lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:New Zealand DQ and QR class locomotives

message: :Image:2079b.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.
If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.Betacommand (talk • contribs • Bot) 23:03, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:2079b.jpg

message: I have heard that DQ 6347 will be written off after its derailment at Picton. This is only a rumour at this stage, so until it can be confirmed I'm only putting it here. Windowsvistafan (talk) 07:10, 1 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: DQ 6347

message: My notes show the reverse of the data in this article. I have 2011 rebuilt from 1497 and 2012 rebuilt from 1495. However I also have the following notes:
1497: Converted to DQ class (15th QSR) but got behind 1495 in the order.
1495: Converted to class DQ (16th QSR) but got ahead of 1497 in the order.
All of which suggests that the conversion of 1497 was started before that of 1495 regardless of their TasRail number allocations. My interpretation is as above but I can see that yours is just as likely if not more so. I'd appreciate a clarification if that is possible.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 222.155.165.194 (talk) 20:57, 1 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  TasRail 2011 and 2012 

message: It's worth pointing out that locomotives which were allocated QR2033, DQ6013, DQ6036, DQ6399, and DQ6416 never actually ran in NZ with these numbers  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 222.155.165.194 (talk) 21:09, 1 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  TMS Numbers 

message: Assuming the recently removed reference to a preservation group was this group, don't bother re-adding it as it was set up as a joke. Besides, it's too late to save one now as they've all been sold. pcuser42 (talk) 22:55, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Preservation group
Talk:Egon Wellesz

message: {{subst:image source|Image:202(1).jpg)) Betacommand (talk • contribs • Bot) 23:04, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
Talk:The Gray Prince

message: This stub, at best, amounts to a favorable review of the book. Really, it's more like a three-paragraph diatribe, bracketed at top and bottom by flattering, nearly identical comments about the book in question. I tend to favor inclusion in Wikipedia, so I'd rather the article were improved than deleted, if possible; but I'd rather have nothing than an unencyclopedic stub.
I'm adding the {cleanup-rewrite} template. — CKA3KA (Skazka) 23:14, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  This stub needs serious help!
Talk:2007 IIHF World U18 Championships

message: :Image:2007 IIHF U18 logo.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.
If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.Betacommand (talk • contribs • Bot) 23:16, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:2007 IIHF U18 logo.jpg
Talk:Duwamish River

message: What about adding information about the PBS Frontline episode originally broadcast on April 21st, 2009 entitled Poisoned Waters? It discussed the Superfund site on not just the 5 mile stretch of the Duwamish River, but also ones in neighboring businesses and communities like Boing and South Park. I would add information, but I'm not informed about the river outside of this wiki page. PBS, and especially Frontline, are always excellent sources of journalistic excellence due to the research they do. The show will be replayed the next two days early in the morning in case anyone wanted to see the two hour episode.
-Brian —Preceding unsigned comment added by Brianbobcat (talk • contribs) 03:35, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  PBS Frontline-Poisoned Waters 

message: I recently uploaded some aerial photos I took of the Duwamish Waterway, below. Feel free to use if useful. Dcoetzee 09:48, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  New media 

message: Please comment at Talk:Green River (Washington) regarding a merge with Green River D O N D E groovily Talk to me 23:56, 2 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge with Green River 

message: Hey everyone,
Article here (I don't think there's a paywall or article view limit at PB)  - 
This should slot in nicely into the Pollution section and I leave it to the excellent (and more experienced) contributors of the page to add what is necessary in a WP:SUMMARY style. No way my couple-of-times-raft-floating-on-the-Duwamish-self could give a decent perspective of this river's troubles.
Cheers!
Shortiefourten (talk) 18:14, 25 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  ProPublica article on Duwamish cleanup efforts
Talk:Pesen Na Evrovizija 2007

message: :Image:20061 large.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.
If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.Betacommand (talk • contribs • Bot) 23:18, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:20061 large.jpg
Talk:P.'s Correspondence

message: "Some consider it the very first such work in the English language (depending on whether or not Benjamin Disraeli's "Alroy" of 1833 is defined as being alternate history)." This is an important point for this article, and it might justify the existence of an independent entry for "P.'s Correspondence"; but who are those "some"? Couldn't anyone specify who said that and where?--93.40.121.204 (talk) 09:08, 27 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Lacks reference!
Talk:2006 South Asian Games

message: {{subst:image source|Image:2006 SAF-mascot and logo.jpg)) Betacommand (talk • contribs • Bot) 23:20, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
Talk:Expectation value (quantum mechanics)

message: This concept seems not the least bit different from the one treated in expected value.  Only the terminology and some of the notation are different, this one perhaps reflecting conventions prevailing among some physicists. Michael Hardy 23:23, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: The article currently says this:
: The expectation value, \langle x \rangle\, of an operator, \hat{X}\,, operating on a wavefunction \psi is given by
: 
:: x = \frac{ \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} ~ \psi^{*} \hat{X} \psi ~ dV } { \int_{-\infty}^
{\infty} ~ \psi^{*} \psi ~ dV }.
Shouldn't it say something like the following?
: The expectation value, x = \langle \hat{X} \rangle\, of an operator, \hat{X}\,, operating on a wavefunction \psi is given by
: 
:: x = \frac{ \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} ~ \psi^{*} \hat{X} \psi ~ dV } { \int_{-\infty}^
{\infty} ~ \psi^{*} \psi ~ dV }.
As it is, it says the expectation value is called \langle x \rangle\,, but the operator is not called x\,, but rather is called  \hat{X}, and then the "displayed" identity does not say "\langle x \rangle =\cdots\,", but instead says "x=\cdots\,. Michael Hardy 20:37, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Details 

message: Hello Optics guy07,
putting an example into the article is an excellent idea! As you noted in the edit summary, the notation was not quite in line with the rest of the article, and I tried to clean it up, and also added some context to the example.
I was not completely sure whether you intended to set up the example for a 3-dimensional or for a 1-dimensional particle. I opted for the 1-dimensional particle, in order to make the example as elementary as possible. We can change that, of course.
I also moved the note about non-normalized vectors further up in the article, since I thought it would fit better there. --B. Wolterding 16:05, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Example 

message: Mathematical expectation is defined only in Lebesgue integration terms (and this is when intuitive strong law of large numbers hold, and says E(x)=<x> = long term average of x.
For other integration methods strong law does not hold and does not guarantee this. 
How does QM define expected value? by what integration? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Itaijj (talk • contribs) 08:59, 28 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Some Questions 

message: On 22:30, 12 May 2015, an IP address, 202.92.134.5, committed section blanking on Operational definition. This user has made only a few contributions, at least one of which was unconstructive (see the User Talk page).
The following is the relevant history diff:
?title=Expectation_value_(quantum_mechanics)&diff=662100484&oldid=659202549 (the link works, even tho it's red.)
ReGuess (talk) 18:47, 23 June 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Blank Section: Possible Vandalism?
Category talk:Juilliard School people

message: Following the CFD discussion on merging :Category:Juilliard School of Music alumni and :Category:Juilliard School alumni, which ended with "no consensus", I offered to help tidy up this parent category.  I am doing so, using the following principles:
*Musicians who attended the Juilliard School go in :Category:Juilliard School of Music alumni
*Non-musician alumni go in :Category:Juilliard School alumni
*Faculty (music and non-music) go in :Category:Juilliard School faculty
If it then appears that we need further sub-cats to distinguish between faculty divisions, or for the different non-music alumni, we can create them.  Effectively, :Category:Juilliard School people should be an article-free zone, unless there are people out there who are notable for their involvement with the School but who are/were neither alumni nor faculty.  If anyone sees this, they are welcome to comment.  Bencherlite 23:29, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Category talk:Juilliard School alumni

message: Following the CFD discussion on merging :Category:Juilliard School of Music alumni and :Category:Juilliard School alumni, which ended with "no consensus", I offered to help tidy up this parent category.  I am doing so, using the following principles:
*Musicians who attended the Juilliard School go in :Category:Juilliard School of Music alumni
*Non-musician alumni go in :Category:Juilliard School alumni
*Faculty (music and non-music) go in :Category:Juilliard School faculty
If it then appears that we need further sub-cats to distinguish between faculty divisions, or for the different non-music alumni, we can create them.  Effectively, :Category:Juilliard School people should be an article-free zone, unless there are people out there who are notable for their involvement with the School but who are/were neither alumni nor faculty.  If anyone sees this, they are welcome to comment.  Bencherlite 23:30, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Standard procedure is not to distinguish alumni by career path, but by institution.  Juilliard School has been the official name of the institution that was Juliard School of Music since 1969.  Prior to 1946 there were two related institutions, the Institute of Music and the Juilliard Graduate School, with their top leadership overlapping.  They merged in 1946.  Juilliard School apeears to have musical and dramatic and maybe also some other divisions, but these are not officially called schools.  The old scheme of assignment was just wrong.  Thus I have attempted to place those who were students from 1946-1969 in the Julliard School of Music alumni category and students before or after that time in Juilliard School alumni.  If it is not possible to deduce a time frame I have chosen the more general category.John Pack Lambert (talk) 06:14, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  We need to follow standard proceedure
Category talk:Juilliard School faculty

message: Following the CFD discussion on merging :Category:Juilliard School of Music alumni and :Category:Juilliard School alumni, which ended with "no consensus", I offered to help tidy up this parent category.  I am doing so, using the following principles:
*Musicians who attended the Juilliard School go in :Category:Juilliard School of Music alumni
*Non-musician alumni go in :Category:Juilliard School alumni
*Faculty (music and non-music) go in :Category:Juilliard School faculty
If it then appears that we need further sub-cats to distinguish between faculty divisions, or for the different non-music alumni, we can create them.  Effectively, :Category:Juilliard School people should be an article-free zone, unless there are people out there who are notable for their involvement with the School but who are/were neither alumni nor faculty.  If anyone sees this, they are welcome to comment.  Bencherlite 23:30, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Influenza B virus

message: it has no cure influenza  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.30.32.156 (talk) 17:11, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: It has no cure

message: The type A and Type B articles don't say what the essential differences between them are.
Both say they have 8 RNA strands. (A says 13,588 bases, B says 14,648 nucleotides (=bases) ie B is somewhat larger).
A says they code for eleven proteins (HA, NA, NP, M1, M2, NS1, NEP, PA, PB1, PB1-F2, PB2).
but no similar statement for B (although B still seems to have HA and NA and many of the others).
Presumably the HA and NA of B are very different from all the HA and NA subtypes of A but how ? Rod57 (talk) 16:52, 7 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Differences from Type A 

message: How long is the contagious period?--Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 04:08, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  contagious period 

message: — Assignment last updated by Slolamingsnailmail (talk) 21:26, 14 November 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: Virology 2022

message: The cited article (Osterhaus et al., 2000) says that the infections in dogs and pigs do not meet the criteria to prove an infection. So pigs as a host range is incorrect or further proof is needed. 2003:C4:BF09:EAEA:D09D:A45F:9CF8:1F81 (talk) 11:23, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Influenza B infection in pigs 

message: Interestingly, since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, Influenza B/Yamagata levels have dropped substantially,- B/Yamagata was already on a downturn before the COVID-19 pandemic- and no such viruses have been isolated or sequenced since March, 2020. 
As of November WHO says “inclusion of a B/Yamagata lineage antigen in quadrivalent influenza vaccines is no longer warranted, and every effort should be made to exclude this component as soon as possible”.
Hence I edited the dogmatic sounding statement in the lede- everything is in flux! Wuerzele (talk) 21:28, 23 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  B/Yamagata
Talk:Influenza C virus

message: I've added the citation which links to the discovery of influenza C in pigs, though I'm not sure how to format it correctly.  If someone who does wants to clean up the formatting that would be grand.
66.251.25.242 (talk) 14:35, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: I've added

message: This page should be merged with page "Influenza Virus C". There is no difference between the two pages.
is a bad thing Insert non-formatted text here  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.19.205.209 (talk) 13:48, 3 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Support. duplicate topic. --Animalparty-- (talk) 07:03, 5 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  flu
Talk:2003 AFL season

message: Thanks for uploading :Image:2003AFLGrandFinal.png. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, then you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.
As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the  tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as  or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.
If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following [ this link]. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 13:07, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Unspecified source for [[:Image:2003AFLGrandFinal.png]]

message: theres some vandalism here, it seems a geelong supporter has it in for collingwood whilst trying to alter history, good luck buddy, but they lost by 86 points.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.190.200.35 (talk) 07:37, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: vandalism
Talk:Slippery dick

message: I suggest that we move to protect this page, as the fish's unique name makes it a target for vandalism.
:i agree, still an amazing name though! Ryan shell (talk) 02:33, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Every slippery dick needs protection...sorry, I couldn't help myself >_>
I agree we need to protect this page T collins.13 (talk) 11:17, 8 May 2018 (UTC)

text: That's a strange assertion, , coming from someone whose edits here have mostly been disruptive. Are you having a change of heart? ... Just checkingyou are aware, aren't you, that the edit history of this page is always here for anyone to read? Just as your contributions, like everyone else's, are preserved for anyone to check? As long as you know, Thanks and best wishes DBaK (talk) 14:53, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Jesus man calm down. 2601:243:C700:38E3:B197:44C8:7479:9E79 (talk) 08:24, 6 March 2023 (UTC)

text: Fair enough! Welcome, , to sensible editing. Enjoy! DBaK (talk) 16:28, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

text: I'm honestly not enough of an expert to know, but I'm sure they would or will be fine with references. Happy editing! DBaK (talk) 16:28, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: The page has been indefinitely pending changes protected, about time! Bᴇʀʀᴇʟʏ • Talk∕Contribs 13:37, 24 March 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Protection 

message: Seems like an obvious question, yes?
Yeah, agreed, I really wanna know how it got its name! --HoopoeBaijiKite 00:01, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: ...There may actually be a sexual connection to the name. Fishbase lists a Brazilian common name, Punheta, which means 'handjob' accoring to google translate. Ryan shell (talk) 02:01, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

text: "It is said that this name originated from the ease with which this fish slips out from one's hand when one seems to be sure of him." — https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/163144/why-is-it-called-slippery-dick —— SubTenebra (talk) 09:18, 30 July 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  What, no etymology?  

message: "Cortinas de la Carne de Vaca" [is supposed to] mean(s) "beef drapes". I think it's highly unlikely that a bay with such a name exists.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.181.109.135 (talk) 02:30, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Stealth vandalism? 

message: Hello , , and . Your "chat" keeps being removed because it breaks the Talk page guidelines. If you read them, you will see that Talk pages cannot be used as a forum, for general chat about the topic, etc. They have quite a closely defined purpose, which you need to stick to, please. Thanks and best wishes DBaK (talk) 21:54, 17 April 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removal of content
Template talk:Influenza

message: http://www.thegurutricks.com/what-is-aussie-influenza-or-flu-and-would-it-be-a-good-idea-for-me-to-get-immunized/  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Guru6069 (talk • contribs) 02:01, 14 January 2018 (UTC)

message: The manual of style suggests abbreviations shouldn't be used unless they are common enough that the majority will be able to understand them without clicking. There is no need to limit the last line of links to four characters each. 70.59.16.167 (talk) 02:39, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Note: I have asked for assistance from the users of WikiProject Medicine. --ElHef (Meep?) 22:08, 30 April 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  The last line of this navbox has too many abbreviations 

message: Please add H10N8 in template.
Carlkang (talk) 15:23, 5 February 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: There is no separate article for this sub-strain (and several others) of the Avian influenza.  The strain is mentioned in that article, and Avian is already in the template.  If and when H10N8 has its own article, then the template should be modified to include it.  Thanks for the suggestion.  78.26 (I'm no IP, talk to me!) 17:58, 5 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 5 February 2014