lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Bhojpuri language

message: Section talking about relationships to other Indo-Aryan Languages uses analogy and non-linguistic terminology when discussing vowels specifically, so it's unclear what sounds are intended. I.e. it describes one vowel as having the same sound as the 'aw in awl', but that sound is different between American, RP, and Indian English
Akku anka (talk) Akku anka (talk) 00:05, 16 April 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  IPA Needed for Phonology 

message: I've protected both of these redirects for now, as the sources I'm seeing suggest that these two are dialects of Bhojpuri rather than distinct languages. In most cases, dialects should either be covered on the page of the parent language, or if there are many dialects, on a page that broadly covers those dialects, such as Bengali dialects.  Creation of standalone articles for Mallika and Kashkia requires sufficient sourcing and a consensus. OhNoitsJamie Talk 15:41, 5 July 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Mallika language]] and [[Kashika Language]] redirects

message: Some guys are distorting the Bhojpuri Language article. He has updated this page multiple times without giving any source. Kindly check this user edits @Sang00500. He is indulging in edit warfare which is a breach of Wikipedia policy/rules. Kindly verify and take strict action on it. Aadit kumar misir (talk) 10:14, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: It is quite clear to anyone perusing your edits that the disruptive edits are coming from your side. The sociolinguistic classification "Nagpuriya Bhojpuri" is best left out for the body not the linguistic classification meant for the infobox. You do understand that "chiefly spoken" means the regions where it is the primary language (as described Oxford Dictionaries) not each and every place it is spoken (which can be expanded in the body of the article). "National language" in Nepal is dubious labelling since all spoken languages are classified as such without any governmental patronage (this has been left out from other WP articles as well per consensus). Gotitbro (talk) 06:51, 26 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bhojpuri Speaking Region
Talk:Chrism

message: As the caption on the lead photo clearly states, the vessel in question is marked "OS", standing for "Holy Oil"; however, the vessel of chrism would traditionally be marked "SC" (the third vessel would be marked "OI", Latin for "oil for the infirm")--so this photo actually does not depict the subject of this article. MishaPan (talk) 02:17, 25 November 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I think you were absolutely right and I have changed the photo. In my opinion didn't even look like chrism.--Turris Davidica (talk) 09:28, 25 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Error on lead photo

message: Given their very closely related subjects, someone wanting to bump this up to  status should probably take an hour or so and sort things properly between anointing and chrism. The entire present #Catholic section at Anointing probably belongs here, along with most of the #Orthodox section, since it's focused on the specific forms and treatment of the oil and not its ritual use. — LlywelynII 13:34, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: SCOPE
Talk:Elaine Tanner

message: The text added by 24.224.202.127 was lifted wholesale from this page:
http://www.mcaws.gov.bc.ca/whm/women_sport/e_tanner.htm
I reworked it for neutrality and for fair use purposes.
Tabercil 00:17, 29 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Proton Satria

message: Better merge the articles Proton Satria Neo and Satria Neo here. I found that there are 2 Satria Neo articles in Wikipedia. Better merge into this article because even though Satria Neo is the replacement model for the Satria, it can be considered as second-gen Satria. Hezery99 09:57, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge the Satria Neo article in Proton Satria article
Wikipedia talk:Coherence (historical)

message: While I understand the basic idea of this proposal, I must object to adding Yet Another type of guideline, per WP:NOT a bureaucracy and m:instruction creep. Please stick to the existing :Category:Wikipedia guidelines that everybody knows and understands about. Radiant_>|< 00:20, 29 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: The idea came from wikipedia talk:easy navigation#Is the overall intent is to be a style guideline? Any suggestions there? --Francis Schonken 07:53, 29 October 2005 (UTC)

text: I don't know about the drama that speaks from that sentence --Francis Schonken 07:53, 29 October 2005 (UTC)
Talk:Fermat primality test

message: Both conditions, 1 \le a < p and \operatorname{gcd}(a,p) = 1, are true. if a^{p-1} \equiv 1 \mod p\  ist true, so every (m\cdot p+a)^{p-1} \equiv 1 \mod p for every natural number m\  with 1\le m\ . So because every natural a\  with 1 \le a < p is \operatorname{gcd}(a,p) = 1, so is every natural number a\  different from prime m\cdot p  a^{p-1} \equiv 1 \mod p\ . --Arbol01 00:40, 29 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: If this is in regard to the rollback I did earlier, I did it because they broke the TeX.  Anyway, whichever way looks better, go for it.  CryptoDerk 00:45, 29 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  both true 

message: I believe that someone should remove the usage section because it is flat-out wrong. PGP is not a program, but rather a system for signing and encrypting information. GPG is a program that implements PGP. I have no idea what GPG uses, but an implementation of PGP, to the best of my knowledge, can use any primality checker it wants. I have not removed the section because I am not completely sure about this, and want to get it right. Does anyone else have any insight into the subject? 
- Alan 134.173.34.115 08:35, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Pretty_Good_Privacy is a program. And it does indeed use the Fermat pseudo primality test to find the primes used for RSA keys. GPG is another implementation that is compatible with PGP. I.e. both programs implement the OpenPGP standard. However, in cryptographic applications the Miller-Rabin test is often prefered. See e.g. the Digital Signature Standard, FIPS PUB 186-3 (draft) Appendix D.5. 24.228.51.109 17:35, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  usage section? 

message: Why is no stipulation made that base 'a' must not divide the 'n' being primality tested?
It seems to me that a basic divisibility check would would be step one before taking exponents and doing the modulus.
In fact, this simple check would eliminate most liars and all of the Carmichael numbers.
134.204.1.226 (talk) 17:32, 12 November 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Divisibility isnt what you want. A check of coprimality would be more appropriate. And there is no reason to do it. If you use a^(n-1)%n==1 youre going to fail the test whenever a is not coprime to n. Whether or not n is Carmichael. 63.40.186.52 (talk) 01:12, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  simple divisibility test
File talk:Lightning over Oradea Romania 2.jpg

message: That's got to be one of the best lightning photos I've ever seen! Superb. --Ukdan999 00:55, 29 October 2005 (UTC)

message: --Natasha2006 19:50, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It's pretty, but it is a tad misleading. The bolts are not simultaneous (which is the impression that the image would give to a layman), but are over the thirty-second exposure time. GeeJo (t)⁄(c) • 15:21, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Beautiful picture. Thanks also for putting it in public domain!  

message: Is it hard to take a picture of 3 lightning bolts?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Vinsfan368 (talk • contribs) 21:45, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Question
Talk:First Hill (NCSSM)

message: I had to remove a bit of odd vandalism "First Hill > you" today, and checking the page history,199.90.6.26 was the culprit.  199.90.6.26 is also the creator of the article. Demilio 18:01, 15 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Hall Activities
I'd hate to see our hall start doing trivial hall activities especially when we've had awesome Cosmic runs, skull shavers and brain strains.  I know it has something to do with keeping up with or outdoing Second Hill but I don't think it's worth it.  Snowmanmelting 00:58, 29 October 2005 (UTC)
File talk:White maggot.JPG

message: I found a multitude of maggots crawling on my ceilings edges and in my pantry.
I also found them in oat meal bags.
I spend five hours collecting them and killing them 200 so far.
Since then I come home and find smal flies that fly in a funny way, and just two or three worm (maggot type) I don't know what they are, where they come from and how to get rid of them.
Can you help me. the worm looks just like the picture above(white maggot jpg.etc.)
 joseph mische --70.67.253.57 01:08, 29 October 2005 (UTC)
Talk:John Sanford

message: The disambiguation notices are all the way at the bottom, instead of the top, making them very hard to find. But disambiguation for three other people would be distracting, and I'm not sure we need a whole disambiguation page for the name "John Sanford". What to do? - furrykef (Talk at me) 01:09, 29 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Disambiguations
Talk:Grand Haven, Michigan

message: Reminder to editors: please follow the Wikipedia USCITY guideline for section names / layout / content.  • Sbmeirow • Talk • 23:40, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Section names

message: I've removed the following dubious claim: "While there is no physical evidence, it is Highly believed that Gangster Al Capone spent a great deal of time in Grand Haven during his days bootlegging alcohol."  A (admittedly quick) Google search turns up no credible reference for this claim. Sagsaw (talk) 02:18, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks! IonlyPlayz2 (talk) 17:29, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title: Al Capone
Talk:Ballymena Academy

message: Alumni - well done. History? Pictures? References? Can do better. Welcome Victuallers 09:04, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Assess

message: How many times will 'mature' be changed to 'immature'? Getting boring. Garethhamilton 13:06, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Humorous joke 

message: I've always wondered, how come WE HAVE A PICTURE OF A MEERKAT, A BUG AND TWO HANDS!!!???
It's kinda weird, I DO like the latin on the badge.
I had the dubious honour of attending the school, and I seem to recall that the ant represented hard work. 204.9.5.171 18:50, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hmmm... 

message: It has come to my attention that this article is bias, in favour of the school. Wikipeida articles have always had a policy of remaining neutral. Examples of "biasness" in a recent edit has described it as "the constant high standard..." and "obviously the school is renowned...".
To make the matter worse, the school has threatened legal action if anyone edits the page. An edit (made by a user who's edits have involved the school before, leading one to believe they are from the school,) has stated
"[It should be noted that any edits of this page can and will be traced to the user's IP address. Prompt legal action will be taken.]"
This seems to me more like an advertisment than a Wikipedia article.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by RPGary (talk • contribs) 00:23, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've tagged this as , and removed one or two obvious bits of bias. The legal threat was added by , who has now been warned because making such threats are against Wikipedia's rules. --h2g2bob (talk) 01:45, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bias 
Talk:Object

message: Is there any difference between:
**An object is a language supported mechanism for binding data tightly with methods that operate on that data.
**A self-contained entity that consists of both data and procedures to manipulate the data.
--Imz 01:18, 29 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Good question. There is an important distinction that is not clear from the presentation. On the one hand, there are theoretical constructs (along the lines of ADTs) that are independent of programming languages; on the other hand, there are the language-supported mechanisms supporting the implementation of some variant of the theoretical constructs. Peak 05:16, 29 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  identical items? 

message: Hello I need to know if the following statement is asking me if I am willing or if I am not willing.  The statement or question is: "Would you object to being fingerprinted?"  Please contact me back with a response. Thank-you, Rhonda  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.171.172.145 (talk) 23:24, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  definition of "object"
Talk:Michelle Dessler

message: It’s so nice to see yet another good article being destroyed by the WikiNazis.  Pages that are 10 times longer are not having huge chunks of them deleted by these self appointed article killers.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.86.238.12 (talk) 08:45, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Article Destruction

message: KEEP this article as it is.  It should not be merged as Michelle Dessler was a major character on the show for three seasons.  The reason given is irrational as certain characters are the ones who are the foundation for the show, whether or not they are still on it.  This merger madness has run amok and is out of control. --MiB-24 (talk) 07:01, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Comment: You might be interested to know that Sherry Palmer, Audrey Raines and Kim Bauer, along with Tony Almeida, have also been tagged for merging into the "Minor Characters" page. Angelriver 05:10, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Merger
Talk:Nina Myers

message: Shouldnt this be one of 3? Or is Mandy (the assassin) not counted?
:Mandy wasn't in Season 3. --T smitts 07:18, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  One of two Villainesses in first 3 season 

message: Another completely ludicrous merge.  Nina Myers is the most important, affecting villian on 24.  She was a major character in Day 1, and was responsible for the death of Jack's wife, which caused so much damage to both Jack and Kim.  She also appeared as a semi-major character in Day 2 and was again major in Day 3.  Nina is also one of the most complex villians on the show.  I say again, she was the one who brought about Teri Bauer's death, the most important death on the show.--Phoenixfan 17:17, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merger 

message: There are sevral instances of Teri and also Terri, which is the right one?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.241.21.58 (talk) 08:19, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Teri or Terri 

message: Article says that she was killed in the room that she had killed teri, but the show never confirmed this. The room seems to be a different one unless it got some SERIOUS remodeling. is there a source for this claim?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.151.194.190 (talk) 01:19, 19 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: The CTU building got some serious bombing in season II, so it might have changed a little bit. --2A02:908:F461:4D00:A985:6C49:7DF6:7C39 (talk) 18:14, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Room of Nina's Death 

message: OK, in the beginning, the terrorists order Nina killed. But she is working with them. What the duce?!?!  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Arthritix (talk • contribs) 01:24, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: That's "deep cover" for you: Gaines did not know Nina was working for Drazen. Alternatively, one could argue that Gaines saw the flak jacket Jack put around Nina--but if that were true, it would have indicated Jack was not cooperating, and Gaines wouldn't have told Jamey to invent a cover story for Nina's death.70.131.57.87 (talk) 15:34, 14 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Plot
Talk:Mounds Park Academy

message: Comment:  The logo for the school should probably be removed and deleted; or at least retagged as fairuse.  I doubt the school released it as PD.  --rob 01:37, 29 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok, looks good now, thanks.  --rob 06:52, 30 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: An early version of this article was an apparent copyvio from this text.  All the "bad" text  seems to have been removed (but please double check).  --rob 08:20, 30 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Copyright

message: Ironic that this page suffers from vandalism whose source is its own students! --24.245.11.103 02:57, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vandalism
Talk:Ryan Chappelle

message: look at Jack's profile at the official 24 website(http://www.fox.com/24/profiles/), it states: "Former Special Agent in Charge", not Director of CTU. This includes George Mason, Jack Bauer, Tony Almeida and the others who held the position.
Are you sure Chappelle has 2 daughters and a wife?  In the episode where he gets executed by Bauer, Jack asks him if he has anything he wants to say to anyone, and Chappelle only mentions his brother that he never talks to.
80.229.237.73 22:26, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Director -> Special Agent in Charge 

message: The Day 1 and Day 2 sections are reading almost exactly the same...? --Buyoof 05:56, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Day 1 and Day 2 

message: Oppose: I oppose this merger.  He was in the first three seasons (the first trilogy) and the video game.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.184.83.137 (talk) 00:43, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Considered 'one of the most powerful' by whom? I think that comment is both original research and not a neutral point of view. Let's keep to solid arguments and not our own opinions. asyndeton talk 19:49, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merger 

message: Not able to find much else online.... Paulbrock (talk) 14:46, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Possible Sources/References
Talk:Breaking character

message: Arguably the most famous (or perhaps infamous) example of repeatedly breaking character occurred during The Carol Burnett Show which lasted from 1967 to 1978. The show was often recorded live before a studio audience and the comedy sketches were written days if not hours before they went on, so oftentimes the performers had not yet had time to be desensitized to the humor. Harvey Korman was the worst. He'd start cracking up at the drop of a hat in later years. However, at one time or another all the regular performers were guilty of breaking character. ZachsMind 13:22, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Carol Burnett Show 

message: According to interviews taken during the second season of CBS's television series Lost for the official podcasts, actors like Naveen Andrews and Dominic Monaghan have admitted to something they called 'corpsing' which is a slang term for breaking character by laughter so much that one or more actors can't go on without a break. The complexities and stress regarding serial production of television can sometimes take its toll and manifest in nervous laughter over the smallest of things. When the actor breaks character, and can't stop himself and regain composure, that's corpsing. Outtakes for many tv shows and movies, now often available on DVD, offer many examples. ZachsMind 13:42, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lost 

message: The example made it into the final cut right?  I added the sentence which said it made it into the final version, because I watched it and assume it to be true.  If I'm wrong, someone please fix it. Sentriclecub (talk) 01:13, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Lord of the rings example 

message: Out-of-character redirects here, and I usually associate that term with roleplaying games rather than with the contexts presented here.  Should this article discuss the notion of breaking character in a game, or is there another page about that to which this can link? B7T (talk) 02:47, 7 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: The discussion above suggests that Out-of-character should not have been merged with this one.  Has consensus changed? B7T (talk) 20:15, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Roleplaying games 

message: I'm thinking that pretty much the entirety of the example farm should be removed.  I'll see if I can find any actual citations for these things, but I suspect that the vast majority of them are either original research or IMDB trivia. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 02:25, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Example farm
Talk:Projection-valued measure

message: Is a standard Borel space the same as a Borel space? --  10:51, 28 October 2005 Oleg Alexandrov 
: Standard Borel space: Borel structure of a Polish space. -- 19:12, 28 October 2005 CSTAR
:: Great! Can I challenge you to fill in the redlink? Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 09:57, 29 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Standard Borel space]] 

message: Re: recent addition:
: It is further generalized by vector measures which take values in any Banach space. 
This is actually quite subtle. By definition, a projection-valued measure P is σ-additive relative to the weak (or strong) operator topology on the set of self-adjoint projections.  This means the P measure of a monotone union of a  sequence of sets  is the operator weak limit of the P measures of the elements of the sequence.  This is equivalent to P being σ-additive relative to the ultraweak topology, since the ultrweak and weak operator toplogies coincide on bounded sets.  The ultraweak topology in turn is a weak* topology (the algebra L(H) of bounded operators on H is the dual of the Banach space of trace class operators). However, weak* topologies require additional structure to define, i.e. being a dual space.  Note that the weak* topology on a dual Banach space E* is weaker in general than the weak topology on E* considered as a Banach space in its own right.
So one should actually say that a projection-valued measure is generalized by a vector measure which which takes values in a dual Banach space and is weak* continuous.
I hope I haven't said anything silly here.
--CSTAR 17:03, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I have a weak* headache after reading all that. But thanks, I got your point. Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 02:44, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vector measure
Talk:Metrication in the United Kingdom

message: It is understood that people in the UK and who are trying to keep this page as a protest to the metric system, however it should just be the facts. The process the UK has gone through to achieve the change, and why a duel measurement system still exsists in the UK. 2406:3400:212:D700:B632:4D38:70C3:3F4 (talk) 10:19, 25 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  This is not a platform for protest 

message: All significant changes to this page are constantly rejected by the user Defacto no matter who makes them. It seems highly unlikely that no real changes to this page has happed for years. Should this user be rejected from reverting changes made to the page. 2406:3400:212:D700:B632:4D38:70C3:3F4 (talk) 10:19, 25 October 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: If you disagree with any of the changes I've made, and I usually give my reasons for them in the edit summary, then please challenge them. But don't forget to explain why you think any specific edit was mistaken rather than just making an unsubstantiated and generalised personal attack like this one with no rationale. -- DeFacto (talk). 19:46, 25 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Does the user Defacto own this page?
Talk:Andrew Peters

message: I saw someone changed Andrew Peters weight down to 194 pounds. I edited it back to 247, since I doubt Peters lost 53 pounds in the off-season. If I'm wrong, can someone give me a source to show me his new weight?FatAddict 02:48, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Battle of Worringen

message: it's a wikipedia page about a battle - it needs a table! pauli 02:42, 29 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  no fancy stats table? 

message: Is this right? With c.4000 combatants each side, it's pretty small compared to Mohacs, Lechfeld, Grunwald, off the top of my head. Kisch (talk) 17:45, 20 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  One of the largest battles of the Middle Ages?