lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:M-11 Shtorm

message: The picture of the SA-N-3 on the Kresta cruiser used on this page is not actually an SA-N-3. It is the FRAS-1 ASW missile on the SUW-N-1 launcher. At least, from the look of the launcher and missile, I think so. 142.151.136.226 (talk) 01:19, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree about the laucher, though from the color and the red stars painted on those "missiles", I'm inclined to believe that they're dummies placed there to try to look impressive. I would argue that that picture should be removed as it is more far likely to confuse a reader than enlighten them as to the subject. Surely there is some freely available image of the actual missile to be found, perhaps on some DoD webpage similar to the one on which was found the second, accurate photo of the launcher was found. On another note, is it of any import to the article that the SA-N-3 was, for many years, believed to be a naval adaptation of the SA-6 Gainful? Probably not.172.190.124.68 (talk) 01:42, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

text: Ok, I've changed the picture. Vilhelm.s (talk) 04:31, 8 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Old talk

message: The third photo of the missile magazine on the Minsk is curious; the missiles are marked with the NATO code "SA-N-3" in big Latin letters, not with the Russian code for the type in Cyrillic letters. Somebody has even slapped a "nuclear" warning roundel on just one missile.--Death Bredon (talk) 12:40, 17 March 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Interesting photo
Talk:9K31 Strela-1

message: I was reading the article, and the ESM equipment listed as the FLAT BOX, is to my knowledge erroneous. Recalling from memory a 1985 Jane's Missiles and Weapon Systems publication(the several hundred page authoritative variety) the ESM is called HAT BOX, and I will uncover this Jane's tomb soon to correct this error and or add data from a source 20 years past.
-Gabriel  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.126.25.240 (talk) 11:10, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Thunderbird (missile)

message: An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Thunderbird (missile):. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so.  Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 20:32, 22 October 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Thunderbird (missile):" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]] 

message: The link to the feature articles about the development of Thunderbird in Flight Magazine no longer works. Possibly these articles from the Flight archive are no longer directly accessible. Everybody got to be somewhere! (talk) 23:06, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dead link
Talk:Cactus Framework

message: Article text was copied verbatim from cactuscode.org.  Claimed "with permission", but that does not formally satisfy copyright policies.  WP:COPYPASTE  Secondarily that means the real source of information is also not cited appropriately. CyreJ (talk) 13:55, 3 October 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Introduction text also appears in publication in IEEE Proceedings (citation [2]), this falls under copyright restrictions. CyreJ (talk) 12:25, 4 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copied
Talk:KGFF

message: Per the WP:Disambig page, "If only a primary topic and one other topic require disambiguation, then disambiguation links are sufficient, and a disambiguation page is unnecessary." Since the radio station call letters are the primary identification and the acronym for a parks foundation is a secondary identification, a hat note is sufficient and requires no more steps than would a disambiguation page for people seeking the King George's Fields Foundation. - Dravecky (talk) 09:53, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Rationale for deletion of disambiguation page
Talk:Blondel's theorem

message: I have corrected the caption to this photo. The IP edit was correct for this style of meter. A 3W 1Ph meter is called 1.5 element as  it contains two half turn current coils and only one 240volt potential coils. Thus one full element and another half as one current coil does not have a matching pot. coil. Note the nameplate indicates 240 volts? This is never a system voltage on meters. It doesn't know what system it will be used on but only it's own coil ratings. Two pot. coils would have no other connection without being in parallel. The meter measures E x (I1+I2)/2. Since each phase is measured at half it's current and twice it's line to neutral voltage all is metered correctly by old standards of accuracy and Blondel's theorem. This is not a good meter for this article cannot meter accurately on any 3 phase 3 wire system accurately due to the 120 degree potentials. That takes two complete elements. A 25% error would be encountered on line-neutral loads. 174.118.142.187 (talk) 00:03, 11 December 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: According to the maker's literature, it's a single-phase meter; it doesn't need the potential coil connected to the neutral, and the maker's literature shows it connected on 120-240 "split phase" systems.  (I bet the meter on my house right now is only a 3 wire meter...but it's dark and -25 C as I type, so OR will have to wait.) --Wtshymanski (talk) 06:56, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
replies: text:  The meter configuration is a shortcut from a full two element meter. Yes it meters accurately but, ,it does not meet the requirments of  Blondell's theorum. It does not in have two elements and the potential coils of do NOT connect to the unmetered common conductor, as required by this theorum. Since it is another method of metering a single phase loads, does not obviously use Blondell's theorum to make it work (equivalent only), and is confusing non-meterology people readers and editors I am removing it. We need another type of meter for the example that actually and clearly applies Blondell's theorum. 174.118.142.187 (talk) 19:18, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Single phase meter caption
Talk:Expletive deleted

message: This article is too (expletive deleted) short to be an article in itself. If, for example, we add (expletive deleted) examples to the article, we may be able to (expletive deleted) keep it. Otherwise, this is a (expletive deleted) stub. It should be merged with Expletive. --Jon Terry 17:00, 7 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't see the merge template... :) --Vlad|-> 12:06, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge with [[Expletive]]?

message: In February 2007 'Expletive Deleted' was proposed for merger; on 6 March of that year its content was merged to Expletive and it be came a redirect. On 18 March 2007 another editor re-created the page, apparently by paraphrasing the (recently merged) content from 'Expletive'. Later the same day, another editor rolled the page back to the redirect. There it sat for some four years.
In September 2011 I proposed that 'Expletive' be split, as it treated three different topics that are each sometimes called "expletive". On 4 November 2011 I split the page to create Syntactic expletive and Expletive attributive; I turned 'Expletive' into a disambiguation page pointing to those pages and to Profanity. Since 'Expletive deleted' was now a redirect to a DAB, I re-targeted it to Minced oath.
On 14 November 2011 another user rolled the page back to the 18 March 2007 version, noting "I cannot find the text of this article in Minced oath which it redirected to." This resulted in broken or inappropriate links; I fixed the ones I found, but others may remain. Cnilep (talk) 06:41, 16 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: An Expletive deleted history lesson
Talk:Autler–Townes effect

message: I recently wrote in my sandbox for a class I am taking and thought perhaps the information in it would be useful to expand the connection between EIT and ATS. You can find it here. It describes that these two effects can be separated into intensity regimes, at least in certain configurations, with regards to the coupling laser.
I will post a similar note about this in the EIT talk, since it pertains to that as well.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Inaginni (talk • contribs) 21:37, 28 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: EIT and ATS
Talk:Knudsen diffusion

message: For cases where α=0, (=-N_{B}), or where y_{A} is close to zero, the... That is cool, but what is N_{A} and what is y_{A} ???  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.6.62.228 (talk) 08:35, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Dubious
Talk:Maleševci (tribe)

message: Is Maleševci a clan or a tribe? In the beginning of this article it is said that they are a tribe but later - clan. Please make it consistent with the definitions of clans and tribes in wikipedia --Bezvardis 17:06, 7 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Clan/tribe 

message: Vlach doesn't mean Aromanian in that context - it was a social class in the Ottoman empire, for christians settlers/nomads. It could be considered as an insult stating that a Serb clan is not of Slavic origin.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.191.250.168 (talk) 14:34, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vlach
Talk:Sherborne St John

message: I've added a todo list with some initial goals. Alan Pascoe 17:18, 7 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Todo list 

message: Removed from this article: "Sherborne St. John was the site of the 1465 Battle of Cranesfield: one of the many Lancastrian uprisings during the reign of Edward IV."
I can find no ref to the existence of this battle. Verica Atrebatum (talk) 21:26, 28 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Battle?
Talk:B–Bbar oscillation

message: It was good to merge the Bs section into that, but now it flip-flops between B0 oscillations and Bs oscillations. That makes the article quite confusing.Pkoppenb (talk) 15:03, 25 March 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cleanup 

message: The result was no consensus to merge, without prejudice. Editors are reminded that non-controversial merges do not require discussion, per WP:Merge. Given the relative lack of interest in this merger my suggestion is that someone with far more knowledge of the subjects than me should simply proceed with the merger one way or another.-- Debate 木 07:12, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Other way around - the oscillation is an aspect of the meson, so it makes more sense to make the B-sub-s meson the main article, which can cover B-Bbar oscillation and other things as well. wikipediatrix 18:38, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You're right in principle, but in practice the B-sub-s meson article contains nothing except a blurb about B_s mixing (oscillation), so it fits nicely here. And the content here is more general than just for the B_s. The B-Factory experiments study B_d mesons, not B_s mesons. (As an aside, the particle physics wikipedia pages are in general very disorganized. Not much thought has been given to which topics deserve a whole article and which deserve only a mention in a longer article. At the moment there are a lot of very short articles, so in general article-merging is a good idea, I think.) Josh Thompson 21:50, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge proposal 

message: The degenerate chromodynamic (strong force; monoquarklike) pre-Big-Bang particle, oscillated between its matter and antimatter form, and Everettianly (many words interpretation) both alternatives branched out as the "matter universe" and the "antimatter universe".
It's a fringe theory. Not the nowadays dogma.
Also it leaves open many interpretations of the initial: either monoquarklike, or gluonlike, or new fundamental force like protocosmic particle (the asymmetric force is a proposed alternative theory which includes a new (stronger than the strong force) biased force [supersymmetry is deemed wrong])  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:587:4114:ECDF:C038:7F48:5CF:108D (talk) 04:13, 19 June 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  B–Bbar oscillation as an equivalent example for why we live in a matter-universe
Talk:U Nu

message: This guy has the coolest name I've seen in a while. JIP | Talk 14:41, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: NO U 190.163.17.162 (talk) 03:03, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Name
Talk:Nanoengineering

message: As the main article states: (date 2015-05-12) "Nanoengineering is largely a synonym for nanotechnology", perhaps a separate article is not needed at the current state. Also, there seems to be a separate article Nanotechnology education covering the Degree programs listed below (perhaps not in the full detail such as their launch detail, which is perhaps not that notable). Section: Techniques is a stub and is better described in article Nanotechnology. Suggest to delete, redirect to Nanotechnology and briefly mention the Engineering aspect of Nanoengineering there. Smwrd (talk) 08:55, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:QW-2 Vanguard 2

message: Is Vanguard the translation of the name, or just the export name? If not, can somebody add a translation  TREKphiler any time you're ready, Uhura  05:15, 25 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Chin who Kelly? 
Talk:Lionel Stander

message: Was Stander a Communist?Lestrade (talk) 19:21, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Do you mean "card-carrying?" I don't know the Communist Party's policy on the issuance of membership cards. Did Stander possess a membership card? If not, was one never issued? If it was issued, did he lose it? Do you mean ever? Yes, was he ever a Communist? Or is this "direct question" a philosophocal query? This is a direct question, not a philosophical query. As usual, it is almost impossible to receive an answer to a direct question. Stander's answer to the HUAC's direct questions seemed to have been similarly oblique.Lestrade (talk) 18:44, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Direct Question

message: This article looks like all original research. Where are the notes???? Deriobamba (talk) 13:37, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: References
Talk:Roger Clark

message: Roger is on the Right hand side, maybe that should be made clear?
What does (c.) mean? I can't find out even in this internet age. I would take it out. 92.40.193.97 (talk) 18:08, 20 October 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Center, I presume. Fixed. Prolog (talk) 20:00, 20 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  First image caption 

message: I don't think there has ever been any such thing as the Circuit of Scotland. Scottish Rally, yes, since 1932. 92.40.193.97 (talk) 18:13, 20 October 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Good catch. Fixed. Prolog (talk) 20:00, 20 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Circuit of Scotland"
Talk:AGM-76 Falcon

message: I've dumped the "nuclear ASM developed for the YF-12" version of this article based on WP:V. Basically, I can't track down the original source for this; one claim on a forum was CIA documents for the YF-12 program, which if true might indicate there was a reuse of the designation, however the only confirmed information (on which the source relied, based on the same forum thread I found) were the official USAF designation issuance for the ARM version. Unfortunatly this is a near-criminally underdocumented weapon, but the bottom line is that no nuclear version for the YF-12 appears to ever have existed. - The Bushranger One ping only 09:35, 25 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rewrite
Talk:Anti-Fascist People's Freedom League

message: Recently, an editor added Category:Rebel groups in Burma. Although Anti-Fascist Organisation can be regarded as Rebel groups in Burma, AFPFL was a political party founded after decisive Allied victory in Burma Campaign, negotiated independence for Burma, and the main political party in Burma from 1945 until 1962. PhyoWP  *click           02:49, 10 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rebel groups in Burma
Talk:Misnay–Schardin effect

message: Misznay could not have designed the M93. He died in 1968, but the development for the M93 did not start until 1987, 19 years later. I did however work at one of the tool and die that made tooling for some of the components for Honeywell. 2601:243:1202:D9F0:2DB4:C0AD:5B60:A28D (talk) 05:36, 10 July 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: I have removed this incorrect information. I have added the M93 mine to the Misznay-Schardin effect#See_also section. 193.146.10.221 (talk) 09:46, 6 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Misnay and the M93
Talk:AIM-97 Seekbat

message: The following is an unreferenced statement added by a user who has only edited Wikipedia twice. It has been placed here until someone can be bothered to provide proper citation for it.
"During the testing of the Seekbat, CIM-10 Bomarc surface-to-air missiles (SAM) were utilized in the target drone role; the Bomarc missile was used to simulate the high flying Foxbat.  The Bomarc would prove to be a poor choice for target drone, due in part to the requirement to operate it in a manner outside its intended operational envelope.
In sustained high altitude flight, the Bomarc would roll onto its back and dive when the engines became oxygen starved.  This flight characteristic was previously unknown to program officers.  When the Bomarc rolled on its back, the wings shielded the engines, causing the Seekbat to unlock from the target during terminal guidance.  Instead, the Seekbat test missile IR seeker would chase the sun once the Bomarc went "cold."  Because this was misunderstood by engineers, continued efforts to develop the missile guidance systems were undertaken without any effort to correct the drone issues that were causing the targeting malfunctions.  Each test missile was hand built and very expensive to produce, causing the program to suffer cost overruns."
Graham1973 (talk) 03:20, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unreferenced claims 

message: This is so that if anyone can be bothered to join in improving this article research is not duplicated.
Flight International magazine ran 'World Missile Survey' articles that covered the AIM-97 Seekbat in 1974, 1975 & 1976. Equivalent articles in 1973 & 1977 do not mention the missile, even though in the case of the 1973 article the program had begun and in the case of the 1977 issue the progam had been canceled the previous year. This is important because in the previous years articles cancelations were mentioned.
It is highly probable that mentions appear in Janes Weapon Systems and other similar publications in the same 1972 - 1977 time frame. These articles are critical to understanding the course of testing and whatever reasons were given for program cancellation.
Graham1973 (talk) 10:39, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Researching contemporary reports 

message: These two claims were found on the internet while attempting to locate information to expand the article, neither claim has a documentary source. These are placed here as pointers to future research:
# The missiles were also intended for ASAT use.
# Israel was involved in the program to some extent. This makes sense as the Soviets had deployed MiG-25Rs to Egypt.
Graham1973 (talk) 10:42, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Two claims found on the internet that need investigating
Talk:List of thermodynamic properties

message: Altitude is not a property, if you're thinking of position in gravity field that's a different matter, but altitude, especially as defined in the linking article has nothing to do with gravity effects. 
I agree with the above anonymous comment about altitude.  It gives the location of something, but that is not, I think, part of describing the state of a system.  I'll delete that entry.  Christopher King (talk) 20:18, 17 December 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Altitude a Property? 

message: I removed the "Gas constant" and "Specific gas constant" from the list.  I don't believe those are thermodynamic properties.  The article on physical properties begins with "A physical property is any property that is measurable, whose value describes a state of a physical system. The changes in the physical properties of a system can be used to describe its transformations or evolutions between its momentary states."  Having done that, I think I'll try to say something at the start of this article about what a thermodynamic property is/isn't.  Christopher King (talk) 19:39, 17 December 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: A Constant Is Not a Property

message: The way this article is written makes it seem as though there is one and only one symbol that is commonly used for many of these quantities. If only.... Is the intent to list one symbol that has been used to represent that quantity, the most common symbol used for that quantity, or all symbols that are commonly used for that quantity in textbooks and journal articles? Just the internal energy alone could arguably have 10 or more symbols associated with it, depending on the author. There is a citation to Čengel and Boles at one point, but their notation is hardly the most common (and indeed is downright odd at times). Kaiserkarl13 (talk) 20:43, 19 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title: Which Symbols Should Be Listed?
Talk:Natural abundance

message: Article is feeble.  Best "merged" into main article and "Natural Abundance" redirect created. 84.92.241.186 20:44, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That is true.  But natural abundance does not have to be restricted to elements (if it were, then merger to Abundance of the chemical elements would be the best option).  It can also apply to molecules, isomers, species, food, etc.  Abundance gives some clues. --Rumping (talk) 11:44, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

text: In addition to other natural abundances, "isotopic abundances" (over and above those that occur naturally) will eventually get their own article(s).  They play a powerful role, for example, in the laboratory study of presolar grains and their connection to processes of stellar nucleosynthesis.  The fact that solar system isotopic abundances are so predictable offers an important backdrop for this (and other) isotopic studies, and I imagine might as well be here as anywhere else provided the substance develops over time.  I'll see what I can do to help downstream.  Thermochap (talk) 14:57, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

text: The natural abundance background is important to the diagnostic power of many isotopic labeling and low blank trace-element detection techniques as well.  For example, a colleague of mine irradated a nanogram sized particle with so many neutrons that every U235 atom in it was fissioned, and then counted the number of fission tracks that resulted.  He found one, which in turn allowed him to infer U238 abundance (assuming solar system abundance ratios) and hence total U abundance in the particle as well. Thermochap (talk) 16:07, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge 