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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

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

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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

{{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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]
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)Reply[reply]
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)Reply[reply]
OK, I have made a variant template -- please see explanation at Vicipaedia:Taberna. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 13:24, 11 Martii 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I like that that the layout is consistent with our small yellow button on {{nexus desiderati}}. :-) --Rolandus 13:37, 11 Martii 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]
OK, and in return I have downloaded a Burmese font ;) --Iustinus 01:04, 12 Martii 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

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

thanks[fontem recensere]

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

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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

occifialis[fontem recensere]

Kanths rof xifing my sputid mikastes!!

portmanteau[fontem recensere]

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

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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

BTW, have you seen this book? --Iustinus 01:22, 27 Aprilis 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]
So a "squid Sandwich" would be Pastillum lolligonibus fartum? or even without the "filled", simply Pastillum lolligonibus?--Xaverius 11:51, 15 Maii 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
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)Reply[reply]

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

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)Reply[reply]
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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

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, 11Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

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

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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]
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)Reply[reply]
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)Reply[reply]
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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]
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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

==Dotted lines==[fontem recensere]

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

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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

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

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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

Beyoncé[fontem recensere]

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

Usor:[fontem recensere]

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

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)Reply[reply]
I prefer sandals, too. =] --Ioshus (disp) 19:40, 14 Iunii 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Gracias[fontem recensere]

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

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)Reply[reply]

{{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)Reply[reply]

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

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)Reply[reply]

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 PotesReply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

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

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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]
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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

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

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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

Gratias ago[fontem recensere]

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

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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

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

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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

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

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

Yes, it exists: it's in the OED, marked: "Rare in literature, but common in southern dialects." IacobusAmor 17:03, 5 Augusti 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
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)Reply[reply]
By "southern dialects," it probably means "southern dialects of England." IacobusAmor 13:53, 6 Augusti 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
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)Reply[reply]

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

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)Reply[reply]

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

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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

Ambacia[fontem recensere]

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

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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]
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)Reply[reply]

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).Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

sidus[fontem recensere]

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

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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

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

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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]
[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)Reply[reply]
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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

- 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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]
I wouldn't have thought that it was a matter of my browser!--Xaverius 16:11, 13 Novembris 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
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)Reply[reply]
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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]
  • 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)Reply[reply]
  • 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)Reply[reply]
Ok, i suspected something like that, thanks, Hendricus 21:08, 13 Novembris 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
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)Reply[reply]
  • 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)Reply[reply]
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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

Godlieb[fontem recensere]

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

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

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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]
I'm not certain what to do with categoria:Libri biologici ?? Hendricus 19:48, 27 Novembris 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

... 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)Reply[reply]
I haven't yet though ... Sorry! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 09:49, 10 Decembris 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
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)Reply[reply]

Auxilium pro editione[fontem recensere]

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

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).Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]
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)Reply[reply]
Respondi in mea pagina. Martinus Neander 22:31, 10 Decembris 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]
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)Reply[reply]
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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]
Thank you, I’ll watch out when I edit with this browser. Sincerely, Obstructus 18:55, 14 Decembris 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
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)Reply[reply]

phylum[fontem recensere]

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

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)Reply[reply]

Dickens[fontem recensere]

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

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)Reply[reply]
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)Reply[reply]
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)Reply[reply]
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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]
I mean within the lemma's of French naturalists, Hendricus 16:26, 6 Ianuarii 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

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) ]Reply[reply]

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

->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)Reply[reply]
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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

Thanks, I missed that. I'll look at it later tonight. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 19:42, 11 Ianuarii 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]
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)Reply[reply]
I always thougt that curator was a function of wich the person is responsable for moneymatters??, Hendricus 20:38, 11 Ianuarii 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]
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)Reply[reply]
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)Reply[reply]
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)Reply[reply]
Eggs..? - now i'm confused, Hendricus 14:21, 12 Ianuarii 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]
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)Reply[reply]
Now, who is confused? Hendricus 14:42, 12 Ianuarii 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]
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)Reply[reply]
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)Reply[reply]
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)Reply[reply]
Merci, ThbdGrrd! Très utile à savoir. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 10:19, 13 Ianuarii 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]
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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]
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)Reply[reply]
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)Reply[reply]
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)Reply[reply]

Yes, good point. OK. Any new categories can be Litterae ... not Litteratura ... from now on. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 18:24, 13 Ianuarii 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]
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)Reply[reply]
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)Reply[reply]

"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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

Poesis Epica[fontem recensere]

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

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)Reply[reply]

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).Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

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

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).Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]
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)Reply[reply]
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)Reply[reply]
Mihi quidem magis placeat Urbs sancti/sanctae ... quam Fanum sancti/sanctae ..., sed videlicet non sum Hofmannus. --Fabullus 10:54, 4 Iulii 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

Britanniae[fontem recensere]

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

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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

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

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).Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]
[Discussion copied to Vicipaedia:Taberna#Litterae maiusculae: let's continue there! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 17:20, 9 Martii 2008 (UTC)]Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

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

Mudkips[fontem recensere]

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

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)Reply[reply]

tibi nuntius[fontem recensere]

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

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

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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]
Sicut Fabullo dixi in eius disputatione, noster Andreas Gollan dicit flos lactis.--Ioscius (disp) 13:52, 27 Martii 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]
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)Reply[reply]
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)Reply[reply]
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)Reply[reply]
Et ita cramum etiam Gollan dixit.--Ioscius (disp) 14:39, 27 Martii 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Gaudeamus igitur ... Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 14:42, 27 Martii 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]
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)Reply[reply]
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)Reply[reply]
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)Reply[reply]
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)Reply[reply]
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)Reply[reply]
Ego eandem rem vidi eodem spatio temporis. Lewis & Short Venantium citant. Vide nunc infra ...! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 16:43, 27 Martii 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Pro fudge recipe lac, butyrum, saccharum ... Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 16:06, 27 Martii 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Aha, illud 'cremum' Needhamianum non est aliud ac lac! --Fabullus 16:19, 27 Martii 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]
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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]
Caput tibi inclino, Andrea! Cramum sit. --Fabullus 16:43, 27 Martii 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]
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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]
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)Reply[reply]
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)Reply[reply]
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)Reply[reply]
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)Reply[reply]
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)Reply[reply]
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)Reply[reply]
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)Reply[reply]
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)Reply[reply]
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)Reply[reply]
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)Reply[reply]
Gratias multas ago, o Ceylon, ob consilia libenter data! Cras, fortasse (UV volente) possumus incipere ... Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 21:25, 1 Aprilis 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

Special characters[fontem recensere]

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

Vasconia[fontem recensere]

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

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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

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))Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]
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)Reply[reply]
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)Reply[reply]

Revert/Ban[fontem recensere]

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

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)Reply[reply]
Yes, I see. Why do you do it? Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 13:09, 18 Iunii 2008 (UTC)Reply