Disputatio Usoris:Andrew Dalby/Tabularium 1

E Vicipaedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Fortasse ...[fontem recensere]

...ut magistratus nobis factus est, incipias nuntia hic accipere =]. Congratulationes!--Ioshus (disp) 22:11, 5 Februarii 2007 (UTC)[]

Templates[fontem recensere]

Honestly ... I had in mind to tune them a bit: borders, margins, images, ... Ok, I'll try to control myself as much as possible. ;-) --Rolandus 18:11, 21 Februarii 2007 (UTC)[]

I added padding:25px; margin:25px;. ;-) --Rolandus 18:57, 22 Februarii 2007 (UTC)[]

Incepta collaborativa[fontem recensere]

Huh, I thought you lived farther up North. Probably just a rash assumption based on the fact that you're English. Anyway, now that Moretum is page of the month, perhaps you want to look it over again and see if you can add anything? Also, see Disputatio Formulae:PaginaMensis#March 2007. I know I've seen you express a wish for more herb articles. Want to help out with that? --Iustinus 19:51, 1 Martii 2007 (UTC)[]

reddenda[fontem recensere]

No, I did no rating, I just changed "reddenda" to "latinitas|reddenda". Sort of cleanup. In my opinion 99 % of these "reddenda" are meant to be "maxcorrigenda" or better. I think the reddenda-template mostly has been misused. See Disputatio_Formulae:Non_latine#reddenda. Please adjust the rating. I hope we will get rid off "reddenda" soon. Better to use "non latine", which is rarely misused. ;-) --Rolandus 21:39, 8 Martii 2007 (UTC)[]

No interwiki links[fontem recensere]

What about having a category like Categoria:Pagina vix in Vicipaediis aliis for pages where it might be impossible to add interwiki links because there might be no other Wikipedias which have or even will have these pages? At least to avoid that I will add "nexus carentes" again. ;-) Or, another aspect: These pages are our speciality and should be marked. --Rolandus 17:21, 10 Martii 2007 (UTC)[]

{{nexus carentes}}[fontem recensere]

That's why the bottom of it says "si sint". The template was designed to be in pages even when there are no interwiki links. This lets people know we aren't lazy, there just aren't any intervicis. That way, when and if someone starts an article in another language they will change the template then. Thoughts?--Ioshus (disp) 17:25, 10 Martii 2007 (UTC)[]

Yes, I understand that. In practice, though, I usually see {{nexus carentes}} on pages where there ought to be interwiki links but no one has yet identified them. I think we maybe need to distinguish this type of page from the other type, in which, having checked, we are pretty certain that Vicipaedia has got there first. Hence I really like Rolandus's idea very much indeed --
Maybe we could categorize such pages, see above. --Rolandus 17:33, 10 Martii 2007 (UTC)[]
Yes indeed. I was playing with a snappier name like Categoria:Latine solum. What do others think? Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 18:18, 10 Martii 2007 (UTC)[]
Maybe add a iam. I don't want to sound as if it's necessarily a good idea that it is only Latine ad tempus.--Ioshus (disp) 19:21, 10 Martii 2007 (UTC)[]
OK, I have made a variant template -- please see explanation at Vicipaedia:Taberna. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 13:24, 11 Martii 2007 (UTC)[]
I like that that the layout is consistent with our small yellow button on {{nexus desiderati}}. :-) --Rolandus 13:37, 11 Martii 2007 (UTC)[]

Reading strange alphabets[fontem recensere]

I can read the Sanskrit, but not the Burmese. That's because I don't have the proper fonts installed. As for my egyptian, I suspect the part you're having trouble with is the Coptic equivalents, which you can likewise read if you install the fonts. Try the font links at en:Coptic Alphabet#External links. If you're having trouble with the characters I used for transliteration, well then honestly I don't have any idea what fonts to direct you too. You might try a unicode font that includes IPA. --Iustinus 05:51, 11 Martii 2007 (UTC)[]

No, it'll be the Coptic. I should no doubt have realised that ... It explains why pages like en:Egyptian hieroglyphics didn't seem to offer me any help! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 08:50, 11 Martii 2007 (UTC)[]
OK, and in return I have downloaded a Burmese font ;) --Iustinus 01:04, 12 Martii 2007 (UTC)[]

TUGS[fontem recensere]

I think you are right. The template explains what someone can do now. I will add the option of merging the content with an other article. --Rolandus 18:13, 12 Martii 2007 (UTC)[]

Fabula tempus cum Thomas[fontem recensere]

I have made a {{latinitas|pessima}} template, however, this template refers to the whole page, not only to the title. Maybe we need a template saying "title is nonsense". ;-) --Rolandus 06:27, 13 Martii 2007 (UTC)[]

utopica/res futurae[fontem recensere]

Salve! Categoria:litteratura de rebus futuris et categoria:litteratura utopica conferendas esse puto. --Alex1011 11:24, 16 Martii 2007 (UTC)[]

duae columnae[fontem recensere]

Dic si erro, at nonne rogavisti de quo modo duas columnas in fontibus facias? Invenisti:

 <div class="references-small" style="-moz-column-count: 2; column-count: 2;">

Vide Infinitas#Fontes. Exeo, bene dormi!--Ioshus (disp) 05:31, 19 Martii 2007 (UTC)[]

Ahhh, fuit Iacobus. Mea culpa...--Ioshus (disp) 17:16, 19 Martii 2007 (UTC)[]

thanks[fontem recensere]

For cleaning up my typos!--Ioshus (disp) 13:32, 20 Martii 2007 (UTC)[]

redirect[fontem recensere]

Yeah, I think this might be the best idea. In any other language, as I said, this would not really be a problem, certainly cf en:Athenaeus, but at la, I think we need to be careful, because this was just a regular word for Athenian before this particular author.--Ioshus (disp) 13:44, 22 Martii 2007 (UTC)[]

Athenaeus[fontem recensere]

Thanks for the note. Bleh, I need to get some more real life work done so that I'll have time to catch up on wikipedia. As for the Latinization of Δειπνοσοφισταί, you are right that Deipnosophistae is more common even in Latin (that is, in Latin editions of the text and similar references--I don't beleive the word shows up in any Classical texts), but I have no idea why: so far as I can tell that ει is indeed a diphthong, so it should come out as ī in Latin. --Iustinus 03:49, 25 Martii 2007 (UTC)[]

occifialis[fontem recensere]

Kanths rof xifing my sputid mikastes!!

portmanteau[fontem recensere]

Agricola? Agri+incola...--Ioshus (disp) 03:54, 27 Martii 2007 (UTC)[]

agricola <= [agri] "gen. 'of the field'" + stem [col-] "pertaining to cultivation/habitation." [col-] is also the base of colo, incolo, colonus, Grk. βουκόλος, βουκολέω; incola develops also along these lines, from [in] + [col-], related to but not the origin of agricola. --Sempronius Tyro 14:26, 27 Martii 2007 (UTC)[]

Yes. Not quite what Carroll had in mind. As I have just said at Disputatio:Portmanteau, I think we need an article Verbum compositum. Will you start it, or shall I? Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 14:59, 27 Martii 2007 (UTC)[]

If you haven't gotten to it by tonight, after I translate Jollyroger's scherzo for him, I will start it. Even if I do start it, it will require some help (I certainly defer to your superior linguistic prowess =]).
Semproni, of course I understand the root col-, i just thought that in this specific instance agricola was formed from incola as cola itself is not usually used in this agent sense of "one who lives" the way that the prefixed form is.--Ioshus (disp) 15:18, 27 Martii 2007 (UTC)[]

Zacynthus[fontem recensere]

Thanks for cleaning up.

Yes, I try to automatically detect some strange constellations in order to find pages which need cleanup. The output you'll find on Usor:Rolandus/temp/Dump-20070328. This one uses the XML dump of 28th, March 2007.

--Rolandus 04:59, 2 Aprilis 2007 (UTC)[]

SORGLL[fontem recensere]

Andrea, quaeso, inspciasne hanc paginam et http://www.rhapsodes.fll.vt.edu/, translationem meam inter Anglicam sententiam conferens? Quippe nolo Societatem contumelia afficere mala sententiae conversione =] Gratias!--Ioshus (disp) 15:53, 3 Aprilis 2007 (UTC)[]

Thanks, Andrew. And yes, you're certainly correct that nominis is the appropriate word.
Would you mind going back to the Vicipaedia:Taberna#Professors of classics (or Classics)? I think the Anglophone and the Latinist in me need sorting out =] --Ioshus (disp) 20:16, 7 Aprilis 2007 (UTC)[]

Gratias[fontem recensere]

Mehercle! Mihi Stellam Constantiae adiudicavisti! Amice, tibi gratias summas ago, quod me tot tantisque beneficiis ornaveris! Haudquaquam tali honore me dignor. IacobusAmor 12:43, 22 Aprilis 2007 (UTC)[]

been a while[fontem recensere]

Sorry it took me so long to respond, Andrew, but respond I have at Vicipaedia:Taberna#Professors_of_classics_.28or_Classics.29. I think we are on the same page, and I'm ready to make the changes, I just had one more point of question. Thanks!--Ioshus (disp) 14:42, 24 Aprilis 2007 (UTC)[]

idiota[fontem recensere]

I meant "idiota" of course in the classical meaning (up to the nineteenth century) of "homo rusticus", "homo qui in provincia habitat". But to avoid misunderstandings it is probably better to avoid that term or I should have added a short explanation. --Alex1011 15:16, 25 Aprilis 2007 (UTC)[]

Humius[fontem recensere]

WorldCat seems to be pretty clair that his usual Latin name was Humius. The unlatinized Hume does also occur. --Iustinus 00:47, 27 Aprilis 2007 (UTC)[]

BTW, have you seen this book? --Iustinus 01:22, 27 Aprilis 2007 (UTC)[]
Yeah, I have the same problem. But there is the side-bar with all the page numbers, so you could select from that. --Iustinus 04:54, 28 Aprilis 2007 (UTC)[]

Cornutus[fontem recensere]

Yes, you're correct that I started the Cornutus article, but it appears that Massimo added the bibliographic reference. By the way, I've been enjoying Siren Feasts. Montivagus 05:46, 30 Aprilis 2007 (UTC)[]

en:Talk:Lives of the Twelve Caesars#Name[fontem recensere]

Could you have a look at this, Andrew, and offer an opinion? I was about to write the article, to make the red link in your latest formula turn blue, but I was distracted by the poor naming. I saw you had already made comments on it...--Ioshus (disp) 15:16, 1 Maii 2007 (UTC)[]

Visigoths[fontem recensere]

Hello Andrew, could you help me with this sentence? I just can't figure out how the cases work there... --Xaverius 21:41, 1 Maii 2007 (UTC)[]

Nomina in Francia[fontem recensere]

Hi, I've noticed you changed nearly all the names of French kings and presidents, just because they were in Latine. I'd like to know if we have to use Latine names or native French ones. Actually, it's not always easy to decline it when we don't have the first name. E.g. in the article about Franciscus Mitterrand, we used to read  : "Postea aliquot menses pro imperio Petani laboravit". How are we supposed to decline Pétain if we change his name. Do we have to write "pro imperio Philippi Petain", "pro imperio Philippi Pétain" (with an accent , as in French), "pro imperio P. Petain", "pro imperio P. Petani", "pro imperio Petani", "pro imperio Philippe Petain",...

If you have any idea about this question, please answer on the page Reges praesidentesque Franciae. We need to have a strict rule to follow, so that we can't do anymore as we want, each with its own rules...


Maria Antonia Iosepha Ioanna Habsburgum[fontem recensere]

Fontem addidi ciao e grazie--Massimo Macconi 11:05, 12 Maii 2007 (UTC)[]

german user[fontem recensere]

Thanks for cleaning this up, Andrew. As I have confessed, my German is minimal. We do have a policy on this somewhere, maybe Vicipaedia:Nomina usorum.--Ioshus (disp) 12:27, 12 Maii 2007 (UTC)[]

Cibi Matritenses[fontem recensere]

Helo Andrew. As you are a renown eminence in food and Latin, maybe you could help me. Today is 15 of May, which is Madrid's patron day. I am feeling homesick, and I thought that writting about Madrid's typical food would help. I wanted to write :

How is it said in Latin a)sandwich, b)"cocido", c)"churros" and d)doughnut?

Traupman says 'sandwich' = pastillum fartum, and his example shows that whatever the sandwich is made of goes into the ablative: 'ham sandwich' = pastillum pernā fartum. IacobusAmor 11:43, 15 Maii 2007 (UTC)[]
So a "squid Sandwich" would be Pastillum lolligonibus fartum? or even without the "filled", simply Pastillum lolligonibus?--Xaverius 11:51, 15 Maii 2007 (UTC)[]
They'd have to be rather small squids. Cicero has pulvinus rosa fartus 'cushion stuffed with roses', so it would seem that you want the ablative singular: pastillum lolligine fartum. IacobusAmor 12:02, 15 Maii 2007 (UTC)[]

Cheers mate!--Xaverius 10:45, 15 Maii 2007 (UTC)[]

I see you food-lovers are sorting it out by yourselves. I can make some suggestions, though. Your abl. pl. of lol(l)igo has to be lol(l)iginibus (not -gonibus). The best word to use for the bread part probably depends on what kind of bread it is. I'm sure pastillum is fine; but yesterday, at Saumur, I was lunching on flat bread fouée filled with goose rillettes, and the fouée (regional French) comes from Latin [panis] focacius (cf. Italian focaccio). So, if it's a flat bread used as wrapping, "focacius" might do.
The best description of a sort-of-doughnut is in Cato's recipe for "Globulus -i" -- deep fried in fat or oil and then soaked in honey. They are mentioned (as "Globi") at the beginning of the Satyricon, but translators haven't understood this text properly.
I've never had "chocolate con churros" and don't have a mental picture of these churros. But they might correspond roughly to Cato's "Encytum -a"; they were served with honey or with mulsum, but then, Cato hadn't got round to trying chocolate!
I look forward to reading your articles. I'm sure you'll manage to stave off your homesickness, Xaveri: the method you have chosen sounds excellent. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 12:23, 15 Maii 2007 (UTC)[]
Correcting myself lightly, the true Latin form is probably encytus (pl. encyti) since this corresponds with the Greek. Since we can't ask Cato, we may never know for sure. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 13:38, 15 Maii 2007 (UTC)[]

Reges Sueciae[fontem recensere]

Dear Andrew,

Of course. There's no problem. I forget every time the right form. I let you correct the page Thank and ciao --Massimo Macconi 16:20, 18 Maii 2007 (UTC)[]

Praemium[fontem recensere]

Gratulationes, Andreas! Propositus est praemio Sidus Optimi Vicipaediani. Vide Vicipaedia:Praemia Vicipaedianis --Xaverius 11:27, 21 Maii 2007 (UTC)--Xaverius 18:58, 11[]

Nunc sum ego qui gratus ob praemium est! Nescio si bene merito praemium datus sum, sed id honorabo. Et a novicio Oxoniensi ad veteranum Cantabrigensem gratias multas ago!--Xaverius 08:39, 22 Maii 2007 (UTC)[]

Crushuva[fontem recensere]

Thank you for your message. The name Crushuva is the name of the city where Aromanian is the official language. Unfortunately there is no Academy protecting the language, even though our electronic publisher - Moscopole-Crushuva is mainly made of university professors who are Aromanian by origin and have a sound knowledge of the language. Eeamoscopolecrushuva 07:39, 22 Maii 2007 (UTC)[]

block[fontem recensere]

Hi Andrew, I unblocked the IP you blocked today. It appears that this IP was removing and not adding linkspam. Maybe you meant to block someone else, or did I miss something? Greetings, --UV 15:44, 26 Maii 2007 (UTC)[]

No problem – all IP addresses look somewhat similar … Greetings, --UV 15:51, 26 Maii 2007 (UTC)[]

Gratias tibi multas precor amice. Si omnes v pro u consonante utantur sic ego etiam faciam.

v pro u consonante[fontem recensere]

Gratias tibi multas precor amice. Si omnes v pro u consonante utantur sic ego etiam faciam.

Iosephus Zuccalas 12:59, 27 Maii 2007 (UTC)[]

About my damage[fontem recensere]

Dear friend, I'm very sorry for what I did but believe me I didn't want this at all !!! I'm new to wikipedia so I'm understanding things step by step. So I'm sorry if I made sombody to waste his time. Please try to have patience. Anyway henceforth I will try not to do anything but what I exactly understand.

I do apologize.

Backlinks[fontem recensere]

In former days ;-) I added backlinks, but then I let the bots do the work. Now I wanted to find out whether they do their work well. If a backlink is added manually I will see this. This list is not for methodical research. Even if the list has the effect that someone adds the backlinks manually by using my list, this will be ok for me. ;-) I'd like to have a list of the existing backlinks in the English Vicipaedia. This is technically possible (the dumps exists: http://download.wikimedia.org/enwiki/20070402/enwiki-20070402-langlinks.sql.gz) but it is a very big file: 31.7 MB. However, while writing this, I think I will download the dump ... ;-) --Rolandus 09:49, 28 Maii 2007 (UTC)[]

Oh, I would need another file, too: http://download.wikimedia.org/enwiki/20070402/enwiki-20070402-page.sql.gz - but it has another 259.3 MB.
The structure of the langlinks-file is (page-id, language-code, foreign title):
(7208,'af','Vladimir Lenin'),
(8461,'af','Vladimir Poetin'),
(3760,'af','Volksrepubliek van Sjina'), 
The big file (enwiki-20070402-page.sql.gz) has the connection between page-id and (English) title
Hm ... but I could download the small(er) file and then extract a list, what pages in the Latin Wikipedia are linked and then we could check this list aigainst the (smaller) list of pages of the Latin Wikipedia. So I could avoid the download of enwiki-20070402-page.sql.gz.
Hmmmm ... ;-) Roland
Not hard work ... it will be just some lines of code when it is done. But it would have been hard to download the file with the 259 MB. --Rolandus 12:00, 28 Maii 2007 (UTC)[]
Bad news: I have created two lists: Usor:Rolandus/temp/Interwiki links from en to la and Usor:Rolandus/temp/Interwiki links from la to en. But, since I do not know the name of the page which contains a link, this does not help much. I just know that there is a page in the English Wikipedia with an id of let's say 22457, which has an interwiki link to a page "Caesar" in the Latin Wikipedia. For example, I do not know why 5 English pages seem to have a link to the Latin page "homo". The problem with the special characters could be fixed, though. I fear we have to trust the robots ... --Rolandus 18:21, 28 Maii 2007 (UTC)[]
You are right with your theory about the red links ... and I see you could get some useful information even from those files ;-) --Rolandus 18:23, 29 Maii 2007 (UTC)[]
I hope I have fixed the problem with the special characters. Maybe you are interested how I did it:

# Script for extracting interwiki links from the
# interwiki dump of the English Wikipedia
# which point to 'la'.

use strict;
use utf8;   # handling special characters

# input file; can have utf8 characters
open my $INP, "<:utf8", 'C:/$vicipaedia/enwiki-20070527-langlinks.sql' or die;
# output file
open my $OUT, ">", 'en.txt' or die;

while (my $line = <$INP>) {
    # entries have this structure: (12118,'af','Groenland')
    while ($line =~ s/.*?\((\d+),'la',\'([^']*)'\)//) {
	# printing the title to the output file
	printf $OUT "# [[$2]]\n";
# closing the input and output file
close $INP;
close $OUT;

The script is rather short ... and could even be avoided if I used a database. --Rolandus 18:53, 29 Maii 2007 (UTC)[]

De Provinciis[fontem recensere]

Certainly, I must congratulate you for your work on the provinces! All in a sudden, we have a page for every province!--Xaverius 21:14, 2 Iunii 2007 (UTC)[]

Nearly done. It was easier to do it all at once, although of course the new ones are very brief stubs at present. The strange thing is, how variable the interwiki business is. Some have 10 or 15, some have just 1 or 2, some have none, with very little logic to it. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 21:21, 2 Iunii 2007 (UTC)[]
When I finish my essay for this week and the chapter of my site report, I'll try to find/make some maps for these provinces of yours. I have with me Tim Cornell's Atlas of the Roman World, which is very helpful. At least, not all of them will have the same map!--Xaverius 21:28, 2 Iunii 2007 (UTC)[]

You have also succeeded to finish a template in the list of "templates with red links": Vicipaedia:Pagina_desiderata#Paginae_in_formulis_.28Formulae_cum_nexibus_rubris.29. :-) Thanks! --Rolandus 08:24, 3 Iunii 2007 (UTC)[]

Arbela[fontem recensere]

Of course I don't object if Arbela is the correct Latin name. I know i've seen the name Arbela used for an ancient city, but I did not realise that it was the same as modern Arbil. I'm just happy to know that I was competent enough in writing Latin that I did not have to be corrected. Thanks. -- 23:51, 2 Iunii 2007 (UTC)[]

de figura paginae primae[fontem recensere]

Salve Andrea. A few of us were discussing the layout and content of our pagina prima, and some expressed desire to rehaul it. This might include color changes, content changes, layout changes, and who knows what else. Could you join the discussion at Disputatio:Pagina prima/Nova? Give us a list of things you want a main page to have, what you dont want a main page to have, and what specifically you might think to do differently with ours. We will then try to come up with a design that meets as many of these requests as possible, based on content from everyone. Thanks, and regards.--Ioshus (disp) 20:37, 3 Iunii 2007 (UTC)[]

german maidens[fontem recensere]

Your comment indeed made me chuckle, sir. It reminded me of The Awful German Language, have you read it?--Ioshus (disp) 01:10, 5 Iunii 2007 (UTC)[]

languages for pagina prima[fontem recensere]

I contacted user Aphaia] of Meta, who created the language bar template at Translation of the week, and asked him to come help us with a template.--Ioshus (disp) 01:51, 5 Iunii 2007 (UTC)[]

==Dotted lines==[fontem recensere]

Sorry for having irritated you. :-) --Rolandus 19:09, 5 Iunii 2007 (UTC)[]

Usor Kedemus[fontem recensere]

I thank you for your remark. I have some difficulties to know how much we have to respect the work of the page's author. In any case the form of Kedemus remark was not friendly, therefore I appreciate a lot your answer. Ciao e grazie --Massimo Macconi 08:31, 7 Iunii 2007 (UTC)[]

Massimo, I think talking of respect (Disputatio:Kareem Abdul-Jabbar) is completely misplaced in this context. We should rather want to find a consensus every time and Kedemus should have better tried to get your ok before moving back the page. And in my opinion we do not have "authors", just "editors". Everybody who contributes to a page is an editor. The first editor is not the author. There is no author. --Rolandus 09:52, 7 Iunii 2007 (UTC)[]

Habits[fontem recensere]

Andrew, I am recycling your (but not only yours) explanations for later re-use: Usor:Rolandus/temp/habits. So instead of explaining things individually again and again, we could just point to this list. If we created individual formulae for each little entry, we could compile lists by just writing Formula:Xxx, Formula:Yyy, ... etc. And each habit could be discussed on its talk page. --Rolandus 12:59, 8 Iunii 2007 (UTC)[]

Sorry, but ... see Disputatio Formulae:About redirects. --Rolandus 19:40, 8 Iunii 2007 (UTC)[]

Thanks[fontem recensere]

Thanks for the redirect and response :)

Metric v. Imperial[fontem recensere]

Andrew, do you know by any chance if in vicipaedia we have something established as a norm regarding units? I mean, we are metric here, aren't we? This is regarding Kareem Abdul-Jabbar were left his height in metres but Kedemus has changed it back to feet and ounces (which is not by the way a distance unit).--Xaverius 20:07, 8 Iunii 2007 (UTC)[]

I wondered, when I saw this dispute, but no, I don't know. I haven't seen a rule. (But uncia means both ounce and inch, so I think there's no problem with that detail: it is a unit of distance.) Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 20:17, 8 Iunii 2007 (UTC)[]

Disputatio:Litaniae Sanctorum[fontem recensere]

Dear Andrew,

I understand your point of view. In any case under the disputation page I wrote some remarks about the reasons I believe it could be useful to maintain the page. Ciao --Massimo Macconi 20:11, 9 Iunii 2007 (UTC)[]

Beyoncé[fontem recensere]

I agree, of course. I believe yours is the better choice: Ciao--Massimo Macconi 17:10, 11 Iunii 2007 (UTC)[]

Usor:[fontem recensere]

Anonymous sock puppet? --Ioshus (disp) 12:42, 12 Iunii 2007 (UTC)[]

I blocked it for a day for removing content from pages. I don't like socks. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 12:45, 12 Iunii 2007 (UTC)[]
I prefer sandals, too. =] --Ioshus (disp) 19:40, 14 Iunii 2007 (UTC)[]

Gracias[fontem recensere]

I'd just like to thank you for smoothing everything over alongside Ioshus. ----Harrissimo 19:35, 14 Iunii 2007 (UTC)[]

Sadly I can only really speak English (and bits of Latin & German.) I just like to chuck in random languages now and again :) ----Harrissimo 19:44, 14 Iunii 2007 (UTC)[]

{{communia}}[fontem recensere]

Just so you know, there is another variable in our {{communia}}. If you add a |, you can put the word into the accusative governed by ad. Seems a couple people didn't know this about that template. Cheers! --Ioshus (disp) 19:46, 14 Iunii 2007 (UTC)[]

Of whom I was one! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 19:55, 14 Iunii 2007 (UTC)[]

Alexander Potes[fontem recensere]

Good evening, Andrew, or I guess maybe morning where you are. I was wondering if you would have an objection if I restored the slander that was on the above "user"'s talk page. I saw you removed the insult, for which I am certainly thankful, but I really don't mind insults from little children. It makes me smile, more than anything. Furthermore, we will be able to refer to it in the future as a reason why we took the action we took. What are your thoughts? Regards. --Ioshus (disp) 05:13, 23 Iunii 2007 (UTC)[]

No problem, Josh. I'll revert my move. We will need to put a notice on the userpage(s) anyway: I don't even know if we have a precedent on Vicipaedia for this. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 09:24, 23 Iunii 2007 (UTC)

Excuse Me Please[fontem recensere]

I have no objection to you deleting some of my usernames, but leave me one! I mean, i only made them because one got blocked, and the other got hacked into! 14:01, 24 Iunii 2007 (UTC)Alexander Potes[]

See my message at Disputatio usoris:Jamesp#Your blocking. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 17:41, 24 Iunii 2007 (UTC)

Sorry[fontem recensere]

I am sorry, it just seemed to me at the time that the comments were being given to me, until I realised that they were not. I would be very happy if all the content on my talk page could be deleted and I could start again. Thanks Jamesp 19:18, 24 Iunii 2007 (UTC)Alex Potts (P.S would it be possible to use a different name, as I am just going to forgwt this one?)

Thanks[fontem recensere]

Ita vero, and thanks

'Movere' tab[fontem recensere]

Salve Andrew. I often read your contributions, and always with great pleasure. I have recently noticed, and thought I would point out, that unregistered users (or at least me, when I forget to log in) do not have the 'movere' tab at the top of the screen. This fact is relevant in cases like this one: Disputatio Usoris: Vale, Montivagus 16:21, 26 Iunii 2007 (UTC)[]

puppet show[fontem recensere]

Hi Andrew-

22:02, 23 Iunii 2007 Legbatterij-Argonautica (disputatio | conlationes | obstruere) usor novus
0:00, 23 Iunii 2007 Fparri (disputatio | conlationes | obstruere) usor novus
07:41, 23 Iunii 2007 Kahlil (disputatio | conlationes | obstruere) usor novus
19:34, 22 Iunii 2007 GreaterLondon (disputatio | conlationes | obstruere) usor novus
19:34, 22 Iunii 2007 LuckyLindy (disputatio | conlationes | obstruere) usor novus
19:33, 22 Iunii 2007 Strattonshire (disputatio | conlationes | obstruere) usor novus
19:32, 22 Iunii 2007 FortHuntington (disputatio | conlationes | obstruere) usor novus
19:32, 22 Iunii 2007 QuackyQuackDuck (disputatio | conlationes | obstruere) usor novus
19:31, 22 Iunii 2007 Ichhabevielesocken (disputatio | conlationes | obstruere) usor novus

I know Ichhabevielesocken through greater London was part of the sockpuppet fest? May I greet Kahlil through Argonautica cordially?

Regards. --Ioshus (disp) 15:44, 27 Iunii 2007 (UTC)[]

Consider the mood lightened!! =] --Ioshus (disp) 16:30, 27 Iunii 2007 (UTC)[]

thank you for the names of prime ministers[fontem recensere]

for me it's sometimes difficult to know the Latin translation of some english names. Ciao--Massimo Macconi 11:58, 29 Iunii 2007 (UTC)[]

Medicago truncatula[fontem recensere]

Etant donné que tu as l'air de parler Français couramment, je me permet de t'écrire dans cette langue puisque mon niveau de latin est pitoyable (j'essaies de l'améliorer avec Xaverius) et que mon niveau d'anglais n'est pas suffisant pour exprimer certaines subtilités.

J'ai vu, à la page Medicago truncatula que tu as mis in biologia moleculari pour en biologie moléculaire. pourrais tu me donner le nominatif de cette expression et, puisqu'il s'agit d'une expression, peut-être serait-il plus judicieux de mettre biologia moleculari entre crochets et non seulement biologia comme ça l'est en ce moment, merci d'avance -- Thoma D. 12:05, 29 Iunii 2007 (UTC)[]

Pour vous en dire la vérité, je ne suis pas très au courant dans ce domaine! J'ai imaginé un adjectif 3e déclension "molecularis" (un peu comme dans quelques langues modernes), dont l'ablatif serait "moleculari". Et, oui, vous avez raison. Il nous faut éventuellement un article sur Biologia molecularis. Faisons ce lien rouge. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 12:12, 29 Iunii 2007 (UTC)[]

Narratiuncularum[fontem recensere]

Salve! I must return to "narratiunculorum" a te scriptum. The underlying word being narratio (generis feminini), the derived diminutive should be feminini generis, too, viz. narratiuncula. --Neander 20:56, 30 Iunii 2007 (UTC)[]

Campanini Carboni[fontem recensere]

Thank you very much for adding the formula, it's very useful. In these very day I've bought the new edition of Campanini Carboni. I agree with you to create a new Formula:Campanini2003 to use for new work or in the case we re-check references to the old edition. Ciao--Massimo Macconi 14:19, 4 Iulii 2007 (UTC)[]

praenomina[fontem recensere]

ok pour Aristides, je vais l'ajouter à la liste de Rolandus mais j'ai des doutes pour Ferdinandus qui est plus comme Ferdinand que Fernand. -- Thoma D. 16:50, 4 Iulii 2007 (UTC)[]

Praesidentes[fontem recensere]

As I said to Xaverius: "of course I will change what is in those pages but I work with an other user (Usor:Massimo Macconi) and I tried to show him what we have to do. This is just an experiment i've done to see if my formula was OK. that will change and we have added some informations to some prime ministers.". Vale. -- Thoma D. 11:53, 5 Iulii 2007 (UTC)[]

Juniperus/Iuniperus?[fontem recensere]

Fabullus Andreae s.p.d. Pagina tua de Iunipero mihi valde placet, praecipue cum hoc sit nomen filiolae meae. Hoc unum te rogare velim: nonne nobis in Vicipaedia est usui littera i usurpare tam pro i consonanti (j) quam pro i vocali? Fac valeas.--Fabullus 18:38, 5 Iulii 2007 (UTC)[]

Lingua Arabica[fontem recensere]

I don't understand. Massimo already pointed out that the image had got lost by dint of my visit. The only thing I did (or think I did or intended to do) was to assess the Latinitas of the page. Perhaps I should say Titivillus fecit. I restored the image, of course. I'm very sorry about the mess, but because I seem not to know what the mess consists in, I'm unable to do further rectifications. Perhaps it's better to re-establish the pre-Neanderthalian state. --Neander 21:15, 6 Iulii 2007 (UTC)[]

Tirolis[fontem recensere]

Hi Andrew! I was a bit careless adding the (sive ...) bit, not having read the talk page. I just put Tyrolum because it was the previous title and the page creator must have had a reason for it. I'll remove them now. --Harrissimo 12:43, 8 Iulii 2007 (UTC)[]

Leodis (again)[fontem recensere]

Hi Andrew, sorry if my arguments are growing a bit feeble now, but I my have found a lead for Leodis. In the Leeds Grammar School school hymn (written in Latin), there are the words Leodenses Cuncti and towards the end it says schola Leodensis. There is also a very frequent Leeds word Leodiensian meaning an ex-pupil of L.G.S. or in general a person from Leeds. I am pretty sure these words do not come from Ledesia. --Harrissimo 12:31, 11 Iulii 2007 (UTC)[]

I'm not sure if this Website is reliable and has no latin quote or picture but just read the first sentence: [1]. --Harrissimo 14:23, 11 Iulii 2007 (UTC)[]
OK. I'll try and have a look at the reception area of Leeds Grammar School when I go there next (they have some old stone tablets with inscriptions on, maybe in Latin). I'm pretty sure there aren't going to be any latin sources for leodis on the internet. --Harrissimo 14:45, 11 Iulii 2007 (UTC)[]

es:Vuelta a España[fontem recensere]

Hi Andrew! Do you think that as we have Circuitus Franciae would Circuitus Hispaniae be a good translation for es:Vuelta a España?--Xaverius 09:09, 13 Iulii 2007 (UTC)[]

And could you help me with the "proper" translation of the cyclist races of Index circuituum birotariorum?--Xaverius 11:15, 13 Iulii 2007 (UTC)[]
1. Perfect, I think. 2. I'll try! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 11:18, 13 Iulii 2007 (UTC)[]

Scin tu...?[fontem recensere]

Hello again, Andrew. I am going on an excavation today to Toledo and I'll be there for a couple of weeks. We will not be isolated but it will be hard for me to get close to an internet connection. If I cannot make it, could you please change the "scin tu" section in a fortnight? I know it is still early, but otherwise I'll forget to tell anyone. Cheers!--Xaverius 09:06, 15 Iulii 2007 (UTC)[]

Thanks for changing the setion! I had a great time in the excavation. However, again I'll be excavating in August in Numantia, so I have to ask you again to change the section for me! I'll be going in a couple of days, so I'll try to keep up with my contributions if I can--Xaverius 11:49, 30 Iulii 2007 (UTC)[]

San Francisco/Foreign Accents[fontem recensere]

Hi Andrew! I managed to find a source which is probably reliable for San Francisco (See its talk page), and are you happy with the verdict in the Taberna (that we should use foreign accents for sourceless names, but add 26 letter alphabet redirects)? --Harrissimo 12:44, 17 Iulii 2007 (UTC)[]

complements[fontem recensere]

Hello, Andrew, you gave good critics to me for aspectus, and I still go on editing this article. I have made some tables, with links, vide-etiams, sources etc. What do you think now, is that enough? Are vide-etiams under the text really necessary? I hope you will find it good, thank you. Maybe you can help the article, too. -- IP Quindicenne 12:57, 20 Iulii 2007 (UTC)[]

Départements et préfecture[fontem recensere]

En effet, je viens ed voir le travail que tu as fait. Je trouve que c'est du bon travail, dáutant que lq quasi totatlité eds liens est bleu...

En revanche, je ne sais pas si c'est toi qui l'a fait mais le mot département est maintenant traduit par Praefectura, ce aui me gène un peu, d'autant que l'équivqlent francais de Caput Praefecturae est ... préfecture. Donc, je pense que, pour éviter toute confusion, il serait préferable d'utiliser le terme Departitio ...

Merci pour ton travail, je vais le regarder avec un peu plus d'attention dès que j'aurai plus de temps.

Ricardus 11:57, 24 Iulii 2007 (UTC)[]

Loidensis!?[fontem recensere]

I was just searching around the catholic diocese site and it suggested Loidensis! I didn't believe it was serious but after a search I also found this site suggesting an nominative as 'loidis'. It isn't my actual goal (i.e. Leodis) but could this still be put in a sive/infobox?

P.S. I also found out a book called Ducatus Leodiensis, not that that advances my quest any further :( --Harrissimo 16:00, 24 Iulii 2007 (UTC)[]

I have added Leodis and Loidis now to Ledesia. I will delete the table, since it makes the Horsforth page look a bit over the top and neither of the other 2 Wikis who have Horsforth articles use one. So I will remove it, and the one for Incolae Noti on the Espo page. BTW, the picture was actually taken by a Swede (not as in the vegetable...) Good luck making some money! --Harrissimo 17:09, 26 Iulii 2007 (UTC)[]

De Oculo Solis fabula[fontem recensere]

Here is that text you requested:

.. ὀ δ’ ἔφ]η· πρὸς τῆς Τύχης […
......]εινεν τῶι στόματ[ι..
......]κτος ἄρτος ἐστι .[..]α̣
...]ακτος· η καὶ τουτ̣[..] τρο[φ......] ἐστιν· ὀμώμοκά σ̣ο̣ι̣,
εἴρηκά] σοι.
—Frag. A, col. I, lines 51—56

As a special bonus, here's the original Demotic (which goes into much more detail):

Ḏd n=s pɜ Wnš-Kwf “Tw=y c.wy Pɜ-Šɜy! Tw=y nw rr=s
ḏd cnḫ n ḏkyḏ pɜ-ỉr=t, m qty.t ḏd: mtw=t kḏ ky. Ỉrty.t / tcɜ.t bly.t pɜ nt ỉr n=t ẖrɜ.t, bw(-?)ỉr(-?)rḫ=t pɜy=f ẖmm ỉrm pɜy=f
ḥḏy, m-qty ḏd: pɜy=f cnḫ, pɜy=f mwt, m-qtyt ḏd: {mtw=t ḫm | ỉn} pɜ nt r ỉw=f
r ty ḥmm=f, mtw=f ty ḥḏy=f tɜ ḥṱy.t [tɜy (nt wn?)] mtw=f. Tw=y ỉr
cnḫ ỉỉr-ḥr=t ḏd wɜḥ ỉw=y ḏṱ=s n=t.”
The Jackal-Monkey said “I am the arms of Fate! I see that it is the oath of a child that you have made. Which is to say you are another child. Milk, bread, bly.t are what are your (i.e his) sustenance, you do not know his heat and his cold, which is to say, his life and his death. Which is to say {you are a little one: | is it the case that} that which makes him hot, and makes him cold is the fear that is his{.|?} I swear to you that I have told you.”

The "jackal-monkey," by the way, is Thoth. Part of the story is that the two deities have transformed themselves into animals. I suspect "jackal-monkey" is the original Egyptian term on which Greek κυνοκέφαλος is modeled. This especially makes sense given that the baboon (κυνοκέφαλος) was a sacred animal of Thoth's. One problem with that theory: the Greek version of the does not translate jackal-monkey as κυνοκέφαλος, but as λυκόλυγξ!! Um... OK.

The items in curly-brackets have been read differently by different scholars, and as I have not yet examined the Demotic manuscript with my own eyes, I have not formed an opinion as to what it actually says.

Anyway, let me know if anything interesting leaps out at you. --Iustinus 17:10, 24 Iulii 2007 (UTC)[]

Gratias ago[fontem recensere]

Gratias, Andrea, ago pro adhortatione benevolenter accepta. Vale.--Irenaeus 18:48, 30 Iulii 2007 (UTC)[]

Name for Seoul[fontem recensere]

Well, I agree Seulum was the established usage in the past. Recently, however, Seoulum has come to use and the usage is much extended now.

  1. I tried 'Seoulensis' and 'Seulensis', a derivative form, which is frequently used in latin nomenclature of species. While Seulensis gives only 264 results (reduced to 117)[2], I got 22,200 for Seoulensis (reduced to 426) [3]. This result excludes pages from wikipedia.
  2. There is a copy of a letter in latin from pope John Paul II, on designation of new archbishop of Uijeongbu. You can see what he used, Seoulum. --Nudimmud 10:37, 31 Iulii 2007 (UTC)[]

Dear Andrew,[fontem recensere]

in the next hours I can't check if this user ( try again to vandalize, could you help me. In a few minutes he has done a lot of damage. thank you and ciao--Massimo Macconi 15:49, 3 Augusti 2007 (UTC)[]

Yes, I'll watch, Massimo! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 15:55, 3 Augusti 2007 (UTC)[]

Multitudo nexuum[fontem recensere]


Hoc verum est, quod nimis multos nexus feci. Sed non venias in altero ultimo. Non omnes paginae, quae necessariae sunt, iam exsistunt. Et quoque verba, quae obvia videntur, non talia simplicia realiter sunt.

Saluto, Goslicius 16:03, 3 Augusti 2007 (UTC)[]

Apologies, too[fontem recensere]

Sorry, I thought you wouldn't respond, so that I saw your message slow, too. I can understand the reason "time", and I respect such people, it's not bad. I see to you for future: It's mainly that you reply anywhen, but do not not respond, this may be interpreted as disrespecting. But now I know, thanks, that was polite! Hope you have a nice day -- IP Quindicenne 14:10, 4 Augusti 2007 (UTC)[]

Ha! I like the word anywhen! --Ioscius (disp) 14:44, 5 Augusti 2007 (UTC)[]

Well... why? It doesn't exist? -- IP Quindicenne 16:46, 5 Augusti 2007 (UTC)[]

Yes, it exists: it's in the OED, marked: "Rare in literature, but common in southern dialects." IacobusAmor 17:03, 5 Augusti 2007 (UTC)[]
It may exist, but to a (modern) native speaker it sounds a bit funny (and if you check my babel box, you'll see I speak a southern dialect, myself). It is not bad, IP, and you were certainly well understood. I was being honest when I said I liked it =] --Ioscius (disp) 17:41, 5 Augusti 2007 (UTC)[]
By "southern dialects," it probably means "southern dialects of England." IacobusAmor 13:53, 6 Augusti 2007 (UTC)[]
As seen from a scriptorium in Oxford, the southern dialects of any other country are off the map or over the horizon. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 13:57, 6 Augusti 2007 (UTC)[]

-- Okay ;-)! -- IP Quindicenne 13:44, 6 Augusti 2007 (UTC)[]

pasteur[fontem recensere]

cher Andrew, à la page de discussion de Ingmar Bergman j'ai demandé aux autres amis de la.wiki tradution en latin du mot "pasteur" d'église. Ioshus il dit qu'on pourrait utiliser le mot sacerdos, mais je crois que les réformés n'accepteraient jamais une telle traduction parce que ces eglises ne connaissent pas un sacerdoce dans le sens de l'eglise catholique. que penses-tu? Merci--Massimo Macconi 09:46, 5 Augusti 2007 (UTC)[]

Je crois que sacerdos est impropre dans cette circonstance. Meilleur: ecclesiae minister. IacobusAmor 13:02, 5 Augusti 2007 (UTC)[]

Categoria:Biographia[fontem recensere]

I remember ... and I did not like the idea of having pages categorized two times. But I did not care much about it. The good thing: I have found out that we have {{CategoryTOC}} which solves the problem we have with large categories ;-) --Rolandus 14:44, 5 Augusti 2007 (UTC)[]

The dump[fontem recensere]

Thanks for the hint, I have a list where the template 'Praefecturae Franciae' was missing. This is the list:

	    'Regiones Berolini',
	    'Urbs Birmaniae',
	    'Elementa chemica',
	    'Grammatica Latina',
	    'Commune provinciae Bauzanensis',
	    'hispania Visigothica',
	    'Praefecturae Franciae'

I have created these two sections of the dump again. Really more useful now. ;-) --Rolandus 16:55, 7 Augusti 2007 (UTC)[]

Vicipaedia:Translatio#Disputationes[fontem recensere]

Andrew, I cited you again: Vicipaedia:Translatio#Disputationes ;-) Because this covers the question "Shall we have list elements translated?". I think we should not have it when there is a blue link, but we should have it, when the link is red and the translation makes it clearer what is meant. --Rolandus 10:42, 12 Augusti 2007 (UTC)[]

salve![fontem recensere]

Hi Andrew! How's your summer going? I am still excavating, so I will not be able to help in Vicipaedia at least until late August. I haven't either been checking what things are going on... Is there anything important that has happened here in the last month? I'll try to finish the page of Hispania Visigothica before September. Cheers!--Xaverius 19:00, 12 Augusti 2007 (UTC)[]

De pagina ad British Parliament pertinenti rectius nominanda[fontem recensere]


L'emploi que certains font de senatus me semble risquer de provoquer des confusions et j'aimerais savoir ce qu'en pense quelqu'un qui, comme vous, est meilleur latiniste que moi et contributeur plus fréquent. Dans l'article "Senatus Britanniarum", le mot désigne le parlement dans son ensemble, i.e. les Lords et les Communes, alors que dans "Senatus Foederalis Germaniae" il désigne uniquement une des chambres, le Bundestag. On trouve d'ailleurs un autre cas de senatus employé comme traduction de chambre ou house dans "Glossarium rerum publicarum" à propos de la Chambre des Représentants, ce qui donnerait une définition absurde si on voulait faire de même avec le Sénat ("Senatus CFA est senatus superior..."). Bref ne croyez-vous pas qu'il faudrait que tout le monde s'entende une bonne fois sur les équivalents latins des termes du vocabulaire parlementaire ? Après tout, l'avantage de Vicipaedia est que les contributeurs sont peu nombreux, donc il ne devrait pas être impossible de trouver un consensus. Personnellement, je serais d'avis, comme je l'ai écrit hier dans la page de discussion de "Senatus Britanniarum", de traduire parliament par parlamentum, ce qui permettrait de garder senatus pour les assemblées dont le nom vient de ce mot (senate, sénat, senato, senado, etc.). Quid tibi videtur ?ThbdGrrd 19:42, 13 Augusti 2007 (UTC)[]

Ait Ainsworth's Dictionary (Londinii, ca. 1780–1830):
A parliament, Senatus.
To call, or summon, a parliament, Senatum convocare, comitia edicĕre.
To hold, or keep, a parliament, Comitia celebrare.
To prorogue a parliament, Comitia prorogare. To dissolve it, Dissolvĕre.
The parliament-house, Senaculum, curia comitialis.
A parliament-man, Senator.
Parliamentary, Ad senatum pertinens, ex usu ||parliamenti. ← Signum "||" significat verbum non esse bonum Latinum translaticium.
Ait 'Bradley's Arnold' Latin Prose Composition (Londinii [1938] 1961):
Parliament = Senate. [p. 414]
Senate, senātus, 4, m. [p. 420]
Senate house, cūria, f. [p. 420] IacobusAmor 22:06, 13 Augusti 2007 (UTC)[]

Ambacia[fontem recensere]

Sciebam hanc paginam aciem tuam capturam, Andrea! --Fabullus 12:24, 14 Augusti 2007 (UTC)[]

gerundivum[fontem recensere]

Gerundivum, ut mihi videtur, saepe nimio aestimatur. Antiqui saepe gerundio usi sunt ubi grammatici nobis gerundivum praecipiunt. Lucretius 1.111 scribit "aeternas ... poenas in morte timendum." (vice "poenae ... timendae") et idem 4.777 "multaque nobis clarandumst" (vice "multaque claranda sunt") Nullam rem ergo tibi curandum est! --Fabullus 12:21, 17 Augusti 2007 (UTC)[]

Levels[fontem recensere]

Thanks for your note. I've added this: Disputatio_Vicipaediae:Latinitas#Questions_about_the_levels_of_latinitas. ;-) --Rolandus 12:19, 18 Augusti 2007 (UTC)[]

Minime[fontem recensere]

Haud quaquam Andrew.

Omnia computatra systema asministrativum requiruntur

vide..requiro sibi vult..quaero,rogo..quid sim sed in passiva voce.. sibi vult..necesse..


Newspaper names[fontem recensere]

I copy here my discussion under Tempora Novi Eboraci: Ok I agree with you to wait and see what the others think. It's true that other wikis don't translate the names but on en.wiki is always given the english translation of the newspaper name, e.g Le Monde (English: The World) is a French daily evening newspaper with a circulation in 2004 of 371,803. ciao--Massimo Macconi 09:40, 25 Augusti 2007 (UTC)[]

With auctor I have heard it said the person who first wrote this page under a German name with possibile Latin traslation in the text, therefore I believe we could return without problems to the German name also for the Tagblatt. For Osservatore Romano I'll check www.vatican.va, if there's a Latin translation. Ciao e grazie --Massimo Macconi 14:31, 29 Augusti 2007 (UTC)[]
Post scriptum there's no problem for the "slowing down" the important thing is to follow a common standard. Now I'll add new pages with the original name

Iura[fontem recensere]

Dear Andrew, I too prefer I to J. when I did the page, I was at the beginning without experience and with all my Latin forgotten, therfore I agree with the move Ciao--Massimo Macconi 09:37, 1 Septembris 2007 (UTC)[]

New Vocabolary[fontem recensere]

I have bought a new ditionary with CD: very useful!

Luigi Castiglioni, Scevola Mariotti, Vocabolario della Lingua Latina, Latino - Italiano . Italiano - Latino, IV edizione a cura di Piergiorgio Parroni con CD Rom, Torino 2007

Calvaria Samogitiensium[fontem recensere]

Thank you for your work on article Calvaria Samogitiensium. May I ask you to expand it a little bit more? It is pretty important Christian artcle, so I think it would be pretty important to have it in Latina. Pleckaitis 06:30, 24 Septembris 2007 (UTC) (Best of greetings from Samogitia).[]

email[fontem recensere]

Hi Andrew, would you mind checking your email? I know you usually see messages here, first. Regards.--Ioscius (disp) 14:55, 25 Septembris 2007 (UTC)[]

interwiki[fontem recensere]

Hi Andrew, thanks for reminding me of the interwiki links (and for adding them for me, of course). I actually wanted to extend the article and add them in the next days, but from now on I'll do it at once when starting an article. --Partonopier 19:01, 25 Septembris 2007 (UTC)[]

Voting[fontem recensere]

Hi, Andrew, thanks for the note ... this voting has not been announced, so I missed it. But a personal invitation is even better. :-) --Rolandus 14:17, 29 Septembris 2007 (UTC)[]

sidus[fontem recensere]

Thank you very much for proposing me for a sidus honoris. Ad multos annos! --Alex1011 20:47, 30 Septembris 2007 (UTC)[]

De Aquitaniae provincia, ducatu, regno et regione[fontem recensere]

Ut scripsi in pagina mea "Il ne nous reste plus qu'à créer des articles relatifs au duché d'Aquitaine de l'époque mérovingienne, au royaume d'Aquitaine de l'époque carolingienne et au duché de Guyenne !" ThbdGrrd 12:20, 17 Octobris 2007 (UTC)[]

Wayne's Quicky Lube[fontem recensere]

Ego Wayne's Quicky Lube IP locum eundem cum schola teneo. Omnes discipuli scholae Linguam Latinam student. Vicipaedia nostris discipulis est maximi momenti et ponderis. Placeo tibi te removere obtructionem. Plurimas gratias agam. 14:49, 17 Octobris 2007 (UTC)[]

OK, I'll take it off, and we'll see. But no jokes, please! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 14:59, 17 Octobris 2007 (UTC)[]

Tibi plurimas gratias pro suam indulgentiam. Alia autem IP loca scholastica, quorum unus praescriptus ( non ex parte est, obstructa remanet. patere, magister misericordia plene, liberorum voces auditas esse. Wayne's Quicky Lube 16:05, 17 Octobris 2007 (UTC)[]

Hmm. I don't see why. I thought I had reversed the block, but blocking and unblocking are complicated processes for mere mortals like me. I'll ask around. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 16:16, 17 Octobris 2007 (UTC)[]

Defence Minister[fontem recensere]

Salve! For defence minister, formula:LCBF suggests for Minister of Defence: patriae totius rei militari praepositus which I guess could be shortened to Praepositus rei militari. My dictionaries suggest that minister is more of a servant than a politician. P.S. It's an honour to be your 100th disputator! Harrissimo.

Hmm. I see just what you mean, and I like praepositus rei militari. I suppose ministers started out as Royal servants, even if they tend to forget this nowadays ... I fear we already have an awful lot of ministers on Vicipaedia, though. Are you really recommending that we change them all?! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 19:25, 31 Octobris 2007 (UTC)[]
[4]. I understand now. Minister -tri is servant and minister -trii is minister. I have no problem with the word now. We could probably even exchange praepositus if we need uniformity. Harrissimo.
No, I don't think this ("Minister -tri is servant and minister -trii is minister") is correct. I think they are the same word, and -trii is a mistake. The fact is, for a modern government minister, Latin minister is a good term for historical reasons (because they are historically servants of the head of state) but Latin praepositus is a good term for contemporary reasons (because they don't behave like anybody's servants and they have been put in charge of something). You takes your choice, I think. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 20:01, 31 Octobris 2007 (UTC)[]
Actually, words lists -trii as legitimate but "NeoLatin uncommon". Harrissimo.
I'm surprised. There you go ... Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 20:56, 31 Octobris 2007 (UTC)[]

Hong Kong[fontem recensere]

Howdy. Just wondering, is there any guidance at all given on how to Latinise names? Should it be Latinisations of the original name, or should it be a Latin translation of the original name?

E.g., Latinisation: "Confucius" Translation: "Kong, the Venerable Old Sage"

Ago gratias tibi! YuanShikai 03:37, 1 Novembris 2007 (UTC)[]

Nebrasca-hata[fontem recensere]

get a life dalby. you know the Eskimos were the first inhabitants of nebrasca. you're just as bad as those people who deny the holocaust. and by the way, how was your butryalia?

I replied to this (mistakenly, as it turns out) at Disputatio Usoris:Rex Nebrascorum. See further discussion in re Nebrascae there. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 09:55, 7 Novembris 2007 (UTC)[]

I wish to Reply to "Nebrasca-Hata"[fontem recensere]

-Dude, holocaust humor? No. Definitely not.Your defense of the Nebraska truth movement has done more to damage it than could a thousand Ioscii Rochii. At least spell Butyrumalia right. Jesus! As a fellow supporter of the Nebraska-truth movement, I wish to distance myself from this tasteless vandal and re-affirm that the movement is devoted to correcting Vicipaedia's factual inaccuracies with class, and will never, ever make light of the holocaust. That's not our thing.

Sir, you are a disgrace to Nebraska-Truth supporters evertwhere.

Post scriptum: The Nebraska-truth movement also does not engage in ad hominem attacks against usores such as Mr. Dalby. It's just childish.

Apologies on behalf of my colleague,

Nebraska-Truth Editor #1,842

Certainly I agree with both points here:
  1. Making fun of the holocaust is uncool everywhere.
  2. In fact, I have it on good faith that far from making ad hominem attacks on Dr. Dalby, he is rather considered the movement's "homey".
Speaking, Mr. 1,842, however, about spelling, there happen to be two Cs in my nomen gentilicum.
--Ioscius (disp) 01:41, 6 Novembris 2007 (UTC)[]

- Apologies, Ioscius. By the way, I hope you all had a pleasant Butyrumalia. (In all sincerity)

Farewell, Nebraska-Truth Editor 1,842

Melius facere textum meum[fontem recensere]

Non tantum retrahere, quantum meliorare textum meum volebam. Pippus 18:16, 8 Novembris 2007 (UTC)[]

Tibi gratias Andrew. Si argumentum meum validum putas, pergratum mihi feceris tu ipse restituens emendationem meam. Aliter, timeo ne quispiam me accuset vastationis. Vale. Pippus 15:04, 10 Novembris 2007 (UTC)[]

Babel[fontem recensere]

I am endeavoring to add, from the instructions included on the English Babel set, the complete set of Babel forms, as they did not exist in the Latin version, and did not (seem to?) conform to the international standard. I cannot see a way of adding them in one complete go, alas... perhaps I should have started with a bottom-up instead of a top-down approach? The "user cannot read... etc", is the literal copy of the english Babel form, as described in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Babel . I am just following the instructions found there under "How to get Babel boxes to work on other Wikipedias"... Bonicolli 11:37, 11 Novembris 2007 (UTC)[]

Thanks for your kind answer. Perhaps we could just make this just a simple redirect? It would be ideal if the Babel boxes behaved the same in every Wikipedia. Bonicolli 14:51, 11 Novembris 2007 (UTC)[]

rex nebrascae[fontem recensere]

Hey Andrew-

I was thinking of unblocking this guy and seeing where he goes. Read his latest comment:


--Ioscius (disp) 17:17, 11 Novembris 2007 (UTC)[]

Riga[fontem recensere]

I agree completely with you. Tomorrow morning I was in a hurry therefore I didnt' do it myself. Now I'm going to correct the pages Lettonia and capita mundi.Ciao--Massimo Macconi 11:42, 13 Novembris 2007 (UTC)[]

De formula paginarum homonymarum[fontem recensere]

Hi Andrew! May I suggest you that you write the template on homonyms on the first line of the article? If it is placed after the template for an image the image is put on top of the template and all the text is moved under it, the result being that the top part of the page is left blank but for the image. I do not know if I made myself understood, so you can check it in the changes I've made in the pages on hobbits.--Xaverius 16:04, 13 Novembris 2007 (UTC)[]

I can imagine what you describe, but in my browser it doesn't happen. However, Hendricus also prefers to place the formula as you do, above the image, so, yes, I will follow your advice and his example! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 16:09, 13 Novembris 2007 (UTC)[]
I wouldn't have thought that it was a matter of my browser!--Xaverius 16:11, 13 Novembris 2007 (UTC)[]
Believe it or not ... I have just tested, using the page Achaea. What you describe happens on IE and Opera 9; it does not happen on Firefox, Netscape or Opera 6. So I'll do as you say, because that will give a better page layout for everybody (so far as we know!) Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 16:21, 13 Novembris 2007 (UTC)[]
There was a small problem in Formula:Videdis, which caused different browsers to guess differently about how this problem should be tackled. I corrected the template, so there should be no significant differences between browsers any more. --UV 22:56, 13 Novembris 2007 (UTC)[]

split category after nation[fontem recensere]

Hi, if i want to splitup the scientists by nation, without getting "too" detailed, what would it become?

-- Hendricus 18:11, 13 Novembris 2007 (UTC)[]

It's a very good idea. I think the best form would be Categoria:Biologi Britannici (noun first, geographical adjective second). Agreed, you can also put each person in a category that pins down the specialty more precisely, like categoria:Ornithologi.
Adjectives you'll want include Britannici (note that one t and two n's is standard!), Francici, Germanici, Italici, Hispanici, Lusitanici (Portuguese), Helvetici (Swiss), Danici, Suedici (Swedish), Norvegici, Austriaci, Hungarici, Polonici, Russici, Graeci, ... For U.S. people, I think we have generally not used "Americani", because "Americani" really refers to the continent, not the nation: so for these you could say Categoria:Biologi Civitatum Foederatarum, literally "Biologists of the United States". Ask me any others you like! When adding a previously unknown category to a page, you can safely leave it as a redlink for a day or two, in case anyone else has opinions about the title or spelling, before you go ahead and create the category page. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 18:58, 13 Novembris 2007 (UTC)[]
  • Ok, then where to put the categories? i was thinking (take the english as example)
  1. categoria:Biologi Brittanici placed into categoria:Britannia and categoria:Biologi alter natio???
  2. categoria:Zoologi placed into categoria:Zoologia and categoria:Biologi alter speciality???
Well now.
  • We have not been consistent about categories for people by national origin. Sometimes there is a category, but it may take several forms: see Categoria:Britanni (that's one way) and Categoria:Homines Turciae (that's another way). Sometimes there isn't one at all, in which case the only available supercategory is the nation itself, e.g. Categoria:Germania. I don't think I can give a general rule (I wish there was one). Either you go searching among existing categories, or you leave the task for someone else. Either approach is quite respectable!
  • The other supercategory -- the specialty -- is easy enough. [note: I wrote carelessly here. I meant to say, the other supercategory into which you place Categoria:Biologi Britannici etc. ] -- My answer is, you can simply put it in Categoria:Biologi, or, I think better, you can make a new category Categoria:Biologi secundum civitatem -- which itself will become a member of Categoria:Biologi. ("secundum" means "according to")
  • I think a specialty category like categoria:Zoologi should go into categoria:Zoologia and categoria:Biologi. No need for anything more, so far as I can see. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 19:24, 13 Novembris 2007 (UTC)[]
  • Ok, make it a rule then, about the supercategories:
  1. according to speciallity: categoria:Biologi secundum civitatem
    1. according to nation: categoria Biologi secundum natio??
No, sorry, I wrote carelessly and I have confused you. Civitas means "state, nation". I chose this word (rather than natio) when I created Categoria:Litteratura secundum civitatem because natio has various other connotations, ethnic etc., whereas civitas (I think) is more purely political/geographic. So categoria:Biologi secundum civitatem is "Biologists according to country".
If you want a category "... according to speciality", make it "Categoria:Biologi secundum specialitatem" (unless someone suggests a better word). Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 20:53, 13 Novembris 2007 (UTC)[]
Ok, i suspected something like that, thanks, Hendricus 21:08, 13 Novembris 2007 (UTC)[]
I am planning to create the missing categories for people by nation, but I guess I won't come around to it soon, because there are still a lot of exams coming up until mid of December, which are all relevant for my Abitur. . . And maybe we should decide fist how to name the categories: Categoria:Germani or Categoria:Homines Germaniae. --Amphitrite 22:03, 13 Novembris 2007 (UTC)[]
  • Hi, yesterday i've managed to get the biologi categorised, looking at it i think the same structure can be used for: categoria:Medici, categoria:Musici and categoria:Chemici, probably there are more of these professions so i think it would be wise to place a category between the "profession by country" and the country itself, what do you think??Hendricus 16:23, 14 Novembris 2007 (UTC)[]
Notice that Amphitrite (just above) plans to develop the people-by-nation categories, maybe in December. I also plan to write more articles about Scriptores and Historici and maybe some other academic types. I suggest it may be best to develop the structure further, over the next few weeks, as we add more articles. It is fairly easy to add supercategories whenever we want to. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 17:18, 14 Novembris 2007 (UTC)[]

Quaestio Le K-li[fontem recensere]

Removi quaestionem, responsus, disputationes ad Disputatio Usoris:Le K-li. Spero neminem me vituperaturum! Fere nihil scio de iconographia religiosa ... Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 11:59, 14 Novembris 2007 (UTC)[]

Godlieb[fontem recensere]

Hi, Andrew, is there a Latinname for Godlieb? Hendricus 23:22, 15 Novembris 2007 (UTC)[]

Amadeus has been used. Try it and see if anyone has a better idea. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 23:52, 15 Novembris 2007 (UTC)[]

Hello, could you please check my article I've just created (Antanas Pocius). I didn't know words for choirmaster and organist in Latin :) Thank you --A.A.J.S. 18:23, 17 Novembris 2007 (UTC)[]

corrections[fontem recensere]

Hi, Andrew, i was wondering why my new contributions from the past few days aren't corrected, is there someone who's in general for checking the new pages like at the english or dutch projects? Some of those corrections i like to use for future articles, thanks, Hendricus 19:11, 20 Novembris 2007 (UTC)[]

I guess there isn't any reason, Hendrice, just that maybe no one has had the time! There are not so many of us here at Vicipaedia. As for me, yes, I have been very busy ... Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 19:18, 20 Novembris 2007 (UTC)[]

Categoria:Correction needed bucket[fontem recensere]

Goodevening, i've created this bucket - wich i will be placing at several users, hoping one of you have some sparetime to give a look at it, for some articles wich need some attention about some corrections and translationhelp, the corrections made will be used for exsample for future addings, thanks for your help, Hendricus 19:20, 23 Novembris 2007 (UTC)[]

cat: Biologia[fontem recensere]

Goodday Andrew, i just started with selecting the articles in the categoria:Biologia, (hope you don't mind) - i've created two subcats about categoria:Vita Biota .. as starting place to all species, and categoria:Homo antiqui don't know if it's the right choice do, Hendricus 19:33, 27 Novembris 2007 (UTC)[]

I've placed the specialties within subcat: categoria:Biologia secundum specialitatem and started with: categoria:Chemia secundum specialitatem and categoria:Medicina secundum specialitatem, what do you think?Hendricus 19:34, 27 Novembris 2007 (UTC)[]
I'm not certain what to do with categoria:Libri biologici ?? Hendricus 19:48, 27 Novembris 2007 (UTC)[]

Silphium[fontem recensere]

My mind boggles at the task of writing on the infamous condiment. I can't even decide which of the many names for the plant we should place the article under, let alone how to structure the actual text. Any clever advice? Or would you like, being the real expert, to volunteer yourself for the task? ;) --Iustinus 00:29, 3 Decembris 2007 (UTC)[]

... Admittedly, up to now I haven't done much about food in Vicipaedia (simply because for the last year and more the "real" work I've had to do has been on other topics).
On the title, I think I would go for Laserpicium, but not with much confidence. As for writing it, well, yes, perhaps I might. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 12:48, 3 Decembris 2007 (UTC)[]
I haven't yet though ... Sorry! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 09:49, 10 Decembris 2007 (UTC)[]
I somehow missed your responses here. If you do manage to write this, I shall be insufferably pleased. If not, I may get around to it myself someday. I think we should describe asafoetida under assa foetida but make it clear that the distinction is essentially modern (much as you argued for safranum). --Iustinus 17:09, 10 Decembris 2007 (UTC)[]

Auxilium pro editione[fontem recensere]

Ok, I understand. --Anarkangel 22:41, 3 Decembris 2007 (UTC)[]

formula:Capsa linguae[fontem recensere]

Salve! If you know how to work these fiddly 'if' tags, please could you attach one to the IPA pronunciation in the formula? (the dash just looks a little out of place at Linguae Samicae). Harrissimo 00:40, 10 Decembris 2007 (UTC).[]

Yes, I'll try. (I don't really know how to work them, I usually just copy them from places where they are already working!) Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 09:49, 10 Decembris 2007 (UTC)[]
Salve, Andrea! A small detail re IPA: Linguists doing phonetics and phonology are very keen on putting phonetic symbols in brackets, "[...]". I suggest we observe the convention. --Neander 19:46, 10 Decembris 2007 (UTC)[]
Respondi in mea pagina. Martinus Neander 22:31, 10 Decembris 2007 (UTC)[]

Historia Linguae Latinae[fontem recensere]

Hi, I created a new version for the Latin language history timeline in the related Taberna section. Please take a look at it. Thank you! --Mexicanus Flag of Mexico.svg (scribe!) 18:52, 11 Decembris 2007 (UTC)[]

Vice Bunes[fontem recensere]

Hi Andrew, noticed your comment under Vanuatu. I can't say I read Latin very well, so I confine my contributions to English WP, but I thought I should point out a few problems I have with the Vice Bunes story. Having read and taught Pacific and Australasian history for 30 years, I've never come across this story at all, nor is it even remotely alluded to in any books in my reasonably extensive library. The only reference I can find that verifies this story is here [6] This seems to be a summary of a symposium about Croatian ethnicity and history, about which I know nothing. On page 11 it makes the claim that Vice Bune explored Melanesia etc, but also goes on to suggest Croatians discovered North America, suggesting it is a highly questionable source. M. Yosamya is cited as the authority.

On English WP, the first reference to Vice Bune etc were made on 28 and 29 October, 2006, both from an anonymous user (IP and IP under various headings (History of the Solomons, Vanuatu, Pacific Ocean etc). To the best of my knowledge, English WP has now removed all remaining references to him.

But on Simple English WP, Wikipilinas and several other WP projects, Vice Bunes continues alive and well. On the Wikipilinas Vice Bunes page, under Sources it says "Partly adapted, translated and completed (by the same author), from the articles Vice Bune both in Croatian Wikipedia, and in Vicipaedia Latina".

So - it seems to me that Vice Bunes and his Ragenseans owes it all to perhaps one author, apparently spreading the "good word".

Anyway- those are my thoughts. I will get back to English WP, but I will try to keep up my latin! Cheers --Nickm57 04:58, 13 Decembris 2007 (UTC)[]

Thank you for your comments and that reference, which is new to me. With materials that IacobusAmor has gathered already, these are exactly what I wanted for a brief meta-history of the Bune story. That, at any rate, may deserve a place on Vicipaedia. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 10:01, 13 Decembris 2007 (UTC)[]
Andrew you have made an outstanding contribution to this matter. I thought my detective work was good - but I take my hat off to you. --Nickm57 11:33, 14 Decembris 2007 (UTC)[]
Hi, I am this suspect son (Ph.dr. A.Ž. Lovrić) of prof. M. Lovrić - disreputed in your 'Vicipaedia Latina'. - His ignorant pseudobiography you wrote and published here, is very offensive and 90% falsified, as follows: He is not deceased but killed by Yugoslav secret police (UDBA), this was even two decennia prior to 2003 (he is born in 19th century - then in '2003' he may be even 130 old!). You are very ignorant in regional linguistics: he not 'pretended' at all to speak in 'Dalmatian' (that was a dead Romance language derived from Latin), but in a very divergent Liburnian being intermediate between the ancient Illyrian group and old-Venetic (Italic group) ... etc. Moreover, I am not 'botanist' (only as young student I worked in Botanic garden for funding) but then after my studies, M.Sc. and Ph.D. theses in other branches, I work some decennia ago in Dept. Molecular Genetics. In your pamphlet filled by malicious gossips, the unique truly fact is my name, and that he was college professor (of history). Thus, your falsified and offensive pamphlet in a street style of 'yellow' press is the worst one ever published on my father after Yugoslavia's disaster (and probably linked to former Yu. communists). Therefore, I am obliged to process you and Vicipaedia Latina in related European tribunals. --Dr. A.Ž. Lovrić, m.p. 2. 1. 2008.
Thanks for your comment, Dr Lovrić. The basis of the page I began on your father was not malicious gossip, but information available to me from your own statements on the Internet, from the Croatian national library, and from widely circulated claims about Vice Bune in which your father's work is frequently cited. It is because of these frequent citations that your father's work has become of wide interest, but unfortunately his own writings seem very difficult to get hold of outside Croatia. I will correct the biography, so far as I can, on the basis of your information above.
Is there any previously published biography or obituary to which you can refer me?
I do not understand what you say of his date of death. If he was killed two decennia before 2003, was he at that time 110 years old? If you could tell me plainly at what date he was born and at what date he died, this would help.
I cannot see anything offensive to you in the article, though I am sorry to have described you as a botanist when in fact you are a molecular geneticist. I'll correct that, of course. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 12:48, 2 Ianuarii 2008 (UTC)[]

Ob nexus fractos[fontem recensere]

Sorry for breaking the interwiki links. Clearly it was not intentional—my browser must have messed up the encoding. I doubt that’s something worth a month of block. Sincerely, Obstructus 18:37, 14 Decembris 2007 (UTC)[]

I see! Thanks for explaining that. I'll remove the block (the reason, of course, was that interwiki links are often altered by anonymous users, they can be vandalized and the vandalism can easily escape notice). Please check this problem carefully next time you edit: you may have to use a different browser, I guess. And do use a named account! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 18:49, 14 Decembris 2007 (UTC)[]
Thank you, I’ll watch out when I edit with this browser. Sincerely, Obstructus 18:55, 14 Decembris 2007 (UTC)[]
Which browser (and which operating system) were you using when you made this edit? In fact, there is a safeguard mechanism in place in MediaWiki that should prevent such things from happening with browsers that are known to have this problem. It would be a good idea to have your browser added to the "wgBrowserBlackList" to prevent this problem from reoccurring. Greetings, --UV 23:13, 15 Decembris 2007 (UTC)[]

phylum[fontem recensere]

Morningagain Andrew, just wondering about Latin and english > Phylum or Phyllum ?? Hendricus 11:35, 30 Decembris 2007 (UTC)[]

much much better[fontem recensere]

Morning Andrew - and all the best wishes for the coming year, i think it's much better about the categoria of the taxobox, for now i'll be working at some images at commons, this afternoon or evening i'll make this correction tour trough all marsupial and monotremes articles, i like you to take a last look about the Wallabia bicolor for any corrections befor i use it in that purpose, thanks, Hendricus 12:45, 1 Ianuarii 2008 (UTC)[]

Dickens[fontem recensere]

...of course. Happy new Year you too--Massimo Macconi 13:06, 5 Ianuarii 2008 (UTC)[]

pagina structure biographies[fontem recensere]

Hi Andrew, it seems we have two kinds of structures for the biographical lemmas:

I think we should try to keep one kind of structure, Hendricus 15:53, 5 Ianuarii 2008 (UTC)[]
Do you mean the birth and death? Not a problem, I think. If you have only the years, you can do it the simple way (1900-1999). If you have more (days and months, places, etc.) you need the extra words to make everything clear. (natus die 7 Maii 1900 Londinii; mortuus ...). OK? Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 16:16, 5 Ianuarii 2008 (UTC)[]
I'm the one who changed the structure of Andreas Marius Constantinus Dumeril to show that, if a stipula is expected to grow (as 99.99% of them are), it should be structured ab initio to ease that growth. Putting full dates & places of birth & death in the first line will inconvenience later editors, who'll be obliged to spend extra effort removing full dates & places from the first line, often rewording them, and always putting them elsewhere. All the temporal information that's needed in the first line is the plain years in parentheses, e.g. "(1876–1954)." The first sentence is a succinct summary, needing only the person's (1) name, (2) years (or century), and (3) claim to fame. The details will naturally follow. (For some people, a short "Vita" section will suffice; for others, the "Vita" section will break down into many subsections or new sections.) I've made this point before, but it should have been made at the beginning, before Vicipaedia had accumulated maybe a thousand or more biographical stubs. Expansion of every one of them will require effort that wouldn't be wasted had such stubs been structured for growth at the start. Since we're surely much, much, much closer to the start of Vicipaedia than the finish, we can still feel confident about rethinking the way biographical stubs are structured. To organize their information as if they were complete articles (which is what many writers have been doing) may give them the illusion of elegance, but it places a barrier in the way of writers who want to expand them. IacobusAmor 17:11, 5 Ianuarii 2008 (UTC)[]
Fine. I didn't realise you had edited Dumeril. I agree with your points ... but I'm not a serial writer of biographical stubs. I'll leave further discussion on this to you and Hendricus (and maybe Massimo??) Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 18:18, 5 Ianuarii 2008 (UTC)[]

Muséum National d'Histoire Naturelle[fontem recensere]

Morning Andrew, how do you translate: Muséum National d'Histoire Naturelle paris? Hendricus 13:19, 6 Ianuarii 2008 (UTC)[]

Hi, Andrew, i think that when someone who's a better Latin author than myself translate some of the tekst from English wiki, most of the links redirecting to institutes are blue (the French that is), Hendricus 16:25, 6 Ianuarii 2008 (UTC)[]
I mean within the lemma's of French naturalists, Hendricus 16:26, 6 Ianuarii 2008 (UTC)[]

Academia de Medicine[fontem recensere]

Hi, Andrew, when you look at Academia Nationalis Medicinae and you go to the French interwiki, what does it says? is it a part of the French Institute or not? it's different from the English, Hendricus 21:04, 7 Ianuarii 2008 (UTC)[]

Got it. mais ne fait pas partie de l'Institut de France "but does not form part of the Institut de France". Also, it never went to Poitiers: it went to the "rue de Poitiers" (Poitiers Street) in Paris. I thought that seemed odd. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 09:47, 8 Ianuarii 2008 (UTC)[]

Elliot[fontem recensere]

[Copied from my user talk in case anyone wants to improve my suggested names of institutions -- or indeed translate the whole text! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 12:57, 9 Ianuarii 2008 (UTC) ][]

Goodday Andrew, can you help me with translating this peace of tekst? Hendricus 21:45, 8 Ianuarii 2008 (UTC)[]

->Elliot was one of the founders of the American Museum of Natural History in New York and the American Ornithologists' Union. He was also curator of zoologia at the Field Museum in Chicago.

Elliot used his wealth to publish a series of sumptuous color-plate books on birds and animals. Elliot wrote the text himself and commissioned artists such as Iosephus Wolf and Iosephus Smit, both of whom had worked for Ioannes Gould, to provide the illustrations.

The National Academy of Sciences awards the Daniel Giraud Elliot medal "for meritorious work in zoology or paleontology published in a three- to five-year period. Established through the Daniel Giraud Elliot Fund by gift of Miss Margaret Henderson Elliot."<-

Ofcourse i like to add these institutes: American Museum of Natural History; Field Museum (Chicago); American Ornithologists' Union; National Academy of Sciense en ofcourse the Smithsonian Institute, maybe you can help me with the titles, Hendricus 21:53, 8 Ianuarii 2008 (UTC)[]
I would say: Museum Americanum Historiae Naturalis, Museum Fieldianum Historiae Naturalis; Consociatio Americana Ornithologorum; Academia Nationalis Scientiae; Institutum Smithsonianum. I'm copying this to the Taberna and others may make better suggestions. I say Consociatio because we have avoided Unio in the past, I guess because it's a rare word in Latin. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 12:57, 9 Ianuarii 2008 (UTC)[]

categoria: Socii M.N.H.N (Lutetia)[fontem recensere]

Good evening Andrew, you must have noticed that i have placed a category at some French scientists who have been working at the museum, i haven't created it because i have my doubts that socii is the right name for it, maybe professore or conservatore would be better, what do you think? Hendricus 19:15, 11 Ianuarii 2008 (UTC)[]

I thought maybe Conservatores was best, as you see. Difficult. I haven't met professors in museums before. I guess they taught and conserved at the same time! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 19:42, 11 Ianuarii 2008 (UTC)[]

I was hoping to see some correction (translation) at Gabriel Bibron, maybe you can help me with that?, Hendricus 19:20, 11 Ianuarii 2008 (UTC)[]

Thanks, I missed that. I'll look at it later tonight. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 19:42, 11 Ianuarii 2008 (UTC)[]
Certain museum-workers at the Smithsonian Institution are officially known as curators, for which the Latin curatores might be apt. Other workers who conserve materials there are not curators. IacobusAmor 20:31, 11 Ianuarii 2008 (UTC)[]
I always thougt that curator was a function of wich the person is responsable for moneymatters??, Hendricus 20:38, 11 Ianuarii 2008 (UTC)[]
Not in English. Iacobus is quite right, curators look after museum things. Maybe I should have chosen that word. But, after all, we want a word that can cover the "professores" as well as the "curatores". So we could leave it as it is for the present: see if anyone else has an opinion. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 20:50, 11 Ianuarii 2008 (UTC)[]
I don't have a dog in this fight, so maybe one of our better-read friends will compare the terms and make recommendations. At the Smithsonian (as I recall), the higher-ranking title is curator (curators are the people with the equivalent of academic tenure): some workers at the museum are curators, but many are not. Also with curator, bear in mind that we have the English VERB 'to curate', referring to the process of taking care of an object or a collection or preparing an exhibition; for this word, plain old curo, -are might be adequate. Contrast with it the English NOUN curate, for which the Latin vicarius, -i might suffice, though I see in the English dictionary that the medieval Latin for it was curatus, -i. IacobusAmor 22:13, 11 Ianuarii 2008 (UTC)[]
Now you're trying to confuse us. Curates (n.) have little to do with Hendricus's contributions to Vicipaedia, except possibly when he mentions eggs ... Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 09:52, 12 Ianuarii 2008 (UTC)[]
Eggs..? - now i'm confused, Hendricus 14:21, 12 Ianuarii 2008 (UTC)[]
It's a joke for (a) native speakers of English who (b) have a deep knowledge of English culture. ;) IacobusAmor 14:31, 12 Ianuarii 2008 (UTC)[]
Now, who is confused? Hendricus 14:42, 12 Ianuarii 2008 (UTC)[]
Imagine a mere curate invited to lunch with Lord X (some time in the 19th century), and anxious at all costs not to offend his host (who probably pays his stipend). There are boiled eggs. The curate starts on his egg, there is a bad smell, the curate looks worried. Lord X: "Have you a bad egg, Mr Y?" Curate, politely: "Oh, no, your Lordship, I assure you, it is very good in parts."
The joke first appeared as a cartoon in Punch, I think. You now have the required deep knowledge of English culture, Hendrice. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 15:37, 12 Ianuarii 2008 (UTC)[]
I put that "deep culture" bit in because most native speakers over here in America don't know what a curate is, have never heard of Punch, have never seen a bad egg, and might be puzzled as to why a lord would condescend to dine with someone to whom he was paying wages; however, I'll hazard a guess that most Americans have heard of the nineteenth century. IacobusAmor 15:48, 12 Ianuarii 2008 (UTC)[]
Permettez à un Français de vous donner une précision : le Muséum d'histoire naturelle n'est pas seulement un musée, mais aussi et surtout un institut de recherches et une sorte d'université. Les savants dont parle Hendricus sont donc des professeurs, qui sont titulaires d'une chaire (en latin cathedra), et non des conservateurs comme on en trouve dans les musées. Traduire par "socius" ("socii" au pluriel) me semble donc pertinent. ThbdGrrd 21:08, 12 Ianuarii 2008 (UTC)[]
Merci, ThbdGrrd! Très utile à savoir. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 10:19, 13 Ianuarii 2008 (UTC)[]

Litteratura[fontem recensere]

Doleo me iterum partem censoris agere, Andrea, sed nescio an ille litteraturae usus iam disputatus sit quem adhibuisti, verbum literature Latinum in sermonem vertens. Quod cum apud classicos auctores aut scripturam alphabeticam quae dicitur aut grammaticam significet, miror te non litterae Persicae, Anglicae, etc. scripsisse.--Ceylon 17:43, 12 Ianuarii 2008 (UTC)[]

Recte mones, Ceylon. Id verbum, hic diu adhibitum, accepi ut novus Vicipaedianus. Si mutamus, multi nos laudabunt; sed permultas paginas debebimus editare! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 18:11, 12 Ianuarii 2008 (UTC)[]
Dixit Cicero: "litteratura constat ex notis litterarum et ex eo, in quo imprimuntur notae" (http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/cgi-bin/ptext?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.04.0059%3Aentry%3D%2326839). IacobusAmor 18:30, 12 Ianuarii 2008 (UTC)[]

Denotat Tullius (aut potius auctor ignotus Oratoriarum partitionum) hoc loco scripturam quae constat ex notis litterarum, non opera poetica et pedestria.--Ceylon 18:41, 12 Ianuarii 2008 (UTC)[]

There is a saving grace. What we are talking about here is the names of categories. I know we are, because Ceylon just caught me editing some category pages and because scarcely a single literature survey article as yet exists on Vicipaedia. So:
(a) For writing something substantive about Litterae (a stub exists), Litterae Latinae, and any other literature, we have an almost blank canvas. We can decide what words are best and use them. No problem.
(b) It is the case in many languages and in many wikipedias that words used for classification and for building a taxonomy get slightly out of kilter with everyday life. This is normal: it's partly because classifiers and taxonomists and librarians are slightly mad, but also because you want taxonomy words to be sometimes more neutral and sometimes more inclusive and sometimes slightly differently bounded as compared with everyday words. Hence we have categories such as Categoria:Homines Turciae, which are awkward (in some cases almost dog-Latin) but convenient because of the problems of definition and exclusion that you get with Categoria:Turci. What I'm saying is, we should think of the nodes of the category structure as being tokens rather than words. We want them to be grammatical, and to be as clear as possible to the largest possible range of users, but we don't want them or need them to set our standard of good Latin writing.
We can still change them. Classifiers and taxonomists and librarians are often mad enough to change the names in their classifications. But it's hard work, and we need to think whether it's the way we most want to spend our time. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 10:19, 13 Ianuarii 2008 (UTC)[]
Tell me how to go about it and I'll have a go at changing them (unless anybody objects).--Ceylon 11:59, 13 Ianuarii 2008 (UTC)[]
I don't object, certainly. Click on "recensere" when you are on any category page (e.g. the one you want to change), and you'll see that (normally) it simply contains category entries for the next higher level in the tree (and sometimes interwiki links). You are eventually going to delete this category page, replacing it with a name we prefer. So.
Part I.
  1. Copy the whole contents of the edit window.
  2. Close it.
  3. Click on the first of the entries in the list (i.e. the first of the pages that belongs to that category).
  4. Click on "recensere" for that page.
  5. Edit the category name concerned, replacing the one we don't like with the one you are about to create.
  6. Save.
  7. Now you have a redlink for the category you haven't yet created. Click on it.
  8. Into the empty edit window, paste the material you copied at 1 above.
  9. Save.
  10. Before you forget, follow up one of the interwiki links into a non-Latin wikipedia and (via edit and save) correct the entry that appears there for [[:la:Categoria:...]], substituting your new category name.
Part II. (This could conceivably have been automated by some bot or other, but, if so, no one told me!)
  1. Using your browser "go back" function, go back to the old category page, the one we don't like.
  2. Click on the second entry in the list (you have already edited the first entry).
  3. Edit that page, as above, substituting your new category name. Save: notice that (if you typed it correctly!) it is now a blue link. But don't click on it.
  4. Using your browser "go back" function, go back to the old category page again.
  5. Repeat steps 2-4 until you have done them all.
  6. Finally, notice that there may be sub-categories that belong to this category (they will be listed above the list of pages that belong to it). If there are any such, you will need to edit them in just the same way.
  7. [Did I say finally? Finally, using your browser "go back" function, go back one last time to the old category page. Use your browser "refresh" function and verify that it now contains no pages and no sub-categories. Now click on "delere" and delete it!]
You have now changed the name of one category. Reward yourself with a chocolate. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 14:12, 13 Ianuarii 2008 (UTC)[]
part II, step 8: on the old category page, click on "nexus ad paginam" in the toolbox on the left-hand side of the screen and verify that no links point to the old category page. If there are links pointing there, most of them will need to be changed as well to point to the new category page.
Unless you are an administrator yourself, you cannot delete the old category page yourself. Edit the old category page and add {{delenda}} categoria mota ad [[:Categoria:CATEGORIANOVA]] --~~~~ (replace CATEGORIANOVA with the new category name). An administrator will then delete the old category.
Andrew: I think that there are bots that can move categories. I hope to get a better internet connection at some time in the future - I might try to operate a bot then, unless someone else can provide us with a "category renaming service". --UV 20:10, 13 Ianuarii 2008 (UTC)

Ouf, I just did a search for litteratura - you're right, there's a lot that needs changing. Why isn't there a search & replace function on Wikipedia? :) I'll try to get started with it, although I'm a tad nervous I might destroy something in the process. For the time being, could we agree not to use litteratura for any new pages at least?--Ceylon 15:26, 13 Ianuarii 2008 (UTC)[]

Yes, good point. OK. Any new categories can be Litterae ... not Litteratura ... from now on. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 18:24, 13 Ianuarii 2008 (UTC)[]
In view of what UV says above, it might be a good idea to hold off wholesale moves of existing categories for a short time. If a bot could do this for us, it would be much, much easier. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 20:36, 13 Ianuarii 2008 (UTC)[]
See Vicipaedia:Automata/Category move requests – I would be ready to try out a few simple tasks for Usor:UVbot if need arises. Greetings, --UV 01:45, 29 Martii 2008 (UTC)[]

"Litteratura" has long vexed me as well, but if we replace it with litterae, we'll need some new solution to distinguish litterae "literature" and litterae "writing system." Granted there's a difference between "letters" and "writing systems," but it seems to me that when the ancients wanted to refer to the latter they most commonly just said litterae+adj. Of course we'll have much more call for litterature categories than writing system categories, at least when it comes to specific adjectives. --Iustinus 11:22, 15 Ianuarii 2008 (UTC)[]

I see your point; however, in practice confusion may not be too badly compounded, because I think we are using Categoria:Scripturae for writing systems. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 21:06, 16 Ianuarii 2008 (UTC)[]

Poesis Epica[fontem recensere]

Mea culpa. Nescivi, autem non intellego funditus. Respondas, Anglice, quaeso. --Sapiens23 20:21, 19 Ianuarii 2008 (UTC)[]

Works by Authors[fontem recensere]

I read in Gallia that Caesar's De Bello Gallico was written "a C. Iulius Caesare". How should the sentence be written? Should we put both into the ablative? And if so, should there be anything done about the praenomen? --Sapiens23 19:26, 20 Ianuarii 2008 (UTC)[]

I changed it (just your everyday -us --> -o, which does indeed change for all parts of the name). Harrissimo 19:32, 20 Ianuarii 2008 (UTC).[]

Haai Andrew Dalby[fontem recensere]

My Dear Andrew, could you please inform me if there is an Old Greek Wikipedia project (.grc). Yours, L. Lucretia 14:06, 21 Ianuarii 2008 (UTC)[]

Not a fully functional wikipedia, but there is a test version here. I haven't been involved with it myself; I think the modern Greek wikipedia is even more deserving of support! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 15:59, 21 Ianuarii 2008 (UTC)[]

Thank you so much for your reply, I'm answering in my talk page where you also responded. Please see the message response there. CARITAS, Lucretia 16:26, 21 Ianuarii 2008 (UTC)[]

Hi![fontem recensere]

Hi Andrew. How would you say: C is the most (numerous)of the languages being spoken? --Jondel 14:55, 21 Ianuarii 2008 (UTC)[]

Ex omnibus aliis linguis in Philippinis acceptis usitatissima est Cebuanensis. "Of all the other languages spoken in the Philippines, Cebuano is the most used." That's my best try. I'll put this on the taberna in case better ideas emerge. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 16:16, 21 Ianuarii 2008 (UTC)[]

Gratias ago! I 'll be using Ceylon's version if you don't mind.--Jondel 08:35, 22 Ianuarii 2008 (UTC)[]

Data nationis[fontem recensere]

You were right - I confused myself with the old {{Lingua}} where they had privata and publica. Harrissimo 18:57, 31 Ianuarii 2008 (UTC).[]

De notis Graecis[fontem recensere]

Gratias quam maximas, Andrea, quod longe meliorem reddidisti formam notarum Graecarum a me in "re" Euripidea adhibitarum. Huius artificii posthac certe meminero. Martinus Neander 18:09, 1 Februarii 2008 (UTC)[]

Categoria:Stipulae Biographicae[fontem recensere]

yes of course I'll correct them. If you do not put defaultort, you have to put Name, Surname and sometimes I forget it. Ciao e grazie--Massimo Macconi 18:04, 12 Februarii 2008 (UTC)[]

same problem[fontem recensere]

I too am not at home from this saturday till sunday 25.2.08: we will see what we can do. Ciao

Translatio[fontem recensere]

Quæso, hanc formulam inspice corrigeque, ac de erroribus me explica ut discam.--Le K-li 20:32, 21 Februarii 2008 (UTC)[]

Pourquoi fanum ?[fontem recensere]

J’ai du mal à comprendre pourquoi vous tenez à re-nommer en "Fanum" des villes que toutes les chroniques et chartes médiévales appellaient "Sanctus…" ou "Sancta…". Les auteurs de ces chartes et de ces chroniques me semblent témoigner d’un usage ancien et je suis prêt à parier que c’est toujours ainsi que s’exprime l’Église catholique pour désigner, en latin, les lieux dont le nom commence par "Saint" ou "San" ou "Saõ". Les autres contributeurs de Vicipaedia agissent de même pour des toponymes d’autres pays que la France, d’ailleurs (par exemple pour des villes ou des provinces d’Amérique latine ou pour des capitales d’États américains). Cela me semble beaucoup plus clair... Vale nihilominus ThbdGrrd 10:13, 26 Februarii 2008 (UTC)[]

If I might intervene: According to [7] and our Vicipaedia:Translatio nominum propriorum in Latin there was usually made a difference between the Saint and the place named after the Saint. There might be some exceptions where this rule was not followed. --Alex1011 10:39, 26 Februarii 2008 (UTC)[]
Merci à vous deux! Mais je ne renomme pas (cette fois) -- c'est simplement que nous avons eu auparavant des liens rouges vers Fanum Dionysii, et j'en ai ajouté d'autres dans les pages que Thbd a éditées hier (sans toucher, d'ailleurs, au nom visible qu'il a préféré). Quant au choix entre les noms latins multiples de cette ville (voir ici!) je n'ai aucune opinion: la décision reste au téméraire qui commencera la page. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 11:37, 26 Februarii 2008 (UTC)[]
Ad Alex1011 An Hofmannus maxime reverendus sit non dubito, sed id de fani usu censeo quod de senatu ad parlamentum designandum iam scripsi (in disputatione "Parlamentum Britannicum"). Sententiis quae in Medio Aevo aut recentius creatae sunt et liquidiores sunt frui possumus et debemus, etiamsi saeculis XVII et XVIII a doctis contemptae sunt.
Pour Andrew Je continuerai donc, quand je créerai des articles sur des toponymes en "Saint(e)-quelqu'un", à écrire Sanctus ou Sancta. Je vais d'ailleurs créer ainsi des articles pour les abbayes mentionnées dans les articles sur les Carolingiens et les CapétiensThbdGrrd 20:00, 26 Februarii 2008 (UTC)[]
Mihi quidem magis placeat Urbs sancti/sanctae ... quam Fanum sancti/sanctae ..., sed videlicet non sum Hofmannus. --Fabullus 10:54, 4 Iulii 2008 (UTC)[]

Titus Quinctius Flamininus[fontem recensere]

Mea culpa. Ego lexi in primissimo versu "Titus Quinctius Flaminius" (nam hoc scriptum erat) et movi verba ad paginam "Titus Quinctius FlamiNIUS". Peto excusationem. Vale. --Vercassivellaunus 14:16, 29 Februarii 2008 (UTC)[]

You're welcome[fontem recensere]

I would say this in Latin, if I would only knew how. Văd că ştii şi puţină română. Asta e bine. You should add your name to Vicipaedia:Legatio nostra to provide help to new Romanian users. You're much more experienced than me. All the best! StefanCaliniuc 15:01, 3 Martii 2008 (UTC)[]

Britanniae[fontem recensere]

Thank you! I'm glad the research didn't go to waste! Harrissimo 22:59, 3 Martii 2008 (UTC).[]

Hyppolitus Flandrin[fontem recensere]

There isn't any particular reason, I have copied the formula from de.wiki. For defaultsort I'll add it at once. Ciao--Massimo Macconi 18:29, 5 Martii 2008 (UTC)[]

Choice of the new pages...[fontem recensere]

I reveal you the secret:

  1. suggestions I have found in the books I'm reading (for istance now Crystal, therefore Webster etc.)
  2. group of articles (encyclicae, dogi di Venezia) and when I do not know...
  3. Random article on other wikis till I find a page who interest me (there's always a lot of things to learn).

Ciao--Massimo Macconi 20:56, 5 Martii 2008 (UTC)[]

Tom R[fontem recensere]

Since the author has got a message, he will complain if it was not a joke ... and if he cares. --Rolandus 20:57, 7 Martii 2008 (UTC)[]

Andrew, shouldn't we restore the page and discuss the issue? See Disputatio Usoris:Ranthrock --Rolandus 21:35, 7 Martii 2008 (UTC)[]

Batpersons[fontem recensere]

When/if the page is finished at the Scriptorium, they can be merged, I guess. But I think we should not recommend a merger at any time if they are both written in bad Latin. Harrissimo 14:40, 8 Martii 2008 (UTC).[]

Vicipaedia-namespace[fontem recensere]

Andrew, maybe you will agree even more, after I tell you this ... ;-)

  • Yes, people will click through the pages. This is why I think interlinking the pages is important. The index-pages where meant as a entry-point, a checklist for the first time, like {{Salve}}.
  • I meant, that categorizing is not critical/dangerous. So we need less discussion than with other tasks. I think categorization is very important for navigating through the collection. However, since a page can be put into more than one, we can archieve even conflicting needs.
  • I did not mean that the pages shall look bad. But if they do, I will rather vote for improving them (and be patient) than quickly removing them.
  • The motivation of all actions should be to improve the collection and not to get rid of the ugly parts. I do not impute that someone has this motivation, but it should be a (written) guideline to not have this motivation. If this is trivial ... fine! :-)

--Rolandus 20:09, 8 Martii 2008 (UTC)[]

Calendarium Gregorianum[fontem recensere]

Sorry for not answering you in Latin. I assume you are English-speaking, and therefore you made a mistake usually done by English-speaking latinists, thinking that adjectives derived from proper nouns should be capitalized. That is definitely not the case in Latin, and the biggest evidence you have is that in ALL Latin languages words like these do not receive the upper case in their initials (pt:Calendário gregoriano, es:Calendario gregoriano, fr:Calendrier grégorien, it:Calendario gregoriano, ro:Calendarul gregorian etc). And I am yet to see compelling evidence that rules made for Germanic languages should be applied in Latin ones (especially in the Latin language par excellence). Could you provide them? Rsazevedo 15:51, 9 Martii 2008 (UTC)[]

Forgive me for jumping in here, but I can think of several reasons:
1. It's the style of the Clementine Bible; e.g., Et cum ducerent eum, apprehenderunt Simonem quemdam Cyrenensem (Biblia Sacra, Evangelium secundum Lucam, 23:26), non cyrenensem. This example does away with any worry that "rules made for Germanic languages" are being "applied in Latin ones."
2. It's the style of the Loeb editions; e.g., post ludos Romanos reum lege Plotia (Cicero, Letters to Friends, Loeb edition, vol. 205 [2001], p. 372), non post ludos romanos reum lege plotia.
3. It's the style of Vicipaedia as its tradition has developed. Look up romanus in the searchbox ("quaerere") and see what you see.
That's not to say that change isn't possible, but those who advocate change are usually the ones who need to prove their point. IacobusAmor 17:07, 9 Martii 2008 (UTC)[]
[Discussion copied to Vicipaedia:Taberna#Litterae maiusculae: let's continue there! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 17:20, 9 Martii 2008 (UTC)][]

Candidates[fontem recensere]

Thanks for testing :-) This is another try: Usor:Rolandus/temp/Candidates (the list without the pages which are likely to exist) --Rolandus 21:36, 9 Martii 2008 (UTC)[]

I have moved it to Usor:Rolandus/Missing important pages and started to work with it. --Rolandus 23:21, 9 Martii 2008 (UTC)[]
Thanks, I have added Constantinus I, Akbar Magnus and Aemilius Durkheim to the list. --Rolandus 06:28, 13 Martii 2008 (UTC)[]
Thanks, I have added Bardot and Monroe. --Rolandus 22:07, 16 Martii 2008 (UTC)[]

Mudkips[fontem recensere]

Amice, Cur non tibi delectant Mudkipz? Gustavistine cum butyro? 19:45, 14 Martii 2008 (UTC)  :)[]

A est B[fontem recensere]

Pleasure. I am sure the time will come for "A, B", too ... just not yet :)--Ceylon 12:46, 16 Martii 2008 (UTC)[]

tibi nuntius[fontem recensere]

Anonymous amat Andream www.internetisseriousbusiness.com. 18:07, 19 Martii 2008 (UTC)[]

AHA! So THAT'S why people hate getting "Rickrolled" so much. What an evil script! --Iustinus 18:46, 19 Martii 2008 (UTC)[]

Absinthium[fontem recensere]

Optime egisti amovendo meam notam a Taberna in Disputationem, sed non intellego quomodo possunt scire et videre Vicipaediani in pagina disputationis Absinthii esse novum nuntium. Praeterea necesse est te mihi explicare, quaeso, alteris verbis "those uppercase initials", quia "uppercase" in meis dictionariis non extat,Gratias.Lio 20:59, 20 Martii 2008 (UTC)[]

today's move[fontem recensere]

it^s ok Andrew I believe yours it's the right choice. Ciao--Massimo Macconi 09:59, 24 Martii 2008 (UTC)[]

Municipia provinciae Pisarum[fontem recensere]

Salve Andrew Dalby. Tibi assentior propter Municipia provinciae Pisarum. In veritate inutile est eundem indicem addere sub omnibus municipiis. Sed necesse est indicem addere in "Formula Commune Italianum". Hodie, in talis formula, indicem municipiorum videre non poteamus.--Nuada 13:18, 26 Martii 2008 (UTC)[]

grapheocrates[fontem recensere]

Salve, Andrea. Nescio, num possit grapheocrates delere rationem... Numquam perlegi omnes regulas et potestates gradorum magistratus variorum. Credisne nobis Adamam petendum aut debemus reliquere Turcicos ipsos rem solvituros? Me confiteor nullo pacto curare eorum nugas vel ludos... --Ioscius (disp) 12:47, 27 Martii 2008 (UTC)[]

cream=crema??[fontem recensere]

Fabullus Andreae s.p.d. Novistine quid sit cream Latine? In translatione Latina Harrii Potter Petrus Needham vocabulo utitur crema, quod tamen neologismus videtur, per vocabulum Francogallicum crême a Graecolatino chrisma derivatus. Nonne in studiis tuis de rebus coquinariis antiquis nomen magis Latinum invenisti? Iam tibi ante rem concessam gratias ago, --Fabullus 13:32, 27 Martii 2008 (UTC)[]

Me paenitet interponere, sed ad propositum inveni apud Words hoc:
cremum, cremi  N (2nd) N   [DXXFS]    Late  veryrare
gruel, pap, decoction; thick juice made by boiling grain or animal/vegetables);
crem.a               V      1 1 PRES ACTIVE  IMP 2 S    
cremo, cremare, cremavi, crematus  V (1st) TRANS   [XXXBO]  
burn (to ash)/cremate; consume/destroy (fire); burn alive; make burnt offering;
Ergo forsitan oportet vocabulo cremum uti pro creme? --Rafaelgarcia 13:39, 27 Martii 2008 (UTC)[]
Sicut Fabullo dixi in eius disputatione, noster Andreas Gollan dicit flos lactis.--Ioscius (disp) 13:52, 27 Martii 2008 (UTC)[]
Erravisse mihi videor: Petrus Needham utitur ablativo cremo quod cum nomine cremum congruit. Hoc cremum (quidquid id est) una cum buttero (sic!) saccharoque 'fudge' facit. --Fabullus 14:02, 27 Martii 2008 (UTC)[]
Possum accipere "flos lactis" et "cremor lactis" (neologismos? sed bonos).
Fere numquam novi Andream Gollan fingere verba coquinaria... Nescio eius citationem, at certum eum eam habere. Sicut tu, Andrea, seriose de cibo investigat. Est eius marsuppium (spero ludum verborum meum planxisse =]) --Ioscius (disp) 14:36, 27 Martii 2008 (UTC)[]
Sed fortasse habemus aliquid antiquius. In Alexander Souter, A Glossary of Later Latin to 600 A.D. (Oxonii: Clarendon Press, 1949. ISBN 0198642040) reperio "cramum" (citatio apud Venantium Fortunatum in Gallia, saec. VI); lexica etymologica me certiorem faciunt verbum Francicum crème (> Anglice cream) e forma Celtica *crama descendere. Facile est videre Venantium imaginavisse aut audivisse declensionem neutram Latinam pro verbo Galloromano crama.
Ergo Cramum? Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 14:26, 27 Martii 2008 (UTC)[]
Et ita cramum etiam Gollan dixit.--Ioscius (disp) 14:39, 27 Martii 2008 (UTC)[]
Gaudeamus igitur ... Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 14:42, 27 Martii 2008 (UTC)[]
Satin certum est illud cramum Venantii cream significavisse? Citationem videre velim. Et illud cremum Petri Needham, tertium ingrediens ad fugde parandum praeter saccharum 'butterum'que, scitne aliquis quid sit? --Fabullus 14:52, 27 Martii 2008 (UTC)[]
Ceterum lexicon etymologicum meum me certiorem facit nomen Francicum crème per formas antiquiores crême et cresme a nomine chrisma derivatum esse. --Fabullus 15:11, 27 Martii 2008 (UTC)[]
Debes citare illum lexicon, s.t.p. Ego habeo Bloch & von Wartburg (4a ed., 1968), et Alain Rey (3 voll. 1992), in quibus fidem repono. B&vW (sicut Rey) habent formam Galloromanicam crama et (sicut Souter) citant Venantium. Sed B&vW addunt "croisé de bonne heure avec chrisma, cf. chrême." Id credo. Cur Venantium dubitas? Multa scripsit de cibo; fuit ganeo! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 15:24, 27 Martii 2008 (UTC)[]
Si scire vis: lexicon meum est A. Kolsteren, Vreemde-woordenboek (5a ed. 1970), lexicon sine ulla praetentione scientifica. Libenter ergo tibi cedo. Placet tamen illud de confusione nominum chrisma et crama. Haud diffido Venantio; tantum dixi me citationem inspicere velle, ut videam quomodo Venantium definiat cramum. Fortasse illud cramum ipsum ortum est e confusione nominis Gallici crama et Latini cremum. Sed quid tandem est illud tertium ingrediens ad fudge parandum, quod Needham reddit 'cremum'?--Fabullus 15:57, 27 Martii 2008 (UTC)[]
Sed de verbo Latino cremum ante-Venantiano certissime nihil exstat!
Aha, nunc capio: cremum non est aliud ac varia lectio nominis cramum. Secundum Lewis & Short (hic) cremum = cremor quod est (hic) "the thick juice obtained from animal or vegetable substances, thick broth, pap, etc.", non 'cream'. --Fabullus 16:19, 27 Martii 2008 (UTC)[]
Ego eandem rem vidi eodem spatio temporis. Lewis & Short Venantium citant. Vide nunc infra ...! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 16:43, 27 Martii 2008 (UTC)[]
Pro fudge recipe lac, butyrum, saccharum ... Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 16:06, 27 Martii 2008 (UTC)[]
Aha, illud 'cremum' Needhamianum non est aliud ac lac! --Fabullus 16:19, 27 Martii 2008 (UTC)[]
Quod ad hoc pertinet, litteras electronicas Andreas misi. Nescio num subscriptio quam ei habeo recta sit, sed, ubi cum Iustino locutus ero, rogabo.--Ioscius (disp) 15:43, 27 Martii 2008 (UTC)[]

Rei studium numquam feci, sed inter Conventiculum saepe dicitur multa verba esse neque certum quo optime "cream" exprimamus. Cremum, crema, cramum, cremor, flos lactis. Pendet sane aliquanto ex casu, sed... fortasse opus est studio maiore quo certi fiamus. --Iustinus 15:50, 27 Martii 2008 (UTC)[]

Pro Latinistis hodiernis, est problema auctoritatis. Habemus:
  • Cramum (Souter, Rey), Crama (Bloch & von Wartburg), Cremum (Lewis & Short); omnes haec formae citantur ex eodem carmine Venantii Fortunati. Sensus est (approximative) "cream, flos lactis". Nemo dubitat sensum (approximativum). Cf. d'une part Francogallice crème; d'autre part Cambrice crammen ("clotted blood").
  • Cremor lactis. Neologismus (ut credo), sed credibilis et e Wortschatz classico.
  • Flos lactis. Idem.
Igitur, Latinistae an dabunt auctoritatem (a) ad Wortschatz classicum, vel (b) ad philologos recentioribus, vel (c) ad lexica familiaria? Si ad Wortschatz classicum, fingunt "cremor lactis" vel "flos lactis". Si ad lexica familiaria (e philologia saeculi XIX ineuntis orta), oculis clusis dicunt "cremum" (e Lewis & Short, e lectione seu coniectura mala in textus vetustissimos Venantii). Si ad philologos, dicunt "cramum" (ex eruditis recentioribus [Souter, Rey] e textu recentiori et fideliori Venantii una cum philologia Romanica et Celtica).
Ego? (b) Cramum. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 16:38, 27 Martii 2008 (UTC)[]
Caput tibi inclino, Andrea! Cramum sit. --Fabullus 16:43, 27 Martii 2008 (UTC)[]

P.S. Investigavi illud carmen Venantii. Primi versi sunt:

Aspexi digitos per lactea munera fixos,
et stat picta manus hic ubi crama rapis.

Haud dubiumst quin 'crāma' (cum a longa, ut metrum ostendit) hic sit obiectum verbi 'rapis' atque igitur accusativum. Conicio editores putavisse 'crāma' esse accusativum plurale neutri generis a singulari 'crāmum', quod coniciunt esse nomen Gallicum, sed cur non esse potest accusativum singulare neutri generis: fors sit an 'crāma' non sit aliud quid atque Graecum κρᾶμα (gen. -ματος) i.e. mixtura. --Fabullus 22:54, 28 Martii 2008 (UTC)[]

Gaudeo te carmen Venantii repperisse.
  1. Sensum nunc scimus: est perlucidus. De lacte loquimur. Quid e lacte rapitur? Meministi the cat that got the cream. Optime! Sed
  2. habemus quaestiones duae (quas fortasse editores antea disputaverunt):
    1. singulare (3 decl. n.) vel plurale (2 decl. n.)? Nescimus. Est hapax. Igitur nescio quomodo possumus scire, nisi per etymologiam.
    2. origo Celtica vel Graeca vel incognita? Nescimus.
      1. Minime Latine, quia hoc verbum non potest in modo normali e cremor descendere.
      2. Celtica? Est possibile, si (cum philologi maiores) accipimus comparationem cum verbo Cambrico crammen "clotted blood".
      3. Graeca? sed cur Venantius in Gallia septentrionali, ille primus omnium scriptorum Latinorum, verbum Graecum absconditum selegit et in Latina litteraria inseruit, ut rem describeret quae ni ad inventionem Graecam, ni ad speciem mercaturae, ni ad urbanitatem, ni ad luxum Mediterraneum pertinet, sed ad delicias rurales Europae septentrionalis? Et, si ita pedanticus fuit ut id faceret, cur verbum selegit cum sensu "mixturae"? -- cream enim non est mixtura, sed separatio! est flos lactis!
Veniam da si fortius loquor! Sed re vera habes rationem pro praeferentia etymologiae Graecae?
P.S. Gratias multas ago tibi, mi Fabulle, pro nexu editionis interretialis Venantii. Nunc volo legere ... Fortasse in hac pictura de raptore crami declamat? Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 23:54, 28 Martii 2008 (UTC)[]

Neolatinitas an 'barbaritas'?[fontem recensere]

Mihi ignosce, sed non intellego: cur non possumus (cog)nomina hodierna latinizare (vel Latine vertere) sicut in Aetate Aurea aut in Medio Aevo faciebant? --Gualterius

Mores Vicipaediae difficiles sunt! Sed rationem habemus. Illi (dico, gentes mediaevales) encyclopaediam non faciebant. Qui encyclopaediam faciunt fingere minime debent. Si nomina reficimus, fingimus. Sed, si alii nomina Latinizata faciunt et publicant, uti possumus. Vide, s.t.p., Vicipaedia:Translatio nominum propriorum. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 21:33, 27 Martii 2008 (UTC)[]
Intellego, sed hoc mihi non multum placet (etiam quia praetera nomina non latinizata declinari non possunt). Gratias utcumque et vale!
Mihi autem Latinizationem praenominum non multum placet. Sed collaboro ... ! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 22:46, 27 Martii 2008 (UTC)[]

Categoriae quae ad litteras spectant[fontem recensere]

Salve Andrea. Si daretur robotum illud experiri in categoriis quae parum feliciter de litteratura vocatae sunt ita renominandis ut de litteris agerent, magnae mihi laetitiae faceres. At caveamus - mea quidem sententia - ne duas categorias instituamus ad linguas et ad civitates pertinentes sicut Litterae Francicae et Litterae Franciae, sed prorsus Litterae Franc(ogall)icae omnia comprehendant!--Ceylon 20:11, 30 Martii 2008 (UTC)[]

Non consentio. Credo categorias et linguisticas et geographicas utiles esse. Litterae Franciae comprehendunt libros Latine, Francogallice, Vasconice, Occitanice scriptos. Litterae Vasconicae et in Francia et in Hispania florent. Litterae Latinae mediaevales comprehendunt libros in Italia, Francia, Germania, Britannia (etc.) scriptos.
Nuper rogavi UV an robotum suum potest duas categorias ex una creare. Si sic, possumus eodem tempore Litterae in Francia scriptae et Litterae Francogallice scriptae creare (et similiter pro Scriptores ...); tunc facile erit litteras minime Francogallice scriptas ex altera categoria delere. Quid cogitas? Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 10:22, 31 Martii 2008 (UTC)[]
Nempe utiles sunt, sed Latine difficilius redduntur, cum Romanos tantum de litteris Graecis etc., nusquam autem de litteris Graeciae aut in Graecia aut rursus Graece scriptis locutos sentiam. Duae videntur viae patere: Licet imprimis categorias Litterae Graecae (Greek literature) et Litterae Graecorum (Literature of Greece) distinguere - mallo hoc quam Litterae Graeciae, quamquam iam audio te dicturum in Graecia et alios populos, non solum Graecos vixisse. Altera via duceret ad categorias Scripta Graeca (Greek literature) et Scripta Graeciae (Literature of Greece) nominandas. Constat verumenimvero neutrum dicendi modum palmam Latinitatis laturum esse. Latine esset, cum Litterae Graecae designaverint omnia, quae lingua Graeca sint exarata, cumque categorias geographicas in litterarum studia nullo pacto intulerimus. Tibi autem ut magistratui optime merito lubenter cedo. --Ceylon 20:21, 31 Martii 2008 (UTC)[]
Δευτέρα φροντίς: Forsitan Litterarum monumenta Graeca (aut Litterarum Graecarum monumenta) et Litterarum monumenta Graeciae, ut suasit Iacobus illic?--Ceylon 20:28, 31 Martii 2008 (UTC)[]
O! Talem auctoritatem minime peto. Tecum consentio categorias geopoliticas in litterarum studia "secundarias" (et interdum molestas); sed volo Vicipaediam utilem esse. Credo utile esse monstrare, ad usores qui (e.g.) Scripta Franciae petunt, opera et Latina (auctoribus Francicis) et Occitanica et Francogallica; utile etiam categoriam Scripta Francogallica offerre ubi opera (Francogallice scripta) e Francia, Canada, Helvetia, Belgia orta reperiuntur.
Litterarum monumenta? Hem. Si de Aeneide loquimur, optime; si de libris popularibus hodiernis, dubito!! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 20:54, 31 Martii 2008 (UTC)[]
Quid sentis de Litterae Graecae (i.e. lingua Graeca scriptae) et Graeciae litterae (i.e. in Graecia scriptae)? Illud convenit, hoc fortasse minus offendit et facilius ab altero distinguitur si Graeciae praeponimus, quamvis Latinissimum certe non sit.--Ceylon 06:27, 1 Aprilis 2008 (UTC)[]
Ne nos ipsos implicemus, propono categorias linguisticam Litterae Graecae (i.e. litterarum monumenta Graece compositae) et geographicam Libri Graeciae (i.e. libri in Graecia scripti et divulgati).
Et ne lectores implicemus, oportebit addere explicationem (vide etiam ...) ad caput paginarum categoriarum. Quid sentis? Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 10:31, 1 Aprilis 2008 (UTC)[]
Cum exempli gratia non omnia poemata libris continerentur, maluerim Litterae Graecae et (pudet referre) Litterae Graeciae, quippe quae breviora et similiora fuerint, neque ineptiora quam homines Graeciae &c.--Ceylon 12:09, 1 Aprilis 2008 (UTC)[]
Haec nomina sunt nimis similia. Una littera (!) differunt. Debemus aliquid distinctius reperire, ut credo. Igitur, Litterae Graecae et Graeciae scripta? Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 19:26, 1 Aprilis 2008 (UTC)[]
Litterae Graecae placent, de altero tantum disputari constat. Num Historia litterarum Graeciae?
(Magis magisque clarescit punctum saliens quod dicitur eo constare quod Romani, qui civitates certis finibus distinctas adhuc ignoraverunt, ad huius modi res dicendas adiectivo passim uti solebant. Nam litterae Austriacae, scriptores Austriaci etc. Latinitatem sapunt, quali litterae Austriae aut scriptores Austriae egent. Casus ambigui sicut litterae Hispanicae (num in Hispania aut lingua Hispanica aut a scriptore Hispanico compositae?) non adeo eis interfuisse videntur.)--Ceylon 20:05, 1 Aprilis 2008 (UTC)[]
Recte dicis. Sed de rebus post-Romanis loquimur et interdum necesse est linguam paulisper extendere. Magis magisque volo scripta Graeciae (vel Graeciae scripta) sicut tu supra scripsisti! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 20:13, 1 Aprilis 2008 (UTC)[]
Beata saecula illa quibus ne quidem Vicipaedia scribenda erat! :) Homines certe dum docent discunt, qua re commotus et ego propositum meum negavi. At sit pace mea Graeciae scripta.--Ceylon 20:25, 1 Aprilis 2008 (UTC)[]
Gratias multas ago, o Ceylon, ob consilia libenter data! Cras, fortasse (UV volente) possumus incipere ... Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 21:25, 1 Aprilis 2008 (UTC)[]

Formica (genus)[fontem recensere]

I created this parallel genus-page. I guess we mostly will need this genus-page in addition to the "normal" animal-page. --Rolandus 18:23, 1 Aprilis 2008 (UTC)[]

Butyrum[fontem recensere]

Tibi gratias ago, Magister Dalby, pro tua de butyro pagina. Erat utilis Nationali Linguae Graecae Examini. Est rogatum quid verbum anglicum derivativum του τυρου sit. Propter tuam paginam, recte poteram respondere. Tibi plurimam salutem dat anonymous. 02:03, 9 Aprilis 2008 (UTC)[]

Raymond III of Tripoli[fontem recensere]

Hello Andrew, how are you? Could you hlep me please? Could you write Raymond III of Tripoli in latin? 10:26, 12 Aprilis 2008 (UTC)[]

I'm well, but travelling! Therefore unable to check any sources, and I would rather do that than just invent a form. So I'll copy this to the Vicipaedia:Taberna for someone else to make a suggestion. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 15:57, 13 Aprilis 2008 (UTC)[]

Summus Pontifex[fontem recensere]

Quam modo fecisci redirectionem apud paginam Summus Pontifex, minime accepto. "Erroneam" dixisti, sed ubi latet error?

Pagina discretiva iam est: Pontifex Maximus. Si quo redirigenda fuisset pagina Summus Pontifex, illuc esset. Sed, sucut sane sarteque monstravi, sacerdos paganus numquam 'Summus Pontifex' apellatus est. Videantur etiam en:Supreme Pontiff, es:Sumo Pontífice, it:Sommo Pontefice, pt:Sumo Pontífice et alia.

Non est cur Summus Pontifex non cadat in Papa. Hoc denuo fieri peto. Kyrios 01:32, 25 Aprilis 2008 (UTC)[]

Pontifices[fontem recensere]

Hello Andrew, I do not care much about this matter, however, it is a bit confusing, if it is said "Summus Pontifex sive Pontifex Maximus" and the two terms lead to different pages. Maybe there should be a page Pontifex (discretiva) which explains all variants, but I don't mind. --Rolandus 14:36, 26 Aprilis 2008 (UTC)[]

Special characters[fontem recensere]

No, there is no problem. Please do not check ;-) --Rolandus 15:14, 27 Aprilis 2008 (UTC)[]

Vasconia[fontem recensere]

Salve, Andreas. Si vis, te peto opinionem tuam de disputatio:Vasconia. Gratias ago!--Xaverius 13:07, 24 Maii 2008 (UTC)[]

Fiorello La Guardia[fontem recensere]

Dear Andrew,

for the new page Fiorello LaGuardia do you have any idea how I could translate Fiorello . As you sure know, Fiorello in Italian means something as little flower, ciao e grazie--Massimo Macconi 08:07, 27 Maii 2008 (UTC)[]

thanks. The problem here (especially in Italy and Switzerland) now is that not only we do not have anymore politicians with such nice names but that I believe they are between the worst (Berlusconi and Blocher docent) politician we can imagine!

Serrano[fontem recensere]

I have read the disputatio and seen that on es.wiki the page has been deleted. I believe that the decision of the spanish speaking people is very important. If they do not believe Serrano is a known writer, I do not see any more the reason to keep this page, but of course we can find an other solution--Massimo Macconi 11:28, 3 Iunii 2008 (UTC)[]

New Hampshire/Nova Hantescira[fontem recensere]

What do you think Andrew, should we move this page to Nova Hantonia --Massimo Macconi 18:54, 8 Iunii 2008 (UTC))[]

Will Google find it?[fontem recensere]

Yes, try "Anteros (nomen)" ;-) ... but the German Wikipedia wins the search for "Anteros", because we do not have a page named Anteros. --Rolandus 21:18, 10 Iunii 2008 (UTC)[]

And we win, if someone searches for "Anteros (discretiva)" in Google. Maybe we should move Anteros (discretiva) to Anteros. Then we had a chance ;-) --Rolandus 21:22, 10 Iunii 2008 (UTC)[]
I didn't choose to do it that way, this time, because there is one Anteros after whom the others are named, and I felt he should have prime position. Maybe I'll write a stub for him. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 07:17, 11 Iunii 2008 (UTC)[]
It took a week for Google to add it to its index, but now you can find "Aretinus (nomen)". Ein Hoch dem Wikipedia:Soft_redirect! ;-) --Rolandus 06:48, 17 Iunii 2008 (UTC)[]

Revert/Ban[fontem recensere]

Hanc disputationem removi ad Disputatio formulae:Abecedarium Graecum: OK? Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 09:48, 18 Iunii 2008 (UTC)[]

How I may be at once from Xynta (NL), Centertel (PL), Paetec (US) etc... directly when I switch between them as I want? I am TUNNELLING through them all, to cover my real country. But this is SECRET and you NEVER get it. Your unholy efforts to get me caught and persecuted are futile. 12:56, 18 Iunii 2008 (UTC)[]
Yes, I see. Why do you do it? Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 13:09, 18 Iunii 2008 (UTC)[]
I did it (masking/editing/removing lies) only to provide you FULL VERSION of Greek alphabet, remove false accusations from me and more, such as true identification of original Human language. I only wanted to CONVINCE you to these things for your good. More is explained here: http://www.wikinfo.org/index.php/Adamic_language I noticed, that using force by me to convincing you didn't worked at all, even when I am able to bypass all bans in realtime, thus I switched now to arguments, included in linked page. Greek alphabet was first ever Consonant+Vowel script, thus it is most important to write this original Human language with preservation of its full phonetics. 13:13, 18 Iunii 2008 (UTC)[]
I get it now. I saw that scho was important, and was used in Bactrian; and I realised, of course, that there was a religious motive; -- but I didn't know about Anne Catherine Emmerich or this link with the Adamic language. Thank you very much for explaining. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 13:38, 18 Iunii 2008 (UTC)[]
Just for information, do you know about any Vovel+Consonant alphabet earlier than Greek? And do you accept now in template Template:Abecedarium Graecum all these letters that you reverted previously? 13:46, 18 Iunii 2008 (UTC)[]
OK, question 1: whether the Phoenician alphabet included vowels as well as consonants is arguable: the answer is "it depends what you mean". The Greek alphabet marked a definite advance, no doubt about that. But the devanagari and similar alphabets are much more perfect in their design.
Question 2: not in the template. In the article about the Greek alphabet, give all the information you want (as long as it's historically verifiable). I explained the purpose of the template on the disputatio page. It is not there to show people how to write the original human language. For this reason, it isn't a suitable place for your message.
I respect your purpose, to convince people. You need to understand, I think, that the purpose of Vicipaedia is different. Wikinfo may well be the place where you can pursue your purpose most effectively. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 14:02, 18 Iunii 2008 (UTC)[]
I meant vowels as constant values of constant letters. If so, will be Greek alphabet really first one that introduces vowels on equal footing with consonants? Devanagari is abugida, thus vowels are diacritical or varianting additions to consonants, making Devanagari breaking rule of one constant sign per one constant sound. 14:09, 18 Iunii 2008 (UTC)[]
Those who make the rules, of course, can say that the rules are broken! This term "abugida" is too new-fangled for me (no one had thought of it when I studied linguistics) and difficult to define. If you want a script even more perfect than devanagari, then it has to be Korean.
In terms simply of historical dating, yes, the Greek alphabet probably made the "first best" attempt to treat vowels and consonants equally, but it is far from perfect. "First best" is not grammatical English, and that may indicate that what we are trying to say is not fully thought out and cannot be expressed with perfect clarity. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 14:21, 18 Iunii 2008 (UTC)[]
That is exactly what I meant. Exactly as you said, because Greek alphabet is "first best" equalizing of vowels and consonants in human history, theoreticaly if confusion of tongues never would occured, then we all would be still using Proto-Indo-European language written with Greek alphabet. In this way rule of first things both in language and alphabet is preserved. 14:31, 18 Iunii 2008 (UTC)[]

Usor:Rolandus/List2[fontem recensere]

Andrew, thanks for giving me a note. --Rolandus 10:56, 23 Iunii 2008 (UTC)[]

Formula:Abecedarium Graecum[fontem recensere]

Please pardon me for addressing you in English. I am Yekrats, administrator of the Esperanto Wikipedia. We have recently had problems with anonymous users adding special obscure Greek letters into our Greek alphabet template. I noticed that you have had the same problem in Formula:Abecedarium Graecum, and reverted it a few times, and were yelled at by anonimous users. (That sounds very familiar...)

Have you decided to allow these special characters? At the EO:WP, they are currently under deletion review. The claim seems extremely dubious, and this sort of change was made across almost every Wiki in the past week. The reason I noticed it, was the user was making up Esperanto words out of thin air. ;-) (Specifically, the word Jot.) The user who added them is pointing to the acceptance of the administrators in the Latin Wikipedia as "proof" that it is a legitimate addition to the Esperanto.

Could I please ask your opinion of this? I will try to check back here to get your answer, but if you wish to reach me at home, you may address me at my home, eo:Vikipediisto:Yekrats. Thank you! Yekrats 20:41, 24 Iunii 2008 (UTC).[]

As a contributor to Wikipedia in Norwegian I'm not very comfortable learning that the "Whole Scandinavians acknowledges these Greek letters" - and as this wikiproject seem to be where the issue of "jot" etc has been dicussed in some depth. I too would be very interested in your advice. I apologise for asking advice about something that doesn't concern this wikimediaproject, but you do seem well informed. My e-mail is enabled btw. Regards, Finnrind 22:25, 24 Iunii 2008 (UTC)[]
I did some more reading here and cross-wiki reading, and believe I have figured most of the background out. Aplogies for the inconveniece. Best regards, Finnrind 23:56, 24 Iunii 2008 (UTC)[]

Just for further information, according to this discussion in the EN:WP, the symbol is not ancient at all, and not used in modern Greek either. -- Yekrats 00:17, 25 Iunii 2008 (UTC)[]

Thanks to both. I have made Jot a redirection to J, since, in fact, it is the German name for that letter. A similar redirect exists on de:wiki. I have placed links about the supposed Greek letter at Iota (the name Jot is a non-Greek variant of iota). Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 07:30, 25 Iunii 2008 (UTC)[]

De litteris Graecorum[fontem recensere]

Hello Andrew! I must say I've tried to follow the discussion on the Greek letters but I get lost constantly with multiple edits and anonymous users. Is there an easy way to sum the whole argument up? Is there a way in which I can help? Cheers,--Xaverius 16:54, 26 Iunii 2008 (UTC)[]

I've replied by email. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 17:46, 26 Iunii 2008 (UTC)[]
I got it - thanks--Xaverius 13:34, 29 Iunii 2008 (UTC)[]

Alexander Severus[fontem recensere]

I would not change the page as already written and I believed they were correct. For me, of course, it's not a problem if you use the normal dates.--Massimo Macconi 08:44, 28 Iunii 2008 (UTC)[]

time[fontem recensere]

what a problem! I hope in he future we will find more friends who could work with us. Thank you for the new Latin name I'll put it also in the page Index nominum Latinorum hominum praeclarorum--Massimo Macconi 15:46, 28 Iunii 2008 (UTC)[]

Lies[fontem recensere]

I use identity lies to cover my real identity - this is against masonic agendas that I suspect to emerge anywhere. 10:03, 29 Iunii 2008 (UTC)[]

Andrew Dalby, your edits exposed this user to freemasons. He only fights for truth, but wants remain anonymous for his safety. 10:23, 29 Iunii 2008 (UTC)[]
I think, if you try to fight for truth using lies, you fail. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 11:40, 29 Iunii 2008 (UTC)[]
Thus I abandon lies in favor to proxies as masquerading tools if you told me that these lies can make my struggle for truth non-efficient. I of course want that Adamic/Catholic truth will win. 13:27, 29 Iunii 2008 (UTC)[]
What you are doing you can also do by using an account. You need not to tell us who you are. Call yourself "Alpha et Omega" or something like that. I guess, this is not your real name ... --Rolandus 06:36, 2 Iulii 2008 (UTC)[]

Translatio[fontem recensere]

Is the following text understandable? If not, please let me know which are the mistakes.

Folia Brassicae oleraceae carnosa semper sunt, et proteina habet quae eidem plantae sinent aquam alimentaque servare. Secundo anno evolutionis, alimenta servata faciunt inflorescentiam flavam prodi, quae unum sive dua metra longa est.

Supposedly, it says:

The leaves of Brassica oleracea are always fleshy, and they have proteins that allow the plant to store both water and nutrients. In the second year of its development, the stored nutrients produce yellow inflorescences, which are 1 or 2 meters tall.

I didn't know how to translate nutrients; that's why I used the word alimenta.

Thx in advance!!!--Le K@l!Face-glasses.svgnuntia? 04:26, 3 Iulii 2008 (UTC)[]

"habent" + "easdem plantas sinent" + "Secundo vitae anno" + pro "faciunt prodi": "gignunt"? "generant"? + "inflorescentias flavas" + "longae sunt" &c. IacobusAmor 02:02, 4 Iulii 2008 (UTC)[]
Consentio cum Iacobo! Poenitet me, Le, quia lentissime respondi. ;( Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 07:25, 4 Iulii 2008 (UTC)[]

No problem!!! Thx you all a lot!!!--Le K@l!Face-glasses.svgnuntia? 18:54, 4 Iulii 2008 (UTC)[]

Tour-de-France time again[fontem recensere]

Andrew, it's Tour-de-France time again. Any chance you'll add this year's map with Latin names, as you did last year? IacobusAmor 12:38, 6 Iulii 2008 (UTC)[]

What fun! I'll get to work ... Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 12:45, 6 Iulii 2008 (UTC)[]
If I'm reading the map right, the racers will be passing your house on Tuesday or Wednesday. Go and wave to the cameras. We'll be watching! IacobusAmor 12:50, 6 Iulii 2008 (UTC)[]
We weren't there, I'm afraid. France is a bit bigger than it looks on that map. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 15:33, 9 Iulii 2008 (UTC)[]

salve /invitatio[fontem recensere]

Thank you I have never noticed the difference. Ciao--Massimo Macconi 21:34, 7 Iulii 2008 (UTC)[]

Nomen Pii Taofinuus[fontem recensere]

Andrew, you did right to fix the defaultsort. If his name were merely Taofinuu, that would mean he had the right to use that name & to exercise its legal powers as a chief (technically in his home village an "orator," tulafale); but he wasn't a chief: if he'd been a chief, with the right to the title Taofinuu, his full name in the world at large would have been Taofinuu Pius. That his name was Pius Taofinuu tells you he was a nonchief, and that Taofinuu was the name of the chief into whose family he was born. Clear? IacobusAmor 13:07, 26 Iulii 2008 (UTC)[]

Robertus Greene[fontem recensere]

Thank you very much for your translation. For the link I agree with your remark. The choice of the link depends on the fact that I usually use de.wiki to open new pages in la.wiki. Ciao--Massimo Macconi 09:23, 23 Iulii 2008 (UTC)[]

copy[fontem recensere]

Thank you for your precious suggestions. I hope I will not forget them in the future. Ciao--Massimo Macconi 15:46, 27 Iulii 2008 (UTC)[]

Guidus Ubaldus e Marchionibus Montis[fontem recensere]

thank you for the fast correction of my big misstake. Ciao

Arcadius Avellanus[fontem recensere]

Macte, docte Dalby! Gratias tibi pro re de Avellano. Nuper ad Vicipaediam venio, itaque me paenitet eius mores certe rectissimos me non penitus intellegere. Gratias ego tibi ago et agam si paginas meas praeclara sub custode atque latinitate tua ponas. Thesaurus 16:05, 28 Iulii 2008 (UTC)[]

Categoriae[fontem recensere]

Sorry, I believed I had only added the categories Nati/Mortui perhaps I have done it without thinking. Thank you for your explanation, they are always helpful also for the future--Massimo Macconi 17:54, 29 Iulii 2008 (UTC)[]

Gratias[fontem recensere]

Tibi gratias ago ob praesidium ac patrocinium tuum ! Sine tuo suffragio iam a Vicipaedia Latina recessissem, etsi latinitatis amator : adeo difficile est ad opus commune operam dare, alio semper aliud sentiente.Marcus Terentius Bibliophilus 09:40, 31 Iulii 2008 (UTC)[]

Gratias ago et ego ob commentum tuum. Paginas de coaevalibus Caesaris et Ciceronis semper lego et valde admiro. Sic, difficile est; ... sed credo nos aliquid utile facere ... Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 11:19, 4 Augusti 2008 (UTC)[]

Martinus Weinek et Gaspar Capparoni[fontem recensere]

Hoc in Tabernam removi. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 16:44, 6 Augusti 2008 (UTC)[]

formula:in progressu[fontem recensere]

Dear Andrew, what do you think about thid discussion I have opened? I was hearing a radio programm on Italian language and they spoke of the sentence work in progress and they said the same thing can be said with the latin words in fieri. ciao--Massimo Macconi 10:27, 8 Augusti 2008 (UTC)[]

I replied at Vicipaedia:Taberna#Disputatio Formulae:In progressu. In fieri sounds like very bad Latin to me (but so does In progressu). Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 12:34, 8 Augusti 2008 (UTC)[]

an other question[fontem recensere]

do you believe there's nothing to do to eliminate the ban on the old greek wikipedia? ciao--Massimo Macconi 12:03, 8 Augusti 2008 (UTC)[]

Is there a discussion currently? If so, where? My view is this. There are two issues. One is the current guideline of the Language Subcommittee, which is designed to rule out all new wikipedias in ancient languages. The other is, are there enough people interested to create a good Ancient Greek wikipedia?
  1. The Language Subcommittee adopted the relevant guideline while asleep. Its current members have been, up to now, too pompous, embarrassed or immature to say this openly, but they don't dispute it. It may be that they were compelled by some higher authority to adopt this detail in their guidelines and not to explain it: we wouldn't know that, of course. It may be that they simply like having a rule, so that they are relieved of the need for discussion on ancient language proposals: that's a normal way for bureaucrats to work. A way to change the situation would be for someone else to join the committee. But I don't know how that's done or whether it can be done at all, and although I would be very interested in the substantive business of this subcommittee and would have a lot to contribute, I don't really have much time for Wikipedia bureaucracy!
  2. OK, now on Ancient Greek in particular. I don't honestly know if there are enough people willing to put the work in. My impression was that there was not quite enough work done in the incubator, but I may well be completely mistaken. I can't count myself as a potential contributor, incidentally: I think it's more useful to the world to contribute to the Modern Greek wikipedia, as I sometimes do. Anyway, if there are enough people, they could surely get accepted at Wikia, build up their encyclopedia there (and make sure to include links to their articles from all possible Vicipaedia pages!). That's what I would do in their position. Then, when they reach a more solid state, and when one or two things have shifted on the Language Subcommittee, they could transfer back again. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 13:07, 8 Augusti 2008 (UTC)[]

Categoria:Eruditi Americani[fontem recensere]

Quae mihi scripsisti in pagina disputationis grata sunt. Ut soleo, nunc alteram quaestionem prolaturus sum: Quae vis inest adiectivo "Americani"? Suntne cives CFA'ae an omnium civitatum illius terrae continentis? (Nota bene: Contra propositum meum antehac retenturus sum categorias sicut Categoria:Homines Germaniae. Habeant subcategorias utiliores! Sin autem supercategoriam Eruditorum Americanorum creem, quomodo appelletur? Homines Americae an Homines Civitatum Foeder.... ?) --Iovis Fulmen 20:07, 10 Augusti 2008 (UTC)[]

Ea (super)categoria valde desideratur; sed de quaestione tua dubito. Melius fortasse si in Vicipaedia:Taberna quaeris: ibi Vicipaediani Americani (vel Civitatum Foeder ...) responsum fortasse dabunt! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 20:27, 10 Augusti 2008 (UTC)[]

I would be happy if you could have a look at the my proposed translation of en's template "CatDiffuse" at the end of Vicipaedia:Index_formularum_Vicipaediae_Latinae#Paginae s.v. Formulae Propositae. Is it all right (or at least a sound basis for debate) in terms of content, language and technical stuff? --Iovis Fulmen 11:45, 15 Augusti 2008 (UTC)[]

I wonder whether the second section (in lighter font) could be shortened. Maybe all it needs to say is "Huic categoriae addantur praecipue subcategoriae"? Anyway, I think it's fine as it stands, and a very good idea! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 12:44, 15 Augusti 2008 (UTC)[]
Sane tu recte censes. Istud feci. --Iovis Fulmen 15:46, 30 Augusti 2008 (UTC)[]

quia Helvetiae? e non in Helvetia[fontem recensere]

according to my Latin grammar you can you use the locative only for names of little islands or town the first and second declesionand not for a word like Helvetia --Massimo Macconi 19:19, 11 Augusti 2008 (UTC)[]

Graham Green, quia Helvetiae et non in Helvetia[fontem recensere]

according to my grammar you use the locative only for names of towns and little islands of the first and second declesion and a few other words domi, ruri etc. cfr. § 154 pa 173 Grammatica Rubenbauer-Hofmann

--Massimo Macconi 19:23, 11 Augusti 2008 (UTC)[]

Locative vs genitive[fontem recensere]

thank you very much. You are very kind, Andrew, to answer at once to all my questions, ciao--Massimo Macconi 19:49, 11 Augusti 2008 (UTC)[]

Cur "Cisterciani, -orum" ?[fontem recensere]

Je n'ai jamais rencontré cette forme. Le Lexicon Latinitatis Medii Aevi de Blaise ne mentionne que "Cisterciensis". Quelles sont les sources qui vous ont poussé à créer une catégorie "Abbatiae Cistercianorum" ? ThbdGrrd 13:08, 12 Augusti 2008 (UTC)[]

Une source très fertile: l'erreur. Merci, ThbdGrrd! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 12:12, 15 Augusti 2008 (UTC)[]

Re: Georgius Queirolo Bravo[fontem recensere]

Oh. Most terribly sorry for the mistake! Dang. I thought you were one of those users who are simply delighted to revert the advices left in controversial articles. Most terribly sorry. See ya. --Mushii 19:18, 20 Augusti 2008 (UTC)[]

Your changes on Claudius Ebner[fontem recensere]

Hello. I have two questions:

  1. Why did you change Ebner's profession from "translatista" to "interpres"? From what I know, interpres is also (and maybe primarily used) for an interpreter, but to define a translator, I found the expression "translatista" in the dictionaries (PONS, Vatican). Ebner is not an interpreter but a translator. Therefore I would prefer to put back "translatista". Or do you have another reason why you changed it?
  2. You changed the article from the original name "Klaus Ebner" to "Claudius Ebner". Are there rules (I don't know) on the Latin Wiki how to latinicize names respectively obligations to do so? In the beginning I also searched for a possibility to latinicize the first name but I couldn't find a satisfying form. "Claudius" is etymologically wrong; The German "Klaus" stems from the name "Nikolaus" but since it is a kind of abbreviation, the Latin names "Nicolaus" etc. wouldn't really correspond. Is it an accepted way to latinicize Klaus to Claudius on the Latin Wiki? --Ennius 16:42, 28 Augusti 2008 (UTC)[]
In classical Latin (according to Cassell's), the word for English interpreter & translator alike is interpres. (The word for an interpreter of dreams is coniector.) A word having the form translatista is obviously a neologism. Vicipaedia uses such words when necessary; but if a good classical word for something exists, it's usually preferred. Why reinvent the wheel? ¶ That's an interesting problem with Klaus. A possible Klaus, -i might seem weird at first: Klai liber 'Klaus's book'? Hmm. IacobusAmor 18:28, 28 Augusti 2008 (UTC)[]
As to translatista, I agree with Iacobe and would add that it is a malformed word, since the stem is Latin and the termination Greek. Up to now we have used interpres in both senses on Vicipaedia, and I don't see a strong reason to change.
As for Klaus, I was wrong about the origin of the German name. Thank you. I guess our usual rule will convert him to Nicolaus. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 20:34, 28 Augusti 2008 (UTC)[]
I agree that "translatista" is a malformed word. I also agree that Latin interpres used to denote both 'interpreter' and 'translator' (kind of). But in modern world there is reason to keep these terms apart even in Latin. In many (most) universities there are syllabi for "Translational Studies", "Translation Science" etc. Dubbing these as "interpretative" even in Latin would create unnecessary ambiguity. Besides, in ancient times, translation wasn't quite the same thing as it is now, because translations were rather free adaptations. This is something Hieronymus was concerned about (and with). Indeed, Hieronymus uses the Latin word translator (e.g. Epist.57.5). I think Ebner is Latine translator rather than "interpres". --Neander 12:32, 29 Augusti 2008 (UTC)[]
Hmm, yes, that's a good one (and it's rather odd that the Vatican doesn't use the word!) In that case most of our current "interpretes" will have to be re-categorized, because most of them are translators rather than interpreters. I will copy this discussion to the most relevant place, which, I think, is Categoria:Interpretes. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 12:36, 29 Augusti 2008 (UTC)[]
In English, people who supply running translations, as during speeches at the United Nations, are called interpreters, so (from the English perspective) we have no problem here: an interpreter is a translator. Of course, because of modern usage in vernacular languages, translator would be more readily intelligible to novices than interpres. IacobusAmor 13:04, 29 Augusti 2008 (UTC)[]
I've copied this to Categoria:Interpretes -- please continue there! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 13:07, 29 Augusti 2008 (UTC)[]

Al-Baqara[fontem recensere]

Salutem tibi dico plurimam, qui me de hac novissima mutatione certiorem fecisti. Cum praepositio Arabica ل li plures rationes indicare possit, quas Latine casibus aut genetivo aut dativo reddere oportet, constat لله lillāh (i.e. li+Allāh) et "Dei" et "Deo" et nescioquot aliis dicendi modis verti posse. Lingua Latina autem hoc versu nullum casum nisi genetivum admittere mihi quidem videtur, quia sensus spectat ad eum qui haec omnia, quae in terra atque in caelo sunt, fecit et propterea possidet atque administrat. Similiter si dicimus هذه الصورة لمحمد hāḏihi ṣ-ṣūratu li-muḥammad ambiguum est, si Machometus imaginem fecit aut possidet modo aut rursum ille est, qui in imagine monstratur, sed quodcumque verum est, Latine interpretari cogimur: "Haec imago Machometi (est)".--Ceylon 14:02, 6 Septembris 2008 (UTC)[]

Hominideae[fontem recensere]

Hello Andrew, I have answered here: Disputatio_Usoris:Rolandus#Disputatio:Hominideae. --Rolandus 07:00, 9 Septembris 2008 (UTC)[]

Thanks, Andrew. I have fixed it on the pages here and there was an interwiki link to be fixed. --Rolandus 14:45, 26 Octobris 2008 (UTC)[]

Kupferhof Bauschenberg[fontem recensere]

The article about "Kupferhof Bauschenberg" has been finshed using some support from other writers. Please, have a look and decide, whether it is good enough to be kept in the latin wikipedia.

By the way: I bought a new dictionary and after nearyl 30 years without a word in Latin I am improving. You will see. :-) --BBKurt 09:12, 10 Septembris 2008 (UTC)[]

I'm really glad your interest in Latin has revived ... Of course the page stays! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 14:48, 10 Septembris 2008 (UTC)[]
-) --BBKurt 21:05, 10 Septembris 2008 (UTC)[]

Agnus Wilson[fontem recensere]

Owen is the gaelic name for "sheep", well in latin become Agnus--Lodewijk Vadacchino 21:35, 19 Septembris 2008 (UTC)[]

Thanks! I replied at Disputatio:Agnus Wilson. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 21:58, 19 Septembris 2008 (UTC)[]

Georgius Queirolo Bravo[fontem recensere]

Well, I see that there is a consensus to keep the article so I won't add any comment. Thanks for reporting. --Dferg 18:49, 24 Septembris 2008 (UTC)[]

Your comment on my discussion page[fontem recensere]

I responded on my page to your suggestions. --~~BBKurt 12:57, 1 Octobris 2008 (UTC)[]

De caeso[fontem recensere]

Salve Andrew! te quaero, quomodo queso manchego Latine dicamus?--Xaverius 22:51, 6 Octobris 2008 (UTC)[]

My answer may be a bit boring. Since I have to do some work on cheese, I have been making stubs on cheeses, beginning with those that have an appellation. The names of these are fixed by Bruxellian law, and don't change from language to language. So I have made my entries under the original name (either the Bruxellian one, or, if all normal people use a simpler form, the simpler form). So, if I were making the one on Manchego cheese, I would call it either Queso Manchego (which seems to be the Bruxellian form) or I might well prefer Manchego (if that's the form that everyone uses). But what do you think? Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 12:32, 7 Octobris 2008 (UTC)[]
I see. From te top of my head, I do not think of any other Manchego that could be confused with the cheese, because de Manchego wine is Valdepeñas and the bread has also a different name. Manchego could work then! Although this would make me ask, what would be the Latin for La Mancha... I've seen Mancia, Manica but I guess this is a different matter--Xaverius 21:36, 7 Octobris 2008 (UTC)[]

wilson?[fontem recensere]

Salve Andrew, is there a Latin translation for the name: Wilson? Hendricus 17:41, 7 Octobris 2008 (UTC)[]

In this case it's a middlename: William Wilson Saunders, Hendricus 17:45, 7 Octobris 2008 (UTC)[]

Gratias ago[fontem recensere]

Carissime Andreas, tibi gratias ago de correctione in pagina Lula da Silva. Non bene Latine loquor et scribo.

I speak better English, I would like to ask your help, when I'll need, may I?

Je visite toutes les annees Laval Mayenne, et j' ai vu que tu habites proche. Felicitations !!!

Ecris moi tôt

Quod valeas mihi pergratum erit.

Rex Momo 20:18, 12 Octobris 2008 (UTC)[]

cats[fontem recensere]

Salve Anfrew, i saw you've changed the cat about employees of the british museum, i've created it after example of: Categoria:Socii Musei Nationalis Historiae Naturalis (Lutetia), does that mean that that one is wrong too? I like to create a category about members of the Museum Historiae Naturalis (Britannia) as well, i thought it would become something like: Categoria:Socii Musei Nationalis Historiae Naturalis (Britannia)? Hendricus 16:49, 13 Octobris 2008 (UTC)[]

I answered on your talk page. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 17:22, 13 Octobris 2008 (UTC)[]
Ok, then maybe this museum should be in it's own catagory as well Museum Nationale Historiae Naturalis (Lutetia) with it's members?Hendricus 20:27, 13 Octobris 2008 (UTC)[]
Good point. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 20:28, 13 Octobris 2008 (UTC)[]

Matthiolus[fontem recensere]

Ave Andrea, mihi valde placet me causam fuisse (ut videtur) paginae novae tibi scribendae. Perge sis et alios quoque botanistas suis quemque paginis commemora, vel paginas iam existentes auge! Equidem, ut paginam de Melongena perfecero, ad alia nomina Arabica redibo.--Fabullus 05:14, 14 Octobris 2008 (UTC)[]

Ita, reus es! Et re vera volo alios nonnullos qui de herbis, de alimentis, de re culinaria scripserunt in Vicipaediam nostram inserere ... sed tempus fugit ... Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 11:55, 14 Octobris 2008 (UTC)[]

Trés bien[fontem recensere]

Tibi gratias ago, and I hope to see the right image tomorrow. For now I put a simple, little image, because if I put more than 120px it doesn' appear.

Tibi gratias ago !!!

Rex Momo 12:50, 14 Octobris 2008 (UTC)[]

Ad meliora !!! =[fontem recensere]

Carissime Andreas, feci quod mihi dixisti in Paulus Victor Borkhoche, ... sed etiam in Benedicta Boccoli et etiam Abdelmajid Lakhal.

Tibi gratias ago

Rex Momo 20:34, 14 Octobris 2008 (UTC)[]

names[fontem recensere]

Salve Andrew, what would you suggest for: Royal Botanic Society and Gardens and it's members? Hendricus 16:09, 17 Octobris 2008 (UTC)[]

The "Gardens" were important but they were maybe not officially part of the Society's name. Hence the en:wiki article is at en:Royal Botanic Society. So we can call it Regalis Societas Botanica.
I know that garden (it is not a botanical garden now, but still pleasant to walk in). I used to work just across the road from there. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 16:22, 17 Octobris 2008 (UTC)[]

Salve Andrew, Until now we have been categorying the museums for natural history in it's category: Categoria:Musea historiae naturalis, i think it's wise to create a simmilair tree for the mayor archeological museums as well, musea like the british museum, the museum in paris and the american museum of natural history work a lot in that area too, maybe it's even a good idea to split the archeological into subfield like Egyptology, greece, roman and native american? Hendricus 09:11, 18 Octobris 2008 (UTC)[]

Think about it carefully. Some of those museums are not specialized at all (like the British Museum). Maybe we should get a few more articles about museums first, and then think about the subcategories? But Categoria:Musea archaeologica would be quite OK, if you wanted to start with that. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 12:23, 18 Octobris 2008 (UTC)[]

Gregory[fontem recensere]

I believe you have done a good job. I had deleted the previuos general descriptive page because it was a double of the exting one Gregorius (nomen)--Massimo Macconi 15:23, 19 Octobris 2008 (UTC)[]

Pronuntiatio Latina[fontem recensere]

Hi, I made some necessary changes to this article; for more details view its discussion page. Regards, --El Mexicano 15:03, 20 Octobris 2008 (UTC)[]

colloquium percontativum[fontem recensere]

Ciao! Sorry the problem is that I'm always using the same model I have saved as a word file. I would change it at once. Ciao--Massimo Macconi 17:41, 24 Octobris 2008 (UTC)[]

Ceramic/pottery[fontem recensere]

Hi Andrew, I just thought that figlina might be better for en:pottery rather than en:ceramic, but I cannot think of any other word for ceramic, other than terra. What do you think?--Xaverius 11:01, 25 Octobris 2008 (UTC)[]

Figlina is the art, not the pots. When you can't find a Latin word for an English word, try a synonym of the English word. Cassell's doesn't have a Latin term for the English word ceramic, but under the English word earthenware you'll find the Latin noun fictilia (-ium, pl.) and the Latin adjective fictilis, -e. Will these words help? IacobusAmor 11:08, 25 Octobris 2008 (UTC)[]
I was trying to do that from Spanish synonims. So figlina would be es:Alfarería and then fictilia es:cerámica?--Xaverius 11:10, 25 Octobris 2008 (UTC)[]
Yes, that's it, surely. If you want a singular word for the heading (corresponding with the en:wiki "Ceramic") then it would be fictile neut. sg. This is for focusing on the materials. If you are focusing on the work done with ceramic materials, I think you can have the phrase opus fictile. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 11:21, 25 Octobris 2008 (UTC)[]
OK, I'll put this in the disputatio--Xaverius 13:10, 25 Octobris 2008 (UTC)[]

gratias multas tibi ago pro tuo scripto in meam quaestionem. sum novus in vicipaedia, sed linguam latinam scribere non est impedimentum; est vere dilectosa haec verbosa exercitatio. scribe mihi et duc me. vale --Flos parthenopea sive de amoribus 19:50, 27 Octobris 2008 (UTC)[]

et, si necesse est, certiorem te facio quod domus mea est in Urbe, pulcherrima urbs caput mundi!!!!!!!!!!!!--Flos parthenopea sive de amoribus 19:52, 27 Octobris 2008 (UTC)[]

Litterae electronicae[fontem recensere]

Litteram electronicam tuam respondi, Andrew--Xaverius 12:38, 3 Novembris 2008 (UTC)[]

Italianus versus Italicus[fontem recensere]

Dear Andrew, what do you think of this discussion see at the end Disputatio Usoris:Neander‎;, ciao --Massimo Macconi 20:35, 14 Novembris 2008 (UTC)[]

Quomodo moventur paginae?[fontem recensere]

Volebam "Universitas catholica chilensis" ad "Universitas Catholica Chilensis" movere, sed nesciebam ubi aut quomodo. Num mihi docere potes?

Vicipaedia:Movere says that as a measure to prevent vandalism, newly registered users cannot move pages unless four days have elapsed since registration – I guess that was Cato's problem! --UV 02:06, 21 Novembris 2008 (UTC)[]

Portū Namnetum[fontem recensere]

Thanks and ciao  :- ) --Massimo Macconi 13:21, 22 Novembris 2008 (UTC)[]

Help please[fontem recensere]

Could you please review and correct the following Latin translation? Thank you in advance. --El Mexicano 15:38, 22 Novembris 2008 (UTC)[]

SEAT es una compañía española, propiedad del Grupo Volkswagen, integrada en el Grupo de Marcas de Audi. La marca produce modelos con un diseño expresivo y un carácter innovador y deportivo. En la actualidad la empresa española comercializa siete modelos (Alhambra, Arosa, Córdoba, Ibiza, Inca, León y Toledo) y exporta las dos terceras partes de su producción. Sus principales mercados son los europeos y está presente en 70 países de los cinco continentes. La factoría de Martorell, inaugurada en 1993 por el rey Juan Carlos I, está considerada como una de las más avanzadas de Europa gracias a sus sistemas logísticos y a la flexibilidad del proceso de producción. Las ventas a cliente final de SEAT se sitúan a 500.000 unidades al año.

Latine: "SEAT est societas hispana, proprietas Catervae Volkswagen, coniuncta cum Nomina Audi. Societas modellos formae expressivae et characteris gymnicae innovatorisque fabricatur. Hodie societas hispana septem modellos (Alhambram, Arosam, Cordobam, Ibizam, Incam, Leonem et Toledonem) vendet, et duas tertias partes operarum suorum exportat. Primarii mercati sui sunt Europaei cum presentia in 70 civitatis quinque continentorum. Fabrica Martorellensis, Rex Johannes Carolo Primo inaugurata in 1993, est una excultissimarum Europarum ob systemas logisticos suos et flexibilitate processi productionis. Venditiones ad cliente finale 500.000 unitates annorum estimantur."

Haec in Taberna duplicavi. Ibi vide. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 15:42, 22 Novembris 2008 (UTC)[]

Rhedicina[fontem recensere]


Rhedicina operibus G.Cowperii invenitur ('Could Homer come himself, distressed and poor, and tune his harp at Rhedicina's door'). Renascentiae inventionem orthographia diversa exsistentem esse credo. Etymologice a Cambro-Britannico 'Rhydychen' derivatur (rhyd 'vadum' significat, ych, pl. ychen 'bos, boves').

Testes alii: W. Thompson, On the Countess of Pomfret's Benefactions to the University of Oxford; Piozziana.----Clive Sweeting

Tibi gratias ago[fontem recensere]

Tibi gratias ago causa adiuti tui.

Rex Momo 21:55, 25 Novembris 2008 (UTC)[]

Praefecturae Franciae[fontem recensere]


I think it was a bad idea to double the list in Formula:Praefecturae Franciae. I think something like that will be better :

Numerus Nomen
01 Addua
02 Axona
03 Elaver
04 Alpes Provinciae
05 Alpes Superiores
06 Alpes Maritimae
07 Ardesca
08 Arduenna
09 Arigia
10 Alba
11 Atax
12 Avario
13 Ostia Rhodani
and so on

What do you think ? Cdlt, VIGNERON * discut. 12:30, 26 Novembris 2008 (UTC)[]

Yes, I agree, that's a better idea! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 12:31, 26 Novembris 2008 (UTC)[]
That’s done. Cdlt, VIGNERON * discut. 15:59, 23 Decembris 2008 (UTC)[]

Ayuda traducción latín / Help latín translation[fontem recensere]

Ayuda Traducción latín[fontem recensere]

Buenas tardes Andrew
Ante todo pido disculpas por dirigirme en español, no dominó el latín y veo conoce España muy bien. MUY BUENO lo de Cibi Matritensis (churros versus Globuli matritenses versus spanish donuts).
Trabajo en un art. de es.wiki sobre instrumentos musicales medievales/Organistrum [[8]] y trato de incluir una traducción fiable del texto que incluyo; he realizado una, pero mi nivel de latín es very ... very insuficiente.
Si puede ayudarme, agradecería su colaboración.

Los párrafos hacen referencia al 'Ysis' y 'Organistrum' un instrumento de música medieval.

1) Características generales y uso del instrumento.
Ysis est instrumentum in modum rote introrsus habens cordas nervales grossas et fortes et rotam interius cum pice registratam et exterius clavos cerastes quos eciam canens registrat cum digittis Ysis dictum quoniam ab ysi inventrice primitus est repertum quo instrumento comuniter mulieres solent suum victum querere.
Autor: Paulus Paulirinus; Titulo: Tractatus de musica
(Ref.: Josef Reiss, "Pauli Paulirini de Praga Tractatus de musica (1460)," Zeitschrift für Musikwissenschaft 7 (1924-25): 261-64.)

2) Como deben distribuirse las teclas para obtener notas musicales correctas.
[-303-] Eiusdem Oddonis quomodo organistrum construatur.
In primis a capite iuxta primum plectrum, infra usque ad aliud plectrum, quod ponitur post rotulum, per duos passus metire, et in primo passu pone C. secundus finit.
A C ad finem metire per tria, et quartus retro reddit G.
a G ad finem per tres, et quartus retro pone D.
a D. ad finem per III. et in primo passu pone a.
De a. ad finem pone III. et in primo retro pone E. et ab E. ad finem per III. in primo passu pone [sqb].
Item a C. ad finem per II. et III. retro pone F.
ab F. ad finem per IIII. in primo passu pone b.
De fistulis.
In mensuris fistularum istae sunt voces C D E F G a [sqb] c. Gravis C. quae est prima fistula, longitudo ponitur ad placitum: quae divisa per quatuor passus, uno passu sublato reddit fistulam F.
Quae C. si dividatur in tres passus, tertio passu sublato reddit fistulam G.
G autem divisa in tres, quarto passu adiuncto reddit fistulam D.
retro. D vero partita in tres, tertio sublato reddit a. a divisa in tres, quarto passu adposito reddit fistulam E retro.
E iterum aequata in tres, tertio ablato reddit fistulam [sqb].
Fistula F in quatuor passus redacta dat fistulam b. quarto passu succiso.
Notet autem prudens musicus, has mensuras constare per diatessaron et diapente.
Tomado de: http://www.music.indiana.edu/tml/9th-11th/ODOORG_TEXT.html
THESAURUS MUSICARUM LATINARUM de la School of Music Indiana University
Autor: Odo; Titulo: Quomodo organistrum construatur
Origen: Scriptores ecclesiastici de musica sacra potissimum, 3 vols., ed. Martin Gerbert (St. Blaise: Typis San-Blasianis, 1784; reprint ed., Hildesheim: Olms, 1963), 1:303.
Available online at http://www.chmtl.indiana.edu/tml/9th-11th/ODOORG_TEXT.html

Como no dispongo de usr en la.wiki, firmo con la IP y añado mi pág. de discusión en es.wiki Grosas/discusión [[9]]
También puede dejarse una nota en la pág. de discusión del artículo: [[10]].

Muchas gratias de antemano por la ayuda. 22:00, 26 Novembris 2008 (UTC)[]

De Vitoria[fontem recensere]

Salve Andrew! What do you think on this issue? It rings a bell of a discussion long ago about Lutetia/Parisius. Cheers!--Xaverius 20:56, 29 Novembris 2008 (UTC)[]

Wolverhampton / Wulfrunehantona[fontem recensere]

Iam fontem inveni nominis Latini hujus urbis. Debetne titulus paginae mutari?

Catgories[fontem recensere]

I thank you for your precious job and I hope both can go on with this speed. I apologize if sometimes I do not insert nationality's subcategories but I am not sure if they exist and in the meantime I have not time to check it. Ciao and Buone Feste!--Massimo Macconi 12:33, 6 Decembris 2008 (UTC)[]

De Cotoneo[fontem recensere]

Vale, carissime Andreas, et tibi gratias ago causa adiuti de Marco Pannella.

Please, I need your Administrator help. I live at 5 kmetres from this village, and I lve it. My Latin teacher, that lives Cotonei told me that this is its real Latin name.

I appreciate who made the matter, but if it's possible, can you take off this orrible Codonio? This is only an "Latinized" name of Italian name Codogno.

In this Municipality is very famous the APPLE COTOGNO (Cydonia vulgaris) and it's made a fantastic jam with it.

Thank you very much and have a nice Sunday

Rex Momo 16:32, 6 Decembris 2008 (UTC)[]

OK, Rex, I moved it. In fact, any user with an account can move pages.
I agree with your teacher that this is probably the correct Latin name, but it would be good to have some evidence: therefore I will put a {{Fontes desiderati}} on the page. If you can find a reference to this Latin name of the town, please add it in the footnote.
We have to leave the redirect Codonio where it is, for the present, because other Wikis will link to this name. After a while, if it is really completely wrong, we can delete the redirect, but not yet. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 17:02, 6 Decembris 2008 (UTC)[]
The original author, the one who bestowed the name Codonio upon the town, spelled altitudo as altidudo, perhaps implying that he consistently hears (or speaks a dialect that uses) /d/ for /t/. IacobusAmor 19:06, 6 Decembris 2008 (UTC)[]

Verbum corpus[fontem recensere]

Hi Andrew , how are you? How do you feel about the word corpus being used to mean 'a group of people'? I have a Traupmann dictionary that says 'community, corporation' and you can see the same by googling corpus Archimedes Text Repository=>Lewis and short. Cheers, --Jondel 18:46, 6 Decembris 2008 (UTC)[]

Hi Jondel. I don't know if we're speaking about a specific page. In general, I think, if corpus is used in this sense, it needs to be closely accompanied by words making the precise meaning clear, such as "corpus rei publicae". Without that help, I think, it might be difficult to understand. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 18:53, 6 Decembris 2008 (UTC)[]
Try caterva, globus, circulus, turba, coetus, &c. The corpus in corpus Archimedes, or corpus Alexandrinum, or whatever, like the appendix in Appendix Vergiliana, refers to a group of texts, not a group of people. IacobusAmor 19:11, 6 Decembris 2008 (UTC)[]
Thanks Andrew, Iacobus.How are you Iacobus? This(bottom) shows the usage of guild/political body of people and other examples of group of people.Andrew. I don't want to refer to a specific page since it should be a fix , apply-to-all meaning and based on standards. Knowing other languages, I realize words are hard to translate directly and are very contextual though.--Jondel 19:47, 6 Decembris 2008 (UTC)[]
Corpus means "a body" as in the human body, or any other kind of body. It meaning as a corporation or group corresponds to the idea "body of people". If in english it would sound wierd to use body where you want to say corpus, don't use it.--Rafaelgarcia 19:52, 6 Decembris 2008 (UTC)[]
That's good advice. A clue, Jondel, is that you had to send me to the bottom of that dictionary page. Dictionaries have to be used intelligently. If you are choosing the last meaning, among many, your readers will not easily understand you: other meanings will come into their minds first. That's why I suggested, at the beginning, that if you use "corpus" in this way you would need to attach to it some other word that makes your meaning clear. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 20:56, 6 Decembris 2008 (UTC)[]
Yes. I got the meaning thanks to Rafael, thus we can use it simimilar to English idioms corps 'of officers' or in the Latin corpus 'mercatorium' as guild (body of tradesmen) and other usages. Gratias ago to all.--Jondel 21:22, 6 Decembris 2008 (UTC)[]

Andrea Magno !!![fontem recensere]

Tibi gratias ago!!! Sed cur nota mihi in tua disputatione et non in mea scripsisti?

No problem !!!

Rex Momo 00:58, 7 Decembris 2008 (UTC)[]

Vale, carissime !!![fontem recensere]

I've seen the voices of Melkite-Catholic Bishops Paulus Victor Borkhoche and Isidorus Battikha are controled. Can you controle if the other Melkite-Bishop Ioannes Adelius Elya it's goo?

Tibi gratus sum

Rex Momo 14:20, 10 Decembris 2008 (UTC)[]

You've understood !!![fontem recensere]

As all theMelkite Bishop had your visit, except Ioannes Adelius Elya, I wanted only this. So I am sure, now that also this page was written godd from me.

Tibi semper gratias ago

Rex Momo 22:38, 10 Decembris 2008 (UTC)[]

Future perfect[fontem recensere]

Oops, yes. But you should have felt free to fix it: if I'm wrong I'm wrong! --Iustinus 20:58, 14 Decembris 2008 (UTC)[]

Tibi do opionionem meam[fontem recensere]

Vale carissime Andreas, quomodo te habes?

I redirected Soteropolis (Brasilia) as Sanctus Salvator Bahiae, and I created the Category Urbes Bahiae. Now Sanctus Salvator Bahiae is capital of the Federal State of Bahia. Please, can you put in Category Urbes Brasiliae also Urbes Bahiae?

And if you can, as Cotoneum (do you remember?) can you do the same? As graduated in Brazilian History, I think it's better Sanctus Salvator Bahiae than Soteropolis (Brasilia).

Thanks a lot and Merry Christmas and Happy New Yer !!! I'll be in Entrammes Mayenne from Jan. 3rd to 6th in Port du Salut Abbey. Can we meet there?

Rex Momo 16:45, 21 Decembris 2008 (UTC)[]

Sorry, Rex, I'm travelling at present and can't help. If you can't do these edits/moves yourself, I suggest you ask another administrator.

I hope you enjoy your time at Port du Salut. I won't be nearby at that time, I'm afraid. Good wishes -- Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 18:55, 21 Decembris 2008 (UTC)[]

See my changes to Categoria:Urbes Bahiae. I added the supercategories and I added the name of an equivalent category on another wikipedia.
I moved Soteropolis (Brasilia) to Sanctus Salvator Bahiae. See Vicipaedia:Movere o vedi it:Aiuto:Sposta. --UV 19:26, 21 Decembris 2008 (UTC)[]

Tibi semper gratias ago !!![fontem recensere]

Vale, carissime Andreas. Tibi gratias ago causa adiuti de Rege Momo Vladimiro.

As I sayd, I'll be at http://www.portdusalut.com/ from Sat. 3rd to Wed. 7h morning. I know you are very busy, but if you want to come there, to drink a sweet Trappist beer, be welcome.

Please, how can talk with Santista1982 (see on my disputatio, the note Urbs Sanctorum)? He doesn't have a page, and discussion

Happy New Year !!!

Rex Momo 23:18, 1 Ianuarii 2009 (UTC) (Aléx)[]

T-AA/ST[fontem recensere]

Hi Andrew, I've tried to make some good points for you to ponder on the discussion page. See what you think. -- [Anon]

  • Oh, and apologies, I realize I created some confusion. I didn't mean to say the sub-region is known as "Alto Adige and South Tyrol", but that both terms are quite widely used in English independently. For the region, Trentino-Alto Adige was by far the most used in English and Latin-based languages. For the subregions, still Alto Adige is used more often than South Tyrol, but the latter is indeed used. You will often see BBC, Guardian, etc. flipping back and forth between the two terms -- [Anon]
Fine, thanks, I see what you mean now. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 09:58, 5 Ianuarii 2009 (UTC)[]
No problem, I'm happy to discuss this region with those that are interested, and there is no hurry. Good night. -- [Anon]
Catching up on the discussion before I go to work. I'm not surprised at all to see that User:UV is a native German speaker from the history he explained. It is simply the Germanic version of things -- and as you may guess -- it is not quite right. Not that the Italian, nor anyone else's is quite right either, but you probably get the point. :) -- [Anon]
Well, that may be, but if underlying ethnolinguistic tendencies are in question, O anonyme, you could perhaps be more explicit about your own background. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 18:12, 6 Ianuarii 2009 (UTC)[]
See my comments regarding the reliability of de.wikipedia at Disputatio:Tridentinum et Tirolis Meridionalis. --UV 22:09, 6 Ianuarii 2009 (UTC)[]

Aloisius vs. Ludovicus[fontem recensere]

You wrote: "For a French Louis, Ludovicus is the right choice", but nevertheless, it seems that French equates Aloysius to Louis. I would just as well assume Ludovicus as well, but I'm not sure I have good reason. Please explain. --Iustinus 15:56, 5 Ianuarii 2009 (UTC)[]

Ah, well, I'm trying to finish my cheese text and can't hunt examples right now. Sorry! But (a) I know that French coins up to the 18th century used "Ludovicus" for Louis; (b) is somebody with the name "de Gonzague" a good example of a Frenchman? Happy New Year -- Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 16:06, 5 Ianuarii 2009 (UTC)[]
To crystallise my dismissal of L. de Gonzague's evidence. What the French wiki is saying is no more than this: "We call him Louis, but his original name (since he's Italian) is Aloisio; because of that, his Latin name is sometimes (parfois) Aloysius." If you see that as evidence that Aloysius is the Latin for Louis, it is because you have been studying too many ancient languages at once! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 19:52, 5 Ianuarii 2009 (UTC)[]
I'm not saying that Louis is Aloysius, just that Aloysius is Louis. I guess the article does pretty conclusively show that French is capable of making the distinction (Aloïs) when it really wants to. But still, it concerns me the if the Romance languages tend to conflate the two names, we're invariably going to guess incorrectly sometimes. --Iustinus 20:16, 5 Ianuarii 2009 (UTC)[]
No, your first sentence is wildly wrong. The article is saying that Louis is Aloisio, and that Aloisio is Aloysius. The reason why this differs from your sentence, is the reason why it is a bad idea to translate from a translation.
Your conclusion that the Romance languages tend to conflate the two names is therefore based on very ill-chosen evidence. This article does not say a word about how French names relate to Latin names. As I tried to say at the beginning (before I even looked at the article!) it isn't about a French name, or a French person, at all. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 20:51, 5 Ianuarii 2009 (UTC)[]
That frankly seems like a distinction without a difference to me. Maybe if we were dealing with the Samoan form of the Welsh form of a Latin name it would be hazardous to assume we could use the usual Latin form (there's always Abraham vs. Ibraimus, for instance), but within the world of European languages, there are usually recognized equivalences, especially where saints are concerned.
BUT, the French article does clearly say that he was originally called Aloïs, and things get even more confused when we look at fr:Louis de Gonzague#Différentes formes du prénom, which lists distinctive forms of the name not only in French, but also in Portuguese and... what the hell? Italian! This is just nuts. Apparently the Romance languages can distinguish Aloysius from Ludovicus, but at least in the case of Mr. Gonzaga prefer not to.
Which brings me to your next point: Luigi Gonzaga is not French. Your implicit challenge is to find Frenchmen named Louis in the vernacular, but Aloyius in Latin. Well, you are right, the evidence for that is not copious, but neither is it insignificant:
  1. Aloysius Bertrand. (I will admit this is a shakey example, both because it is a pen name, and also because the man was actually born in Italy. Still, en does list his real name as Louis-, not Luigi-)
  2. Louis of Poissy, Cursus Elementaris Philosophiae Christianae (1880) "a Fr. Aloysio editus"
  3. Louis-Claude Fillion, Biblia sacra juxta vulgatae: exemplaria et correctoria Romana (1887), "Denuo editit divisionibus logicis analysique continua sensum illustrantibus ornavit Aloisius Claudius Fillion."
  4. Louis-Adolphe Paquet, Disputationes theologicæ, seu, Commentaria in Summam theologicam D. Thomæ (1900), "auctore Aloisio-Adulpho Paquet."
  5. Louis Hémon is called Aloisius in Genovefa Immè's 1995 translation of his Marie Chapdelaine. Admittedly Mme. Immè married an Italian, but she is herself French, and seems to have accepted the equation in this case.
(Additionally, there are examples of non-French Aloisii being called Louis in French, such as Ab Al.Ferd. Comite Marsigli > "par Mr. le Comte Louis Ferdinand Marsigli", so that part of the problem is clearly not limited to Gonzaga.)
Now, I will grant that the best policy is probably to assume Ludovicus for Frenchmen, but clearly exceptions to this rule do exist.
(Then of course there's Clovis, which is recognized as a distinct name, but goes back, I believe, to the same proto-germanic form. I'm pretty sure I saw a third name from early French history with the same quirk, but I can't recall what it was) --Iustinus 21:57, 5 Ianuarii 2009 (UTC)[]
Oh Lord. You're right all the time, Iustine! .... Well, I mean, this time anyway! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 22:15, 5 Ianuarii 2009 (UTC)[]
Ha, utinam! --Iustinus 22:45, 5 Ianuarii 2009 (UTC)[]

ab italia salutatio et spes optimi novi tibi anni[fontem recensere]

Salve, mi Andrea, et ignosce me non subsignasse meam priorem conlationem. Pro certo ioculatus sum et nolui nemini offendere. Sum Neapoli, docens nonnullos discipulos in itinere archaeologico/classico/artistico/etctico... die undecimo ibimus Romam, et in Americam redibimus post 10 dies Romae. Male habetur interrete et omnino oblitus sum meam tesseram non recordatam hoc in computatro. Spero te optime habere, et annum novum prosperrimum fore. Valeas quam optime in proximum. --Ioscius (disp) 00:09, 6 Ianuarii 2009 (UTC)[]

Mi Iosci, te facile recognovi! ioculariter obstruere minatus sum nec unquam talem rem perpetrabo. Spero te auf klassischem Boden bene habere et cum spirito antiquo (i. q. grappa?) inspirari. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 10:00, 6 Ianuarii 2009 (UTC)[]

Littera J[fontem recensere]

De paginâ de Shawn Johnson. Utor litterâ "j", ob quam rem usor alterus paginam meam mutavit. Imperium DE ORTHOGRAPHIÂ arbitrarissimum stultissimúmque est--scriptum à primo qui potuit et non postea mutatum. Vicipaedia Angla orthografiam non coartat. Ego paginam non rursus mutavit, ob imperiis Vicipaediae; volo tamen alteros paginas non inutiliter mutare. At imperium DE ORTHOGRAPHIÂ mutari debet. Si litteram "j" non amas, vide "Gadgets" in "Praeferentiae meae"--"Vertere omnes 'j' in 'i'".--Jchthys 00:08, 7 Ianuarii 2009 (UTC)[]

Iam correxi accentus et Orthographia illius paginae ut pagina normis Vicipaedianis obtemperit. Secundum argumenta tua, biblia sacra "ORTHOGRAPHIÂ arbitrarissimum stultissimúmque" quoque utitur, quae argumenta omnino recuso. "Nisi vis verba tua crudelissime recenseri, mutari, et ad libidinem redistribui, noli ea submittere." Vale--Rafaelgarcia 00:29, 7 Ianuarii 2009 (UTC)[]
I didn't mean to attack anyone--just the rule itself, which seems to have been made by someone off the cuff and then treated like policy. From my reading of the talk page, it seems that the consensus reached was that (1) it's a minor issue, and people shouldn't go correcting everyone else (that's why I'm not changing the orthography back again); and (2) people should be free to use "j", since it can always be turned off in one's user preferences. Compare the English Wikipedia. There's no heavy-handedness on English spelling; people are allowed to use either set of spelling rules they please. This might be even more important in Vicipaedia Latina, because there are fewer contributors--we can't get hung up on these minor issues. --Jchthys 15:47, 7 Ianuarii 2009 (UTC)[]
I prefer 'j' myself as well as 'michi' and 'nichil' and a host of other mediaevalisms, but am happy to submit to authority and be altered for the sake of uniformity here. As for diacritic marks, they are a complete waste of energy. This is Latin, not Polish or Czech. 16:00, 7 Ianuarii 2009 (UTC)[]
The vast majority (and I do mean vast, maybe 99.98 percent) of all optional instances of I & J have been keyboarded as I, not J. Ergo, fortasse paginae "Praeferentiae meae" oportet offerre novum gadget, quod vertere omnes I in J possit. Tum Jchthys erit beatissimus. ;) IacobusAmor 16:33, 7 Ianuarii 2009 (UTC)[]
Actually, that's not true about English Wikipedia. It is edited by its users, and I correct lots of Americanisms there! 16:51, 7 Ianuarii 2009 (UTC)[]
Hmm, there may be a few who would object to your use of correct in that context! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 16:58, 7 Ianuarii 2009 (UTC)[]
Latin has not just two but about 10 different spelling conventions in use during its 3000 year existance including ALLCAPITALSSWITHNOSPACINGBETWEENWORDS, and a variety of alternative declensions. But this is an encyclopedia, where a uniformity of editorial standards is expected, not a free-for-all bulletin board. Furthermore, we are only insisting on the spelling conventions currently in place in modern latin and found everywhere in latin textbooks for sale in bookstores. I'd like to see if the english wiki allows Twain or simplified franklin or interspel or IPA. --Rafaelgarcia 17:00, 7 Ianuarii 2009 (UTC)[]
As stated in the talk page for "De Orthographia", most foreign (i.e. non-English Latin textbooks) use ligatures as well as the letter "j". These (arbitrary, and inconsistent in my opinion) imperia regarding spelling are an unnecessary deterrent to contributors; maybe I'll start contributing to La Vikipedio Esperanta if someone doesn't change that imperium (I'm not going to do it myself).
In any case, it would be good to have a gadget to turn all consonantal i into j—then people could concentrate on the more important issues. Unfortunately, that kind of gadget might take someone a while to create. But that kind of gadget, I think, solved the ligature conflict.
(When I see Latin quoted traditionally in nineteenth-century works, even in English, j and diacritics are used.)
Incidentally, how is my Latinitas in the article? —Jchthys 18:39, 7 Ianuarii 2009 (UTC)[]
Fine, though I found it a bit hard to read with the accents and ligatures! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 19:06, 7 Ianuarii 2009 (UTC)[]
Though I actually didn't use ligatures—except one capital ligature in a subsection heading.--Jchthys 22:12, 7 Ianuarii 2009 (UTC)[]
Then forgive me -- that one must have caught my eye! Your Latinitas is just fine, so far as I'm a judge. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 11:24, 8 Ianuarii 2009 (UTC)[]
I mst say that it always strikes me as inconsistent that 'j' is abolished and yet 'v' retained. I guess that is because consonantal 'v' and vocabular 'u' are so different in pronunciation (except among 'Waynie Weedy Weaky' schoolmasters). That being said, it is thought that consonantal 'j' was always pronounced like the French 'j' among English Latin speakers up to the Reformation.Tergum violinae 20:31, 7 Ianuarii 2009 (UTC)[]
Me too. But, like a contributor above, I think it's more important to write articles than to worry about it. In publishing, one usually accepts a "house style". Same thing really. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 20:36, 7 Ianuarii 2009 (UTC)[]
But who set the rule? surely not a consensus?--Jchthys 22:12, 7 Ianuarii 2009 (UTC)[]
What else? Everything here is by consensus. Consensus (nearly always) means compromise. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 11:20, 8 Ianuarii 2009 (UTC)[]
The reason I say that is that it was originally set (by an anonymous user) and never changed, though to me the consensus by the end of the disputatio seemed to indicate that it was not agreed with. Those arguing for the rule argued for it for the sake of consistency and obedience to authority, not necessarily because they agreed with the rule.
A reply should be put on mea disputatio.--Jchthys 12:50, 8 Ianuarii 2009 (UTC)[]
Here will do just as well! My answer is that I don't think I've ever done anything for the sake of obedience to authority, certainly not this. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 13:02, 8 Ianuarii 2009 (UTC)[]
Maybe that needs expanding. I do of course sometimes obey authority, otherwise I would be dead or in prison. But I don't do it for the sake of obedience: I do it for the sake of being happy, having enough to eat, etc. These things, I find, are achieved -- up to a point -- by going along with society. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 10:33, 9 Ianuarii 2009 (UTC)[]

Two quick questions[fontem recensere]

Andrew, why did you remove the categoria "Musici Civitatum Foederatum" from a couple of American composers' articles? They seem like musicians (musici) to me. ¶ Why did you cut the categoria "Socii Academiae Americanae Artium et Litterarum" and other categories from Elliott Carter's biography? By the time we have a few hundred thousand articles, we'll be needing such categories, at least if the architecture of en: (where I got them from) is to be believed! IacobusAmor 17:27, 9 Ianuarii 2009 (UTC)[]

It was a semi-automatic move, in obedience to the rule "Don't include subcategories and immediate supercategories side by side" (because the category "Compositores C. F." which I have just revised is a subcategory of "Musici C. F."). However, this rule can be ignored, so if you think the category useful, please re-insert it. Sorry. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 17:31, 9 Ianuarii 2009 (UTC)[]
I feared that that might be the case. The problem then is that you may need more subcategories: for composer-pianists (e.g., Gershwin), composer-guitarists (e.g., Berlioz), composer-singers (Dufay), and so on. Or better: deploy "Categoria:Musici Civitatum Foederatarum" for composers who performed in public. Which of course will include quite a few of them. ¶ How about the other question? IacobusAmor 17:36, 9 Ianuarii 2009 (UTC)[]
I don't think I deleted any of your potential categories. The one you mention, I actually created (and will receive your grateful thanks with my accustomed modesty!): see Categoria:Socii Academiae Artium et Litterarum Americanae, which sprang into existence an hour ago. The ones that seemed to have no potential relationship to any category structure currently existing on la:wiki, I included in <!-- -->. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 18:09, 9 Ianuarii 2009 (UTC)[]

Inter Amnes[fontem recensere]

Vale carissime Andreas, et Felix 2009!!! J' avait ecrit cette nouvelle page sur mon Entrammes. Est ce que tu peut voir s'il òa va? Comment c' est possible de maitre la photo de la France avec le petit point rouge ou se trouve la petite ville?

Tibi semper gratias ago.

Rex Momo 08:58, 11 Ianuarii 2009 (UTC)[]

Perhaps[fontem recensere]

Perhaps, if we're going to rate the Latinity of texts, we need a second system—to rate the non-Latinity aspects of texts. For example, you say the Latinity of 4.020 incolarum , in provincia is OK, but those four words contain two infelicities: the period (where ISO has nothing between the digits), and the space to the left of the comma. In the absence of such a second system, one tends to compile all infelicities together, and would accordingly not mark the Latinity here so high as Latinitas|1. That's unsatisfactory of course, but what else can one do? The vocabulary & syntax may be OK, but the overall impression of the article is still not OK. Maybe the whole rating sytstem should be abolished! In any case, the verbal descriptions are confusing and need adjusting, for how (in any logically arranged series) can –3 on a scale of 1 to –7 be the mark that's maximally in doubt ("maxdubium")? IacobusAmor 13:24, 11 Ianuarii 2009 (UTC)[]

Hold on, what is this really about? If it's Bisbona, then, since you rated the page, the editor has removed most of the text (meaning that it has become a stipula, and we don't usually rate the Latinitas of stipulae) and added the formula "In progressu" (and we don't judge in-progressu pages). In those circumstances, I lightly rearranged the first sentence, removed the no-longer-relevant Latinitas label, and encouraged him to add more in-progressu text. What else should I have done?
Oh, I see what it was now. My summarium was "Latinitas OK". This was misleading. I really meant "no point in judging until text is expanded and in progressu is removed"!
On general issue 1, I have always felt and have always said that we have too many levels of bad Latinity. I avoid those ugly formulae. If the Latin is good enough to keep at all, but needs correcting, I add {{L-1}}, which sorts the page in an appropriate category and adds a red dot at the top right.
On general issue 2, "Latinitas" is not the same as "overall impression". So far as I know, no one ever said it was. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 13:57, 11 Ianuarii 2009 (UTC)[]
Oh, but to get the ball rolling then, I'll be glad to say it is. :) 13:30, 12 Ianuarii 2009 (UTC)
From time to time, unknown contributors add pasages that, though in perfectly good Latin, are fit more for ten-year-olds than for adults. In such cases, the Latinity is bad because the match between the words and their presumed audience is bad. ¶ Someday, perhaps, readers will be able to specify levels of Latinity and have Vicipaedia display itself onscreen at the specified levels, much as readers now can choose certain other variable features, such as fonts. English-speaking contributors have produced two wikis (the regular one and the Simple English one), but why stop at two levels of difficulty? The future only a couple of decades hence may well be beyond our ability to imagine it, but let's try anyway! One concern in that regard is the rating-system—why it exists, and how it should be functioning. IacobusAmor 13:47, 12 Ianuarii 2009 (UTC)[]
Well, if you propose a revised or consolidated system of evaluating pages, who knows, others might agree with it! I have just pursued the following course of speed-reading, and I recommend it ... First, glance at Vicipaedia:Hierarchia paginarum. I think this is mostly a very useful outline, but the area you are talking about is what falls between Stipula and Pagina mensis. It is headed Pagina and as far as quality is concerned it simply says "must be graded for Latinity". Then, have another glance at Vicipaedia:De Latinitate#De bona et de mala latinitate. Are there too many grades? Is there insufficient guidance about how to apply them? If yes, then finally glance at Formula:Latinitas (and, heaven help us, the discussion page, to which we all long ago contributed).
Can there be a better, more comprehensive and easier-to-manipulate system? I think maybe yes ... Andrew Dalby (disputatio)
OK, for starters: in Vicipaedia:Hierarchia paginarum, why are the six criteria for stipulae & paginae numbered 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 ?! IacobusAmor 14:27, 12 Ianuarii 2009 (UTC)[]
History, probably. I'm not defending, or offering justification for, what we have now. I'm offering support for improvements. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 14:33, 12 Ianuarii 2009 (UTC)[]
Then let's not renumber them, in case the lack of #2 means something! IacobusAmor 14:41, 12 Ianuarii 2009 (UTC)[]
If we discuss on this level, we'll get nowhere, but ... when I look at the page, the criteria run from 1 to 6, and it apparently hasn't been edited for four months, so heaven knows what you're seeing.
Anyway, let's close this before we get to counting angels on pinheads. Revised criteria would be for everyone to discuss, not just you and me, so why not propose something on the Taberna? Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 14:57, 12 Ianuarii 2009 (UTC)[]
Sorry - final post - just to put the matter of the strange list straight: when I was writing the numbered list of six points, it just generated as 1, 3, 4, 5... I have no idea why. Harrissimo 18:04, 12 Ianuarii 2009 (UTC).[]
Ah, I see. Then it can only be a matter of how a browser interprets the symbol "#" when used to number parallel columns. I use Firefox, and I get 123456 in each column. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 18:38, 12 Ianuarii 2009 (UTC)[]

Gododinium[fontem recensere]

I was pleased to see that you noticed Gododinium. I had hoped you would, as you know a good deal more about this sort of thing than I do. Any idea if en:North Yorkshire has a Latin name, beyond the literal and Classicizing "Comitatus Eboracensis Septentrionalis" (as I speculated iside the <!-- --> brackets?) --Iustinus 21:06, 13 Ianuarii 2009 (UTC)[]

I'd advise you use Comitatus Eboracensis Septentrionalis, cumbersome as it is. I would have recommended Isuria Septentrionalis, but the source we got Isuria (meaning Yorkshire) from has previously been proven unreliable. Harrissimo 21:17, 13 Ianuarii 2009 (UTC).[]

List of Arabic star names[fontem recensere]

Hi Andrew, no I hadn't noticed those lists. They may come in handy when filling in the list. For the moment I simply created the list to save 'my' Nomina Latina e lingua Arabica mutuata from becoming crammed with star names. The roughly corresponding English page List of Arabic loanwords in English has done the same. I am hoping that star afficionados among us will follow up my example and complete the list. --Fabullus 18:22, 15 Ianuarii 2009 (UTC)[]

Semper gratias ago[fontem recensere]

Carissime Andreas, tibi gratias ago causa visitae in Nikkae Costae pagina. Etiam in Vladimiri Georgii Scerbanenco pagina ire potes, et tuos consilios dare?

Vale !!!

Rex Momo 07:23, 16 Ianuarii 2009 (UTC)[]

GRATIAS AGO !!!![fontem recensere]

May I ask something? I remember that in Latin I put the verbs at the end of every phrase. Is there a rule in Wiki LA to put in the normal place, as if it is a Englis, Italian or other modern phrase?

Etiam parvam surpresam vide Inter Amnes.

Gratias causa visitarum explicationisque tuarum ago.

Rex Momo 17:32, 16 Ianuarii 2009 (UTC)[]

De positione verbi, omnes fere consentimus: positio normalis est ultima in sententia. Exceptionem facimus de verbo esse: utile et normale est hoc verbum inter "subiectum" et "praedicatum" ponere (e.g. Rex Momo est clarus editor Vicipaediae). De aliis verbis, notanda est variatio in textis Latinis; positio ultima est "normalis", non "obligatoria". Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 18:56, 16 Ianuarii 2009 (UTC)[]

Pinkernell:[fontem recensere]

Dear Andrew,

I agree with you. Thankl you and ciao Massimo

The Passion of the Christ[fontem recensere]

Hi Andrew. What was the reason for moving Passio Christi (pellicula) to The Passion of the Christ: [11]? --Wallach2008 20:23, 20 Ianuarii 2009 (UTC)[]

It's because our rule for a long time (see VP:TNP#Libri et arte facta) has been to use original titles for published works, unless a translated Latin title already exists. Until recently this rule hadn't been applied to some pages about films; but they were beginning to stick out, so I moved the ones that needed moving. If you look at Categoria:Pelliculae, you'll see that they all follow the rule now. Naturally, redirects from the Latin titles remain. OK?
PS. But if in this case a Latin title for the film has been published somewhere -- not impossible, I realise, since the script is partly in Latin -- then my move was unnecessary. We can move it back, with a reference to the source for the Latin title. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 20:47, 20 Ianuarii 2009 (UTC)[]
PS. My real concern was about bot's cange of the link from Passio Christi (pellicula) to The Passion of the Christ: Христовы (фильм) at russian wikipedia. Now I see that the change was appropriate. --Wallach2008 22:05, 20 Ianuarii 2009 (UTC)[]

Necare[fontem recensere]

Bonjour et pardon de vous répondre en français : je manque de temps pour rédiger une réponse en bon latin et je sais que vous parlez français.

Ce qui m'a poussé à considérer qu'EB n'était pas à sa place dans les necati/-ae, comme d'ailleurs je l'avais pensé pour Jésus, c'est d'abord que les autres noms cités dans cette catégorie étaient des hommes, ou des femmes pour la catégorie necatae, qui étaient décédés de mort violente et en dehors de toute procédure judiciaire. Ayant repris mon dictionnaire latin-français (de Félix Gaffiot), j'y ai lu que necare veut dire "tuer" ou "faire périr" sans plus de précision, ce qui pourrait donc s'appliquer aussi aux exécutions capitales. Les exemples cités à l'appui sont tirés de plaidoiries de Cicéron et du De bello Gallico, mais comme je n'ai pas ce genre de livres dans ma bibliothèque personnelle, je ne peux pas aller vérifier à l'aide du contexte s'il faut comprendre ce verbe dans un sens particulier. Ce qui cependant m'incite à penser que necare veut dire "assassiner" est que le même Gaffiot cite les mots necatio et necator au sens de "meurtre" et de "meurtier". Certes les auteurs cités sont pour l'un Isidore de Séville et pour l'autre Macrobe et cette référence à l'Antiquité tardive peut révulser certains, mais comme vous le savez peut-être, je n'hésite pas à aller chercher mon vocabulaire (parlamentum...) dans des périodes bien plus récentes ! Donc jusqu'à ce que nous ayons trouvé autre chose, je reste partisan de l'équivalence necati/necatae avec "assassiné(e)s". Mais je vais quand même réfléchir à ce qu'on pourrait trouver pour désigner toutes les personnes décédées de mort violente, puis pour subdiviser cette catégorie en sous catégories plus claires.

Bien à vous ThbdGrrd 17:35, 24 Ianuarii 2009 (UTC)[]

Lege, quaeso, in hujus categoriae disputatione responsionem quam (latine !) tibi feci.
Utinam amicus noster Macconi, qui multos homines propter damnationem interfectos in hanc categoriam recenter posuit, disputationem legisset ! Utinam ille et alii omnia quae scripsimus nunc legant...
Vale ThbdGrrd 17:07, 1 Februarii 2009 (UTC)[]

Thank for advisement[fontem recensere]

Thanks, have handled to report to the qualified gentleman and the Norwegian Embassy that that had to be said! Thank you for having told me!--Lodewijk Vadacchino 20:02, 24 Ianuarii 2009 (UTC)[]