lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory

message: The lab’s research had expanded into biology and genes since 1963, when it began to study the human-health consequences of environmental radiation exposure. Lawrence Livermore was major contributor to the Human Genome Project.
Livermore Labs has a Biosciences and Biotechnology Division, whose past projects have included studies of “how to better determine the origin of a virus,” how coronaviruses such as SARS and MERS transferred from animals to human beings, portable virus-detection technologies, rare mutations of viruses within animal hosts, the movement of virus-like particles through the air, and to identify effective countermeasures.
https://www.nationalreview.com/the-morning-jolt/the-energy-department-lab-investigating-covid-knows-what-its-talking-about/
J mareeswaran (talk) 03:50, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Biosciences and biotechnology division  

message: I'm concerned that there needs to be a greater density of citations on this article, and/or some promotional-sounding sections need to be rewritten. Some paragraphs and sections are entirely citation-less, and sentences like ...could be more encyclopaedic.
Particular focus on the sections:
*Overview
*Other programs
*Key accomplishments
*Key facilities
*Largest computers
*Livermore Valley Open Campus (LVOC)
*Sponsors
*Organization
*Corporate management
AntiDionysius (talk) 22:20, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Issues
Talk:USS Bremerton (SSN-698)

message: I'm curious if the 1994 drydock incident in Pearl Harbor should be mentioned here? I cannot find much online about it other than an article in a civ. paper: https://products.kitsapsun.com/archive/1994/09-13/298955_uss_bremerton__sub_damaged_in_f.html The article is not entirely accurate as several people were in fact injured. I was stationed at the time on another drydock and for a period of time no Naval drydock was allowed to dock boats. After additional procedural checks were added, boat docking recommenced. Perhaps someone active at that time could lend some detail or if there's an official (and available) incident record available... 2001:4998:EF60:8:0:0:0:10CC (talk) 21:59, 11 November 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Hello, you're correct that this incident, like any content, should be supported by an attached source. Sources like the online newspaper you noted are actually of the type we use quite often (including that specific paper, used often for naval stories involving NB Kitsap and USN ships of NW region/Eastern Pacific). As for "official sources", like US Navy and other gov't sites, we use them as well, (but have a look at primary vs secondary sources). As for first-hand accounts, we cannot use those, as we have guidelines against anything considered original research and any apparent conflict of interest. Hope you find this info useful. - wolf 23:57, 11 November 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  1994 drydock incident
Talk:Leadership High School

message: wtf is Zelda? Gay mofo faggot! stop deleting the shit there mofo! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by LongeeMAC (talk • contribs).
:you're not looking for Zelda are you? Nothing personal, but take a look at Wikipedia:WikiProject Schools, Wikipedia:Manual of Style, Wikipedia:About, and especially Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not, this is not a personal webspace.  Any editor can remove material without verifiable sources that doesn't explain why it is notable/special.  In regards to Derrick Li, et al.  a web and wiki search shows no association to UCSD, UCSF, HGP, nor any published papers to assert notability.  Wikipedia is not here to speculate on the future.  Zedla 17:36, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've added a NPOV tag to this. I highly recommend all editors to look at the links that Zedla mentioned and perhaps other schools' pages such as Balboa High School or Stuyvesant High School, the latter of which is a featured article and the previous having good article status.
--Quixotic Rick (talk) 06:36, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
Talk:SCU Leavey School of Business

message: Unregistered users have been adding unsourced material that doesn't belong on this page. Please make sure all factual material follows Wikipedia's editorial guidelines or I'll need to escalate this page for administrator attention. Ericgoldman (talk) 20:54, 13 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Improper Editorial Contributions
Talk:Left, Right & Center

message: First, I deleted obsolete talk page entries about Matt Miller. Second, I see 3 broken links in the Article, and 1 that is not relevant. I'm going to add the correct link to the show's commentary site, and fix this page.
Jimgettman (talk) 09:11, 14 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Broken and Irrelevant Links
Talk:Lemon Grove Middle School

message: Not sure how to make epad photo smaller. Going to get more info on it later. It is a big deal at this school.
Well first I would like to say that I am currently a student at LGMS, and we hardly use our epads... A few of our teachers incorperate it as musch as they can, but the only class that uses it on a regulary basis, is the eTeam, the elective that repairs and helps students with their ePads.
Sincerely,
Sabrina Sabin  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sabinasabn101 (talk • contribs) 04:54, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
Talk:Lemon Grove, California

message: I think the reference to "the Polish princess Filomena Wojciechowski" needs verification. Normally in Poland, the surname form for such a princess would be Wojciechowska. A Wikipedia article says Polish President Stanisław Wojciechowski (1869–1953) was born into a noble family, but it doesn't say a princely family. Googling turns up one other reference to such a personage, in an article titled "Filomena Wojciechowski, The Polish Princess," in volume 22, number 1, of San Diego Leaves & Saplings, published by the San Diego Genealogical Society, probably about 1994. The periodical is held in numerous libraries, but the article is not online. Someone should find and read it to see if this was just a nickname or the name of an authentic princess. Wbkelley (talk) 16:08, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I added some FACT tags in hopes that someone may find a referance to these claims. This information seems a bit odd to not be cited. We should give it a week, and then remove the information if no citations can be found.--Jojhutton (talk) 16:15, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: You posted about needing facts verified for the urban legend of the polish princess, I found a page that has some proof! Hope to be of help and not a hindrance...
http://lemongrove.patch.com/articles/the-polish-princess-of-lemon-grove. Here's the link to the facts  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.220.145.142 (talk) 09:52, 14 July 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I have copied this discussion to the article on Greenwood Memorial Park (San Diego), where she is buried, and have added her name here under notable residents.Mercurywoodrose (talk) 18:31, 14 October 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Polish princess 
Talk:Mark 45 torpedo

message: See here.Geni 14:32, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: posible image

message: The correct infobox for this article is  -MBK004 06:38, 25 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Infobox?

message: A sourced statement about the Kill Probability of this weapon was removed and replaced with an unsourced statement that it was a joke in the edits on October 26th. Can we get a source for one of those statements and eliminate the other? Wevets (talk) 23:34, 28 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I added the line "When fitted with the W34 warhead, ASTOR was considered to have a kill probability of 2 (or "Him and Me"), because the underwater blast radius was greater than the standard range of the torpedo" back in May 2011, with a cite to Submarine Warfare: an illustrated history by Anthony Preston, a respected naval historian. The "Him and Me" bit may be a joke, but Preston seemed to take the info on blast radius vs. range seriously. This is supported by an information plaque at Pearl Harbor (attached to the torpedo photographed in the article), which claims "The Mark 45 was a controversial weapon because, even at maximum range, the exploding nuclear warhead could cause damage not only to the submarine's target, but also to the launching submarine." -- saberwyn 12:49, 2 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Kill Probability

message: The article says the MK-45 is nuclear-capable, and replaced by the Mk-48.   But it does not say if the MK-45 has been decommissioned or whether the MK-48 is also nuclear-capable (MK-48 wiki article says nothing about its nuclear capability).   Nor any treaties regarding the use of nuclear-weaponized torpedoes.--71.10.145.225 (talk) 00:36, 3 December 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Info missing on nuclear capability
Talk:Carl Charlier

message: It's a deep shame that Johann Heinrich Lambert lived in 1728–1777. They could certainly have collaborated very well otherwise. I think that another Lambert is the one intended. Said: Rursus (☻) 18:12, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: No, it was him. Charlier based his work on the 18th century mathematician. Sob however much needed! Said: Rursus (☻) 18:41, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Sob!
Talk:Lemoore, California

message: TIGHT  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.180.93.151 (talk) 09:08, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Leo Carrillo State Park

message: This park is very easily accessable via PCH (Highway 1,
yet the uncited article claims it is only accessible by Decker Canyon, which nicks the park briefly, but not an access point.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Johnnywalterboy (talk • contribs) 00:14, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Access to park/beach 

message: For a CA state park to be named after someone, it was customary to donate something. Carrillo's family was here very early, and owned considerable property. Was that it?Profhum (talk) 20:21, 22 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Did Leo Carrillo donate land to the park?
Talk:Vilhelm Bjerknes

message: Was going to link from this page to Bjerknes forces, although no page actually exists for this phenomena. If anyone feels like getting their head around it, see http://scholar.google.co.uk/scholar?q=Bjerknes+forces&safe=images&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&hl=en&tab=ws . I'm no expert, but am aware of the existence of this phenomena - and its absence on WP. --CharlesC (talk) 13:56, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bjerknes forces 
Talk:Zwaardvis-class submarine

message: I believe I had read somewhere that the 2 Zwaardvis class submarines in Lumut had been disposed off as scrap metal. I do not recall where did I read this though.  Will be having some friends visiting the naval base this weekend to confirm it.  [amlisk]  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Amlisk (talk • contribs) 17:39, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Untitled 

message: I think the Dutch Zwaardvis and Taiwanese Hai Lung classes should be removed from the Barbel-class template, with a separate template made for the Zwaardvis class, including the Hai Lungs, especially as they were all built in the Netherlands. A similar appearance and general arrangement does not amount to "the same" class. There is no indication from the articles that assistance of any kind was received from the United States in developing these submarines. Also, the Barbel-class' beam is 0.4 meters more than in the Dutch-built classes. RobDuch (talk) 21:55, 12 April 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Zwaardvis and Hai Lung classes not close enough
Talk:USC Davis School of Gerontology

message: The entire lead would benefit from a rework. Here's something I cobbled together that might get the next editor started: 
The School of Gerontology at the University of Southern California, founded in 1975, was the first professional school of gerontology established in the United States, and remains one of the oldest and largest gerontology schools in the world. 
:
The Davis school has pioneered educational programs including: ...
I'm personally reluctant to capitalize disciplines such as gerontology except in the most formal invocations; beyond that, it just adds pretense and visual clutter. — MaxEnt 14:49, 3 March 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lead flagged for puff
Talk:Leonard Law

message: The external link: *California Education Code § 94367 (Leonard Law)  gets a server error! Gah4 (talk) 21:45, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  error
Talk:Hal Crook

message: Dear Hal
My name is Charlie Alexander
I owned Remillard Shool of piano in Exeter RI. I began teaching Julian at a young age. I just wanted to thank you for all your work with Julian. He’s truly ama zing and I know you had a great deal to do with that. I’m writing to thank you. I think the world of Julian and you as well. 
Again Thank you!!     Charlie 71.214.56.157 (talk) 22:26, 3 January 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Julian Shore
Talk:Letterman Digital Arts Center

message: I'd like to see more about this facility. This article could be bigger. Gingermint (talk) 01:32, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bigger 
Talk:Frederick Cook

message: The statement that Henderson says that a 1910 expedition verfied Cook's claim does not seem to be right - at least, I cannot find it in Henderson's book.  Henderson does refer (p.283) to Anderson and Taylor's climb in 1910, but as I read it more as an example of climbers who were branded liars but later proved to have been correct.Mhockey (talk) 17:13, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: If the citation does not support the claim (and, not having access to the book, I accept the point), I think the the statement "but another 1910 expedition allegedly verified much of Cook's account (Henderson, 2005)" should be completely removed. That would mean the next sentence "The validity of the latter claim may be weighed by comparing Cook's map of his alleged 1906 route versus reality, over the last 10 miles" would need considerable rewriting, or removal too. Thoughts? The second sentence could be converted into yet another claim of the route discrepancy, still citing Bryce. I wonder whether to remove both sentences giving Bryce as a second reference for "a tiny peak". Thincat (talk) 21:46, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  McKinley expedition 

message: The statement that Cook acquiesced in the attempted publication of the dictionary under his own name is supported by the statement in the cited text:
Dr. Cook had agreed with the authorities of the Observatoire on a proposed cover for the work.  It was to read:  "YAMANA-ENGLISH DICTIONARY By Frederick A. Cook"Mhockey (talk) 09:23, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Yamana dictionary 

message: For what it's worth Cook was in the same prison as Yellow Kid Weil (q.v.), who believed Cook had reached the North Pole. Minasbeede (talk) 00:50, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Yellow Kid Weil
Talk:FNRS-2

message: Where was the 1953 dive (3170m, IIRC) made?  TREKphiler hit me ♠  07:20, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: In over my head?

message: According to the bathyscaphe article, FNRS-2 was not rebaptized as FNRS-3, it was rebuilt as FNRS-3 using components from FNRS-2.  70.29.210.72 (talk) 04:23, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: FNRS-3
Talk:U-boat pen

message: The two articles U-boat pen and Submarine pen describe exactly the same thing, except that "U-boat pen" is a historical term referring to submarine pens built by the Germans in WWII. Someone who knows more about naval warfare should choose which term to merge the articles under. If there's a lot to say about submarine pens today, merge it there; if there's more to say about the historical development of the U-boat pen, merge it there. But having a duplicate article is silly. --Quuxplusone 05:00, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Proposed merge with [[Submarine pen]]
Talk:Lexington Hills, California

message: I propose to merge Lexington Hills (Santa Clara County, California) (for the census county division - CCD) into Lexington Hills, California (for the census designated place - CDP). The two pages seem to be referring to the same area (if not the same, they seem to greatly overlap). The I think that the content in the CCD article can be added in as a section of the CDP article, as the CCD article is not very expansive. Having two pages referring to the same general area seems confusing, especially which each page is not very unique. If they are to remain separate, it would be good to expand both articles to show their uniqueness and further explain the relation between the CCD and CDP to justify separate articles.  Gimelthedog (talk) 13:33, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merger proposal
Talk:Diving plane

message: you should have information on how this uses hydrolics and pneumatics  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.117.135.68 (talk) 16:54, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: It is written 
Newer boats, starting with the third-flight Los Angeles class subs (or 688is) have eliminated the sail planes, and operate instead with bow planes.
but this sentence is not true worldwide. For instance, type 094 is newer and did not eliminate this design.
I think this sentence should be modified to specify its validity (US-navy subs only?).
Cormul (talk) 09:24, 13 May 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  should validity be specified?
Talk:Jumping wire

message: Article reassessed and graded as stub. --dashiellx (talk) 17:38, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Tag & Assess 2008
Talk:SM U-35 (Germany)

message: The opening paragraph states that the submarine operated in the Mediterranean Sea in World War I, but further along the article says it also operated in the North Sea in "clean up" (what does that mean?) operations.  I believe some re-wording of the first paragraph should be done to not confuse the reader into thinking it served only in the Med.  Maybe it could say it operated primarily in the Mediterranean instead? - Itsfullofstars 05:54, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Operational theater

message: Re the caption to the photo, it says it's a picture of the sub in Newport in 1916. Which Newport? The link says the one in Wales. But Britain was at war with Germany, how could it dock in Wales? 71.102.15.95 (talk) 19:34, 18 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, something wasn't right. The Newport link was incorrectly pointing to the Newport, Wales article.  The editor meant to refer to Newport, Rhode Island, USA, however even that is suspect.  See article SM U-53, which states it was the U-53 that paid a 'courtesy visit' to Newport, Rhode Island in 1916.  I've commented out the photo and the caption.  The disputed photo might still be of the U-35, but if so the location wasn't "Newport." --Itsfullofstars (talk) 22:36, 18 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Don't forget, the U.S. wasn't at war in 1916. A courtesy visit isn't beyond belief.  TREKphiler any time you're ready, Uhura  23:23, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The picture used right now clearly is not U-35. U-35 was a Type U-31 ocean-going submarine, while the picture used shows coastal submarines of Type UB-II. Those don't look like Type U-31 submarines at all.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.189.12.26 (talk) 22:34, 6 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Disputed photo

message: Is sinking an unarmed merchant ship (even neutral) a victory?
:From the POV of a German submarine &/or her skipper (which this page is), yes.  TREKphiler any time you're ready, Uhura  08:46, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Victories
Talk:SM U-110

message: I've removed this:
"U-boat was the nickname for the German word "Unterseeboot" which means "submarine." "
because it's dubious; U-boat is the English word for a German submarine, (and which is derived from the German word "Unterseeboot"): 
and also because I can't see its relevance here. I'm sure there are more important things to say about this boat. 
Xyl 54 (talk) 17:22, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: U-boat

message: I've put the co-ordinates back that were here before. They are the same as given on the uboatnet page, but lead to a point in the middle of County Donegal. Does anyone know what they should be? Xyl 54 (talk) 01:48, 26 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Co-ordinates
Talk:Lincoln Theater (Yountville, California)

message: Mount Vernon, Washington links to this page for the local Lincoln Theatre, however there is no such page linked here.  Should it be put on the requested articles list, or should the link in Mount Vernon, Washington be deleted? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Tj9991 (talk • contribs) 04:30, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mt Vernon Lincoln Theatre
Talk:Lincoln, California

message: Why does the article intro list the census as 2007? Since when is there a 2007 census? Killiondude (talk) 04:23, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Note- I fixed that sentence and included a reference awhile ago. Killiondude (talk) 08:32, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Hi there! I just made an edit to a link for the mayor. The previous link was not working so I decided to update it to a proper source. Can somebody double check that I did this properly? I am new to editing wikipedia and want to make sure I am learning how to edit sources the right way. Thanks!  Nicolebuss (talk) 22:05, 26 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit to a Link
Talk:Linda, California

message: Should pictures be posted, or would that just be too depressing?Isaac Crumm 06:47, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I lol'd. :) Killiondude (talk) 20:54, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
Talk:OK-550 reactor

message: BM-40A reactor currently redirects here. But according to http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ship/row/rus/705.htm the BM40-A and OK-550 are distinct types with similar characteristics, both used for the Alfa class:
Two different models of liquid metal (probably lead-bismuth) reactors were used. The four boats built at the Admiralty shipyard used the BM-40A reactor with two separate steam loops and circulating pumps. The boats built at Severodvinsk [Project 705K] used the OK-550 with branched first-loop lines and triple circulating loops and pumps.
If this can be verified, or if this source is considered reliable, this information should be included in the article. Andrewa 18:29, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: BM-40A reactor
Talk:Argonaut (submarine)

message: As the wikipedia usage guidelines regarding disambiguation state...
::There is no need to add disambiguation links to a page whose name already clearly distinguishes itself from the generic term. For example, Solaris (1972 film) is clearly about one specific movie and not about any of the many other meanings of "Solaris"
I added a disambiguation page since i don't think the title argonaut (submarine) makes it clear that this article is about the submarine class and not about individual submarines e.g. (argonaute).Larryisgood (talk) 14:52, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Wouldn't renaming the page be a better solution? Ship/sub class articles usually have class in the name. - BilCat (talk) 14:36, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Sounds good to me, how about Argonaut (submarine class)?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Larryisgood (talk • contribs) 10:57, 20 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Disambiguation
Talk:Silent Service

message: What exactly is this page supposed to be? It lools like a DAB page, but is tagged as a stub. It's been that way for a very long time, so I don't any expansion is planned. It would probably be best to merge Silent Service (disambiguation) here, and make it the sole DAB page for the title. - BillCJ (talk) 20:56, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, it should be merged with Silent Service (disambiguation). At the time it was marked as a stub, it was a single sentence about the U.S. service. On its own not a stub that is likely to be expanded into an article, just an ambiguous term. older ≠ wiser 22:45, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: What is it??