Disputatio:Philippus Fleury

Haec pagina non est delenda, pro uirili parte. Philippus est indagator maximi momenti. Sciurus nesciens (disputatio) 10:30, 24 Aprilis 2022 (UTC)sciurus nesciens[reply]

Si maximi momenti vere est, ubi est eius vita in maxima orbis terrarum vicipaedia? IacobusAmor (disputatio) 11:23, 24 Aprilis 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nusquam, ut ita dixerim, sed ingeniī suī oratoris gratia Roma antiqua floret rursus per noctēs "nuits du plan de Rome" gallicē nuncupatās quae fiant in amphitheatro Cadomī uniuersitatis saltem quinquies quotannis. Liquet hunc euentum esse maximī momentī ad nitorem uniuersitatī dandum. Sciurus nesciens (disputatio) 15:35, 24 Aprilis 2022 (UTC)sciurus nesciens[reply]

Sciure, vide fr:Wikipédia:Notoriété. Pápiliunculus (disputatio) 16:00, 24 Aprilis 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ridicula commentatio adhuc. Ita Vicipaedia Latina numquam florebit! Vicipaediis sunt regulae qualitatis observandae. Invito Sciurum nescientem ut commentationem de isto viro tam praeclaro Francogallice pangeret pro Vicipaedia Francogallica omnibus necessariis rebus additis. Alternativam en: Roga dominum Fleury ipsum, quando natus sit et alias plures res de eius vita et fac communices hoc in Vicipaedia Latina. Diu heri apud Carolinam Février facta de eius vita quaerebam - neque sufficit. Ne annum nativitatis quidem repperi! Tempus longum, quo efficacius usus sim! Sciure, da nobis omnia de vita dilectorum tuorum scienda ut res vere Vicipaedianae producantur! - Giorno2 (disputatio) 16:46, 24 Aprilis 2022 (UTC)[reply]

So sorry, for not writing this in latin. It would take at least two days (?), and I haven't the time. J'espère, que tout le monde comprend l'anglais. Sinon, dites-le, je le traduis. Espero que todos comprendan el inglés. Si no, decidlo, lo traduciré. Any content in Vicipaedia should be Notable and Verifiable. Notice that en:Wikipedia:Notability says if no reliable, independent sources can be found on a topic, then it should not have a separate article. Grosso modo, Vicipaedia is not the place to create literature on a topic, rather the place, where existing literature is compiled and formatted. I think everybody agrees Phillipe Fleury exists, that he is a professor of latin at the University of Caen-Normandy, who has published, and that he is, or was, the head of an (absolutely interesting for me) project of a maquette of ancient Rome. Thus, things he wrote in his papers, I guess they apply for a reliable source. The point is, there are NO reliable sources, so far I haven't found any, about HIM, not of his, but about him. No one has written about him. No newspaper, no magasine, there are no papers about him as a person, or about him as a professor, or about him as a researcher. For what is he notable? Is any university professor not notable, then? As far as I know, he may be average as a professor, researcher. There are NO reliable sources to prove the contrary. At least, I haven't found anything. Sciurus seems to have Phillipe Fleury in great consideration. But Sciurus is not a realiable source, to tell us how notable anyone is, based only in his opinion. Neither is any Vicipaedia's editor, for that matter. As far as I know, Sciurus may be Phillipe's student. Not even Phillipe's peer, but student. That would put him in a particular fragile position as an assessor of Phillipe's notability. Really, there's no way to know anything, for sure, about Phillipe Fleury, so far, except that he exists and that his trade is of a professor's of latin at a certain university. Not all professors, of whatever subject, of any university in the world, are notable. The subject of this article is not notable enough in my opinion, and I support its deletion. Everything, I have found, about Phillipe Fleury: [1][2][3][4][5][6] youtu.be/K1c8I1VWBt8 youtu.be/BJHKcw7ai5M. None, of which, supports his notability. Pápiliunculus (disputatio) 11:10, 25 Aprilis 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sine ulla dubitatione, nondum sum peritus harum rerum Vicipaedianarum. Plurima sunt mihi discenda.

Ignoscite mihi ! Sciurus nesciens (disputatio) 14:54, 25 Aprilis 2022 (UTC)sciurius nesciens[reply]

Forsitan melius sit de incepto "plan de Rome" tractare, cuius iam pagina francica extat. Omnia fere quae inveni vel in rete vel in diurniis de Philippo Fleury eum ad hoc inceptum referunt. Jeanthorlon (disputatio) 06:35, 26 Aprilis 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Sciurus nesciens: @Pápiliunculus: @Giorno2: @IacobusAmor: Vicipaedia Latina interdum vitas Latinistarum, expertium aliarum Vicipaediarum, divulgat. Hominum autem viventium biographi apud nos, sicut apud omnes Vicipaedias, fontes "independentes" (non ab homine ipso editos) citare debent. De Philippo Fleury fontes "independentes" hucusque non citantur. Si recensiones editionum eius exstant, bene! Quis reperire potest? [Quo nuper scripto, paucos per Persée repperi ego.]

Verbis @Jeanthorlon: assentio: pagina de "forma Romae" Cadomi servata (quam ipse vidi et admiravi!) utilissima erit. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 20:22, 29 Iunii 2022 (UTC)[reply]