Theasfl (talk • contribs) 06:32, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
Talk:Koozh

message: them arabs, always making stuff up...koozh is a term for the process used to make east-indian bongs. Go smoke somewhere else besides wiki-pedia —Preceding unsigned comment added by GreatestManAlive (talk • contribs) 02:26, 7 November 2006 (edit)
: No, this is a real food, more commonly spelled koozhu, occasionally koolu. See google. cab 02:54, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Also this was an obvious misuse of the  tag. cab 03:06, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Yedid Nefesh

message: I'm not sure whether there should be a vav in "m'shōch" in the second line of the first verse and also in "ehōv" in the penultimate line of the final verse. Does anyone know? DBJC 6 November 2006
¶ Judging from the photo of the ms page, which is not easy to read, no vav in m'shoch but yes a vav in "ehov".  However, the first printed version (1601) has a vav holem in "m'shoch" and also one in "ehov" Sussmanbern (talk) 11:08, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: What is here called the original Hebrew is actually not that.  The manuscripts show that the version printed (according to ms, of course) in the siddurim "Sim Shalom," "Koren," and "Rinat Yisrael" is the original.  Whether it is "correct," modest, interesting, traditional, etc, I don't know, but it seems to be the way Azikri wrote it. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Mattcarl (talk • contribs) 13:34, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Original Hebrew" is not the original version, only traditional 

message: I see that @DoritG has removed a claim that "" This book does indeed say that the poem is found in that manuscript, but doesn't itself challenge the attribution to Azikri. The poem is found f.146v, near a transition between scribes. Reif seems to imply that the poem is transcribed by the first hand (f.144r-f.148r), but the NLI entry says that the poem is written "בכתיבה מאוחרת מעל דף ריק" = in a different hand on a blank page. Certainly a great many manuscripts have liturgical poetry scrawled on endpapers, margins, etc., which are of a much later date than the original scribe's colophon. I'm noting this just because it was sort of sourced and to allow @Sussmanbern (who added it) to respond; plus maybe someone has access to the manuscript itself? Happy editing! GordonGlottal (talk) 13:27, 15 August 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Authorship re 143[7] Commentary on Numbers
Talk:Alive in Athens – The DVD

message: I'll briefly note that, as far as formatting, I based the capitalization of the song names on how they appear on the back cover of the DVD.  As words like "of" and "the" appear capitalized there, even when not beginning or ending a title, I've followed that convention in the article. TheBrigand 18:26, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Track Listing
Talk:Statistical time-division multiplexing

message: Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: http://searchnetworking.techtarget.com/definition/STDM. 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.  NortyNort  (Holla) 01:57, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copyright problem removed 

message: * https://ece.uwaterloo.ca/~mazum/ECE610/statmux.pdf
* https://web.stanford.edu/~dntse/papers/jsac95.pdf
* http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.28.8364&rep=rep1&type=pdf
* https://courses.cs.washington.edu/courses/cse561/04au/lectures/lecture01-plan.txt
*  http://searchnetworking.techtarget.com/definition/STDM
18:16, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Potential Source/Reference Material
Talk:Weighted fair queueing

message: The following comment was posted to my talk page. I believe this refers to this edit of mine. I think it best to discuss here instead.
you have simplified the reference to the "Fair queuing principle" to a simple mention to "fair-queuing scheduler". My point of view is that the term "fair queuing" has two meaning: a general principle and an specific scheduling policy. Then, the expression "all fair-queuing schedulers" is ambiguous. This is why the term "Fair queuing principle" was used, with a reference to the section. MarcBoyerONERA (talk) 05:36, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: This is something that is best conveyed in the copy and not as a (subtle) section link. Before proceeding with improvements here, please read my recent request at Talk:Fair_queuing#Family_of_Algorithms ~Kvng (talk) 19:28, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Section link
Talk:Wecota, South Dakota

message: I removed "The town is also famous for its annual Testicle Festival or Mountian Oyster Festivel" as it seemed unlikely. If it is in fact true, please include citations when you put it back. Cheers. Euchiasmus 22:17, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: A Google search reveals nothing like this for the Town, County, or even State for that matter. I think it was bogus.--Arg342 (talk) 01:08, 12 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Annual Testicle Festival? Mountain Oysters?
Talk:Microconnect distributed antenna

message: Hello fellow Wikipedia people,
I hope you find the added information helpful and feel free to change what you want. this is my first attempt at adding text for a technical term. 
I was wondering if we should try to go in depth about the dates and locations these antennas are implemented?
I also was having trouble finding more information about the topic itself.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Studentgrizzly (talk • contribs) 00:56, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Microconnect distributed antenna added information.
Talk:Patch panel

message: As I related in the Talk page for the image, I don't think the punchpanel diagram makes sense. There cannot be a single wire connecting the panels (unless the panels act also as switches and routers, which they clearly do not).Amead (talk) 03:54, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Punchpanel diagram flawed

message: ...seems inappropriate to me, since it illustrates a pair of switches, which have their own onboard jacks, and do not constitute a patch panel, which would be a passive jack field inbetween active devices. Bill Woodcock (talk) 18:50, 12 July 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: There are also patch panels in the picture. This is a typical arrangement for a network build and I think it is good to show the use of the panels in context. ~Kvng (talk) 14:16, 15 July 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Eh. You're absolutely right. I dunno, I must have been in a bad mood or something. This is one of those times when an "undo" that was socially acceptable to use would make me feel better about myself, but, well, here we are. Bill Woodcock (talk) 04:35, 16 July 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: , All is good. No need to feel bad about yourself. ~Kvng (talk) 15:49, 18 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Photo of two GigE switches...
Talk:Constrained Shortest Path First

message: The article's focus is on MPLS, but link pruning exists in both OSPF and IS-IS. In either of these protocols, unidirectional links are removed before shortest path computation. I.e., if router A's LSA/LSP advertises a link to router B, but router B's LSA/LSP does not advertise an opposite link, then the supposed link from A to B is pruned. IS-IS performs an additional pruning of all outbound links from routers which have the overload (OL) bit set in their LSP (except for self, i.e. if it's the calculating router's own LSP). (This can be – inaccurately – emulated in OSPF by setting the metrics of these links much higher than those of "normal" links.)
What the IGPs do not do is pruning different sets of links on the same router, that is, have a single router calculate multiple routing tables. I am guessing this is the distinguishing criterion for calling it CSPF. In any case, this point could be clarified, if anyone knows how. Aragorn2 (talk) 13:31, 26 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Present in OSPF and IS-IS
Talk:Check Point

message: thanks for the clarification. I will consult John of Reading. thanks Spintendo for all your help in formatting etc. as i am new to wikipedia it helped me a lot.
as for the user name, it is my personal user, linking to my personal email. i changed the signature.
Rafi.Kretchmer at Check Point 08:45, 27 February 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Account Name =

message: I saw that you wrote to me but put it on my user page, and not my user talk page. I have corrected this for you. I've moved the discussion here so other editors can more easily participate.
Regarding what you are proposing to add to the Check Point page: I fully expect that you're not going to like my opinion, and that's OK. My view is that the addition is not at all encyclopedic -- it reads distinctly as an attempt to sell a product. It is something I would expect to read in a marketing whitepaper, not an encyclopedia. The most that would maybe be salvagable from this would be a brief, one sentence mention that Check Point sells firewall solutions for small-to-large businesses. Any more than that, and we're starting to give undue weight to this one particular aspect of the company in its article. (See WP:PROPORTION - in my view, this applies to all types of topics in articles.) Even then, I think the present content of the article as it stands covers this aspect of the business reasonably well.
I think it is important that I again bring to attention what Wikipedia is (and isn't) for. Quoting from "Wikipedia is not a soapbox or means or promotion": "Wikipedia articles about a company or organization are not an extension of their website or other social media marketing efforts."
At this point, consensus would be required to make this change to the article; as it stands I am not in favor of its inclusion, for all of the reasons I have just stated. –Erakura(talk) 16:54, 27 February 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Discussion
Talk:Lester Germer

message: Some suggestions for improvement as the article is expanded:
*Template:Infobox Scientist should be added 
*Photograph should be added from a source with a free license, if available
*Some basic biographical information required, including precise date and place of birth, precise date of death, positions held (with dates), any family details
*Article needs expanding and should emphasise reasons for notability of subject
*Article should be divided into appropriate subheadings
*Information on research should be expanded and references required
*References should be expanded and preferably converted to inline format
*External links to useful online resources should be added if available
Espresso Addict 00:54, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Review comments

message: Whenever the famous experiment on electron diffraction is referred to it is always Davisson-Germer. But then in 1936 Nobel Prize went only to Davisson. Why? I am not able to find this anywhere on the web.
Further the references here seems to be inadequate. Two references, only on rock climbing and that also not directly on Germer. I think some scientific references should also be there. Particularly the original reference of Davisson-Germer experiment.
Deviuma (talk) 02:41, 28 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why did he not share the Nobel Prize 

message: The page lists his alma mater as Columbia and his PhD advisor as Clinton Davisson, but as far as I can tell Davisson was never at Columbia. Davisson's page says he went from Carnegie Institute of Technology to Western Electric/Bell Labs in 1917. Which part of this information is wrong? -Athaler (talk) 21:02, 30 March 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Alma mater and advisor?
Talk:Internet Engineering Steering Group

message: I would say trying to keep an updated list here of "current" members is not working, and by the rule of Wikipedia is not a directory we should probably give up and just point to the real list. If we had citations, I suppose a list of notable people who had been on it at some time in the past might be appropriate, which could include "current" members as of edit time. W Nowicki (talk) 22:29, 17 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Out of date
Talk:Mandø

message: I removed the sentence "The Blackpol warbler is also found on the island."
There is one record of the North American Blackpoll Warbler on Mandø (15 october 2006), and even though it is the first record in Denmark, it is clearly irrelevant to the ecology of Mandø. It might however be relevant to mention it in a trivia section.  Apus 08:18, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Blackpoll Warbler 
Talk:Jack Preger

message: This article appears to be highly biased in favour of the individual about whom it is written. A more balanced view is needed. It should be tagged and identified as a biased article.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.112.109.253 (talk • contribs) 
:I have incorporated information from only the sources cited in the references section, and none seem too critical of Preger. If you can find any sources that are more critical of his work, by all means add information from them into the article, but remember to also mention what these sources are. Regards, Kavadi carrier 23:02, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Biased article 

message: *He has also twice been nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize. 
Being nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize is an honor, but it is not official or even prestigious. Any national legislator or about a third of the university professors in the world can make a nomination, and there have been as many as 140 some years. Nominators are requested to keep their nominations secret, so it's only those wishing publicity who make announcements, and more often it is impossible to verify. I see no reason to keep it. No offense to the subject, this is a general Nobel Peace Prize "nominees" issue. -Will Beback · † · 09:53, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nobel Peace Prize nomination 