lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Sid Sackson

message: "It can be argued that German-style board games wouldn't exist without his creations"
Eh? I don't have a clue what a "German-style board game" is, but I gather from the article on them that a large proportion of them come from Germany. And so presumably don't have a lot to do with this Sid Sackson chap. Or am I wrong? I won't change the article, as it would probably be better to leave it to someone who actually knows about these games. -- Oliver PEREIRA 01:14 Dec 10, 2002 (UTC)
Oliver-go to kriegspiel, these "german-style" board games were around before this man was born. It is probably more accurate to say that he helped them grow in popularity within the US. Furthermore, Acquire isn't a "German style board game". Im gonna remove it. Vera Cruz 01:20 Dec 10, 2002 (UTC)
:Kriegspiel isn't a German-style board game in the context of the article as far as I can make out. I've not come across any of these "designer games" myself, but I used to play wargames as a kid. Kriegspiel was a game played by German military students and was then used as the name of an Avalon Hill wargame. However, if your assertion that Acquire isn't a German-style board game is correct then I'm sure you were right to remove the comment. Mintguy 02:21 Dec 10, 2002 (UTC)
Thanks for clarifying that! -- Oliver PEREIRA 01:33 Dec 10, 2002 (UTC)
----
User:63.225.161.90, if you've got a reason to remove the statement that he specialized in wargames, could you explain it? I'm going to put it back in until then. -- John Owens 05:43 Apr 9, 2003 (UTC)
It seems like, given the fact that *none* of the significant games cited in the article are wargames, the burden of proof is still on the assertion that they were a specialty.  I myself can think of no Sackson wargames (except in the loosest sense).  Though, given how prolific he was I'd not be surprised to find out that there were some.  --Stellmach 20:29, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Kleene algebra

message: The beginning of the article defines a Kleene algebra as possibly: "A bounded distributive lattice with an involution satisfying De Morgan's laws, and the inequality x∧−x ≤ y∨−y. ..." What are x and y, here? A5 18:57, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: They are uniformly quantified variables, as it is often the case in mathematics.  Pierre de Lyon 12:16, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Free variables in definition 

message: This article obviously needs to be split as the two concepts both called Kleene algebra don't have anything in common except who discovered them. Even the bibliography is different, which is why they are both called Kleene without chance of confusion in most texts. Tijfo098 (talk) 18:49, 24 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Split 

message: I'm a bit confused.
The axioms have 1 + a(a*) ≤ a* for all a in A
But the page also says regexes form a free Kleene algebra. But for regexes, one has 1 + aa* = a*, not merely ≤
What am I missing? Given the rest of the Kleene algebra axioms, can I derive the equality? (I've fiddled with that a bit but so far haven't been able to derive such)
Or did I greatly misunderstand something?
Thanks.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Psy-Kosh (talk • contribs) 04:55, 31 January 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Somewhat hidden in section Kleene algebra#Definition, the article notes that "a≤b" can be defined as "a+b=b". Hence, all inequations can be expanded to equations. In particular, 1+aa*≤a* is equivalent to 1+a*+aa*=a*. — However, the theory is still not algebraic due to the conditional axioms "if ... then ...". As mentioned in section Kleene algebra#History, Redko has proved in 1964 that we can't do better. (Btw: I wonder if there is an English translation of his/her paper available?) - Jochen Burghardt (talk) 22:50, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Inequality vs equality for * axioms?
Talk:Power rule

message: Consider x^2.  At x=3, the derivative is 6.  If graphed, the curve is plotted through x=1[1], x=2[4], x=3[9], x=4[16] etc.  Derivative at x=3 is 6, the average of the prior tangent x=2 to x=3 (a line 4y to 9y), which is 5, and x=3 to x=4 (a line 9y to 16y), which is 7 ... (5+7)/2 = 6.  This makes sense, since the x^2 derivative at x=3 represents an angle midway between x=2 and x=4.  It's the average of prior and latter tangents.
Now consider x^3.  At x=3, the derivative is 27.  For x^3, x=2 is 8, x=3 is 27, and x=4 is 64.  The tangent from 8 to 27 is 19; the tangent from 27 to 64 is 37.  The average of prior and latter tangents is 28.  Isn't is odd that x^3, which increases faster than x^2, has derivatives that are less than the prior and latter tangent averages?
Sure, there are algebraic proofs.  But they rely, as all know, on using (h) to represent a very small value at first, then changing its value to zero later.  Sometimes common sense makes its demands. Please explain why the power rule produces results that seem conspicuously illogical.  
BrianMCoyle
:(I have no idea how many years ago the above was written, but I'm answering it anyway.) y = x^2, or any quadratic function with a positive x^2 term, increases faster and faster as you go further along. So if you take any three equally spaced x-values, y = x^2 at the middle value will be less than the average of the other two y-values.
:Since the derivative of x^3 is a quadratic (namely 3x^2), it has the same property. It's precisely because it increases faster than linear growth that the derivative at any point is less than the average of the derivatives at equally spaced points on either side. Common sense and mathematical logic are in perfect agreement. 2.24.117.101 (talk) 01:20, 8 May 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Curiosity

message: Frankly, the proof in this section appears unsightly and unwieldy to me. If we're only interested in proving it for integer n, then an inductive proof using the product rule seems to make more sense, not to mention it can be done in just a few lines, and is (in my opinion, at least) considerably easier to follow and more intuitive than the one presented in the article. Here's my proposal:
We plan to prove that \frac{d}{dx}x^n=nx^{n-1}. We begin by noting the trivial case:
\frac{d}{dx}x^0=\frac{d}{dx}1=0=0\cdot x^{-1}
* Removed above remark from main body of article. The power rule is not applicable when n = 0 and x = 0, as it yields the undefined form 0/0. To differentiate f(x) = 1 at x = 0, one needs to use the more fundamental result of the derivative of a constant function. Slider142 (talk) 07:13, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proof 

message: I don't think the subject of this article is very notable compared to the power rule which has a good history. Currently power rule redirects to here, I propose to move this article  to there instead and just have the polynomials part be an extension or use of the power rule Dmcq (talk) 09:01, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Rename to power rule
Talk:Estimator

message: One should be able better to define this word without immediately linking it to estimate.
 :In mathematics designations need to be redefined. This is fine.  Limit-theorem (talk) 19:14, 6 August 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: near-circularity of definition

message: The 2nd paragraph of the subsection titled "Unbiased" is quite confusing. I'm not sure what it's trying to say. It should be rewritten. Vired (talk) 04:05, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unbiased section is confusing
Talk:Hortense de Beauharnais

message: There seems an obvious contradiction in this article, which states that Hortense "had blonde hair and big blue eyes", whereas the portrait shown gives her brown hair and brown eyes. This isn't my area, and it may be entirely possible that her hair colour changed, but the disparity makes the article look amateur to a casual reader. Could someone either (a) provide a citation for the description or (b) find a picture that more closely fits the description?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Oriana Naso (talk • contribs) 05:43, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I know this was a dozen years ago, but if you take each portrait to maximum magnification, the eyes are blue.  As for her hair color, she was a golden-haired child.  I have known several such whose hair darkened with maturity. J S Ayer (talk) 04:09, 9 February 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Appearance and portrait

message: It says that she "cleverly disguised her pregnancy (she was by then, in her sixth month), during the baptism of Napoleon's son, Napoleon II when she was chosen to be one of the child's godmothers, an honour she shared with Madame Mère, mother of the Emperor" but it doesn't cite a source or describe exactly how this was done. I'm all kinds of intrigued now, but this is just leaving me hanging. 76.122.199.36 (talk) 23:27, 16 November 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: 'Clever' Pregnancy Hiding?

message: made a couple of insertions that meant, obliquely but clearly implying that Charles Joseph, comte de Flahaut, was the father of Napoleon III as well as of the acknowledged bastard de Morny.  If we're going to say that, let's say it directly, eh?   undid one of these edits and I undid the other. —Tamfang (talk) 23:37, 19 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  paternity of N3 
Talk:Oi (interjection)

message: http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/oy relates to this article. I believe there is a template that adds a link and a Wictionary logo to the page. Can someone add this? __meco 13:18, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Can someone find a Wictionary template? 

message: :It is also used in Singapore except that the pronunciation is 'oh-y' instead of 'or-y'.
"or-y"?!?! --Cotoco 15:11, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pronunciation 

message: In Finalnd, I've seen 'oy' after company names, so I assumed it meant something like 'inc', indicating what kind of conpany it is. But that's a guess. Anyone know? DirkvdM 18:00, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Finland

message: We also speak a form of "oi", written as "oj" (pron. oy) - it denotes surprise.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.39.53.107 (talk) 08:45, 13 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  in Poland
Talk:Baby Boy (film)

message: Since this movie never existed, is it necessary to have an article about it?  Can't all that needs to be said, be said in the Tupac article? -- Zoe
:It does exist, but without Tupac Shakur in it because he died before it was filmed. Hope that clarifies matters! -- Oliver PEREIRA 02:13 Dec 11, 2002 (UTC)
::Yes. The movie did indeed come out in 2001 with Tyrese Gibson in Tupac's place (I've seen the film on DVD, the first two acts are great, third act is *eh*) --FuriousFreddy 17:24, 21 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: The name of the New Orleans rapper included on this disambiguation page is actually "Baby Boy Da Prince." This can be verified at this music site
x  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 161.38.221.137 (talk) 17:59, 7 August 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rapper 
Talk:Ron Turcotte

message: This is either an error, or a damn good story  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 166.147.88.20 (talk) 14:11, 5 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: How did he win in '79 if he was paralyzed in '78?
Talk:Alexandre Dumas fils

message: Work in progess....DW
Technically though, Alexandre Dumas, fils was an octoroon, and not a mulatto, right? —Gabbe 15:01, Jun 22, 2004 (UTC)
Mulatto was the term Dumas and his father used and seems appropriate.
right. his father's father's mother was black. that makes him ⅛. Colorfulharp233 00:57, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Alexandre Dumas, père which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you.  —RM bot 23:00, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Move discussion in progress

message: This article needs to make up its mind. Is “fils” italicized or not? —174.141.182.82 (talk) 07:38, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, per MOS:FOREIGN.  It is now marked up properly as .  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  05:32, 8 July 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Italicizing “fils” 
Talk:Taras (mythology)

message: The definition here is an exact copy of this page, which in turn is a reference to the Elseviers Mythologische Encyclopedie. (Edited by Dr. A.R.A. van Aken / Amsterdam: Elsevier, 1961). This, and possibly quite a few other references in Wikipedia could have been just copied straight out of that reference - and therefore subject to copyright? Unfortunately, the user who added the entries, Tucci258, hasn't posted anything for over 30 days, so I couldn't check their other entries.
Not that I'd like to see this particular definition go :)
-- taras — Preceding undated comment added 01:36, 11 December 2002 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Cognates with Paris, first, bir, etc. with meaning "a new one".    Okolo-basii (talk) 13:18, 11 February 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Tata Group

message: Someone has entered first line describing Tata as a chain of curry houses which is untrue and is at best tacit racism, not sure what this should have read prior. 217.45.11.12 (talk) 13:21, 18 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Curry houses? 

message: anything controversial should bed added to the sub wiki criticism and controversies remove it from the top of the wiki page 117.202.87.41 (talk) 08:32, 21 February 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: No it should not. Criticism section are deprecated see :WP:CSECTION.  The lead section is mean to be a summary.-- Toddy1 (talk) 14:52, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Controversies 

message: Tata Group is a group of companies - i.e. a corporate group.  It is not a subsidiary.-- Toddy1 (talk) 14:52, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: A corporate group is an entity made up of other entities. The entity can either be owned by it's own members or a clear owner. In this case, Tata Sons is the parent company, making this a subsidiary. Corporate group should not be used in company_type because the only accepted types are Private, Public, Subsidiary, Division, and Joint venture. If this will use infobox company, it will need to follow the documentation. WiinterU (talk) 15:49, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Corporate Group
Talk:Easter Island

message: Under the subtopic "European contact" of the history section, the text states that James Cook visited Easter Island in 1774, four years after Chilean priest Juan Ignacio Molina. However, Juan Ignacio Molina first visited Easter Island in the year 1776. Referencing the linked source, it's unclear what year James Cook's voyage took place, but if the source referencing Juan Ignacio Molina's voyage is accurate, then the sentence should be updated to indicate James Cook visited Easter Island in 1780. Ronniepfeffer (talk) 20:05, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Correcting a typo 

message: The BBC is now using Rapa Nui as canonical, with Easter Island as an 'also called'. Example link. This appears to be relatively recent, with the reverse being true in 2021.  Please give your !vote to rename or keep .  Of course, this would go vise versa with the current redirect from Rapa Nui. Chumpih t 15:47, 23 February 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: The official governmental name of the island is "Isla de Pascua" but the local language is also official (with Spanish) on the island, so "Rapa Nui" seems to be just as legitimate. Pascalulu88 (talk) 17:05, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rename to Rapa Nui 

message: Laura Tarita Alarcón Rapu resigned in 2021. The new governor is René De la Puente Hey. Reference is our own article on Isla de Pascua Province. Pascalulu88 (talk) 17:02, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Update: Change of governor in 2021 

message: Recent plant DNA research indicates pre-Columbian contact with South America: https://www.livescience.com/archaeology/obsidian-blades-with-food-traces-reveal-1st-settlers-of-rapa-nui-had-regular-contact-with-south-americans-1000-years-ago.  this should probably be added. 2605:A601:F300:700:0:0:0:1349 (talk) 22:57, 20 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  South American contact
Talk:Perpetual student

message: I created and directed the "Career Student" article page to this article. Dreammaker182 03:21, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: "Career Student" article

message: You are all reasonable, lets try to reach consensus in the talk page. The IP claims that the section is unreferenced and therefore needs to be removed. Aside from the fact this article is confusing (at least for me) and needs major clean-up and expansion, I feel like the section added by the registered users could go under a section, however does not fit in the lead of the article. Dat GuyTalkContribs 16:21, 3 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removal of content 

message: This is a dictionary definition + some trivia. Good deletion candidate for deletion. EEng 14:17, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Also a good candidate for deletion deletion, I guess. EEng 15:23, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Dicdeftriv
Talk:Regicide

message: Shouldn't it be in a separate article? This one ("Regicide") is a generic one and should not dwell on specific regicides, unless there is something peculiar that can contribute to better understanding of the concept. Staszek Lem (talk) 16:53, 21 July 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. The emphasis on the execution of Charles I (and on Britain in general) in this article is strange. Ichthyovenator (talk) 12:49, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Section "The regicide of Charles I of England" 

message: Iran: Naser al-Din Shah Qajar was killed by Mirza reza Kermani 185.83.196.122 (talk) 12:19, 21 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Iran: Naser al-Din Shah Qajar was killed by Mirza reza Kermani
Talk:Nutritional information about the apple

message: I wonder if a simpler summary of this chart could be placed on the main Apple (fruit) page with link here for those that require more depth and detail? quercus robur
:I think that would be a good idea, I'm really not sure which information should go, and which should stay though. Give it a go if you feel like it! :) Smelialichu 16:22 Dec 12, 2002 (UTC)
----
What are the units mcg, mcg_DFE etc? I guess mcg is micrograms, the abbreviation is µg.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 193.171.121.30 (talk) 12:32, 6 May 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: See Ash (analytical chemistry). —porges(talk) 23:36, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Lokapala

message: Could some one indicate as to which culture the Lokapala belonged?  -- Zoe — Preceding undated comment added 04:25, 12 December 2002 (UTC)
replies: text: Hindus and Buddhists.--Dangerous-Boy 07:35, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Because the term "Lokapala" is ambiguous between its Hindu and Buddhist usage, I think it is inappropriate to merge this page with "Guardians of the directions".  However, most of the material here properly belonged there, so I have moved it and changed this page to a disambiguation page with pointers to the both "Guardians of the directions" and "Four Heavenly Kings". — Preceding unsigned comment added by RandomCritic (talk • contribs) 12:59, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge proposal
Talk:Windsor, Colorado

message: Put your text for the new page here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.81.26.202 (talk) 
Just did a major overhaul of the page, adding categories similar to other local communities, and adding more information abotu the town, Ayuyu2 (talk) 23:51, 25 February 2011 (UTC)
Talk:European Court of Justice

message: "The principle of direct effect would have had little impact if Union law did not supersede national law. Without supremacy the Member States could simply ignore EU rules. In Costa v ENEL (1964), the court ruled that member states had definitively transferred sovereign rights to the Community and Union law could not be overridden by domestic law." I was wondering whether we should avoid the anachronism here and, instead of Union law (or EU law), use Community law (or EC law). Is there any settled practice or guideline on this? Gitz (talk) (contribs) 00:19, 21 January 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  EU law vs EC law 

message: The division map seems to be a reused svg showing EU countries, this is no longer accurate, as it excludes Northern Ireland along with the rest of the UK.
Northern Ireland should still be colored blue, as the ECJ still has jurisdiction. 109.78.91.206 (talk) 01:27, 10 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Division Map should include Northern Ireland
Talk:Duration (music)

message: This article needs to be reorganized so as to include a definition of Duration from a dictionary, and then have separate sections leading to (Music) and (Physics). As it stands now, the article suggest all contents refer to (Music), while there are very distinct (and confusing) references to the role of Duration in quantum physics.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.29.164.238 (talk) 00:59, 4 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Reorganization

message: As for in the common sense has a duration greater than zero (but not very long) at the outset.
Since this article is concerned with how to make common sense of amounts to begin with, reference to a nonzero value cannot be made initially.
If it is viewed that (and how) the common sense which is established as a result of this article is relevant in the definition of event, then ought this not rather be described :Event|there.
I view it as essential to make the distinction between  and :Values otherwise manifest; which may not be difficult to express.
p.s. I'd even be hesitant at the outset to qualify the amounts to be determined with an notion as ambiguous as time, too.  
p.p.s. Is it |admissable to new mail at the top of the buffer; perhaps at least after suitable rearrangements and  ??
Best regards, Frank  W ~@) R, Jan. 5, 2003
==="{" and "}"===
[Fwappler] The { and } characters have no special meaning in Wiki markup. So writing "{Wikipedia:Style}}" just makes your text hard to read. What does this mean: " {T}} ... is a commensurate relation by which {P}} instructs ... (some others like) {S}}"? Is this some scientific notation? If so, explain it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tarquin (talk • contribs) 
:The first "{" was removed by User:Stevage since the links did not include a colon and thus every example was transcluded. Hyacinth (talk) 04:16, 18 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I readded them but with . Hyacinth (talk) 04:29, 18 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Duration greater than zero

message: [Fwappler] The { and } characters have no special meaning in Wiki markup. So writing "{Wikipedia:Style}}" just makes your text hard to read. What does this mean: " {T}} ... is a commensurate relation by which {P}} instructs ... (some others like) {S}}"? Is this some scientific notation? If so, explain it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tarquin (talk • contribs) 
:The first "{" was removed by User:Stevage since the links did not include a colon and thus every example was transcluded. Hyacinth (talk) 04:16, 18 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I readded them but with . Hyacinth (talk) 04:29, 18 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: "{" and "}"
Talk:Lists of mountains

message: Some of the tables have feet or miles, others are only metric? I'm not extremely averse to including feet, but it should be done consistently (or not at all). On second thought, it would just make for a lot of clutter here, so I think it should be separate table, a user option, or possibly based on the browser settings (for US or British English). Shanen (talk) 12:17, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Inconsistent metrics? 

message: Some of the remaining sections contain lists of high points of islands in particular regions or oceans. All the entries on these lists exist on list of islands by highest point, and are better managed there, so I propose that there's no necessity in keeping the existing region-based lists on this page. This applies to the sections: Antilles, Atlantic Ocean, Arctic Ocean and Indian Ocean. --David Edgar (talk) 23:14, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Sure. I just added a wordlwide section in Lists of mountains with List of countries by highest point and List of islands by highest point among other lists. ZachG (Talk) 10:09, 6 June 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Clean up: islands