Disputatio Usoris:Andy85719

Page contents not supported in other languages.
E Vicipaedia

Salve, Andrea!

Gratus aut grata in Vicipaediam Latinam acciperis! Ob contributa tua gratias agimus speramusque te delectari posse et manere velle.

Cum Vicipaedia nostra parva humilisque sit, paucae et exiguae sunt paginae auxilii, a quibus hortamur te ut incipias:

Si plura de moribus et institutis Vicipaedianis scire vis, tibi suademus, roges in nostra Taberna, vel roges unum ex magistratibus directe.

In paginis encyclopaedicis mos noster non est nomen dare, sed in paginis disputationis memento editis tuis nomen subscribere, litteris impressis --~~~~, quibus insertis nomen tuum et dies apparebit. Quamquam vero in paginis ipsis nisi lingua Latina uti non licet, in paginis disputationum qualibet lingua scribi solet. Quodsi quid interrogare velis, vel Taberna vel pagina disputationis mea tibi patebit. Ave! Spero te "Vicipaedianum" aut "Vicipaedianam" fieri velle!

--Ioscius (disp) 04:16, 9 Iulii 2007 (UTC)[reply]

de imaginibus[fontem recensere]

Gratias agimus quod imagines imposuisti. Quaesumus ut imagines non in Vicipaediam Latinam impones, sed in Vicimediam Communiam, quibus impositae, omnes imagines ab omnibus inceptis Vicimediorum adhiberi possunt, fere 9 incepta in linguis 250! Si solum apud nos impones, nos soli imaginibus utamur. Quomodo impones discas apud Communia hic (Anglice). Vide etiam Vicipaedia:Imago et Vicipaedia:Imagines imponere. Iterum gratias ob tuam contributionem, et tempore apud Vicipaediam Latinam fruere!

Thank you for uploading images. Please upload images not to the Latin Wikipedia, but to Commons. Images uploaded there can be used by all Wikimedia projects - some 9 projects in 250 different languages! - just as if they were uploaded locally, but if you only upload here, only we can use them. Instructions for uploading into commons can be found here. See Vicipaedia:Imago and Vicipaedia:Imagines imponere, also. Thank you for contributing, and have fun on the Latin Vicipaedia!

(You can ask for further assistance at Commons:Village pump or in the Taberna.)

--Ioscius (disp) 04:57, 10 Iulii 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Ack. I'll have to repeat my request... If an image does not meet the criteria for Commons, it also is not allowed here. If it does meet the criteria for Commons, upload it there. If you have any questions about this, ask me or UV, who knows much more about Commons itself. Thanks!--Ioscius (disp) 03:53, 14 Iulii 2007 (UTC)[reply]

sententia[fontem recensere]

Thanks!--Ioscius (disp) 05:00, 10 Iulii 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Andy. Would you mind terribly if I put the lyrics into two columns, so that the translation is facing instead of in another paragraph? --Ioscius (disp) 01:15, 11 Iulii 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why are you so silent, man? This was not a rhetorical question. I've seen you doing good work, but your silence is confusing...--Ioscius (disp) 12:52, 11 Iulii 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I made the changes that you requested. I was silent because I been napping for most of the day and therefore was not able to receive your message. You may do what you like to change the page and make it better.
Andy85719 00:28, 12 Iulii 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for making that change. I didn't mean to sound harsh, I just think communication is a big part of a proper wiki. We're all in it together. And thanks again for all those state mottoes! --Ioscius (disp) 00:38, 12 Iulii 2007 (UTC)[reply]
No problem.

Andy85719 04:09, 14 Iulii 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, man, this is getting tiresome asking the same thing over and over. DO NOT upload images here. Thank you.--Ioscius (disp) 12:59, 14 Iulii 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've added some links where this topic has been discussed: Vicipaedia:Imagines_onerare#Disputationes. Maybe this will help to understand why we have this policy with uploading images. --Rolandus 13:50, 14 Iulii 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I understand the desire not to upload images. However, because wikicommons doesn't allow fair use images almost all of the city logos and flags cannot be added, thus hampering my attempts to improve the site. If I can't put logos and flags down for U.S. Cities, the page looks crummy, left with links to non-existent pages. Any way to resolve this would be greatly appreciated. Andy85719 20:33, 14 Iulii 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Sadly, there is none. If it's not ok at Commons, it's not ok here. Sucks, but there it is...--Ioscius (disp) 21:23, 14 Iulii 2007 (UTC)[reply]
All right. I'll see what I can do without some of them and try to find some documentation for the seals. I'm sure that the cities will have some policy that I can use. Especially large cities. Andy85719 21:34, 14 Iulii 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Now you're talking! Sometimes it takes a little extra work, but it will be worth it in the long run. Thanks for cooperation! --Ioscius (disp) 22:03, 14 Iulii 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox on Columbopolis[fontem recensere]

Salve Andrea! It's not a huge issue, but can I please ask why you changed info box on the Columbopolis page? I find the blue version more informative, neater and easier to handle... --Harrissimo 00:01, 15 Iulii 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry if I offended anyone but I notice that on most of the other version of Wikipedia, the infoboxes for cities are uniform. Therefore, in an effort to unify the different pages, I reverted them to the formula infobox. Now this infobox is by no means informative and requires much more information, but it is a starting point. If you think that you want more information the infobox can be found under Formula:Urbs Civitatium Foederatarum Americae. However, changing this without allowing a cities to "opt-out" of giving certain information will require someone to go through and redo all of the cities. A very tedious task if I may say so myself. If you are really bothered with the Columbopolis page infobox you can revert it, although then the major city infobox continuity will be broken.Andy85719 00:22, 15 Iulii 2007 (UTC)[reply]
That's OK, I didn't realise it was an official infobox. You could probably easily add some of the things that that infobox lacks into the main article though (e.g. Altitude and coordinates). It's certainly true that the 'blue' one is used more on most cities from the rest of the world, though. --Harrissimo 09:58, 15 Iulii 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It is possible, with the help of an if, to add an optional item to an infobox. For all I know, this may help with the sigillum question as well. UV helped me to do it on the infobox {{Commune-Franciae}}, where I wanted the option of a picture. If it's useful, have a look at that formula to see how he did it. ... and forgive me if you both knew this already! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 11:53, 15 Iulii 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Name Changes/mutationes nominis[fontem recensere]

Salve, I have noticed that some of the names of cities have been labeled in inconsistent manners and then redirected. In my opinion, we should use the most correct manner of separating names. In the template for the cities, the top list the cities with the format :

Urbs, Genetive Civitatis

However, some cities were only listed as a city name. And others used the less appealing:

Urbs (Civitas)

I think that we should restrict this use to places ruled by a very distant country such as

Aruba (Dania)

With U.S. states, the tradition is to separate the city from the state with a comma. In keeping with latin the state name is changed to the genetive to denote the city is "of the state.

If anybody has a problem with this please contact me. Andy85719 19:13, 15 Iulii 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Andy, it was a hasty move to change all those place names. We have been working towards a standard on Vicipaedia, and the standard is this: when it's necessary to distinguish place names, we add the region or country name, in parentheses, in the nominative. It's not just Vicipaedia: lots of other languages do it this way, as you can see by checking the interwiki links. It would have been better to have asked about previous decisions, and then discussed the issue, if you want to change the policy. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 19:19, 15 Iulii 2007 (UTC)[reply]
[Added later:] Incidentally, there is a good reason for using parentheses in Wikipedia titles, a reason that wasn't obvious to me when I began to edit but was explained to me here and is also explained at en:Help:Pipe trick. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 19:40, 15 Iulii 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hm, I do not see any good reason to deviate from the standard established here. If there is no need for a disambiguation (or if we have more than one place called by the same name, but one place is by far more important than the other), then we should keep the title short and omit the unnecessary state name. If there are two homonymous place names, we should disambiguate them in the usual way for disambiguations, that is using brackets.
By the way ("very distant country"): To me, Dania is much less distant than Civitates Foederatae Americae! --UV 20:04, 15 Iulii 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry for such hastiness on my part, but I have looked at the other links and the usage of a comma is more frequent than the usage of the parentheses. From the information I collected, I made that determination. I will return all of the cities to the your desired format, but a must ask you to first look at the statistics from the other wikipedia sites: Here are some stats:
Atlanta, Georgia
, = 9
() = 3
Chicago, Illinois
, = 4
() = 1
Houston, Texas
, = 6
() = 2
Miami, Florida
, = 6
() = 1
Los Angeles, California
, = 6
() = 2
Dallas, Texas
, = 6
() = 3
San Francisco
, = 8
() = 5 (including latin)
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
, = 7
() = 4
Minneapolis, Minnesota
, = 6
() = 3
I could continue, but I don't want to ramble. Anyway, a clear majority of the languages, at least for U.S. cities use a comma to designate state names. Also, some of the ones that are using a comma are artificial languages like Esperanto. I checked into cities that are just part of a country and are not in a state per se and they are listed mostly with commas too, but more do have parentheses if they have any designation at all. I don't want to be the fly in anyone's ointment but it makes more sense to make this change. Also, to prevent disputes like this, there needs to be a detailed latin style guide to deal with these issues. As I said before, some of the cities were not listed with the state at all, and others had parentheses but the Genetive inside. I think we can all agree that the rules should be much clearer, with name format and the actual names of cities. Why is it Sanctus Franciscus but Didacopolis or Columbopolis, an extremely odd and cacophonic name? If surnames aren't altered, why isn't Castrum Vorthi spelled Castrum Worth? If we have Kansia with a K, why is it Cansianopolis? All these issues must be resolved. And Campi for Las Vegas? Oh, and when I said distant I was referring to territories that are not part of the contiguous country. For example Puerto Rico, a territory of the U.S. would be labelled Portus Dives (CFA), designating that it is part of the country even though it isn't a city and it has its own name. Andy85719 20:17, 15 Iulii 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your reply, Andy. You raise some very good questions there, and I for one will be happy to join in a discussion of them. And you are quite right that we have not yet achieved consistency, and sometimes not even euphony, but we are working towards these perfect states ...
I don't say that Latin has to go with the majority; it's just that Vicipaedia, like other Wikipedias, has gradually established some policies, and there are (sometimes) reasons to stay with them. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 20:40, 15 Iulii 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Andy, you are right: It is sometimes not easy to realize whether we are having an inconsistency or a local policy. Concerning the naming of cities, we are aware of having our special rules which have some technical adavantages (I mean brackets instead of comma) and are more convenient (I mean to use just the name without the state ... where possible). If you want to help expanding our written policy/rules ... please do :-) --Rolandus 21:50, 15 Iulii 2007 (UTC)[reply]
See also Vicipaedia:Titulus#Tituli_regum. --Rolandus 21:57, 15 Iulii 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Andy, since you hadn't yet moved any of the pages back, I moved Bostonia. In general it should be quite simple to revert the moves. If you will do them, as you promised above, that would be great.
If you feel doubt about the correct form to go for (apologies for repetition) it should be the city name without any state name if the city has a unique name or is obviously the most widely known, like Boston; it should be the city name followed by the state name (in the nominative, in parentheses) if disambiguation is needed.
And feel free to discuss any of the names that you think wrong or cacophonous or both! Our aim is never to invent names, always to use names that have been published before, but you may certainly find cases where this rule doesn't seem to have been followed. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 21:09, 16 Iulii 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I've moved the other names back now. Please just take this as not being argumentative but just restoring a status quo. All practices in wikis are always up for discussion ...
And I meant to say before, but forgot, that I think the work you're doing on US cities and states is really useful. Just now I'm trying to do some similar things with French départements and cities. It's always a long job. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 13:47, 17 Iulii 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Two place names[fontem recensere]

I noticed your comments at Columbopolis and your move of Sanctus Franciscus to Franciscopolis. I can find a source supporting you on Columbus -- I think you're right on that one. For Franciscopolis you'll need to find a source (independent of Vicipaedia), because there is a source for Sanctus Franciscus: I've cited it in a footnote on the page. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 12:38, 17 Iulii 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Harrissimo has already found a source supporting you on Franciscopolis (see the discussion page) so you will probably carry that one too! Good move. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 12:52, 17 Iulii 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I am still so unsure about place names. Do I use the gen. of the State? Do I put the state in parentheses? Do I just put a comma and then the nominative. This is really key. As of now, I am following the format shown on the U.S. main page. Andy85719 03:07, 2 Augusti 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Our current standard is definitely this. Wherever disambiguation will be necessary, because there could be 2 or more articles under the same name, put the state name (or region or country, whatever is appropriate) after the town name, in the nominative, in parentheses. You will find lots of examples of this among real articles, and very few counter-examples, because Rolandus, and I, and others have been standardizing! But you will also find redlinks in various different formats -- let's by all means change them before any more articles are created.
See also my comment on the Taberna. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 07:28, 2 Augusti 2007 (UTC)[reply]

(first name last name)[fontem recensere]

I think you see what I've been doing to the names. Please have a look at VP:TNP to see how to handle names. I wonder if it's really necessary, given our stated policy, to say Ioannes Shadegg (John Shadegg). It would suffice (in my humble opinion it would even suffice to do without the parentheses, whatsoever, but...) to just say Ioannes Shadegg (John) since we don't translate last names. What do you think? --Ioscius (disp) 03:52, 2 Augusti 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I completely agree. I am prone to be very wordy, in almost everything. It does make more sense given that the surname is indeclinable. Although, I wonder what we do with Chinese names. The wife of Don Young is Lu Young. How would I translate that? Otherwise your right. Andy85719 03:57, 2 Augusti 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Donaldus, and for her Lu, Lui, f., I would think. We have precedent in Winnie ille Pu. =] --Ioscius (disp) 04:02, 2 Augusti 2007 (UTC)[reply]
And wordy isn't necessarily bad everywhere, just wonder if we could be more tidy in the biggest, boldest thing on the page. =] --Ioscius (disp) 04:03, 2 Augusti 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't even think of Pu. That is a good idea. Names are tricky.Andy85719 04:12, 2 Augusti 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Aye, they are, but so are religions. Just because English forms them with ism doesn't mean that Latin does with ismus. Look at the recent changes, I've edited all your pages! Religio is feminine, so is factio; ergo Catholica, Democratica. We have Ecclesia Catholica, Protestantes, etc. And we have Index nominum.--Ioscius (disp) 04:17, 2 Augusti 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I was having the party modify the person rather than the thing. Same with the religion. Hence, he is a Democrat, the democrat modifying him. I'll do it the other way now. My Latin Dictionary left out some of the more modern religions so I was sort of guessing. I am glad there are more knowledgeable people on this site to help.
Man, please please please slow down! Patricius, non Patricus, James=Iacobus, non Ioannes. Please ask if you don't know something, I've been following you around for an hour and a half, now!! --Ioscius (disp) 05:25, 2 Augusti 2007 (UTC)[reply]
And these pages you are creating: they don't have any text or any interwiki links. This means the English wikipedia probably doesn't have a link to here, either. As I said, slow down a bit. Let's do things the right way.--Ioscius (disp) 05:30, 2 Augusti 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I agree. I have finished the small states. The big states like California, Texas, New York and Florida will take very long time. Now I can begin to fill in the one that I have so far. Thanks again for your help. Andy85719 05:33, 2 Augusti 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Interwiki links[fontem recensere]

Please provide interwiki links where possible. Example: Michael Michaud. I have added the link there. Thanks. --Rolandus 05:59, 2 Augusti 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It is getting late here (11:03 pm). I'm going to sleep but I will be sure to add any interwikis early tomorrow morning. Thanks.Andy85719 06:03, 2 Augusti 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Fine! :-) ... and don't forget a description (maybe "Michael Michaud est ..."). ;-) --Rolandus 06:14, 2 Augusti 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Andy, are you watching the taberna? Please see Vicipaedia:Taberna#.22Vir_civilis.2C.22_.22legatus.2C.22_etc. --Rolandus 09:20, 4 Augusti 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please do also write the title in bold when it is mentioned the first time, like I did in Duglassius Lamborn. Thanks! --Rolandus 15:01, 4 Augusti 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Classes and styles[fontem recensere]

Many of the more sophisticated templates from other Wikipedias depend on styles which are defined in stylesheets and attached by using the HTML attribute "class".

Page Vicipaedia:CSS has some hints.

Other Wikipedias sometimes have a richer Common.css (MediaWiki:Common.css), for example. Changing this style needs administration rights, I think, but the real work is, to find out what has to be changed/added.

If you need help in this case, Usor:UV is always a good address, sometimes I can help too. Or you simply post your request in the taberna. Like: "What do I have to do that table XY in the Latin Wikipedia looks like table YZ in the AB Wikipedia?". See also Vicipaedia:Reporting technical problems.

However, I personally do not think that - for example - the English Wikipedia has always the nicer layout. So sometimes it is ok for me, if our layout is different. ;-) But, as I said, in cases where you want the same layout and it does not work, just ask for help.

See on page Disputatio_Vicipaediae:Pagina_prima what effort it took us to design our Pagina prima. Oh, I've forgotten: Usor:Rafaelgarcia is also a good address for layout problems. And others ...

--Rolandus 06:39, 5 Augusti 2007 (UTC)[reply]

... and you have also to take Javascript into account, like MediaWiki:Common.js. --Rolandus 08:32, 5 Augusti 2007 (UTC)[reply]

... has been tagged with {{non stipula}} . --Rolandus 06:09, 7 Augusti 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the correction Tempus->Temporis--Rafaelgarcia 03:06, 14 Augusti 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Some neo-latin[fontem recensere]

Hi Andy! I notice you have requested very many translations in the taberna about Chemistry, Politics etc. I may have some answers for you. Have you ever seen D. Morgan's lexicon? It has hundreds and hundreds of useful terms which you could use to try and translate things. It has some things about Religion, Politics, Chemistry and pretty much everything else. If you are trying to adjectivise one of the nouns, which you will probably have to, then I guess you should just follow the general patters, of which I am not sure. Hope the link is helpful for you! --Harrissimo 15:22, 14 Augusti 2007 (UTC)[reply]