Disputatio:Index praenominum

E Vicipaedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Disputatio deletionis[fontem recensere]

as this list does not contain more links than Categoria:Nomina,
it adds no value. --UV 21:33, 22 Maii 2006 (UTC)
I think, we should keep such pages, since we can add red links for
wanted articles, which do not have a page yet. --Roland2 11:29, 25 Maii 2006 (UTC)
Consentio Rolando, nexus rubri possint utiles.--Ioshus Rocchio 03:15, 11 Iunii 2006 (UTC)

In response to UV: I think this page should contain first names. I just gave examples for the names where we do not have a page yet. --Roland2 16:43, 11 Iunii 2006 (UTC)

movenda?[fontem recensere]

movenda ad Index nominum propriorum (sine verbo articulus)? --UV 21:26, 18 Novembris 2006 (UTC)

Nominum?[fontem recensere]

I moved it, but Index nominum would be better, wouldn't it? --Rolandus 18:33, 19 Novembris 2006 (UTC)

I also think so: nomen, nominis, nomini, nomen, nomine - nomina, nominum, nominibus, nomina, nominibus --Alex1011 08:07, 20 Novembris 2006 (UTC)

Actually these are praenomina, aren't they? Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 19:21, 5 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)

Incidentally, Abdul is not a whole forename. Abd al-Rahman or Abdul Rahman is a phrase that can't logically be divided. Just being pedantic ...
Where there are legitimate alternatives in modern Latin, like Eduardus and Edwardus, or Galfridus and Goffredus, is the aim to create one article or two? Once I know this I can add items to the list myself! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 19:30, 5 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)
This Abdul is from me. I included it more or less mechanically to start this list: "Abdul Rahman" is in "homines", so Abdul might be a first name ... ok, wrong in this case. ;-)
I think - for technical reasons - this page should be a list of elements like ...
  • Carolus ... pages we have
  • Edwardus ... pages we do not have, but where the name is likely a first name in Latin
  • GerhardGerardus ... common first names from other langugages
  • Tim ... non Latin name where we do not have a translation yet
  • Abdul[1] ... a name (?) which looks strange, so a reference is added
  • Christopherus ... maybe just a variant of Christophorus, might become a #REDIRECT
Concerning the question whether we should have one or two articles for Galfridus and Goffredus: I think, this is more a question of comfort. And in the long run (20 years later) we will know if one or two pages have proven to be better. ;-) Let's simply start and we will see. --Rolandus 16:55, 6 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)

Suggestions[fontem recensere]

  • When we have a page (or redirect) for an entry, all information should be moved to the target page.
  • In the long run this should be just a list of pages (and redirects).
  • Redirects might be written in "italic" but this is not really necessary.
  • Entries which are not Latin should get an asterisk.
  • Every entry should be linked.
  • Red links can have information which makes it clearer what page is to be created.
  • This page shall be just a list of pages/redirects, the information about the entries should be maintained (only) on the target pages.
  • The main reason of this page is to help in creating all the name pages (and redirects) we want to have.
  • Where we do not want to have a page, we should have a redirect, at least.

--Rolandus 17:59, 11 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)

Movendum?[fontem recensere]

As I said above, this is actually a list of "praenomina". Nomen has several meanings in Latin, as we can partly see from the articles Nomen and Nomen (grammatica). Praenomen has just one meaning, and this is it! (French prénom, English forename or Christian name). It seems to me quite wrong to call these "nomina". I propose moving this to Index praenominum. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 14:20, 16 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)

To forename and Christian name I should have added the American English synonym given name! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 14:25, 16 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)
Actually, in colloquial speach the most common Americanism is "first name." Which of course raises the question of Cano Zigoro and Hu Jintao again: what the heck do we call a praenomen that does not come first? I mean, praenomen clearly is the mot juste for this list, but what do we do about that? --Iustinus 16:32, 16 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)

Christopherus, Dwight[fontem recensere]

Andrew removed Christopherus as a barbarism. That it is, but it is definitely attestested, unlike many of the other barbarisms on our list ;) As for Dwight, I am now obligated to bring in the Conventiculum: one prominant regular at Lexington is named Dwight Castro. But because there is, to our knowledge, no Latin form of that name, he prefers to go by his middle name, Albert(us). --Iustinus 16:35, 16 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)

Sorry about Christopherus. If it is attested, yes, it must go back in the list. We are all barbarians now.
Yes, I wondered about Dwight. There are many other examples, from the 19th century onwards, of historic surnames (nomina or cognomina?!) being used as first names. I guess that's the case with Dwight (also Winston, Harvey, and any number of other examples). I take it we don't try to Latinize these unless there is a precedent to cite. Perhaps similarly with the playful names and spellings popular in certain parts of the English-speaking world. This Index is set to grow exponentially ... Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 17:20, 16 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)
Yes, well, I believe Rolandus intends, for the time being, to catalogue everything, and then organize it later. Certainly this list will be unmanageable if every attested variant of every attested name is listed, so sooner or later, Roland will have (I presume) to move some of the variants to the articles on the names themselves.
XXX) see below
And you are right about the origin of the name "Dwight", so far as I can tell. Our best bet for finding a precident, I think, would be the works of Dwight Robinson, a turn of the century Oxonian. He wrote at least two volumes of plays in Latin, as well as his dissertation. It is a sad fact of the worldcat that for some reason only (I estimate) one in a thousand Latin dissertations listed in library catalogs give the Latin name of their author, even though the majority of other Latin books do. This is very frustrating. On those few occasions where I've been able to track down the text of such a dissertation, the author has almost always Latinized his name, so I don't know where this convention of dropping it from the listing comes from. --Iustinus 18:38, 16 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)
Apparently his published volumes give his name in English. Here's one of them, from the Library of Congress
LC Control No.: 21020299
Type of Material: Book (Print, Microform, Electronic, etc.)
Personal Name: Robinson, Dwight Nelson.
Main Title: Plays and songs for Latin clubs, by Dwight Nelson Robinson.
Published/Created: [Delaware, O., Independent print shop] c1921.
Description: 31 p. 23 cm.
Contents: Christus parvulus; a Christmas morality play.--Christus triumphator; an Easter morality play.--Pyramus et Thisbe.--:::::Horatius implicitus.--Joy to the world.--There’s a song in the air.--Hark! the herald angels sing.--Silent night.
Notes: "This collection of plays and songs is a result of the activities of the Latin club of Ohio Wesleyan university."
Subjects: Latin language--Study and teaching--Activity programs.
Drama in education.
Music in education.
LC Classification: PA2109 .R65
Language Code: englat
Other System No.: (OCoLC)5656142
Oh, well. IacobusAmor 15:14, 20 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)
I know why (I think). For their headings, librarians choose names that are likely to remain valid, and preferably that have some official force. Even in the 19th century people weren't baptised under Latin names, and weren't likely to go on publishing in Latin all their lives. The librarians therefore preferred the "real" names of dissertation candidates. What's more, dissertations are a bore to catalogue and are seldom consulted. Therefore, they did the job as quickly as possible and didn't bother to copy out the alternative form of name given on the title page: they knew it was unlikely to help in a real search. Sadly, Iustine, they did not predict your existence! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 13:14, 17 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)

XXX: We have not talked about this, so I can just guess. I guess ...

  • We should have an article about each name where we have an article about a person with this name.
  • Moreover we want to have articles about names where we do not have articles about people with this name.
  • We should - normally - not have articles for variants of names.
  • Variants should be redirects to the main form of a name.
  • Each redirect - given it is a correct variant - should be mentioned in the article.
  • We should have articles about names we do not want to be latinized. This should be stated there.
  • It is no problem to have a lot of foreign names which redirect to their latin form (given that the foreign name is mentioned there).

So I thought, we should expand this list of names:

  • This list needs not to be complete, it's just a mean to create the articles.
  • When all red links in this list have been cleaned up, we should concentrate on the articles.
  • Then the list is just for convenience or might be even deleted.
  • A list does not have an extra value when it is just an alphabetical listing of existing articles or redirects in a specific category.

We could put a template into the to be created articles like:

"This page is about a personal name. It is under construction and might even contain wrong information. You can help:

  • Please provide sources for attested usages of this name.
  • Make a note when it is likely that there is no latin translation of this name.
  • Convert this page into a redirect, when it is just a variant of a name (please add this variant to the target page)
  • List pages of people who have this name.
  • Provide interwiki links.
  • Remove the template then."

--Rolandus 22:40, 16 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)

Now that sounds like a good plan! Here's a Latin draft for others to work on:
  • Haec pagina de praenomine, nondum perfecta, fortasse continet errores. Si tibi placet, corrige hoc modo:>
    • Indica fontes Latinas ad orthographiam huius nominis corroborendam vel corrigendam.
fons is masculine.
    • Indica si credis nullam versionem Latinam exstare huius praenominis.
I wonder if this option is really that important, given that Latin forms often exist in surprising places. Cases like "Dwight" are indeed an issue, but given that it's difficult to prove a negative, we might get a lot of false positives on this test.
    • Si exstat pagina de hoc praenomine aliter scripto, verte hanc paginam in redirectionem.
I would say hanc aut illam or some variant thereof, since either page could be the "main" version of the name. Also, I have been looking for ages for a more classical way to say "redirect," since something similar must have existed.
    • Si exstant paginae de hominibus aut feminis huius praenominis, adde nexus.
viris aut mulieribus! Or, perhaps given todays penchant for epicene names, perhaps viris feminisve ;)
    • Adde nexus interwiki si possis.
    • Cum paginam perfeceris, dele hanc formulam.
I wonder if it's wise to just delete at that point, given that fully doing this might require the work of more than one person, and it will be hard to tell when it is done. Perhaps a different template could be used to indicate that the article has been vetted at least once, or something like that?

Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 13:14, 17 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)

Adding my notes, in blue. --Iustinus 18:15, 17 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)
Gratias tibi ago, Iustine! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 10:25, 18 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)
How shall this template be called? Formula:Praenomen in dubio ? --Rolandus 19:20, 19 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)
Hmm, well given what I said above, I wonder if there should be more than one version of this too: perhaps a template that's just {{praenomen}} for names that are thoroughly vetted, and maybe an intermediate one too. --Iustinus 20:04, 19 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)
I agree and this conforms with Ioshus' suggestion of having a template for "attested" names (of people, places etc.). Maybe we will have to find out how to do that in detail, but it would be a good idea to rate or articles in several aspects, see e. g. Vicipaedia:Aestimatio (this page is just a start). A pair of templates for the good and the bad articles about names would be a special case of that concept. --Rolandus 20:37, 19 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)
How shall these templates be called? --Rolandus 21:18, 22 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)

Templates[fontem recensere]

... from above: We need 3 of them, I think ...

  1. one for a name page in question
  2. one for a name page which is ok
  3. one for a name which occurs in a page and is in question, maybe like {{fontes carentes}}, but more specific.

--Rolandus 14:31, 28 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)

Vernacular names[fontem recensere]

Something else occurs to me: once we have this all taken care of, with god articles for all these Latin names, what do we do about vernacular names that have more than one Latin equivalent? For instance, it is legitimate to translate Luigi as either Ludovicus or Aloisius (cf. Index fontium Latinorum de Iaponia, where Mr. Frois is listed as the author of two books, but used both Latin names!). So then do we need to have an article Luigi explaining this? Or is there a better way to do that? Of course, ideally, I'd eventually like to have lists of equivalents by language, to make these things easier to look up. --Iustinus 00:44, 18 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)

Maybe a discretiva page for Luigi will work. Or Luigi shall get his own page, since the Italian page it:Luigi should also have an interwiki link to the Latin Wikipedia. --Rolandus 20:08, 21 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)

More on name pages[fontem recensere]

Another thing: when a name page uses an ancient name, we shoudl be sure to add all the relevant historical persons, red or not, from antiquity. Ideally from later times too, though that becomes exponentially harder with some names. --Iustinus 20:32, 22 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)

For article titles starting with a given name, that is quite easy: Specialis:Prefixindex or Specialis:Prefixindex/Stephanus. --UV 21:08, 22 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)
At least as far as blue links are concerned. --Iustinus 00:28, 23 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)

Names from auctores neolatini[fontem recensere]

I have a added some names to the list, mostly from auctores neolatini where they are in use or from pages we already have. So index nominum is not a list of correct names but it also has names which should be cleaned up. There are several entries in this list:

  • correct Latin names
  • correct non-Latin names (mostly marked with an asterisk and mostly a redirect to a page with the corresponding Latin name)
  • redirects (mostly in italic style)
  • not correct entries

I hope this list is helpful for cleaning up. --Rolandus 15:22, 14 Iulii 2007 (UTC)

think this ought to be Vicipaedia:Index nominum?[fontem recensere]

? --Ioscius (disp) 04:12, 2 Augusti 2007 (UTC)

Harrison Ford etc.[fontem recensere]

Does anybody know how to translate the name Harrison? Some things from the internet:

  • Harrison (as a surname) = Filius Henrici or Harrisonus (but I don't like the latter)
  • It has the same meaning as Harry (Harrius)
  • They both relate to Henricus
  • Our page for the year 1989 says Harrisonus Ford is in Indiana Jones.

--Harrissimo 16:02, 18 Augusti 2007 (UTC)

I think we can't translate Harrison. And, in general, I think we can't translate forenames that are just copies of surnames. There's a growing number of them: it seems a favourite habit in Britain, the US and Brazil, for some reason. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 08:48, 24 Augusti 2007 (UTC)
So we would have to say "of the person Harrison Ford?" or just use Harrison -is (like David -is?) --Harrissimo 11:01, 24 Augusti 2007 (UTC)

-ens vs. -entius[fontem recensere]

How do you know when to choose Vincens or Vincentius, Innocens or Innocentius, Constans or Constantius? LionhardusCiampa 21:53, 23 Augusti 2007 (UTC)

Let me rephrase the question. If the person's name in the vernacular is Vincent, Vincenzo, etc., how do you know whether to translate it as Vincens or Vincentius? There are many names like this: Wilhelm (Wilhelmus or Guglielmus?), Jerome (Girolamus or Hieronymus?)? LionhardusCiampa 10:57, 24 Augusti 2007 (UTC)

It's a good question and I hope someone's going to come along with an answer! However, the new examples you have given raise different issues.
  1. For Jerome, only Hieronymus is correct (I think). Girolamus, if you find it used on Vicipaedia, was maybe someone's quick guess based on the Italian: it should probably be corrected.
  2. For William, Wilhelm, etc., unfortunately, there were many medieval Latin versions of this popular name. We have discussed it before ... can someone find it? I think we tend to choose the Latin form that is most popular in the country concerned. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 11:26, 24 Augusti 2007 (UTC)
-ens/-entius might be discernible on purely phonetic grounds—Vincenzo, for example, gets its -zo from the -tius of Vincentius, and there would be no cause for it if it were Vincens (which would give ?Vincente), and likewise English 'Vincent' would most likely come from a form without the -tius, which would have given (modo Francogallico) -ce, as in Laurence = Laurentius, Horace = Horatius. Of course this may not always pertain—it certainly can't be reversed to make Vincentii into Vincences—but might be usable as a guideline (similar to using Iohannes over Ioannes when the native name has the H). —Mucius Tever 19:18, 24 Augusti 2007 (UTC)
Oh dratticus. Does that mean that my moving and changing of all instances of Edwardus and Edvardus to Eduardus was wrong (mostly on the Anglo-Saxon king pages) --Harrissimo 19:12, 24 Augusti 2007 (UTC)
  1. ex pagina ...

Movenda?[fontem recensere]

Sicut Ioscius supra anno 2007 proposuit, an debemus ad Vicipaedia:Index praenominum movere? Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 11:44, 17 Martii 2013 (UTC)

Articles about praenomina[fontem recensere]

Many of these are among the shortest articles in UV's list Vicipaedia:Dump/Paginae breves. I have already linked together the articles about classical Roman praenomina (e.g. Aulus, of which there were only a few) with a navigation box, so those are safe.

I propose a rule-of-thumb for the others:

  • If it is a proper article with sources cited, great! Make sure there is a link to Index praenominum
  • If it is a disambiguation page about a praenomen of Latin form (e.g. Gulielmus) listing people (e.g. kings, saints) whose main name this was, great! Make sure there is a link to Index praenominum
  • If it is a very short article about a praenomen of Latin form (e.g. Gulielmus), merge it into the disambiguation page if there is one, or make it into a disambiguation page if there is need for one, or in other cases redirect it to Index praenominum
  • If it is a very short article about a non-Latin praenomen which has a Latin form, make it into a redirect to the article about the Latin form (e.g. redirect Vilmos to Gulielmus)
  • If it is a very short article about a non-Latin praenomen which seems to have no Latin form, delete it. There is an almost infinite number, and to say "X is some man or woman's first name" is not notable information. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 10:08, 6 Ianuarii 2016 (UTC)
Would that mean that we would eventually get rid of {{Disnomen}}, its corresponding Categoria:Paginae de nominibus discretivae, {{Redirnomen}}, and its corresponding Categoria:Nominum redirectiones? No objection from my part! --UV (disputatio) 11:50, 6 Ianuarii 2016 (UTC)
Yes, that follows logically, and I would be happy with the resulting deletion/simplification. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 12:30, 6 Ianuarii 2016 (UTC)
I dealt with a few of the very shortest on this basis. I found it useful to have Index praenominum open in a separate window, to make sure that it mentions the names I was redirecting. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 12:51, 6 Ianuarii 2016 (UTC)