Disputatio Usoris:Andrew Dalby/Tabularium 2

E Vicipaedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search


Rolandus Burrage Dixon[fontem recensere]

I thought he might catch your eye! However, the bit about his work on the peace commission came straight from en:, which you may want to correct. It says: "He was [a] . . . member of the American Commission to Negotiate Peace (1916-18) in Paris." IacobusAmor 20:30, 29 Martii 2009 (UTC)

I might, but I get a bit tired of correcting en:wiki. Some similar pages will say "Versailles" instead of Paris, which is even more of a howler. It's not just wikipedia: the standard (US) biography of Ho Chi Minh describes him delivering copies of his Vietnamese "Claims" along the corridors at Versailles; there would have been no one there, and he wasn't the fellow to waste a railway ticket ...
You can see from already-linked pages on the Inquisitio (1917-1918), the Commissio ... and the Deliberatio ... where people actually were at what date. I have not heard that Dixon went to Paris in 1919: I take it the date in the article is therefore correct and he was one of the many who worked in the Inquisition up to 1918 but didn't make the transatlantic trip. However, this would want to be confirmed. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 08:49, 30 Martii 2009 (UTC)
The New World Encyclopedia (http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Roland_B._Dixon), which I hadn't checked before and seems to have a better article on him than Wikipedia, says: "In 1918, he became a member of the House Commission, which collected reports on the political conditions in Central Asia. Dixon spent several years with the commission, negotiating peace in Asia." Nothing about Paris! Maybe this passage has useful clues for you. I'll fix our text when I find time, but meanwhile anybody is free to have a go at it. IacobusAmor 11:32, 30 Martii 2009 (UTC)
It sounds very dubious, because "Colonel" House fell from favour in April 1919 (and Wilson, whose protégé he had been, was mentally inactive after September 1920 and out of power in March 1921). Therefore, if I understand correctly, I don't at present believe in this "House Commission" (except as the Commissio Americana ad Pacem Componendam (1919) whose history we know) and I certainly don't believe any such thing would have continued for several years after 1918. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 11:43, 30 Martii 2009 (UTC)
The mystery deepens! Note that Dixon doesn't appear among the men in the photo of your article. ¶ Do we have an insertable sign that questions an assertion of fact? I've been assuming that "dubsig" should be used only for dubious Latinizations (or generally the forms of words), but maybe it has broader uses? ¶ In America, official commissions, committees, etc. are often popularly called by the name of their chair, so "the Smith Commission" could be a way of referring to the President's Commission on the Blablabla Incident, and "the House Commission" could be a perfectly ordinary phrase for the group in question. IacobusAmor 12:31, 30 Martii 2009 (UTC)
Yes, sure -- the dubious assertion in the "New World Encyclopedia" was that the commission continued for several years after 1918.
All such errors are typical of tertiary sources, i.e. encyclopedias, which is why one never relies on them! In this case I think the doubt is manageable. The House group, under one or other name, existed 1917-1919 (it cannot have existed in 1916 because the US hadn't got involved in the war at that time; it ceased to exist by 1920 when the last treaty was signed). Everyone says Dixon was in the House group at a certain period; Wikipedia says he was in it 1916-1918; he isn't in the 1919 photo, I hadn't heard his name as a Paris participant in 1919, and that all fits. Conclusion: he was probably in it 1917-1918, and on this tiny issue en:wiki scores about 50/100, "New World Encyclopedia" scores about 30/100. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 13:19, 30 Martii 2009 (UTC)
Here's the real story (or something much closer to the real story than the wikipedias have), in his obituary in the American Anthropologist (written by Tozzer & Kroeber): "In 1918 Dixon became a member of the House Commission, called the “Inquiry,” and collected reports on the political conditions in Central Asia. In December of the next year he sailed for France with the American Commission to Negotiate Peace and remained in Paris until May." So he served on the commission from 1918 at least to 1920, and was in Paris from about December 1919 to May 1920. Unless of course even people who knew him and had access to (some of) his private & official papers erred! IacobusAmor 13:56, 30 Martii 2009 (UTC)
OK, that's good evidence: his absence from the photo means nothing, of course. Maybe it was his day off. But your "1920" is wrong, based on a misunderstanding by the obituarist or the copy-editor: the words "of the next year" ought not to be there. In fact they all sailed to Paris in December 1918, and they (nearly all) remained in Paris until May 1919. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 14:11, 30 Martii 2009 (UTC)
Or maybe "of the next year" is right and 1918 is wrong (and should be 1917). IacobusAmor 14:48, 30 Martii 2009 (UTC)
Very neat. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 15:47, 30 Martii 2009 (UTC)
According to the twelfth edition of the Encyclopaedia Britannica, the Conference of the Powers assembled in Paris for its first plenary session on 18 January 1919, and its Supreme Council met for the last time on 21 January 1920, but "Even then the work of the peace settlement was incomplete." The article goes on & on & on, in excruciating detail. IacobusAmor 14:04, 30 Martii 2009 (UTC)
Yes, that agrees with my timetable. Very few if any of the "Commission" remained after May 1919; but he may have been among the few, if he was dealing with Asia. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 14:11, 30 Martii 2009 (UTC)

Iosephus Song Sui-Wang[fontem recensere]

Vale, carissime Andreas, in historia episcopi Jordan te vidi. Gratias ago! Etiam in haec nova re ire potes?

Rex Momo 18:57, 31 Martii 2009 (UTC)

subcategories for scotland[fontem recensere]

Salve Andrew, i was just beginning to create subcategories for scottish scientists - (Categoria:Zoologi Scotiae), like the english wiki does, i discovered that you removed Categoria:Geologi Scotiae, was this because of bad latin? Hendricus 10:03, 7 Aprilis 2009 (UTC)

IPA, Sardou, etc.[fontem recensere]

Ciao I give you answer in my discussion page. Thank you and Happy Easter--Massimo Macconi 12:39, 10 Aprilis 2009 (UTC)

Thanks Andrew![fontem recensere]

My pages are always very short, but I prefer to write little than to write a lot with a lot of misstakes--Massimo Macconi 14:36, 10 Aprilis 2009 (UTC)

Diarium, radiophonia et televisio sunt ...[fontem recensere]

Salve Andrew, Neander told me you might be the right person for questions about modern words in Latin. I'm looking for a translation of "(mass) media" (simple:mass media) and "media studies" (simple:media studies). Right now, radiophonia and televisio are parts of the Categoria:Technologia, while diarium is part of the categories "Opera" and "Litterae". Greetings from Berolinum --Kolja21 18:31, 13 Aprilis 2009 (UTC)

Kolja, I am going to copy your question to the Vicipaedia:Taberna because I am sure that others, also, will have opinions on this! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 18:36, 13 Aprilis 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! Sounds great. --Kolja21 23:01, 13 Aprilis 2009 (UTC)

Re: Diodotus[fontem recensere]

Thank you! Indeed, I still have some bugs in my work; mistakes that I have made more than once. But everyone on here has been extremely supportive and constructive, and I will continue to sharpen my skills with all of your help! How do you feel about my Latin in general? Are there any notable overall corrections to be made in my style? CeleritasSoni 19:25, 16 Aprilis 2009 (UTC)

Oranius Ioannes Tempesta[fontem recensere]

Salut, mon chér ami. Merci pour Nik NOvecento. J'ai laissée cette autre page en custorire ça fait long temp, mais pas de personne l'ont corrigée. Est ce que peut tu regarder se ça va?

Merci et a bientôt

Rex Momo 17:22, 28 Aprilis 2009 (UTC)

Quaestio de categoriis[fontem recensere]

Andrew, just wondering why you're changing the category of "International organizations" (Organizationes inter civitates) to "Organizations of states" (Societates civitatum). Plenty of international organizations (e.g., the Red Cross) aren't run by the governments of states. Did my "inter civitates" for "international" throw you off? Is there another & better option? ¶ Otherwise, I'm fine with changing (the modern monstrosity) organizatio to (the classical) societas. IacobusAmor 12:55, 3 Maii 2009 (UTC)

We have two categories: Categoria:Societates internationales and Categoria:Societates civitatum. I think they cover it, don't they? But, if not, suggest a third. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 12:58, 3 Maii 2009 (UTC)
I didn't know that. I was avoiding the adjective internationalis because to Cicero (if Cassell's is to be belived) it would have implied something having to do with barbaric & uncivilized tribes (nationes). IacobusAmor 13:03, 3 Maii 2009 (UTC)
Well, that's us today, I guess :) Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 13:04, 3 Maii 2009 (UTC)

Macedonia[fontem recensere]

Thanks for helping to clear up the mess! For the sake both of clarity and of diplomacy, favouring none of the Macedonias above the others, I thought it best that Macedonia should become a disambiguation page, as it now is. --Fabullus 11:55, 5 Maii 2009 (UTC)

The best choice, I'm sure. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 11:56, 5 Maii 2009 (UTC)

Thanks[fontem recensere]

Your welcome is very kind, and I appreciate the helpful information. I hope that I can contribute to Vicipaedia without making too many errors!--Pebbles 17:02, 7 Maii 2009 (UTC)

slovene wiki[fontem recensere]

Hey Andrew. I noticed you created Vicipaedia Slovenica. I was just curious why you chose to make this particular page. Do you have some sort of Slovenian affiliation? You can see from my babel template (I will happily translate for you if you wish) that I have an affiliation. Just curious, no big question. Cheers. --Ioscius (disp) 01:37, 11 Maii 2009 (UTC)

Algorithmus - algoritmus - algorismus[fontem recensere]

Hi Andrew, I see you redirected Algorismus to Algorithmus (the method) instead of Algoritmus (the man). However, I was just contemplating moving Algoritmus (the man) to Algorismus, which seems to be the oldest attested Latin name of the man. But perhaps you can think of a better way to distinguish between the two. These are the facts as I know them:

  • The man (al-Khwarizmi) is called in Latin Algorismus, Algoritmus and many other variants. Algorithmus (with th) does not seem to be among them.
  • The method is called in Latin algorismus, algoritmus but also in more recent publications algorithmus.

It seemed to me that we might use the unambiguous and modern-sounding algorithmus for en:algorithm, a concept that is still very much in use, and the oldest attested form, Algorismus, for the historical figure. What say you? --Fabullus 11:37, 17 Maii 2009 (UTC)

I'm sure you are right, Fabulle. I will delete Algorismus for the present, and you can place al-Khwarizmi where you think best! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 11:42, 17 Maii 2009 (UTC)

Mrs. Greenwood[fontem recensere]

Scisne Margaretam Greenwoodem-Whalenem? Magistra mei est. Irishguy4m 23:49, 21 Maii 2009 (UTC)

Bisbona[fontem recensere]

Multas gratias tibi ago! De pagina "Bisbona"...bene speremus!:) --MarcusXC 17:33, 29 Maii 2009 (UTC)

Salve! Come si usano i template in Vicipaedia? --MarcusXC 19:23, 2 Iunii 2009 (UTC)
Gratias! --MarcusXC 14:09, 5 Iunii 2009 (UTC)

Veniam peto, bene non intellegi[fontem recensere]

Ave, Andrew! Veniam tibi peto. Non intellegi notae "UV" significationem et errorem esse putabam quia imaginem semper minorem inveniebam: ehu, nondum Vicipaediae Latinae peritissimus sum. Me excuso et tibi ago gratias de communicatione in pagina disputationis mea. Ave atque vale.--Alexander Gelsumis 19:40, 30 Maii 2009 (UTC)

Credo optimam esse, ago gratias propter patientiam tuam. Si dubia aut impedimenta habebo in pagina creanda aut in imagine addenda, non haesitans auxilium a te petam. Vale.--Alexander Gelsumis 16:33, 1 Iunii 2009 (UTC)

Edson Damian[fontem recensere]

Vale, carissime Andreas, et tibi gratias ago causa istae paginae. Can you watch again, a little, please? I put another new and a picture. Can you watch if all is good. Tibi semper gratias ago

Rex Momo 09:48, 1 Iunii 2009 (UTC)

How to say "Novel" in Latin[fontem recensere]

Hi Andrew, I'm writing a Vici page about Gabriele D'Annunzio, one of my favourite writers. But how can I say "novel"? I have some ideas, like "Liber longior" or "Implicatior liber" but I hope you can help me. Thank you.--Alexander Gelsumis 17:08, 1 Iunii 2009 (UTC)

For "novel" we usually say "mythistoria", Alexandre. Good! I look forward to reading the page! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 17:12, 1 Iunii 2009 (UTC)

Patres Albi[fontem recensere]

Vale, carissime Andreas, quomodo te habeas? Can you watch a little this page, if I have written something wrong in my not good Latin?

Tibi semper gratias ago

Rex Momo 09:19, 5 Iunii 2009 (UTC)

"Régime de Vichy"[fontem recensere]

De adjectivo censui. De nomine tamen adhuc incertus sum : "respublica", ut dixi, patenter non decet et "Francia" absurdior est, sed dubito an "regimen" facile intellegatur. Quid tibi videtur ? ThbdGrrd 19:52, 15 Iunii 2009 (UTC)

Chalcolithicum[fontem recensere]

Vale Andrea, paginam Aetas Aenea movisti ad Chalcolithicum. In pagina tamen Aetas Lapidea distinguitur inter Aetas Cuprea (chalcolithicum) et Aetas Aenea. --Fabullus 04:23, 17 Iunii 2009 (UTC)

Gratias ago, mi Fabulle. Corrigi errorem (cui ego contribueram!). Habui duas paginas, Aetas Aenea (eam nuper movi) et Aenea aetas. Nunc, fortasse, bene est. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 11:48, 17 Iunii 2009 (UTC)

Translation Request[fontem recensere]

Ad Vicipaedia:Tabernam movi. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 09:28, 19 Iunii 2009 (UTC)

Category for translators?[fontem recensere]

Does Vicipaedia have a category for translators from Latin? I see that Haroldus Norse translated poems by Catullus (at least numbers 15, 16, 21, 33, 55, 81, 100) into English verse. Also Italian (or, rather, Romanesco)? He translated some poems by Belli too. IacobusAmor 12:40, 19 Iunii 2009 (UTC)

Yes, we have Categoria:Interpretes Latino-Anglici! At present we've developed these language-pair categories only for Latin, but it could in the future be done for other language pairs too. Meanwhile, to take account of Norse's translations from Italian, you can also put him at Categoria:Interpretes textuum Italianorum. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 13:33, 19 Iunii 2009 (UTC)
Done, and done. Thanks! IacobusAmor 13:36, 19 Iunii 2009 (UTC)

Petens Ammonitum[fontem recensere]

Hey Andrew, I have a quick question. I just began working on Harrius Potter et Camera Secretorum, and got immediately stuck (of course) haha. In the first sentence it reads, "in aedibus Gestationis Lugustrorum", which is supposed to translate "In the house of Privet Drive"....I get "gestatio" as bearing/wearing (Noun), which makes no sense. Is this a common neo-latinization for Drive/Way/Road? Or can you at least put some sense into it for me? It would be greatly appreciated! (P.S. Casu primo posui hoc in disputatione de "Andrea Dalby"! Ha!) CeleritasSoni 00:47, 21 Iunii 2009 (UTC)

In what is perhaps an even stranger developement...why do I keep switching languages? haha too late for this =) CeleritasSoni 06:02, 21 Iunii 2009 (UTC)
Why me, CeleritasSoni? What do I know about Harry Potter?!? No, I can't make any sense of that. Since some of the Harry Potter books exist in Latin, the best way is to work from the names used in the printed translations. Don't know if that helps in this case ... Good luck! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 09:00, 21 Iunii 2009 (UTC)
Checked a dictionary; per L&S, gestatio can mean 'drive' in the sense of going about in a vehicle and in the sense of the place one does so. —Mucius Tever 15:43, 21 Iunii 2009 (UTC)
Ah, yes, I see! Thanks, Myces. It's true, then: a "drive" (as a street name) is so called, historically, as a place in which one would drive a carriage. However, I can't help thinking that not many will understand the word "gestatio" if used as a street name. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 18:55, 21 Iunii 2009 (UTC)
Well, it is the name of the place. I don't know if there would be any words better suited to actually translate 'Drive' as opposed to other types of street. —Mucius Tever 21:58, 21 Iunii 2009 (UTC)
I'd assume it's Via. If this is the first Potter book, I actually own a copy, but I've searched & searched and haven't found it! If it turns up, I'll let you know. IacobusAmor 19:54, 21 Iunii 2009 (UTC)
Haven't found which? 'in aedibus Gestationis Ligustrorum' is on page 1, first sentence. —Mucius Tever 21:58, 21 Iunii 2009 (UTC)
Oh, I see: it's the other way round! Well, maybe it's a misleading translation, as there's no significant conceptual difference among a drive and a street and a way: you can drive on any of them, and you can have an address on any of them, and each of them can be straight or curvy, wide or narrow. Whether a real-estate developer or a surveyor calls a path a drive or a street or a way may depend merely on whim. Both a street and a drive may be a narrow, winding road, and both may be as broad & straight as broad & straight can be. IacobusAmor 22:37, 21 Iunii 2009 (UTC)
I dunno, it might be misleading in the way that the surname 'Baker' is misleading when its bearers aren't pistores. In many places labels like "drive", "boulevard", "way", etc. are just part of the name of the street and don't necessarily describe its properties. The same town might even use them to have a Privet Drive, a Privet Lane, and a Privet Avenue all at once, so they can't usually be ignored or remapped. —Mucius Tever 23:27, 21 Iunii 2009 (UTC)
For example, on the left you see a drive, and on the right a street. IacobusAmor 00:09, 22 Iunii 2009 (UTC)
Lake Shore Drive.jpg
Misasa Onsen Street01.jpg
Gestatio for drive in the sense of a street for driving appears to be decidedly non-classical. As far as I know this neologism was invented by Peter Needham. The closest classical meaning is "a promenade, a place where one is carried to take the air". In general, it means "a bearing, a carrying, a being carried about". I would have just translated it as a "via" or if I really felt compelled to be more specific I would have just used "via autocinetica". However, as a Proper Name, rather than a mere substantive, I really can't dispute it.--Rafaelgarcia 00:33, 22 Iunii 2009 (UTC)
Well, those are just L&S's glosses, and they are working with a slightly different language than we are. (They give "bear, carry" and "be carried" as their major glosses for 'veho', too; a modern dictionary—Traupman's—s.v. gestatio has "ride (on horseback, in litter, in vehicle); drive (place); walk (place)".) I googled one translation of the first example L&S cite and 'gestatio' is translated by all of 'a ring, for taking the air on horſeback". —Mucius Tever 13:50, 22 Iunii 2009 (UTC)
For the record: Cassell's doesn't have gestatio ; and for the verb gesto (a frequentative of gero), it gives the basic sense as 'to carry, bear about' and a second sense as 'to ride about'. IacobusAmor 14:05, 22 Iunii 2009 (UTC)
To put it in context, just remember what Gestatio means in english and romance languages: gestation!--Rafaelgarcia 11:53, 24 Iunii 2009 (UTC)
I am afraid this is only one of Peter Needham's to my view misguided decisions. These include 'birotula automataria' for Hagrid's gigantic motorbike, 'Hermione' declined according to the third instead of first declension, and unattested 'Nicolas (indecl.) Flamel(us)' for attested 'Nicolaus Flamellus', to mention just a few that I happen to remember. --Fabullus 05:13, 22 Iunii 2009 (UTC)
The 'Hermione' gets me too, ever since I found out it was a Greek name. I'm sure I've mentioned my biggest peeve, where the basiliscus in the second book is everywhere a basilicus. —Mucius Tever 13:50, 22 Iunii 2009 (UTC)
The misspelling basilicus could emanate from the press (typesetter, copyeditor, proofreader), rather than the translator, and a diminutive form for a gigantic motorbike might have ironic value. Hermione, though, if it has an attested history in the first declension, probably shouldn't wantonly jump to the third! IacobusAmor 14:05, 22 Iunii 2009 (UTC)

Thanks[fontem recensere]

Thanks for catching the error on exstinctus before it led to something.--Rafaelgarcia 11:54, 24 Iunii 2009 (UTC)

SOS !!![fontem recensere]

Vale Andreas carissime, quomodo te habeas? Necessito adiutum tuum, si potes: je cherche, urgentement, le discours de Obama à L'Université de Notre Dame.... en Français.

Je l'ai trouvé seullement en Anglais, mais j'aurai besoin aussi en Français. Est ce que tu peut m'aider le trouver?

Tibi sempre gratias ago causa adiutorum tuorum

Rex Momo 12:00, 26 Iunii 2009 (UTC)

Movere titulum: a "Pugna navalis apud Trafalgar (1815)" ad "Pugna avalis apud Trafalgar (1805)"[fontem recensere]

Ave, Andrew!

Errorem feci in hac pagina scribenda: nam scripsi "1815" pro "1805" sed nescio titulum redirigere. Potesne me adiuvare? Gratias ago.--Alexander Gelsumis 16:00, 27 Iunii 2009 (UTC)

Emendationem a te factam vidi et eam magni facio. Ave atque vale,--Alexander Gelsumis 16:07, 27 Iunii 2009 (UTC)

Thanks[fontem recensere]

Thanks, Andrew, for fixing the title of Electricitas so speedily. (I'll go to Wikipedia now and add a link there, so as to help our score on the ratings for the 1000 pages.) Now we have another problem: the article's nexus for Electrum wrongly redirects to Electron—which amber most certainly is not! If electrum really can mean electron, we need a disambiguation page, since Vicipaedia should surely allow for the possibility of having an article on amber! IacobusAmor 14:39, 29 Iunii 2009 (UTC)

You maybe remember, Iacobe, that you can deal with this yourself. Type "electrum" in the search box. When you get to "Electron", click on the little word "electrum" under the title. Now click on edit. Create your discretiva page. Eurekas! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 14:57, 29 Iunii 2009 (UTC)
We do have a discretiva page, see : Electron (discretiva), where amber is called succinum--Rafaelgarcia 15:05, 29 Iunii 2009 (UTC)
Ah, right. Then I guess the redirect at Electrum could be edited to point to Electron (discretiva). Is that best? Succinum is surely the right Latin word for "amber". Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 15:28, 29 Iunii 2009 (UTC)
Ack. Now you're confusing me. The earliest source for succinum in Ainsworth's & Cassell's is Pliny, but electrum goes back to Vergil & Ovid; so, apparently being earlier, shouldn't electrum take precedence (even if it does come from Greek)? The form of succinum preferred in Cassell's is sūcĭnum, and that seems reasonable, if (as Cassell's says) the word derives from sucus. IacobusAmor 18:03, 29 Iunii 2009 (UTC)
You're right Iacobus. I think the original page authors like Pliny were motivated by the fact that the word Electrum is used for so many contradictory things: in latin just about any material that is amber colored is called electrum: gold/silver alloys as well as amber.
Under electrum Lewis and Short give :"ēlectrum, i, n., = ἤλεκτρον.I Amber (pure Lat. succinum), Plin. 37, 2, 11, § 31; Ov. M. 15, 316. — Plur., Verg. E. 8, 54. — " but under succinum they redirect to sucinum where they state :"sūcĭnum (succ-), i, n. sucus, I amber, usu. called electrum, Plin. 37, 2, 11, § 30; Mart. 3, 65, 5; 5, 37, 11; Juv. 6, 573 al."
So in summary, the proper name seems to be held to be sucinum or succinum with the more popular common name being the ambiguous electrum.--Rafaelgarcia 18:24, 29 Iunii 2009 (UTC)
I'll copy this to Disputatio:Succinum: let's continue there. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 19:39, 29 Iunii 2009 (UTC)

Fauna[fontem recensere]

Iustinus Andreae diu absense spd,

Habeo, Andrea, domini André de flora librum, sed non de fauna. Scisne num exstiterit apud antiquos piscis (non serpens) nomine "aspis"?

Valere te iubet Iustinus 05:52, 1 Iulii 2009 (UTC)

Gratias tibi ago! Sed Pennatula rubra ...? Num sea pen? Si ita est, crux mea nondum resolvitur. Malum! --Iustinus 22:29, 4 Iulii 2009 (UTC)

Paginas meas a te visas esse[fontem recensere]

Hi Andrew,

I am really honoured that you found 'my' pages interesting enough to look them over one by one the day before yesterday, and that you found their latinity palatable enough to be rated L1! To be honest I have my doubts about the latinity of Terra Media (which I hope now to have improved), and Premislia (which still needs a careful check). You have also removed the "stipula"-template from many of my pages. Could you explain to me when a 'stipula' becomes a 'normal page'? Some of my pages are still extremely short, and could easily be expanded by someone more knowledgeable than myself. I feel especially honoured by your inclusion of some of 'my' pages in the list at Usor:Andrew Dalby/Paginae (aliorum) notabiles! By the way, Atropates is now included twice, and Media is a disambiguation page. Thanks and best wishes, --Fabullus 11:06, 2 Iulii 2009 (UTC)

Deletion?[fontem recensere]

Hi, do you know where I can place a request for deletion of my user page (Usor:Chaemera)? I've been searching for the appropriate page, but I can't find it. Much obliged. «Chaemera»™ 18:36, 4 Iulii 2009 (UTC)

I found out you're a admin too, can you please be so kind as to delete my userpage for me? Thanks in advance. «Chaemera»™ 21:43, 7 Iulii 2009 (UTC)

Circumequitatus[fontem recensere]

Verbum Circumequito -are constat hic. Putasne circumequitatus validum esse? (de chilense Rodeo loquor).

Ita, "circumequito" vidi. Non impossibile est quemdam, in lingua Latina hodierna, verbo "circumequitatus" usum esse. Si id speramus, possumus in pagina Chilia reinstituere ... Id nunc feci! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 17:20, 11 Iulii 2009 (UTC)
Rodeo, secundum MWCD, est "a public performance [ergo, ludus?] featuring bronco riding, calf roping, steer wrestling, and Brahma bull riding." Only one of those (four) activities features horses, and the activities of roping & wrestling don't seem to feature riding. A problematic term! IacobusAmor 17:25, 11 Iulii 2009 (UTC)
Rodeo Chilensis non est sicut Rodeo Americae Septentrionalis. Vide: es:Rodeo chileno aut en:Chilean rodeo. Rodeo Chilensis does feature riding and in circles Cato censor 18:58, 11 Iulii 2009 (UTC)
You seem to be arguing that Vicipaedia should use a single word for 'rodeo', and that circumequitatus should be it; but then how does that fit the sense of 'rodeo' as quoted from a North American dictionary above? If one word is wanted, it should be capable of conveying both senses. Ludi animalium tractatorum 'games of the handling of animals' could accommodate both senses (and more!), but it's a bit long and nonspecific. IacobusAmor 14:02, 16 Iulii 2009 (UTC)

Lingua Vandalica Slavica[fontem recensere]

Dear Andrew, could you please review this article I created? Thank you very much. El Mexicano 18:47, 12 Iulii 2009 (UTC)

Media[fontem recensere]

Gratias iterum iterumque! Ergo tu consentias Media imprimis esse regio Asiae, deinde tantum aliae Mediae. --Fabullus 11:44, 15 Iulii 2009 (UTC)

Formula:LHH[fontem recensere]

Hi Andrew. Thanks for the better wording. I adapted it from articles that link to LHH. Actually, there are many more: Specialis:Quaerere nexus externos/www.hls-dhs-dss.ch. Would you be willing to help me to replace the links by the template? --Leyo 13:13, 16 Iulii 2009 (UTC)

societas hominum[fontem recensere]

I think that's right, Andrew. I was going to add that myself, but I forgot the mot juste and wrote societates humanae which of course came up read, so I abandoned ship. Thanks for doing it correctly. =] --Ioscius (disp) 13:36, 17 Iulii 2009 (UTC)

De institutione Cynica[fontem recensere]

Alexander Andreae s.p.d.

Andrea, scribere paginam de institutione Cynica Antisthenis Diogenisque vellem sed nonnulla dubia de verbo hanc interpretante habeo. Non obscure rem agam: licetne institutionem Cynicorum verbo "Cynismo" interpretari sic ut intellegere possim et lato nostroque sensu?

Cura ut valeas. Alexander Gelsumis 12:22, 18 Iulii 2009 (UTC)

Salve, Alexander! Verbum "Cynismus" (= philosophia seu traditio Cynicorum) reperio semel apud scriptorem Latinum tardiorem (Cassiodorum) et quater apud scriptoribus Graecis classicis seu post-classicis; hoc verbum igitur credo satis notum esse et nobis utile. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 12:59, 18 Iulii 2009 (UTC)
Gratias ago tibi. Vale! Alexander Gelsumis 14:11, 18 Iulii 2009 (UTC)

Hi! Need your help...[fontem recensere]

Hi! I'm from Polish Wiktionary. We are translating names of our main templates into various languages (our top 50) in order to help users who don’t speak Polish understand our articles. I wonder if you would be helpful and translate for us just a few linguistic terms into Latin. How about that?

  • [1] pronunciation - pronuntiatus
  • [2] definitions (plural) - definitiones
  • [3] inflection - flexio
  • examples (plural) - exempla
  • [4] syntax - syntaxis
  • [5] collocations (plural) - collocationes
  • [6] synonyms (plural) - synonyma
  • [7] antonyms (plural) - antonyma
  • related terms (plural) - cognata / verba cognata
  • [8] idioms (plural) - idiomata
  • [9] etymology - etymologia
  • notes (plural) - notae
  • [10] translations (plural) - versiones
  • derived terms (plural) - derivata / verba derivata
  • [11] transliteration - translitteratio
  • [12] transcription - transscriptio
  • sources (plural) – fontes

PS. Please note that some of them must be in plural. We’d be very grateful Best regards! --PiotrekSzwecja 16:37, 1 Augusti 2009 (UTC)

It sure helps. Thank you! Here you can see them all. --PiotrekSzwecja 18:14, 1 Augusti 2009 (UTC)

Diana pagina mensis Augusti.[fontem recensere]

Salve ! Plurimas gratias tibi ago, Andrew. Magno honori arbitror esse mihi, quod aliquantulum contribui paginae "Diana", ut quae digna titulo paginae mensis iudicata est. Tua cura meliorata magis placet quam antea. Marcus Terentius Bibliophilus 13:09, 3 Augusti 2009 (UTC)

De imagine Catonis Censoris[fontem recensere]

Ave optime, Andrea.

Cum quidem adhuc imperitus sim, intellegere non possum amotionis imaginis a pagina "Marcus Porcius Cato Maior" causam: in plurimis libris meis atque in paginis interretialibus inveni hanc imaginem (vide hic), remotam die 17 Iulii, esse hermam - Saeculo II a.C.n. factam - Catonis Maioris ipsius nec illam eius pronepotis Uticensis appellati, cuius statuae multae et imagines pictae nobis sunt. E Disputatione hunc nodum quaestionis esse intellexi, sed spero te me correcturum si errem. Auxilium tuum magni facio.

Vale, Andrea, et salve. Alexander Gelsumis 14:36, 7 Augusti 2009 (UTC)

Salve optime, Alexandre. Imaginem olim in pagina habuimus, sicut et in Vicipaedia Anglica; et removimus (sicut et e Vicipaedia Anglica remota est) quia re vera nemo scit an imago Catonis sit necne. Legere potes disputationem hic: en:Talk:Cato the Elder#Portrait. Imago est pulcherrima, sed anonyma. Si credis imaginem Catonis esse, necesse erit citare fontem fidelem (in his non includo Communia!) huius rei ... Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 14:48, 7 Augusti 2009 (UTC)
Gratias plurimas, Andrea, tibi ago. Haec pagina utillima mihi fuit. Spero hoc dubium non nimis tibi molestum fuisse. Salve. Alexander Gelsumis 15:19, 7 Augusti 2009 (UTC)

Franciscus Brusonus[fontem recensere]

Gratias tibi ago per refectiones tuas in Franciscus Brusonus.

--Achillus 11:12, 8 Augusti 2009 (UTC)

Frusino[fontem recensere]

Cur omnes meas recensiones paginae Frusinonis delevis? solum mea recensio ultima ("Frusinas") corrigenda erat. --Luca P 19:04, 20 Augusti 2009 (UTC)

Omnes errant: "delevis" -> "delevisti" ... --Luca P 17:55, 21 Augusti 2009 (UTC)

Translation of a short story[fontem recensere]

Hi Andrew!

I would like to request something from you. Yes, translation. I hope, it's not a bad thing for you. Some years ago I wrote a (really) short story about a lonely man (actually symbolized the Saami nation). I translated into some languages and I thought, it would be great to have it more, like also in Latina :) I made this page, the English translation is somewhere there. You can put the Latina translation there. Thank you again! Sorry for my disturb... :( - hu:User:Eino81

Villas Culturas[fontem recensere]

Gallice: Couture sur Loir (41) ----Clive Sweeting

Alpincica et languedocana[fontem recensere]

Salue Andrew, "Alpincica" et "Languedocana" non sunt inuentiones meae. Erant in formula "linguae romanicae". Lingua occitanica diuisa est: - lingua occitanica borealis: aruernica, lemosina, "vivaro-alpina" - alpincica ? vivarensis-alpina ? - lingua occitanica medianis siue australis: "languedocien", prouincialis - lingua occitanica atlantica: gasconica siue aquitanica Translatio vetus "languedoc" est "lingua occitana" (1319). Languedocana = lingua linguae occitanae? --Jfblanc 07:55, 26 Augusti 2009 (UTC)

Gorgontiola[fontem recensere]

Vale carissime, quomodo te habeas? The right name of this city, where is also born the cheese Gorgonzola, is Concordiola, from Dea Concordia.

Can you take off the orrible Gorgontiola and tell som Bot to change? Perhaps is the same that created the page Codonio that I've asked to you to change in Cotoneum.

Thanks a lot!!!

Rex Momo 10:59, 10 Septembris 2009 (UTC)

Rex Momo[fontem recensere]

Vale, carissime Andreas, quomodo te habeas? Novam paginam scripsi et tibi adiutum peto, de ista pagina ad scribendas novas res. Non bene Latine scribo, sed in pagina Italica et Francica ire potes.

Tibi gratias ago

Rex Momo 16:50, 18 Septembris 2009 (UTC)

Nescio, I think it's better to leave Rex Momo like Rex as name and Momo as surname, that in Wiki.LA aren't translated. Rex Momo 19:14, 18 Septembris 2009 (UTC)
Then I misunderstood. I did not know that "Rei" existed as a name. I thought "Rei" was his title and "Momo" was his name, derived from the ancient god "Momus". Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 19:22, 18 Septembris 2009 (UTC)

salve![fontem recensere]

hello my friend,I 'll try!Greco22 16:38, 23 Septembris 2009 (UTC)

Thanks[fontem recensere]

Thank you for welcoming me; I am not able to write in a decent latin yet, so I cannot contribute here: next year I will be more free, and I will start a serious study of latin. I think that, as an italian, it's my duty. See you in future! Mparu 18:53, 23 Septembris 2009 (UTC)

Adfixum/Affixum[fontem recensere]

Hello, if "affixum" is synonymous with "adfixum" as you say, then the definition of affixum needs to be changed as it does not comprise interfixes or infixes. See for example [13], [14], [15]. Greets, Solejheyen 17:39, 27 Septembris 2009 (UTC)
P.S. Mea Latina mediocris est. Solejheyen 17:41, 27 Septembris 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I understand now that some people treat the two words as distinct. It would be good if we can cite a reliable source ... maybe a linguistics textbook. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 17:44, 27 Septembris 2009 (UTC)
Well, I just found a better source, look here [16]. An adfix is not exactly the same as an affix indeed, though they have much in common. Solejheyen 17:46, 27 Septembris 2009 (UTC)
The awkwardness here, Solejheyen (in case you don't know), is that adfixum & affixum are merely different ways of spelling the same Latin word: the former is the etymologically correct (fussier, if you will) way, and the latter is the way that reflects the pronunciation. It's approximately the same difference as that between realize (the etymologically correct spelling) and realise (the evolved spelling, based on French). Just as there's no ordinary difference in lexical meaning between realize & realise, there's no ordinary difference in lexical meaning between adfixum & affixum. IacobusAmor 17:52, 27 Septembris 2009 (UTC)

Interwikis[fontem recensere]

Please update interwikis in Formula:Abecedarium Graecum, using w:en:Template:Greek Alphabet because local interwikis are not current. 19:16, 29 Septembris 2009 (UTC)

Ordo patriarchalis Sanctae Crucis Hierolosymae[fontem recensere]

Vale, carissime Andreas, quomodo te habeas? Haec nova pagina feci. Tibi gratias ago si custodire mea pagina potes.

A bientôt

Rex Momo 06:49, 9 Octobris 2009 (UTC)

Hi Andrew, how are you? Please, can you find 5 minutes to wacht this new page? Sorry, but my Latin isn't so excellente as your, and it's a pleasure that the page can be corrected form you! Have a nice Sunday a thanks a lot Rex Momo 10:45, 11 Octobris 2009 (UTC)
I think you're getting plenty of help from others, Rex. Hope that's OK! I'm a bit busy this evening ... Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 17:23, 11 Octobris 2009 (UTC)

Mutatio nominis[fontem recensere]

Salve! Usoris nomen suum mutare volo: possibile estne? --MarcusXC 17:50, 9 Octobris 2009 (UTC)

Nescio, Marce. Id Usor:Adam Episcopus efficere potest. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 18:30, 9 Octobris 2009 (UTC)

Gratias ago[fontem recensere]

Tibi gratias ago. Here we are lucky today it a sunny day, I will go in Italy in Milan to theather. I hope I can go on in the future with la.wikipedia, but at the same time I'm sorry we find only (from my point of view) few new friends for our project --Helveticus montanus 09:34, 10 Octobris 2009 (UTC)

Commune Italianum[fontem recensere]

Haec de Formula:Commune Italianum removi quia minime me intersunt. Vide Disputatio Formulae:Commune Italianum :) Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 08:51, 14 Octobris 2009 (UTC)

Philippus Maakaroun[fontem recensere]

Vale, carissime Andreas, quomodo te habes? Tibi parvum adiutum peto, si haec pagina corrigere potes, quia mea Lingua Latina non multum bona esse!!!

Tibi gratias ago

Rex Momo 17:03, 17 Octobris 2009 (UTC)

De cibis matritensibus[fontem recensere]

Salve Andrew! as you can see, I'm beginning a new series of articles on food from Madrid (Gastronomia Matritensis). I thought you would be interested! There are some dishes which may have had Roman equivalents and may have had a more adequate name, but I guess that I'll write you as I write them. Vale--Xaverius 14:00, 25 Octobris 2009 (UTC)

Mouthwatering! As for me, I'm working on breakfast this afternoon. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 14:53, 25 Octobris 2009 (UTC)

Pars secunda (de cibis Vasconum)[fontem recensere]

Hi again, Andrew! I was wondering, how do you say "curd"? my dictionary has simply caseus, but that would be confusing, and coagululum doesn't sound right to me. What do you think?--Xaverius 15:39, 29 Octobris 2009 (UTC)

Secundum Cassell's: lac concretum. IacobusAmor 16:09, 29 Octobris 2009 (UTC)
I agree. "Coagulum" is the rennet, not the resulting curd. "Caseus" is what it was sometimes called (just as you can call grape juice "vinum" the moment it begins to ferment), but that word is no help if you want to make the distinction between curds and cheese. "Lac gelatum" was also used, but it is technically wrong of course, so "lac concretum" is the best solution. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 21:27, 29 Octobris 2009 (UTC)

Pars tertia (de tomaculis et farciminibus)[fontem recensere]

Just bringing your attention to this, Andrew. As I wrote this on the same day as the discussion on "Cohortes" started, my comment must have passed unoticed --Xaverius 15:17, 10 Novembris 2009 (UTC)

This time my doubt is a bit more complicated. Whereas in Iberian languages (Spanish, Portuguese, Basque and Catalan) and as far as I can tell in Italian too, we make a disntinction between cured and raw sausage (es:salchicha vs. es:embutido) I was wondering if in Latin such a distinction would exist. Whether if it exists or not, I came across several terms and I cannot decide which would be more accurate for either term: tomaculum, farcimen and lucanica. What do you reckon?--Xaverius 12:25, 2 Novembris 2009 (UTC)

Plus I now just thought about en:cold cut/es:fiambre, which would be the general category for all of these, wouldn't it?--Xaverius 12:28, 2 Novembris 2009 (UTC)
I'm really sorry, Xaveri, I overlooked this so-interesting topic. I have been pretty busy the last few days.
An authority on sausage is a paper by Frank Frost, 'Sausage and meat preservation in antiquity' in \Greek, Roman and Byzantine studies\ vol. 40 (1999) pp. 241-252. I have a copy before me as I write. Maybe Francus Frost deserves a Vicipaedia entry. Anyway, Frost believes (and gives evidence for the belief) that a botulus is the general word for a sausage, while a lucanicum (or lucanica) is a cured sausage. He doesn't discuss tomaculum. Unfortunately for us, Frank gives much more space to Greek terms than Roman.
Now I'm looking at my own collections of words. According to Aulus Gellius, farcimen was the upper-class word for what the lower classes called botulus; while according to Petronius, botulus and tomaculum were somehow worth distinguishing, and both might be served to eat. Apicius treats "short, chopped/sliced Lucanica" as ingredient in a cooked dish. In Petronius again there is a c(h)orda, served in slices. There is also a medieval Latin word salsicia that is the parent of modern "saucisse" etc.
The distinction you mention, incidentally, corresponds to French saucisse (fresh sausage) and saucisson (cured sausage). My inclination is to treat botulus as a sausage in general, botellus as a fresh sausage, tomaculum as a cured sausage, and lucanicum and chorda as specific types of cured sausage. But I'm not certain. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 13:43, 11 Novembris 2009 (UTC)
Thanks Andrew - no worries about the delay. Then I guess that we would want a categoria:botuli which will include pages on fresh (Categoria:botella) and cured (Categoria:tomacula) sausages. Farcimen would then redirect to botellum, the general page on fresh sausages. Special sausages, like black pudding could be botellum sanguineum or something similar, although translating names of modern-day sausages may get complicated: weisswurst can be clearly botellum album, but chorizo may be chorizo (tomaculum) (although according to the DRAE, it derives from saslicium.--Xaverius 14:21, 11 Novembris 2009 (UTC)

Libbie Henrietta hyman[fontem recensere]

Salve Andrew, how do you think a womansname should be translated? en:Libbie Henrietta Hyman, Hendricus 15:31, 26 Octobris 2009 (UTC)

Salve Andrew, the past days i´v been correcting quit some articles, added some bio´s and a museum and even somen categories, there haven´t been any corrections after that. does that mean i´m starting to learn it? Hendricus 19:45, 26 Octobris 2009 (UTC)

template botanistae[fontem recensere]

Salve Andrew, the abbrevations are only to be used with botanical specimens, i'v added that in the formulae, i also added a little leaf, maybe you like it? Hendricus 18:41, 28 Octobris 2009 (UTC)

Cohortes = Parlamentum?[fontem recensere]

Dear Andrew, Could you look into this link which appears utterly bizarre to me but usor: has created and created again without explanation. It seems vandalism to me.--Rafaelgarcia 22:24, 2 Novembris 2009 (UTC)

Cassell's and White's dictionaries don't make any such connection. IacobusAmor 22:30, 2 Novembris 2009 (UTC)
It is not a vandalism, it is just the old Castilian name for parilament, "las Cortes" which existed in Navarre too and etymologically come from cohors. It is usually used always in the plural (las Cortes). I cannot think of a medieval document now which would call them cohortes in Latin, but I'll have a look --Xaverius 23:04, 2 Novembris 2009 (UTC)
It would seem then that Castillian cortes is a sibling of French & English court, as all three words reflect Latin cohors. But a court is not a parliament, and redirecting a form of Latin cohors to a word for a parliament but not at the same time redirecting it to a word for a court may therefore be inappropriate. IacobusAmor 23:28, 2 Novembris 2009 (UTC)
In the context of Spain at least, "cortes" are the parliament. However, this should not necessarily apply to Latin (even if in medieval Latin this was used to refer to Castillian, Navarrese and aragonese cortes).--Xaverius 23:30, 2 Novembris 2009 (UTC)
I see. However, even with this figurative sense, in latin this could only be understood as a proper name at best. Corhortes Hispaniae = The Corhorts/Retinue of Spain, which obviously is not a synonym by any stretch for the term cohortes nor is it literally translating the spanish term Cortes either. Nevertheless the names Cohortes Hispaniae etc can be profitably incorporated in a disambiguation page on cohors. A latin source for such names should be given though, or the spanish/Navarre name should be preserved with a suggested latin translation in parentheses. THe issue now is how to communicate with the anonymous user...Do you think you can Xavieri?--Rafaelgarcia 23:59, 2 Novembris 2009 (UTC)
I'll try again to communitace with him, but I do not know if it will work. I think it is the same user (with different IP) who created most of Canariae Insulae and Castella et Legio (in which, by the way, cohortes also appear). We never managed to contact him. And lastly, I haven't found a source for cohortes other than the RAE dictionary.--Xaverius 09:30, 3 Novembris 2009 (UTC)
[conflict of edits -- I see I'm partly repeating but will say it anyway! --] I'm glad Xaverius chipped in here because I didn't know this. But from what we now know, I'm prepared to bet the word does occur in the medieval Latin of Spain with this special sense. I don't have a citation to hand, however.
The immediate reason for a redirect, I guess, is that the writer on Navarra has used the word cohortes in this special Spanish sense. It's also used in that way on at least one other page of ours. That seems a fair reason to permit the redirect, at least for the present, until we have something better on cohors and/or cohortes. This writer, whoever it is, is a reliable Latinist who has made many, many useful contributions. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 11:04, 3 Novembris 2009 (UTC)

categories[fontem recensere]

Salve Andrew, i´ve placed some categories at Gulielmus Aitcheson Haswell, can you take a look for me? thanks, Hendricus 17:54, 6 Novembris 2009 (UTC)

Cypros an Lawsonia inermis?[fontem recensere]

Dear Andrew, I would appreciate it if you could have a look at the latest edits to Cypros (arbustum) and Lawsonia inermis, and my comments thereto at Disputatio:Lawsonia inermis. --Fabullus 09:30, 10 Novembris 2009 (UTC)

Liber de wikipedia[fontem recensere]

Care Andree,

Facilius francogallice quam latine loqui est... sed, si vis, possum etiam anglice loqui.

J'ai déjà eu l'occasion à plusieurs reprises de lire vos articles de la wikipédia latine. Or, venant de recevoir une proposition de compte rendu de la part du Bulletin des bibliothèques de France (BBF), j'ai eu l'heureuse surprise de découvrir qu'il était dû à votre plume. Je dois le recevoir d'ici quelques jours et suis sûr de n'avoir que du bien à en dire.

Bien cordialement,

Remi Mathis 13:10, 12 Novembris 2009 (UTC)

Ah! Don't make such dangerous predictions, Remi! But it's nice to hear from you, and I'm pleased to know that you'll be writing something. In return, I'm sure that whatever you have to say will be full of interest. Good wishes -- Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 13:14, 12 Novembris 2009 (UTC)

Non-fiction[fontem recensere]

Dear Andrew, How are you? Could you please help me? How would you translate in the page National Book Award no fiction section. Thank you--Helveticus montanus 10:22, 22 Novembris 2009 (UTC)

Greetings! It's not easy, is it? In classical times practically all books were non-fiction, so the distinction hardly needed to be made. You might say "Libri rerum", because "res" are matters of the real world. Iacobus and Rafael might have other suggestions.
For sections lower down that page you might consider "Libri iuveniles" and "Libri pueriles". Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 10:39, 22 Novembris 2009 (UTC)
Thank you for your very useful suggestions--Helveticus montanus 10:44, 22 Novembris 2009 (UTC)

De revolutionibus[fontem recensere]

Adding this to category Germaniae scripta is erroneus. Majority of Polish books of this time were written in latin and printed in Germany. So Poloniae scripta Germaniae edita. Mathiasrex 15:19, 22 Novembris 2009 (UTC)

There is no error. See Disputatio:De revolutionibus orbium coelestium. If the book was written in Poland, please say this in the text, adding a footnote if the claim is controversial. Having done this, you can add the category "Poloniae scripta". Do not remove "Germaniae scripta". Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 15:47, 22 Novembris 2009 (UTC)

De Miecislao[fontem recensere]

Salve, Andrew. How can I undo the redirecto on Miecislaus I (dux Poloniae) ad Miecislaus I (rex Poloniae) without simply emptying the page as you told me not to do?--Xaverius 12:53, 29 Novembris 2009 (UTC)

This is the way to delete an awkward redirect and then make a move. Part 1. Try to go to the redirect Miecislaus I (rex Poloniae). You will be landed at Miecislaus I (dux Poloniae). Now click on the little words "Miecislaus I (rex Poloniae)" underneath the page title. You will be taken back to the redirect. Now click on "delete", and confirm that you wish to delete.
Part 2. Go to the page Miecislaus I (dux Poloniae). Click on "move". Type in "Miecislaus I (rex Poloniae)". (You wish a redirect to be created, so don't remove the tick. It is bad practice to remove redirects.) Confirm. The page will be moved. Eureka! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 13:01, 29 Novembris 2009 (UTC)

damnatio memoriae[fontem recensere]

Hey Andrew, thanks for going back over my grammar in damnatio memoriae. I've been studying Slovene 5-6 hours a day this semester and my how my Latin (and everything else) is struggling as a result. That difficulty multiplied by attempting a total rewrite of an article at 0730 and I'm bound to miss a few hominums and delevits. I've missed being around here, but I think I'm finally at a point where my Slovene is good enough that I can scale back to 2-3 hours a day and find some more time to help out around here. Cheers =] --Ioscius (disp) 12:10, 4 Decembris 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, forgot to reply. I didn't realise they were your words I was trying to improve, Iosci! And, yes, you have been missed. But maybe the Slovene Wikipedia has been getting the benefit? Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 11:12, 9 Decembris 2009 (UTC)

Aelam/Elam[fontem recensere]

Fortasse melius est paginas Aelam et Lingua Aelamitica movere ad Elam et Lingua Elamitica (nunc paginas redirectionis). Illud 'ae' vice 'e' videtur esse res tantum typographica e tempore classico tardivo cum inter ambo nihil interfuit. Nunc tamen, ut et Ciceronis tempore, 'ae' [ai] dicimus, non [e]. Etymologice 'e' melius esse videtur quam 'ae'. Praeterea, Elam quoque in fontibus Latinis (sicut Nova Vulgata) attestatur. --Fabullus 13:17, 8 Decembris 2009 (UTC)

Laete consentio, Fabulle! Ego enim mutationes facio in pagina de lingua si tu eandem rem facis in pagina de regione. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 13:19, 8 Decembris 2009 (UTC)

Paginam Elam non possum delere qui magistratus non sim. --Fabullus 13:29, 8 Decembris 2009 (UTC)

Da veniam: movi. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 15:17, 8 Decembris 2009 (UTC)

Praemium Runcimanianus[fontem recensere]

Going on with my pages dedicated to litterary awards it has been a nice surprise to find your name for the Runciman award. I see that in the page "Andrew Dalby" the prize is named Praemium Runcimanianum, should we modify the page's name? Ciao --Helveticus montanus 20:40, 9 Decembris 2009 (UTC)

No, I think you were right: "Praemium Runciman" agrees better with our rules. Yes, I was interested to see you created that page! Best wishes -- Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 22:20, 9 Decembris 2009 (UTC)

Professores melius quam Professor[fontem recensere]

Recte me monuisti, mi Dalby, de usu Vicipaediae latinae, tam de litteris quadratis quam de categoriis, sequarque libenter hanc regulam mihi pro tua affabilitate indicatam. Hac occasione oblata, velim etiam te interrogare cur categoria nominetur Belgia non Belgica sive Belgium. Belgia enim nomen est nymphae quae repraesentabat Belgicam. Multo elegantius est, ut puto, loqui de regno Belgicae, sive de Belgica sive de Belgio. Rarissime Belgia invenitur apud nonnullos poetas neo-latinos. Aliquid aliud: categoria Professores sive Alumni Universitatum Lovaniensium mihi non videtur congruere cum veritate historica. Fuerunt enim Lovanii tres Universitates studiorum quae inter se nullum connexum historicum habent. Ita melius est categoriam pro unaquaque earum universitatum creare ut feci, ne ingens confusio fiat inter has tres scholas universitarias. Nescio quid tu de his rebus reputes, sed licet tibi de hac re tuam propriam opinionem sequi. Vale perquam optime.--Bruxellensis 17:01, 12 Decembris 2009 (UTC)

Credo, care Bruxellensis, te recte dividisse categorias de eruditis Lovaniensibus: utilius erit categorias universitatum singularum habere. Possumus igitur novis categoriis semper uti, veteribus delere.
De nomine civitatis Belgiensis (et categoriae respectivae) licet apud Disputatio:Belgia ... disputare! Salve optime -- Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 09:44, 13 Decembris 2009 (UTC)

Your radio interview[fontem recensere]

Dear Andrew, a new nice surprise I heard you yesterday hearing a podcast of a BBC radio broadcast (All things donsidered if I rember right)! Ciao--Helveticus montanus 10:15, 20 Decembris 2009 (UTC)

I just heard you this morning!--Xaverius 10:47, 20 Decembris 2009 (UTC)
I hope some of it made sense. I can't remember what I said! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 20:34, 20 Decembris 2009 (UTC)

Catharina Owen Eldred[fontem recensere]

Recte animadvertisti, mi Dalby, errorem quem calamus nimis rapide motus effecit et ad rectiorem formam illam Catharinam, pro tua eximia navitate, reduxisti. Quam optimus custos esse videris Vicipaediae! Quam sagax et perspicax scrutator! Te duce, omnia menda suum vindicem invenient! Gratias plurimas.--Bruxellensis 17:04, 21 Decembris 2009 (UTC)

dessert[fontem recensere]

Hey Andrew, I was reading some of the quotes on Cannabis, trying to figure out how I will organize that page better, when I came upon the translation of the Galenus which suggests that cooked cannabis seeds are used in a typical tragemata, which article I was thinking to start. I ask if that's the best translation of "dessert" or should it be a redirect to something better? (oh and I'm halfway through my Christmas present, your new book on Wikipedia). Best! --Ioscius (disp) 19:52, 27 Decembris 2009 (UTC)

What an excellent Christmas present idea! (Hope you're enjoying it.) The word tragemata was indeed borrowed into Latin -- used by Pliny and others -- and for good reason: at least, I can't think of a native Latin word meaning exactly what it means, things to chew alongside wine after dinner. It even survived into Romance languages (French dragée "spicy sweet e.g. sugared almond"). Yes, I think tragemata should probably be the word, though how closely it corresponds to dessert depends on your view of dessert ...
Ah, but now I realise that there is also the Latin word Bellaria, discussed e.g. by Aulus Gellius 13.11.7. He implies that the meaning is the same; in which case the substitution of tragemata may have been a matter of fashion, and we should perhaps choose the more-Latin "bellaria" after all. It already exists as an article, I notice, though covering "sweets" rather than "desserts". Gellius would disapprove of that interpretation of "bellaria", but he wasn't always right .... Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 20:30, 27 Decembris 2009 (UTC)
I am indeed enjoying it.
So perhaps we should keep the bellaria article covering confectionery in general and start tragemata specifically for dessert. If bellaria can have more than one interpretation and tragemata only one perhaps that's the way to go. My view of dessert certainly includes things to eat with wine after a meal. I'd even forego the meal in its favor. Thanks! --Ioscius (disp) 21:15, 27 Decembris 2009 (UTC)
Yes, that makes good sense. And assuming we may include cheese in our dessert, I might make the same choice as you. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 21:38, 27 Decembris 2009 (UTC)
In my humble opinion cheese should be with every meal and as a snack in between.--Ioscius (disp) 22:22, 27 Decembris 2009 (UTC)

a few more cibus questions[fontem recensere]

Hi Andrew, me again. It would help a lot if you could take a look at the whole Cannabis#Cibus section. I am linking things there but the majority of things are redlinks. Things I can't seem to suss out for myself:

  • Ephippus:
    • Brachus
    • Brygmus
    • Mnûs*??
    • Pyramides
    • Conchae (seafood?)
    • Iovis cerebrum??
  • Platina
    • Baricocoli Senensium

If you could help that would be great. Thanks! --Ioscius (disp) 21:08, 27 Decembris 2009 (UTC)

I suspect you should replace Brachus, Brygmus, Mnûs with [...]. No one understands these words, and there is no point in making the eager readers of the cannabis article puzzle fruitlessly over them. Pyramus I could do an article on, taking it from p. 70 of my A to Z. Conchae seems in the wrong place in the menu: maybe there's another mistake. There are sources on Iovis cerebrum: Athenaeus 514e, 642f; Zenobius 3.41; Hesychius s.v. Dios enkephalos. The phrase is claimed to mean "a morsel fit for a king", but I really don't understand why, and if it does have that vague meaning I don't see why Ephippus should put it in his list with all those other very specific things. Not very helpful, I'm afraid.
Baricocoli I can help with! See this link. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 21:38, 27 Decembris 2009 (UTC)
Ok see what I have done with brachus, brygmus, and mnus, but it lacks a source (that the meanings of these words are not well understood). Could always cite our resident food expert ;].
What shall we do with conchae, then? I agree it looks weird on that menu, but so it is written?
Same problem with Διὸς ἐγκέφαλος. Weird as it seems, so it is written. Should we add a reference to that too?
--Ioscius (disp) 22:18, 27 Decembris 2009 (UTC)
OK, on conchae, the meaning for what it's worth is most likely "mussel", Mytilus edulis. Seems best to link to that.
On Διὸς ἐγκέφαλος, the interpretation is given by Henricus Liddell, Robertus Scott, A Greek-English Lexicon. 9a ed. (Oxonii, 1925-1940) s.v. ἐγκέφαλος "III. prov. of rare and costly food, morsel for a king". Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 22:41, 27 Decembris 2009 (UTC)

a/ab[fontem recensere]

About your change to 50412 Ewen, I thought a was to be used before consonants, ab before vowels and h, and abs before t (if at all)? -- Robert.Baruch 14:42, 8 Ianuarii 2010 (UTC)

Yes, quite right (though abs can be forgotten). Similarly e before consonants, ex before vowels. Note that initial h is ignored (i.e. count as a vowel). I was afraid the script might not reliably make this distinction. If it can, do it. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 15:01, 8 Ianuarii 2010 (UTC)

Lobia massonica[fontem recensere]

Verbum lobia, significat ut scribit Bacci id quod nos vocamus "a lodge" sive "une loge". Verbum massonicus etiam existit (videas Bartal etc...), videas infra omnes notulas meas. Etiam existit, secta massonica (quo utuntur hostes latomismi).

Si dici potest Secta massonica etiam dici potest Logia massonica, sive logia massonum, sive Logia francomurariorum. Lingua latina non est ut opinor rigida et congelata, semper adiectivus addi verbo potest. Ita anglice dici potest: a lodge aut a lodge of freemassons idem latine dummodo verba extiterint!

  • Francomurarius invenitur in Bacci
  • massonus in Ducangio
  • masso -onis in Blaise.
  • massonum secta in Blaise.
  • secta massonica in Codice Juris Canonici.
  • latomismus in Bartal

tamen verbum lobia, quo utitur Egger mihi videtur aptius. Hoc verbum, secundum peritos, venit et verbo francico laubja e quo cadunt verba theotisca Laube et anglica loft. In latinitate mediae aetatis invenitur (saec. IX) verbum laubia quod significat porticum. Sed secundum P. Guiraud hoc verbum venit e graeco logeum sive logium. Legito: Alain Rey, Dictionnaire historique de la langue française, II, Paris, 2000, p. 2046-2047, sub verbo "loge". Carolus Egger, Latinitas, 1983, p. 190, dat nomen: lobia.

  • Antonius Bacci, Lexicon vocabulorum quae difficilius Latine redduntur, Romae, 1963, p. 337: "francomurarius".: "
  • Vide: Albert Blaise, Lexicon Latinitatis medii aevi praesertim ad res ecclesiasticas investigandas pertinens, Turnhout, Brepols, 1975, p. 571, : masso- onis.
  • Antonius Bartal, Glossarium mediae et infimae Latinitatis Hungaricae, Leipzig-Lipsiae: latomismus

Vale. --Bruxellensis 16:15, 14 Ianuarii 2010 (UTC)

Bene, et gratias ago. Oportet potius haec in pagina ipsa a principio aperte explicare. Si collocatio "lobia massonica" est neologismus, oportet id dicere. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 16:19, 14 Ianuarii 2010 (UTC)

Etiam animadvertendum est in omnibus symbolis est iunctura lobia +massonica: Cur non latine?
  • de:Freimaurerloge
  • en:Masonic Lodge
  • es:Logia Masónica
  • et:Loož (vabamüürlus)
  • la:Lobia massonica
  • nl:Loge (vrijmetselarij)
  • pl:Loża wolnomularska
  • pt:Loja Maçônica

--Bruxellensis 17:05, 14 Ianuarii 2010 (UTC)

Quis potest tali quaestioni responsum dare? Sed et has res potes ab initio in notula indicare, sic:
1. Lobia massonica: fortasse neologismus? Cfr. Anglice Masonic lodge, Hispanice Logia Masónica. De verbis "lobia" et "massonicus -a -um" vide notulas alias.
Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 18:15, 14 Ianuarii 2010 (UTC)

Lobby[fontem recensere]

Quod attinet ad lobby, mihi magis placet verbum quo utuntur Germani: Lobbyismus, etenim nemo scit quid sit lobium tempore medaevali, forsitan "porticus". Lobby cum duo b, non mihi videtur ex verbo lobium originem suam trahere. Inspiciendum est in dictionario etymologico scientifico. Valeas pancratice.--Bruxellensis 16:24, 14 Ianuarii 2010 (UTC)

Tale dictionarium iam in pagina citavi hodie; tu citationem delevisti! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 16:32, 14 Ianuarii 2010 (UTC)
Tunc da mihi excusationem quia inconsulto feci mutando textum.--Bruxellensis 17:02, 14 Ianuarii 2010 (UTC)
Do! Et vale optime Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 18:15, 14 Ianuarii 2010 (UTC)

Puy-de-Dôme[fontem recensere]


I'm not often on the Vicipædia, is it normal that Puy-de-Dôme is a redirection to Puy-de-Dôme (praefectura Franciae) ? Cdlt, Vigneron * discut. 15:14, 19 Ianuarii 2010 (UTC)

Hi Vigneron! The answer is that it's OK, it's not a bad thing, although it would be even better if we knew a Latin name for Puy-de-Dôme and then we could move the page to that Latin name. If you wanted to start a page for another concept with the same name (e.g. the mountain?) this is possible, the redirect can be edited to turn it into a full article. Does that answer your question? Greetings -- Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 16:55, 19 Ianuarii 2010 (UTC)
Thats ok for me. I searched for the latin name but I can't found it.
FYI : there is no concept with the same name (the mountain is Puy de Dôme). In french the hyphen are used for disambiguation (Puy-de-Dôme vs. Puy de Dôme, Mont Saint-Michel vs. Mont-Saint-Michel or Saint Michel vs. Saint-Michel).
Cdlt, Vigneron * discut. 15:41, 20 Ianuarii 2010 (UTC)

Conventiculum[fontem recensere]

Hi Andrew. I proposed a meeting of vicipaediani some time ago, and now it seems that it may actually take place. If it were to take place, and you were able to come (I knot it is too far away still, but it just occured to me), we would be delighted if you could give us a lecture on Vicipaedia! after all, you are the only one with a book written on the topic, and we heard you in the BBC. There is plenty of time, so you can give it a thought if you wish. Cheers, --Xaverius 00:30, 27 Ianuarii 2010 (UTC)

I will certainly do my very best to come: Rome seems a good idea to me. And, yes, I am always happy to talk ... so I agree to say something ... but I hope others will also! Unluckily it appears Rafael can't come at that time. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 14:36, 27 Ianuarii 2010 (UTC)
We can open in the discussion a setcion for "proposed topics" - maybe someone will also speak! It's a pity Rafael cannot come, but this means we'll have to organise another meeting in the States.--Xaverius 15:31, 27 Ianuarii 2010 (UTC)

Translation[fontem recensere]

Hi, Can you translate my userpage here in the Latina Wikipedia? Thanks. --MisterWiki 16:27, 11 Februarii 2010 (UTC)

This guy has a permanent block at en:, Andrew, you know this guy? --Ioscius 17:52, 11 Februarii 2010 (UTC)
No offence, MisterWiki, but I'm a bit busy! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 18:04, 11 Februarii 2010 (UTC)
No problem, but I don't know why everybody judge me because of that block. --MisterWiki 06:11, 18 Februarii 2010 (UTC)
Forgive me -- that wasn't my reason. I really am a bit busy just now! Ask on the Vicipaedia:Taberna. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 11:33, 18 Februarii 2010 (UTC)

geoponica[fontem recensere]

Andrea, des mihi quaeso fontem illum in Geoponica ubi de introitu veris tractat? Gratias! --Ioscius 19:58, 12 Februarii 2010 (UTC)

Geoponica 1.1 (chapter title: "On the subdivisions of the year, the solstices and equinoxes").
Incidentally, did you notice any of the following signs, mentioned in chapter 1.4? Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 21:28, 12 Februarii 2010 (UTC)
"Holly-oaks [Quercus coccifera and Q. ilex] and oaks [Q. robur] fruiting heavily mean that the winter will be a long one. Nanny-goats and ewes, mating and wanting to mate repeatedly, foretell a rather long winter. If cattle dig at the soil, and stretch out their heads towards the north, they predict a hard winter."
No, but I saw the kurenti scaring away the winter. Can't be long now. --Ioscius 00:07, 15 Februarii 2010 (UTC)

Usor ignotus[fontem recensere]

Salve Andrew. An usor ignotus is creating formulae in French, which I cannot understand, and I cannot communicate with him. I've asked Bruxellensis for help, but I thought you may also want to have a look at what he is doing.--Xaverius 13:48, 17 Februarii 2010 (UTC)

Yes, thanks Javi, I've blocked him for the present. He seems to be making unwanted duplicates of our Formula:Ling. Whether he has a connection with Usor:WikiDreamer I'm not sure. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 14:03, 17 Februarii 2010 (UTC)
What about {{U}} and {{M}}? I've asked Bruxellensis to translate a note to him into French, but as he is probably a Pole, we may need another usor who is actually Polish (like Matthiasrex).--Xaverius 14:06, 17 Februarii 2010 (UTC)
I think we can afford to wait for some explanation of those. The ones we have deleted clearly duplicate our Formula:Ling. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 14:09, 17 Februarii 2010 (UTC)

you around now, andrew?[fontem recensere]

Just sent you a mail. Comments appreciated =] --Ioscius 13:54, 20 Februarii 2010 (UTC)

Comments sent :) Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 14:25, 20 Februarii 2010 (UTC)

Salve[fontem recensere]

Iustinus Andreae spd, svbeev. Ab aliis notis in disputatione tua adscriptis video te parum nuper vacare, ne igitur multum te importunem. Attemen volo te rogare num epistolam meam acceperis. Vale quam optime. --Iustinus 05:54, 21 Februarii 2010 (UTC)

Da veniam, mi Iustine. Accepi hodieque respondebo. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 13:11, 21 Februarii 2010 (UTC)
Dummodo acceperis & repondere aliquando velis, contentus sum :) --Iustinus 17:49, 21 Februarii 2010 (UTC)
Responso accepto gratias tibi ago! --Iustinus 03:05, 22 Februarii 2010 (UTC)

Nomen 'systema stellare'[fontem recensere]

(a Disputatio:Taygeta (systema stellare))

Systema stellare videtur alterum systema solare designare. Fortasse, systema stellarum (Anglice 'system of stars') melior est? Pantocrator 22:59, 23 Februarii 2010 (UTC)

Gratias ago ob nuntium! in paginam disputationis respondi. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 13:02, 24 Februarii 2010 (UTC)

Occasional editor[fontem recensere]

Hello, I am never going to do very much here as my studying of Latin only went as far as 1965 (4 years at school and one term at University), since when it has been hardly used. I have just done a Peter Fox article for the English WP having found that Latin articles already existed for several university librarians I knew something about. The Latin user name was of course just chosen as a variant on a pseudonym used by a 19th century author.--Felix Folio Secundus 09:19, 26 Februarii 2010 (UTC)

Deleted image[fontem recensere]

You wrote in http://la.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disputatio:Abecedarium_Graecum as follows:

For the letter J (for which Jot is the German name) I have preferred an image giving both uppercase and lowercase forms. The various incarnations of Eta are dealt with at that page, but the image you supply will be more use when we have the Spiritus asper page. Watch this space.

that you prefer Yot in both uppercase and lowercase. This file that meets your preferences was deleted from Commons, because it was falsely classified as fiction, see http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Yot_uc_lc.svg&action=edit You can request its undeletion at image deleter's talk: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Anonymous_Dissident , which is preferable, because you are more trusted in Wikipedia than anonymous users. 19:29, 26 Februarii 2010 (UTC)

You're mistaken, I think: the file I chose is still there. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 19:35, 26 Februarii 2010 (UTC)

This is not mistake. Deleted File:Yot_uc_lc.svg is nearly identical to image cited by you except serifful/serifless alternation, while having matching naming scheme, and has stylization strictly matching with:

Digamma uc lc.svg Stigma uc lc.svg Heta uc lc.svg San uc lc.svg Sho uc lc.svg Qoppa uc lc.svg Sampi uc lc T-shaped.svg

I know about existence of this file from Internet Archive:


In http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Yot_uc_lc.svg&action=edit you must scroll up to see deletion log. 19:43, 26 Februarii 2010 (UTC)

I'm very sorry, but I can't help you. I chose not to use that file; I did not think it was helpful. Therefore its deletion from Commons is not a problem for me. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 20:17, 26 Februarii 2010 (UTC)

Your revert introduced errors, because bad glyphs are pointing to bad letters. Reexamine your bad edit, please:


Note that San wikilink is falsely marked with Qoppa variant. I thought that you are reliable, but I now doubt that. 20:34, 26 Februarii 2010 (UTC)

Consider your aims carefully. If your real aim is to waste the time of administrators and confuse readers of Wikipedia in many languages, yes, you have done some of that, but it hasn't made you happy.
If your real aim is to publish the truth as you see it, you're failing to do that. Even if some of your changes stay a short time, they are all reverted eventually.
Yet other people succeed in spreading information by way of Wikipedia. How is that they succeed, while you fail and make yourself unhappy? If this question interests you, I could suggest one or two ways in which you would succeed better.
But you have to be prepared to learn. I came to Wikipedia not only to teach but also to learn. If you believe you have learned everything already, and insist only on teaching others, Wikipedia is not the best place for you to do it. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 13:45, 27 Februarii 2010 (UTC)

Insigna[fontem recensere]

I was correcting a few of Nuada's city pages from insigna to insigne when I found there are over 120 more - too many for me to correct.

Is there any chance that insigna is a valid spelling? Pantocrator 14:46, 27 Februarii 2010 (UTC)

No, you were right. The plural "insignia" would be quite OK too, but "insigna" means nothing. One might ask a bot to help ... UV runs one of those ... Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 14:50, 27 Februarii 2010 (UTC)

VolkovBot[fontem recensere]

Please unblock the bot. The problem was in pywikibot framework where 'disambig' template was included into the list of disambig templates, and this confusion has caused bot's misbehaviour. I've corrected my local copy but the issue needs to be addressed globally for all iw bots. --Volkov 15:04, 4 Martii 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for unblocking. As for the template, if I got you right, current 'disambig' template does the same thing as en:Template:Otheruses. It may be wise to rename Latin template to avoid any further confusion. --Volkov 16:55, 4 Martii 2010 (UTC)

Middle voice[fontem recensere]

In many of your edits, most recently here, you have changed active to passive forms where the meaning is middle. This is good Latin, indeed. Latin preserves the PIE use of passive forms of otherwise transitive verbs with middle meaning, where English uses the active (this is the shortest way to summarize it). However, both Latin and English use the present 'active' participle also with middle meaning (also a PIE inheritance).

I mention this because it seems to be omitted in all Latin grammars I know of, but nonetheless is an important feature of the language. People are likely to get it wrong; perhaps we should add it to one of our guides? I was thinking of writing something myself. Pantocrator 13:47, 14 Martii 2010 (UTC)

Sorry I didn't reply yesterday. Yes, I have always felt that a Latin passive (middle in sense) often corresponds to an English active intransitive: perhaps I'm unconsciously conscious (sic) of this because I studied Greek as well, and Greek retains a partly-separate middle voice. I hadn't thought about the use of the active participle with middle sense. By all means write something! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 19:00, 15 Martii 2010 (UTC)
I found a grammar that explains this as I have (the use of passives as middle in s. 125-126, and the double use of the pres. part. in s. 139), but it's strange that I had to look at so many before I found one that did. Pantocrator 00:03, 25 Martii 2010 (UTC)
I too have long believed many languages have a middle voice and just don't know it. If there isn't a functional difference of voice between "I open the door.", "The door is opened by me.", and "The door opens", then I don't know anything.
Not sure what you're reading, though, Pantocrator, for PIE lacked a passive voice (as is most widely postulated)?
--Ioscius 19:17, 15 Martii 2010 (UTC)
PIE is usually described as having a 'mediopassive'. Perhaps at some time it was only used as a middle, though, with no passives expressible in the language, but it is relatively easy to pass from the middle to the passive in such s system. Pantocrator 00:03, 25 Martii 2010 (UTC)

Persian Empire(s)[fontem recensere]

Salve Andrea, in pagina diputationis mea tibi respondi. --Fabullus 11:42, 22 Martii 2010 (UTC)

Honoratus/Honorius[fontem recensere]

I see you fixed the inconsistency by moving Honorius de Balzac to Honoratus. Should I then change the name on my list?

There are Saints of both names, but I know of no vernacular form today from 'Honorius'. This page and this show Italian Onorato, which confirms Honoratus (French apparently does not have a separate form from Honorius). Pantocrator 00:03, 25 Martii 2010 (UTC)

There are Popes called Honorius (Onorio in Italian). There is also an Italian painter en:Onorio Marinari. So Honorius does certainly exist as a forename. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 15:35, 28 Martii 2010 (UTC)
Well, then, there is in Italy. I guess the forms must be taken separately, and we just have to assume that French 'Honore' comes from Honoratus for the reasons given. Pantocrator 01:04, 29 Martii 2010 (UTC)
I have no opinion as to which name is more appropriate here, but for an example of Honoré = Honorius, see fr:Honoré d'Autun --Iustinus

Interpretes textuum Hispanicorum, etc.[fontem recensere]

Good evening, Andrew. Excuse me that I write in English. I am looking at the Categoria:Interpretes textuum Hispanicorum. Is it meant to be the Latin equivalent of en:Category:Translators to Spanish? If "yes", please let me know, and I will inter-wiki this category and all the other similar ones. Best regards, --Fadesga 00:19, 28 Martii 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for checking, Fadesga. A good thing you did. In fact our category is equivalent to en:Category:Translators from Spanish (from, not to), and all these categories of ours belong under en:Category:Translators by source language. It will be good if you do the interwiki links! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 15:28, 28 Martii 2010 (UTC)
Hi Andrew. Thank you so much for your kind remark. So, I have already inter-wikied all the possible "translator from..." pages I came across. Now, I wish two things: 1) that you create the Latin versions of "Category:Translators by source language" and "Category:Translators by destination language" (because the Categoria:Interpretes is actually "Category:Translators" and nothing else); 2) that you create a couple of subcategories, for instance, "Category:Translators into English" and "Category:Translators into Latin"; with these two new subcategories, I can help create further subcategories for other languages. I like this task!! Best regards from Montevideo, --Fadesga 23:35, 28 Martii 2010 (UTC)

gratias[fontem recensere]

Andrea, gratias tibi auxilio tuo de pagina me scripta "Josepho Matt" ago. Sapiens et doctus magistratus es, et semper verba tua auscultabo. --Andrew K. 03:13, 29 Martii 2010 (UTC)

De libro tuo de Wikipedia[fontem recensere]

Ave Andreas,

Ecce versus quos scripsi de libro tuo sunt. Quos qui invenies.

Remi Mathis 07:38, 29 Martii 2010 (UTC)

ok...i'm sorry :'([fontem recensere]

ok...the next article I ask help to the tavern, I am also taking a course of autodidactic Latin I hope that to my next Article to be improved. I Wish you an Excellent Holy Week--Lodewijk Vadacchino 12:09, 29 Martii 2010 (UTC)

Evidently Iacobus was willing to help, so there's no problem. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 12:13, 29 Martii 2010 (UTC)

Sumpa[fontem recensere]

I rather think it's excessive of you to try to get it deleted. There's no grammatical errors in there; only the title is dubious, and it's only still there because there's no agreement on the best name.

I'm not sure why you deleted Origo either; as I created it, I'm pretty sure it was in Latin! Pantocrator 21:00, 3 Aprilis 2010 (UTC)

Origo didn't read like Latin to me! But by all means have it back if you're going to work on it. Let me know. If we restore it I suggest you mark it {{Tiro}}.
It wasn't doing any harm, and I may well work on it. Bad English is still English, and bad Latin is still Latin. Yes, of course you should bring it back (outside of mainspace if you insist).
"Sumpa" is sitting on the borderline: there are errors in every sentence plus the title is neither a Latin word nor a foreign word. Are you still working on it? Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 21:08, 3 Aprilis 2010 (UTC)
Not at this moment, but I always keep track of my articles. Pantocrator 22:01, 3 Aprilis 2010 (UTC)

Chronovisor[fontem recensere]

Mutasti, mi optume Dalby, "chronovistrum" in "chronovisor", quod, pro certo habeo tibi ius est, sed magis mihi videtur hic ius linguae latinae servandum esse quam ius privatum uniuscuiusque. "Chronovisor", ut mihi videtur, homo est qui vidit temporalia. Nonne tunc si auribus tuis verisimiliter delicatis displiceat chronovistrum, placere possit chronovisorium? Sed expecto sententiam senatus vicipediani. Vale semper perquam bene.--Bruxellensis 12:25, 5 Aprilis 2010 (UTC)

Et tu vale optime, Bruxellensis! Consensum disputationis ad paginam ipsam non video; scio autem nos regulam habere "Noli fingere". Igitur verbum Anglicum "chronovisor" misi quia citationem huius verbi faciliter repperi. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 12:48, 5 Aprilis 2010 (UTC)
Bene secundum aureas regulas vicipedianas egisti, nunc est expectandum ut aliquis scribat de hac re.--Bruxellensis 13:09, 5 Aprilis 2010 (UTC)

Tartessus[fontem recensere]

Salve, Andrew. How is your paper on Solomon and Tarsis/Tartessus going? or is it actually finished? --Xaverius 15:00, 7 Aprilis 2010 (UTC)

Taxinomia linguarum[fontem recensere]

Hi Andrew, is there, as far as you know, any generally accepted taxinomical nomenclature for languages? For instance, if Indoeuropean languages are a family, what then are the Indo-Iranian languages (a subfamily?), and what the Iranian (a genus)? --Fabullus 12:48, 8 Aprilis 2010 (UTC)

Yes, I did look into this, a while back, when writing the Dictionary of Languages. My conclusion was that though some linguists, working on some families, have tried to introduce a fixed system -- with different names for each taxonomic level, and with different suffixes for the names of the groupings -- just like Linnaeus -- the great majority don't accept any such system. And personally I agree with the great majority! because (a) with gene research it is increasingly dubious to what extent such a system works in biology (b) even if did work for biology, languages aren't like that: they change for all sorts of reasons, at all sorts of speeds, and their relationships are much more complex than simple genetic descent.
So, when I was writing the brief Vicipaedia pages on Indian languages, I used "familia" for the highest-level group (everyone uses that word), and simply borrowed handy everyday words such as grex and series (one might add ramus etc.) for smaller units without seriously trying to be systematic.
Are you going to write more about Iranian languages? What a good thing! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 14:05, 8 Aprilis 2010 (UTC)
(Mithridate nostro exhortante, Latine pergam): Non in animo habebam plura de linguis Iranicis scribere. Novistine me antea nihil fere de his linguis novisse, sed quae scripsi plerumque alibi in interreti invenisse! Transmittendo tamen multa didici! Vale, --Fabullus 10:24, 16 Aprilis 2010 (UTC)

Textilia vs. textiles[fontem recensere]

Andreae Fabullus s.p.d. Valde gaudeo nunc paginam Latinam de bombycino scriptam esse. Scribesne etiam de serico? Ceterum credo Categoriam:Textiles cum Categoria:Textilia iam diutius exstanti coniungendam esse. 'Textilia' tamen melius quam 'textiles' scribendum esse puto. Vide Charlton T. Lewis, Carolus Short, A Latin dictionary (Oxoniae 1879), lemma textilis . --Fabullus 15:22, 14 Aprilis 2010 (UTC)

Recte mones. Contribui. Gratias, mi Fabulle. Fortasse tu vis de serico scribere? Si nolis, ego paginam incipere possum. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 15:51, 14 Aprilis 2010 (UTC)
Quid de Amorgino scis? Id nomen in pagina Anglica video, sed fontes a me lectis potius de productione insulae Cos loquuntur. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 16:06, 14 Aprilis 2010 (UTC)
De serico tu paginam age scribe, nam ego ne differre quidem sericum a bombycino noveram! De Amorgino item nihil novi, sed Coa novi a commentatoribus Lucretianis qui putant Lucretius IV 1130 Cia aut Chia (manuscripta inter se discrepant) pro Cois scripsisse. --Fabullus 10:39, 16 Aprilis 2010 (UTC)

Admin stuff[fontem recensere]

I see you deleted a nuch of redundant pages today; why didn't you get around to those actually marked for deletion by me? One at least is not only a housekeeping deletion. Pantocrator 19:59, 24 Aprilis 2010 (UTC)

Nothing personal! I just happened to be working through a different list. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 20:09, 24 Aprilis 2010 (UTC)

I just posted another topic on the taberna; I wish I didn't but I know no one important responds to me elsewhere; but still if I just do it myself I get reverted and yelled at.

On English wikipedia, there are admins that spend much of their time responding to user requests and housekeeping stuff. Here, on the other hand, you are the only one here at all reguarly, and you spend all your time here writing articles - which is not a bad thing, but it's not what admins are for. Pantocrator 19:59, 24 Aprilis 2010 (UTC)

True, there are not so many of us, and we all have our own interests and lives. Our main aim -- all of us, I'd say, whether admins or not -- is to make Vicipaedia bigger and better. At this stage, with a small number of regular users, that's best done (I think) by improving pages and writing more. Long discussions can be too much of a distraction -- and that means you may find that nobody wants to take on too many discussions at once. I guess you just have to take us as we are! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 20:09, 24 Aprilis 2010 (UTC)

Nowy Dwór Królewski[fontem recensere]


I'm sysop on Papowo Biskupie Wiki. I organize action writing article Nowy Dwór Królewski on all languages version Wikipedia. Please writing article.

Link on Enclish Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nowy_Dwór_Królewski

Answer on this page: http://pl.papowo.wikia.com/wiki/Dyskusja_użytkownika:Kinrepok

Orationes[fontem recensere]

Congratulations, Andrew, on turning (most of) the orationes into preces. Macte! IacobusAmor 21:13, 5 Maii 2010 (UTC)

Done them all now. But they are weak pages, most of them: they need a few more facts and many fewer lines of quoted text! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 12:02, 6 Maii 2010 (UTC)

Translation[fontem recensere]

Hi there Andrew! Would you be so kind to help me translate en:RES_–_The_School_for_Renewable_Energy_Science into your language? Please. If you think that article is too long, here is a short version: "RES - The School for Renewable Energy Science is a international graduate school located in Iceland. The school is a higher education institution offering a one-year M.Sc. in various renewable energy technologies, continuing education. All instructions and correspondence are in English. Acclaimed international faculty ensures very high standard and quality." Thanks a lot and best regards. :) --D

Accurate[fontem recensere]

I'm well and you? I thank you for your -as always - precious suggestion. Could you please check also my new pages about the Football World Cup, for instance 1970. I will use it actually as a model. Thank you and ciao--Helveticus montanus 11:58, 9 Maii 2010 (UTC)

Interwiki[fontem recensere]

Please in protected Formula:Abecedarium Graecum change interwiki from bad

pl:Szablon:Alfabet grecki (horizontal)

to good

pl:Szablon:Alfabet Grecki (vertical)

because in this point two different interwiki sets are crosslinked. 21:11, 10 Maii 2010 (UTC)

Factum'st. --Ioscius 21:14, 10 Maii 2010 (UTC)

Formula:Abecedarium Graecum[fontem recensere]

Could you change interwiki as described in discussion. Malarz pl 21:27, 11 Maii 2010 (UTC)

The Polish page to which you want an interwiki link does not exist. Also the Aragonese needed correction. Otherwise, I've made the changes you requested. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 21:37, 11 Maii 2010 (UTC)
thanks. PL template have temprary title while I'm clening interwiki. The old pl:Szablon:Alfabet grecki was removed, bat some (three) protected templates have interwiki to them. When those interwikis will be corrected I will move template to this (corrrect) name. Malarz pl 20:17, 13 Maii 2010 (UTC)
That seems to have happened now, and I have corrected the interwiki to pl:Szablon:Alfabet grecki. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 15:58, 19 Maii 2010 (UTC)
Ah, I see. No problem. I'll make that change as soon as you wish. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 20:31, 13 Maii 2010 (UTC)
I found, that ja interwiki should be ja:テンプレート:ギリシア文字, not ja:Template:現代ギリシャ文字. Malarz pl 19:11, 17 Maii 2010 (UTC)
OK, done. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 19:47, 17 Maii 2010 (UTC)

Casus belli[fontem recensere]

Hello, I understand why it was removed. You told me I can recover the data there, could you please restore it temporarily so that I can copy it somewhere else? Thank you, --Darwinius 14:04, 14 Maii 2010 (UTC)

Yes, of course. Sorry to be inhospitable. I'll restore it briefly. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 14:06, 14 Maii 2010 (UTC)
It's back there now. Please let me know when you have made your copy. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 14:09, 14 Maii 2010 (UTC)
I've copied it now, thank you very much. It's me who have to excuse for using this wiki for unrelated business. :) Thanks again, --Darwinius 14:59, 14 Maii 2010 (UTC)

Aloysius-Isaac Lemaistre de Sacy[fontem recensere]

Tibi gratias ago causa adiuti in hac pagina. Etiam in hac pagina me adiutare potes?

Thanks a lot, my Latin isn't so good as your !!!

Rex Momo 09:45, 19 Maii 2010 (UTC)

Crosslinked interwikis[fontem recensere]

Please: in Sho interwikis:

change ku:Şo (japanese measure) to ku:Sho (Greek letter)

in Koppa interwikis:

change ku:Qoppa (indian city) to ku:Kopa (Greek letter)

because otherwise interwiki sets are crosslinked and bots are stumbled. 15:49, 19 Maii 2010 (UTC)

OK, done. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 15:55, 19 Maii 2010 (UTC)

De lingua prisca hispanica[fontem recensere]

Hi Andrew. I was wondering if for medieval Spanish it would be better to use lingua Castellana prisca or lingua Hispanica prisca. The thing is that this language (ipse sermone Roman paladino), was only present in Castille, and not in all of Spain, so Castellana may be more adequate. What would you think? --Xaverius 18:24, 21 Maii 2010 (UTC)

I think you are probably right to prefer Castellana. My old textbook (Entwistle, The Spanish Language) carefully uses "Castilian" for the medieval period to about 1500 and then switches to "Spanish". And Nebrija, for example, calls it Castellana. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 20:31, 21 Maii 2010 (UTC)
Over here in the Americas, castellano is the Spanish language in general, including the language spoken today. IacobusAmor 10:56, 22 Maii 2010 (UTC)
The problem with Nebrija is that he is the hinge between both modern and medieval Spanish. I use always castellano anyway. I'll use Castellana prisca then in this case.--Xaverius 21:08, 21 Maii 2010 (UTC)
Non est obliviscendum quin vera lingua hispanica prisca sit lingua "vasconica" olim tempore Romanorum in tota Hispania locuta nunc solum in montibus Pyrenaeis!--Bruxellensis 09:28, 22 Maii 2010 (UTC)
And just a tiny thing, could you have a look at my versio latina of the Coplas por la muerte de su padre?--Xaverius 10:49, 22 Maii 2010 (UTC)

Re: Revert[fontem recensere]

Maybe, but the edit was made by a cross-wiki vandal. --Diego Grez 17:20, 27 Maii 2010 (UTC)

It's better to check facts. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 17:39, 27 Maii 2010 (UTC)

Categoria:Vetus Testamentum[fontem recensere]

sorry, I do not even remeber to have deleted the category, it was a misstake. --Helveticus montanus 06:24, 30 Maii 2010 (UTC)
here we are more lucky. The spring was cold and wet but the last 15 days have been sunny, ciao--Helveticus montanus 05:11, 31 Maii 2010 (UTC)

Satrapiae Imperii Achaemenidarum[fontem recensere]

In pagina disputationis mea respondi. --Fabullus 09:51, 31 Maii 2010 (UTC)

Et iterum ... --Fabullus 08:56, 6 Iunii 2010 (UTC)

Directores BM et BL[fontem recensere]

Hello, There may not be a single head for the library after 1973; Whitaker's Almanack 1988 gives three directors general: Humanities and Social Sciences, J. M. Smethurst; Science, Technology and Industry, Maurice Bernard Line; Bibliographic Services, Peter R. Lewis. The first of these relates to the part which had been the library departments of the British Museum. I will try and investigate further.--Felix Folio Secundus 12:50, 13 Iunii 2010 (UTC) I have now added Smethurst to the list; he becomes deputy chief executive for a few years so he was probably under Lynne Brindley's predecessor.

Re:I couldn't find a list of heads of the British Library after 1974 (see Index bibliothecariorum et directorum Musei Britannici necnon Bibliothecae Britannicae). Can you, by any chance? Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 12:48, 12 Iunii 2010 (UTC)--Felix Folio Secundus 16:06, 13 Iunii 2010 (UTC)
  • Duff, E. G., ed. (1899) Catalogue of the printed books and manuscripts in the John Rylands Library, Manchester. Mancunii: J. E. Cornish, 1899. 3 voll.

This reminded me that the forms of Latin names to be used are a problem: e.g. Franciscus Taylor was as far as I know plain Frank Taylor in all his appearances in print. Then there are Ioannes / Iohannes / Joannes / Johannes. I would have put Eduardus Gordon Duff for the above as the letter w did not exist until the Middle Ages. (Duff now has an article in the en:wikipedia).--Felix Folio Secundus 10:02, 17 Iunii 2010 (UTC)

If you look on our Taberna you will find massive discussion of the forms of various Christian names, but often no conclusions. However, we definitely don't use J (in Latin names). I tend not to worry about the rest of it, just to write the articles. Is Wikipedia not a "work in progress"? :) It is of course possible to make redirects from forms not chosen, and if you want to move one of these pages to a form that seems more appropriate, by all means do it. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 10:17, 17 Iunii 2010 (UTC)
Brian Lang bridges the gap according to an article cited in the Lynne Brindley article. How 'chief executive' translates into Latin I am not sure (?director principalis); I shall not get too worried about forms of names since the persons dealt with are so diverse.
Yes, the name rings a faint bell. Good, good! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 12:51, 22 Iunii 2010 (UTC)

Problem in the article Corbin Bleu[fontem recensere]

Hey mr.Andrew Dalby, Possible request, Corbin Blue article you need to add other languages, Please, See here [17] add them Thank you friend .--Zimmer611 23:50, 16 Iunii 2010 (UTC)

I've unprotected the article. Go ahead and add the interwikis. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 09:52, 17 Iunii 2010 (UTC)

Varburgum[fontem recensere]

Vale Andrew, petitio reevaluare L-1 pagia Varburgum Vestphalorum

Tempore carente, id ad Tabernam moveo. Da veniam! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 12:28, 18 Iunii 2010 (UTC)

Monacum[fontem recensere]

Propter auxilium tuum tibi gratias ago. Kamulewa 13:54, 19 Iunii 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for John Beames and Ho Chi Minh[fontem recensere]

It's John Beames birthday today, and I was pleased to find that someone (you!) had made a Latin Wikipedia article. I've studied several North Indian languages, so Beames holds a special spot in my personal pantheon. And what a surprise that you've also written a very sizable Ho Chi Minh article also in Latin. A surprise since I'm leaving for Vietnam in a few months to teach. Thanks for you polyglottery! 14:03, 21 Iunii 2010 (UTC)

Beames was at my elbow when I (all too briefly) studied a couple of North Indian languages; I liked his style, and afterwards rediscovered it with great pleasure in his memoirs. As for Ho Chi Minh, he's one of the main figures in a short book of mine due to appear later this year (the title may turn out to be South East Asia in 1919, but who knows?) I envy you your journey to Vietnam: I've never been there. Make the most of it. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 14:14, 21 Iunii 2010 (UTC)
I realized I forgot to sign my comment. I will look forward to reading your book when it comes out. Interlingua 14:16, 27 Iunii 2010 (UTC)

Francisco de Melo Manuel[fontem recensere]

Bonjour, j'écris quelques articles pour débrouiller certains homonymes du XVIIème siècle portugais : Francisco de Melo. On confond souvent l'écrivain baroque Francisco Manuel de Melo avec d'autres Francisco de Melo, et notamment son cousin germain Francisco de Melo Manuel qui fut aussi écrivain (il n'en reste pas grand chose), dessinateur, ambassadeur en Hollande et Angleterre, où il vécut jusqu'à sa mort, auprès de la reine Caterina. Il existe un portrait de lui qu'on attribue parfois à son cousin, où apparaît une devise en latin, que j'ai été incapable de traduire de façon compréhensible : Iovis et Mihi ex utraque Melos. pourriez vous la traduire ? l'article se trouve sur le wikipedia portugais, où vous pourrez trouver ce portrait. Merci. Cordialement Usor:Victorcouto pt.Usuário:Victorcouto

Neologismus[fontem recensere]

Hi Andrew, I noticed that you marked Murus quartus as a neologismus, but shouldn't it rather be called a 'calque' (what's that in Latin?). Somehow I find calques less objectionable than neologisms, especially if other languages render the same concept by calques as well. In this respect 'Murus quartus' is exactly the same as my Via Sericaria (de: Seidenstraße, en: Silk Road, etc.). Best regards, --Fabullus 08:05, 6 Iulii 2010 (UTC)

That's a good point. In such cases we should indicate that Vicipaedia is allowing the creation of a new calque, but "neologism" is not suffieciently precise. So, that's it, what should we say for "calque" or "loan-translation"? Will our Latin term turn out to be a calque itself ...? :) Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 08:41, 6 Iulii 2010 (UTC)
In the introduction to the English article on the Silk Road it says: "The term "Seidenstraße" (literally "Silk Road") was coined retrospectively by the German geographer Ferdinand von Richthofen in 1877 and has since found its way into general usage." I was planning to write something similar on the corresponding Latin page, which would remove any objections someone might have against the Latinization of the term. A similar sentence might be added to Murus quartus as well. --Fabullus 09:27, 6 Iulii 2010 (UTC)
Why "murus"? A good many languages (Swedish, Finnish, German, Dutch, ...) have "paries". Even English "wall" could be so translated. ||| Re calques, I'm all for allowing them (except for English idioms translated as such into Latin). --Neander 18:05, 6 Iulii 2010 (UTC)
Well, I didn't devise it, I simply accepted the author's term without applying independent thought. And the author no doubt inserted the first or only Latin word that came to mind! So by all means improve and move the article. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 18:29, 6 Iulii 2010 (UTC)
I copied my message to the discussion page of "Murus quartus" that would've been the proper place for me to begin with. --Neander 19:30, 6 Iulii 2010 (UTC)

Elisabetha Grable[fontem recensere]

Thank you for touching up the Elisabetha Grable article. My Latin always was shaky!

--UnicornTapestry 17:33, 17 Iulii 2010 (UTC)

Expanding request[fontem recensere]

Hello, I would love for you to expand this article (Selena), so it can be either a "good article" or a "featured article" on this wiki. For more information about the page visit, en:Selena, so you can have an idea or thoughts about expanding this article. Please respond to me on my talk page located here (en:User talk:AJona1992). Thank you AJona1992 18:00, 19 Iulii 2010 (UTC)

Nomina asteroidum[fontem recensere]

Vale Andreas! I hate to say it, after you've done such good work putting in the source names for asteroids. Could you also add categories when you add the sources? Such as [[Categoria:Asteroides ab hominibus appellati]], etc? --Robert.Baruch 19:04, 20 Iulii 2010 (UTC)

Oh, yes, of course, I forgot that. Thanks! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 19:49, 20 Iulii 2010 (UTC)
Well, no, seems I didn't forget. The idea is new: Mr. Spock is currently the only member. Fine; it's a good idea. But Mr. Spock is not a man, is he? He's either a fictional Vulcan, or a cat, or possibly both. And there may be some other difficult categorization issues ahead ... Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 13:51, 22 Iulii 2010 (UTC)

Dialectus Ionico-Attica[fontem recensere]

Hi Andrew, would you care to have a look at the latest edits to Dialectus Ionico-Attica and the disputatio thereto? Thanks, --Fabullus 14:25, 4 Augusti 2010 (UTC)

And thanks again! --Fabullus 18:10, 4 Augusti 2010 (UTC)

Concerning U.S. Constitution Translation[fontem recensere]

I would like to point out, just in case it was overlooked, that Section 7 of the translation leaves the following words out: unless the Congress by their Adjournment prevent its Return, in which Case it shall not be a Law.Andy85719 01:05, 9 Augusti 2010 (UTC)

I'm not much of a US Constitution man, so I'll copy this to the Taberna. Continue there! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 08:25, 9 Augusti 2010 (UTC)

Sinitur[fontem recensere]

Dear Andrew, I found this word in a page dedicated to an African nation. I remember to have check it, but now I do not find it again. Perhaps it was a missunderstandig of an other verb. Therefore now I will ask if a bot can change it to "situs est". Thank you--Helveticus montanus 19:52, 26 Augusti 2010 (UTC)

sinitur[fontem recensere]

Dear Andrew, I am very grateful for your correction and your interest for my pages (very simple, but at the moment I have little time) and in any case in Italian we say "meglio tardi che mai" that's "it is better later than never" :-) --Helveticus montanus 17:09, 27 Augusti 2010 (UTC)

Alexander Bergomensis[fontem recensere]

Hi my dear, how are you? I made this new page, can you watch for me if is good? I corrected also in Bergomum, because I'm sure that the Protector of the city is this Saint Alexander, and not Poe Alexander!. Thaks a lot for your help.

Alexander... Rex Momo 15:54, 28 Augusti 2010 (UTC)

Disputatio:Marius Balotelli-- 15:30, 31 Augusti 2010 (UTC)

Lingua Italica/Italiana[fontem recensere]

Salve Andrea! In hac pagina iudicium meum scripsi. Cura ut legas, quaeso. Ave atque vale. Ariel 11:48, 2 Septembris 2010 (UTC)

Gratias ago ob notitiam, sed de hac re plura dicere nolo. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 12:41, 2 Septembris 2010 (UTC)

la-1 et id-1[fontem recensere]

As la-1 and id-1, I can't pretend being able to introduced improvements without the counterpart of new mistakes... However, as the Latin article on Indonesian started with "Ornitographica" for "spelling", I hope the balance might be positive and I would not worry if my own mistakes were eventually corrected, re-corrected or de-corrected. On the opposite... Regards. Acsacal

Tellus / Terra[fontem recensere]

Hello, There is an article in English about these which offers some suspect etymology for these words. There is also an article there about "Tara (goddess)" which makes Tara=Terra (?). So Vicipædia needs to consider it.----Felix Folio Secundus 17:24, 10 Septembris 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for your reply: I decided later to remove the Tara connection. both etymology and comparative mythology are best left to experts, not something I would claim to be. Best wishes.--Felix Folio Secundus 18:34, 25 Septembris 2010 (UTC)

Ehno-linguistic map of Afghanistan[fontem recensere]

The map was removed based on the following discussion [18]. Please refer to the second discussion on that page. The map is based on unavailable data (information on ethnic composition of the districts). It has used AIMS as a source, but that source doesn't have any information on the ethnic composition of over half of the districts of Afghanistan. Thank you (Ketabtoon 14:40, 24 Septembris 2010 (UTC))

Thank you. I've read the discussion now. The map displays the languages of Afghanistan according to one criterion: majority speech in each district. This appears to me useful and not POV, and I note that it was decided not to delete the map from Commons. Other criteria could certainly be used. Rather than simply delete this map, we should try to replace it with a better one, or add another that provides a balancing viewpoint.
The problem with the data is, of course, that accurate and up-to-date data for Afghanistan are not available. It is still useful to display the best information we can get. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 14:52, 24 Septembris 2010 (UTC)
What I have done for the present is to edit the map captions. They now say (in Latin) "Majority languages of each district of Afghanistan. NB: Old data". If you want me to change this again, please say so. I have also removed the percentages, because in the context of this map it is not clear to me what they are percentages of! And let's hope that we will soon have a better map to accompany or replace this one. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 14:59, 24 Septembris 2010 (UTC)
Thank you for going over the discussion. Majority of the users want the map to be deleted. There are some who wants to keep it based on [19], but with a dispute tag. It was not deleted, because according to COMMONS, anything that is legally hosted should be available - even if it is not neutral. The creator of the map was banned from English wikipedia for disruptive pov editing. According to the creator, the map is based on information taken from AIMS. However, AIMS doesn't have any information on ethnic make up of over half of the districts, and nothing on linguistic make up of the districts of Afghanistan. So, if the information is not available at AIMS, how did the user come up with that information?
The important point is that there are other credible ethno-linguistic maps available at the commons which can be used [20], [21], [22], [23]. I should also mention that the current map totally contradicts all other ethno-linguistic maps of Afghanistan. (Ketabtoon 05:32, 25 Septembris 2010 (UTC))
As you can see, most of the other maps look alike. This is a very up to date and accurate map available on the net. If you google "ethnolinguistic maps of Afghanistan", you will notice that there is not a single other map which matches the current map. I am also trying to use AIMS and MRRD (Ministry of Rural Rehabilitation of Afghanistan) to create a similar district ethno-linguistic map. The stats provided by MRRD are the joint work of MRRD, UNHCR and Central Statistics Office of Afghanistan. So far, it looks something like this. It is not complete yet, but even this map looks much more like all the other ethno-linguistic maps available on the net. Dari is spoken by the "green" and "blue" portion. However, it would be a much better idea if we still use the more academic and credible maps provided by the US government and NGOs. (Ketabtoon)
That's very useful, thank you. I look forward to seeing your map completed. Meanwhile I have asked Fabullus to comment here: he originally inserted and captioned the maps in Vicipaedia, and I think he may have an opinion. But, yes, we could either replace this map with one of those others, or put them side by side. The discrepancy is interesting in itself ... Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 13:26, 25 Septembris 2010 (UTC)
Hi Andrew. It is very decent of you to invite me to this discussion! When I inserted the map I had no other motive (and certainly no personal p.o.v.) than to illustrate the geographic division of languages in Afghanistan, based on my interest in languages in general. I should of course have checked the reliability of the map and the data it provides, and I am very happy that someone is doing that right now. Thanks in advance, Ketabtoon, and thanks for your explanation. --Fabullus 09:41, 26 Septembris 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for joining in, Fabullus. In view of what you both say, I will delete the image from our pages and substitute the most recent of those linked by Ketabtoon above. However, it's not a perfect solution: those maps do not credit a source of data (further back than the CIA World Factbook), and the Texas map collection is just a collection, it's no more a guarantee of NPOV than Commons is. Clearly the recent maps are relying on relatively old information. It will be good to have Ketabtoon's own map when that is completed. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 11:45, 26 Septembris 2010 (UTC)

K123456[fontem recensere]

Thank you for welcoming :-) Hi K123456 09:57, 28 Septembris 2010 (UTC)

Correspondence with me[fontem recensere]

Do you want to correspond with me e-mail? I think provate e-mail. I from Czech Republic and I want to improve my English. Write me on my takl page. Hi K123456 17:22, 29 Septembris 2010 (UTC)

Ode an die Freude[fontem recensere]

Salve Andrea. Stipulam An die Freude omnino correxi, sed simulac conatus sum ad nomen plenius Ode an die Freude movere, quo aliae quoque Vicipaediae uti videntur, infectis rebus te adeo. Demiror enim, cur mutationem facere nequeam. Neander 06:38, 1 Octobris 2010 (UTC)

Salve optime, Neander. Motus interdictus est ob historiam prae-existentem paginae pessimae Ode an die Freude, quae olim cum An die Freude contributa est. Nunc igitur, personam dictatoris (perpetui?) agens, hanc movi, istam delevi. Tibi etiam epistulam electronicam mitto. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 08:42, 1 Octobris 2010 (UTC)

Candidus Fuldensis[fontem recensere]

Salve Andrew Dalby,

Gratias maximas tibi ago, qui paginam meo vitio tyrone dignissimo mendosam quodammodo defaecavisti. Consilium tuum secutus conventum aperui et anonymus esse desii. Spero instantissime me tuo auxilio tam simplicibus casibus in futuro non abusurum esse. Sed triarii est tyronibus manum dare, ut tu fecisti aliis in exemplum. Error meus indicatione falsa provocatus est. Nam non illud tag defuit, sed notam non clauseram </ref>. Itaque iterum atque iterum frustra illud tag inserere conatus sum et non vidi illud </ref> desse. Sed nunc paululum didici et vitium hoc me non repetiturum esse promitto. Fac valeas, nec te taedeat tyronibus succurrere --Brun Candidus 17:50, 11 Octobris 2010 (UTC)

Correct revert[fontem recensere]

Original post had textually written alphabet, so I restored it, see:

especially, because image after update no longer match original post meaning. 18:56, 12 Octobris 2010 (UTC)

Yes, you were quite right to restore the original alphabet. Thank you. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 19:03, 12 Octobris 2010 (UTC)

Your useful correction[fontem recensere]

Daer Andrew, I thank you for your help and I wish you a pleasant travel. I will continue to try to add new pages but unfortunately I have few time, I hope always new people will help us so that I can ameliorate the pages I have already created. Do you know that in his last book "Our Magnificent Bastard Tongue: The Untold Story of English" John McWhorter praise you. Ciao--Helveticus montanus 17:30, 13 Octobris 2010 (UTC)

P.S have you ever been in Switzerland? If you will come here, let me know

interwiki linking question[fontem recensere]

Hey Andrew, I was just looking at tempus trying to caerulify some of the red links there when I got to motus (physica). This one obviously corresponds 1:1 with en:Motion (physics). Then I was looking at en:Motion, which is, naturally, a discretiva page there, as ought be motus apud nos. But should they be linked together? Notice that at the English page, many of the things listed use Motion as a proper noun. Am I worrying too much or being overly pedantic? Any thoughts on the philosophy in question here? Thanks and best. -- Ioscius 10:06, 3 Novembris 2010 (UTC)

I believe this was Iacobus's text, and he (as he has once or twice reminded us) treats English as default. This works for him as a method -- but we must also think outside that box. I would urge you to do what's comfortable to you but, whenever in doubt, start from Latin terminology when deciding what needs disambiguating and what links where. I always find strong differences if I compare disambiguation pages for an English common noun and a Latin common noun that are supposed to be synonymous.
Incidentally Iacobus, if I understand him, looks forward to the day when Vicipaedia will be fully the equal of English Wikipedia. The only real difference between him and me (but it's a big one) is that I look forward to the day when it will be better. And I'm fairly sure my day will come sooner. I don't suppose that helps ... :/ Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 10:25, 3 Novembris 2010 (UTC)
With the technology of that happy day, as soon as one wiki becomes better, the others will follow, with ever-decreasing temporal intervals of disparity, so that eventually they'll all be better, and seemingly all at once, iterum et iterum usque ad finem temporis. ;) IacobusAmor 13:30, 3 Novembris 2010 (UTC)
Ah, but now that I re-read your question, I see it differently: should disambiguation pages be linked to "the same" words, or to synonyms? Yes, sometimes a common Latin word may be used as a proper name in English (e.g. Veritas, misnomer of a British political party): so then do we link our Latin disambig page "veritas (discretiva)" to the identical form in English, "Veritas (disambiguation)", or do we link it to "truth (disambiguation)"? Is that what's on your mind? If so, the answer is that I have often wondered, and I have no answer :) It is a general problem, and the only general answer would be to allow disambig pages to have two sets of interwiki links; which we can't do. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 12:46, 3 Novembris 2010 (UTC)

de invitationibus[fontem recensere]

Andreae s.p.d.

eorum invitationem qui nil utile ad Vicipaediam miserunt, quiete delere potes. --Martinus Poeta Juvenis 18:39, 9 Novembris 2010 (UTC)

Edit request for admin on the Taberna[fontem recensere]

Hey, can you help me out here on this edit request: Vicipaedia:Taberna#Edit_request_for_MediaWiki:Sidebar_for_multiple_language_support. It will require an administrator, so I thought I'd ask you. Thanks! -Oxguy3 23:05, 9 Novembris 2010 (UTC)

I was quicker ;-) --UV 00:03, 10 Novembris 2010 (UTC)

De absentia mea[fontem recensere]

Fabullus Andreae s.p.d. Gratias tibi ago ob cordialem tuam salutationem! Hos dies perparvum modo tempus in Vicipaediam dego, quod dissertationem de cosmologia Epicurea praeparabam, quam nunc paratam hebdomadam proximam denique defendam. Praeterea tamen multa alia me occupant impedientia quominus multum tempus hic verser. Interdum tamen visitabo. Fac valeas, --Fabullus 10:22, 11 Novembris 2010 (UTC).

100 libri Saeculi XX: nota scriptoris[fontem recensere]

A number of your edits are inconsistent, eh.
You capitalized French titles that weren't, and decapitalized ones that were. My capitalization was taken directly, cut and paste, from WP articles on those books. Yours are arbitrary.
Franciscus Scott Fitzgerald: Scott is a Christian name, not a surname. It historically derives from Scot, which is why I had Scotus, as in Duns Scotus. Scotus, Scottus, whate'er you please, it still needs to be Latinate.
Scriptor scriptrixve is more precise. Is Auctor political correctness? I originally had Auctor, as cognate with Author/Auteur/Autor/Autore in my other translations of this page, but other Latin articles actually use scriptor and scriptrix, not auctor.
Albertusque: You changed that to et Albertus. I studied Latin in school for 5 years. Why does your personal taste outweigh mine?
Goscinnix is already in use here. I realize it's a pun, but so what? It suits the author's work and is more Latin than ending a word with a foreign Greek υ, as you have (re)introduced.
Regulus: Has the book really been translated under that title?
Vale, Varlaam 00:10, 13 Novembris 2010 (UTC)

Fine. You're a sysop with 75K edits. And you went to Birkbeck, etc.
But I stand by my original points, regardless.
Varlaam 00:27, 13 Novembris 2010 (UTC)
In reverse order: Yes, Regulus has been so translated: see the footnote on our page about the book. It might be worth remembering that prince has a wider range of meaning in French than the apparently "same" word in English.
Yes, Goscinnix is a good conversion and it hurt me to change it. [Added: if he, or someone else, published this version of his name, we can use it. Did he, by any chance?]
The variation between et and -que is largely a matter of sentence rhythm. If you don't like my rhythm, I suggest you change it back. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 09:49, 13 Novembris 2010 (UTC)
Gildersleeve (#476) makes a semantic distinction, thus: "-Que (enclitic) unites things that belong closely to one another. The second member serves to complete or extend the first." (In other words, the Romans used -que much as one might use an ampersand in "Mr. & Mrs. Doe" and "tried & true.") Familiar examples are "Senatus populusque Romanus" and "Ibi mortuus sepultusque Alexander" (Livy). A more complex & instructive instance is "[Sol] oriens et occidens diem noctemque conficit" (Cicero). ¶ While we're on the subject of coordination: many modern authors have unperceived trouble with atque ; says Gildersleeve: "Atque . . . adds a more important to a less important member." In other words, English-speakers can think of it as tending to be more like 'and even' than merely 'and'. IacobusAmor 13:04, 13 Novembris 2010 (UTC)
Those are useful points, thanks, Iacobe! Whaether I was subliminally aware of them, heaven only knows, but I had certainly never thought about them :) Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 13:11, 13 Novembris 2010 (UTC)
Oddly enough, I thought it was political correctness, and unnecessary in Latin, to use the two terms scriptor/scriptrixve when one term covers it. If you like scriptor better than auctor, again, change it back.
There has been a lot of dispute here about Christian names. An utter waste of time in my personal opinion! We already have a redlink to Franciscus Scott Fitzgerald and I changed this one to match. What we want is an article. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 09:49, 13 Novembris 2010 (UTC)
We also have a redlink to Fitzgerald's cousin Franciscus Scotus Key, but that's probably incorrect. American onomastic traditions require the default interpretation that this particular Scott was a surname that was given as a middle name; more Vicipaediano, unless it can be shown that the family conceived of the name as meaning 'Scottish person' (which of course, though quite remote, is possible, much as Titus Pomponius was known as Atticus 'the Athenian'), it should therefore not be Latinized. IacobusAmor 13:04, 13 Novembris 2010 (UTC)
I've now added a redlink to Franciscus Scott Key in the new article Terra Rubra. IacobusAmor 13:41, 13 Novembris 2010 (UTC)
If my capitalisation is inconsistent, correct it. We have discussed this on Vicipaedia somewhere, a while ago, and the upshot I think was that we capitalise (a) proper names (there are some unexpected proper names in some of these titles) (b) all major words in English titles (b) apart from these exceptions, only the first word in all other titles. I believe en:wiki has a special rule for French titles, additionally capitalising the first noun: personally I feel that's too complicated, and the fact that it didn't happen in all the French titles you pasted, only in some of them, supports me -- it is perhaps too complicated for the people on en:wiki as well! But if you want to argue for a new rule on French titles, go ahead.
I never war -- life's too short -- so if you change any of those points back again, they stay (till someone else happens along, and who knows what they will think!) I meant what I said on the talk page: it was a good idea to translate the page and it was nicely done. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 09:49, 13 Novembris 2010 (UTC)

Chops[fontem recensere]

Salve, Andrew! I was wondering if you could think of a better translation of 'chop' other than the secti agnelli I came up with. I will not ask for a translation of es:escabeche (even if it is allegedly mentioned in the "One Thousand and One Nights", according to es:wiki), for I imagine it will not have a Roman/Latin equivalent. Cheers--Xaverius 00:02, 20 Novembris 2010 (UTC)

Tim Maia[fontem recensere]

Vale, carissime Andreas, quomodo te habes? It's a long time I don't made page in Latin Wikipedia!

Please, I need your help: I just made this new page about this Brazilian singer, but, as you know, I write in horrible Latin! Can you help me ti put the page in good Latin? If you don't understad, you can watch something from English page, ok?

Gratias causa adiuti tui!!!

Rex Momo 15:20, 22 Novembris 2010 (UTC)

Thank you by your attention[fontem recensere]

Hi, Mr. Andrew:

Thank you by your attention. I am new in Vicipaedia, and since colege times I use only Latin for reading, and not writing. I sorry by my Latin, but I am very happy people in this site made a lot of changes in my text.

One more time, thank you very much. Erico Molero, from Brazil.

Erico, from Brazil[fontem recensere]

About Past Masters band, I will try to find more resources. I finally understood the Wikipedia system, and its criteria to keep or not a page in it. Thank you anyway by your attention!

Erico Molero.

Problem in the article Corbin Bleu[fontem recensere]

Hello mr.Andrew Dalby, Possible request, Corbin Blue article you need to add other languages, Please, See here [24] add them Thank you friend .--Zimmer611 15:28, 4 Decembris 2010 (UTC)

Hello mr.Andrew Dalby, Possible request, Corbin Blue article you need to add other languages, Please, See here [25] add them Thank you friend.

And also, why can not Wikipedia:Bot, to add other languages in the article, the article did not need this protection Protecta, add this protection better Semi-protecta.--Zimmer611 19:12, 27 Ianuarii 2011 (UTC)

The problem, Zimmer, is that the article has to be protected against you. If the article is not fully protected you can make your continual useless edits to the page. I know you're not a vandal but you can't write Latin, so your edits always have to be reverted. We are busy people, and the quick way to solve the problem you are causing is to protect the article.
If you would promise just to leave the article alone, we could unprotect it and everyone would be happy. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 19:30, 27 Ianuarii 2011 (UTC)

Mons Celtorum (fuit Cantal)[fontem recensere]

Salve Andrew, Orbis Latinus habet 'mons Celtorum', ergo moveo Cantal ad montem Celtorum. --Jfblanc 13:45, 7 Decembris 2010 (UTC)

Nomina dialectorum[fontem recensere]

Salve Andrew! Ista nomina jam erant in Vicipaedia. Pro mihi quoque non sunt "naturalia". I agree to change them. Best regards; --Jfblanc 21:11, 7 Decembris 2010 (UTC)

Scriptores apud Melissam[fontem recensere]

Bene vidi categorias addendas et addam ne tibi sit nimis grave opus propter negligentiam meam. Vale optime.--Bruxellensis 13:01, 8 Decembris 2010 (UTC)

Helena et Susanna Bugiucle[fontem recensere]

Ave Andrea! I have a question concerning the proper transcription of the Greek surname Βουγιουκλή, since you are the one who proposed Bugiucle. All modern Greek female surnames are in fact genitive cases of male ones, implying "daughter of" or "wife of" i.e. Ελένη (κόρη του) Βουγιουκλή. So I wonder if it would be better to transcribe Βουγιουκλή as Bugiuclis (according to Sophocles / Sophoclis). (Of course the etymology of Βουγιουκλής has nothing to do with κλέος (glory) like in Σοφοκλής, as it is, in my best guess, a hellenization of the Turkish surname Büyüklü (büyük = big), although in modern greek is treated more or less the same as Σοφοκλής). --Protnet 22:56, 20 Decembris 2010 (UTC)

Hello, Protnet. Thank you for telling me the origin of this surname -- I was quite unable to guess!
We start on Vicipaedia from the fact that Latin has a standard transliteration for Greek (the same ever since ancient times), so we always use it for Greek surnames. It looks strange, sometimes, when the surname is a Turkish one, but it is always possible to follow the rule so we always do.
We can easily deal with the fact that men's middle names are the genitive case of their fathers' names. That kind of thing has been done in Latin too. But thank you for explaining that women's surnames are the genitive case of men's surnames. I wasn't sure of that, and I don't think we have ever discussed on Vicipaedia how to deal with it. I think you are right right that just as we would say "Sophoclis" as the genitive of "Sophocles", so we should say "Bugiuclis" is the genitive of "Bugiucles". Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 09:26, 21 Decembris 2010 (UTC)

Interwiki[fontem recensere]

Please add to Yot legitimate interwikis:

it:Jod 19:50, 21 Decembris 2010 (UTC)

OK, gentlemen, no problem, I've added them. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 20:49, 21 Decembris 2010 (UTC)

Divina Comoedia[fontem recensere]

Ciao! In Google Books ci sono altre due versioni della stessa edizione (two versions of the same edition): 1 e 2. Micione 12:57, 22 Decembris 2010 (UTC)

Christmas[fontem recensere]

Happy Christmas and a Happy 2011 to you, dear Andrew!--Helveticus montanus 18:23, 23 Decembris 2010 (UTC)

problems with some users[fontem recensere]

Dear Andrew,

how are you? I write you because I have some problems with two users. One of them is Jondel. He adds pages which from my point of view has little to do with the Latin language (see first version of Lojban). When I correct them, he regularly (see [[26]] and his previous collatio) does not accept the corrections (on the above mentioned page he stands on that the agent in a passive sentence should be expressed with per + acc instead of a +abl, I checked two grammars but per means through and not by). Being at work, I did the corrections as anonimous but I remember to have had a discussion with him on other corrections I did as Helveticus. Besides (and that's what makes me angry) he always deletes the formulas indicating the low level of the Latin language used on his pages. Could you help me please? Could you give me a suggestion?

Also Lilly Kitty creates long pages on interesting arguments but with a poor Latin but I feel she is going better and in any case she accepts the corrections I do.

Ciao and a happy new year 2011--Helveticus montanus 21:44, 28 Decembris 2010 (UTC)

I don't think LilyKitty's work is a problem! Perhaps you agree with me here really. These are very important subjects, about which no one else on Vicipaedia writes much, and I have the impression that the Latin is improving all the time (just like mine and yours, if it comes to that ...)
I'll remind Jondel not to remove the templates. As discussion elsewhere happens to have shown (so I'm revealing no secrets), Jondel isn't fully at home with the grammar of European languages -- and is also a bit impatient, but usually regrets it later ... Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 21:59, 28 Decembris 2010 (UTC)
thank you Andrew. I agree with you for LilyKitty. The only problem is perhaps that her pages are very long. Therefore I ask me sometimes if there's people who has the time to correct them. In any case I tried to correct the shortest ones and it was a good exercise to improve my Latin which (I know it) is poor. What also makes me angry is perhaps the feeling that some of our vicipaedia's friends do not even try to check in a vocabulary or a grammar if the words they use exist in the Latin language or if their sentences are correct. That's the case for Jondel. When I saw the remark on per/a I thought first: ah I do not know some aspect of the Latin Language. Then however I checked my grammars and I found that his peremptory statement has absolutely no grammatical foundation --Helveticus montanus 22:58, 28 Decembris 2010 (UTC)
I know, I know! You read these statements and you think: "Who's wrong? Have I been wrong all this time?" But then, occasionally, it turns out that we have been wrong, and we are being taught something new ... Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 09:38, 29 Decembris 2010 (UTC)
vere humilitas occidit superbiam :-). Tibi gratias ago--Helveticus montanus 11:44, 29 Decembris 2010 (UTC)
Look, I use examples also to bolst my grammar. I feel per can be used as 'by'. The example I am familiar or have in mind is 'Res publica per me defensa nobis' . Res publica defensa is ablative absolute. me in 'per me' is accusative. There is also 'Superstitio rursum erumpebat ... sed per Iudeam (accusative), originem eius malis.... You have to go beyond the grammar books and use language samples themselves. Please don't get angry but at least discuss. I don't invent but I investigate thoroughly. We have the internet which allows us to do this. In good faith.--Jondel 14:42, 29 Decembris 2010 (UTC)
Q. 1: The words "Res publica per me defensa nobis" can't be found in that form on Google. You tell me where you found those words, and I'll help you to understand them.
Q. 2: "superstitio rursum erumpebat, non modo per Iudaeam, originem eius mali, sed per urbem etiam". I found that on Google OK. That means literally "Superstition was breaking out again, not only through Judaea, the origin of this evil, but even through the City". So here is "per + acc.": it doesn't mean the same as "a + abl." I don't know the context of your original discussion with Helveticus, but you seemed to be saying that the two mean the same thing. They don't. You wouldn't use a + abl. in this sentence. "Per" means "through" (in this case you might also say "throughout" or "across" or perhaps even "in"); "a/ab" means "from", or (identifying the agent of an action) "by". The meanings are quite different. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 14:27, 29 Decembris 2010 (UTC)
The original article was the Lojban article. I used 'inventa per gregem' Helveticus changed to 'inventa a grege' which fine by me. My point is that the are the same but most are not familiar with per +acc to mean 'by'. Do you have the Latin grammar (Oxford press) book? It is not popular but it is British. A frequent conflict I have is that I feel people are limited in using words and grammar in particular way. It is good that a natural standard is being formed(e.g. not to use per as 'by'). With templates, as with medicine, and other complicated things, 'if it ain't broken, don't fix it. But if it did exist in classical times, it should be investigated. I have the grammar references. With Q1, I have the oxford book now. Let me peruse a bit and I 'll be back 3 min. --Jondel 14:42, 29 Decembris 2010 (UTC)
The problem with generalizing from an unusual or special form (seen in per me) is that it's, well, unusual or special. Gildersleeve says the pattern seen in per me works with persons, but only sometimes with things; accordingly, per gregem (with the noun not being a person) may be leading you onto thin ice. Gildersleeve says (416.18) "Per = ab of Agent is found only in late Latin." ¶ Your non modo per Iudaeam means 'not only throughout Judea' and has nothing to do with Agency. IacobusAmor 15:00, 29 Decembris 2010 (UTC)
It is from that late Latin usage, perhaps, that the Spanish derives. Spanish por is regularly used for the agent. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 15:05, 29 Decembris 2010 (UTC)
The sentence which eludes me right now but I memorized by heart is "Re publica per me defensa nobis eorum benevolentiam conciliavit." Perhaps I saw it in my Wheelock. From the grammar book I have 'per deos' by the gods, I will try to avoid usage in this way. It may be late latin but it is 'standard latin'. I acceept 'non modo ' has nothing to do with agency.I have to go now. Sorry for the trouble if any.--Jondel 15:21, 29 Decembris 2010 (UTC)
Iacobus is quite right, I feel: if we work from "per deos" we are generalising from a special usage. The gods are a bit special: if they are involved, things are done not just by them but through them, with them, etc. ... It's quite difficult to pin down the meaning of that Latin "per" in another language. With humans, if you say "per me" you are most likely to mean "as far as I'm concerned" or "with my permission" or (maybe in "per me defensa") "with my co-operation or involvement or guidance or leadership" but not in the simplest and most straightforward sense "by me". Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 15:32, 29 Decembris 2010 (UTC)
OK, I find "Per me defensa est respublica" used as an example in some old grammar books, and the old books are saying that "per" equates with "a" in this case. I don't fully agree, though clearly you can argue it. If I were publishing a translation of that phrase, I would be uncomfortable with a mere "by" as equivalent. Anyway, it is a special usage. "Me", probably Cicero, is taking a slightly superhuman (not to say divine) point of view. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 15:42, 29 Decembris 2010 (UTC)
The est isn't in Cicero's phrasing quoted below, where (pace Shackleton Bailey's free translation) I take the subject of the clause to be (per me) defensa res publica 'the defense of the republic (through my actions)'. IacobusAmor 15:52, 29 Decembris 2010 (UTC)
[Edit conflict.] The phrase per deos presumably means 'by the gods', but it isn't a statement involving Agency in the usual sense, and is merely a customary way of taking an oath (confer English 'by Jehosaphat! by gum! by God!'). ¶ The passage you seek may be this (Cicero, Ad Familiares, 225 (IV.13), 2): omnibus amicis quorum benevolentiam nobis conciliarat per me quondam te socio defensa res publica, translated—quite unliterally—by D. R. Shackleton Bailey in the Loeb edition as 'all the friends whose good will I won when I defended the state with you at my side'. One might take this per me to mean something more like 'on my account' ('through my actions') than 'by me', but more experienced readers may of course differ. IacobusAmor 15:43, 29 Decembris 2010 (UTC)
The way I see it, is that per + person indicates an objectification of the doer. He is not the true origin of the action, simply a tool through which something is done. v.e. Mk 14,21: “Vae autem homini illi, per quem Filius hominis traditur!”--Chris1981 23:37, 3 Ianuarii 2011 (UTC)
Yes, that's a useful perspective, thanks. In fact I agree with both of the above speakers! Per + acc. is not, in classical Latin, an equivalent of a + abl.
But it's possible, perhaps, that because of its use in this special way in religious expressions, especially Christian, it eventually (in late Latin) came to be thought of as equivalent. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 09:44, 4 Ianuarii 2011 (UTC)

Happy New Year in Advance!![fontem recensere]

Andrew and Iacobus, I wish you guys in advance a Happy New Year! Ut valetis? Vos laudeo hortorque laborantes. Please understand that we have similar goals. I will do my best to avoid per +acc when I can use ab+abl anyway. However please do study the phrases below. I am very sure that per can be used in the instrumentative sense but is not well documented in latin text books. I have 'by;by means of' in my dictionary. If the articles I write are correct, it is upsetting to see templates because it invites others to another form of latin which may be questionable. The articles are not very long so why not try to correct them instead. They won't be too taxing on your time and effort. Gratias ago.--Jondel 11:28, 30 Decembris 2010 (UTC)

per ' by' (perseus.tufts.edu, Julius Ceaser) regno occupato per tres potentissimos : kingdom occupied by three most powerful [--Jondel]

You've given a mistranslation here: a kingdom was not occupied by three most powerful &c.: in context (book 1, last sentence of section 3), regno occupato is an ablative absolute ('when they had seized their kingship'), and per tres potentissimos goes with the verb you haven't quoted. The whole is perhaps well caught in the Loeb translation: 'when they had seized their kingship[, they would be able,] through the efforts of three most powerful . . . [tribes, to master the whole of Gaul]'. This 'through the efforts of three' (per tres) isn't at all the same as 'by the three' (a tribus) would be. Each preposition has multiple senses, and using one for all isn't likely to be a reliable strategy. IacobusAmor 12:12, 30 Decembris 2010 (UTC)
This is where I got it. my point is that per is used in the instrumentative sense('by means of') in your above translation, of 'of three most powerful' could also be translated as through the efforts by three.. . --Jondel 12:21, 30 Decembris 2010 (UTC)

(perseus) Of agency, through, by, by the hands of, by the agency of : quae comperta sunt per me: per homines explorare, S.: per procuratores agere: quo minus cum eis amicitia esset, per populum R. stetisse

(perseus)Of means or manner, through, by, by means of : id a te per litteras petere: vates per avīs consulti, L.: per litteras [--Jondel]

I don't see anything here on which I can usefully comment. Sorry. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 19:42, 30 Decembris 2010 (UTC)

I think I accept the templates. I've been here a few years now but, I see I still have a lot to learn(Seeing Iacobus' recent improvements on Guilelmus Jones). By the way please feel free to change the per + acc to ablative forms . I got used to this. Thank you very much for your patience.--Jondel 12:50, 6 Ianuarii 2011 (UTC)

Facere melior Maassluisia[fontem recensere]

Multos multos gratias omnibus vobis ago qui pagina Maassluisia curaverunt in modo quo non me potui. Non plus dicere possum, nisi Vive Vicipaedia!--RayquazaDialgaWeird2210 12:59, 17 Ianuarii 2011 (UTC)

Suecia[fontem recensere]

Multos gratias , mi Andrew! Experientia docet! Jim Jhendin 14:01, 17 Ianuarii 2011 (UTC)

Προσθήκη κατηγοριῶν[fontem recensere]

Andrea, velim, si vis, pro me iustas addas categorias in Apocolocyntosin. Puto enim categorizationem meum non esse "poculum theae". :-) Martinus (Neander 18:00, 7 Februarii 2011 (UTC))

Secundum en:Apocolocyntosis, categoriae sunt "Latin prose texts | Satirical works | 1st-century works | Hades (underworld) in Greco-Roman literature | Political thought in ancient Rome | Works by Seneca the Younger." IacobusAmor 18:33, 7 Februarii 2011 (UTC)
Feci. Possumus, si volumus, categoriam "personalem" pro Seneca creare, sicut nuper pro Claudio creavi; etiam categoriam de itineribus ultraterraneis ... Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 21:09, 7 Februarii 2011 (UTC)

Categories[fontem recensere]

Please feel free to change or delete categories. My main focus is having correct encyclopedic content in good Latin. When someone changes the content for articles I am concerned, I have to check both the Latin correctness and that the elements are still contained. Like nature, I hate vacuums(undone things) and thus may be creating categories as I go along. --Jondel 01:31, 13 Februarii 2011 (UTC)

Sorry I didn't reply, Jondel, and thanks for your comment. That's useful to know. I tend to work very fast with categories, and sometimes I delete them, but my final aim is always to bring more users to our pages via more useful categories! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 13:51, 23 Februarii 2011 (UTC)
Well leave the categories to you. For Heroes, maybe in the future, vir fortis could be created. (Unless it exists already). Jondel 11:48, 25 Februarii 2011 (UTC)
Yes, that's a good point. The problem with "Heroes" as it stood is that it was POV: how do you define who is a hero? That's why long ago I suggested deleting it, and I guess that's why no one objected. In a way it's the same with the national symbols and state symbols (which Iacobus likes to add as redlink categories, and which I delete). If they are unofficial national symbols, that may be very interesting but they aren't always sufficiently verifiable to be listed in categories. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 12:38, 25 Februarii 2011 (UTC)
Correction: to be accurate, I long ago asked "what is this category about?" (It contained several Filipino historical figures, Vlad the Impaler from medieval Romania, and a couple of ancient Greek mythological characters); Iacobus (if I'm not mistaken, maybe in a summarium) commented that the concept was POV; and it was UV, more recently, who proposed deleting it. No one else commented, and so in due course it was deleted. The basic problem was, as I said above: "it was POV: how do you define who is a hero?" Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 19:26, 25 Februarii 2011 (UTC)
In the United States, the state birds, insects, reptiles, songs, dances, and so on are matters of law, having been enacted by the legislatures and signed by the governors. They're quite verifiable, and they are of course listed as categories elsewhere. IacobusAmor 13:12, 25 Februarii 2011 (UTC)
And if they are official national symbols, that's such a boring concept that it isn't notable any longer. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 12:38, 25 Februarii 2011 (UTC)
"Boring" is a POV, irrelevant in the creation of categories. One person's "boring" is another person's "fascinating"! IacobusAmor 13:12, 25 Februarii 2011 (UTC)
I knew you'd show up, mi Iacobe! Well, if you think them interesting, and if you actually create those categories for US states, and if you populate them, who knows? you may find that nobody deletes them. Yes, I've known of the state symbol business since I was 9 years old, when someone gave me a secondhand copy of the Information Please Almanac. American states are very odd. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 14:10, 25 Februarii 2011 (UTC)
What I'm saying is that if we try to categorise every concept, we get into unverifiability and we end up wasting time. In some cases, instead of categorising, we can make lists. Lists can have footnotes and links. So you could -- in this particular case -- make a list of Philippine national heroes :) Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 12:38, 25 Februarii 2011 (UTC)
Which would pose a POV danger, especially if it excluded, for example, the heroes known as the Ultimi Philippinarum! IacobusAmor 13:12, 25 Februarii 2011 (UTC)
I'm more optimistic, I guess. It could work well. It's up to Jondel. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 10:01, 26 Februarii 2011 (UTC)
Notable and encyclopedic are the main issues(not boring and exciting).(but there are non encyclopedic but very interesting articles at the English wiki) If in the English speaking world, the Hero-ness can be verified by legislature, then perhaps we can create a vir fortissimus category (or some latin equivalent of national symbol person). I assume the category of Hero is not too acceptable because it should be defined by the Greek mythological context. I create categories because it obviously becomes more organized and navigable but it is not such a big issue for me. I will try not to create news categories but search for existing ones and try to be careful with their appropriateness. So. It is up to you or the mainstream majority Latin wikipedians. Jondel 13:43, 27 Februarii 2011 (UTC)
I agree with you and Iacobus, Jondel -- I was wrong to raise the issue of boring and exciting! But the problem with "Heroes" really was the POV -- or, looking at it another way, the impossibility of defining the concept. It would be the same with "vir fortissimus", I think: would you and I and others agree on who fits in this category? In our biography articles we aim to explain people's lives and achievements. We don't aim to rate them greatest or strongest.
Actually, some of our articles, especially the old ones, do, calling men & things of all sorts clarus and inlustris (the latter often with the shudder-inducing hiatus of a illustre); see L'oro di Napoli, La ciociara, La città delle donne, La strada, La voce della luna, Ladri di biciclette, Lo sceicco bianco, Lo scopone scientifico, etc. Just overnight, a biography has characterized a poet as famosissimus. I usually delete such judgments when I find them. ¶ It's especially chuckle-inducing to be told that certain of one's compatriots are clarissimi when one has never heard of them. ;) IacobusAmor 14:55, 27 Februarii 2011 (UTC)
I do just as you do (amazing how often we agree). It is (I personally think) a wasted word to say a subject is "clarus". If it isn't notable, we don't write about it. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 17:23, 27 Februarii 2011 (UTC)
Let our readers do that, based on the evidence we provide.
It is a good idea to search for existing categories. You certainly are free to create new ones; usually there's no problem, but ask yourself first, "Would others agree with me on who belongs in this category? Will its membership be easy to define?" If these questions would be controversial, maybe better to make a list with references and footnotes (as I suggest above) or to explain the issue in the text of the articles. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 13:57, 27 Februarii 2011 (UTC)
You know, readers would understand that vir fortissumus was really not meant to mean the 'heroes' being brave and strong but being a national symbol.(but they are brave anyway so no harm done) (As a translator ) you have to struggle with getting the meaning across (national symbol translated as vir fortissimus) yet correct in definition(thus avoiding heroes). There are a lot of late latin words that retained their form in many languages like Hero,and it is hard to avoid using them in this Latin wiki in the modern easier to understand sense. It communicates so much better! If their countries' legislative bodies defined them as national symbols that should be the (encyclopedic)evidence and that, I think should fit the category(and the rating). References and footnotes are indeed required (but require so much work). I guess I should respond in the discussions. Jondel 14:46, 27 Februarii 2011 (UTC)
The issue with "Would others agree with me " is that, relatively few people write in encyclopedias, let alone a latin one. So the impression I have is few would care or take the initiative or would be too busy to do so.(nature hates vacuums) Well I'm glad people like you are around qui probe curet. I will try hard to anticipate the sentiments of others hopefully to get it right the first time round.(I have to go now) Jondel 14:46, 27 Februarii 2011 (UTC)
Yes, if a formally constituted body legislates a list of "national heroes" (?fortissimi civitatis/reipublicae viri), one should think that that fact could rightly define a wikipedia category, much as other formally voted lists do, like those that name the winners of Academy awards and Nobel prizes and such. Likewise the winners of contests (including sports, TV game shows, etc). The essential criterion is the formality of the mechanism that generates the list—and perhaps that it be external to Vicipaedia. IacobusAmor 15:04, 27 Februarii 2011 (UTC)
And that the members and the award itself are notable (hence I'd incline to cross the TV game shows off your list). Quite right: we have several such categories. When they are created, clearly defined, unambiguously named, and populated, there's no problem, I'd say. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 17:17, 27 Februarii 2011 (UTC)

la:Georgius Queirolo Bravo[fontem recensere]

Hi, please delete the page Georgius Queirolo Bravo per http://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Steward_requests/Speedy_deletions&oldid=1314357#Jorge_Queiolo_Bravo_and_related_articles its Vanity and spam.

The discussion you link to is two years old, and it mentions our decision to keep the article. So what is new? I suggest, if you now want to propose we delete it, you get a user account and explain your reasons here: Disputatio:Georgius Queirolo Bravo. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 16:46, 21 Februarii 2011 (UTC)

De nomine paginae[fontem recensere]

Mi Andrew, paginam scripsi de en:23-F, quam nominavit Conatus ad democratiam Hispanicam derogandam anno 1981. Est nomen latinum a me propositum verum aut bonum?--Xaverius 11:34, 23 Februarii 2011 (UTC)

True and good, I think; one might prefer the "anno 1981", which is a bit of an anticlimax as the last part of the title phrase, to go in parentheses "(1981)"; but it's a minor thing and I wouldn't bother to mess around with it until others have commented if they are going to ... :) Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 13:47, 23 Februarii 2011 (UTC)
Thanks. If it were "(1981)" rather than "anno 1981", it would seem to me as if it were one of many... which on a second thought is what happened, which is sad. Anyway, I thought that being today the 30th anniversary we needed such a page!--Xaverius 14:08, 23 Februarii 2011 (UTC)

Derby Museum[fontem recensere]

es:Derby Museum and Art Gallery, ca:Derby Museum and Art Gallery and eu:Derby Museum and Art Gallery have now been created!--Xaverius 11:19, 1 Martii 2011 (UTC)

Thanks very much, Javi, the people at Derby will be over the moon! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 11:41, 1 Martii 2011 (UTC)

Categoria:Animalia ficticia[fontem recensere]

Hi Andrew, the other day you added a 'blue' category Categoria:Animalia ficticia to my new page on the fabulous tarandrus with the remark 'for now'. I take it, then, that you have some reservations about the present use of this category, which at present combines both animal species, such as Unicornis or Kraken, and individual animals, such as Aslan, and fails to distinguish between fiction (e.g. Aslan), mythology (e.g. Unicornis), and rumours (e.g. Yeti). Do you have an opinion on this matter? Or better still: do you have ideas to solve the mess? --Fabullus 12:05, 3 Martii 2011 (UTC)

Hi Fabulle, nice to hear from you! I don't have an opinion yet: one puts things in half-appropriate categories because it will help to concentrate minds and produce, eventually, a more satisfactory categorisation.
We have some categories for things that are "fictitious" (if the Latin word ficticius means that); we have some categories for things that are "of doubtful existence" (opinabilia); we don't, I think, have categories for things that are mythological. That may well be a different concept from those other two, and perhaps that's what we should start doing. If we do, as between the terms fabulosa and mythologica I have no strong view. Have you? Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 12:29, 3 Martii 2011 (UTC)
For the record: for English 'fictitious', Cassell's dictionary gives commenticius and fictus ; for 'mythical', it gives fabulosus. It doesn't recognize ficticius. ¶ Surely the big wikis have addressed this problem and found solutions for it? IacobusAmor 13:22, 3 Martii 2011 (UTC)
I guess "ficticius" wasn't a good choice. Luckily those categories are sparsely populated. We could shift the "ficticia" things to "commenticia" and start a series "fabulosa" -- in which Categoria:Animalia fabulosa Graeca will already belong. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 14:32, 3 Martii 2011 (UTC)
Hey, I created that one! That was back in the day when my system could create pages. :/ IacobusAmor 14:40, 3 Martii 2011 (UTC)

Categoria:Pisaurenses[fontem recensere]

Salvus sis, mi Dalby, proposuisti ut haec deleretur categoria, sed puto eam utilem fore ut appareat hanc urbem non solum Victoris nostri Ciarrocchi sed etiam alterius poetae esse quasi cunae. Utile est enim nonnunquam tales coincidentias palam monstrare. Sed submitto hoc tuo sapienti iudicio. Vale semper optime.--Bruxellensis 13:18, 5 Martii 2011 (UTC)

Hoc tempore, mi Bruxellensis, categorias incolarum urbium et oppidorum singulorum non habemus. Id possumus facere, sed erit opus re vera magnum et longum. Suadeo utilius fortasse futurum esse nomina incolarum, et praesertim scriptorum, in pagina ipsa Pisaurum enumerare.
Non obstante, si vis categoriam singulam Pisaurensium retinere, minime delebo! Oportet autem categoriis singulis quattuor "membra" praebere ad minimum (vide VP:CAT). Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 13:29, 5 Martii 2011 (UTC)

Communia praefecturae Adduae[fontem recensere]

Dear Andrew, I will work only on the already existing pages (creating the new category) but I hope he will no add any more otherwise I will stop him because his pages has nothing to do with the Latin language (when I have remarked it today it was too late). In the future I will slowly complete the villages but for the moment only for this departement Do you agree with me? --Helveticus montanus 13:31, 5 Martii 2011 (UTC) Dear Andrew, I'm on holiday therefore I will let Bersatu blocked. Later we will see. Ciao Massimo

Just testing[fontem recensere]

Please help: replace this red text with a translation of the English message below. Thank you!
This page relates to the Wikipedia GLAM/Derby Collaboration and the Derby Multilingual Challenge. Click here to sign up!

" Wikipedia is particularly pleased to see that Derby Museums are encouraging the creation of articles in languages other than English." (Jimmy Wales, 14 January 2011)

Please help: replace this red text with a translation of the English message below. Thank you!
Announcing the Derby Multilingual Challenge

This is the first multilingual Wikipedia collaboration. All Wikipedians can take part, in any Wikipedia language. The challenge runs from 1 May until 3 September 2011.
Sign up now!
" Wikipedia is particularly pleased to see that Derby Museums are encouraging the creation of articles in languages other than English." (Jimmy Wales, 14 January 2011)

films[fontem recensere]

thank you very much friends to have me told of the discussion in taberna and to appreciate my work. According to the disposable time I will add more navbox about directors. Ciao e grazie!--Helveticus montanus 18:40, 23 Martii 2011 (UTC)

Categoria Auctores Latini hodierni[fontem recensere]

Bene vidi et optime fecisti ad formulas unificandas. Utar igitur hac categoria. Dommodo omnes hodierni auctores maneant in eadam categoria ut facilius inveniantur ab indagatoribus qui de litteris latinis hodiernis aliquid noscere cupiunt. Est bonum instrumentum et ut puto utile. Vale perquam optime, mi Dalby, pergasque tam in rebus coquinariis quam latinis nos diu delectare.--Bruxellensis 11:54, 25 Martii 2011 (UTC)

Stella Constantiae/Thanks[fontem recensere]

Dear Andrew, I thank you very much for the award you proposed to give me--Helveticus montanus 18:02, 29 Martii 2011 (UTC)

Civitas Dei[fontem recensere]

Vale, carissime amice, quomodo te habes? Je te demande une petite re-lecture de cette nouvelle page que j'avait crée. Merci encore pour ton aide et bon fin de semaine.

Rex Momo 08:45, 1 Aprilis 2011 (UTC)

Bersatu[fontem recensere]

Dear Andrew, from your remark I imagine you have already tried to explain Bersatu that he should add more information. Before I thought I could prepare for him a model (with at least the number of inhabitants, an external link to the official page and an image when possible) and explain him to use it. Do you believe it will be only a loss of time --Helveticus montanus 17:47, 3 Aprilis 2011 (UTC) This is what I have written to him:Cher Bersatu, je suppose que tu parles français. On te remercie pour ton aide à vicipaedia mais tu es en train d'ajouter trop de pages avec trop peu d'information. Tu nous peux surement aider, mais tu devrais respecter un model minimal. Par exemple en indiquant le numéro d'habitants, en introduisant dans la page si possible une image et une liaison à la page officielle de la commune. Voie svp par exemple mes modifications à ta page Ceignes. En outre si la commune est indiquée aussi avec le nom du département vicipaediae utilise la forme par exemple Ceignes (Addua) et non Ceignes, Ain. Tu devras donc avant tout modifier le nom dans la listes des communes du département. Je reste naturellement avec plaisir à disposition pour toute information. Si tu devrais continuer à ajouter pages sans informations je serai malheureusement obligé de te bloquer

I do not understand at the moment Bersatu has he been stopped or it is free?--Helveticus montanus 18:27, 3 Aprilis 2011 (UTC)
No, he isn't blocked at present (at least, not by me!) Whether he knows French I have no idea. He has been seen on the Buginese Wikipedia (minority language of Sumatra). ... :) Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 18:40, 3 Aprilis 2011 (UTC)

ooops please could you perhaps translate it in Eglish for me, of course you could do it faster than me--Helveticus montanus 18:51, 3 Aprilis 2011 (UTC)

That's the thing, Massimo, I guess his English is not too good either. Still, I'll certainly have a try ... ! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 18:55, 3 Aprilis 2011 (UTC)
thank you for your translation. Because of lack of time I will add some other French villages, I hope Bersatu will use them as an example-- 18:56, 4 Aprilis 2011 (UTC)

Pro benevola salutatione gratias ago ...[fontem recensere]

... interdumque hanc in vicipaediam me iturum rediturumque promitto. --Irenaeus 11:59, 6 Aprilis 2011 (UTC)

DE pagina Francogalliae.[fontem recensere]

Salve, Mense augusto anni 2010i, paginam latinam Francogalliae mutavisti ut fontem nominis "Franciae" adderes. Fontem dedisti : Johannis Iacobi Hofmanni Lexicon universale. Explanationem vocabuli Franciae ex hoc lexico legens, animadverti hoc vocabulum ad francogalliam nuncupandam usurpari non posse : "Francia, vulgo la France, regiuncula est regni Franciae sic dicta, in provincia inferiori Franciae, inter Lutetiam ad austrum et Sylvanectum ad boream, versus Fanum Sancti Dionysii, Monmorancium et Gonessam, et extenditur tantum ad aliquot leucas in illo tractu". (confer http://www.uni-mannheim.de/mateo/camenaref/hofmann/hof2/s0304a.html) Immo plane significat regionem francogalliae hodiernae quae nunc "Île de France" vocatur.

Mea sententia, (et aliorum) nomen latinum regionis quae Francogallice "France" vocatur non est "Francia", est "Francogallia". 11:30, 7 Aprilis 2011 (UTC)Fredericus Charpentier scripsit.

Gratias ago. Si paginam "Francia" movere suadetis, tibi et aliis oportet apud Disputatio:Francia ... disputare. Utile erit fontes et pro sententiam vestram, et contra (si sint!), recensere et citare: Vicipaediani enim de rebus, minime de sententiis, disputant et statuunt. Utilius erit conventum aperire et conlationes plures in paginis Vicipaedicis facere. Usque adhuc, nisi fallor, perpauca scripsisti (de aliis nihil scio). Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 11:45, 7 Aprilis 2011 (UTC)
Nomen Francia manifesto provinciam, regionem, rempublicam significare potest. Confer en:Île-de-France (provinciam) et en:Île-de-France (regionem). Praeterea, vide commentarium de metonymiá, et tum compara Novum Eboracum (civitatem, unam ex quinquaginta civitatibus Civitatum Foederatarum) et Novum Eboracum (urbem, unam ex permultis urbibus). IacobusAmor 12:46, 7 Aprilis 2011 (UTC)

Bindon Abbey[fontem recensere]

Movendumne ad Bindonium? --Alex1011 20:51, 14 Aprilis 2011 (UTC)

Ita, amice Alex, si fons sit. A, iam citationem vidi. Move! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 21:04, 14 Aprilis 2011 (UTC)

De epico carmine[fontem recensere]

Salve, Andrew. Excuse me for my recent prolongued wiki-absence, but somehow there are always other things to do! I have written a short page on a French song (La Guerre (Janequin)), which I have described as a "carmen epicum", but I do not know how adequate this will be, and yout opinion will be most welcome! Cheers--Xaverius 19:14, 1 Maii 2011 (UTC)

Fascinating! I knew nothing about this. I am reading with interest. If it seems too short to be a carmen epicum you can consider the terms "epyllion/epyllium" (a classical term for a short epic-like poem) or "cantilena", a medieval word used for a ballad, including e.g. a "Song of Roland" in some form that was sung before the battle of Hastings. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 17:22, 3 Maii 2011 (UTC)
Thank you, Andrew! I'll use cantilena, if is a medieval term, which I feel is more adequate for this composition. I'm glad you find it interesting, I find it myself a great song, and the version I'd linked from the page in particular (you can always trust the King's Singers to make great versions)--Xaverius 17:49, 3 Maii 2011 (UTC)
The fundamental question is what did Janequin and his Latin-writing contemporaries call it! IacobusAmor 19:23, 19 Maii 2011 (UTC)

Wright Challenge[fontem recensere]

Hi Andrew ... I'm guessing you are back from hols. One user is having a hospitality issue on the French wikipedia. |"They" are deleting articles and asking questions later. Could you intercede as it requires v good French I think (as that is the issue I believe with our contribution)? Details are on my talk page. I have recently updated everyone's scores and we have 6-7 barnstar holders. Any ideas to up the game even more? Victuallers 19:16, 19 Maii 2011 (UTC)

I wrote to ClemRutter. Thanks. The problem was the origin in machine translation, whch maybe was too evident after all. Many wikis would delete on getting a whiff of that -- actually it was nice of them to move it to his userspace. OK, back to work tomorrow. Thanks for fielding all the messages over that period -- Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 20:42, 19 Maii 2011 (UTC)

Thanks[fontem recensere]

Thank you for the reply and the encouraging words. What troubles me most is that when I try writing Latin, I naturally use 'Romance' vocabulary and syntax; words usually from vulgar Latin or directly related to modern Romance languages. As a novice, I also use simplistic syntax with heavy use of infinitives, like modern languages. As a result, an Italian or Spanish would easily understand my writing.

However I believe the case was different in 'real' Latin: an Italian or Spanish would not really understand an original Latin text. The vocabulary would be a bit more alien, and the syntax more complex (with subjunctive, gerunds, and other constructs like those 'little words' which connect phrases), not just relying on infinitives.

So, besides correcting grammatical mistakes, I wish some expert would add more spice in my "watered down" Latin and improve it in the spectrum of how 'real' Latin can be. Can you help me on that matter? Lusor 09:30, 22 Maii 2011 (UTC)

Vincentius Bertolone[fontem recensere]

Vale, carissime Andreas, quomodo te habes? Parvam et rapidam relecturam istae paginae tibi peto. Tibi gratias ago.

Rex Momo 10:18, 23 Maii 2011 (UTC)

Praemiolum[fontem recensere]

AnimWIKISTAR-laurier-WT.gif Pro auxiliis firmissime datis
Hocce praemiolum modestum igitur tibi, carissime Domine Andrea, quod me Vicipaediano olim alumno atque tyroni grate opem sine ulla negatione mihimet ipsi in cunctis temporibus pressae necessitatis dedisti, pro edictis beneficiis a. D. bis millesimo undecimo, secundo Kalendas Iunias, muneri dignatus sum. Cura semper ut valeas! --Martinus Poeta Juvenis 10:00, 30 Maii 2011 (UTC)

Fontes Byzantinorum temporum[fontem recensere]

Salve Andrew! I have written a short section on sources for late antiquity. Sadly, I do not know other written sources for this period, and maybe there are some important texts that I may have left aside. Could you have a look? Cheers--Xaverius 16:21, 30 Maii 2011 (UTC)

Sorry I didn't do it till now, Javi. I made some minor changes, adding some links, but I think you have all the main sources there already. Glance at my list Libri rerum gestarum Byzantinarum: from this you might want to add Malalas and Menander Protector but the latter is fragmentary so maybe not worth it. I guess that list of mine follows on from yours. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 20:37, 2 Iunii 2011 (UTC)
Perfect, many thanks, as always! --Xaverius 22:42, 2 Iunii 2011 (UTC)

Cipriani[fontem recensere]

Can you delete this [27]? The title is uncorrect!-- 18:20, 4 Iunii 2011 (UTC)

OK, done! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 19:54, 4 Iunii 2011 (UTC)

Um[fontem recensere]

Why was I reverted like a vandal? Firstly, Pichilemu is part of Chile (Chilia), and secondly, it was founded in 1542 (though most dates indicate the date of the creation of the commune, which is infactual). The edit was perfectly okay. Please, undo your action. Diego Grez 15:41, 5 Iunii 2011 (UTC)

Linguae Periclitate[fontem recensere]

Fortasse vis de periclitatione morteve linguarum commentationem scribere, cui nexum ab Phonographum#Historia inscribamus? --Iustinus 07:31, 10 Iunii 2011 (UTC)

Vulnerabilitas[fontem recensere]

Dear Andrew, what do you think of Vulnerabilitas socialis, verbum vulnerabilitas in Castiglioni, Aloisius; Mariotti, Scaevola. Vocabolario della lingua latina, latino-italiano, italiano-latino. Quarta editio a Petro Georgio Parroni curata (Taurini, 2007). non est. Ciao Helveticus montanus 14:34, 15 Iunii 2011 (UTC)

Gratias...[fontem recensere]

ago tibi, Andrew, pro aiutorio tuo. Vides me parvulum esse in vicipaedia... --Castaliensis 13:29, 17 Iunii 2011 (UTC)

Corbin Bleu[fontem recensere]

You have protected Corbin Bleu, so the bots can't edit it's interwikis. Can you update them from fr:Corbin Bleu please ?
Regards --Hercule 11:23, 22 Iunii 2011 (UTC)
Thanks, done. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 11:35, 22 Iunii 2011 (UTC)
Thank you for your contribution in an article Corbin Bleu, but you can develop the article such as this article David Clayton Henrie, please.--RockStar50 19:09, 23 Iunii 2011 (UTC)

Lagidae[fontem recensere]

Great job with all the Ptolemaic stuff! --Iustinus 18:31, 23 Iunii 2011 (UTC)

Yes, well, the Ptolemies may yet bring you and me together. I am more and more interested in the transmission of luxury from Greece and the East to Rome: clearly the Ptolemies were a stage in this process. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 19:01, 23 Iunii 2011 (UTC)

Planeta[fontem recensere]

Hello Andrew! So planeta is masculine? Ah, how could I miss that? Mea culpa...

Anyway, thanks for pointing out.

Donatello 19:12, 25 Iunii 2011 (UTC)

Artur Balder[fontem recensere]

Hello Andrew! I am here again to talk about the article latina about Artur Balder. I think the sentence about cross wp spam is out of context in the article itself. If you want, you can place it on the Discussion page of the article. But you are interferring and intermixing the life and work of a person with the fact that an internal issue took place in the wikipedia. You should consider this points. --Lolox76 17:23, 9 Iulii 2011 (UTC)

De la traduction de région par regio[fontem recensere]

Bonjour. Je viens de répondre à Leonellus Pons au sujet de l'emploi de regio et je l'ai fait en invoquant ce qui me semble d'usage sur Vicipaedia depuis plusieurs années en cette matière. Mais peut-être le débat pourait-il être enrichi, voire tranché par un Britannique résidant en Poitou-Charentes (ce qui n'est pas la même chose que le Poitou...), qui plus est contributeur fréquent à Vicipaedia ? ThbdGrrd 10:05, 10 Iulii 2011 (UTC)

Sanctuarium Nostrae Dominae Custodis Derthonae[fontem recensere]

Vale, carissime amice, quomodo te habes?

Please, can you correct this page that I've made now? Thank you very mauch for your help!

Rex Momo 09:21, 17 Iulii 2011 (UTC)

[fontem recensere]

Sorry, Latine non loquor. ;) [[Specialis:Conlationes/71.14 1.101.92|]] 19:48, 5 Augusti 2011 (UTC)

Ecclesia Iesus Christi Sanctorum Dierum Ultimorum[fontem recensere]

Hello. What grammatical error is there in the title of the page that I moved it to? As far as I can tell there are no mistakes…Iesus is a 4th Declension noun, so the genitive is -ūs, and Christi agrees with that…the genitive of sancti is sanctorum, and the genitive of dies (plural), which is 5th Declension, is dierum. I'm aware that dies can sometimes be feminine but in this case I made it masculine because that seems to be how it is more commonly used…so the form of ultimus that would agree with it is ultimorum. Literally it says "The Church of Jesus Christ of the Saints of the Last Days". This agrees with the way that the church's name is rendered in other romance languages and properly conveys the meaning of "Latter-Day" within the context of the doctrine of the church. I admit I'm a few years removed from my formal study of Latin but I don't see where I went wrong here. Please enlighten me; I will continue this discussion on the talk page of the article itself.--Antodav 13:54, 30 Augusti 2011 (UTC)

OK, I will answer you there. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 14:04, 30 Augusti 2011 (UTC)

Wolseius[fontem recensere]

Hello, I have finished the draft Chronologia at Disputatio:Thomas Wolseius but feel that the Latin version is not good. Perhaps you could have a look at it sometime.--Felix Folio Secundus 11:56, 24 Septembris 2011 (UTC)

The new version is much better. The phrase you queried was supposed to mean "sought the office of Pope" but the grammar was probably wrong. The Chronologia was not compiled in a very good way but an attempt to provide at least a fuller account of an important statesman. The English article is so long that summarising it would take many hours so the Chronologia was based on one in the French WP which I had already translated into the Simple English WP. Thank you for the improvement.--Felix Folio Secundus 12:01, 4 Octobris 2011 (UTC)
Now what's the Latin for the "Field of the Cloth of Gold"? Perhaps "Arvum Textilis Aurei" would fit.--Felix Folio Secundus 02:56, 5 Octobris 2011 (UTC)

Philippus gonzález[fontem recensere]

Hi Andrew. I'm sorry I've been absent this summer. I'm in the process of returning to normal academic life (i.e, not in a field) and as usual now I return to our vici. I've seen the comment about the Spanish president list. I am not sure right now if the list is correct, but it al seems a problem of terminology (president of the government vs. president of the Republic). As the list stands now, I believe that it correctly represents the presidents of the government of the Republic, because there were just two presidents of the Republic (Azaña and Alcalá Zamora).--Xaverius 18:55, 30 Septembris 2011 (UTC)

No problem, then, Javi. And it's good to see you back again. I hope you enjoyed your time in the field ... Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 19:18, 30 Septembris 2011 (UTC)

De nominatione categoriarum geographicarum[fontem recensere]

Mihi placet disputationem concludere de vicis Italiae, gratias tibi ago. Quaero si sit locus ubi scribitur de nominatione categoriarum geographicarum, quoniam categoriae de geographia Italiae mihi sunt sine ratione. --Achillus 14:26, 5 Octobris 2011 (UTC)

Gratias tibi ago. Nunc categorias moveo nec nomina muto. Si video necesse est mutare scilicet disputatio offerenda. Vale. --Achillus 13:05, 7 Octobris 2011 (UTC)

Regna mediaevalia Cambrica[fontem recensere]

Vide si tibi placet hanc disputationem. Mattie 03:23, 14 Octobris 2011 (UTC)

Basilica Virginis Candelariae[fontem recensere]

An augmentum redit articles hic English version in Italian, sic vos docebit vos. it - en-- 13:13, 14 Octobris 2011 (UTC)

My writing in Latin is bad ... could help expand the paper, we would appreciate it endlessly, thank you very much to improve the article of the Virgo Candelariae, I've left the Italian and English version for you to gui, God bless you always.

Alfajor[fontem recensere]

Crustulum Argentinum modo edi, cui nomen est alfajor. Vox, arabica sane, satis antiquast, et invenitur in Antonii Nebrissensis Dictionario Latino (p. 459): "Alfaxor o alaxur.artomeli.grȩcum." --Iustinus 02:36, 21 Octobris 2011 (UTC)

Vandalism[fontem recensere]

I believe that I have just saved Vikipedia from the terrible threat of vandalism, in the person of Usor: in the article Dâmboviţa (circulus). Since my Latin is worse than sub-par; since I am new to this Wikipedia; and I since I could not find a VP article on vandalism, I would be very grateful if you could look over what I threw together for it.

I would also value your advice on how to deal with Latin vandalism in the future, since that is probably the most useful contribution I can make here. Chamberlian 20:17, 28 Octobris 2011 (UTC)

I don't yet see anything terrible, just a faulty link. By all means explain further. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 20:41, 28 Octobris 2011 (UTC)
A full inspection of the link will show that it is, unless I am woefully mistaken, a commendably clever joke: "You have reached the last page on the internet. If you think you have reached this page in error, you have not. It is simply because you have been online too long and had nothing better to do." Chamberlian 20:16, 30 Octobris 2011 (UTC)
Yes, that's what I saw too! Well, thank goodness it's possible to get back home again from there. Of course it was right to delete the link. There's no mystery about dealing with vandalism: the basic step, if it clearly is vandalism, is to remove it. If it repeats, blocking may be needed, and admins (magistratus) may need to be alerted. Thanks for your help -- Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 21:44, 30 Octobris 2011 (UTC)

Emijrp/List of Wikipedians by number of edits[fontem recensere]

If I'm reading the summarium right, you made about three hundred edits in Vicipaedia last week, but the edit-counting bot says you made more like three thousand. See comments at Disputatio Usoris:Emijrp/List of Wikipedians by number of edits. IacobusAmor 16:39, 31 Octobris 2011 (UTC)

Gosh. Yes, 300 might be right: 3000 can't be! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 16:40, 31 Octobris 2011 (UTC)
Also, as I just checked (easy to do by comparing edits via the historia button), it says Rafael made 2030 edits last week—but in fact, he didn't make any. Something is seriously wrong with that bot! IacobusAmor 17:02, 31 Octobris 2011 (UTC)

Ⲡⲗ̅ⲫⲉⲗ?[fontem recensere]

Andrew, I went and commented to en:talk:Falafel per your request. As you will see, my feelings on this etymology are mixed at best, but I wouldn't dismiss it entirely if it interests you. To be honest, though, I tolerate wikidebate poorly, and may not have the fortitude to keep up with this conversation... you may need to let me know when/if it develops. --Iustinus 03:18, 4 Novembris 2011 (UTC)

Fortasse volumus commentationem Latinam elaborare, quod nunc apud falafel invenitur. Ex Davide Morgan credo me aut "cicer frictum" aut "isichiam ciceris" audivisse, sed non bene memini—et sane difficultati est nobis felafel etiam ex faba fieri, ut nuper te hortante didici. Fuitne felafel in opere Iambobini/Iambonini quod abhinc multis annis ad te cititabam? Non iam habeo apud me, et obliviscor. --Iustinus 04:06, 10 Novembris 2011 (UTC)
Hmm, interesting idea, I have him not far away, I'll look.
I will write a note for PPC, and I would be happy if you will look at it before I submit it. Essentially it will be to outline the question and to say that a second etymology has been posited, but that there are problems with it.
Am thinking about the fish below. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 13:25, 10 Novembris 2011 (UTC)
Now that I think of it offa might be superior to isichia—cf. the Egyptian Arabic ṭaʿmiyya. I suspect this tripartite folk etymology results from keeping exactly the same vocalization as the Arabic—if it really does come from Coptic -phel makes a lot of sense, but phala- is, if not impossible, at least unlikely (due to the weakening of vowels in unstressed syllables). This is why they had to resort to stacking prefixes, rather than treating it as one word. But I digress. I'll write you a little more by email. --Iustinus 20:10, 10 Novembris 2011 (UTC)

Petrocephalus[fontem recensere]

Hey, if you'll look at my Usor:Iustinus/pisces_Nilotici chart, you'll notice that the one species for which I don't have any ancient name in any language is Petrocephalus bane (well, the Egyptian name seems to be bs, but I can't find any authentic citations). Do any of your sources give a classical name for this species? --Iustinus 04:51, 7 Novembris 2011 (UTC)

Not that I've found yet. It is mentioned a couple of times in Darby et al. (as I expect you know), said to be "esteemed" nowadays, but no names given. Is it illustrated on figs 7.34 and 7.36 (same relief) of Darby et al.? I can only go by the generic picture in FishBase, so I could be fishing in the wrong pond there. How can a fish be native to Cote d'Ivoire and Egypt? Clever creature! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 10:12, 11 Novembris 2011 (UTC)

Municipium[fontem recensere]

Thank you for your precious help Andrew. Of course from now on I will use curia but now we have hundreds of pages to correct. Could somebody activate a bot please? Thank youHelveticus montanus 11:31, 8 Novembris 2011 (UTC)

My impression is that Helveticus has used it only in the pages about French communes, and only in picture captions, so the text to be replaced would always be ": municipium ]]". Is that right, mi Helvetice
yes that's rightHelveticus montanus 08:31, 9 Novembris 2011 (UTC)

The World and Wikipedia[fontem recensere]

Citogenesis --Iustinus 17:37, 16 Novembris 2011 (UTC)

Ruthenia[fontem recensere]

Good day! Why are you reverting my edits? 11:45, 19 Novembris 2011 (UTC)

Because I don't yet see the justification for them. Please explain at Disputatio Categoriae:Ruthenia. Thanks! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 12:11, 19 Novembris 2011 (UTC)

Vandalism Template[fontem recensere]

Do we not have anything in the way of a {{subst:Uw-vandalism1}} template here?

If I were to draft one, would you have any advice for it?

Do we have a latin word for vandalism?
Should it include the message in a second language?
Should that language be English?

Does this even seem like something worth doing? - [ Usor:Chamberlian ]

Vandalism is not a big problem, though it happens. Most unwanted edits are made from anonymous IPs, whose users don't know any Latin and are making a quick tour of the Wikipedias; they don't come back to read messages.
We had a brightly-coloured template called something like "Destructor", designed long ago to place on naughty user pages. I haven't used it for a long time and I can't find it now. As you can tell, it isn't often used. Ask at the Vicipaedia:Taberna: someone will remember!
As I said to you above, the main thing with vandalism is simply to revert it. Incidentally, I don't know whether the erroneous link you discovered back there was vandalism or not. It could have been an honest error, for all I know. There is a relevant and possibly useful website with a very similar address. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 09:28, 22 Novembris 2011 (UTC)

Cyprianus Biyehima Kihangire[fontem recensere]

Vale, care Schulz-Hameln, tuum adiutum peto. Parvam relecturam dare in ista pagina potes?

Non callidissime loquor nec scribo Latine, et relectura tecnica sicut tua necesse est! Tibi gratias ago!

Rex Momo 15:41, 30 Novembris 2011 (UTC)

On Sortilegii[fontem recensere]

Thanks for your note, Andrew! My idea was to replace "Sortilegii" by creating a redirect to Alea (modus ludendi) that I had begun to write. But the result was that I happened to create a misspelled Area (modus ludendi) without noticing the lapsus. Having done this, I believed in my sleepy mind that my [[Alea (modus ludendi)]] had been overwritten or something by the redirect. So I made the silly decision to prefix a {{delenda}] tag to it and left the whole mess at that, having in mind to get back to it later. Now, I think, Area (modus ludendi) should be deleted, and Sortilegii should be redirected to Alea (modus ludendi), but I'm afraid that my further moves will be no good -- certainly these aren't my strengths! Would you please do the requisite changes for me? Neander 21:35, 10 Decembris 2011 (UTC)

In any case, the form of sortilegii appears to be false, as (Cassell's says) the word is sortĭlĕgus, -a, -um (presumably with stress on the antepenult) 'prophetic, oracular' and sortĭlĕgus, -i 'soothsayer, fortune-teller'. So if you want a redirect from sortilegii, you should probably add a redirect from sortilegi too. ¶ I happened upon the article as it was, unmindful of its history and without the benefit of the day's first cup of coffee, read the title as Area (locus ludendi), and supposed you might be writing about a 'playground'—to be contrasted with Area (geometria), of course! IacobusAmor 22:29, 10 Decembris 2011 (UTC)
Yes, I must have been sleepy too or I would have questioned "Area" more searchingly. I did think, "Is Neander speaking with a Japanese accent today?" OK, I will make the required moves soon if no other magistratus has done it already! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 09:47, 11 Decembris 2011 (UTC)
Hope you like the picture. Neander, there could be few better illustrations of your first sentence. Not sure whether "Paginarum lusores" is the ideal title. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 14:02, 11 Decembris 2011 (UTC)

Mentor[fontem recensere]

Rem de mentoribus incepi (modo ut commentationem habeamus), but I think you should take a look at the footnote and, if possible, cite the sources you consulted that claimed the word was first used in French. Mattie 20:13, 4 Ianuarii 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for telling me. I'm glad you've done that and I'll add some stuff later! It's interesting that the first [or maybe second] Mentor was a transsexual (i.e. Aphrodite playing the part of a man). I'm sure I wrote something about that somewhere ... Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 09:49, 5 Ianuarii 2012 (UTC)
I also added a page on the mythological figure. I don't know whether you think the picture suitable. The young man may well have needed a mentor at that moment. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 14:23, 5 Ianuarii 2012 (UTC)
Great job, Andrew! The page is much better now, I'm glad you took the time to work on it. I moved the picture into the "Origo nominis" section, which I thought it was better suited for. This makes the page layout look a bit odd at the moment, but once the page will be longer (who knows when that'll be, but nonetheless) it should be ok. Feel free to put it back where it was, though! Mattie 18:37, 5 Ianuarii 2012 (UTC)

Change of username[fontem recensere]

Salve! Do you know where I may change my username? (Aaemn784 > Panarium) --- Aaemn784 02:32, 13 Ianuarii 2012 (UTC)

Yes, you need to ask our grapheocrates, Disputatio Usoris:Adam Episcopus. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 11:56, 13 Ianuarii 2012 (UTC)

Thank you[fontem recensere]

Thank you, Andrew Dalby, for the good faith welcome. It is most appreciated. ;) Cheers, Cirt 13:33, 13 Ianuarii 2012 (UTC)

Thanks[fontem recensere]

Andrew thank you for welcoming. I was reading your biografy and to tell you the whole truth i am impressed and honoured to know you. I studied latin at school but girls were more important to me at that time... so my possibilities on this project are a bit limitated by my poor "latin" tools and I am very happy to know there are around the world some very good latinists like you. For sure I will bother you and your wisdom asking for help in future. Andrew only culture and knowledge improve our world, so thank you and good job--1felco 07:34, 14 Ianuarii 2012 (UTC)

Sorry not to have replied earlier, 1felco. I hope you stay with us -- it'll be a pleasure to work with you. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 13:21, 24 Ianuarii 2012 (UTC)

Pagina movenda[fontem recensere]

Salve Andree,

Administrator es, itan? Ego non, ergo nequeo commentationem Wikipediam ad Vicipaediam movere, cum "Vicipaedia" ad "Vicipaediam Latinam" redirigat... Si vis, possisne quae in disputationem mense Octobri scripsi legere commentationemque movere? Gratias, curaque ut valeas! Mattie 18:18, 14 Ianuarii 2012 (UTC)

Sorry I overlooked this till now. Writing in haste and therefore in English: sorry about that too! I could move it for you; the objection is that many links point to Vicipaedia and intend "Vicipaedia Latina". All those links would be misdirected if this page was moved. But I agree the renaming is logical. Therefore, would it be better to move it to "Vicipaedia (series)" or something like that? I'm happy to do what you think best, I just want to be sure you've considered the outcomes! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 16:56, 17 Ianuarii 2012 (UTC)
Albert non Albrecht, Smith non Smyth, Vicipaedia non Wikipedia est. As a proper name, Vicipaedia can't be confused with Wikipedia. Brands are unique. No adjective is needed. Of course to distinguish in Latin the German Wikipedia from the Spanish Wikipedia, then the adjectives will romp! IacobusAmor 18:10, 17 Ianuarii 2012 (UTC)
Yes. I'll now copy this to Disputatio:Wikipedia, which is where Mattie suggested that the page be renamed: that's the best place to discuss this (not unimportant) point. It came to me here only because a deletion was needed in order to carry out the move. So let's continue there. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 18:27, 17 Ianuarii 2012 (UTC)
Iacobo in disputatione tacente, te credo paginam movere posse, si vis ... :) Mattie 17:25, 23 Ianuarii 2012 (UTC)
OK, initial moves made! I'm short of time, so if you could check the text of the page and edit where necessary, that would be good. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 19:17, 23 Ianuarii 2012 (UTC)
Factum est! Mattie 22:44, 23 Ianuarii 2012 (UTC)
OK, I have now completed the moves. I worried unnecessarily, in fact: there was no mass of incoming links to Vicipaedia that were aiming for Vicipaedia Latina. So all was quickly done. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 13:20, 24 Ianuarii 2012 (UTC)

Jatorduak[fontem recensere]

Happy new year, mi Andrew! I've replied (late) on my disputatio. I wish I could have been more useful! --Xaverius 16:28, 17 Ianuarii 2012 (UTC)

Syntax of paintings?[fontem recensere]

Andrew, you're doing a great job, indeed, in introducing paintings by world famous artists. While I can't boast on any kind of expertise on this area, I feel that it might be good to outline some syntactic principles governing titles of paintings – after all, willy nilly, we seem to be establishing official names for illustrous works of art. For example (and right now this is my only example!) the title "Pictor cum uxore ientaculum sumit (Metsu)" strikes me as being a bit too long. (And somehow I've got the impression that finite verbs aren't too welcome in tiitles of books and articles, but I'm not sure about this.) Thus, I'd prefer a shorter title like Pictor cum uxore prandens. What do you think about this? Neander 20:57, 3 Februarii 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for your comment, Neander. My aim is to come back to these pages and flesh them out, dealing with them group by group and making sure that there are links to museum catalogues etc.
I am indeed somewhat hesitant about making up names for paintings, but of course only a minority have what you might call a "real name" given in the painter's lifetime and used by everyone thereafter. So it seems to be the reasonable thing to do.
The question of whether to use a finite verb or a participle puzzled me (book titles rarely contain either, so far as I can think, but then books rarely depict a single action, while paintings often do.) I did not spend too much time heartsearching at the beginning: there were only a few. They are multiplying. Yes, I was feeling that I may have made the wrong general choice, and if you think that too, I have all the more reason to reconsider.
Better than either finite verb or participle (I think) is a noun that implies the action. So, if there was only one subject in this picture, it would surely be "Ientaculum pictoris" (or "prandium"; or "uxoris"). Nice and short. But "Ientaculum pictoris et uxoris" is much less neat.
When you have a good name in your mind, I will be really happy if you either move a page to a better title, or suggest a better title on the talk page. You can feel confident that I won't be annoyed! I didn't spend long over each name ... I always have in mind the ease of renaming pages on Vicipaedia, one of its luckiest features ... But meanwhile, yes, I will look back over the titles with finite verbs and try a bit of rephrasing.
You may notice a current emphasis on breakfast. I am hunting up possible illustrations for a book on this subject. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 21:29, 3 Februarii 2012 (UTC)
Yes, I had the impression that you're working on a book, and indeed, I have noticed the breakfast theme. So, what I've got is "1+1", but failed to do the addition. :–) I suggested the participial construction on the model of the Catalan name Parella desdejunant and Spanish Pareja desayunando. Paying heed to your preference for a noun that implies the action, I might add some food for thought and suggest Ientaculum coniugum. Neander 23:06, 3 Februarii 2012 (UTC)
The title of a painting isn't at all the same thing as the caption of an image: the former indeed doesn't want to have a finite verb, but the latter often (at least in the most elegant company) demands it. Each is an implied sentence, which wants to end with a period. (Even a title consisting of a single noun, say, X, has the underlying form "[Hic est] X.") Accordingly, the title of this painting might well be, as Neander suggests, Ientaculum coniugum, or maybe just plain Ientaculum. The caption, however, might well be something like Pictor cum uxore ientaculum sumit or Pictor et uxor prandent, with details about the food, the setting, the location, the date, the purpose, whatever might helpfully diagnose the presentation. Perhaps ideally for artworks, a third sentence will add the size, the composition ("oil on canvas," "tempera on wood," etc.), the institution where the object is currently kept, and (when pertinent) the name of the collection within that institution and the name of the donor or the institutional fund that purchased the object. Some sources, e.g. the Prints & Photographs Division of the Library of Congress, suggest that the caption include the custodial institution's own catalogue number. IacobusAmor 00:13, 4 Februarii 2012 (UTC)
Very interesting! I learnt a lot. Neander 00:26, 4 Februarii 2012 (UTC)
Yes, thanks, Iacobe. As you see, it's titles that are the focus of our discussion here, and your point seems very good to me, captions can be quite different and should not distract us. I think "Ientaculum coniugum" is very nice; all the better, in fact, in that some existing titles that I've seen for this picture identify it firmly as the artist and his wife, others (the minority) don't, and I don't yet know what the evidence is. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 09:32, 4 Februarii 2012 (UTC)

De Bollandistis[fontem recensere]

Adhuc est simplex et modestum initium sed iam gratulor tibi pro exhortationibus tuis. Valeas semper optime.--Bruxellensis 13:15, 11 Februarii 2012 (UTC)

/Gladiator & others[fontem recensere]

Sorry about those category mixups. You know this thingies,[/somenewarticledraft] whatever they are called are like your own personal sand boxes. They were'nt meant to be official. Im too lazy(you need to see my messy English Wikipedia page.) to put them in a separate isolated file. I will try to disable those categories at these pages since they may mess up the overall category scheme at wikipedia.--Jondel 23:35, 13 Februarii 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, Jondel, don't worry about it, it's your userspace! Just so long as you didn't mind me adding the <!-- --> there's no problem at all. All the best -- Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 11:48, 14 Februarii 2012 (UTC)

Re Bowenia serrulata[fontem recensere]

Ave! It was just a draft, I had not so much time, so i left some errors in declensions. Some answers to your questions:

  1. yes, it is possible. clearly it will make mistakes if nouns are of different declensions, but it seems to me too that they have all the same declension. I could teach a bot to change -ae with -arum, but not to understand which declension a noun belongs to, unless I use a dictionary a bot can read: unfortunately, what I found don't cover all scientific language.
  2. Ok.
  3. I am checking it.

In these days, I am busy with some things to do in real life, but as soon as I have time I will fix this issues and produce new test-pages. :)--Nickanc 17:32, 17 Februarii 2012 (UTC)

That's fine, Nick, take your time! I'm busy too ... When we have a good draft, we'll ask others to comment as well. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 18:19, 17 Februarii 2012 (UTC)

Lorem[fontem recensere]

Lorem ego potest auxilium emendare hoc, gratias: Maria de León Bello y Delgado.-- 12:32, 18 Februarii 2012 (UTC)

Draft page and translation help[fontem recensere]

It's here now: Usor:M0rphzone/Latifundium. Feel free to work on it yourself and ask others to help.
I saw your comment at the Vicipaedia:Porta communis. We do in fact get lots of help here from people who don't know Latin -- links, interwikis, images, making templates etc. You don't have to know Latin to do those things, sometimes working with others. Writing text in a foreign language is hard work and needs study. But you can start here: if you want guidance in learning Latin, ask for help, e.g. on the Vicipaedia:Taberna. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 09:52, 22 Februarii 2012 (UTC)
Yea I realized the translation was pretty broken considering I just copy-pasted using Google Translate. (Of course, Latin is a complex language and accurate translations are still being developed.) I only started the article because the word was formed from Latin words, and I thought that there should be a page here. I was thinking that I could just start the page and connect to the English article so people can see the Latin version. My idea was to have people fix the problems with the translations and other things, but I guess the Latin is too poor, lol. Thanks for moving it to a sub-page for me. And for my own comments, I should probably learn Latin first, otherwise it's a bit hypocritical. Can you help with translating the article correctly or is it too much work? - M0rphzone 08:43, 25 Februarii 2012 (UTC)
Fair enough, and thanks for replying. OK I will start the article this afternoon: I just don't have time to write a full article right now, but when I've started it I will mention it on the Taberna: others will probably help further. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 09:55, 25 Februarii 2012 (UTC)

Mons Casinus / Mons Cassinus[fontem recensere]

Salve Andrea, in "Montem Cassinum" "Monte Casino" commutando equidem te recte fecisse arbitror; aequo iure etiam "Cassinum" "Casino" commutandum esset, non tibi videtur?--Utilo (disputatio) 13:33, 17 Martii 2012 (UTC)

Tibi consentio, amice Utilo. Verba addo in paginam disputationis. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 13:34, 17 Martii 2012 (UTC)

Thank you[fontem recensere]

Thank you for {{Capsa lateralis}}, Andrew! :) Mattie (disputatio) 20:21, 20 Martii 2012 (UTC)

Pleasure! But see my note to UV: I would prefer it to be collapsible (optionally), so that it needn't get excessively long. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 20:28, 20 Martii 2012 (UTC)
As long as it originally loads in its non-collapsed form, that sounds like a very good idea to me. Mattie (disputatio) 20:30, 20 Martii 2012 (UTC)

A cruce salus[fontem recensere]

Ave Andrew! Valde sum laetus quia, longo tempore intermisso ob studia, redire possum in Vicipaediam. Cura ut valeas! Alexander Gelsumis (disputatio) 16:45, 4 Aprilis 2012 (UTC)

I agree with you[fontem recensere]

Dear Andrew, for Academia Linguae Hebraicae I agree with you. From an also wet and cold Southern Switzerland I wish you a pleasent evening--Helveticus montanus (disputatio) 19:06, 10 Aprilis 2012 (UTC)

Bulgarian issues[fontem recensere]

Usor:6. клас is a sock of Usor:Fadams, evading block to add childish crosswiki nonsense. This username (6. клас) is also blocked as a sock at enwiki, bgwiki and species, although the master account at enwiki has a different name than Fadams. Koumz (disputatio) 13:31, 14 Aprilis 2012 (UTC)

Yes, thanks, I had already noticed the relationship. OK, blocked. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 13:34, 14 Aprilis 2012 (UTC)

Thriambos[fontem recensere]

Ave, grate Andrea. Paginam institui de hoc Dionysio cantico, scribens "Thriambus". Putabam hoc verbum exsistere in Latinis glossariis — verbo "triumphus" excepto — sic ut "dithyramb-us" (διθύραμβος) et "iamb-us" (ἴαμβος); attamen nullum argumentum invenire potui. Oportetne paginam movere? Alexander Gelsumis (disputatio) 18:19, 16 Aprilis 2012 (UTC)

Veniam peto ob responsum tardiorem, mi Alexander. Censeo orthographiam "thriambus" nobis idoneam esse etsi fontem nondum repperimus, quia Latinizantes fere semper -os Graecum in -us Latinum translitterant. Orthographia confirmatur e nomine speciei zoologicae "Culex thriambus". Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 11:37, 18 Aprilis 2012 (UTC)
Bene igitur. Sit tibi dies iucundus, Andrew! Alexander Gelsumis (disputatio) 13:13, 18 Aprilis 2012 (UTC)

Thanks and[fontem recensere]

Monmouthpedia thanks you for your many contributions Andrew. We seem to have been able to do quite well but if you fancy a do at thanking the emerging French entries then brill. You might like tom play the video on the French Qrpedia page - interesting to see sub titles! Please keep an eye on the points page as we will be announcing how you can watch the web stream. We have had to postpone the launch because we need the new Monmouthpedia Wifi to be in place to show off your work to people in Monmouth. If you can add your Skype name to the points page then that would enable us to contact you. We are intending to have a second phase of this competition but we wanted to make sure we kept to the deadline we had published. This will be the world's first Wikipedia town with your help. Thanks again .... we must meet! Victuallers (disputatio) 11:34, 17 Aprilis 2012 (UTC)

Tombstone inscription in Latin[fontem recensere]

Ave Andrew, I'm trying to write a sentence in Latin, and I need help. It's a tombstone inscription for a poem I'm translating (Dante's Inferno, canto XI, see my blog divinecomedian.wordpress.com. Or maybe .org, I post so rarely I don't even remember.) Anyway, if I shouldn't be asking here, then please delete this posting, and sorry for the inconvenience.


Notes: 1. Via recta in ABLATIVE (due to A). 2. Diaconum photinum in ACCUSATIVE ('cos of PER) - but some online grammars say passive agent should be ablative? 3. Word order is "whatever sounded poetic to me" when I wrote it.

In English, the inscription would say something like:


All help gratefully appreciated! C Ryan. ETA: forgot to sign, sorry. 13:50, 19 Aprilis 2012 (UTC)

You're OK, I think. "Per + acc." is much less usual for the agent than "a + abl." but it's all right, especially in medieval Latin, and handy for you here because you are already using "a + abl." in another sense. As to those online grammars, a straight ablative of agent, without any preposition, would be appropriate for inanimate agents, but that evidently doesn't include Diaconus Photinus. I'd think it more likely that "seductus" would be the last word of the whole thing, but rhythm counts for something after all, and there's nothing wrong with your word order as it stands.
Happy to help. You may yet get further comments from one or two others who perhaps watch this page! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 14:03, 19 Aprilis 2012 (UTC)

Andrew, thanks a million! I'll keep watching this page in case someone else contributes. C Ryan93.92.153.12 06:53, 20 Aprilis 2012 (UTC)

Gratias permultas ob hortationem elegantem benivolamque. Vicipaedia non deserenda!---- 30Aprilis Clive Sweeting

De lexico[fontem recensere]

Salve iterum.

Scire velim quod lexicum bonum Anglice-Latine et e contrario sunt.

Commendes aliquid?

Salutibus Donatello (disputatio) 16:41, 9 Maii 2012 (UTC).

Ad verba Latina Anglice vertenda habes dictionarium perutile: Charlton T. Lewis, Carolus Short, A Latin Dictionary (Oxonii, 1879) textus.
Ad verba Anglica Latine vertenda ego dictionario vetustissimo utor, scilicet Iosephus Esmond Riddle et Thomas Kerchever Arnold, A Copious and Critical English-Latin Lexicon (1849-1872) Textus. De libris recentioribus, confiteor, pauca scio. Salve optime, mi Donatelle -- Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 18:07, 9 Maii 2012 (UTC)
Magnas gratias ago!
Quid laetus eram.
Donatello (disputatio) 22:16, 9 Maii 2012 (UTC).

[fontem recensere]

Magnas Gratias, Andrew...Quaero nomina, sed non semper sunt, hmm :)Gaudio (disputatio) 19:02, 12 Maii 2012 (UTC)

Conciliabulum[fontem recensere]

Thank you Andrew!--Helveticus montanus (disputatio) 04:18, 22 Maii 2012 (UTC)

De categoriis[fontem recensere]

Ave, mi Andrea! Quomodo te habes?

A te opem peto ad categorias recte imponendas horunce nuper institutarum de phalange ac peltastis paginarum; ad hoc, putasne novam imponere licere categoriam de re militari Graeciae (nec non Macedoniae) antiquae? Nam in animo hanc augere materiam habeam. Alexander Gelsumis (disputatio) 09:06, 22 Maii 2012 (UTC)

Pro tempore, mi Alexander, creavi Categoria:Res militares Graecae antiquae et Categoria:Res militares Romanae antiquae. Si utile erit, potes addere Categoria:Res militares Macedonicae antiquae; si incertus es, possumus tardius addere. In has categorias potes paginas novas tuas congerere et, si necesse sit, in categorias minutiores mox dividere. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 17:41, 22 Maii 2012 (UTC)
Ex animo plurimas ago tibi gratias. Vale, mi Andrea. Alexander Gelsumis (disputatio) 19:57, 22 Maii 2012 (UTC)

Dictum factum...[fontem recensere]

... Andrea, paginas movi. Vale! Alexander Gelsumis (disputatio) 15:50, 23 Maii 2012 (UTC)

est Verbum Anglice...[fontem recensere]

Andrew, I think that your practise of using English for concepts not existing in Latin is great specially for solving the mess about the right/appropriate latin term. Also, your change about quotes to "Dictum" was realy very helpful and has become a standard practise for me. --Jondel (disputatio) 23:23, 30 Maii 2012 (UTC)

I don't remember what this is about, Jondel, but I'm glad if I've been helpful ... :)
I want to add, though, that I avoid that practice, even though you attribute it to me! Unless I am discussing a concept that is clearly and uniquely pinned to English speakers, I try not to use English words when writing Latin, and not even to translate from English without re-thinking the sentence in Latin terms. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 08:47, 31 Maii 2012 (UTC)
Well one instance I think was the Narnian Chornicles. I think it was originally (improvised)Latin then you moved it to Narnian Chronicles. hmmm. Maybe you intended not to translate original English titles. e.g. Narnian Chronicles was a different case....(?)Jondel (disputatio) 12:12, 10 Iunii 2012 (UTC)
I understand now, Jondel: I didn't realise we were talking about book titles. Yes, you're absolutely right, I did argue long ago that for book titles, film titles etc. we should use the original title as our heading unless there is already a published Latin translation. And I still agree with myself -- that's lucky :) Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 14:40, 10 Iunii 2012 (UTC)

Concerning the Bakar mockery[fontem recensere]

Ave, Andrea! Si tibi placet, vide id quod nuper scripsi apud Disputatio:Derisio_Buccaris. Quid putas? Alexander Gelsumis (disputatio) 09:57, 8 Iunii 2012 (UTC)

... Nullum consilium, mi Andrea? Alexander Gelsumis (disputatio) 20:22, 19 Iunii 2012 (UTC)

Greek[fontem recensere]

Hello Andrew! You who speak Greek better than me; in the article about modern Greek, I've putted up a time ago an example text in modern Greek about the first article of human rights. I took it from the English article, so what's written is correct. But it would be great if it would also be shown in major case. Maybe you know how? Like this?

Minor case

Άρθρο 1: 'Ολοι οι άνθρωποι γεννιούνται ελεύθεροι και ίσοι στην αξιοπρέπεια και τα δικαιώματα. Είναι προικισμένοι με λογική και συνείδηση, και οφείλουν να συμπεριφέρονται μεταξύ τους με πνεύμα αδελφοσύνης.

Major case


Should the major case text have those short lines like the minor case text have? Donatello (disputatio) 15:52, 26 Iunii 2012 (UTC).

I'm not exactly an expert on modern Greek, Donatello! My observation, however, is that texts in upper case are usually printed without any accents. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 18:39, 26 Iunii 2012 (UTC)

Nicodemus Sippo[fontem recensere]

Vale, carissime Andrew, quomodo te habes? Tibi peto parvam releturam istæ paginæ quæ creavi. Tibi gratias ago.

Rex Momo (disputatio) 08:53, 5 Iulii 2012 (UTC)

Categoria:Atropatene[fontem recensere]

Salve Andrew, if you open Categoria:Atropatene you'll see at the bottom of the page Categoria:Adrabigania. I am not able to change or cancel it. Could you help me?--Utilo (disputatio) 20:42, 11 Iulii 2012 (UTC)

Yes, thank you!--Utilo (disputatio) 20:49, 11 Iulii 2012 (UTC)
Categories are strange things. If the interwikis include an unwanted link to an la: category, that link will be formatted as if to a supercategory. It took me a long time to learn that ...
I have now completed the emptying of the old category and I will delete it. That's the right thing to do, I hope! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 20:52, 11 Iulii 2012 (UTC)

Change the protection of this article[fontem recensere]

There is a problem in this article Corbin Bleu, I hope Exemption for this article, so that he could, the bot user to add other languages. That you want to protect from vandalism in this article, make protection Formula:Semi-protecta. Thanks. --M.Sunshine (disputatio) 23:27, 15 Iulii 2012 (UTC)

Thank you Andrew Dalby, I will only fix this article. Change such as a picture, and sources. Best Regards. --M.Sunshine (disputatio) 14:22, 16 Iulii 2012 (UTC)

Respondi[fontem recensere]

Te in pagina disputationis mea respondi. Mattie (disputatio) 01:15, 28 Iulii 2012 (UTC)

Lathyris[fontem recensere]

Have I erred in equating Aetius' "Λαθυρίδων" with ervilia over at conditum? André equates Latin lathyris with Euphorbia lathyris and also the squirting cucumber, but I only have his book on Latin. And why does Aetius use the plural here anyway? --Iustinus (disputatio) 18:09, 7 Augusti 2012 (UTC)

Oh, gosh, Iustine, I forgot all about this! I'll look at it tomorrow! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 20:15, 17 Augusti 2012 (UTC)
I was thinking of making that conditum, especially now that I have some cicerchia looking for a use. But even if I acquire some caper spurge, according to en:Euphorbia lathyris it is poisonous (no indicator is given, but I can only assume it is *more* poisonous than cicerchia ;) ) --Iustinus (disputatio) 14:56, 24 Augusti 2012 (UTC)
OK, Iustine, hope you haven't done it yet. Don't believe André on this if the result would be to make you ingest Euphorbia lathyris. I suspect it's called that because the fruits are little bean-like things, not because Linnaeus thought it is the ancient "lathyris". All the SE European members of Euphorbiaceae that I can see are inedible, dangerously medicinal or just poisonous. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 20:50, 24 Augusti 2012 (UTC)
Fascinating. BUt of course "dangerously medicinal" would not exclude it from a medical conditum (it would just exclude it from casual experimentation!) Parallel recipes do include risky ingredients like scammony, for instance. But I guess you are leaning back to my original understanding, i.e. ervilia, here? --Iustinus (disputatio) 20:57, 24 Augusti 2012 (UTC)

Georgius Axer[fontem recensere]

Optime recteque transtulisti Jerzy in Georgium, quod hoc praenomen Polonicum idem valet ac Georgius. Mihi quoque, cum habent formam latinam, magis placent praenomina latina. Ut semper omnia vidisti, omnia solerter meliorasti. Vale.--Bruxellensis (disputatio) 19:59, 17 Augusti 2012 (UTC)

Si adiuvi, gaudeo! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 20:16, 17 Augusti 2012 (UTC)

mess at the Taberna[fontem recensere]

Thank you for fixing the mess I made at the Taberna! I have no idea how I "managed" to do that …

Greetings, --UV (disputatio) 18:32, 1 Septembris 2012 (UTC)

A pleasure! A similar thing happened to me, and I, also, don't quite know how, but I blame my mouse :) Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 19:17, 1 Septembris 2012 (UTC)

Galen[fontem recensere]

You may have seen the recent reference I added to portulaca... wow, this Syriac translation of Galen is fascinating! --Iustinus (disputatio) 06:33, 10 Septembris 2012 (UTC)

Neuropasta[fontem recensere]

Ave Andrew ut vales? Amabo te inspices neuropasta de quo dubito an neuropaston(vide fontem) ut graece nomine singulare,potius sit. Gratias ago.Jondel (disputatio) 09:01, 12 Septembris 2012 (UTC)

Bene repperisti hoc verbum, Jondel! In pagina disputationis proposui "neurospastum" (-i neut. 2 decl.). Forma pluralis erit "neurospasta". OK? Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 10:31, 12 Septembris 2012 (UTC)
Gratias. Quidem bene sit, si tibi videtur ita. Non certus sum quomodo reddere ex Graece. Posterior spectabo Traupman.Jondel (disputatio) 10:47, 12 Septembris 2012 (UTC)

Categoria:Ludovicus Ariosto[fontem recensere]

Thanks for helping out with the categories for musicologists. Now that I've found an attestion of Ariostus, here's another one: Categoria:Ludovicus Ariosto needs to be changed to Categoria:Ludovicus Ariostus. (I've fixed the links within the articles, so all that remains is the category itself.) Whenever you find time, of course. ;) IacobusAmor (disputatio) 20:36, 15 Septembris 2012 (UTC)

Nice find, Iacobe. OK, done! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 20:41, 15 Septembris 2012 (UTC)

De nomine quodam[fontem recensere]

Andrea, tu me sapientior ut es in rebus admistratoriis, tuum velim rogare consilium. De nomine oppidi Caballino-Triportus agitur. Amicus noster Italus primo nomen q.e. "Caballinus et Tres Portus" voluit, deinde ego, ut expeditius Latine dicatur, volui "Caballino-Triportus" dici, et deinde amicus noster nomen q.e. "Equilinum et Trium Portuum" vult. Omnia nomina proposita sine fonte esse videntur. Quid dicunt normae nostrae? Nonne, quoniam fontibus caremus, nomine Italiano utendum sit titulo? ¶ De hoc oppidulo nominando flocci facerem, nisi timerem, ne lectores falsam normam ex titulis nostris acciperent (aut Latinitatem nostram vituperarent). Istud enim "et Trium Portuum" mihi quidem improbabile videtur. Si disputationem inspicies (etiam versus ab amico nostro deletos), videbis eum credere "Caballino" (in "Caballino-Triportus") formam ablativi esse, quamquam de compositione dvandva agitur (cf. "Lexicon Anglico-Latinum" etc.). In summa, nunc puto nomine Italiano utendum esse titulo. Quid dicis? Neander (disputatio) 16:55, 16 Septembris 2012 (UTC)

"Sapientior ... in rebus administratoriis"? Hanc nuncupationem peiorativam censeo ... :) Ita, sicut dicis, "quoniam fontibus caremus, nomine Italiano utendum [est] titulo". Qua re statuta, disputatio moritur. Regulae Vicipaedicae interdum utiles sunt. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 17:17, 16 Septembris 2012 (UTC)
Utinam ne tanto opere res administratorias despexissem! Num iam credas, si, balsamum vulneri afferens :–), dicam: forte & casu accidit, ut unum verbum, parvum sed grave, scilicet per errorem, omitterem: "Sapientior ... etiam in rebus administratoriis". Neander (disputatio) 19:14, 16 Septembris 2012 (UTC)
Ha! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 11:56, 17 Septembris 2012 (UTC)

De nomine quodam, pars II disputationis fortasse infinitae[fontem recensere]

Andrea, denuo eadem fere quaestio me vexat: Vallis Erycina oppidum est, cui nomen Latinum deest. Suam observans methodum auctor nomen Italianum latinizavit. Quamquam nomen hoc Latinum haudquaquam insulsum est, nonne nihilo minus hic Italiano utendum sit nomine? Si Vallerycini googleizemus, videamus, quantam vim normativam inter lectores extra Vicipaedianos exerceamus. Utrum suades: nominis ad formam Italianam motionem, an usum {{Convertimus}} formulae? Tuus Martinus (Neander (disputatio) 17:03, 29 Septembris 2012 (UTC))

Vae mihi supercauto! Iam antea de his mihi respondisti. Re paulisper perspecta nihil faciendi consilium cepi, nam si unum titulum moveas, sescenti similes restent. Per me scaturiat fons ille aegre effrenandus! Neander (disputatio) 06:20, 30 Septembris 2012 (UTC)
An de hac re antea respondi, mi Martine, haud scio. Scio autem me heri minime respondisse et veniam postulare incipiebam ... Minus de te, plus de apostolo Paulo et Turri Eiffelia curabam.
Usque adhuc re vera nomina vicorum et compitorum Italiae "Latina" incaute accepimus. Si de singulo vico Vallis Erycinae dubitamus, possumus formulam <ref>{{Fontes desiderati}}</ref> et iuxta lemma et iuxta nomen gentilicium imponere; deinde, nisi fons reperitur, nomina ficta (?) delere. (An licet "Valderice" in "Vallis Erycina" sine fonte convertere, in dubio sum ego: si versionem amamus, oportet retinere et {{Convertimus}} uti.) Si autem de paeninsula tota inquisitionem Hispanicam suscipis, gaudeo (et adiuvabo). Tunc oportet collegas nostros Nuada et Sacreum de regulis VP:TNP certiores facere; oportet graduatim formulam <ref>{{Fontes desiderati}}</ref> in multas paginas, ubi fons non citatur, imponere; oportet in easdem paginas, eodem fere tempore, textum utilem introducere (et pondus nexuum imaginumque reducere?) Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 08:43, 30 Septembris 2012 (UTC)
Manifestum est "Vallem Erycinam" nondum quidem nomen Latinum extra Vicipaediam datum habere, nam, ut in Vicipaedia Italiana legimus, "il comune di Paparella - San Marco ... prese il nome di Valderice il 25 gennaio 1958." Mihi quidem constat Valderice scibendum esse, quamquam nihil obstat, quin in symbola nomine Vallis Erycinae ludamus. At forsitan facilius sit formula {{Convertimus}} uti, ne bellum editorum nascatur. A profana contra amicos Italos expeditione, etsi iusta sit, mihi animus refugit, nam sedulitatem et utilitatem Nuadae admiratus velim, ut ne quid moleste ferat apud nos. Neander (disputatio) 15:31, 1 Octobris 2012 (UTC)

Image enlevée[fontem recensere]

Discussion emended to include the whole exchange.

Reverti editionem tuam ad Lingua Mandarinica normalis quia rationem deletionis non explicavisti. An alia imago melior erit? S.t.p. Latine, Francogallice, Anglice etc. explica.

I reverted your change at Lingua Mandarinica normalis because you didn't give a clear reason. Would a different image be preferable? Please explain in Latin, French, English ... as you choose. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 11:33, 4 Octobris 2012 (UTC)

Bonjour. Je ne sais pas si vous connaissez les character chinois, mais l'image montre une phrase qui rappelle la sodomie (pardonne-moi, ça veut dire "ton anus est blessé", ici 黄花=菊花=Chrysanthemum est utilisé depuis quelques années sur internet en Chine pour remplacer le mot anus). Cette phrase vient de la parole d'une chanson dont la phrase originale est "菊花残,满地伤”,que le sens a été mal expliqué par certains internautes. Sinon cette pharase ne fait pas du tout une phrase de la langue courante. Je pense donc l'auteur a fait cette image à exprès pour rigoler. Ce n'est pas sérieux de mettre sur les pages wikipedia à ce propos. Malheureusement je n'ai pas trouvé d'autres images qui montrent en même temps plusieurs styles de charactères chinois. Il en faudra faire une mais pas avec cette phrase. Merci. Dirrival (disputatio) 11:52, 4 Octobris 2012 (UTC)
Merci, je comprends parfaitement. Est-ce que cet image -- File:Chenzihmyon typefaces.svg -- éviterait le problème? Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 11:57, 4 Octobris 2012 (UTC)
Oui, c'est la première phrase du fameux livre chinois fr:Classique_des_Mille_Caractères. Je vais aussi utiliser cette image pour remplacer l'ancienne dans d'autres pages. Merci.Dirrival (disputatio) 12:01, 4 Octobris 2012 (UTC)
Given that it is the first sentence of a real chinese primer, I don't understand why it is being removed. It does not matter if anyone is insulted by it I think.-- 13:11, 4 Octobris 2012 (UTC)
Well, even if there's a dispute over whether it's offensive, it seems sensible to consider an alternative that offends nobody. What, O anonyme, do you think about File:Chenzihmyon typefaces.svg? I like it better myself because it gives more alternative typefaces and because the lines are read vertically, which is normal for Chinese. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 13:17, 4 Octobris 2012 (UTC)
The replacement text is not the first line from a famous classic chinese primer so it is not an equivalent.I am more worried about the principle to cowing to this kind of objection. I think people can be offended by anything. In this case, the intent is clearly not to offend anyone. By the admission of the person, he is being offended by some kind of modern reinterpretation of the first sentence from the classic chinese primer. It's like someone being offended by some Dr. Seuss book and objecting to a quotation. Next we will be looking for replacement quotes for the declaration of independence because someone decides to reinterpret happiness to mean sodomy. Really? Are they going to delete this line out of existence and next just burn all references to the primer next? Censorship is a slipperly slope.-- 13:52, 4 Octobris 2012 (UTC)
I think you have misunderstood because the initial discussion happened partly on my page, partly on Dirrival's. I am inserting the missing passages above to make this clear. From this, if you would please re-read, you will see that the replacement text (found and suggested by me) is the one that is taken from a classical Chinese reading primer. In fact that was one reason why I thought it would be a good choice. The original image, the one that Dirrival wished to delete, is not taken from a primer: it is an altered line from a popular song, and Dirrival suggests (in French, above) that it was altered on purpose, as a joke. Note also that its origin is not explained on Commons. The image that I suggested as a replacement is properly identified on Commons, so we can identify it in our caption as well. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 14:06, 4 Octobris 2012 (UTC)
I've inserted the replacement image now, and attributed it as accurately as I can. I checked, and I believe the text corresponds to the first four characters of the en:Thousand Character Classic, as the Commons caption indicates. So I think this change is for the better from all points of view, but if you disagree, feel free to explain further! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 17:48, 4 Octobris 2012 (UTC)
Dear Andrew, Thank you for looking into it and figuring it out. I apparently misunderstood what was said, but you have done correctly in substituting the new image which is much better in addition because the characters displayed are actual ones from the classic.-- 03:59, 5 Octobris 2012 (UTC)
I'm glad you agree. It was a complicated story! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 09:20, 5 Octobris 2012 (UTC)

Acute[fontem recensere]

Salve Andreas. Quaeso mutes nomen ad commentationem Noonien Soong ad Noonian Soong? Pro dolor vitiose scripti. Donatello (disputatio) 18:40, 9 Octobris 2012 (UTC).

Movi, amice Donatello, sed et tu potes paginas movere. Ad caput paginae editorialis vide stellam caeruleam et triangulum incanum. Sub triangulo verbum "Movere" reperis! Salve optime -- Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 18:46, 9 Octobris 2012 (UTC)

Ecclesia Ulrikae[fontem recensere]

Discussion moved to Disputatio:Ulrica. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 13:51, 10 Octobris 2012 (UTC)

Ecclesia sancti Francisci de Paula in Catona[fontem recensere]

Vale, carissime Andreas, quomodo te habes? Ista nova pagina creavi, et tibi parvam relecturam peto. Pagina non longa est, solum 7-10 minutos laboris!!!

Tibi gratias ago!

Rex Momo (disputatio) 11:43, 10 Octobris 2012 (UTC)

Franciscus Buzzurro[fontem recensere]

Vale, carissime Andreas, quomodo te habes? Tibi peto parvam relecturam istae novae pagine. Notus citharista Italicus est, habilissimus!

Tibi gratias ago!

Rex Momo (disputatio) 06:29, 18 Octobris 2012 (UTC)

Bacchae[fontem recensere]

I will probably write an article on underwear, loincloth or whatever the anonymous guy wanted to see. I know we can't accommodate everybody. Im working on article for skateboard.I guessed a very unsourced obviously invented article will be headache(Bacchae is a type of Greek drama?), misleading and an embarrasment.Jondel (disputatio) 08:44, 25 Octobris 2012 (UTC)

I could be wrong, and if someone is serious about this we will hear more, but yes, that's it exactly. My impression is that we're getting a description of a half-imagined costume seen on an image that has been used to illustrate the drama "Bacchae". "Bacchae" is the name of the drama, and a term for the people seen wearing the costume, but it isn't the name of the costume.
As you know, we already have "subligaculum". There is also a Greek word (which could be used in Latin) more or less corresponding to "thong" (or "loincloth" perhaps): the word is diazoma, and I can cite references for it. If you want to start that article, Jondel, go ahead! I could restore the existing text and move it to "diazoma": tell me if you would like me to do that. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 08:58, 25 Octobris 2012 (UTC)

Tibi legendum[fontem recensere]

http://ancientfoods.wordpress.com/2012/11/30/dna-sleuth-hunts-wine-roots-in-anatolia/ --Iustinus (disputatio) 06:54, 1 Decembris 2012 (UTC)

Societas Educativa, Scientifica, et Culturalis Consocietatis Nationum[fontem recensere]

Salve Andrea, vide Disputatio:Societas Educativa, Scientifica, et Culturalis Consocietatis Nationum, quaeso! Nonne melius esset pro nomine non attestato "Societas Educativa, Scientifica, et Culturalis Consocietatis Nationum" siglis UNESCO uti (aut nomen semel quidem attestatum "Societas cultui humanitatique provehendis")? Praeterea UNO in Vicipaedia Latina non est Consocietas Nationum, sed Consociatio Nationum.--Utilo (disputatio) 17:15, 2 Decembris 2012 (UTC)

Martyrs , Christians in Japan Categoria[fontem recensere]

Salve, Andrew. Licit mihi, forsan te loquam in abhinc in mixta Anglicis Latinisque. There seems to be categories missing for Martyrs and Christians in Japan which I would be creating soon but if you have a better schema, please go ahead and implement them. Gratias tibi ago for your emendationes at the Miyamoto article and divine :P intervention with Harrismo --Helveticus montanus--. Vale.Jondel (disputatio) 11:52, 4 Decembris 2012 (UTC)

Yes, there are certainly enough relevant articles!
No one on Vicipaedia has yet had the energy to apply categories for religious believers consistently [In saying this I overlooked Iacobus's Episcopalians and Bruxellensis's Freemasons]. Actually, in countries where such believers are in a comfortable majority, it's difficult to do it thoroughly and the result may hardly be notable. But where they are in a sometimes-persecuted minority, as in this case, it is useful and interesting.
You could immediately make a category for Categoria:Martyres Iaponiae, a subcategory of Categoria:Martyres and of Categoria:Incolae Iaponiae. No problem. But it should only have single-person biographies in it, because we have built an invisible wall between biographical categories and all the others. So, for the groups of martyrs, we need a different category Categoria:Martyres enumerati, which I will create right now, and I will add a subcategory Categoria:Martyres Iaponiae enumerati. Still no problem. We can link the biographical category and the group category with a Vide etiam in each.
For Christians in general you can, if you want, make a category Categoria:Christiani Iaponiae, a subcategory of Categoria:Christiani and of Categoria:Incolae Iaponiae. How's that? Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 13:05, 4 Decembris 2012 (UTC)
Wow! I'm getting dizzy already! Well I thought since latin was so associated with Catholicism/Christianity, people were deliberating where to put what. I'l start with the Christiani Iaponiae article by article. I'll be clicking on your link above to put the categories.Jondel (disputatio) 13:34, 4 Decembris 2012 (UTC)

Ars heraldica[fontem recensere]

Ut ad quaestiunculam tuam breviter iam repondeam, scias permultos libros de scientia heraldica ubique in Europa latine exaratos esse tamque manuscriptis quam typographicis editionibus in lucem prodiisse. Iam possum hunc percelebrem librum indice tibi ostendere : Philippus Jacobus Spener, Insignium theoria seu operis heraldici pars generalis, Francofurti ad Moenum, (editio altera) 1717. Editio electronice proposita..

Mox cum mihi paulo maius tempus erit curabo in ipso lemmate partem bibliographicam augere. Vale.--Viator (disputatio) 11:05, 8 Decembris 2012 (UTC)

Bene, bene! Exemplar interretiale iam perlegere incepi. Gratias tibi ago. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 12:17, 8 Decembris 2012 (UTC)
Et hic liber tibi utilitati esse poterit :

t'is the season to be jolly.... mad[fontem recensere]

Thank you for being so accommodating. You know it is spooky about that timing of new crawford article and our (small ) discussion about gemini categories. Well uh maybe I was being extreme. It is good also that you spotted that wrong inter wiki link at the Taliban article. "This is SPARTA!!" is the shouting response of King Leonides in that movie 300 right after the persian herald comments "This madness!". Cheers.Jondel (disputatio) 14:36, 13 Decembris 2012 (UTC)

Ah, I see now, Jondel. I didn't recognise the quotation -- but it seemed to make (mad) sense anyway!
Thanks for your note. Heaven knows whether Cynthia deserves her day in the limelight. Still, we try to make people happy. Somehow the discussions here are more friendly than among the English Wikipedians, and there are always so many good things waiting to be written ... Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 14:45, 13 Decembris 2012 (UTC)
By the way stay away from beaming lights from floating disks late at night. Those slant eye creatures are notorious for doing ---- probes!Jondel (disputatio) 14:56, 13 Decembris 2012 (UTC)

greetings from classical chinese wikipedia!!(wikipedia 文言)[fontem recensere]

爾安: 拉丁古語,興於七丘,博揚萬里,影響之深,冠絕古今,今得天涯比鄰之友,不亦樂乎!

Cassanum[fontem recensere]

it's a real pleasure to help you, dear Andrew. Best wishes for a Merry Christmas!--Nuada (disputatio) 22:48, 19 Decembris 2012 (UTC)

Merry Christmas[fontem recensere]

Thanks for your reply. No problem for the delay. Merry Christmas to you and family! Rex Momo (disputatio) 12:17, 20 Decembris 2012 (UTC)

Fistula Panis[fontem recensere]

Ad Disputatio:Fistula panis movi. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 12:27, 27 Decembris 2012 (UTC)

Thank you![fontem recensere]

At first, thanks for the conlationes that you've given to me for fontes desiderati. I'm only 14 (my latin is the latin that I learnt at school in 3 years), so I don't speak a "native latin". I'd like also to tell you that my father, an Italian writer and scholar, quoted your opus Siren Feasts on his book about Ancient Greece (Il mito delle Sirene and Le mythe des sirènes).

Thank you for all,

Franciesse (disputatio)

Ludovicus Carolus Prates et Sanctiacobi Brasiliae[fontem recensere]

Hi, dear Andrew, how are you? Please, I ask if you have 2-3 minutes to read these 2 pages I made. I thank you very much for your help.

Happy New Year!!!

Rex Momo (disputatio) 11:40, 4 Ianuarii 2013 (UTC)

Lingua Monoecensis[fontem recensere]

Yes, I'm trying to move Lingua Monoecica to Lingua Monoecensis (so I have to delete it). As you suggested I don't want to copy and past it. Franciesse 10:12, 6 Ianuarii 2013 (UTC)

Rete scientiarum et technologiarum universitatum Africae Subsaharianae[fontem recensere]

Salve ! Je voulais vous remercier pour votre aide précieuse sur mes premières pages en latin. Je contribue habituellement sur Wikipédia en français (et notamment sur des articles d'universités africaines) mais je souhaite continuer à faire quelques articles en latin. Toutefois, je bute sur deux traductions : comment diriez-vous "Université des Sciences et Technologies de Côte d'Ivoire" et "Université des Sciences et Technologies du Togo" s'il vous plait ? Merci d'avance pour votre aide. Bien cordialement, DG-IRAO (disputatio) 19:30, 13 Ianuarii 2013 (UTC)

J'ai fait des suggestions à Rete scientiarum et technologiarum universitatum Africae Subsaharianae. Vous comprenez que dans un tel cas il n'y a pas de traduction parfaite, mais celle que j'ai mise correspond à ce que nous faisons d'habitude. Bien à vous Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 19:50, 13 Ianuarii 2013 (UTC)
C'est très bien, merci pour tout et à bientôt. Cordialement, DG-IRAO (disputatio) 20:31, 13 Ianuarii 2013 (UTC)

Andrea, confiteor me parum intellegere, qua ratione in titulis Latine exaratis maiusculae initiales adhibendae sint. Exempli gratia, in pagina Wikipediae Francogallicae ita scriptum est: Université des sciences et technologies du Bénin, sed in Rete scientiarum et technologiarum universitatum Africae Subsaharianae, "Universitas Scientiarum et Technologiarum Beninensis" scripsisti. Scire velim, unde orta sit ratio (et necessitas?) maiuscularum initialium in titulis Latinis, cum in titulis Francogallicis minusculae initiales nihil nocere videantur. Unica causa, quam ego excogitare possum, est quod Anglophoni maiusculis initialibus favent, et tam multi hodie credunt usui Anglophonorum in omnibus fere rebus obsequendum esse. Doleo, quod tanta elegantia et comitate te alloqui nequeo ac amicus qui supra scribit. Dissimilis cultura me produxit, sed amica mente et ego has scripsi lineas. Neander (disputatio) 21:20, 13 Ianuarii 2013 (UTC)

Da veniam, amice, si inconsulte interveni. Petente DG-IRAO, versiones (sicut supra barbarice explico) more maiorum proposui. Si vis, tibi licet proposita mea mutare.
Duae quaestiones recognoscendae sunt: (1) quid iam fecimus; (2) quid oportet facere.
  1. Videbis, subcategoriis perlectis e.g. categoriarum Categoria:Universitates et Categoria:Societates eruditae, nos usque adhuc initiis verborum sententiosiorum maiusculis usos esse quando instituta etc. nominamus. Ita, nisi fallor, id quod supra amico DG-IRAO dixi, recte dixi.
  2. Hic anno 2006 adveni; de nominibus institutorum mores Vicipaedianorum antiquiorum me accepisse credo. Unus sum (qui sine dubio permulta talia nomina apud nos iam converti). Maiuscula mihi parvo momento sunt. Si alii censent mores sequendos Francorum, Hispanorum, Italianorum aut Suecorum (aut etiam Germanorum! omnibus inter se differentibus), laete obtempero, sed regulam statuere titulosque paginarum necnon categoriarum exstantium ad regulam novam convertere oportet. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 10:26, 14 Ianuarii 2013 (UTC)
It may be of interest to know that a capitalized Subsaharan in running text would look odd in North America. Likewise other major geographic indicators, like north & south ; and the lowercasing of transatlantic (not trans-Atlantic or Trans-Atlantic or Transatlantic) and transpacific has been the norm over here for many years. The spelling in Merriam-Webster's Collegiate Dictionary, which my be taken to indicate the norms of American spelling, has been sub-Saharan for decades, and the style of the academic journal Africa Today for at least a decade has been to use the spelling subsaharan. ¶ While we're at it, isn't the i intrusive, and despite the forms attested by biologists, shouldn't we be preferring subsaharanus and subsaharensis against subsaharianus and subsahariensis ? ¶ Ergo, given the "down style" that Neander suggests, lemma quod exspectaverim est Rete scientiarum et technologiarum universitatum Africae subsaharanae—except, of course, that in "display type" (as in headlines, the titles of objects & events, and other items being set off from running text), capitalization all round is most welcome. ¶ However, what's this about the Spanish? The lemma in the Spanish wiki uses the "up style": Red de Universidades de Ciencias y Tecnología de África al Sur del Sahara. And though the French wiki capitalizes only the first word, the English wiki quotes the French lemma thus: Réseau des Universités des Sciences et Technologies des pays d'Afrique au Sud du Sahara. Note the capitals! Conclusion: it's not expected that wikis will capitalize French titles in the manner that the French wiki does. IacobusAmor (disputatio) 11:28, 14 Ianuarii 2013 (UTC)
Contrary to what's alleged above, it's the French wiki, not the English wiki, that's the "odd man out"! Compare:
en: The Pontifical Catholic University of Chile
fr: L’université pontificale catholique du Chili
es: Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile
it: La Pontificia Università Cattolica del Cile
pt: A Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Chile
sv: Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile
¶ OK, so that one isn't originally in French. Try this one:
fr: L’université Sorbonne Nouvelle, ou université Paris-III
en: The New Sorbonne University (Université de la Sorbonne Nouvelle, also known as Paris III)
es: La Universidad Sorbona Nueva (en francés: Université Sorbonne Nouvelle)
it: L'università Paris III - Sorbonne Nouvelle
pt: A Universidade Sorbonne Nouvelle - Paris III (fr: Université Sorbonne nouvelle - Paris III)
ru: Университет Париж III Новая Сорбонна
Note that when the English, Portuguese, and Spanish wikis quote the French title, they capitalize Université. Regarding the capitalization of at least some proper nouns, French appears to be the exception, not the rule. IacobusAmor (disputatio) 11:46, 14 Ianuarii 2013 (UTC)
¶ Let's try one more set, with a French original:
fr: L’Union pour la démocratie française
en: The Union for French Democracy (Union pour la Démocratie Française, UDF)
es: La Unión para la Democracia Francesa (en francés Union pour la Démocratie Française)
eo: La Union pour la Démocratie Française
it: L' Unione per la Democrazia Francese (Union pour la démocratie française, UDF)
nl: De Union pour la Démocratie Française' (UDF, Nederlands: Unie voor Franse Democratie)
no: Union pour la Démocratie Française (UDF) (norsk: Unionen for fransk demokrati)
pt: O partido União pela Democracia Francesa
tr: Fransız Demokrasisi için Birlik (fr. Union Pour la Démocratie Française)
Conclusions: (1) other wikis, in their own languages, don't slavishly copy French capitalization, and (2) they don't even copy French capitalization when quoting French titles. Basing Vicipaedia's style of capitalization on the French style, instead of a more generally recognized style, would seem to be ill-advised. IacobusAmor (disputatio) 11:58, 14 Ianuarii 2013 (UTC)
De hac ultima re pro certo consentio. Mores de litteris maiusculis Francici non a nobis imitandi sunt: e.g. fr:Saint-Marcellin (Isère) sed fr:Saint-marcellin (fromage). Mores autem caseorum faciendorum laudo. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 12:22, 14 Ianuarii 2013 (UTC)
Indeed, other wikis don't slavishly copy French. They slavishly copy English. Neander (disputatio) 16:41, 14 Ianuarii 2013 (UTC)

As French is famous for lowercasing the titles of published works, one suspects that the down style is likelier to prevail in the titles of publications than in the titles of organizations & institutions (universities, societies, companies, departments of government, etc.). Nevertheless, even there we sometimes encounter the up style. Behold Le Fantôme de l'Opéra—not Le fantôme de l'Opéra, and certainly not Le fantôme de l'opéra ! Select intervicis:

bg: Фантомът от Операта
el: Το Φάντασμα της Όπερας
es: El fantasma de la ópera
fr: Le Fantôme de l'Opéra
gd: Taibhse an Opra
it: Il fantasma dell'Opera (romanzo)
pt: O Fantasma da Ópera
ru: Призрак Оперы (роман)
sv: Fantomen på Operan
tl: The Phantom of the Opera
tr: Operadaki Hayalet (roman)
uk: Привид Опери (роман)

Note that here, the Spanish goes the other way and out-Frenches the French! IacobusAmor (disputatio) 12:59, 14 Ianuarii 2013 (UTC)

Vix proderit pluribus exemplis corroborare quod manifestum habemus: complurium linguarum abdicationem de suis scribendi moribus propter maiorem linguae Anglicae apud fere omnes gratiam. Optime scio hunc processum sociopsychologicum se ipsum alere et ideo paene inevitabilem esse. His in rebus Veritas quidem reperi non potest, ne ex more maiorum quidem Vicipaedianorum, nisi forte pueri mirabiles Latinitatis fuerint. Neander (disputatio) 16:35, 14 Ianuarii 2013 (UTC)
Mi Neander, e more maiorum veritatem neque quaesivi ego neque repperi. Anglus sum, confiteor, sed consuetudines meas (si de titulis constituendis loquimur) e bibliotheconomia haureo, non e nationalitate. Veniam petivi si inconsulte interveni. An das? Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 19:33, 14 Ianuarii 2013 (UTC)
Care Andrea, praesertim Iacobo respondi, sed nunc video me verba nimis austere et insollerter fecisse. Neque animadverti te veniam petere, quia non vidi, cur veniam petere deberes. Profecto et quam libentissime tibi, homini clementi et placido, veniam do et dabo! Et tu mihi ignoscas, rogo, quod tantam "tempestatem in hirnea" in tua pagina effeci. Salutem plurimam, Martinus. (Neander (disputatio) 21:00, 14 Ianuarii 2013 (UTC))
Bene semper hic venisti, mi Martine. Gaudeo insuper, mi Iacobe, me de tantis titulis in tantis linguis certiorem iam factum ... Ut bene dormiamus! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 21:26, 14 Ianuarii 2013 (UTC)

Happy New Year[fontem recensere]

Dear Andrew, I wish an Happy Year 2013 and thank you for your explanation about aliquidnovi etc. If it remains me some time, I'll do it with pleasure--Helveticus montanus (disputatio) 05:06, 17 Ianuarii 2013 (UTC)

Happy New Year[fontem recensere]

Dear Andrew, I wish an Happy Year 2013 and thank you for your explanation about aliquidnovi etc. If it remains me some time, I'll do it with pleasure--Helveticus montanus (disputatio) 05:06, 17 Ianuarii 2013 (UTC)

Gratias ago pro salutatione[fontem recensere]

Salve, gratias ago pro epistola Tua cara, quem mihi usori novo scripsisti. Opto Tibi quoque omnia bona, Physis (disputatio) 18:52, 21 Ianuarii 2013 (UTC)

de Categoria emendare[fontem recensere]

Ave, Andrea, auxilium tuum mihi opus est ad categoriam unam emendam : "Categoria:Flumina Britannia Minor" quia eam rem facere nescio et legendum esset "Flumina Britanniae Minoris". --Leonellus Pons (disputatio) 23:39, 30 Ianuarii 2013 (UTC)

Optime, mi Leonelle, hodie facio. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 09:33, 31 Ianuarii 2013 (UTC)

De quodam vocabulo[fontem recensere]

Andrea, textu imaginis (in Apostolis) mutato accuratius Maiestatem inspexi animadvertique te in eadem imagine describenda usum esse vocabulo retabulo. Quia retabulum mihi verbum ignotum est, velim scire, unde hoc vocabulum ('panel'?) sumpseris. Ipse vocabulum tabulare a plurali tabularia 'paneling' deduxi, sed incertus sum, num verbum iustum sit. Neander (disputatio) 19:40, 31 Ianuarii 2013 (UTC)

Sine fonte, mi Neander, ex aethere confeci. "Tabulare" gaudens accipio! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 19:46, 31 Ianuarii 2013 (UTC)
Paene invenisti, mi Dalby, verbum iustum quod est "retrotabulum", latinitatis mediaevalis (ut res), est verbum e quo cadunt : retabel, retabulo, rétable etc.....
Verbum "tabulare" non quadrat quia significat "velum quod tendebatur un palatio", item verba "tabularia et tabularium = archium, tabulamentum = solum ligneum etc..--Viator (disputatio) 20:23, 31 Ianuarii 2013 (UTC)
Bene! melius! Gratias tibi ago, Viator! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 20:26, 31 Ianuarii 2013 (UTC)
  • RETROTABULUM, Glossarium mediae et infimae latinitatis, Ducange.enc.sorbonne.fr/RETROTABULUMEn cache.

Retrotabulum » (par P. Carpentier, 1766), dans du Cange, et al., Glossarium mediae et ... RETROTABULUM, Posticum altaris, seu ejus ornamentum, Gall. The Medieval Latin retrotabulum (modernized retabulum) was applied to an architectural feature set up at the back of an altar, and generally taking the form of a screen framing a picture, carved or sculptured work in wood or stone, or mosaic, or of a movable feature such as the Pala d'Oro in St Mark's Basilica, Venice, of gold, jewels and enamels.--Viator (disputatio) 20:30, 31 Ianuarii 2013 (UTC)

De his nihil novi, nam latinitatem mediaevalem parum degustavi. Cottidie aliquid novi disco! Et ego Viatori gratias ago! Neander (disputatio) 20:39, 31 Ianuarii 2013 (UTC)

Salve etiam tibi, pardner[fontem recensere]

Fwiw, I added {{mdash}} to Viki's formulae, so you can now use — instead of typing two hyphens (--). Also, remember not to leave a space before your sig or it turns your name into code set apart in its own box (unless that was the look you were going for). LlywelynII (disputatio) 16:14, 3 Februarii 2013 (UTC)

María de León Bello y Delgado[fontem recensere]

Etiam in Lingua Hispanica: Ultimam sententiam legit: In beatificationis processus.-- 17:38, 4 Februarii 2013 (UTC)

Categoria:Lingua Havaiiana[fontem recensere]

Salve, ut vales Andreas? :( Spero ne offensum accipias de Categoria:Lingua Havaiiana creata tua? Potiusne sit Havaiiana quam Havaiana? Solum velim sit singula categoria nisi molestia sit alicui. Jondel (disputatio) 01:41, 7 Februarii 2013 (UTC)

Offensum minime sentivi, amice Jondel! De nomine harum insularum Iacobus potius quam ego orthographiam idoneam scit. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 11:26, 7 Februarii 2013 (UTC)
Iam motu tibi, gratias tibi ago. More wikipedia, licet Iacobus (et aliquis etiam salve vandal), moveat.Jondel (disputatio) 05:01, 21 Februarii 2013 (UTC)

At High School[fontem recensere]

I've been attending the Italian High School for a few months, and yesterday I studied (again) Homer. After the teacher told us about D'Aubignac, Vico and Wolf, she said: "And one of the last people that has suggested a theory about the existence or not of Homer is... Andrew Dalby!". I was very surprised. Well, I knew that you're famous, but I didn't know you were also in my school lessons!

Greetings from your loyal student, Franciesse 09:35, 10 Februarii 2013 (UTC).

I'm slightly amazed, Franciesse. All I can say is, your teacher knows exactly how to select the most important names ... :) Anyway, it's good to see you here regularly. Keep working on Latin (Greek too?) and keep visiting Vicipaedia. Best wishes Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 19:40, 10 Februarii 2013 (UTC)

Fatoumata Diawara[fontem recensere]

Carissime Andreas, tibi gratias ago causa adiuti in haec pagina! Is it alla right? Didi I write good in my not good Latin? :-)

Rex Momo (disputatio) 10:46, 7 Martii 2013 (UTC)

Ita, bene scripsisti, Rex! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 15:13, 7 Martii 2013 (UTC)

Paeninsula Italiana, postea Paeninsula Italica[fontem recensere]

Ad paeninsulam Italianam describendum quam formulam uti debeo? Regionis geographicae illa non inveni! Franciesse 15:07, 7 Martii 2013 (UTC)

Nescio, Franciesse, nisi illam quam iam imposuisti, "Geo-stipula". Optime stat. Sed dubito an fortasse, logicam Marci sequentes, debemus in "Paeninsula Italica" mutare. "Italiana" enim potius de lingua utimur, multis verbum "Italicus" ad alios usús praeferentibus. Quid dicis? Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 15:13, 7 Martii 2013 (UTC)
Statim moveo paginam, in mea memoria haec disputatio non erat... Sic bonum est me scribere in notis omnia alia nomina paeninsulae post scriptum "Paeninsula Italica (Italiane: Peninsula italiana vel Penisola italiana)"? Formulae pondus leve est, ergo eam his diebus curabo (novae formulae creatione, forsitan?). Franciesse 20:48, 7 Martii 2013 (UTC)
Quid de Respublica Italiana? Corrigendum vel nomen "burocratizatio" verbalis considerandum? Franciesse 20:56, 7 Martii 2013 (UTC)
Hmm, yes. Notice the dispute, at the top of the page Italia, between "Res publica Italiana" in the text and "... Italica" in the infobox. Our logic (and the preference of most Italian Vicipaedians) leads to "... Italica". Are you happy with that?
Our use of "Italiana" for the language was agreed some time ago. Not everybody likes "Italiana" even in that context -- it is a rare Latin word, so rare that some say it doesn't exist -- but it is at least convenient, because of the irritating fact that the ancient languages (e.g. Oscan, Umbrian) are generally called "Linguae Italicae". Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 21:11, 7 Martii 2013 (UTC)
Ok, now it's all very understandable! We have Lingua Italiana only for the contrast with the Italicae linguae. Henceforth I will correct, if there are, all the mistakes about that (that maybe I did myself). Gratias vobis ago et ave! Franciesse 21:29, 8 Martii 2013 (UTC)

Arthurus Balder[fontem recensere]

Hi Andrew. Regarding the changes applied to the subject, just to inform you that those books mentioned in the article (http://la.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arthurus_Balder) under Tetraogía de Teutoburgo, Tetralogy of Teutoburg, about the Clades Variana at Saltus Teutoburguensis, Germania Magna, year 9AD, those are NOT AT ALL books for children but for adults, and about WAR. Thats why I added the categori de bellum scriptores and re militaria. Tha saga mentioned at the Engslish and Spanish article as Trilogía de Curdy, Trilogy of Curdy, published by Random House, that one is for children, as for The MonarchStone / La Piedra del Monarca. So please read the fonts instead of deleting what other wp editors do write correctly. Thanks and have a good weekend.--Lolox76 (disputatio) 17:16, 9 Martii 2013 (UTC)

Good advice, Lolox. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 18:20, 9 Martii 2013 (UTC)

Wikidata[fontem recensere]

How are you? I thank you for your information, but I have not understood what I have to do now. In the past I created the page with a link to an other wikipedia and than the system created itself all the other links, should I do something different? When I'm working also on a already existing page I do not see anymore the links to the other wikipedias, but when I am not working on the page I can see them. I thank you in advance for your help. Ciao--Helveticus montanus (disputatio) 03:59, 12 Martii 2013 (UTC)

New pope[fontem recensere]

I thank you for your precious help. These days I have unfortunately not enough time to add more information. In any case if I remember the page of Angelus Scola, the most favoured (I do not like it :-( ) was not created by me and contained already more information (perhaps it was created by the "papabile" himself :-) , it seems it has done all possible things to become pope and from my point of view it's not a good thing) Helveticus montanus (disputatio) 15:54, 13 Martii 2013 (UTC)

That's an amusing idea -- a papabile who is also a Vicipaedian (and an autobiographer)! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 16:09, 13 Martii 2013 (UTC)

Marcus Addy[fontem recensere]

Greetings Andrew. I read in Behind the Name, a name database, about the name "Addy". This is how I came to "Adam", and then looked in my lexicon for that name, and it said Adam[us]. It means that you don't have to use "us". The names are stressed Ádam and Adámus. So that is how I wrote Marcus Adamus. I guess it should be Adam/Adamus. But what do you consider it should be?

Donatello (disputatio) 18:07, 24 Martii 2013 (UTC).

Someone would have to ask his parents, Donatello. If they called him "Mark Addy Johnson" because they thought "Addy" was the same as "Adam", fine. Unless there's some evidence on that, I would think it almost certain that "Addy" is a surname in his family, possibly his mother's surname.
You might get some ideas from "Behind the Name", and some of them might be true, but I wouldn't take it as a reliable source. Who's responsible for it? Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 18:17, 24 Martii 2013 (UTC)

Wikidata[fontem recensere]

I thank you Andrew. If I understand rightli, I do not have to insert the Latin links of the new page on wikidata but only one link in my new page? Ciao--Helveticus montanus (disputatio) 13:51, 25 Martii 2013 (UTC)

Wikidata[fontem recensere]

I thank you Andrew. If I understand rightli, I do not have to insert the Latin links of the new page on wikidata but only one link in my new page? Ciao--Helveticus montanus (disputatio) 13:51, 25 Martii 2013 (UTC)

Simia[fontem recensere]

Hi Andrew, how are you? Where will you spend holy week( Are are you catholic?)?

Just a heads up. I am going to write this article by translating the first paragraph of the monkey article at the English wiki, but saw some confusion at Roland's discussion page. It's a bit difficult since there are no clear cut definitions. Jondel (disputatio) 10:05, 26 Martii 2013 (UTC)

Ah, no, rather not, Jondel. My interest in popes is (let's say) academic.
Andrew, sorry, I didn't mean to put you on the spot. There's just a lot of catholic activities here though, like bishop's conferences, palm sunday and penitents carrying crosses, etc. I'm really here for academic, encyclopedic purposes too (as well as enrich my latin).Jondel (disputatio) 06:52, 28 Martii 2013 (UTC)
I haven't looked at simia yet. My impression is that an article under this title probably needs to deal with apes and monkeys together, like the French article fr:singe. Whatever the article does, it probably wouldn't correspond to any single Linnaean classification node ... but I could well be wrong. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 13:22, 26 Martii 2013 (UTC)
The English-language concept apparently has no taxonomical standing, but if you put the pertinent primates into a single set, then you have an article that might refer to the Haplorrhini, the Simiiformes, the Anthropoidea, the Catarrhini, or the Hominoidea, depending on what, exactly, you mean by "monkeys and apes taken together." IacobusAmor (disputatio) 13:43, 26 Martii 2013 (UTC)
Yes, agreed. Looking further, and seeing what some other wikipedias say, modern common parlance in various languages either divides monkeys/apes, or combines them, but in any case distinguishes them from man. Thus, French singe roughly equals "Simiiformes excluding man". Our problem in knowing what to say under "simia" is that classical writers didn't know many species in this order, so we can hardly claim to say how wide their definition of "simia" was. But if for the sake of argument we take "simia", also, as meaning "Simiiformes excluding man", we might conclude that the article Simia need only be a definition (with citations): all the rest can go in Simiiformes. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 14:21, 26 Martii 2013 (UTC)
The French might not exclude humans if they were speaking English. See the book The Naked Ape. IacobusAmor (disputatio) 12:15, 28 Martii 2013 (UTC)

It is unfortunate that this wasn't defined in modern languages and latin (at least medieval). Well, maybe that is the role of wikipedia, to fill in the gaps. Anyway, some future experts can correct or re-work this. In the mean time, I would like to create this. I need to improve my French.Jondel (disputatio) 06:52, 28 Martii 2013 (UTC)

Beth Carvalho[fontem recensere]

Tibi gratias ago. Please, can you watch also the disputatio? Thanks a lot for your help!

Rex Momo (disputatio) 20:48, 2 Aprilis 2013 (UTC)

Yes, I will -- it's a pleasure! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 21:03, 2 Aprilis 2013 (UTC)

resurrectus>post resurrectionem[fontem recensere]

Salve Andrea! Bavarese recte animadvertit me participio "resurrectus" prave ita usum esse, quasi esset significationis activae. Quod in Prandium ad Mare Tiberiadis tu etiam fecisti - et forsitan saepius, ut et ego. "Christus resurrectus" in "Christus post resurrectionem" mutavi et mutabo, si tale quid invenero. Vale!--Utilo (disputatio) 15:50, 3 Aprilis 2013 (UTC)

Gratias tibi ago, Utilo! Ita scripsi, confiteor :) Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 17:34, 3 Aprilis 2013 (UTC)

Hilarius Antoniazzi[fontem recensere]

Carissime Andreas, habesne 5 minutos etiam ad corrigendam hanc novam paginam quam feci?

Tibi gratias ago!

Rex Momo (disputatio) 21:19, 3 Aprilis 2013 (UTC)

Tibi gratias ago! Rex Momo (disputatio) 17:54, 4 Aprilis 2013 (UTC)

Alma Mater Carolsruhensis[fontem recensere]

NB. Haec disputatio nunc ad Disputatio:Institutum Technologiae Carolsruhense movi. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 13:26, 16 Aprilis 2013 (UTC)

Tiririca[fontem recensere]

Vale, carissime Andreas, quomodo te habes? Tibi peto parvam relecturam istae novae pagine quae nunc feci. Comicus ateque politicorum peritus brasilianus est, amicus Shaolin.

Tibi gratias ago!

Rex Momo (disputatio) 09:17, 12 Aprilis 2013 (UTC)

Tabella tributaria‎[fontem recensere]

Your shaolin kung fu reflex has saved world! It's great you noticed my spelling mistake which I hope I can minimize. Regards. Jondel (disputatio) 10:48, 16 Aprilis 2013 (UTC)

No problem, Jondel. I'll keep practising my reflexes ... Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 12:31, 16 Aprilis 2013 (UTC)

De Imaginibus Quas Non Video[fontem recensere]

Franciscus (qui me est) vobis salutem dicit;

causam propter quam in pagina de Praesidibus Senatus Italici imagines photographicae non videntur cognoscetis?

Franciesse 18:48, 18 Aprilis 2013 (UTC)

Incertus sum, mi Francisce, sed haec propono: tabulam illam ex alia Vicipaedia quadam dempsisti: in illa Vicipaedia fortasse fasciculi "locales" accipiuntur. Apud Vicipaediam Latinam oportet fasciculos apud communia reperire. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 19:15, 18 Aprilis 2013 (UTC)
Ita, ita est! Vide experimentum meum! Imaginem alteram Fanfani e Vicipaedia Francogallica inserui, quam illi apud communia reppererunt. Eam imaginem nunc in pagina tua videbis. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 19:20, 18 Aprilis 2013 (UTC)
Gratias! Ut mihi dixisti faciam! Franciesse 19:29, 18 Aprilis 2013 (UTC)
Alicuius imagines non inveni, sed eorum maioritas nunc repraesentatur. Franciesse 19:44, 18 Aprilis 2013 (UTC)

Salve[fontem recensere]

Erubesco propter benignitatem tuam. Gratias ago ob nutum tuum! Interea formulam explicativam in commentationes imperatorum Byzantinorum addere coepi. Ea cum perfecero te auxilium rogo, ut me certiorem facias, si placeant mutationes, teque rogo, ut mihi in commentationibus recensendis subvenias! Autokrator (disputatio) 18:19, 21 Aprilis 2013 (UTC)

De Editione Vicipediae Mobile[fontem recensere]


Nuper animadverti editionem mobilem Vicipediae magna ex parte corruptam (ubinam e.g. est pagina prima?) neque usui cottidiano aptam esse (Iphono quoque in commentationibus recensendis utere velim ;) ), eo magis, ut variis in locis lingua Anglica nondum in sermonem Quiritum versa sit. Quomodo id corrigi posse quaero? Fortasse ipse emendationi rerum manum admovere possim? Autokrator (disputatio) 14:03, 29 Aprilis 2013 (UTC)

Confiteor, Autokrator: nihil de editionibus mobilibus Vicipaediae scio. Oportet, nisi fallor, apud Tabernam quaerere. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 14:18, 29 Aprilis 2013 (UTC)
Paginam primam editionis mobilis creavi: http://la.m.wikipedia.org/. Explicatio paginae primae creandae vel modificandae est hic: meta:Mobile projects/Mobile Gateway#How do I format a mobile homepage?.
Verba Anglica editionis mobilis tu ipse Latine vertere potes: http://translatewiki.net/wiki/Special:Translate?action=translate&group=ext-mobilefrontend&language=la&filter=
--UV (disputatio) 21:41, 29 Aprilis 2013 (UTC)
Gratias ago quam maximas! Velocissime adiuvasti.

De Italicis nominibus[fontem recensere]

Ave! Alia dubia habeo, meus magister forsitan vero estis (si nimis vos turbo, dicite quaeso!)... Italicus nomen Luigi (Francogallice Louis et Anglice Lewis) vertitur Latine Aloisius vel Lodovicus? In locutione Pierluigi ( = Peter Louis), exempli gratia, vertere Petrus Aloisius mihi licet? Gratias iam nunc propter vestras curas.

P.S. Quia in nostro libro de mythis fuistis et vos cognovi, inter discipulos scholae meae quos cognosco maximus factus estis et una ex eis semper quaeret de vobis et de nostris disputationibus! Franciesse 12:54, 30 Aprilis 2013 (UTC)

Bene hic venis et libenter respondeo, mi Francisce, sed in hac re iudicare haud possum! Alii usores fortasse, sive Usor:Massimo Macconi sive alius quis, melius quam ego sciunt quomodo haec nomina Latina, fere synonyma, seligenda sunt. Scribo ego "Ludovicum" (non "Lodovicum"), sed inter Petrum Aloisium et Petrum Ludovicum in dubio sum ... Pro certo licet "Aloisium" scribere: si alii dissentiunt, rationem praebebunt. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 14:52, 30 Aprilis 2013 (UTC)

Signore delle cime[fontem recensere]

Vale, carissime Andreas, quomodo te habes? Tibi peto parvam relecturam istae novae pagine quae nunc feci.

I already put the page in Arzignanum so it will not be alone in Wiki Latina, ok?

Tibi gratias ago adiuti tui.

Rex Momo (disputatio) 10:35, 1 Maii 2013 (UTC)

Regina Iansiensis[fontem recensere]

I have made a slight beginning on a new article for the queen of Jhansi, Uttar Pradesh, India. Even the latinising from the Hindi / Marathi seems baffling but last year I invested a lot of effort into the Rani's English WP article which was deficient in many respects. So far so good. Please offer some advice if you are willing to do so. The last item on Disputatio:FFS.--Felix Folio Secundus (disputatio) 17:52, 3 Maii 2013 (UTC)

Oppida et vici Graeciae[fontem recensere]

Salve Andreas! Cum tu nunc categoriam "Oppida et vici Graeciae" institueris, ego iam antea categoriam "Loci inhabitati Graeciae" institueram. Una ex duabus mihi superflua esse videtur.--Utilo (disputatio) 10:56, 10 Maii 2013 (UTC)

Quaestioni tuae, non iam visae, partim respondi apud disputationem tuam! Ita, fortasse aliquid superfluum videbitur. Praefero addere et postea rursus cogitare: OK? Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 11:30, 10 Maii 2013 (UTC)

Illustration de Cresson ou de Hattin[fontem recensere]


Je crois que votre expertise pourrait être utile dans cette discussion sur Commons, si vous souhaitez y participer. (Voir aussi .) -- Asclepias 18:52, 12 Maii 2013 (UTC)

Orban/Merkel[fontem recensere]

Dear Andrew, I thank you for your correction. It was Mr. Orban's judgement about Mrs. Merkel, but it's not a problem if you simply remove the news :Ciao

Orban/Merkel[fontem recensere]

Dear Andrew, I thank you for your correction. It was Mr. Orban's judgement about Mrs. Merkel, but it's not a problem if you simply remove the news :Ciao Helveticus montanus (disputatio) 15:16, 22 Maii 2013 (UTC)

Ave![fontem recensere]

Dear Andrew, thank You very much for Your friendly words of welcome and the helpful instructions. In conversation with me You might use Latin, English or German (my knowledge of all three of them is on the same poor level!) My first attempt on Vicipaedia Latina will be to try to complete the article about Emperor Charles III. (If You'd like to get more information about the user Artregor visit me in the German WP). With my best regards --Artregor (disputatio) 02:17, 26 Maii 2013 (UTC)

An invitation to work with the World Digital Library Wikipedia Partnership[fontem recensere]

Hello Andrew! Thanks for your words of encouragement. Glad to see that the Latin Wikipedia is so lively!

Posted an invite for the the World Digital Library Wikipedia Partnership on your English Wikipedia user page. Please join in! We need more editors with different language backgrounds. I've been going to town on Nahuatl materials, but I really don't know Latin, much less Greek. It would be great to encourage projects like World Digital Library to collaborate with Wikipedia to serve the lesser-studied-languages communities!

As a librarian interested in saving endangered languages, I'm a fan of the "All Japanese All The Time" approach to language learning. So it seems only natural that we would want to help people find recreational reading on their topics of interest, even if their language of choice is not considered officially "living." :) Djembayz (disputatio)

Possible reusable texts in Latin?[fontem recensere]

Ave! again, look what I found. Can't tell for sure, but parts of this text might make ready-made articles in Latin, like the Encyclopedia Brittanica 1911 edition: De publica privataque romanorum vita (1902). Djembayz (disputatio) 02:14, 4 Iunii 2013 (UTC)

Iosephus de Marzi[fontem recensere]

Vale, carissime Andrew, quomodo te habes?

Haec pagina, scriptor Signore delle cime creavi, et tibi parvam relecturam tibi peto.

Tibi gratias ago!

Rei Momo (disputatio) 07:51, 6 Iunii 2013 (UTC)

Transtyria[fontem recensere]

Potestis inspicere opus meum ac adiuvare me in creatione paginae de natione non agnota a circiter omnibus aliis nationibus appellata Transtyria? Si potestis corrigere aliquid, facite id, quaeso! Forsitan Vicipaediae Anglicae auxilio augebo illam paginam, sed nunc quaeso aliquem corrigere velle meos (multos!) errores. Grat., Franciesse 18:15, 8 Iunii 2013 (UTC)

Paginam perutilem tuam cras legere volo, Franciesse. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 20:33, 8 Iunii 2013 (UTC)

Gratias[fontem recensere]

Gratias ago. :) Ambae lingua Latina et Vicipaedia Latina me placet. -- Donatello (disputatio) 13:17, 29 Iunii 2013 (UTC).

Hadriatica[fontem recensere]

Tibi gratias ago--Helveticus montanus (disputatio) 05:35, 30 Iunii 2013 (UTC)

Messing around[fontem recensere]

Hi, Andrew! I've been messing around for some time with Hubble. Could you please restore the title of the article to "Hubbleanum telescopium spatiale", which is the scriptio provided in the source. I'm afraid that if I continue, more damage will be done. Thanks, Martinus (Neander (disputatio) 14:48, 30 Iunii 2013 (UTC))

Don't lose any sleep, mi Martine, nothing's broken. I've moved as you requested, and everyone can now start the game all over again ... ! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 15:08, 30 Iunii 2013 (UTC)
Martinus iners tibi gratias ago. Yes, indeed, the game is ready for the second round. But any move will be a deviation from the source ... :-) Neander (disputatio) 15:29, 30 Iunii 2013 (UTC)

Turres Veteres[fontem recensere]

Carissime Andreas! Tibi gratias ago causa nomen exactum istae pagine scripsisti!

Rei Momo (disputatio) 12:16, 2 Iulii 2013 (UTC)

Si utilis fui, gaudeo! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 07:52, 3 Iulii 2013 (UTC)

De motionibus ratione carentibus[fontem recensere]

Hi again, Andrew! Speaking of edition wars, I've been wondering for some time whether it'd be technically possible to set the "Movere" gadget so as not to accomplish the instruction, unless the "Causa" field has been filled with a reason of substance. I'm aware of the possibility that the field can be filled also with an evasive reason, but anyways the necessity of filling the field might at least give argumentation a chance. I've run across many (too many) unexplained redirections the meaning and sense escapes me. Martinus a.k.a. Neander (disputatio) 19:24, 2 Iulii 2013 (UTC)

P.S. Now the shape of Augusta Taurinorum is comme il faut. Bravo! Neander (disputatio) 19:35, 2 Iulii 2013 (UTC)

Thank you! The first few sentences, at most. One must add that Sacreum and Nuada do good work in beginning so many articles about Italian places, and that making an encyclopedia in Latin is going to be quite a long task ...
I feel sure that a reason could be demanded by the system. It surely couldn't demand a reason of substance, because it isn't sufficiently intelligent. But, as you say, the need to fill in any reason at all might discourage some hasty moves. Perhaps UV (who will probably know) may look in and comment. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 19:42, 2 Iulii 2013 (UTC)
I have now implemented this requirement. Could you please announce this change in the Taberna and translate/improve the error message that appears (at least every other time) when a user tries to move a page without specifying a reason (MediaWiki:Abusefilter-warning-pagina mota sine causa data)? --UV (disputatio) 22:56, 3 Iulii 2013 (UTC)
Thank you very much, UV. I'm back at my desk and will do as you ask. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 13:31, 5 Iulii 2013 (UTC)
Thanks a lot! By the way, we can monitor attempts to move a page without specifying a reason here: [28] If we find that too many useful page moves get prevented by our new requirement, we can disable it again (but I doubt that this will be the case). Greetings, --UV (disputatio) 20:50, 5 Iulii 2013 (UTC)
It's amusing to see that record -- of course it trapped you (trying to move the Harenarium) and me (trying to move Halicarnassus) and a couple of others who were, or were not, just testing the error messages ... Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 12:12, 6 Iulii 2013 (UTC)

Dioeceses Italianae[fontem recensere]

Ok I have only used an already existing model (see dioecesis Laudensis)--Helveticus montanus (disputatio) 12:02, 6 Iulii 2013 (UTC)

Yes, I see, I understand now -- it struck me that the ruthless postponement of the "est" was not typical of the Helveticus style! Anyway, as I say, I'm glad you are doing this. We really ought to have articles about the cathedrals, too ... Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 12:23, 6 Iulii 2013 (UTC)

De fontibus desideratis[fontem recensere]

Hi, Andrew! Do we have any principles constraining the use of the formula {{fontes desiderati}} ? If not, the strategy exemplified by Hamiltonium + {{fontes desiderati}} is probably OK. But then, I surmise, the path will be open for Barkingium et Dagenhamium + {{fontes desiderati}}, or Entrepierresium + {{fontes desiderati}}, and thousands of cases like that. As I understand it, we're not supposed to give norms for extravicipaedians. Yet I have a funny feeling that the {{fontes desiderati}} strategy may be at least crypto-normative in character, giving free rein to ready-made entries, very easy just to pick up and put into use, though there might be other possibilities worth considering. Neander (disputatio) 06:13, 10 Iulii 2013 (UTC)

I consider {{fontes desiderati}} a temporary step, a stage in a process. This is how I use it, anyway, and especially on two specific occasions, on which I encounter a Latin name that appears to have been made up:
  1. if I need the name to be verified because I want to create a category (categories can't be moved as simply as pages can, so at that stage it really matters)
  2. if I have found an attested name which I think preferable to the one we are currently using as page name
Usually, once I have inserted {{fontes desiderati}}, if no source has been offered when I next come to the page (and assuming I can't find one myself) I then take action to get the pagename into accord with our general rules: either moving to an alternative-but-attested name, or moving to the native name (because I don't know any acceptable Latin name) or occasionally, if VP:TNP clearly permits us a newly devised name in this case, changing the {{fontes desiderati}} to {{convertimus}}.
Less usually, if lots of us have been using this name for years and years, I start a discussion about the move before going ahead and doing it.
I think this process works OK. As for Hamiltonium (Ontario), I don't remember ever having looked at the page. That being the case, if I do now look at it and notice that "Fontes desiderati" has been on it for a reasonable time, and if I have a moment to check whether I can independently confirm "Hamiltonium" or not, I would then adopt my usual process (above) to get the pagename into accord with our general rules. And that's what I would encourage others to do. "Fontes desiderati" means "there's something wrong here: let's put it right". Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 11:47, 10 Iulii 2013 (UTC)
Ah, I see now, it's a new page. I have occasionally myself done what Donatello did there, if I thought it really likely that a source would turn up. The result should be the same: "fontes desiderati" marks a fault that needs correction and we should aim to correct it soon, either by supplying a source or by moving the page. Notice that Donatello didn't invent this name, but took it from the existing pages Canada and Hamiltonium (discretiva). I think it was quite reasonable to start the page under this name, just in case the previous Vicipaedian who first wrote "Hamiltonium" had a source for it after all. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 11:56, 10 Iulii 2013 (UTC)
Contra nostram paginam discretivam, the British name Hamilton is attested in Latin as Hamiltonius, not Hamiltonium,[1][2] so it's reasonable to expect that all the Hamiltons will be Hamiltonii, not Hamiltonia. IacobusAmor (disputatio) 14:20, 10 Iulii 2013 (UTC)
  1. Francis Glass, A Life of George Washington, in Latin Prose, ed. J. N. Reynolds (Novi Eboraci: Harper & Brothers, 1835), pagina 139; vide Alexander Hamiltonius.
  2. Vide etiam William Camden, Annales rerum Anglicarum et Hibernicarum regnante Elizabetha, vol. 1, hic.
  3. That's a useful attestation -- great -- but I'm not sure your argument about the place names follows Latin usage. Roads and colonies got a feminine adjective from their male creators' names. So you might argue for "Urbs Hamiltonia" or "oppidum Hamiltonium" ... or you might go on praying for an actual attestation of a Latinized place name :) Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 14:26, 10 Iulii 2013 (UTC)
    As I suspected, "Hamiltonius" has been treated as an adjective (like a Latin gentile name). Google will find you a tombstone for "Domina Isabella Hamiltonia nobilissimis Parentibus nata" and, elsewhere, the phrase "gente Hamiltonia". Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 14:31, 10 Iulii 2013 (UTC)
    That sort of thing isn't uncommon in gender-loving languages, is it? In Poland, Mr. Nadolny's wife will be Mrs. Nadolna. IacobusAmor (disputatio) 14:51, 10 Iulii 2013 (UTC)
    Thanks for the explication! In the case of city names ending in -ton, one would reasonably expect some uniformity. Lexintonia might provide a pattern. Neander (disputatio) 16:49, 10 Iulii 2013 (UTC)
    An Anglican bishop who resides in Hamilton, Ontario, just now reminds me of en:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/452_Hamiltonia: "452 Hamiltonia is an asteroid. It was discovered by James Edward Keeler on December 6, 1899, but was then lost until 1987. Its provisional name was 1899 FD. The asteroid is named for Mount Hamilton, the site of Lick Observatory where Keeler was working when he discovered the asteroid." IacobusAmor (disputatio) 16:54, 10 Iulii 2013 (UTC)
    Actonia, Bostonia, Princetonia, Tivertonia, Trentonia, Vasingtonia, Vellingtonia, etc. IacobusAmor (disputatio) 17:09, 10 Iulii 2013 (UTC)
    Well, if you two want to look for uniformity in the Latin conversion of English names ending in -ton, you'll find some, though far from 100%. If you additionally want to urge a new rule for Vicipaedia, I'd suggest the best place is Disputatio_Vicipaediae:De_nominibus_propriis rather than my talk page! But, since it was raised here, I will just add that I'm against adopting any such rule :) Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 18:58, 10 Iulii 2013 (UTC)
    This is my last in this thread, I promise. What I was out for is not urging new rules but constraining what I suspected to be a possible loophole, exemplified by Hamiltonium, in the use of {{fontes desiderati}}. "Hamiltonium" seems to be out of the blue: no source, not even a principled precedent pattern. If a Latinate form is to be provided for the entry, "Hamiltonia" + {{fontes desiderati}} would've been at least a better guess because of those inductive examples brought forward by Iacobus. I now realise that I should've opened this discussion in the "Hamiltonium" page. Please, accept my apology! Neander (disputatio) 10:58, 11 Iulii 2013 (UTC)
    No need at all for apology, Neander -- I'm glad you asked me, because I was able to suggest it isn't quite out of the blue, though indeed it appeared to be. I agree, it does want correction (of whatever kind) within a short time.
    I'll copy all of this to Disputatio:Hamilton (Ontario) now, because, if by any distant chance a rule about translating -ton is adopted, Hamilton will be affected! Reflecting further on the application of what we have seen to this specific case, "Kingstonium" (see Kingstonium ad Hullum and Kingstonium ad Tamesim) shows that you could convert to a neuter as well as a feminine form: possibly because you were thinking of an oppidum rather than an urbs? Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 11:39, 11 Iulii 2013 (UTC)
    Hanc disputationem ad Disputatio:Hamilton (Ontario) movi: s.v.p. ibi pergite! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 11:39, 11 Iulii 2013 (UTC)

    Sancta Maria Maior (Lisbonum)[fontem recensere]

    Carissime Andreas, haec nova pagina vici Olisiponis creavi. Tibi peto parvam relecturam, causa mea Lingua Latina non bona sicut tuam est.

    Tibi gratias ago!

    Rei Momo (disputatio) 20:57, 10 Iulii 2013 (UTC)

    Notae[fontem recensere]

    Talkback[fontem recensere]

    I guess "talkback" template doesn't exist here, but I did ask you a question over at my talk page. Thanks for the welcome! StevenJ81 (disputatio) 16:38, 15 Iulii 2013 (UTC)

    Shabbat[fontem recensere]

    Awesome. Thanks. If you have any questions on the content, just yell. (I did try to keep it simple for simple:, but you never know ...) StevenJ81 (disputatio) 16:53, 22 Iulii 2013 (UTC)

    I'll keep on at it from time to time. Simple English is simple to work on! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 18:08, 22 Iulii 2013 (UTC)

    Retogenes[fontem recensere]

    Hi Andrew - sorry for the delay. Retogenes I knew about, but about the other I had no idea... I think all the Numantine war is narrated by Appian, so he may be the first place to check for Retogenes...--Xaverius 09:55, 23 Iulii 2013 (UTC)

    but check this--Xaverius 09:57, 23 Iulii 2013 (UTC)
    And perhaps it should be spelled Rhetogenes... but that's just my guess, if Appian was writing in Greek...--Xaverius 10:02, 23 Iulii 2013 (UTC)
    Sorted: http://www.livius.org/ap-ark/appian/appian_spain_19.html#%A794 --Xaverius 10:04, 23 Iulii 2013 (UTC)

    Spin City[fontem recensere]

    Greetings Andrew. I am creating articles about the fictive characters and their actors concerning the television series Spin City. But for the character "Mayor Randall Winston" I do not know for sure how to translate "mayor". He's a mayor (or maybe with big r, Mayor, I don't know) of New York (the city). Do you know what it's called?

    Donatello (disputatio) 13:54, 24 Iulii 2013 (UTC).

    I find this difficult too. But you can try "Praefectus urbi" or "urbis" (dative or genitive), a title used by the Romans. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 14:10, 24 Iulii 2013 (UTC)
    Could I intrude? Praefectus is great. Also how about bergomagister, comarchus and possibly maior for mayor?Jondel (disputatio) 12:25, 25 Iulii 2013 (UTC)
    I don't know "Spin City" so maybe I can't comment further. Comarchus is literally (in Greek) the headman of a village: a good word, certainly. "Burgomagister" looks like a very close equivalent of the German term (I don't know which came first there, German or Latin). Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 13:10, 25 Iulii 2013 (UTC)
    I have the Oxford, Collins, 2 other dictionaries, even Iacobus' favorite Cassells. I didn't check the Cassell but they all seem to contain comarchus(--even if it is obvously greek--). Burgomagister seems to be more correct. Bergomagister comes from Whitaker.
    That's interesting. Comarchus is quite OK but implies a village rather than a city. "Bergomagister" is a misspelling (it suggests a German mountain rather than a German town), confirming, I guess, that it's wise to get a second opinion on words found in Whitaker! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 14:23, 25 Iulii 2013 (UTC)
    I found this Demarchus (Quod tibi videtur?) (links to the English mayor) .Jondel (disputatio) 14:40, 25 Iulii 2013 (UTC)
    We currently have the articles Demarchus (as Jondel pointed out) and Magister civium (with a {{contribuenda}}) template and interwiki links that are probably wrong). --UV (disputatio) 20:57, 25 Iulii 2013 (UTC)
    Commentationem Demarchus modo mutavi. Magister civium sententia mea ad "Demarchus" conferatur.--Utilo (disputatio) 10:09, 26 Iulii 2013 (UTC)
    Macte! Paginam Magister civium contribui et redirexi. --UV (disputatio) 11:56, 26 Iulii 2013 (UTC)

    formula and restaurant[fontem recensere]

    Salve! Ut vales? Would you be writing the restaurant article? Also I'm afraid of creating a disaster with the Formula of Presidents of Guinea Aequatorensis. --Jondel (disputatio) 14:46, 1 Augusti 2013 (UTC)

    Me? Well, I guess I might ... unless you feel hungry ...
    In fact, you know, you can simply move the formula. That's quite OK. Then, after doing that, you can correct the spelling inside it. Just try it, Jondel, and don't worry :) If anything goes wrong, I'll pick up the pieces! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 14:50, 1 Augusti 2013 (UTC)
    I'm hungry but starting to bulge in the middle :(. Well I hope everyone is ok with poppina. We'll here I go with the formula.Jondel (disputatio) 14:56, 1 Augusti 2013 (UTC)

    Leeuw-Saint-Pierre[fontem recensere]

    Salve. Fortasse adiuvare potes. Nuper Leeuw-Saint-Pierre creavi, sed aliae editiones Vicipaedianae dicunt Sint-Pieters-Leeuw. Scisne quomodo esse oportet? Etiam, potestne illud nomen ad Latine mutari? -- Donatello (disputatio) 01:13, 6 Augusti 2013 (UTC).

    Sunt duo nomina vulgaria, i.e. Leeuw-Saint-Pierre et Sint-Pieters-Leeuw. Ambo, nisi fallor, officialia sunt. Fortasse nomen Batavicum praeferre oportet quia incolae Batave loquuntur ... sed liberi sumus!
    Bene erit si nomen Latinum reperire possumus, sed usque adhuc non repperi ... Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 14:44, 7 Augusti 2013 (UTC)
    Hic fons saepe utilis est, sed formam clare Latinam in eum non video. Respiciens problemata politicae linguarum Belgicae, "Sint-Pieters-Leeuw" melius esse censeo. - [anon] Lesgles (disputatio) 18:18, 8 Augusti 2013 (UTC)
    Credo ad nomen Batavicum muto. Gratias ago. :) -- Donatello (disputatio) 13:18, 8 Augusti 2013 (UTC).
    Licetne ad "Sanctus Petrus-Leeuw" mutare? Dicasne mihi de Leeuw significatione? -- Donatello (disputatio) 13:23, 8 Augusti 2013 (UTC).
    De nomine Leeuw nihil dicere possum, sed videmus Francophonos eandem formam lingua sua retinere. Licet igitur fortasse Latine ita exprimere: Leeuw Sancti Petri: ita enim, neque aliter, intellegere possumus nomina Batava et Francogallica. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 13:29, 8 Augusti 2013 (UTC)
    Credebam leeuw Francogallice erat, sed Batavice quando quaerebam. "Leo" significatione est. Tum licetne ad "Sancti Petri Leo"/"Leo Sancti Petri" mutare? -- Donatello (disputatio) 14:56, 8 Augusti 2013 (UTC).
    Non licet, mi Donatello. Lexicum quod amicus anonymus supra citavit nunc perlegi. Ibi videbis (pagina 136) verba severa "Grammaye and other writers derive this word from leeuw "lion". This is an absurdity." Re vera nomen "leeuw" e verbo vetere leye (vel sim.) "amnis" derivat, sed talia toponyma non nobis licet vertere. Aut Leeuw Sancti Petri temptare, aut Sint-Pieters-Leeuw retinere oportet. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 15:33, 8 Augusti 2013 (UTC)
    Intellego. Muto ad "Leeuw Sancti Petri". -- Donatello (disputatio) 15:53, 8 Augusti 2013 (UTC).

    Societas Parisiensis missionum ad exteras gentes[fontem recensere]

    Carissime Adreas, vale!

    Haec nova pagina societatis religiosae creavi, et tibi peto parvam relecturam, cum 5 minutos haberis. Tibi gratias ago!

    Rei Momo (disputatio) 21:18, 6 Augusti 2013 (UTC)

    Tibi gratias ago! Rei Momo (disputatio) 20:28, 7 Augusti 2013 (UTC)

    Obstetricia[fontem recensere]

    Salve Andrew, ut vales? Can I ask how you are able to determine that it is neutral plural? Familiarity? Is this a third or fourth declension noun? Gratias.Jondel (disputatio) 15:40, 11 Augusti 2013 (UTC)

    You're quite right, Jondel, I should have added a source. I've done that now. It's 2nd decl. neut. pl. (according to Lewis & Short). Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 16:00, 11 Augusti 2013 (UTC)
    Great! I hastily clicked on the red link to create the article. I will try put more attention to this details.Jondel (disputatio) 16:12, 11 Augusti 2013 (UTC)

    Categoria:Cyborgrganismi[fontem recensere]

    Hi Andrew, how are you? I would like to create a Categoria:Cyberorganismi and a fictional version. Any comments? Cheers.Jondel (disputatio) 13:55, 14 Augusti 2013 (UTC)

    Hi, Jondel. I can't see any objection, as long as you (or someone) writes the pages! I'm swimming among the Caribbean islands today ... Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 14:00, 14 Augusti 2013 (UTC)
    Wow! Enjoy!Jondel (disputatio) 14:35, 14 Augusti 2013 (UTC)
    ... I mean, virtually. I'm an armchair swimmer. See Insula Trinitatis and others ... :) Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 17:52, 14 Augusti 2013 (UTC)

    Re:Locus patrimonium ...[fontem recensere]

    Hello, I completely agree about the necessary change of title of the categories I created yesterday, I would suggest for the title something like Mundi Hereditatis Situs/Loca in --nomine civitatis vel regionis-- (as in the categories of the English Wikipedia) or Patrimonia Humanitatis --nominis civitatis vel regionis-- (as in Italian) or Patrimonium Mundi in --nomine civitatis vel regionis-- (singular title with a collective meaning as in French). During my long work I used that Locus patrimonium because I had found it - before I started with the categories about World Heritage Sites secundum civitatem digestae - in categories about Italian regions' ones. I excuse for what I did, but I thought that Nuada here was following common decisions, and I did not read this disputationem by UV. For being thoroughly forgiven I'll personally move each category to the right title when we'll have decided.

    Franciesse 17:24, 14 Augusti 2013 (UTC)

    Ok. I did create the categories only for those countries which have at least one page on Vicipaedia about a World Heritage Site in their territory, so I didn't create any empty category. However, every category I added can be found starting to work with Categoria:Locus patrimonium UNESCO continente digesta, and then going to each subcategory about continents. --Franciesse 13:08, 15 Augusti 2013 (UTC)
    Salve Andrea! Quare commentationibus Wachau et Athos categoriam UNESCO Mundi Hereditatis dempsisti? Sunt in indice!--Utilo (disputatio) 16:39, 21 Augusti 2013 (UTC)
    Salve, Utilo. Id feci quia et commentationes (Athos, Wachau) et categoriae respectivae (Categoria:Athos mons, Categoria:Wachau) hanc categoriam monstraverunt. Mihi videtur aut paginam aut categoriam respectivam hanc cantegoriam monstrare debere, neque ambas. Quid censes? Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 18:59, 21 Augusti 2013 (UTC)
    Intellego. Quae cum ista sint, equidem hanc categoriam in commentatione ponerem, a categoria superiore removerem.--Utilo (disputatio) 21:48, 21 Augusti 2013 (UTC)
    Mihi optime videtur. S.t.p., mi Utilo, muta sicut dicis (quia ego ad cubiculum eo!) Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 21:53, 21 Augusti 2013 (UTC)

    Municipality[fontem recensere]

    Hello sir. I wonder if this word is commune in Latin. What do you know? -- Donatello (disputatio) 17:52, 14 Augusti 2013 (UTC).

    We can use both words, commune and municipium, whichever best suits the country we are talking about. In France they chose the Latin word commune to emphasise the democratic basis of this new structure, so, for French communes, we use the same Latin word. Some other countries call them municipio (etc.), which is obviously a use of the Latin word municipium: so we can do the same. In Britain (also Louisiana) for historical reasons they are called parish, and we can call them paroecia. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 17:59, 14 Augusti 2013 (UTC)
    I see. :) Thanks. -- Donatello (disputatio) 01:27, 15 Augusti 2013 (UTC).

    Japanese language[fontem recensere]

    Greetings Andrew. How do we write Japanese names as names of the articles? I know that in the lemma we explain how it's pronounced. When Japanese words and names are written in the Latin alphabet, long vocals use a line over themselves (don't know what it's called), like Ankō Itosu, Yōichi Kotabe, mīzu, "water", dōmo arigatō gozaimas, "thank you very much". I know that when we write japanese words in the Latin Wikipedia, we use these symbols. -- Donatello (disputatio) 15:34, 19 Augusti 2013 (UTC).

    Hi, Donatello. Our custom has been -- as with other international transliterations from foreign scripts -- to use the diacritics in the text but not to use them in the pagename. The reason (this may not be true now, but it used to be) is that search engines are better at finding names without diacritics; also, names without diacritics are easier for readers to type.
    I was taught to call that line a "macron" :) Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 17:37, 19 Augusti 2013 (UTC)
    I see. :) Thanks. -- Donatello (disputatio) 00:57, 20 Augusti 2013 (UTC).
    Macron was the name yes. :) -- Donatello (disputatio) 00:59, 20 Augusti 2013 (UTC).

    Abbasid dynasty and caliphate[fontem recensere]

    (Those dratted 1000 Paginae...) So I see that we have Abbasidae, corresponding very nicely to it:Califfi abbasidi at d:Q4437641, but we don't have a page on the Abbasid caliphate, equivalent to it:Abbasidi at d:Q12536. The links were changed within Wikidata on the 20th by Usor:Infovarius, and I do see what he's thinking. Naturally it's d:Q12536 that's on the 1000 Pages list, so I'd like to have a page. Any objections if I just add something, perhaps also changing Caliphatus Bagdatensis to point to the proposed new page? Or should the Wikidata links be put back the way you had them? Or do you have a better idea? A. Mahoney (disputatio) 18:11, 30 Augusti 2013 (UTC)

    Check; will do. (Wish me luck!) A. Mahoney (disputatio) 19:30, 30 Augusti 2013 (UTC)

    De indice pictorum[fontem recensere]

    Verba tua Italiane translavit. CiaoHelveticus montanus (disputatio) 03:58, 31 Augusti 2013 (UTC)

    De indice pictorum[fontem recensere]

    Verba tua Italiane translavit. CiaoHelveticus montanus (disputatio) 04:00, 31 Augusti 2013 (UTC)

    Regina Ihansiensis[fontem recensere]

    See Disputatio Usoris:Felix Folio Secundus#Regina Ihansiensis for another draft of an article on the Rani of Jhansi. Please assess.--Felix Folio Secundus (disputatio) 23:11, 11 Septembris 2013 (UTC)

    Let me butt in on writing Devanagari jh (झ) as ih in Latin. Because devanagari jh stands for the voiced palatal stop / ɟ / + aspiration, i.e. / ɟʱ /, it's best to write Jhansiensis (because h in Ihansiensis would indicate only that i and a belong to different syllables). Neander (disputatio) 21:06, 12 Septembris 2013 (UTC)
    Unfortunately the usage of the Roman Catholic Church has "Dioecesis Ihansiensis" according to the English article on the diocese of Jhansi; your advice is very useful.--Felix Folio Secundus (disputatio) 05:42, 13 Septembris 2013 (UTC)

    P.S. Would the "dhyan" of Dhyan Chand be the same syllable as in Jhansi?--Felix Folio Secundus (disputatio) 06:53, 13 Septembris 2013 (UTC)

    No, it's not the same. Jh is jh and dhy is dhy. We stick very closely to the international transliteration of Indic languages, because they have more consonants and consonant groups than Latin, so any adjustment would obscure necessary distinctions.
    My view is that since we normally allow ourselves to switch between I and J as necessary, we could be cavalier with the Vatican here and render their form as "Jhansiensis". To a pure Latinist the two are identical, after all, while to an Indologist the difference is important.
    Apologies for not responding to your request before, Felix Folio! I'll look at the page now. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 08:50, 13 Septembris 2013 (UTC)
    Version one was very poor Latin and I would not complain about not getting a reply. Nowadays I find doing odd jobs round the English Wikipedia much easier than trying to write any articles, even in English. The Rani is so famous in India that however brief a Latin one is worth having. There seem to be four different Indic languages in Bundelkhand as well as a small outpost of Roman Catholicism. Ecclesiastical Latin is only one of the forms of the language.--Felix Folio Secundus (disputatio) 11:10, 13 Septembris 2013 (UTC)

    Loegria[fontem recensere]

    Optime egisti revertendo, putabam enim hoc utile fore eis qui in auctoribus mediaevalibus in talia nomina rariora incidissent quae aliquatenus magis poetica (ut etiam Albio) quam geographica esse videntur. Vale pancratice. --Viator : ΕΙΣ ΜΕΙΖΩ ΣΟΦΙΑΝ (disputatio) 18:32, 15 Septembris 2013 (UTC)

    Amita Surica[fontem recensere]

    Carissime Andrew, quomodo te habes?

    Haec pagina nunc de cantrice brasiliana feci et tibi peto parvam relecturam. Tibi magna gratias ago!

    Rei Momo (disputatio) 16:14, 17 Septembris 2013 (UTC)

    Terpsionica[fontem recensere]

    Andrea, Terpsionem gastronomum ex Terpsione philosopho separavi suadente Pauly-Wissowa. Spero me recte fecisse. Si quid mutare vis, quin mutes, quippe cum plus me de re cibaria scias. Neander (disputatio) 20:51, 18 Septembris 2013 (UTC)

    Vae mihi! In errorem me ipsum induxi incuriose credens gastronomica illa a te addita esse, quamquam re vera iam in exemplari Anglico ab Iacobo translato fuit. Veniam peto! Neander (disputatio) 11:14, 19 Septembris 2013 (UTC)
    ... de nihilo, mi Neander! Commento tuo heri lecto, haud memini an de Terpsione hic iam scripsissem. Re vera fere easdem res atque tu (aut Iacobus) scripsi, sed alibi -- in libro meo A to Z. Pro certo duos Terpsiones recte separavisti. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 12:17, 19 Septembris 2013 (UTC)

    Peshwa[fontem recensere]

    This पेशवे must be the Marathi for "peshwa"; what the right form to use here is I do not know but he is now mentioned under Jhansi. I have also been confused by the spellings of names like Ganghadar Rao and Jhokan Bagh. Both Edwardes in his Red Year which was the main source I used when writing up Jhansi and Allen Copsey have the "h" in a different place. I hope what we have now is right. The section in Allen Copsey's Rani Lakshmibai on the rani's genealogy treats the names oddly, e.g. "Rao" (meaning "prince") is shown as a surname and the family names, e.g. Tambe, Newalkar, are not there. Please advise.--Felix Folio Secundus (disputatio) 14:14, 24 Septembris 2013 (UTC)

    Sorry, a bit slow here. The basic problem is that modern Anglophone historians often use the forms given in 19th century sources, sometimes getting them slightly wrong (and sometimes they were already slightly wrong even in 19th century terms!) Since there's no tradition of writing about 19th century India in Latin, we ought to prefer, not the Anglicized forms, but a straight transliteration from Indian scripts. So far I've just said what you know already ... the problem is that you can't transliterate from Indian scripts, right? I think that while you are working, you should not worry about this unduly -- choose a form from the sources you are using and sort it out when your work is done. Whenever you want a pagename, I or Anne Mahoney (or Neander?) can check that name for you. On the specific names you mention:
    • The form you cite, पेशवे, reads peśave. Having read en:Peshwa I see that we could legitimately transliterate either from Marathi or from Persian -- the latter choice would give us pešwā
      • Both Devanagiri and the Arabic/Persian scripts are ones I cannot read. pešwā could be used as I suppose it is borrowed from Persian.
    • It is Gangādhar (dh, not gh): the full name गंगाधर राव in IAST is Gaṇgādhara Rāva
      • I assume "Rao" (prince) is a Hindi form; the Marathas had clan names and this man is a Newalkar.
    • I haven't yet found the name Jhokan Bagh written in Devanagari script, and I don't know its etymology, so I can't (yet) rule on its spelling!
      • PS The Devanagari form झोकन बाघ Jhokana Bāgha, everyday Jhokan Bāgh, occurs once on Facebook as part of an address in Jhansi. Assuming that the writer's spelling is correct, there we have confirmation ...
      • It is the name of a garden where a massacre occurred on 8 June 1857; the facebook address shows that the name is still in use.
    • It makes future verification easier if you give the fullest names you can, so include the family names if any source supplies them. For our purposes it may not always matter very much whether Rao/Rāva is a surname, a title or somewhere between

    Don't know if that helps ... Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 12:43, 27 Septembris 2013 (UTC)

    Thank you very much; your expertise is extremely useful. My Latin is very limited so I do not expect to create more articles here. It is difficult enough working on Indian articles in the English WP but Jhansi is a very interesting topic. English WP has the problem that some of the articles treat Indian names as if they were given name & surname compounds which does not work for people like "Nana Sahib" or "Shahjehan Begum".--Felix Folio Secundus (disputatio) 09:43, 28 Septembris 2013 (UTC)
    Devanagari is actually an easy script to learn; it helps that the alphabetical order is phonetically logical. Devanagari gives you the vowels, unlike Arabic/Persian script, which omits most of them. Knowing it means that you can at least read the names of the equivalent Hindi/Marathi articles if you need to do that. If you are continuing to write about India, you might find it worth spending the time to learn it ... Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 10:22, 28 Septembris 2013 (UTC)
    Butting in here just to say that, not knowing Devanagari myself, I sometimes get transliterations (I think IAST?) from Google Translate (e.g. http://translate.google.com/#hi/en/गंगाधर%20राव). If you have the Ä button on, it shows up as gray text underneath the left box. Lesgles (disputatio) 16:11, 29 Septembris 2013 (UTC)

    Cashel, Hibernia[fontem recensere]

    Salve Andreas. Velis inspectare et mutare nuper a me creatum "Cashel (Tiperaria)"? Ampliae aliae rei, in commentationibus de castles, adhibere oportemusne "arx" aut "castellum" -- Donatello (disputatio) 16:31, 1 Octobris 2013 (UTC).

    Beautiful place! I never saw a picture of the castle before. I haven't much time now, but I will read as soon as I can. An arx would often be a fortress on a rock or mountain, so it is ideal for the "Rock of Cashel". Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 17:14, 1 Octobris 2013 (UTC)

    Epigraphik-Datenbank[fontem recensere]

    Salve, mi Andrea. Ad tuam peritiam Vicipaedianam hodie refugio : video enim in aliis Vicipaediis (Germanica, Francogallica, Italiana...) nexus directos ad textum inscriptionum Latinarum intra situm Epigraphik-Datenbank Clauss collectarum per notam huiusmodi fieri CIL 13, 1751. Quod si quid simile in nostra Vicipaedia pono, nihil tale, eheu, evenire comperior. Itaque addere soleo "ad verbum Beleg imprime XXX", quod incommodius est. Nonne adiuvare possis ? nam hic datorum thesaurus multa verba in litteris non reperta Latinitatis studiosis praesto efficit. Gratiam plurimam, si velis et possis.

    Vale quam optime, Andrea Marcus Terentius Bibliophilus (disputatio) 14:22, 2 Octobris 2013 (UTC)

    Optime nunc est, mi Andreas, plurimam gratiam tibi ago. Vale. Marcus Terentius Bibliophilus (disputatio) 15:10, 4 Octobris 2013 (UTC)

    Monotyp(ic)a[fontem recensere]

    Dear Andrew,

    IacobusAmor responded on Disputatio:Taxon_monotypum regarding -typus, -typicus. In case you want to join the discussion, your input is appreciated. With kind regards, Wimpus (disputatio) 10:45, 3 Octobris 2013 (UTC)

    A sentence[fontem recensere]

    Hello Andrew. In the article about egg, I recently adde a good picture, where its description in the English article says "A baby tortoise emerges from its egg". I'm not sure of how to say this in Latin. I wrote "Testudinida infantis extrat ex ovum suum", but extrare is "exit"... I guess it's either emérgere or emérgi. Do you know if we say this English sentence like this: "Testudinida infantis emergit ex ovum suum" ? -- Donatello (disputatio) 15:32, 6 Octobris 2013 (UTC).

    I like questions like this -- so many implications!
    • I would avoid "infans" because it literally means "not yet able to speak": hence it suits human babies but not tortoise babies because (surprise, surprise) they will never be able to speak. Usual words for baby animals are "pullus" (maybe the most general), "catulus" (usually dogs and cats): I would say "pullus". You can use it with an adjective, like "gallinaceus", and you can also use it with a genitive, like "ciconiae".
    • I see where you got "testudinida", but I wouldn't risk it, because those Linnaean family names are hardly ever seen in the singular. The ordinary Latin word for a tortoise is "testudo" (f.), so I'd use that. There is an adjective "testudineus".
    • Cicero gives you a good phrase to work with, "ex ovis pulli orti", chicks just out of their eggs. This is "orior, oriri, ortus sum", arise: so, according to Cicero, that's what a baby reptile or bird does. Fine: best not to argue with Cicero.
    • You don't need the "suum" (though there's nothing wrong with it) because it's obvious. It isn't coming out of someone else's egg. Latin can be so nice and short and simple.
    It's a really great picture. In truth, the chick is about to come out of the egg, it's broken the shell but it hasn't put its head out yet. So my suggestion is "Pullus testudineus ex ovo oriturus", a tortoise chick about to arise from [its] egg. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 15:59, 6 Octobris 2013 (UTC)
    I see. :) Big thanks for the information. I like "Pullus testudineus ex ovo oriturus" as well. I'll change to this one. -- Donatello (disputatio) 16:34, 6 Octobris 2013 (UTC).

    Gratias multus![fontem recensere]

    I know I'm late for this but thanks for the message you sent me back in 2010!! I haven't fix the phrase because I haven't picked up a book on Latin since high school. -- Sion VIII 2:52, 13 Oct 2013 (UTC)

    Orhan Gencebay[fontem recensere]

    Dear Andrew,

    I am a very fresh beginner at learning Latin, and I thought it would be a good idea to start writing the pages of the celebrities that I like, by fits and starts, as I continue learning Latin. If it is not as smart as that it seemed to me, it is OK. I do not know all the general rules of Latin Wikipedia. Thanks for your polite interest. --Ermangg (disputatio) 18:35, 16 Octobris 2013 (UTC)

    Janev[fontem recensere]

    Thanks for protecting. Maby you like to open a DR too. Hav a nice day. Regards --Steinsplitter (disputatio) 11:41, 19 Octobris 2013 (UTC)

    Greetings, Steinsplitter! I have now made a comment at Disputatio:Igor Janev. By all means continue the discussion there :) Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 11:45, 19 Octobris 2013 (UTC)

    Enteroctopus dofleini[fontem recensere]

    Dear Andrew,

    See my response at Disputatio:Enteroctopus_dofleini. Please remember, that it is only a non-educated guess. With kind regards, Wimpus (disputatio) 20:23, 21 Octobris 2013 (UTC)

    Have a ...[fontem recensere]

    nice holiday in Greece and I thank you for what you have written about my job. ciaoHelveticus montanus (disputatio) 06:07, 4 Novembris 2013 (UTC)