Vicipaedia:Taberna

E Vicipaedia
Salire ad: navigationem, quaerere
Haec est taberna Vicipaediae ubi potes si dubia habes, explanationes quaerere, nuntia ad nos mittere et cetera.
Ut sententias antiquiores legas vide tabernae acta priora.
Quaestio nova
Compendium:
VP:T
Hic colloqui possumus.


Index

Hampton Court[recensere | fontem recensere]

Quaesivi nomen Latinum huius palatii Anglici. Per Google tria exempla verborum "aula regia Hamptoniensi" (abl.) et duo "palatio Hamptoniensi" (abl.) nuper repperi. An quis fontem meliorem invenire potest? Andrew Dalby 09:51, 26 Decembris 2013 (UTC)

Salve Andrea, et "Hampton curia" et "Curia Hamptonia" apud Google-(Books) inveniuntur. Vale! Laurentianus (disputatio) 11:27, 10 Iunii 2014 (UTC)
Etiam "Hamptoniam curiam" (acc.) ibi invenies in quibusdam rebus gestis sub anno 1617 relatis. Laurentianus (disputatio) 15:34, 10 Iunii 2014 (UTC)

Quaestio de nexibus intervicis[recensere | fontem recensere]

Salve. Non fungit de nexibus intervicis addendis commentationibus "Ask et Embla" et "Diddy Kong (creatura ficta)". Quaeso adiuva. -- Donatello (disputatio) 04:26, 1 Ianuarii 2014 (UTC).

Quaestionem tuam non intellego, mi Donatello. An exstant paginae tales in aliis Vicipaediis? Si sic, oportet, sicut semper, paginas nostras apud Wikidata inserere. Si non iam exstant, potes {{Nexus desiderati}} in {{Nexus absunt}} mutare. Si male respondi, explica, s.t.p.! Felicem annum 2014! Andrew Dalby 10:08, 1 Ianuarii 2014 (UTC)
Donatello, Sk!dbot (die 7 Maii 2013) falsum nexum intervicialem creaverat commentationi "Ask et Embla". Nexum per Wikidatam delendam curavi et verum nexum restitui. Etiam "Diddy Kong" nunc nexus interviciales habet. Neander (disputatio) 14:05, 1 Ianuarii 2014 (UTC)
Illo modo erat. :) Gratias tibi Neander. -- Donatello (disputatio) 16:33, 1 Ianuarii 2014 (UTC).

"Droga, -ae" = Psychotropic drug?[recensere | fontem recensere]

Sigrides Albert scripsit in commentario Voce Latina (2013, Vol. 49 Fasc. 193, pagina 433) de duce syndicatús drogarum capto. Habemusne novum verbum quod medicamentum psychotropicum significat? --Robert.Baruch (disputatio) 04:13, 2 Ianuarii 2014 (UTC)

E fontibus mediaevalibus habemus verbum "drogaria" (sed ex uno textu tantum, anni 1526, vide hic). "Droga" Latine nunquam vidi. Alii fortasse aliter, sed ego usor verbo "medicamentum" ad res in medicina utiles appellandas, "pharmacum" ad res noxias aut proprietatibus haud medicis instructas.
Gratias tibi ago, Roberte, propter paginam tuam Usor:Robert.Baruch/Lexicon Nominorum Locorum. Andrew Dalby 09:29, 2 Ianuarii 2014 (UTC)
Mihi quidem videtur fieri posse, ut droga, vocabulum quasi derivativo drogariae involutum, iam aevo medio exstitisset, quamquam hoc testimonium "circumstantiale" tantum habemus, affinibus verbis (ut Gallico drogue [1462], Catalano droga [1437], etc) corroboratum. Sed medio aevo, ut videtur, quamlibet rem ad medicamentum adhibitum significabat. ¶ Droga 'drugs' utique in lexicis recentis Latinitatis (Pitkäranta, Vilborg) praebetur, quod certe opus est vocabulo, quo "medicamenta stupefactiva" (ut ait Vilborg) breviter & diserte denotentur (ut apud Sigridem Albert in loco laudato). Neander (disputatio) 12:50, 2 Ianuarii 2014 (UTC)
Reperitur vocabulum droga in textis Renascentiae, e.g. hic. Ut dicit autem Neander, medicamentum significare videtur (in lingua Anglica ambiguitas similis est, cf. "pharmaceutical drugs"). Si argumentum sententiae clarum est, quid dicitis de stupefactivo vel psychotropico, adiectivis substantivis, medicamento intellecto? Lesgles (disputatio) 15:50, 2 Ianuarii 2014 (UTC)
Non credo verbum "droga" sensum malum in se capere; droga videtur esse substantia ex qua medicamenta preparentur, et hoc sensu fere idem ac medicamentum valet, bonum et malum, nonne? Pharmacum autem sensum malum (physcotropica vel stupefactiva droga) bene capit et satis bene attestatum habetur.--118.169.160.222 17:00, 2 Ianuarii 2014 (UTC)
Fortasse, si Romano more scribere velis, potio ad animum movendum? inquit M. Caecilius, ecce disputatio 11:29, 2 Maii 2014 (UTC)
In libris artis pharmaceuticae usque ad hoc fere tempus leguntur opiata. Laurentianus (disputatio) 12:04, 10 Iunii 2014 (UTC)

Quaestio[recensere | fontem recensere]

Ego paginam eram legendum et ego hoc invenivi:

"Argentum (-i, n.) est elementum chemicum cui sunt signum chemicum Ag (ex radice Indo-Europaea *arg- 'canus, fulgens') et numerus atomicus 47."

Non haberet esse:

"Argentum (-i, n.) est elementum chemicum qui sunt signum chemicum Ag (ex radice Indo-Europaea *arg- 'canus, fulgens') et numerus atomicus 47."

JuanMartinExeni (disputatio) 18:51, 7 Ianuarii 2014 (UTC)

Argentum neutrum singulare nomen est. Dativus+sum recte ponitur cum possessio exprimatur: rectius erit igitur
"Argentum (-i, n.) elementum chemicum est cui signum chemicum Ag (ex radice Indo-Europaea *arg- 'canus, fulgens') est et numerus atomicus 47."
Si vis duplex est emendari potest in singulum:
"Argentum (-i, n.) elementum chemicum cui signum chemicum Ag (ex radice Indo-Europaea *arg- 'canus, fulgens') est et numerus atomicus 47."

sed obscurior tironibus forsitan erit.

εΔω ex Italiano Vicifonte.
Duae annotationes: primo, profecto dativus possessivus est; secundo, quod attinet ad ordinem verborum, memoria tenete verbum temporale non semper in extrema sententia esse debere. Etenim verbum esse huius est bonum exemplum. Cum dicunt Bradley & Arnold, "Sum, when used as a linking verb, rarely comes last." Lesgles (disputatio) 18:00, 9 Ianuarii 2014 (UTC)

Office hours in IRC to talk about VisualEditor[recensere | fontem recensere]

(I tried to see what Google Translate would do, but it was so bad that even I could tell it was wrong. Please translate this message so other people can read it. Thanks!)

Salve!

The engineering department will hold office hours to discuss VisualEditor at these times:

Product Manager James Forrester will discuss VisualEditor and answer questions. Logs will be posted on Meta after each office hour completes. If you want to ask a question and cannot attend or do not speak English, please leave a message on my user talk page or send e-mail to me. Whatamidoing (WMF) (disputatio) 22:52, 9 Ianuarii 2014 (UTC)

Also, please remember that VisualEditor will be turned on for everyone here this Monday, 15 January, a few hours before the first office hour meeting on IRC. Whatamidoing (WMF) (disputatio) 22:57, 9 Ianuarii 2014 (UTC)

Request for comment on Commons: Should Wikimedia support MP4 video?[recensere | fontem recensere]

I apologize for this message being only in English. Please translate it if needed to help your community.

The Wikimedia Foundation's multimedia team seeks community guidance on a proposal to support the MP4 video format. This digital video standard is used widely around the world to record, edit and watch videos on mobile phones, desktop computers and home video devices. It is also known as H.264/MPEG-4 or AVC.

Supporting the MP4 format would make it much easier for our users to view and contribute video on Wikipedia and Wikimedia projects -- and video files could be offered in dual formats on our sites, so we could continue to support current open formats (WebM and Ogg Theora).

However, MP4 is a patent-encumbered format, and using a proprietary format would be a departure from our current practice of only supporting open formats on our sites -- even though the licenses appear to have acceptable legal terms, with only a small fee required.

We would appreciate your guidance on whether or not to support MP4. Our Request for Comments presents views both in favor and against MP4 support, based on opinions we’ve heard in our discussions with community and team members.

Please join this RfC -- and share your advice.

All users are welcome to participate, whether you are active on Commons, Wikipedia, other Wikimedia project -- or any site that uses content from our free media repository.

You are also welcome to join tomorrow's Office hours chat on IRC, this Thursday, January 16, at 19:00 UTC, if you would like to discuss this project with our team and other community members.

We look forward to a constructive discussion with you, so we can make a more informed decision together on this important topic. Keegan (WMF) (talk) 06:47, 16 Ianuarii 2014 (UTC)

Rename request[recensere | fontem recensere]

Would you mind renaming me to Jakec? Thanks. King jakob c 2 (disputatio) 02:03, 17 Ianuarii 2014 (UTC)


Museum Historiae Naturalis (Vidobona) - Museum historiae naturalis Vindobonense[recensere | fontem recensere]

Duas commentationes de Museo historiae naturalis Vindobonensi habemus, quod per errorem alteram coepi (Museum Historiae Naturalis (Vindobona))) - Dubium non est, quin coniungendae sint, sed qualis titulus praeferendus est?--Utilo (disputatio) 13:31, 25 Ianuarii 2014 (UTC)

Salve Utilo. Aliquando tale fietur. Naturhistorisches Museum Wien vocatur, et aliquando Naturhistorisches Museum, ita "Museum Historiae Naturalis Vindobonense" vel litteris minusculis "Museum historiae naturalis Vindobonense" adhiberi oportet. -- Donatello (disputatio) 15:26, 25 Ianuarii 2014 (UTC).
gratias tibi ago - ergo "Museum Historiae Naturalis (Vindobona)" ad alteram movebo ...--Utilo (disputatio) 15:00, 27 Ianuarii 2014 (UTC)

Nuntii blogosphaerici de Vicipaedia[recensere | fontem recensere]

Videte, o amici, commentatiunculam Danielis Fattorii de Vicipaedia nostra paginaque Nabilla Benattia :)

De 100 000 paginis nostris vide etiam hanc commentationem Francogallicam. Andrew Dalby 18:21, 28 Ianuarii 2014 (UTC)

Paginae mensis[recensere | fontem recensere]

An quis aut proponere aut reicere vult paginas mensium Februarii, Martii etc.? Amabo vos, ite sine mora ad paginam "Disputatio Vicipaediae:Pagina mensis"! Andrew Dalby 17:00, 28 Ianuarii 2014 (UTC)

Aspectus pinacothecae[recensere | fontem recensere]

Salve. Quid censetis de his variis aspectibus duobus pinacothecae?

  1. Stella marina#Pinacotheca
  2. Angelopolis#Pinacotheca

Egomet genere primo bona video. Pulchre videt et minus spatium capit. In genere duo minus piuchre videt et maius spatium capit. At in ambibus seligere etiam potes quae magnitudo imaginum habere.

Donatello (disputatio) 03:07, 2 Februarii 2014 (UTC).

Mea sententia, plurimae pinacothecae multorum imaginum sunt movendae ad communia (vide commons:Starfish et commons:Los Angeles). --UV (disputatio) 13:24, 2 Februarii 2014 (UTC)

Chairman/chairwoman in Latin[recensere | fontem recensere]

Hello. Anybody who knows how we say "chairman"/"chairwoman" in Latin? -- Donatello (disputatio) 22:39, 14 Februarii 2014 (UTC).

Praeses, unless you mean someone who carries a sedan-chair, in which case the proper word is lecticarius. Lesgles (disputatio) 01:42, 15 Februarii 2014 (UTC)

Verba athletica[recensere | fontem recensere]

In commentatione David Prowse nobis necesse est verba Latina reperire ad Anglica "body-builder" et "weight-lifter" vertenda. Pro "weight-lifter" lingua Hispanica suggerit "halterophilus", neologismum (?) e Graeco confectum. Andrew Dalby 13:53, 17 Februarii 2014 (UTC)

Nisi pro body-builder fons est, censeo "aedificator corporis" bene sonat, sed de "vir levationis ponderis" pro weight-lifter contentus recte non sum. Aliae rei, puto lingua latina e lingua graeca antiqua multa verba derivata habet, quid lingua minus latine facit. -- Donatello (disputatio) 17:12, 17 Februarii 2014 (UTC).
Ebbe Vilborg, Norstedts svensk-latinska ordbok (editio secunda, Norstedts akademiska förlag, Stockholm, 2009) praebet dictionem q.e. sui corporis cultor/cultrix (s.v. kroppsbyggare), quae (quamquam inverso verborum ordine) etiam apud Tuomo Pekkanen & Reijo Pitkäranta (Lexicon hodiernae Latinitatis Finno-Latino-Finnicum. Societas Litterarum Finnicarum, 2006) offertur (s.v. kehonrakentaja). Constat nostram linguam talibus vocabulis faciendis parum excellere. Neograece 'sui corporis cultus' σωματοδόμηση dicitur, sed quomodo verbum agentis formetur? Apud Graecos antiquos adiectivum σωματοπλαστικός invenitur, quod ad corpus formandum pertinet. Tullius, si nunc apud nos vivat, certe iocose saltem somatoplasticum talem dixerit hominem qui suum corpus satis superque formet. "Linguam in bucca" habens Neander (disputatio) 18:09, 17 Februarii 2014 (UTC)
Inventiones iucundae! Nonne σωματοδόμηση etiam suggerit somatodometor (dometor)? Sed mihi autem placet corporis cultor, qui "culturista" et variantes in pluribus linguis europaeis indicat. Traupman nihil pro "bodybuilding" sed pro "weight lifting" "sublatio libramentorum" dat (Bantam New College Dictionary, p. 700), ergo sublator libramentorum est possibilis. Lesgles (disputatio) 18:47, 17 Februarii 2014 (UTC)
Haud sciam an valeat Herculanus. Laurentianus (disputatio) 15:43, 10 Iunii 2014 (UTC)

Universal Language Selector will be enabled by default again on this wiki by 21 February 2014[recensere | fontem recensere]

On January 21 2014 the MediaWiki extension Universal Language Selector (ULS) was disabled on this wiki. A new preference was added for logged-in users to turn on ULS. This was done to prevent slow loading of pages due to ULS webfonts, a behaviour that had been observed by the Wikimedia Technical Operations team on some wikis.

We are now ready to enable ULS again. The temporary preference to enable ULS will be removed. A new checkbox has been added to the Language Panel to enable/disable font delivery. This will be unchecked by default for this wiki, but can be selected at any time by the users to enable webfonts. This is an interim solution while we improve the feature of webfonts delivery.

You can read the announcement and the development plan for more information. Apologies for writing this message only in English. Thank you. Runa 12:30, 19 February 2014‎ (UTC)

Amendment to the Terms of Use[recensere | fontem recensere]

Call for project ideas: funding is available for community experiments[recensere | fontem recensere]

IEG key blue.png

I apologize if this message is not in your language. Please help translate it.

Do you have an idea for a project that could improve your community? Individual Engagement Grants from the Wikimedia Foundation help support individuals and small teams to organize experiments for 6 months. You can get funding to try out your idea for online community organizing, outreach, tool-building, or research to help make Vicipaedia better. In March, we’re looking for new project proposals.

Examples of past Individual Engagement Grant projects:

Proposals are due by 31 March 2014. There are a number of ways to get involved!

Hope to have your participation,

--Siko Bouterse, Head of Individual Engagement Grants, Wikimedia Foundation 19:44, 28 Februarii 2014 (UTC)

Ivus > Ivo?[recensere | fontem recensere]

Habemus vitas nonnullas hominum cuius praenomen est "Yves, Ivo" etc. Talia praenomina ad "Ivus" mutavimus, sed per errorem, nisi fallor. Nonne forma Latina "Ivo" est? Andrew Dalby 13:40, 2 Martii 2014 (UTC)

+ Ives Goddard? Hoc Ives cum hives, non eaves, sonis congruit. IacobusAmor (disputatio) 15:53, 2 Martii 2014 (UTC)
Dubitatio de nomine tolli videtur oratione quadam Antonii Fernandi Hamyerle Laudatio in divum Ivonem ... Vindobonae anno 1739 dicta. - Bavarese (disputatio) 18:32, 2 Martii 2014 (UTC)
Forma vero recta pro Yves Francico et Ives Anglico Ivo, -onis videtur. Vide exempla "Sancti Ivonis" in libris Google. Lesgles (disputatio) 19:21, 2 Martii 2014 (UTC)
Macte! IacobusAmor (disputatio) 19:33, 2 Martii 2014 (UTC)

Formula pellicula[recensere | fontem recensere]

Dear Friends, I had to eliminate the changes Donatello did on February 28th, 2014 because otherwise the formula doesn't work. Could somebody help Donatello. Thanks--Helveticus montanus (disputatio) 10:34, 3 Martii 2014 (UTC)

I tried to improve the formula. It did not work in the beginning, but after hand I made it. :) But if you mean something else please tell. -- Donatello (disputatio) 00:52, 5 Martii 2014 (UTC).
Yes, it seems to work well now: it's true, it didn't work before. Thanks to both of you. There is one detail that could be improved: where a parameter has no contents, the formula should show nothing on the page: we don't want the empty parameter to appear. (See Sebastiane for an example: on the page it shows Factor: {{{Producer}}}: we don't want to see that.) I think this is done with the use of IF, but when I try, I always get it wrong. Can you do that, Donatello, or can someone else help? Andrew Dalby 09:47, 5 Martii 2014 (UTC)
I have reverted it now. Yes, it's a good idea that those are hidden when they contain no text. Unfortunately I don't know how to do it. Might somebody help? -- Donatello (disputatio) 16:27, 5 Martii 2014 (UTC).
No, the latest version does not work and I have reverted it again. Donatello, if you change a formula, you need to go to "Nexus ad hanc paginam" (left side of the page), choose some random pages, and see whether the formula is still working properly. If it isn't, you have to revert your own edits and try again. Bad luck :( Andrew Dalby 18:19, 5 Martii 2014 (UTC)
My apologies: I thought I had reverted this, but I didn't. It is necessary to revert it: random checks show that it is not working. I will now do so. Donatello, please note what I say above: after making a change, you need to test the formula, not just on your latest page, but on some of the others too. Andrew Dalby 19:18, 7 Martii 2014 (UTC)
(Just seeing this, a bit late to the party!) It's worth noting that you can test a formula even without saving the page. Use the "Preview page with this template" link at the bottom below the "save" button. Put in the name of a page that uses the template and you'll get an edit-preview page showing the template in situ, with the regular edit box below to fix whatever needs it. This is really useful for widely-used templates as you can tweak it, test it on a few pages, tweak it some more, test it again, and so on all without affecting anybody else until you're satisfied. It took me a long time to realize this feature was available, so I'm calling attention to it here to save others travail! A. Mahoney (disputatio) 21:52, 24 Maii 2014 (UTC)

Request for translation[recensere | fontem recensere]

Dear colleagues, please translate the article be:Рыгор Барадулін. Thank you in advance. --Rymchonak (disputatio) 11:24, 3 Martii 2014 (UTC)

Пачатак стварыў; глядзі Gregorius Baradulin. Lesgles (disputatio) 18:33, 5 Martii 2014 (UTC)

VisualEditor discussion[recensere | fontem recensere]

Please help me and your community by translating this message into Latin.

Hello,

The Wikimedia Foundation's engineering department has scheduled office hours to discuss VisualEditor. Please join Product Manager James Forrester to discuss VisualEditor and upcoming plans.

These discussions will be on IRC (w:Internet Relay Chat) at irc://irc.freenode.net/wikimedia-office. For more information on office hours, including how to attend, please see meta:IRC office hours. Logs will be posted at Meta afterwards.

If office hours are heavily attended, it can be difficult to get to all questions, but if you want to ask a question and cannot attend or do not speak English, then please let me know your question on my talk page or via e-mail by the day before, and someone will add it to possible discussion topics.

Whatamidoing (WMF) (disputatio) 18:49, 5 Martii 2014 (UTC)

Voice actor/voice acting[recensere | fontem recensere]

Greetings. How do we say "voice actor" and "voice acting" in Latin? Do you think that actor vocalis et actus vocalis sound okey? "Voice acting" in Latin might be little tricky. -- Donatello (disputatio) 17:20, 7 Martii 2014 (UTC).

Iam habemus categoriam Categoria:Histriones vocales ubi duae paginae a te creatae enumerantur. An locutio melior reperiri potest, nescio. Andrew Dalby 18:58, 7 Martii 2014 (UTC)

Castle[recensere | fontem recensere]

Adhuc commentationem de domicilio munito nobilis mediaevalis (d:Q23413, castle, château fort, Burg) non habemus, sed mihi desiderata videtur. Iam sunt Castellum (d:Q90754, redoubt) Arx (d:Q88291 citadel), Castrum (d:Q57831, fortress), et alii (vide Categoria:Aedificia bellica). Quomodo melius discernentur? Lesgles (disputatio) 22:28, 8 Martii 2014 (UTC)

Vide etiam disputationem veterem: Disputatio Formulae:Munimen. --UV (disputatio) 22:33, 8 Martii 2014 (UTC)
Gratias ago, disputationem non vidi. Etenim est pagina Castra mediaevalia (sine nexibus). Tamen nonne nomen singulare oportet (castrum/castellum/burgum mediaevale)? Lesgles (disputatio) 03:13, 10 Martii 2014 (UTC)
Professores mei olim dixerunt "castra" "pluralia tantum" esse, sed iam scio hoc cum Latinitate mediaevali non congruere. Andrew Dalby 09:49, 10 Martii 2014 (UTC)
Ita, sed castra pluralia tantum secundum Lewis et Short potissime "camp" significare videtur. Ego quoque usum mediaevalem non multum cognosco, sed secundum L&S (castrum "more rare than castellum") et Du Cange ([1], [2]) leviter "castellum mediaevale" praeopto, sed non certus sum. Lesgles (disputatio) 23:50, 10 Martii 2014 (UTC)
Censeo te recte praeoptavisse! Andrew Dalby 09:23, 11 Martii 2014 (UTC)
Formula:Munimen omne describit (usque et castra (pl) et castellum mediaevale =(anglice "Castle"); imprime buttonem "Monstrare" ut videas. Castra (pl. ad litteram "the fortifications") est verbum idiomaticum quod sensum "camp" vel rectius "military camp" capit propter ea quod Romani iter facientes olim semper tentoria inter moles, valla, et alia munimenta quadam die statuebant ita ut ipsi ab hostibus defendantur.--59.115.184.129 10:52, 13 Martii 2014 (UTC)
Ad castellum mediaevale movi et nexus ad d:Q23413 ('castle') addidi. Gratias ago omnibus! Lesgles (disputatio) 18:27, 26 Martii 2014 (UTC)

De commentationibus duoabus[recensere | fontem recensere]

Ave. Nomina Ioanna et Iohanna soli varii modi duo scribere sunt, ita fortasse commentationes Ioanna et Iohanna coniungere possumus? -- Donatello (disputatio) 03:42, 11 Martii 2014 (UTC).

Ita, Donatello, contribuere oportet! Andrew Dalby 11:29, 11 Martii 2014 (UTC)
Date veniam sed ego non consentio. Videte quaeso quae his commentationibus continentur. Iohanna et Iohannes iam apud Hieronymum inveniuntur. Neander (disputatio) 14:04, 11 Martii 2014 (UTC)
Ah, bene. Duo nomina "Ioannam" et "Iohannam" esse dicis, Neander? Sub Iohanna origo plenius describitur, sub Ioanna brevissime. Ego (confiteor) variationem orthographicam hic vidi. Andrew Dalby 14:24, 11 Martii 2014 (UTC)
Constat Iohannam et Ioannam ambo ex nomine Hebraico provenire sed eo differre, quà vià tradita sunt: rectà (ut fecit Hieronymus) an obliquà (per Graecam quae /h/ vocem non tolerat). Equidem negarim hic de nihilo nisi de variatione orthographica agi. Si enim de orthographica tantum variatione agatur, nihil obstet, quin Ioanna ad commentationem Iohanna reducatur. Sin autem putamus ita fieri non posse, nonne concludendum est non solum de voluntaria variatione orthographica sed etiam de differentia quadam semiotica agi? Ioanna Rowling scribitur, nec Iohanna Rowling, non quia brevius est sed, ut credo, quia Ioanna fidelius nomini Joanne respondet et congruit. Item Iohanna von Schoultz scribitur, quia Iohanna fidelius nomen Johanna reddit. Mihi quidem non videtur commendabile Johannam, nomen apud Finnos et Suecos usitatum, in Ioannam torqueri eà tantum causà, quod consequentiae cuidam serviat aut brevitati consulat. Neander (disputatio) 22:33, 11 Martii 2014 (UTC)
De torquendo quis hic loquitur? Si opus sit duas commentationes retinere, ita sit. Utile esse censes in commentatione Ioanna "Vide etiam Iohanna" scribere, et vicissim? Andrew Dalby 10:32, 12 Martii 2014 (UTC)
Certe, hoc (id quod dicit Andrew) mihi utile videtur. Video autem nomina masculina eandem paginam habere, quod Iohannes redirigit ad Ioannes. Fortasse paginae omnium horum 4 nominum debent inter se iunctae esse? A. Mahoney (disputatio) 13:00, 12 Martii 2014 (UTC)
Sincere loquens necessitatem duarum (quattuor) paginarum non video. Duas formas aeque firma antiquaque agnosco, sed quis negabit nomen essentiâ unum esse (non Hieronymus, nisi fallor)? Commentarium de orthographia iucundum est et debet conservari, sed propositum commentationis encyclopaedicae separatae non explet (content forking cavere debemus). Mea sententia, opus est una pagina, parte de orthographia praedita. Alia est quaestio de orthographia in titulis paginarum biographicarum (Rowling etc.), quae antea multum disputata est (vide Vicipaedia:Taberna/Tabularium 18#Categoria:Iohannes Sebastianus Bach). De hac quaestione ambas formas faveo, cum h si attestata est. Lesgles (disputatio) 18:39, 12 Martii 2014 (UTC)
Sunt linguae vicipaedianae, quae duas vel quattuor commentationes tolerant, nec plane video, cur nos speciali parsimonià uti oporteat. Video te, o Lesgles, indictà causà Iohannem ad Ioannem movisse, nec nego me paulum demirari, cur. Neander (disputatio) 20:16, 12 Martii 2014 (UTC)
"Content forking" (scissionis rei?) super indicatae causà. Pone novum usorem notas de praenominis popularitate in terris diversis addere optare; ubi scribet, et quis custodiet, ut altera pagina idem dicat? Nam encyclopaedia primo res, secundo orthographiam tractat, ergo "una res, una pagina" mihi regula utilis videtur. In lingua Anglica Johannes et John propter longum digressum nomina distincta habentur, sed confer en:Stephen (paginam principalem) et en:Steven (redirectionem). Lesgles (disputatio) 01:40, 13 Martii 2014 (UTC)
Mihi videtur (a) nobis facile est multas horas de praenominibus dispendere, (b) alias Vicipaedias commentationes plures sed haud utiles de praenominibus praebere, quia (c) difficile est veram historiam et scientiam de talibus rebus distinguere et (d) difficile est fontes fideles de praenominibus reperire. Igitur supra Neandro dixi "Si opus sit duas commentationes retinere, ita sit:" Neander enim res utiles sine dubio de historia et etymologia Ioannae et Iohannae scribere potest; scribat igitur quomodo velit. Caveat autem! Mihi et fortasse aliis utilius erit in una pagina, neque quattuor, de fortuna huius nominis Hebraici legere. Andrew Dalby 09:46, 13 Martii 2014 (UTC)
Mihimet pauca refert utrum unam, duas, quattuor paginas habeamus, dummodo facile sit omnes invenire. Velim ergo nexus videre inter paginas, si Ioannes, Iohannes, Ioanna, Iohanna separatim describeamus (ut nunc), vel paginas redirectionis habere, si omnes in unam paginam collegamus. Si sola editrix fueram (quod di vetant!), unam modo paginam feceram, cum paginis redirectionis -- sed, ut mihi videtur, licet nobis 4 paginas de his nominibus facere. A. Mahoney (disputatio) 13:20, 13 Martii 2014 (UTC)

Proposed optional changes to Terms of Use amendment[recensere | fontem recensere]

Hello all, in response to some community comments in the discussion on the amendment to the Terms of Use on undisclosed paid editing, we have prepared two optional changes. Please read about these optional changes on Meta wiki and share your comments. If you can (and this is a non english project), please translate this announcement. Thanks! Slaporte (WMF) 21:56, 13 Martii 2014 (UTC)

Catalan Culture Challenge[recensere | fontem recensere]

I apologize if this message is not in your language. Please help translate it.

The Catalan-speaking world... Want to find out more? From March 16 to April 15 we will organise the Catalan Culture Challenge, a Wikipedia editing contest in which victory will go to those who start and improve the greatest number of articles about 50 key figures of Catalan culture. You can take part by creating or expanding articles on these people in your native language (or any other one you speak). It would be lovely to have you on board. :-)

We look forward to seeing you!

Amical Wikimedia--Kippelboy (disputatio) 17:43, 15 Martii 2014 (UTC)

A curiously innumerate category[recensere | fontem recensere]

Cur se monstrat "[[Categoria:Greges humani enumerati|15]]" inter nomina 1, sed non inter nomina 15 enumerata? IacobusAmor (disputatio) 13:54, 18 Martii 2014 (UTC)

Similiter "[[Categoria:Res enumeratae|100]]"; vide categoriam in Centum Napoleonis dies. IacobusAmor (disputatio) 14:09, 18 Martii 2014 (UTC)
Nescio, sed ut videtur cum habemus [[Categoria:Res enumeratae|X]] et numerus X plus quam unum digitum habet, in categoriae pagina hanc paginam sub primo digito, non sub numero ipso, videmus. Si scribo [[Categoria:Res enumeratae|"X"]], pagina sub signo " apparet! Nescio quomodo possim rectificere, sed fortasse post sessiones cursuum experimenta faciam. A. Mahoney (disputatio) 13:19, 24 Martii 2014 (UTC)
Got it: see the help page in EN for details. On Category pages, the pages that belong to the category are normally grouped by the first character of the page names. The syntax [[Categoria:the-category|sort-key]] puts the page into category the-category and says it is to be alphabetized under sort-key rather than under its actual page title. Look at Categoria:Auctores Latini antiqui for example -- the page is divided up by letters. The category stuff is smart enough to respect the DEFAULTSORT formula if there is one, and otherwise uses the sort-key in the [[Categoria]] link.
I conclude that this mechanism won't do what we want with the Res enumeratae category. So, what else could we do with that? A. Mahoney (disputatio) 13:29, 24 Martii 2014 (UTC)
I haven't learned any way around this. You can either have the subheadings right (1, 2, 3 etc.), but then you have |15 and |1000 under the subheading 1, or else you can have the sorting order right, with "1" sorted |0001, "15" sorted |0015, etc., but then they all appear under the single subheading 0. I don't know any way in which you can get both things right. Andrew Dalby 14:10, 24 Martii 2014 (UTC)
We could do sub-categories, for example "Res enumeratae, minus quam 10 res"; "Res enumeratae, 10-99 res"; and so on by orders of magnitude, but this seems silly. Or we could use the order of magnitude as a sort key -- the number of digits in the number, so with Centum Napoleonis dies we'd put "3" rather than "100." That would group everything from 100 to 999 together (not bad), but label them with "3" (potentially very confusing). Or we could use a separate index page instead of a category (or in addition); this means maintenance, but does get things in whatever order we choose to impose. A. Mahoney (disputatio) 16:29, 24 Martii 2014 (UTC)
Yes, agreed, a list page would do what a category page can't! Andrew Dalby 18:47, 24 Martii 2014 (UTC)

How to get rid of an unwanted box?[recensere | fontem recensere]

Capsa "Index [monstrare]" nunc in multis paginis apparet. Quomodo deleri potest? IacobusAmor (disputatio) 13:59, 18 Martii 2014 (UTC)

In omnis paginis plurium trium partium apparet. "Verbo magico" __NOTOC__ deleri potest (vide en:Help:Section#Replacing the default TOC), sed censeo sine causa gravi non deleri debere. Lesgles (disputatio) 16:23, 18 Martii 2014 (UTC)
Let it appear on other people's screens! I just don't want it to appear on my screen. Is there a gizmo for hiding it? IacobusAmor (disputatio) 16:38, 18 Martii 2014 (UTC)
Ah, that I don't know. Maybe UV does? Lesgles (disputatio) 17:43, 18 Martii 2014 (UTC)
I have now added a gizmo to that end to your Usor:IacobusAmor/common.css. You may need to press your browser's "reload" button or wait for a day or so until you see the changes, but then the table of contents box should be gone. Feel free at any time to remove the lines I have added to your Usor:IacobusAmor/common.css if you would like to see the table of contents boxes again. Greetings, --UV (disputatio) 20:53, 18 Martii 2014 (UTC)
Thanks. It hasn't kicked in yet, however. Let's wait & see. IacobusAmor (disputatio) 12:01, 19 Martii 2014 (UTC)
Iam adest. IacobusAmor (disputatio) 14:07, 1 Aprilis 2014 (UTC)
Hmm, still hasn't worked for me. And I just logged in with a different browser and I still get the contents box on that too. Seems as if it takes a couple of weeks. Andrew Dalby 15:44, 1 Aprilis 2014 (UTC)
Sorry, Iacobe, I made a stupid mistake when I created your Usor:IacobusAmor/common.css. I have now fixed it and it should work now! Greetings, --UV (disputatio) 19:51, 1 Aprilis 2014 (UTC)

De verbis paginarum discretivarum[recensere | fontem recensere]

In paginis discretivis multas locutiones videmus: "X potest significare potest", "X potest esse", etc. Constantia hic, ut credo, non est necessaria, sed unam locutionem dubito: "X potest: (1) (2) (3)", e.g. in Insula (discretiva). Estne admissibilis haec omissio verbi? Lesgles (disputatio) 00:20, 21 Martii 2014 (UTC)

Insulam correxi etiam remotis rebus supervacaneis. Neander (disputatio) 09:26, 21 Martii 2014 (UTC)
Neque ego constantiam peto, sed censeo utile esse multitudinem nexuum in lineis singulis paginarum discretivarum ad unum tantum nexum caeruleum reducere. Ita in pagina "Insula (discretiva)" Neander iam fecit. Lector enim, si ad hanc paginam venit, non quaerit e.g. "quid est mare?" sed "quomodo reperire possum illam Insulam de qua meditabam?" Andrew Dalby 10:55, 21 Martii 2014 (UTC)

flumen 'Ilz'[recensere | fontem recensere]

Estne vestrum alicui nomen Latinum notum illius fluvii, qui prope Bataviam (theodisce Passau) in flumen Danuvium influit et theodiosce Ilz nuncupatur? - Bavarese (disputatio) 13:35, 22 Martii 2014 (UTC)

Pars illius urbis ab Hofmanno "Ilstadium" appellatur. An fluvius erit "Ilsus (fluvius)" ((vide indicem (p. 366) huius libri Conradi Celtis apud Google Books)) haud scio.
[Postea:] Ita est. Habes "Ilissus, Ilsus, Iltsa, -za, Ilz, Nfl. d. Donau, Niederbayern." apud Graesse! Andrew Dalby 15:20, 22 Martii 2014 (UTC)g
Graessem/ssum rogavi, sed, ut videtur, parum fortunate. Eo gratiore animo responsum tuum legi. Bavarese (disputatio) 22:14, 22 Martii 2014 (UTC)
In "Monumenta Germaniae Historia", p. 254 (nexus interretialis) nomen fluminis in diplomaton ab Henrico II (ca. anno 1010) scriptus est "Ilzisa". El Suizo (disputatio) 05:50, 28 Martii 2014 (UTC)
Gratias tibi ago. - Bavarese (disputatio) 11:18, 28 Martii 2014 (UTC)

Promontoria > Promunturia[recensere | fontem recensere]

E lexicis recentibus -- e.g. Oxford Latin Dictionary ed. P. G. W. Glare (Oxonii: Clarendon Press, 1968-1982) -- mihi videtur orthographiam "Promunturium" praeferendam. Volo igitur promontoria nostra (satis pauca, e.g. Promontorium Septemtrionale) in promunturia mutare. An quis abnuit? Andrew Dalby 18:43, 28 Martii 2014 (UTC)

Sic etiam in lexico non tam recenti, L&S. Consentio ego. Quid dicit OLD de "septentrionalis/septemtrionalis"? Lesgles (disputatio) 14:48, 31 Martii 2014 (UTC)
Lexica eadem "septentrio" praeferunt. Ego quoque! Andrew Dalby 15:05, 3 Aprilis 2014 (UTC)

De regina Iudita[recensere | fontem recensere]

Paginam "Aethiopia", pro maiori parte haud mala, sicut praedictum est ad paginae mensis dignitatem promoveo. Historia autem Aethiopica (e qua initium in capsa paginae primae comprehenditur) mihi dubitare facit. De regina Iudita, ibi commemorata, pauca (aut, dici potest, nihil) scimus. De illa videte e.g. paginam Anglicam en:Gudit. Fortasse lector aliquis, hanc rem in pagina prima nostra videns, retractabit ... Bene ...

Totam paginam Anglicam nunc legi. Res melius stat. Anglophoni in pagina en:Gudit ab ovo et a traditione orali incipiunt sed ad mala et ad citationes historicorum perveniunt. Regina Iudita re vera vixit :) Andrew Dalby 15:10, 31 Martii 2014 (UTC)

Changes to the default site typography coming soon[recensere | fontem recensere]

This week, the typography on Wikimedia sites will be updated for all readers and editors who use the default "Vector" skin. This change will involve new serif fonts for some headings, small tweaks to body content fonts, text size, text color, and spacing between elements. The schedule is:

  • April 1st: non-Wikipedia projects will see this change live
  • April 3rd: Wikipedias will see this change live

This change is very similar to the "Typography Update" Beta Feature that has been available on Wikimedia projects since November 2013. After several rounds of testing and with feedback from the community, this Beta Feature will be disabled and successful aspects enabled in the default site appearance. Users who are logged in may still choose to use another skin, or alter their personal CSS, if they prefer a different appearance. Local common CSS styles will also apply as normal, for issues with local styles and scripts that impact all users.

For more information:

-- Steven Walling (Product Manager) on behalf of the Wikimedia Foundation's User Experience Design team

Nomina stellarum[recensere | fontem recensere]

Salve. Quomodo nomina ad stellas esse oportent? Nomina (Betelgeuse) sive nota Bayeriana (Alpha Orionis)? Multae commentationes de stellis notis Bayerianis appellantur, interea fortasse minores nominibus. Nostra stella Sol; nescimus eius nota Bayeriana, sed nomine Sole is appellamus. Censeo nomina adhibere oportent quia notae Bayerianae alia genera notationum sunt. -- Donatello (disputatio) 14:38, 1 Aprilis 2014 (UTC).

Si sub nominibus antiquis aut Arabicis paginas creamus, redirectiones deinde creamus a notis Bayerianis. Tales redirectiones categorizamus (vide Categoria:Res astronomicae characteribus Bayeri agnitae).
Nomina antiqua (Graecolatina) iam praeferimus, nisi fallor: Latine enim loquimur! Indicem horum nominum in Categoria:Res astronomicae nominibus antiquis agnitae reperis -- ibi, e.g., Sol enumeratur. Sed an praeferre debemus nomina Arabica seu notas Bayerianas, haud scio!
Bayerus notas suas stellis cuiusque constellationis "fixis" distribuit. Sol, a nobis observatus, non est stella "fixa" et inter constellationes moveri videtur; igitur notam Bayerianam non habet. Andrew Dalby 15:23, 1 Aprilis 2014 (UTC)

Pagina prima: Nuntii[recensere | fontem recensere]

"Vide imaginem": An qinque vel tres imagines? --Malabon (disputatio) 19:15, 2 Aprilis 2014 (UTC)

Correxi. Gratias agimus, lector benevole! Andrew Dalby 19:30, 2 Aprilis 2014 (UTC)

Latin:'A (certain )type of' and ablative of cause[recensere | fontem recensere]

I have two questions:

'A (certain )type of'[recensere | fontem recensere]

So how do you guys say a type of or a certain type of? e.g. Can we say cuiusdam modi or eiusdaem modi or quisdam/ quaedam /quoddam or sors+gen or genus+gen?--Jondel (disputatio) 04:48, 3 Aprilis 2014 (UTC)

"Genus + gen." would be the literal translation for a kind of, and "genus quoddam + gen." for a certain kind of. "Cuiusdam modi" means of a certain manner/fashion/style, and would sometimes work when you are aiming to translate a certain type of. These all differ from "eiusdem modi", which means of the same manner/fashion/style. Andrew Dalby 15:00, 3 Aprilis 2014 (UTC)
(edit conflict; basically the same answer) Yes, except for sors, although grammatically they are different. "Cuiusdam modI" = "of some kind"; "eiusdem modi" (note the e) = "of the same kind"; "quisdam" = "some, a certain"; "genus + gen." = "a kind of". If you want to stick to classical Latin, I wouldn't use sors in this way, unless you're talking about a person's rank or condition in life, cf. Horace, C. 4, 11, 22, "non tuae sortis juvenem", "a young man not of your rank". Lesgles (disputatio) 15:07, 3 Aprilis 2014 (UTC)
Whatever the idiom, it's ill-advised to deploy "a certain type of" in the definition of a lemma—where precision, not vagueness, is wanted: "A dentist is a certain type of doctor, who" is a feeble way of saying "A dentist is a doctor who." IacobusAmor (disputatio) 15:34, 3 Aprilis 2014 (UTC)

ablative of cause[recensere | fontem recensere]

Can we say "He died of wounds." or "He died because of condemnation" as "Mortuus vulnerato est." or "Mortuus damnato est.", respectively?--Jondel (disputatio) 05:19, 3 Aprilis 2014 (UTC)

Yes and no! We would have to choose the right words. Vulnerato means "by a wounded man"; damnato means "by a condemned man". So, no, those words don't say what you mean. Vulneribus means "by wounds", so "vulneribus mortuus est", yes, would convey he died by/from/of wounds.
Now, I'm not sure that people do die of condemnation exactly -- there are steps in between, i.e. imprisoning and killing them. So, in my thinking, the condemnation is not the cause, and I don't think I would say "damnatione mortuus est", he died by/from/of condemnation. We have said "morte damnatus est" (and various similar phrases), he was condemned to death. Or, nearer to what you wanted maybe, "(ultimo) supplicio affectus est" he was executed, he was put to death. Andrew Dalby 12:09, 3 Aprilis 2014 (UTC)
Maybe I should be the cause-ablative phrase in front. e.g. 'damnatione mortuus est' or 'vulneribus mortuus est.' Thank you Andrew!--Jondel (disputatio) 01:50, 6 Aprilis 2014 (UTC)
Vulneribus mortuus est is ok, but damnatione mortuus est is not, for the reason stated by Andrew. Damnatus mortuus est or condemnatus mortuus est does the job. Neander (disputatio) 06:21, 6 Aprilis 2014 (UTC)
Noted and thanks Neander.--Jondel (disputatio) 07:03, 6 Aprilis 2014 (UTC)

Thank you very much Andrew, Iacobus and Lesgles! Iacobus's comment is useful, why create a problem when there is none?--Jondel (disputatio) 01:48, 6 Aprilis 2014 (UTC)

De linguarum mutationibus per tempus effectis[recensere | fontem recensere]

Duae commentationes Vicipaediae insunt quae eadem de re tractant: linguistica historica et linguistica diachronica. Uh oh! Mattie (disputatio) 19:34, 3 Aprilis 2014 (UTC)

Nisi linguistica historica sit reconstructio linguarum, linguistica diachronica mutationes linguarum? Sed consentio, melius esse ex eis unam paginam facere quae de mutatione deque reconstructione tractet. A. Mahoney (disputatio) 19:47, 3 Aprilis 2014 (UTC)
Noster Neander, in Linguistica historica, scripsit: "Quae res linguistica historica contineantur[:] . . . Linguistica diachronica, quae etiam linguistica historica strictiore sensu appellatur, ad internas systematis linguae mutationes describendas et explanandas pertinet." Ergo, linguistica diachronica videri potest una ex nonnullis linguisticae historicae partibus. IacobusAmor (disputatio) 21:17, 3 Aprilis 2014 (UTC)
Vidi, sed nescio, an re vera duabus paginis opus sit. Nulla Vicipaedia alia est, quae hoc faciat. Nihilominus non disputabo, huius rei si talis comparatio ab aliis Vicipaedianis adprobetur. :-) Mattie (disputatio) 23:45, 3 Aprilis 2014 (UTC)
Apud Francogallicos fr:Linguistique comparée de linguistica historica tractat; fr:Linguistique diachronique est pagina redirectionis ad fr:Synchronie et diachronie, quae pagina de oppositione Saussuriana tractat. Et, ut nunc video, nos tertiam paginam habemus, Methodos historico-comparativa (= en:Comparative method et fr:Linguistique contrastive, etiam aliud eiusdem rei nomen); non autem habemus pagina quae de methodo comparativa generaliter tractat (in biologia, in recensione textuum), sed haec est alia res. A. Mahoney (disputatio) 16:25, 4 Aprilis 2014 (UTC)
In structuralismo linguistico lingua intellegi solet ut systema strictum in quo omnia elementa inter se cohaerent (où tout se tient). Linguistica diachronica, quae ad structuralismum linguisticum pertinet, hoc inquirit, quomodo pro systemate linguae tamquam in axe temporali positae per mutationem aliquam (saepissime phonologicam) aliud systema eiusdem linguae substitutum sit. Itaque mutationes solas grammaticas persequitur, exclusis omnibus rebus quae extra grammaticam autonomam sunt. Linguistica historica non solum investigationem diachronicam continet sed etiam complures res ad linguam ut dynamin intellectam pertinentes respicit, quod maximi momenti sunt ad causas et rationes mutationum intellegendas. ¶ Si has duas commentationes habere non possimus, praestet linguisticam diachronicam delere, nam mediocri ne dicam exiguà rerum peritià scripta esse videtur. Neander (disputatio) 19:22, 4 Aprilis 2014 (UTC)
Veritas est in universo confessa linguisticam diachronicam, sicut Neander definit, partem esse linguisticae historicae. Multi pro certo de hoc studio libros et commentationes scripserunt, alii de illo. Mihi videtur spatium amplum exstare ut duas commentationes utiles augeamus. Ad unam rem haesito: professores mei (olim!) nomina "l. h." et "l. d." eandem significationem habere dixerunt. An alii eruditi distinctionem, quam Neander describit, iam sub talibus nominibus fecerunt? Si sic, optime. Andrew Dalby 09:08, 6 Aprilis 2014 (UTC)
Saeculum XX, aetas florentis structuralismi, nimirum voluit linguisticam historicam cum linguistica diachronica adaequare, quo factum est, ut ipsa nomina inter se commiscerentur. Sed ne sinamus unam persuasionem, quamvis praepotens fuerit, totam provinciam expugnare. Sunt historicae linguisticae partes — sicut linguistica socio-historica, pragmatica historica, contactuum investigatio — quae nullo pacto ad investigationem diachronicam accommodari queunt. Neander (disputatio) 11:25, 6 Aprilis 2014 (UTC)
Ita. Professores mei (e.g. de historia linguarum Romanicarum) non structuralistae, potius philologi erant. Cum te linguisticam historicam recognoverunt, sed id quod tu "linguisticam diachronicam", illi potius "linguisticam historicam internam" aut fortasse "grammaticam historicam" appellaverunt. De lingua Francogallica p. ex. libros mihi praescripserunt (quos hodie retineo!) Gualteri von Wartburg Evolution et structure de la langue française (historia linguae sensu latiori), Alfred Ewert The French Language (sensu strictiori), Mildred Pope From Latin to Modern French (grammatica historica strictissima ne plus ultra). An recte distinctionem tuam intellegi? Notandum est distinctionem (quamquam veram) e titulis talium librorum non videri: oportet legere, vel temptare ... Andrew Dalby 12:24, 6 Aprilis 2014 (UTC)
Distinctionem quam optime intellexti, o Andrea! Neander (disputatio) 15:28, 6 Aprilis 2014 (UTC)

Alia supervacanea?[recensere | fontem recensere]

Quattuor repperi commentationes, quae fere eandem rem tractant: tibicen, tibicina, tibia (instrumentum musicum), tibiae. Si nimias videmur commentationes habere, quae mutationes linguisticas ex variis speculis prospiciunt (vide quaestionem priorem), nonne etiam hic aliquid supervacanei haeret? Neander (disputatio) 21:17, 5 Aprilis 2014 (UTC)

Licet me reficere.--Jondel (disputatio) 01:58, 6 Aprilis 2014 (UTC)
Iam confeci quod possum facere. Quaeso, opinor tibia (instrumentum musicum) et tibiae sint separatae, tibi?--Jondel (disputatio) 03:25, 7 Aprilis 2014 (UTC)

Quaeso, non nemo magister possit delere tibicina. Infra nuntius apparet cum coner addere in wikidata. --Jondel (disputatio) 03:57, 7 Aprilis 2014 (UTC) Site link Tibicen is already used by item Q12902372. Perhaps the items should be merged and one of them deleted? Request deletion of one of the items at Wikidata:Requests for deletion, or ask at Wikidata:Interwiki conflicts if you believe that they should not be merged.

I have deleted Tibicina for you. It is usually possible to deal with Wikidata by removing the unwanted entry for an la: page, and then, afterwards, inserting the entry we want. Two steps, but very fast. If that doesn't seem to help, tell me which page you want to link where and I'll do it. Andrew Dalby 08:56, 7 Aprilis 2014 (UTC)
Labore tuo gratias tibi ago O Andrew. Let me see if I can link then redirect after.--Jondel (disputatio) 01:58, 8 Aprilis 2014 (UTC)
Uh, I am trying to add the la interwiki link here. I really appreciate help here. I will investigate this later.--Jondel (disputatio) 02:05, 8 Aprilis 2014 (UTC)
Done it. Yes, it was all mixed up. I think you need to be slightly mad to disentangle Wikidata links. easy for me therefore :) Andrew Dalby 08:47, 8 Aprilis 2014 (UTC)
Nice job thanks!--Jondel (disputatio) 10:06, 8 Aprilis 2014 (UTC)

sectile vs. sectiliatum[recensere | fontem recensere]

In pagina opus sectile lego pavimenta sectiliata. Cum locutionem pavimenta sectilia apud Suetonium et Vitruvium inveniam, testimonia vocabuli sectiliatum (et vocabuli sectiliare?) mihi plane ignota sunt. Non deerunt, ut spero, qui me reddant callidiorem. - Bavarese (disputatio) 11:20, 6 Aprilis 2014 (UTC)

In historia eius paginae summarium lego ""sectīliātum" adiectīvum commoditātis causā novātum". Editor anonymus ibi de labore suo nos certiores facit. Haud licet tale verbum fingere: rescribe igitur si potes, mi Bavarese! Andrew Dalby 12:39, 6 Aprilis 2014 (UTC)i

IRC discussion about VisualEditor in April[recensere | fontem recensere]

Salve!

As you know, the Wikimedia Foundation's engineering department holds monthly office hours to discuss VisualEditor. Please join Product Manager James Forrester to discuss the product and upcoming plans in April.

Saturday 2014-04-19, at 20:00 UTC.

The discussion will be on IRC (w:Internet Relay Chat) at irc://irc.freenode.net/wikimedia-office. For more information on office hours, including how to attend, please see m:IRC office hours. Logs will be posted at Meta afterwards.

If office hours are heavily attended, it can be difficult to get to all questions, but if you want to ask a question and cannot attend or do not speak English, then please e-mail your question to me, and someone will add it to possible discussion topics.

Also, if you are interested in learning more about VisualEditor, please sign up for the meta:VisualEditor/Newsletter. Thank you! Whatamidoing (WMF) (disputatio) 20:14, 14 Aprilis 2014 (UTC)

De qualitate minima[recensere | fontem recensere]

Videte, o amici, id quod nuper scripsi ad Disputatio Vicipaediae:Hierarchia paginarum verbaque rubricata quae in Vicipaedia:Hierarchia paginarum addidi, et opiniones date! Andrew Dalby 09:09, 15 Aprilis 2014 (UTC)

De photographo quodam[recensere | fontem recensere]

Oportet ad Disputatio:Augustus De Luca commenta addere (si vultis!) Andrew Dalby 12:18, 16 Aprilis 2014 (UTC)

Tituli operum italice scribendi?[recensere | fontem recensere]

Interdum id facimus, interdum non. Mea sententia, melius sit et in commentationum titulis operum titulos semper litteris italicis scribere. Mattie (disputatio) 19:32, 16 Aprilis 2014 (UTC)

Usque adhuc quomodo facere nescivi: gratias ago! Regulam laete accipere possum. Sed si habemus titulum verbo discretivo subiuncto, e.g. A Game of Thrones (liber), quomodo "(liber)" litteris rectis scribimus? Andrew Dalby 09:09, 17 Aprilis 2014 (UTC)
Automatice fit. Vide A Game of Thrones (liber). Lesgles (disputatio) 14:09, 17 Aprilis 2014 (UTC)
Si problema quoddam fuisset, {{DISPLAYTITLE:''A Game of Thrones'' (liber)}} etiam inserire potuisses. Mattie (disputatio) 14:50, 17 Aprilis 2014 (UTC)
Gratias ambobus! Andrew Dalby 15:39, 17 Aprilis 2014 (UTC)

"Convention" in Latin[recensere | fontem recensere]

Hello. How do we say "convention" in Latin? A convention like San Diego Comic-Con International. I have used missa, but that is another thing, but it works in some way anyway. But the Latin Wikipedia might want another word. -- Donatello (disputatio) 15:40, 18 Aprilis 2014 (UTC).

Wouldn't conventus or conventiculum work? In particular conventiculum is common for Latinist gatherings like the C. Bostoniense. A. Mahoney (disputatio) 16:39, 18 Aprilis 2014 (UTC)
I agree with Anne's suggestions, but Donatello's missa makes me think of a word that is used colloquially in France. I have to represent our commune at the annual meeting of the electricity company, alongside another councillor who has been there before. It's a big day-long meeting, and he said to me c'est une grand-messe. Andrew Dalby 17:40, 18 Aprilis 2014 (UTC)

Lacuna aut lacus maritimus?[recensere | fontem recensere]

Vos rogo, amici, ut veniatis in iudicium tituli Lacunae, utrum sit "lacuna" praeferenda an "lacus maritimi", ut Viatori placet. Forsitan quidam sententiam dicere possint.--Utilo (disputatio) 19:28, 18 Aprilis 2014 (UTC)

Taenarum[recensere | fontem recensere]

Pagina Taenarum cum sex linguis nexa est, quarum duo (Anglica, Hispanica) in aliam paginam eiusdem argumenti moventur, ubi sedecim linguae connexae sunt. Mihi optandum videtur, ut omnes coniungantur sive commentatio Latina in omnes (vel saltem maiorem partem) nectatur.--Utilo (disputatio) 16:59, 26 Aprilis 2014 (UTC)

Cum septemdecim paginis, e.g. en:Cape Matapan, nunc per Vicidata adnectavi. Nihil melius per Vicidata hoc tempore possumus, sed, si cum aliis etiam linguis adnectare vis, potes nexus ad pedem paginae nostrae manú inserere. OK? Andrew Dalby 08:47, 27 Aprilis 2014 (UTC)
Gratias tibi ago!--Utilo (disputatio) 09:23, 27 Aprilis 2014 (UTC)

Expansio[recensere | fontem recensere]

Videte VP:Expansio, o amici. Si paginas novas creare vultis et res idoneas quaeritis, fortasse in hoc indice reperietis! Andrew Dalby 17:35, 1 Maii 2014 (UTC)

Tabulam magnitudinum harum paginarum invenietis hic: Usor:Amahoney/Myrias epitome. Similis est Epitomae 1000 Paginarum. A. Mahoney (disputatio) 16:00, 6 Maii 2014 (UTC)

Lavatoium [sic][recensere | fontem recensere]

Surely the 68 instances of lavatoium should be changed to lavatorium ? Can a kind programmer figure out how to make the change automatically? Most of them are redlinks. IacobusAmor (disputatio) 23:41, 4 Maii 2014 (UTC)

Done. A. Mahoney (disputatio) 13:20, 6 Maii 2014 (UTC)

No one needs free knowledge in Esperanto[recensere | fontem recensere]

There is a current discussion on German Wikipedia on a decision of Asaf Bartov, Head of WMF Grants and Global South Partnerships, Wikimedia Foundation, who rejected a request for funding a proposal from wikipedians from eowiki one year ago with the explanation the existence, cultivation, and growth of the Esperanto Wikipedia does not advance our educational mission. No one needs free knowledge in Esperanto. On meta there has also started a discussion about that decision. --Holder (disputatio) 10:38, 5 Maii 2014 (UTC)

Interesting. I made a comment at meta (Holder's second link). Andrew Dalby 12:02, 5 Maii 2014 (UTC)
Some statistics I hadn't seen before. Work the little arrows on the column giving "views per hour", and you'll see that Latin comes 57th, at nearly 6000 views per hour. That's not bad, for what Asaf Bartov considers a "dead language". Andrew Dalby 12:10, 5 Maii 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for pointing this out, Holder: I've also weighed in at Meta, and encourage other Vicipaediani to do the same. A. Mahoney (disputatio) 18:15, 5 Maii 2014 (UTC)

Delevi ...[recensere | fontem recensere]

... paginas minimas, male constructas, haud Latine scriptas Charlie Strap and Froggy Ball, Charlie Strap and Froggy Ball Flying High, Charlie Strap, Froggy Ball and Their Friends, Pelle Svanslös (pellicula). Si alius quis magistratus me male fecisse censet, pro certo eo licet historias inspicere, paginas deprotegere et reinstituere :) Andrew Dalby 12:29, 6 Maii 2014 (UTC)

"webshop" Latine versum?[recensere | fontem recensere]

Quis mihi verbum computatralium "webshop" Latine vertit?

Fortasse taberna interretialis. Lesgles (disputatio) 18:14, 7 Maii 2014 (UTC)

Director of Photography[recensere | fontem recensere]

Salvete! Quid est Latine 'DoP', sive 'cinematographer'. Gratias vobis agam, Eisfbnore (disputatio) 16:47, 7 Maii 2014 (UTC)

Puto rectorem photographiae vel cinematographum conversiones accipiendas esse. Lesgles (disputatio) 18:10, 7 Maii 2014 (UTC)
Gratias maximas tibi ago. --Eisfbnore (disputatio) 21:33, 7 Maii 2014 (UTC)

Tech News: 2014-20[recensere | fontem recensere]

06:00, 12 Maii 2014 (UTC)

Tech News: 2014-21[recensere | fontem recensere]

07:18, 19 Maii 2014 (UTC)

emendas[recensere | fontem recensere]

Quaeso magistri me adiuvare emendum res infra et probe removare latinates. Gratias ago.--Jondel (disputatio) 08:48, 21 Maii 2014 (UTC)

Funus, I Have a Dream, ‎ Antivirus,Nosocomus,Nostra Domina Fatimae ,Petroleum ,Heo Chohui.

Ego Heo Chohui necnon Heo Gyun corrigi curabo. Andrew Dalby 09:20, 21 Maii 2014 (UTC)
Gratias tibi ago. Nam velim nos doceas cum dub vel aliqua symbolas ut possumus corrigere ipsimus, ne addet ad labores magistratum.--Jondel (disputatio) 09:26, 21 Maii 2014 (UTC)
Omnibus, neque magistratibus tantum, Vicipaeediam emendare licet!
Alii aliter, sed praefero ego, quando corrigenda video, corrigere. {{Dubsig}} igitur non utor, sed possumus in pagina disputationis de rationibus correctionum disputare! Andrew Dalby 10:36, 21 Maii 2014 (UTC)
Licet omnibus corrigere. Ego etiam video discendum. Autem nescio, et velim esse facile intellectu rem(anglice the article) et velim scire clare quod incommodum sit ponentibus latinates. --Jondel (disputatio) 12:45, 21 Maii 2014 (UTC)
Si res, quas nunc scripturus sum, non intellegis, dic mihi! Andrew Dalby 17:52, 21 Maii 2014 (UTC)

VisualEditor global newsletter—May 2014[recensere | fontem recensere]

This is a one-time mailing to projects that may need this information. Future newsletters will be available as opt-in only. To receive future newsletters (about one per month), please add your page to the subscribers' list at m:VisualEditor/Newsletter. You're welcome to translate to your language.


Since the last newsletter, the VisualEditor team has mostly worked on the new citation tool, improving performance, reducing technical debt, and other infrastructure needs.

VisualEditor-logo.svg

Did you know?

VisualEditor - Editing References - Cite Pulldown.png

The cite menu offers quick access to up to five citation templates.  If your wiki has enabled the "Cite" menu, press "Cite" and select the appropriate template from the menu.

Existing citations that use these templates can be edited either using the "Cite" tool or by selecting the reference and choosing the "Adnotatio" item in the "Insert" menu.

Read the user guide for more information.

The biggest change in the last few weeks is the new citation template menu, labeled "Cite". The new citation menu offers a locally configurable list of citation templates on the main toolbar. It adds or opens references using the simplified template dialog that was deployed last month. This tool is in addition to the "Adnotatio" item in the "Insert" menu, and it is not displayed unless it has been configured for that wiki. To enable this tool on your wiki, see the instructions at VisualEditor/Citation tool.

Eventually, the VisualEditor team plans to add autofill features for these citations. When this long-awaited feature is created, you could add an ISBN, URL, DOI or other identifier to the citation tool, and VisualEditor would automatically fill in as much information for that source as possible. The concept drawings can be seen at mw:VisualEditor/Design/Reference Dialog, and your ideas about making referencing quick and easy are still wanted.

  • There is a new Beta Feature for setting content language and direction.  This allows editors who have opted in to use the "Language" tool in the "Insert" menu to add HTML span tags that label text with the language and as being left-to-right (LTR) or right-to-left (RTL), like this:  <span lang="en" dir="ltr">English</span>. This tool is most useful for pages whose text combines multiple languages with different directions, common on Right-to-Left wikis.
  • The tool for editing mathematics formulae in VisualEditor has been slightly updated and is now available to all users, as the "Formula" item in the "Insert" menu. It uses LaTeX like in the wikitext editor.
  • The layout of template dialogs has been changed, putting the label above the field.  Parameters are now called "fields", to avoid a technical term that many editors are unfamiliar with.
  • TemplateData has been expanded:  You can now add "suggested" parameters in TemplateData, and VisualEditor will display them in the template dialogs like required ones.  "Suggested" is recommended for parameters that are commonly used, but not actually required to make the template work.  There is also a new type for TemplateData parameters: wiki-file-name, for file names.  The template tool can now tell you if a parameter is marked as being obsolete.
  • Some templates that previously displayed strangely due to absolute CSS positioning hacks should now display correctly.
  • Several messages have changed: The notices shown when you save a page have been merged into those used in the wikitext editor, for consistency.  The message shown when you "Abrogare" out of an edit is clearer. The beta dialog notice, which is shown the first time you open VisualEditor, will be hidden for logged-in users via a user preference rather than a cookie.  As a result of this change, the beta notice will show up one last time for all logged-in users on their next VisualEditor use after Thursday's upgrade.
  • Adding a category that is a redirect to another category prompts you to add the target category instead of the redirect.
  • In the "Fasciculus" dialog, it is no longer possible to set a redundant border for thumbnail and framed images.
  • There is a new Template Documentation Editor for TemplateData.  You can test it by editing a documentation subpage (not a template page) at Mediawiki.org: edit mw:Template:Sandbox/doc, and then click "Manage template documentation" above the wikitext edit box.  If your community would like to use this TemplateData editor at your project, please contact product manager James Forrester or file an enhancement request in Bugzilla.
  • There have been multiple small changes to the appearance:  External links are shown in the same light blue color as in MediaWiki.  This is a lighter shade of blue than the internal links.  The styling of the "Style text" (character formatting) drop-down menu has been synchronized with the recent font changes to the Vector skin.  VisualEditor dialogs, such as the "Save page" dialog, now use a "loading" animation of moving lines, rather than animated GIF images.  Other changes were made to the appearance upon opening a page in VisualEditor which should make the transition between reading and editing be smoother.
  • The developers merged in many minor fixes and improvements to MediaWiki interface integration (e.g., edit notices), and made VisualEditor handle Education Program pages better.
  • At the request of the community, VisualEditor has been deployed to Commons as an opt-in. It is currently available by default for 161 Wikipedia language editions and by opt-in through Beta Features at all others, as well as on several non-Wikipedia sites.

Looking ahead:  The toolbar from the PageTriage extension will no longer be visible inside VisualEditor. More buttons and icons will be accessible from the keyboard.  The "Keyboard shortcuts" link will be moved out of the "Page options" menu, into the "Help" menu. Support for upright image sizes (preferred for accessibility) and inline images is being developed. You will be able to see the Table of Contents while editing. Looking further out, the developers are also working on support for viewing and editing hidden HTML comments. VisualEditor will be available to all users on mobile devices and tablet computers. It will be possible to upload images to Commons from inside VisualEditor.

If you have questions or suggestions for future improvements, or if you encounter problems, please let everyone know by posting a note at mw:VisualEditor/Feedback or by joining the office hours on Thursday, 19 June 2014 at 10:00 UTC. If you'd like to get this newsletter on your own page (about once a month), please subscribe at w:en:Wikipedia:VisualEditor/Newsletter for English Wikipedia only or at Meta for any project. Thank you! --Elitre (WMF) (talk) 17:39, 22 Maii 2014 (UTC)

{{Capsa pelliculae}}[recensere | fontem recensere]

Anyone who is good at infoboxes, please see my note at Disputatio Usoris:68.42.60.10. That template is irritating (a) because some of the Latin could be improved, but (b) because the parameters are compulsory and on many pages they are not filled in. If anyone has time and ability to make most of the parameters optional, that would already be much better! I would try myself but I never seem to get it right :) Andrew Dalby 09:26, 23 Maii 2014 (UTC)

Media Viewer[recensere | fontem recensere]

Greetings, my apologies for writing in English.

I wanted to let you know that Media Viewer will be released to this wiki in the coming weeks. Media Viewer allows readers of Wikimedia projects to have an enhanced view of files without having to visit the file page, but with more detail than a thumbnail. You can try Media Viewer out now by turning it on in your Beta Features. If you do not enjoy Media Viewer or if it interferes with your work after it is turned on you will be able to disable Media Viewer as well in your preferences. I invite you to share what you think about Media Viewer and how it can be made better in the future.

Thank you for your time. - Keegan (WMF) 21:29, 23 Maii 2014 (UTC)

--This message was sent using MassMessage. Was there an error? Report it!

Optimus nominum Coreanorum ordo?[recensere | fontem recensere]

Quid est optimum: Seung-Moo Ha vel Ha Seung-Moo? (Similiter nomina Hungariana.) Vide hodiernum usoris Sawol opus. IacobusAmor (disputatio) 14:39, 24 Maii 2014 (UTC)

Nulla exstat ratio, nisi fallor, cur Vicipaediae nomina hominum retrovertent. Oportet nomen ordinare eo modo quo ipse ordinat. An alii consentiunt? Andrew Dalby 15:21, 24 Maii 2014 (UTC)
Unless Vicipaedia uses a standard order, necessary variations in Samoan (and some other Polynesian) names could be confusing. Consider two hypothetical people, using English names for clarity: John Doe is John, a nonchief, son of Chief Doe (so the title Doe is functioning rather like a patronymic); Doe John is Doe, a chief, whose personal name (no longer used alone in public) is John. It's quite possible that Doe John, in his youth, used to be John Doe. The order matters! IacobusAmor (disputatio) 15:57, 24 Maii 2014 (UTC)
I don't know about Samoa, but in general I think it makes sense to follow the other western European languages, i.e. to keep the original order for East Asian names (Kim Jong-un, Xi Jinping), but reverse the original order for Hungarian names (Ioannes Áder, not Áder Ioannes). Lesgles (disputatio) 16:22, 24 Maii 2014 (UTC)
I guess it's true that Hungarian names look odd if the Ioannes comes after the Áder. Now I think about it, I suspect that Hungarians writing in Latin did reverse their names, which would be a suitable precedent for us.
I don't know about Samoa either, but in that case the best way not to be confused is, perhaps, not to change anything [re-reading Iacobus's comment, even this might not end the confusion, but what would?]. Similarly with east Asia, best to leave the names as they are. Andrew Dalby 16:40, 24 Maii 2014 (UTC)
Hoc in Vicipaedia Hungarica inveni:
A magyarok és a japánok külföldön általában megfordítják és a nemzetközi sorrendben használják a nevüket, például János Szabó és Haruki Murakami. A kínaiak, koreaiak és vietnamiak ezzel szemben külföldön is megtartják a keleti sorrendet, a fenti példánkban szereplő két kínai név tehát például angolul is Wang Zhe és Zhang Yimou marad. Azonban a kínai tudósoknál megfigyelhető, hogy nemzetközi publikációban felcserélik nevüket (a példánál maradva: Yimou ZHANG), ekkor viszont a családnevet általában nagybetűkkel szedik a többnyire angol nyelvű könyvekben, folyóiratokban. (Lásd az utalást lentebb). A koreai neveknél azonban a nyugati sorrend is előfordul (Chan-ho Park).
Hungari Iaponesque in terra peregrina generatim nomina sua secundum ordinem internationalem invertunt, ut János Szabó et Haruki Murakami. Sinenses, Coreani, Vietnami vero huic consuetudini contrarii etiam terra peregrina nomina conservant, sicut nomina supradicta (Wang Zhe, Zhang Yimou) genuino ordine manebunt. Ast apud doctores Sinenses considerandum est, nomina sua publicationibus internationalibus esse conversa (ad exemplum manens: Yimou ZHANG), hoc autem facto nomen familiare maiusculis litteris in libris ephemeridibusque Anglicis scriptum est. Sine maiusculis et apud Coreanos nomen ordine occidentali quoque accidere potest. (Chan-ho Park). --Martinus Vester (disputatio) 20:15, 27 Maii 2014 (UTC)
Gratias tibi ago ob commentum perutilem. Andrew Dalby 17:02, 28 Maii 2014 (UTC)
All three Koreans I personally know (1) put the surname last and (2) capitalize the second element of the hyphenated forename. Granted: it's a small sample, but one sees in print numerous other Koreans following the same conventions. IacobusAmor (disputatio) 17:34, 28 Maii 2014 (UTC)
Id pro certo nonnulli facere solent, tam Sinenses quam Coreani (sed Sinensium fortasse pauciores). Andrew Dalby 20:24, 28 Maii 2014 (UTC)

Tech News: 2014-22[recensere | fontem recensere]

08:29, 26 Maii 2014 (UTC)

Tech News: 2014-23[recensere | fontem recensere]

08:07, 2 Iunii 2014 (UTC)

Malcolmus sive Milcolumbus[recensere | fontem recensere]

Num quis praenomine Milcolumbo devotus est? Nam cogito omnes Milcolombos ad Malcolmos movere, quia haec forma crebrius in libris Google apparuit, atque est forma ab Hofmanno praeposita. Lesgles (disputatio) 13:00, 2 Iunii 2014 (UTC)

de quibusdam in pagina prima mutandis[recensere | fontem recensere]

Nonne gratum erit, si in pagina prima

  • pro "Pagina mensis" – pagina mensualis,
  • pro "Imagine mensis" – imago mensualis legetur?

Quid enim pagina mensis docebit,
quid enim imago mensis monstrabit nisi mensem ipsum (utut potuerit)?

Item, si invenietur

  • pro "Paginae mensis priores" – ad priores paginas mensuales inspiciendas
  • pro "Nova addere" – ad novos nuntios addendos,
  • pro "Suadere novas imagines" – ad novas imagines proponendas,
  • pro "Suadere novas quaestiones" – ad novas nugas depromendas,
  • pro "Sono mensis" vero – nullus? :-)

Quae omnia vobis benigne disceptanda propono. Feliciter! --Laurentianus (disputatio) 22:55, 5 Iunii 2014 (UTC)

Nemine contradicente, mutationes ab Laurentiano suasas perfecturus sum. Andrew Dalby 08:31, 7 Iunii 2014 (UTC)
Mutavi (et "sonum mensis" haud dissimiliter). Si mutatio alicui displicet, disputare licet! Andrew Dalby 18:06, 7 Iunii 2014 (UTC)
Non omnino con mutatione "paginae mensis" consentio. Nam casus genetivus plures signficationes habere potest. Cf. "statua Myronis", quae secundum Gildersleeve, significare potest "1. A statue which Myron owns; 2. Which Myron has made; 3. Which represents Myron". Secundo, "mensualis" non est verbum classicum. Lesgles (disputatio) 19:30, 7 Iunii 2014 (UTC)
Salvus sis, Legles! Certe non est una tantum genetivi vis. Utique illa pagina non erit mensis alicuius, sed pagina huius mensis appellanda, id est mensis currentis.
Adiectivum vero mensualis licet non aevi classici sit, quod quidem in fragmentis gromaticorum veterum exstare dicitur, millies mihi adiectivo classico menstrualis praeferendum videtur. --Laurentianus (disputatio) 01:30, 8 Iunii 2014 (UTC)

Persalutatio[recensere | fontem recensere]

Plurimam salutem vobis dico! Renideo hic percipiens concelebrata studia, et tot viri eruditi Latine lepide scribentes! Ex Latinitate (id quod mihi maxime libet) et ex aliis linguis, quae communem originem ab Latinitate ducunt, voluptatem capio. Linguae Graecae hodiernae antea scientiam habuit, quamquam iam ex memoria permultum deposui. In desiderio fraternitatis sum, et novas amicitias contrahere cupio. Scilicet, cum alia multa tum hoc velim: emendare Latinitatem meam (vel dicam, Lingua latina a vobis denuo discere. Quippe qui ad vobis nihil sciam!). Valete!

Salve et tu, usor ignote! Suademus ut rationem usoris creas - vide s.t.p. Vicipaedia:Invitatio! Ut valeas optime! --UV (disputatio) 16:16, 7 Iunii 2014 (UTC)

Heu! Ecce, nescio quo modo hoc facere, quia haud sane hoc intellego. Ignarus sum. Nihilo setius, antequam hoc nuntium scripsissem, rationem usoris "cubano" procudi. Nihil mihi occurrit, cur me scribente hoc non apparet. Quamobrem ita usuvenit? Grates tibi dico, hospitale UV!

Litteris aut hic aut in paginis disputationis scriptis, necesse est in finem ~~~~ scribere. Systema nostrum haec quattuor signa in signaturam et horam convertit. Andrew Dalby 08:43, 8 Iunii 2014 (UTC)
Salve, Cubano! In pagina Specialis:Conventum aperire conventum aperire potes (inscribe et nomen usoris tuum Cubano et tesseram tuam, tunc imprime "Log in"). Vale! --UV (disputatio) 19:52, 8 Iunii 2014 (UTC)

"Secretary of the U.S. Treasury"[recensere | fontem recensere]

USDeptOfTreasurySeal-1862Bill (Higher Resolution).jpg

Re: "delevit paginam Categoria:Secretarius Thesauri Civitatum Foederatarum (error nominis)." Fortasse mendum duplex! Primum, nomen categoricum, ut secretariis accommodaret, plurale esse debuit (Secretarii. . . .), sed item, usque ad 1968, sigillum maiorem iactum suum vindicabat (Thesaurus Americae Septentrionalis Sigillum). ;) IacobusAmor (disputatio) 16:42, 7 Iunii 2014 (UTC)

Solus huius categoriae particeps fuit Rogerius Brooke Taney. Si plures "candidatos" habemus, utile erit categoriam sub meliori nomine recreare. Andrew Dalby 17:47, 7 Iunii 2014 (UTC)

Tech News: 2014-24[recensere | fontem recensere]

07:39, 9 Iunii 2014 (UTC)

Categoriam movere[recensere | fontem recensere]

Aliqui praefecturae Indis nomen emendavit, ergo etiam Categoriam Communia Praefecturae Adduae movere debemus, auxilium peto--Helveticus montanus (disputatio) 13:43, 9 Iunii 2014 (UTC)

Recte dicis, mi Helvetice. Mutationem postulavi. Andrew Dalby 17:21, 10 Iunii 2014 (UTC)

lemma duplex[recensere | fontem recensere]

Etsi lemma Coniunctio dudum exstabat, per errorem novum lemma creavi Coniunctio (grammatica). In quo redigendo ex 'Arte minore' Aelii Donati hausi, non aliter ac Sanctus Isidorus, ex quo prius lemma transsumptum est. Rem igitur dupliciter nunc dari liquet. Parcite quaeso errori meo et inspicite oro utrumque lemma, quodnam retinendum ducatis. --Laurentianus (disputatio) 10:28, 10 Iunii 2014 (UTC)

Ne tibi paeniteat -- talia enim saepe accidunt -- sed tu nunc curare potebis omne, quod utile sit, in unam commentationem congessum esse :) Quo facto, alteram commentationem in redirectionem convertere licet (aut tibi, aut, si id facere nescis, alio). OK? Andrew Dalby 11:23, 11 Iunii 2014 (UTC)
Gratias tibi habeo, Andrea, maximas et pro consolatione et pro consilio dato. Libet ita facere. --Laurentianus (disputatio) 11:41, 11 Iunii 2014 (UTC)

Iterum de pagina mobili[recensere | fontem recensere]

Salvete Vicipaediani,

Iterum miratus sum quare mihi telephono mobili utenti tamen plena editio inceptus nostri indicetur. Quaeso hunc errorem corrigi nisi consulto vel quadam ratione hoc acciderit. Gratias ago! --Autokrator (disputatio) 20:14, 10 Iunii 2014 (UTC)

Tech News: 2014-25[recensere | fontem recensere]

07:13, 16 Iunii 2014 (UTC)

De magistratibus Romanis Vicipaedianis[recensere | fontem recensere]

Ite, o amici, ad VP:PM si vobis novum magistratum recipere placet! Andrew Dalby 15:28, 23 Iunii 2014 (UTC)

Achaea → Achaia[recensere | fontem recensere]

If there are still no objections, could an admin move Achaea to Achaia, which is the classical spelling? I think I've cleared up all of the other pages. Lesgles (disputatio) 19:53, 16 Iunii 2014 (UTC)

Factum est. Neander (disputatio) 20:40, 16 Iunii 2014 (UTC)
Gratias tibi ago! Lesgles (disputatio) 20:43, 16 Iunii 2014 (UTC)
An admin? Can't anybody who has a userpage move articles? IacobusAmor (disputatio) 21:06, 16 Iunii 2014 (UTC)
There was already a redirect at Achaia, which Neander had to delete first. Lesgles (disputatio) 00:31, 17 Iunii 2014 (UTC)

Media Viewer is now live on this wiki[recensere | fontem recensere]


Media Viewer lets you see images in larger size

Greetings— and sorry for writing in English, please translate if it will help your community,

The Wikimedia Foundation's Multimedia team is happy to announce that Media Viewer was just released on this site today.

Media Viewer displays images in larger size when you click on their thumbnails, to provide a better viewing experience. Users can now view images faster and more clearly, without having to jump to separate pages — and its user interface is more intuitive, offering easy access to full-resolution images and information, with links to the file repository for editing. The tool has been tested extensively across all Wikimedia wikis over the past six months as a Beta Feature and has been released to the largest Wikipedias, all language Wikisources, and the English Wikivoyage already.

If you do not like this feature, you can easily turn it off by clicking on "Disable Media Viewer" at the bottom of the screen, pulling up the information panel (or in your your preferences) whether you have an account or not. Learn more in this Media Viewer Help page.

Please let us know if you have any questions or comments about Media Viewer. You are invited to share your feedback in this discussion on MediaWiki.org in any language, to help improve this feature. You are also welcome to take this quick survey in English, en français, o español.

We hope you enjoy Media Viewer. Many thanks to all the community members who helped make it possible. - Fabrice Florin (WMF) (talk) 21:54, 19 Iunii 2014 (UTC)

--This message was sent using MassMessage. Was there an error? Report it!

Orthographia[recensere | fontem recensere]

What is correct spelling of Latin words? by this I mean what are the rules of assimilation? because I saw that we have for an example obsideo and opsideo, one is spelled morphologically other phonologically. Are there similar cases and which is correct or at least considered more correct. This is sore interesting, for there are no examples of dual spellings in for example supscripsi or subscribsi, or nubta form nubo but only nupta. This is also seen in words like adpropero and appropero or similar words. So basically what I ask is if there are some principle or rule by someone or somewho that would decide or byput which spelling is more correct for upnow use in modern classical Latin. Sorry for writting in English.

In my opinion, both modes of spelling are correct. Dictionaries may have their own home made principles of uniformity, but in philological editions of classical authors, variation prevails, though assimilated prefixes (such as appetere, attendere, colligere, componere, corrumpere, irruere, supponere, surripere) tend to be generally more frequent than morphophonemic, unassimilated spellings, except for the type adferre that seems to prevail over afferre. Notice that I am speaking of prefixes here. Etymological (morphophonemic) spellings such as nubsit or scribsit must be considered incorrect (or hypercorrect), though they sometimes do occur in Latin inscriptions. Neander (disputatio) 20:11, 22 Iunii 2014 (UTC)

Tech News: 2014-26[recensere | fontem recensere]

07:20, 23 Iunii 2014 (UTC)

Antlia (mechanica)[recensere | fontem recensere]

Quaeso, nonnullus mihi adiuvare possit cum hac re? Iam respondivi de erroribus. Gratias tibi ago. --Jondel (disputatio) 09:39, 25 Iunii 2014 (UTC)

Wikimania 2014[recensere | fontem recensere]

E pagina usoris mea rescribo:

Salve Andrew, I wonder if there would be any chance of bringing UK Latin editors together at Wikimania? We have lots of tables and spaces over the three days, we can even create a specail banner for you, and it could be fun? If you are interested get in touch with me jon.davies@wikimedia.org.uk Jon Davies (WMUK) (disputatio) 14:31, 25 Iunii 2014 (UTC)

I believe there are two in the UK who are occasionally active, and just a few formerly active :) In total, that's not many! Beyond the UK, well, I'm in France, and there are several others, very active, in Europe. I'll put this on the Vicipaedia:Taberna to see if anyone is interested in making the trip to London (8-10 August)! Andrew Dalby 15:14, 25 Iunii 2014 (UTC)
Equidem libentissime interessem, Andrea, pro tempore autem non licebit. Gratias utique maximas, quia nos certiores fecisti de hoc conventu! Laurentianus (disputatio) 23:16, 25 Iunii 2014 (UTC)
Fortasse melius erit omnes Vicipaedianos anno 2015 iuxta Temistitlanam convocare?? (Wikimania 2015 Mexico City) Andrew Dalby 17:39, 1 Iulii 2014 (UTC)

Grapheocrates[recensere | fontem recensere]

Salvete omnes!

Now that we are in the process of electing new magistrates, perhaps it is time that we also find a new Grapheocrates? We have the only one, but perhaps it is useful to have another who may be more active. This has been an issue for some time (vid. Disputatio_Vicipaediae:Petitio_magistratus), so perhaps we should reconsider it once again and take further action.--Xaverius 19:16, 26 Iunii 2014 (UTC)

Not a bad idea; do you have any candidates in mind? A. Mahoney (disputatio) 17:07, 1 Iulii 2014 (UTC)

Tech News: 2014-27[recensere | fontem recensere]

06:53, 30 Iunii 2014 (UTC)

Tech News: 2014-28[recensere | fontem recensere]

07:07, 7 Iulii 2014 (UTC)

nuper mutata[recensere | fontem recensere]

Could we change the word ameliorarique in the nuper mutata to corrigere. ameliorari seems to be new latin. Thank you.--Jondel (disputatio) 01:45, 10 Iulii 2014 (UTC)

Etiam deterioriari possunt, quod peius est. Praeterea neolatinum malo quam malum Latinum vel nullum. Sunt autem plurima in ipsa programmatura (si ita vultis) retractatione digna. Nonne certum locum designemus, quo omnia sive amelioranda sive corrigenda colligamus? Laurentianus (disputatio) 08:25, 10 Iulii 2014 (UTC)
Fors difficile est collectu. Gradatim autem et paulatim possumus corrigere.--Jondel (disputatio) 09:47, 10 Iulii 2014 (UTC)

ad imaginem mensualem ad Iulium pertinentem[recensere | fontem recensere]

Cur fructus istius plantae mense Iulio crescEnt? Eo tempore nonne et crescunt et creverunt? - Bavarese (disputatio) 10:22, 10 Iulii 2014 (UTC)

Rectificavi orthographiam -- gratias tibi ago! A. Mahoney (disputatio) 11:53, 10 Iulii 2014 (UTC)

Tech News: 2014-29[recensere | fontem recensere]

07:48, 14 Iulii 2014 (UTC)

Ubi poema novum lingua Latina scriptum divolgandum?[recensere | fontem recensere]

Amici, consilium peto! Lingua Latina poema scripsi mea sententia permagnificum; quippe in usum deliciumque hominum divolgandum. Sed ubi id publici iuris faciendum mihi est? Suntne acta diurna poematis Neolatinis aptissima, acta dico quae legitis quaeque sint mihi legenda? Adiuvate, docti! Jackgmitchell (disputatio) 03:00, 18 Iulii 2014 (UTC)

Periodicum cuius nomen est Classical Outlook carmina Latina interdum edidit; vide apud societatem ACL [ http://www.aclclassics.org]. A. Mahoney (disputatio) 16:12, 18 Iulii 2014 (UTC)
Does Vicipaedia have a rule against posting such texts on one's own user page here? IacobusAmor (disputatio) 16:28, 18 Iulii 2014 (UTC)

Tech News: 2014-30[recensere | fontem recensere]

07:42, 21 Iulii 2014 (UTC)