Disputatio Usoris:Jeanthorlon

Salve, Jeanthorlon!

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:

Ops nexusque usoribus novis ( ca, de, en, es, ia, it, ru, ro, no, tl, eo)
De orthographia ( ca, en, es, tl)
Enchiridion interpretis (Anglice scriptum)
Taberna
Lexica Neolatina
Lexica Latina interretialia
Fontes nominum Latinorum ( ca)
Fontes nominum geographicorum
Index formularum

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!— Lesgles (disputatio) 20:22, 21 Decembris 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Personality>persona >vita in re Steve_Ditko[fontem recensere]

Salve Jeanthorlon ut vales? Loquerisne Anglice? Estne francogallice tua lingua materna? Velim te rogare, nonne sit melius 'persona'(non 'vita') pro verbo anglice 'personality'. Iam scio personam esse 'mask' anglice. Amice--Jondel (disputatio) 02:34, 23 Decembris 2016 (UTC)[reply]

'Personality' = indoles (Traupman) vel hominis natura et ingenium (Cassell's). Et hic in Vicipaedia, ut videtur, personalitas! IacobusAmor (disputatio) 05:01, 23 Decembris 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Salvete! Gratias vobis ago, qui mihi idoniorem verbum dederitis.--Jeanthorlon (disputatio) 09:21, 23 Decembris 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Gratias responsum tuum Jeanthorlon et consilium tuum Iacobe.--Jondel (disputatio) 12:16, 23 Decembris 2016 (UTC)[reply]

propriissimus[fontem recensere]

Salve! Gratias pro adnotatione a te facta! Doctus 'Antibarbaro linguae latinae ('Antibarbarus der lateinischen Sprache: nebst Vorbemerkungen über reine Latinität' compositus a Ph. Krebs), in quo libro lego Unerhört ist ein Superlativ 'propriissimus', hunc superlativum vituperandum puto et emendavi. Si tu contra sentis, revertas quaeso. Nemo te impediet. --Bavarese (disputatio) 11:30, 12 Ianuarii 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Salve. Tuam emendationem probo. Ut superlativus "propriissimus" non "unerhört" sit, tamen rarior, forte dubius. Tibi gratias ago. Vale. Jeanthorlon (disputatio) 20:04, 12 Ianuarii 2017 (UTC)[reply]

De categoriis[fontem recensere]

Iohanni s.p.d. Necesse est nobis in paginis novis categorias scribere. Amabimus te si eas addes!--Xaveri us 08:06, 18 Iulii 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Veniam mi da. Tempus mi defuit. Vale. Jeanthorlon (disputatio) 09:41, 18 Iulii 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is needed - Improving the Content Translation tool[fontem recensere]

Hello Friend,

Apologies as this message is not in your native language.

The WMF language team is reaching out to you based on your valuable contributions to the Latin Wikipedia as an editor who frequently uses the Content Translation tool.

We appreciate the great work you are doing in Latin Wikipedia to increase content to ensure that knowledge is available in your Wikipedia and understand that it is annoying to encounter difficulties while translating articles or deleted content afterwards. Therefore, the WMF Language team will like to understand from your experience, the issues you encounter when using the tool to translate content.

Our observations

We noticed that the Content Translation tool is not used frequently and sometimes the articles created are deleted. We say this because, from our statistics, 5360 articles were added to Latin Wikipedia in 2020. Out of the above figure, only 68 of them were translated using the Content Translation tool. 17 of the articles added with Content translation were deleted. While the tool has been frequently used with low deletion ratios on many wikis, the tool's low usage signals a problem or deficiencies peculiar to Latin Wikipedia. As the Content Translation tool can increase content creation in your Wikipedia and is a proven excellent way to efficiently Introduce newcomers to adding content and expand on existing ones.

Our request

So, we are reaching out to you because we want you to participate in a survey. The survey will help us understand your challenges with the tool, the aspect of the tool you think needs improvement that will enable your community to use it more and reduce the rate of content deletion.

Please follow this link to the Survey:
Take the Survey
To know how the information collected from the survey will be used, please read the Privacy Statement.

If you are not comfortable with taking the survey, that is fine. You can still provide us with feedback via email on the following questions:

What is the most challenging part of translating an article using the Content Translation tool? Example (adding the references, the infobox, templates, publishing, etc.
Why is the above the most challenging part of translating articles in your Wikipedia?
In your opinion, what changes can be made to the tool that can make more people in your community use the tool more frequently?
Why do you think some translated articles are being deleted?

So please, feel free to give us feedback in any way that is most convenient for you.

Thank you so much, as we look forward to your response.

UOzurumba (WMF) (talk) 10:03, 21 Iunii 2021 (UTC) On behalf of the WMF language team.[reply]