lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Lattice (group)

message: I'm getting really frustrated trying to understand the contents of this wikipedia page. At the beginning of the page and throughout the majority of the page, a lattice in R^n is a subgroup of the additive group R^n generated by a basis of the vector space R^n. Ok, fine. And then what the hell is going on in "Lattices in two dimensions: detailed discussion" (and "Lattices in 3 dimensions")? After getting a headache, I realize that the only explanation is that a different definition of lattice is considered in these paragraphs, but it isn't written anywhere in the page, making it incomprehensible. I assume the definition considered there is something like "a discrete subgroup of the isometry group of R^n" (and not just an additive subgroup of R^n) possibly with an extra condition like: whose subgroup of translations is a lattice of R^n in the previous sense. The paragraph starts right off the bat with "There are five 2D lattice types". Oh yeah? What's a lattice type? And what is the definition of a lattice you're using all of a sudden? By the way, if it's a wallpaper group, then according to the corresponding wikipedia page there are 17 wallpaper groups, not 5, so what's up with that?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Seub (talk • contribs) 20:27, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Looking briefly at these sections it seems that they classify 2- and 3-dimensional lattices according to their group of Euclidean symmetries. jraimbau (talk) 14:02, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Inconsistency

message: Can someone clean up the second paragraph in section "Symmetry considerations and examples"? It seems like it's trying to pack too much information in a sentence, which makes it nearly incomprehensible to me:
"A lattice in the sense of a 3-dimensional array of regularly spaced points coinciding with e.g. the atom or molecule positions in a crystal, or more generally, the orbit of a group action under translational symmetry, is a translation of the translation lattice: a coset, which need not contain the origin, and therefore need not be a lattice in the previous sense."
I'm also unsure of what is referred to by "translation lattice". 24.62.180.47 (talk) 05:02, 24 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cleaning up paragraph in "Symmetry considerations and examples"
Talk:Bas-relief

message: I have always seen this term hyphenated, but am not 100% certain I want to move the page right away. The linking in wikipedia is split about 50-50 between hyphenation and not, and Google is no help, making no distinction between "bas-relief" and "bas relief". All the same, I will probably move the page soon unless there is an objection. --Yath 22:05, 23 Dec 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: "Bas-relief" is a French word. I looked it up in my Le Petit Robert French dictionary and seems like it should indeed be hyphenated. Therefore, I think the page should be moved.  --Audrey 03:22, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Hyphenation

message: The best way to explain Bas relief is to do it with pictorial examples. I have added a number of examples from different historical periods and regions. The "compatible" 3D is ideally suited to showing it better for serious scholars, while
having a fairly good image for those who don't have the anaglyph glasses. (there are alway several  millions of people who
do have them from Disney movies or comic books.3dnatureguy 00:14, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Added images

message: I have moved some of the images that were here to the alto-relievo page because the sculpture was clearly high relief, not low relief.  Sculpture with undercutting of figures is almost always considered alto-relievo rather than bas-relief. --EncycloPetey 08:55, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Correct, but the very confused lead needs to be sorted on this issue too! Johnbod (talk) 05:20, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Some images here are high relief 

message: i suppose the French etymology comes from the Latin expression not Italian. Cliché Online 15:07, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: the word is french!! (like 3/4 of your dictionary)
Talk:Christian Morgenstern

message: Could someone please provide more detail from which English nonsense poems Morgenstern was inspired? He mostly plays with German words, and I don't understand how playing with the mothertongue and new German nonsense word creations could be inspired by ENP? He doesn't copy a certain style, but rather creates his own unique way. It's almost like Dada in some way, without the political aspect.
So, I vote for removing the note on his "inspiration".
Fabian Haidekker 22:59, 16 Jul 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Why did the article include a paragraph on CM's ancestry?  Was it important for the survival of his publications in Europe?  Did his publisher's defense (gentile origin) stop a Nazi regime from purging his works, in fact? Richard Leining, Aug. 11, 2006
Please correct his age at death...you can't be born in 1871 and die in 1914 at the age of 37.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.218.229.212 (talk) 05:24, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Morgenstern's Ancestry 

message: Can anyone source the english translation of Vice Versa?  I can't find that specific one anywhere.  Kirilcg (talk) 00:51, 12 January 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Done by yours truely, I hope that was okay! (Please edit or improve -- my own version of the next-to-last line now is as follows: "Yet him surveys again in turn," but I'm not sure which one I prefer.) hgwb (talk) 22:10, 30 May 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tranlation Sources 

message: The only reason this received a Start-class assessment is because of the amount of supporting material on this page. This requires more references and in-line citations to advance any further on the assessment scale. –Vami_IV✠ 05:44, 8 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Assessment
Talk:Trolls in Middle-earth

message: The Trolls in the Two Towers has been removed because there was no source? It’s in the movie, not sure the best way to source. See https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=JQ-qktuyMoI Lava Lamps (talk) 17:50, 16 April 2020 (UTC)
replies: text:  I've hidden it rather than removed outright. I've had a serious look for sources. We can't use YouTube in that way. See WP:RS for guidance on suitable sources. Chiswick Chap (talk) 17:56, 16 April 2020 (UTC)
replies: text:  I've found a half-decent source for a simpler statement, which I have added. In general, a secondary source is far preferable to the primary. As for "the film is the reference", that might be all right in an article on a film, which this is not, but as it would be a primary source there, it would do nothing to establish notability. Chiswick Chap (talk) 18:13, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

text:  Indeed, a reliable fact but not the one you wanted. Chiswick Chap (talk) 18:22, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

text:  No indeed, we must insist absolutely on decent sources, anything else is a disaster in the making. I've added a RS for a brief mention; it goes into detail on the software techniques used but I don't feel we should go far in that direction. Chiswick Chap (talk) 18:44, 16 April 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Trolls in the Two Towers 

message: Might not be relevant, because Treebeard is specifically talking about orcs of Isenguard, but I think trolls are included in the evil things that cannot abide the sun because they were made before the sun came, and that was a surprise to Morgoth.
There may be more external sources that discuss this theme? Lava Lamps (talk) 12:34, 19 April 2020 (UTC)
replies: text:  It's said specifically that trolls were bred by Melkor and Sauron, so it's be unwise (WP:OR) to speculate on their origins, especially as the evidence goes the opposite way. Chiswick Chap (talk) 12:50, 19 April 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Evil things and the Sun

message: @Chiswick Chap As the infobox was removed for Dwarf (Middle-earth) and Elf (Middle-earth), should the infobox be removed here? Personally, I think the infobox works okay. GuardianH (talk) 07:13, 10 August 2022 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thanks for drawing my attention to this. I'd say that it was worthless, like the others. The anachronistic and grossly misplaced "base of operations" suggests that the trolls are a 21st-century terrorist organisation, marauding Middle-earth far and wide from their evil base(s), and presumably co-ordinating their nefarious plots via satellite phone. Obviously, the trolls have no "base" and no centralised "operations". Far from just not adding anything useful to the article, this sort of thing is actually damaging. If you want policy on the matter, it's a failure of WP:TONE. Let's get rid of it now. Many thanks, Chiswick Chap (talk) 07:46, 10 August 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removal of the infobox
Talk:Insular area

message: I have reverted this edit, which would have removed Hawaii from mention here. See Newlands Resolution, [] saying "House Joint Resolution 259, 55th Congress, 2nd session, known as the "Newlands Resolution," passed Congress and was signed into law by President McKinley on July 7, 1898 — the Hawaiian islands were officially annexed by the United States. Sanford Dole became the first Governor of the Territory of Hawaii.", and [[Hawaiian Organic Act[[ saying "The Hawaiian Organic Act, Pub. L. 56–339, 31 Stat. 141, enacted April 30, 1900". As I understand it, Hawaii would have been an insular area beterrn these two dates. The Philippines gad a similat situatuib -- probably Guam and Puerto Rico as well, but I have not looked at those. Wtmitchell  (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 08:04, 29 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hawaii
Talk:List of One Day International cricket records

message: In the spirit of WP:BOLD, I made multiple clean-ups to this article:
* Standardized the "updated" label to "Last updated" in all tables
*  notes where applicable, which appear at the bottom of each related table
Placing a note here as a summary since I did not fill in the Edit summary for each of my clean-ups.
Thanks,
Kvwiki1234 (talk) 07:59, 21 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Did multiple clean-ups 

message: 4th of the list should be england vs netherlands where england score 498 223.230.67.121 (talk) 19:59, 26 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  A change in Highest Match aggregate
Talk:Private Pilot License

message: #REDIRECT Talk:Private pilot licence
The requirement for a private pilot's license is incorrect.  One can obtain a student pilot certificate - which is required before one may solo - at age 16 and thus solo an aircraft at that age.  One must be 17 years old in order to obtain a private pilot's license.  See faa.gov, licensing requirements.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.254.240.43 (talk) 20:07, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree completely.  I'll have a go.BaseTurnComplete 21:34, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

message: To try to create a single article about the term Private Pilot without distinguishing the country is a total waste of time. If you want to go at it from an international standpoint, fine, make the few generalizations that you can, then either subdivide it into country-specific topics, or better yet, link to country-specific pages like the ones that were apparently deleted below. Gladtohelp 15:39, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  US-Centric? 

message: Why have these links
* Pilot certification in the United States  	 
* Pilot licensing in Canada 	 
* Pilot licensing in the United Kingdom 	 
* Commercial Pilot Licence
and the interwikilinks de:Privatpilotenlizenz nl:Private Pilot Licence
been deleted? 84.173.213.112 12:44, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Deleted wikilinks 

message: Does anybody know whether it´s legal to fly N-registered planes with an EASA-complaint license in EASA airspace (at least for some countries)? I know for instance that it´s legal to fly those planes with a german (EASA-) license in german airspace but what about flying into third nations airspace? 84.173.245.92 16:09, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: There is no straight answer. You need to check whether the FAA will allow you to fly the aircraft on an EASA license, and you need to check the airspace regulations of that third country to see if they allow it. - crazyscot 10:25, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  N-registered airplane in EASA airspace 

message: Do you really need to fly across the country to get your license? Best to change "cross country" requirement (line 6) to "lengthy" or just plain delete it.  
—Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.198.8.58 (talk) 11:19, 13 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Questionable Requirement
Talk:Grinner's Food Systems

message: Can any of you good people who were originally involved point me in the right direction where I can find the debate in the Vfd archives about this article? It doesn't seem to appear in the archives. It seems to me that it should be explained in the discussion page of this, the "Frank and Gino's" article, what made it so special rather than merely an advertising page for a restaurant, a chain and the Initial Development Incentive Plan so-called. Is this their own incentive plan? Dieter Simon 00:34, 17 Jul 2004 (UTC)
Category talk:Professional wrestling

message: I think there should be a sub-category for professional wrestlers.  Help to sift things out a bit. Oberiko 00:41, 17 Jul 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Discussion 

message: i think we should add another sub catagory for TV shows/PPV's, but i cant think of a good name for it; Professional wrestling productions (maybe), or Professional wrestling shows. Paulley 11:33, 18 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  New Subcat
Talk:National Geographic Bee

message: Hello everyone, the entire Wikipedia community appreciates those who edit this page, as we try to improve this encyclopedia for all. However, I would like to request something of those people who commonly edit this page. I would assume that the majority of people that edit this page are current or previous competitors in the National Geographic Bee. As a result, many editors on this page enter information from firsthand accounts, resulting in the fact that this is an unreferenced page.
I also was a competitor in the 2014 Nationals, and I saw some placings on the state champions list that were obviously incorrect. I have since removed the information, but I please request that editors do not add original research to this article, as it can cause inadvertent placing of incorrect information. Smileguy91Spread the knowledge! 00:49, 19 March 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Just a note for frequent editors 

message: Can someone upload newer, more relevant photos from the National Geographic Bee? There are definitely newer, higher-resolution photos out there that would be more appropriate for this article. LuckyWiki26 (talk) 15:31, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  New photos? 

message: Especially now that National Geographic has discontinued the Bee -- but even before, when the Bee was still an active competition -- does Wikipedia really need such extensive discussion of how the rounds and eliminations of the competition work? That portion of the article is not even sourced. But unless you or someone close to you was actually going to compete in the Bee, I doubt you would be interested in content such as this:
:If there was a tie for the championship round or third place, there would be an elimination round. For example, if four players are left and three made their second mistake, the fourth advances to the championship round and the other three enter the tiebreaker. The moderator then asked each of the three players, at the same time, to write their answers to the same question. In this special round, questions could be repeated by players but they could not ask how to spell a given word. As a result, if one of three responses was correct, the player would rise to the championship round and the other two moved to the tiebreaker round until a third-place winner determined.
Can this be cut down significantly? --Metropolitan90 (talk) 01:56, 11 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Extensive discussion of the rules?
Talk:George W. Bush/Archive 10

message: Okay, I understand that some of my edits may be seen as partisan by others (I don't deny I'm a Bush supporter), but the article is far too long and is far too quick to jump to negative interpretations of Bush. Perhaps much of this could be moved to a new George W. Bush controversy page, leaving this page much cleaner.
As a matter of fact, considering the fact that the page is so long, let's create new pages for each section (e.g. George W. Bush: Personal Life and Education, etc.) That way we can allow a lot of the controversial stuff to stay in, while providing only his picture, the info box at the top, and links to the new sections. Any takers? Savantpol
:Disagree. Putting all "controversy" in a separate section, or worse, a separate article, is awkward. Let's try for a balanced article, not an official White House biography. Thanks. Neutrality 05:32, 14 Jul 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Revamp for succinctness and bias

message: This has been removed from the article:
:Egyptian President Mubarak commented Bush's policies had led to an 'unprecedented hatred' of Arabs for the US. 
Texture considers this "aggressively POV against Bush". Mubarak's comment itself is, of course, his POV, but as an attributed quote I think it was not inappropriate. Comments? Gzornenplatz 03:32, 24 Jun 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: While I'm usually opposed to such quotes, in this context I'd vote for keeping this one. The president of Egypt is more respectable then Al Franken or Michael Moore. Ilyanep 17:58, 24 Jun 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with Ilyanep - and Mubarak. Get-back-world-respect 22:14, 28 Jun 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mubarak 

message: I do not think it is a good idea to make Bush part of that category. He would currently fall into any category of countryX-US-relations, which we certainly do not want. Get-back-world-respect 09:32, 2 Jul 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Another category: US-Iraqi relations
Talk:Closer Economic Relations

message: The article claimed the CER provided a right to live and work in the other country.  I searched the text of the CER and could see no such provision.  The Trans-Tasman Travel Arrangement had been in effect for 10 years by the time the CER came into force and already provided a right to work and live so it is not suprising the CER did not address this issue. Robertbrockway 09:28, 26 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Claims of Right to Live and Work 

message: Malcolm Fraser lost the election on 5 March 1983, and Hawke was sworn in on 11 March. How could Fraser have signed the CERTA treaty as Prime Minister on 28 March? User talk:Kewpid 27 February 2006
:According to http://www.dfat.gov.au/geo/new_zealand/anz_cer/anz_cer_pic.html it was signed by Lionel Bowen and Laurie Francis, so I've corrected the article. Evil Monkey - Hello 01:26, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for that. A bit worrying that some official government sources are wrong Kewpid 09:51, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Signing 
Talk:Hillsong Church

message: Doug Weller talk 09:22, 26 March 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article "Exposing Hillsong: The Pedophile Church That Justin Bieber Made Famous" 

message: Probably don't contribute much to its Wikipedia page SoCalGoetz (talk) 06:55, 12 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  People who hate an organization 

message: — Assignment last updated by Pasillas21 (talk) 19:14, 11 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: Equitable Futures - Internet Cultures and Open Access
Talk:Nicholas I of Montenegro

message: An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect :Nicholas, Prince of Montenegro and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 September 17#Nicholas, Prince of Montenegro until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.  Anotherwikipedianuser (talk) 16:21, 17 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Nicholas, Prince of Montenegro" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]]
Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Clinical medicine/top priority

message: #: gad! a red link... have I spelt it wrong?
:Erich, what's astonishing is that the number one proponent of this topic, who acted like this was the number one priority health topic in the universe was none other than our recently departed mutual friend, who wrote an entire website on exactly this topic (and not a bad one I might add). If only he would have stuck to this, we'd all be mates and mutual admirers...  Want to call him back? Alteripse 21:25, 16 Jul 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: he'll be back when he calms down I guess... I agree its a shame! I advocated a short ban when he was before the AC...Erich 02:42, 17 Jul 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: [[health promotion]]
Talk:Go down

message: Article listed on WP:VFD Jul 17 to Jul 23 2004, was redirected.  Discussion:
Much as I like AC/DC's music, I don't believe a single song deserves its own article (at least in most cases).  I notice that an article has been created for every track in this album; I'm nominating them all.  Merge and Redirect into Let There Be Rock Kevyn 04:01, 17 Jul 2004 (UTC)
Talk:Bad Boy Boogie

message: Article listed on WP:VFD Jul 17 to Jul 23 2004, was redirected.  Discussion:
Much as I like AC/DC's music, I don't believe a single song deserves its own article (at least in most cases).  I notice that an article has been created for every track in this album; I'm nominating them all.  Merge and Redirect into Let There Be Rock Kevyn 04:01, 17 Jul 2004 (UTC)
Talk:Overdose (AC/DC song)

message: Article listed on WP:VFD Jul 17 to Jul 23 2004, was redirected.  Discussion:
Much as I like AC/DC's music, I don't believe a single song deserves its own article (at least in most cases).  I notice that an article has been created for every track in this album; I'm nominating them all.  Merge and Redirect into Let There Be Rock Kevyn 04:01, 17 Jul 2004 (UTC)
Talk:Hell Ain't A Bad Place To Be

message: Article listed on WP:VFD Jul 17 to Jul 23 2004, redirected.  Discussion:
Much as I like AC/DC's music, I don't believe a single song deserves its own article (at least in most cases).  I notice that an article has been created for every track in this album; I'm nominating them all.  Merge and Redirect into Let There Be Rock Kevyn 04:01, 17 Jul 2004 (UTC)
Talk:Fédéré

message: What is this article about? From one section to the next, it seems to be about the multiple meanings of a term over time; the evolution of a French military unit; or a series of celebrations. If I had to pick just one, it seems to be more about the multiple meanings of a term than anything else, and if that's the case, it should be transwikified to Wiktionary, because Wikipedia is not a dictionary. Conceivably, the 1792 section could be spun off as its own article, and everything else sent to Wiktionary. Mathglot (talk) 10:29, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unfocused