lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Parity

message: "Parity is deciding whether something is even or odd."
So parity is a verb? Or is it a person with a rather odd occupation? No pun intended.
It has many meanings but in this article I think it is being used as a noun describing the even-ness or odd-ness of a number. IE: "The quantum-mechanical selection rule states that parity must change from odd to even or from even to odd." Rlee0001 16:57 Oct 19, 2002 (UTC)
: the article is really confused. parity is not about whether a number is even or odd, but about whether the sum of all the bits is even or odd.  In binary, the following number is odd parity even though it is an even number: 00001110; and this number is even parity even though it is an odd number: 00110011. Waveguy 01:34, 12 Sep 2003 (UTC)

message: Current:
* Parity (physics), the name of the symmetry of interactions under spatial inversion
* Parity (mathematics), indicates whether a number is even or odd
Proposed:
* Parity (physics), a symmetry property of physical quantities or processes under spatial inversion
* Mathematically this property relates to the concept of even and odd functions
* Parity (mathematics), indicates whether a number is even or odd
Reasons:
* I feel it does the concept an injustice to describe parity as a "name" rather than a "property"
* The concept of even and odd functions is a glaring absence from this list and is the basis for Parity (physics)
I am interested to know what people think of these changes.--DJIndica (talk) 13:14, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: First of all, I think you need to read MOS:DAB, the ideas on what a disambiguation page should consist of has changed over the years and may currently be different to what you understood it to be when you joined Wikipedia.  The stuff about even and odd functions needs to be removed, dab pages should be as minimalist as possible, just enough to direct the user to the article they are searching for.  I agree even and odd functions are intimately connected with parity but it does not mean parity and is a very unlikely search term for that article.  However, there absolutely should be a link to even and odd functions in parity (mathematics).  Just put it in the "see also" section if you can't think of a way to smoothly work it into the article. SpinningSpark 15:02, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Changes to physics/mathematics definitions 

message: Why is cubing parity not hereTheRandomMan (talk) 23:54, 24 June 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  not here
Talk:Uninflected word

message: For some reason or other it has been suggested that "uninflected word" should be merged into "lemma". I am afraid, I must disagree utterly. Although the word "go", for example, may be the lemma of all its other inflected forms "goes", "going", "went", etc., it is not an uninflected word. An uninflected word cannot be inflected under any circumstances, and therefore never has any affixes, ablauts, etc., whatsoever, and so does it change its morphology. We are talking about words such as "about", "then", "for", "hello", "Yes", etc., in English, and "fũr", "ja", "aha", etc., in German, just to take two languages as examples.
Since we are talking about two entirely different concepts then, the need for a merger just would not arise. By all means, link them as "see also" items, but do not conflate them. Because of there being two entirely separate concepts I am removing the merger notice tag, since it obviates any need to discuss a merger. Dieter Simon 23:43, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Intended merger of Uninflected word with lemma

message: That opening line is one of the least helpful I've encountered on these pages. Wikipedia is meant to assist the public in understanding and is not a platform for academics to show off their technical lexicon. The easiest thing in the world is to make something unintelligible. The clever people can make a difficult topic clear. Jonwoss00 (talk) 19:11, 13 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Opening sentence
Talk:Economies of scale

message: The article confuses economies of scale (returning margins to scale) with efficiencies of physical size.  
Economies of scale apply to the volume of production and the discounts associated with high utilization of productive capacity in either self-owned or contract operations.  To grow you add capacity that increases your cost and higher volume uses more of the new capacity.  In contract production multiple brands supply the volume, but discounts are significant for guaranteeing a large % of a contractor's line production.
Efficiencies of size are those characteristics of larger machines or systems that are a matter of the higher efficiency of large size systems such as aerodynamic efficiency of large vs small rotors or the geometric advantages mentioned in the article. 
To not clearly define these confuses the operational economics issues with a misinterpretation of economies of scale over the last 20 years.  This has led to strategies stressing size, mega data centers and wind turbine and projects, despite consistent evidence that that mega sizing is not an economic benefit or advantage in sectors that use  volume strategies.  Volume wins over size almost universally in more volatile landscapes.  Which mot sectors have become. Rmassimo (talk) 19:22, 30 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Economies of scale
Talk:Freigeld

message: please notify your sources, citations are important 11:28, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  article lacks citations
Talk:Landmark Worldwide

message: I have removed these two statements because I think that they mislead the reader about the findings.  I was not able to find an online copy of the USC study: "Transforming the Network of Conversations in BHP New Zealand Steel", but some summary info is available on Landmark's site [here].
 MY bolding.  Note here that these results are attributable to BHP's OVERALL program, of which LEBD was a PART.  
Unless the study states more clearly what results are attributable to Landmark's programs and which to BHP's, than stating the numbers here are misleading the reader and inappropriate WP:SYNTH. ---Avatar317(talk) 01:09, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  LEBD USC study statements
Talk:Dunstanburgh Castle

message: I was wanting to have a go (some time, no rush!) at sorting out units and convert templates and all that stuff here, a bit more consistently than it is at the moment. On a quick scan through for the flavour, it looks as it we mostly have imperial units first, then metric. This isn't without exception but is, I think, the broad picture. I have a slight personal preference for metric but I am unaware of anything that would force it that way, and I do value a peaceful quiet life. So I am quite tempted to just keep it all acres-first or, like, whatevs. What do you think? Best to all, DBaK (talk) 19:51, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Consistency is useful, but I'd be happy with consistency within each unit rather than necessarily all metric or all imperial (if that makes sense). On the scale of metres, I'd prefer to use metres first with yards and feet in brackets as that reflects modern practice archaeological and architectural practice, though some of the sources will use imperial units first. For hectares/acres I have a weak preference for metric first, though personally I find either a little tricky to conceptualise. For miles/km, as long as it's consistent I don't mind too much, I think there's only one case where that would apply in the article so that's easy! Richard Nevell (talk) 17:15, 5 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Units 

message: I seem to remember going down a steep ladder and visiting a dungeon there 2A02:C7F:4CC9:9B00:6CD2:106C:BA2A:5E56 (talk) 14:01, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: You do remember! Many of us of a certain vintage+ do. It was discussed a little at Talk:Dunstanburgh Castle/Archive 1#Dungeon a mere sixteen years ago, when it was mentioned in the article, at least as a ; it seems to have been lost since then. I don't now know what RS mentions it, but if you think it's inportant you could have  a look for a source. (I am thinking of the days when Mr Stephenson was custodian, btw ...) Cheers DBaK (talk) 19:29, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: That is very likely to have been dealt with by Peter Brears in "The Administrative Role of Gatehouses in Fourteenth-Century North-Country Castles", The Medieval Great House. I don't have access to the chapter at the moment but will see what I can track down. A change in interpretation would be worth mentioning in the castle, especially if some readers are coming here specifically for information on a dungeon Richard Nevell (talk) 00:45, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: That would be excellent, thank you! My own knowledge of this issue tends more towards the folkloric than the encyclopaedic so your input would be more than welcome. Cheers, DBaK (talk) 13:02, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dungeon  below dunstanburgh castle
Talk:Tantalum

message: In case anyone wonders about my "capacitance" edit:  it is not correct to say that tantalum has a higher capacitance than other substances (as the pre-edit version did).  Capacitance is a property of an electronic component, not of a material; it would be like saying that titanium has a higher velocity than iron.  (Sure, if you build a high-performance jet out of it, but...)  I substituted what I think the author of that sentence probably meant, which is that tantalum's main electronic application is in capacitors with high capacitance.129.97.79.144 21:11, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Absolutely makes sense even without an explanation. Femto 17:48, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Capacitance 

message: "Most commonly encountered are oxides of Ta(V), which includes all minerals." Not true. Native tantalum has Ta(0), and Ta is also not pentavalent in tantalcarbide, TaC. And that's not all the exceptions. See: (1) https://www.mindat.org/min-7329.html; (2) https://www.mindat.org/min-7327.html; (3) https://www.mindat.org/min-7120.html; (4) https://www.mindat.org/min-39368.html; (5) https://www.ima-mineralogy.org/Minlist.htm Eudialytos (talk) 19:29, 11 December 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Picky, but true.--Smokefoot (talk) 20:22, 11 December 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks Eudialytos (talk) 22:55, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

text: Thanks. Eudialytos (talk) 22:55, 18 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wrong geochemical-mineralogical data 

message: Text around map says Rawanda, highlight isn’t. 2601:281:D57F:950:E5EB:A6C9:CA9D:472F (talk) 04:10, 4 August 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bad Map
Talk:Mutt

message: Why is the term "mutt" (A person of mixed racial descent) not in Wikipedia, as it is in urban dictionary? "Slang" doesn't belong here? I think the labelling as "derogatory" depends on the viewpoint and is PC. --Philipp Grunwald (talk) 15:53, 16 November 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  mutt as in "of mixed descent" 

message: :The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. 
The result of the move request was: Comic moved, but no consensus for the disambiguation page. There is clear consensus favouring a move for the comic strip, so it should be moved ASAP. But there is no enthusiasm for treating the dog type as primary. A second RM to focus on just the disambiguation page can be done later. (closed by non-admin page mover) — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 03:34, 2 July 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 25 June 2022
Talk:Economy of India

message: when will the updated GDP growth will be shown it's not 7.8% it's 8.2% officially, please update Burglaryscott (talk) 17:03, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Also 7.8% is Q4 gdp of fy 23-24, the official gdp is 8.2% 2405:201:5400:B00F:35B3:4FDC:D3CF:8EE0 (talk) 06:48, 3 June 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  GDP growth FY23-24  

message: Change 7.8% to 8.2% for fy23-24 https://edition.cnn.com/2024/05/31/business/india-gdp-q4-growth-intl-hnk/index.html 2405:201:5400:B00F:35B3:4FDC:D3CF:8EE0 (talk) 06:55, 3 June 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 3 June 2024
Talk:University of Chicago

message: The redirect シカゴ大学 has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at  until a consensus is reached.  Certes (talk) 18:52, 9 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  "[[:シカゴ大学]]" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]]
Talk:Northern Ireland Environment Agency

message: I've set up a new template, . Using *  generates:
Link to example
I'm happy if people want to copy this for other countries; or to add a country/ designating body field and the relevant URLs. Andy Mabbett 11:39, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: SSSI template

message: This article needs to be updated to take account of the fact that the Service, since July 1 2008, is now the "Northern Ireland Environment Agency". 217.41.240.15 (talk) 09:38, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Need To Update to "Northern Ireland Environment Agency"
Talk:Tree structure

message: * I feel tree structure and hierarchical tree structure are the more obvious candidates, as they both describe their subject in similar terms, whereas tree data structure adds 'data' to the equation.
* But I know too little about the use of tree structures in communications and computer science to decide whether these are three distinct articles. I do feel that at least the 'tree structure' article should be less nerdy and more accessible. Genealogists use tree structures too. Also I currently miss information on the naming of elements and relations in tree structures (but perhaps I should look at the general articles on structure for this). branko
* The term "tree" implies a hierarchy, so "hierarchical" is redundant, I think. Plus "Tree structure" is the simplest name, so that's a good thing too. -- Tarquin
* I think most people probably think about the things outside with bark that grow in soil, when they here the word tree. Also it's possible to think of a tree as a sort of graph: I'd tentatively say the meaning is only hierarchical when you put hierarchical data in it. Despite that I think hierarchical is a good way of describing it, being such a common usage. Oligomous (talk) 12:49, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Hierarchy

message: "Wikipedia tree hierarchy of categories and pages under Computing" in the end of the article.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.90.165.14 (talk) 15:01, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Link doesn't work

message: * Tree structure and Tree (data structure) ought to be merged. First of all, they are essentially the same concept. The fact that one is represented by a database and the other by anything is irrelevant. Secondly, as these articles stand, there is significant overlap. Finally, the descriptions of the various objects, etc., in tree (data structure) are already mostly generalised and apply to all trees, not just ones modelled by a computer. — Skittleys (talk) 23:46, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge proposal
Talk:The Troubles

message: I find it very strange that the "Proposal of an independent Northern Ireland" section is twice as long as the entire "Political process" section, while not even the Agreement has its own section. The section is almost entirely an analysis of PM Wilson's unimplemented ideas. Also, the section also seems, to me, to promote a unionist view of the situation (e.g the UK couldn't possibly leave Northern Ireland). As discussed elsewhere on this talk page there is not enough information about diplomacy— I think this section should be dramatically reduced to make room for more impactful diplomacy topics. Placeholderer (talk) 16:01, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Support. This could largely be done with copyediting, I think. But some of the narrative is extremely unencyclopedic ("The British so wanted to leave Northern Ireland in 1975, however, that only the catastrophic consequences of doing so prevented it" -- what the hell is that). Yr Enw (talk) 18:02, 11 February 2024 (UTC)

text: I would say Remove the entire section, and replace it with two or three short sentences, suitably sourced.  Scolaire (talk) 10:53, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Undue Weight to Independent NI Proposal 

message: I have reversed, for the third time, an attempt by the same editor to add a nuanced point to the infobox. It is not an appropriate place for claims such as "sometimes" or "covertly", and I note that the sources provided don't support the precise claim being made anyway, since "Members of the RUC and UDR" and "senior Royal Ulster Constabulary and Ulster Defence Regiment officers were aware and in some cases approved of collusion" is not the same as "United Kingdom (covertly)". Kathleen's bike (talk) 14:07, 26 March 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Would it be appropriate to include them under a qualifier like "Alleged"? I don't fully understand why inclusion as a belligerent makes it inappropriate to do something along those lines— is there a policy page to clarify? (Still learning this stuff!) Placeholderer (talk) 22:39, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Infobox 

message: This has been deprecated at the infobox, see the request for comment at Template talk:Infobox military conflict#RfC on "supported by" being used with the belligerent parameter. Obviously that consensus takes precedence over any local consensus here, but thought it prudent to at least give some notice of its pending removal. Kathleen's bike (talk) 23:45, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposal to remove "supported by" or similar from infobox
Talk:Amiga E

message: * Add citation that the Amiga E was a popular language; currently we only cite the language creator.
* Should the article title be "Amiga E (programming language)"?
* When the maintenance template should be removed?
* Overview should be expanded and/or Syntax block should be added; see: C (programming language) - Overview
CC: @Polluks @Pavlor  Kajsa Gauza (talk) 13:49, 16 January 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Myself, I would remove all parts referenced by primary sources (Aminet etc.) and rewrite the article by using reliable sources (some are already in the article, eg. French AmigaNews). However, my personal to-do list is long and my Wiki time too short, so I can't do it myself in a reasonable time frame. What I can do is to list more reliable sources here on the talk page. Pavlor (talk) 06:07, 17 January 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I would appreciate that. Kajsa Gauza (talk) 13:58, 19 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  To-do list
Talk:Time (magazine)

message: So... from 1941 to 1987, nothing happened at Time (magazine); THAT'S flabbergasting, isn't it? B-class article or Z-class article, that's the question! AlainR345Techno-Wiki-Geek 03:09, 16 November 2023 (UTC)

message: The redirect Time (Magazine) has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at  until a consensus is reached.  Nickps (talk) 22:15, 21 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  "[[:Time (Magazine)]]" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]] 

message: There are multiple places where the article says, "According to Book X, blah...".  Would someone like to move those into refs with proper citations (including authors, publisher, isbn numbers, etc)? -- Gnuish (talk) 14:19, 11 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Move citations into refs? 

message: Tumu delivered 4/18 /24, I didn't get the package TRACK # IzGG760YW71694317, PLEASE RESPONSE ME I CALLED USPS NO ANSWE 40.135.124.221 (talk) 07:48, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  missing my package
Talk:SITA (business services company)

message: This seems to be the correct place for the information.  Both articles are very different but appear to cover the same topic. Vegaswikian 00:02, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I disagree.  Airline teletype (now renamed to Airline teletype technology) seems a more general article, while this article deals specifically with the European co-op operating the technology.  I've removed the merge tag, and linked the articles together. JesseW, the juggling janitor 06:23, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge from Airline teletype

message: I do not agree with the harsh exclamation that the article reads like and advertisement...After the end of WW-II SITA was established as the first and still the largest private comms companies in the World as of 2011. To deny that SITA had its origins in data comms across the planet well before we had ISD Telephony would be a travesty...It is historical fact that a data comms carrier was born out of World necessity in air transportation... Fact SITA further developed SNA to provide global SNA/T when the World was new to Global Data Comms...When the editor and contributors of this article were not even born SITA had been formed and was functional with the largest Main Frame Computer Systems on this planet and still are...Go Visit Galileo, COVIA, AMR - Corporations, Amadeus, Abacus to name a few and thanks for 'Secure Flight'  which keeps our air transports safe in a Global sense. How could you not write about SITA without saying where they came from and what they do very quietly without advertisement nor endorsement.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zczc2311 (talk • contribs) 06:34, 6 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  RE: Advertisment????? 

message: The South Africa government's IT agency is also commonly referred to as SITA. See http://www.sita.co.za/ 196.14.169.11 (talk) 11:09, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: - Used Distinguish template to leave a hatnote.--Xzinger (talk) 06:23, 28 April 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Conflicting company name: State Information Technology Agency (ZA) 

message: more needs to be explained about -CHAMP Cargosystems -
like when dit it become a subsediary of Sita. ?
-and how does it integrate or technicly interface into the rescource network.?
-and if I remember correctly, SITA is or was incorporated like a coop (a co-operativ-company) , with equal size shares and powers by every airline company involved.
-about CHAMP Cargosystems, I remember it from its first few jears of begin in developlement, as begin emploid there as technician for terminal cables, and operator on the Sperry-Unisys 1100 and the then new Unisys 2200, in the shack of old cl44 hangers domesticated to office space, in the south-west end of the main runway, at Findel airport (ELLX).
.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.160.176.192 (talk) 00:19, 2 October 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  about: CHAMP Cargosystems