Usor:Xaverius/Disputatio ad X-2007

E Vicipaedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Salve, Xaveri!

Gratus 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" fieri velle!

Liberus esto quaestiones vel aerumnas ullas me petere. Gratus es apud nos!--Ioshus Rocchio 23:15, 5 Iunii 2006 (UTC)

Salve Condiscipule Oxoniane[recensere | fontem recensere]

Animadverti te studere apud universitatem Oxoniensem. Apud quem collegium studis (that's probably incorrect grammar). Salve! LeighvsOptimvsMaximvs 13:31, 19 Novembris 2006 (UTC)

Credo nos esse soli apud Vicipedia. Vah! Fortasse alios Oxonianos nobis refecendos (recruited, I think) sunt. Vale! LeighvsOptimvsMaximvs 14:11, 20 Novembris 2006 (UTC)
Felix sum. Nullas antequam 2008 examinationes habeo :-). Si ullas habes, te Fortuna favet! Leigh (disp) 20:29, 5 Martii 2007 (UTC)

Praemia[recensere | fontem recensere]

Ceterae Vicipaediae praemia dant alicui pro meritis in eisdem. Credo optime praemia Vicipaediae Latinae facere. Ego mereor nulla, sed certe ceterae Vicipaedistae. Hoc sunt exempla:

Original Barnstar.png Sidus Optimi Vicipaediani - (nomen hic)
Hoc est premium pro multiis meritiis in Vicipaedia Latina; Sit tibi grata!

Rosetta Barnstar.png Stella Interpretis - (nomen hic)
Premium datum illi qui optimas traductiones fecit

Barnstar-stone2-noback.png Sidus Historicus - (nomen hic)
Hoc est praemium pro illo Vicipaediano qui Historiam aut Archaeologiam in Vicipaedia colet

SPQRomani.svg Clipeus Latinitatis - (nomen hic)
Summa remuneratio usori pro optima Latinitate

Vigilante Barnstar.png Stella Vigilans - (nomen hic)
Praemium datum vicipaediano vigilante tironis et dudosae Latinitatis

Orbis Vicipaediani Geographi - (nomen hic)
Orbis Terrarum datum vicipaediano qui Geographiam colit

Feather.svg Calamus Scholastici - (nomen hic)
Premium vicipaediano qui continenter meliorem faciet et semper discit res novas

Barnstar-atom3.png Astrum Scientiae- (nomen hic)
Premium vicipaediano qui Scientiam, Mathematicam, Physicam et Chemiam colet

Tireless Contributor Barnstar.gif Stella Constantiae - (nomen hic)
Remuneratio vicipaediano constante de conlationibus?

Star of Sophia.png Clipeus Philosophicus (nomen hic)
Summa remuneratio Vicipaediano qui de Philosophia vel Religione scribet

Hoc est praemium optimis paginis

Goldenwiki 2.png Haec est optima pagina
Haec pagina commendata a Vicipaedianis est

Comments[recensere | fontem recensere]

These are awesome. Good work! I think the Latin may need minor corrections in some of them, but nothing that I am immediately sure of. Other than traductoris should probably actually be interpretis: traducere is not the most common word for "translate" in Classical Latin, and the one occurence of traductor means somethign else entirely. --Iustinus 17:07, 2 Februarii 2007 (UTC)
Traductor was in my Spanish-Latin dictionary, but I'll use interpretis, anyway, these prizs are to be used by all vicipaediani, so feel free to change them!--Medievalista 17:12, 2 Februarii 2007 (UTC)
Well, one thing I was thinking...probably ought to be all datives, not genitives, ey? Praemium Vicipaediano num Praemium Vicipaediani"?--Ioshus (disp) 17:40, 2 Februarii 2007 (UTC)
And let me repeat Iustinus' accolade: Great work, and thanks!--Ioshus (disp) 17:40, 2 Februarii 2007 (UTC)
For praemium that's a good point. I'm not sure, though, for things like sidus and calamus. It's a situation rather like "philosopher's stone" here. --Iustinus 17:53, 2 Februarii 2007 (UTC)
Excellent idea, but let's make sure there's something for everybody !——
"What I was going to say," said the Dodo in an offended tone, "was, that the best thing to get us dry would be a Caucus-race."
"What is a Caucus-race?" said Alice; not that she wanted much to know, but the Dodo had paused as if it thought that somebody ought to speak, and no one else seemed inclined to say anything.
"Why," said the Dodo, "the best way to explain it is to do it." (And, as you might like to try the thing yourself, some winter day, I will tell you how the Dodo managed it.)
First it marked out a race-course, in a sort of circle, ("the exact shape doesn't matter," it said,) and then all the party were placed along the course, here and there. There was no "One, two, three, and away," but they began running when they liked, and left off when they liked, so that it was not easy to know when the race was over. However, when they had been running half an hour or so, and were quite dry again, the Dodo suddenly called out "The race is over!" and they all crowded round it, panting, and asking, "But who has won?"
This question the Dodo could not answer without a great deal of thought, and it sat for a long time with one finger pressed upon its forehead (the position in which you usually see Shakespeare, in the pictures of him), while the rest waited in silence. At last the Dodo said, "Everybody has won, and all must have prizes."
Which reminds me: has this work been Latinized? IacobusAmor 14:49, 3 Februarii 2007 (UTC)
Should we make a page in which to show the definitive praemia? vicipaedia:Praemia Vicipaedianis? (how is such a page made)?
The disputatio could be used for proposals of awards and voting, or something like that... And apart from that, I ave made a golden award that could be placed in all the pagina mensis that we have had or in other pages that deserve it!--Medievalista 23:50, 4 Februarii 2007 (UTC)
Yeah... Vicipaedia:Praemia Vicipaedianis. Good luck!--Ioshus (disp) 23:53, 4 Februarii 2007 (UTC)

gratias...[recensere | fontem recensere]

...ob praemium meum! Et gratias ut dontationem praemiorum incepisti!--Ioshus (disp) 00:01, 22 Februarii 2007 (UTC)

...sed num re vera nominatus sum? Non enim nomen meum inter proposita video, neque re vera multa de fastis scripsi. Em, forsan multa, sed non multum ;) --Iustinus 21:18, 23 Februarii 2007 (UTC)

Gratias[recensere | fontem recensere]

Gratias vobis ago ob premium. Felix sum :-)!---Massimo Macconi 11:49, 25 Februarii 2007 (UTC)

Ego quoque vobis multas gratias ago ob praemium! --Amphitrite 12:31, 25 Februarii 2007 (UTC)

Praemium[recensere | fontem recensere]

Thanks for the prize! --Rolandus 18:08, 5 Martii 2007 (UTC)

sorry[recensere | fontem recensere]

I did'nt know it. I believed it was the same Thank you--Massimo Macconi 10:38, 10 Martii 2007 (UTC)

De_nomen_usoris_mutando[recensere | fontem recensere]

Xaverius, if you want to change your username, this is possible, see Vicipaedia:Nomina_usorum#De_nomen_usoris_mutando. --Rolandus 10:58, 18 Martii 2007 (UTC)

Hola[recensere | fontem recensere]

Muchas gracias Javier. Como puedes ver por mi tímida presentación soy más aprendiz que otra cosa; del latín me refiero, ya que lo del Wiki lo manejo bastante bien. Me dio la ventolera hace poco y he recuperado los viejos libros de bachillerato, y con un poco de ayuda de la red voy entrando poco a poco en el latín. En estos momentos estoy memorizando vocabulario, que me parece básico. Me vendría mu bien algunas direcciones de ejercicios, mejor si son interactivas, para lanzarme a hacer frases y que me digan si están bien o mal (antes de meter la pata aquí). --Pastranus 11:21, 18 Martii 2007 (UTC)

Ulfilas[recensere | fontem recensere]

¡Buenas tardes! :) I'm interested especialy on eastern heterodox churches (e.g. Montanists) and the Gnostics. I don't feel competent in 4th century western church, but I'll try to see some source fragments about Ulfilas in Socrates and Sozomenos. I don't know if I would be able to get Philosturgius or Theodoret. There are some english texts about him in the internet, but I realy wouldn't trust them, unless they're accompanied with sources :). What exacly is needed? Biography, doctrine? Anyway, I'm ready to help as much as I can. There's no info about Ulfilas on Polish Vikipaedia, so if anything is to be done, will be done also in Polish! Have a nice day! --Ćwiklińsky 14:30, 21 Martii 2007 (UTC)

As there is not much about Ulfilas it would be basically a brief biography, while doctrine can be put in Haeresis Ariana, which is rather short.--Xaverius 19:45, 21 Martii 2007 (UTC)

Legio[recensere | fontem recensere]

Bueno, vale, me atrevo a hacer un artículo sobre León. ¿Qué es mejor Legio (urbs) o Legio VII (urbs)? Por cierto, poco a poco, y ya me corregirás. --Pastranus 19:02, 21 Martii 2007 (UTC)

Bueno, ya he cometido los dos primeros párrafos de Legio (urbs), no sé que tal estarán. Para empezar me he inventado dos topónimos, los ríos Bernesga (Bernesga, ae) y Torío (Torius, i), y he llamado al Camino de Santiago Via Iabocea, que supongo que sí pero no sé. Ya me dirás si el atrevimiento ha sido mucho. --Pastranus 13:07, 24 Martii 2007 (UTC)

Gracias por la corrección y los consejos. Procuraré seguir así. --Pastranus 11:48, 29 Martii 2007 (UTC)

vicingivicingus?[recensere | fontem recensere]

I just want to inform you that I've objected to your page move at Disputatio:Vicingi. Best, Georgius B 18:26, 29 Martii 2007 (UTC)

Gratias[recensere | fontem recensere]

Mehercle! Mihi Stellam Constantiae adiudicavisti! Amice, tibi gratias summas ago, quod me tot tantisque beneficiis ornaveris! Haudquaquam tali honore me dignor. IacobusAmor 12:38, 22 Aprilis 2007 (UTC)

vocative[recensere | fontem recensere]

Hey just a quick note. Masculine nomina which end in -ius, take their vocative simply as -i. So Terentius => Terenti, or in the current example, Methodius => Methodi. While we're at it, names that end in -eus take their vocative in -ei or eu... I can't think of a name, but say we were talking to the color blue: Caeruleus => Caerulei. Ok well there's Orpheus, vocative of which is Orpheu. I'll try and find some other examples. Cheers!--Ioshus (disp) 13:12, 22 Aprilis 2007 (UTC)

It must be that I learnt my vocatives for substantives of the 2nd declension, which form the vocative with -e. Sorry about that, I thought it would have been the same for other substantives.--Xaverius 20:38, 22 Aprilis 2007 (UTC)

Multas gratias[recensere | fontem recensere]

Multas gratias tibi ago pro propositione Numismae Heroicae Ruthenicae! -- Alexander Gerascenco 15:51, 23 Aprilis 2007 (UTC)

Regnum Utrusque Siciliae[recensere | fontem recensere]

I agree with you. It was only a beginnig, but there is a lot of things to add. In any case I know (and confirms it) that the name it:Regno delle Due Sicilie is usually used only after 1815 or from the beginnig of the Borbone dinasty (1720 I suppose). Before the official name of the Kingdom was it:Regno di Napoli, which belong with the kingdoms of Sicily and (before 1720) Sardinia to the it:Borboni and before to the kings of en:Spain. Ciao --Massimo Macconi 21:13, 23 Aprilis 2007 (UTC)

W to V?[recensere | fontem recensere]

Are you sure it's best to change W to V in non-Latin names? (And, by the way, is Arcturus definitely the Latin for Arthur?) Best wishes -- Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 18:23, 27 Aprilis 2007 (UTC)

If you want a precedent, Traupman renders Washington as Vashintonia. (Better: Vasintonia?) IacobusAmor 19:45, 27 Aprilis 2007 (UTC)
I guess that if we are not using ñ, ç, á, ú, ê, ì, ł, š and so, we chouldn't use W. And about Arthur, I would say arcuturus is fine. The star that in Spain we call Arturo in the Boyero constelation (bootes) is in Latin Arcturus.--Xaverius 20:59, 27 Aprilis 2007 (UTC)
OK, but there is a difference between w and those other letters -- w is commonly used in medieval Latin (in some countries anyway!), and we do have it in many titles referring to medieval people. I just noticed you were making this change and thought it best to ask ...
As to Arcturus/Arthur, I think what has happened there in Spanish is that two distinct words have come together. Historically, Arcturus is just the name of the star; Arthurus is (in the texts I have seen) the usual Latin equivalent for Arthur. (There are other variants too, I know.) For example, I have never seen king Arthur called Arcturus in Latin -- but perhaps you have?
I know some Arthur-worshippers connect his name with bears. I always thought they were wrong, but perhaps I am! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 09:29, 28 Aprilis 2007 (UTC)
I will stop making the w>v conversion then. And concerning Arcturus just to let you know that when I moved the page it was already named Arcturus, I did not change that...--Xaverius 12:25, 28 Aprilis 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for that reply! I just wanted to query the w/v point; I find it a very difficult issue in fact and I don't know that we have really found a perfect answer.
As for Arcturus, yes, I noticed the name wasn't chosen by you. As it happens, I was about to change Arcturus wellesley to Arthurus Wellesley, when you changed it instead to Arcturus Vellesley ... That was what made me raise these two questions originally.
But these are tiny issues, anyway. Much more important, I am full of admiration for the articles you are adding to Vicipaedia. The improvement in the subject area of medieval Spain is outstanding, I think. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 19:02, 28 Aprilis 2007 (UTC)
I would just certainly like to add my agreement with Andrew on that last point. You've made a big difference around here in a short time, and we are very grateful. Keep it up, and please don't be afraid to make mistakes. Errando discimus after all.--Ioshus (disp) 21:26, 28 Aprilis 2007 (UTC)
Thank you both! I'll keep going on my Visigoths, as I soon realised that trying to edit five things at the same time does not work. Errando discimus, most certainly, because "el que tiene boca se equivoca"... roughly qui orem habet, erra, but of course, it sounds better in Spanish--Xaverius 22:07, 28 Aprilis 2007 (UTC)

Nomen usoris[recensere | fontem recensere]

Nomen tuum mutavit. Me morae paenitet! Adam Episcopus 21:30, 28 Aprilis 2007 (UTC)

adam grapheocrates[recensere | fontem recensere]

In futuro scito nostrum Adamum solere celerrime res agendas agere, si apud Wikipediam non Vicipaediam rogas.--Ioshus (disp) 21:59, 28 Aprilis 2007 (UTC)

Optime, sed nomen usoris novum nolo.--Xaverius 22:22, 28 Aprilis 2007 (UTC)
Nomina mutare non est solum grapheocratis officium.--Ioshus (disp) 22:26, 28 Aprilis 2007 (UTC)

Hispania Visigothica[recensere | fontem recensere]

Hi Xaverius. I had a question. Would you like me to fix mistakes that I see myself, or point them out to you so you can work with your own sentences, and keep the edit history looking pretty (like Iustinus did for me on Infinitas. Let me know, and I will immediately begin reviewing. Cheers!--Ioshus (disp) 19:17, 4 Maii 2007 (UTC)

No problem, glad I could help. clarus is not so much a problem as praeclarus. I still have to take a final look through to see if there is anything I missed the first time, or anything that I didn't express clearly enough. I will probably not get to that until tomorrow. You've done a really good job, and thanks for being so patient through the editing process.--Ioshus (disp) 12:27, 13 Maii 2007 (UTC)

de Hispaniae Visigothicae parte secunda[recensere | fontem recensere]

In English, so I can make sure not to be confusing:

Moved to Disputatio Usoris:Xaverius/Hispania Visigothica

Hispanus et Lusitanus[recensere | fontem recensere]

Hispanus et, origine toto pectoreque, Lusitanus. "Ibérico" in hispana atque lusitana uicipædia. Quia non u minuscula et V maiuscula semper scribimus? Vale! --Ibericus 11:24, 6 Maii 2007 (UTC)

Haec est Vicipaedia latina, non romana et ita u/v distinguamus. Eodem modo litteras ligatas non utimini. Esne Oliventinus? Frater amici mei quoque oriundus Oliventiae (nescio Latine pro Olivenza) est.--Xaverius 11:59, 6 Maii 2007 (UTC)

Latina non Romana??? Latine V/u! Catalanus et origine Oliuentinus sum. Latine Oliuentia. Populariter Olivença. Puto Martínez Latine Martinius esse. Scribas in disputato meo, non in tuo, te rogo. Vale. --Ibericus 18:07, 29 Iunii 2007 (UTC)

También yo soy latinista, aunque del sector V/u (otro convenio, el de la restauración de la ortografía clásica); además, siempre pronunciamos /u/ o /w/, y nunca /b/. Pensaba que Martínez era "Martinius" como, por ejemplo, Sánchez es "Sanctius" (Sánchez de las Brozas firmaba así). Salud. --Ibericus 19:41, 29 Iunii 2007 (UTC)

ok[recensere | fontem recensere]

I think you are right, I let you move tha page.Thank you--Massimo Macconi 18:58, 7 Maii 2007 (UTC)

de dictionario et opera[recensere | fontem recensere]

Xaveri -- I don't want you to lose heart in this. Your comment "no one understands my dictionary"...what dictionary are you using? The best for this type of work is the L&S or the OLD. As far as modern dictionaries go, Traupman makes a decent one. It's hard too, because, remember for "where" : we had to go through several definitions of the word "where" before we get qua, which is the form we wanted through most of the article. Not all dictionaries are clear about when to use which definition. Furthermore, this appears to be your first major work. You can't expect to get everything right the first time. Keep your head up, and keep at it, because you have honestly made the start of what is going to be a great article. I have in mind to nominate this for pagina mensis once we're done with it.--Ioshus (disp) 12:37, 8 Maii 2007 (UTC)

Xavier is doing fine! Unlike many, he clearly wants to learn, as he demonstrates great patience in working through every phrase. The main lesson here, as everywhere, is that when using dictionaries, you have to "read between the lines" a lot, and it often helps to read the whole entry, and not to stop just as soon as you come close to what seems like what you're looking for. IacobusAmor 14:02, 8 Maii 2007 (UTC)
And yes, you're right, I was looking at an old version for many of my comments. I have refreshed, and all further comments will reflect the new version. I have in mind to finish as I have been, section by section, line by line. Then I will go back through and see if I missed anything and offer a few general stylistic ideas.--Ioshus (disp) 14:30, 8 Maii 2007 (UTC)
Well, thank you both =]. Whenever I check how's Hispania Visigothica going I feel like when I am given back an essay by my tutor. Concerning the pagina mensis, I would be satisfied with {{latinitas|2}}. Concerning my dictionary, it is my old Latin-Spanish / Spanish-Latin "Spes" dictionary. It is rather old. I find it useful, but it must be that, as Iacobus said, I stop when I find the translation I was looking for in an entry. On populatio it says "devastation, pillage, sacking" and so, but then I found where I had seen populatio as "poblate" and "population" - in a medieval chronicle.--Xaverius 16:43, 8 Maii 2007 (UTC)
This word is an example of what happens when a language remains alive (Latin is NOT dead!) for more than two millennia: eventually, inevitably, it has a Golden Age, a period whose style becomes a model for the best of later writers. If populatio didn't mean 'population' during the Golden Age, then (say many later stylists) it shouldn't mean 'population' in modern prose, despite the fact that people have used it so for centuries. Another example is 'bullets', which the Golden Age didn't have; Bradley's Arnold tells us to translate that word as sagittae (after all, bullets & arrows are the same thing: potentially lethal projectiles, discharged usually at an enemy, or at game). But we shouldn't be surprised if somebody in the past few hundred years hasn't come up with a Latin term specifically for bullets—and for guns, which do look somewhat different from bows (arcus). IacobusAmor 17:17, 8 Maii 2007 (UTC)
Incidentally...gun is sclopetum...--Ioshus (disp) 17:28, 8 Maii 2007 (UTC)
Aha.... hence Spanish escopeta. Surprisingly enough I was about to ask how was gun said, for I'll need it when I write Ultimi Philippinarum. Scopletum. I'll remember that--Xaverius 17:54, 8 Maii 2007 (UTC)
"Incidentally...gun is sclopetum." Yes, that's Late Latin. So you accept postclassical terms, but then why don't you accept Medieval Latin populatio to mean 'population'? IacobusAmor 19:28, 8 Maii 2007 (UTC)
Because there is no Roman word for gun, but there is a word for population that does not cause trouble with its polysemy--Xaverius 21:35, 8 Maii 2007 (UTC)
As if there's something wrong with polysemy?! IacobusAmor 21:45, 8 Maii 2007 (UTC)
Hmmm...I think my comment suggested that it was a sticky word, not that it shouldn't be used. I don't use it, because alot of dictionaries don't even include "population" at all in the definition. I suggested a less troublesome word.--Ioshus (disp) 21:49, 8 Maii 2007 (UTC)
I am confused now. Maybe I will use incolae for the inhabitants/population and populo/depopulo (not deponens, for it would then have the classical meaning) for the action of inhabit or depopulate. I think that's fair. Regarding polysemy, an encyclopedia is probably not the best place for it--Xaverius 21:55, 8 Maii 2007 (UTC)
Relax, Xavier, I believe our Iacobus to have been joking about the polysemy. As for the verb, I don't really think it's "safe" to use in any circumstance. The primary meaning of the noun is derived from the primary meaning of the verb, which, as I have said, in classical Latin, means destroy, ravage, lay to waste.--Ioshus (disp) 22:56, 8 Maii 2007 (UTC)

Fabullus Xaverio s.p.d.[recensere | fontem recensere]

Cur, Xaveri, non simpliciter delevisti paginam Kotetus Mielonetus? Sine dubio iocus est illepidus. Vale, --Fabullus 14:23, 12 Maii 2007 (UTC)

Magistratus non sum, ergo paginas delere non possum!--Xaverius 14:28, 12 Maii 2007 (UTC)
At ego sum; igitur delebo. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 15:23, 12 Maii 2007 (UTC)

Saludos[recensere | fontem recensere]

Sí, tu plantilla la verdad es que me gustó bastante. Espero que no te haya molestado que te copiase, pero si lo hizo, rápidamente lo quito. No habría problema, en cualquier caso la culpa sería mía por plagiario xD. Te agradezco el enlace, es realmente bueno y útil. Procuraré ir creando y ampliando artículos, y como bien comentas, sobretodo los relacionados con mi tierrina ^_^. Bardeluc 09:14, 14 Maii 2007 (UTC)

¡Gracias pues! :). Es interesante lo de la lista, voy a crearla de hecho. Salu2. Bardeluc 09:29, 14 Maii 2007 (UTC)

Ultimi Philipinarum[recensere | fontem recensere]

Hola Xavieri vea mi traduccion en mi pagina de disputacion.Rafaelgarcia 01:21, 15 Maii 2007 (UTC)

Cambié una de mis lineas de traduccion en mi pagina de disputacion.Rafaelgarcia 13:10, 15 Maii 2007 (UTC)

Cibi Matritenses[recensere | fontem recensere]

Respondi in pagina mea, Xaveri. -- Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 12:24, 15 Maii 2007 (UTC)

Jarzecki[recensere | fontem recensere]

Witaj, przepraszam, że tak późno się odzywam, ale nie zaglądałem ostatnio na łacińską wikipedię. Piszę po polsku, bo przywitałeś się ze mną w tym języku. To miłe:) Studiuję archeologię w Toruniu na Uniwersytecie Mikołaja Kopernika (Nicolaus Copernicus University). Zajmuję się archeologią śródziemnomorską (mediterranean archeology). Obecnie "siedzę" w mumizmatyce Królestwa Bosporańskiego (the coinage of the Bosporan Kingdom from the first to the trith century AD). Odezwę się jeszcze jak będę miał trochę więcej czasu. Napiszę po angielsku. Trzymaj się!Pozdrawiam
Salve! Gratiam ago per epistulam Tuam. Archaeologiam studio Thoruniam in Polonia, annus quartus. Ti scribero epistulam in englice. Indulge pro errores. Cura ut valeas:)

de Hispania Visigothica[recensere | fontem recensere]

Scito, Xaveri amice, me non oblitum esse coeptum tuum. Labori in Hispaniam Visigothicam in animo habeo reddere, hoc hebdomadis fine. Fac valeas.--Ioshus (disp) 13:34, 18 Maii 2007 (UTC)

Gratias tibi ago! Cum in Oxoniam pervenias, debeo tibi "pintas". Noli te excusare; scio nos scholasticos millias ceteras res in mente habemus ut bibere, edere, dormire, musicam tangere, nunquam studire sed semper discendo (not sure of all those infinitives, though)--Xaverius 14:59, 18 Maii 2007 (UTC)
Male intelligo "pintas" amice... ¿Tu quieres pintarmi? Quot annos habitabas et habitabis in Anglia?--Ioshus (disp) 14:58, 19 Maii 2007 (UTC)
Pinta, -ae is my version for a "en:pint of beer/cider/ale" which is the basis of a student's diet in England. I've been here for two years and I'll be here for at least another three. Then I maight be going to the US for my PhD, but if not, I'll stay in England for a loooonger time.--Xaverius 17:49, 19 Maii 2007 (UTC)
I understood that immediately -- but then, I was once a student in England ... Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 18:04, 19 Maii 2007 (UTC)
And of course, mr. Dalby, I also owe you a couple of pints for your help in socolata cum encytis and many other!--Xaverius 18:08, 19 Maii 2007 (UTC)
Andrew will do (especially if you're buying the pints). Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 19:04, 19 Maii 2007 (UTC)
Aha! I like pints! I think the Latin measure that approximates it is sextarius. The next time I'm in England, I will definitely hit you up for a drink.--Ioshus (disp) 18:55, 19 Maii 2007 (UTC)

Fontes...Xaveri, I fear we need more of them. We have them for all the direct quotes, but we need them for the content which isn't in quotations. We have entire sections that are uncited. I certainly trust you, but certainly if we are to use this for pagina mensis, we need a few more fonts. What do you think?--Ioshus (disp) 04:16, 20 Maii 2007 (UTC)

I'm on it..--Xaverius 14:23, 21 Maii 2007 (UTC)
Macte! I thought you'd be game...--Ioshus (disp) 15:01, 21 Maii 2007 (UTC)

fontes[recensere | fontem recensere]

Starting to look great, man.--Ioshus (disp) 14:19, 28 Maii 2007 (UTC)

As far long as I can avoid my essay... =]--Xaverius 14:25, 28 Maii 2007 (UTC)
Aha, etiam opera tua procrastinas? Vicipaedia, si nil plus, est instrumentum cordi meo carissimum quo omnia officia vitem mea =] Ut laetus procrastines...--Ioshus (disp) 14:54, 28 Maii 2007 (UTC)
Nos Hispani procrastinationem invenimus! Quid est, tum denique, pro-crastineo nisi para mañana...?--Xaverius 20:56, 28 Maii 2007 (UTC)
procrastinare apud Words, procrastineo. Ita, ut dixisti, pro-cras-tin-are, not exactly "para mañana" more like "hasta". "Pro" here doesn't really mean "for", but more like "until" or "towards"... I'm having a hard time translating the sense of it.
We have a saying in English, rather crude, but illustrative: "procrastination is like're only screwing yourself".--Ioshus (disp) 12:34, 30 Maii 2007 (UTC)
Bloody hell, the thigns you hear from the other side of the pond =]... Nevertheless, I have to say that I am currently rather absorbed by my site report and I cannot procrastinate as much as I could. The counter part is that I get to visit the site on which I'm doing my research, so I'll spend a week in Italy!--Xaverius 15:28, 30 Maii 2007 (UTC)

Sidus[recensere | fontem recensere]

Thank you very much, Xaveri! I'm not at all sure I deserve it, but I'm very proud of it ... Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 20:17, 21 Maii 2007 (UTC)

Et felicitationes, a veterano Cantabrigiensi ad novicium (!?) Oxoniensem, pro sidere tuo bene merito! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 07:34, 22 Maii 2007 (UTC)

iHola![recensere | fontem recensere]

Hi! I was passing by and thought I would like to be aquiantanted with you. The article of Los ultimos Filipinos is interesting. I apologize, many Philippine textbooks and articles, well, don't portray the Spaniards well. I will however make an effort to distinguish the 'Spanish Authorities' in the Philippines. I hope we achieve a good Neutral Point of View in all of the langauge versions. Best regards,--Jondel 09:25, 22 Maii 2007 (UTC)

Monte Barro[recensere | fontem recensere]

Dear Xaverius,

I've visited Lecco more times but never Monte Barro. From Lugano to Lecco with the car is perhaps an hour and a quarter (more during the day because there's always a lot of trafic). With the train it's very long because there isn't a direct line from Lugano to Lecco (only Lugano - Milan 1- 1,5 hour according the frontier checks and then from there to Lecco).

If you need more information, I could ask a friend of mine who is working in Lecco.

Ciao--Massimo Macconi 12:03, 31 Maii 2007 (UTC)

nickel+odeon[recensere | fontem recensere]

The etymology, as it were: these odea apparently used to cost only a nickel.--Ioshus (disp) 05:27, 1 Iunii 2007 (UTC)

De provinciis[recensere | fontem recensere]

Thanks -- it's nice that you noticed! Nearly all done now. It was easier to do it all at once, although of course the new ones are very brief stubs at present. The strange thing is, how variable the interwiki business is. Some have 10 or 15 interwiki links, some have just 1 or 2, some have none, with very little logic to it. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 21:23, 2 Iunii 2007 (UTC)

Splendid! I look forward to seeing any maps you find or make. There are some available in Commons, but not all are good, and I chose to put the one boring map there all through until I (or someone else!) has time to select something better. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 21:34, 2 Iunii 2007 (UTC)
There was a reason why those three later Spanish provinces aren't in the list. All over the Empire there were massive changes in 296/298. Therefore, I was thinking, it might be better to do as the Germans do (see de:Liste der römischen Provinzen ab Diokletian: yes, they got there first!): to have a completely separate list of Diocletianic provinces from 296/298 onwards. Additionally, from that date on, it's useful to know what dioecesis a province belonged to: a whole new administrative level to fit in somehow.
So my inclination would be to get the new page Provinciae Romanae Diocletianae under way with those three items! But what do you think? Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 09:31, 3 Iunii 2007 (UTC)
Well, in archaeology and Roman stuff the Germans are there first always... Well, than why do we mix Republican provinces (Hispania Ulterior, Gallia Comata) with High Imperial (Mauretania Tingitana, Pannonia) provinces and Middle Imperial provinces (Tres Daciae)? I think we should have then a Index provinciarum Romanarum Rei Publicae, Index provinciarum Romanarum Imperii and Index provinciarum Romanarum Diocletiani. In the same way a {{provinciae republicae}}, {{provinciae imperii}} and {{provinciae diocletiani}}--Xaverius 09:54, 3 Iunii 2007 (UTC)
That's a much better plan: the big reorganizers were Augustus and Diocletian. All right, three separate pages. Let's go for it. Even the Germans haven't thought of that! When it comes to the formula, though, rather than have three separate ones (which would be a big eyeful on the pages for provinces that survived through all three periods) we could have a formula with three flip-down sections (have you seen those?) Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 10:04, 3 Iunii 2007 (UTC)
-- And the Imperial page can then include the information whether they were Senatorial or Imperial provinces. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 10:06, 3 Iunii 2007 (UTC)
Ah... the wonders of team work! Should we name the article with a genitive or with the adjective? I mean: "provinciae rei publicae" or "provinciae res publicanae"?--Xaverius 10:14, 3 Iunii 2007 (UTC)
Well, I think they weren't truly republican. They were provinces belonging to the Roman republic. So, genitive. Index provinciarum Rei Publicae Romanae. And the existing page gets renamed as you proposed above. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 11:34, 3 Iunii 2007 (UTC)
Incidentally, I did not make a redlink (or produce a stipula) for names which changed when the territory remained roughly the same. E.g., no stipula (at present) for Hispania Citerior because I took this to be a straight renaming, so the existing article at Hispania Tarraconensis could be made to cover it. But that was just a snap decision, I'm not sure what's best in the long run. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 11:39, 3 Iunii 2007 (UTC)
Ok, it is going to be like this then:

--Xaverius 12:05, 3 Iunii 2007 (UTC)

Just one thing. I am not sure about the two sections for Augustan and post-Augustan, because Augustus was reforming the provincial structure through his lifetime -- he didn't do it all at once like Diocletian. Therefore, as I see it, there's no Augustan system separate both from what went before and from what came after. It might turn out better not to imagine a straight cut-off date, but just to have the pre-Augustan list on the Republican page, the post-Augustan list on the Imperial page. The date of change, where there was a change, would have to be given separately for each province. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 12:23, 3 Iunii 2007 (UTC)
But I was referring to the Claudian provinces (Britannia, Mauretania, Thracia), Trajanic (Dacia, Assyria, Mesopotamia) and Severan (mutiple divissions provinces. I see your point, nevertheless.--Xaverius 12:28, 3 Iunii 2007 (UTC)
You may be right, then. I really don't feel sure! Let's get the republican and post-Diocletianic pages going, and then see. ... But, having said that, I have to leave this alone for today, I think. There are some non-Vicipaedian things that I mustn't postpone. So you have it all to yourself for today.
I see you were briefly misled by the Catalan article on Alpes Graiae: am I right there? I believe, in this case, the Catalans are wrong: they were not the same as Alpes Poeninae, even though the two provinces were sometimes combined. It made me think that you may possibly find this search useful: [1]. It does a Google search restricted to all the European Wikipedias, including Latin and English. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 12:52, 3 Iunii 2007 (UTC)
I have just noticed that we have an article Dioecesis. It seems to take it from the religious angle, but seems to give a list of late Roman dioceses which may be valid administratively as well. If you hadn't seen it before, you might want to have a look ... Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 10:53, 4 Iunii 2007 (UTC)
Now I have had another look at Dioecesis. How infuriating! All the links to that page are religious. The one interwiki link from it is to a religious page (the German one). The early editor forgot to make any interwiki links to it, I think. So we might never have found it! Yet in fact it consists of a table of late Roman provinces -- just what you are beginning to do, though not in the same order.
I think I will split that page, because the links to it have nothing to do with its actual subject. We do need a page on "Religious Diocese", and now we also have an "Administrative table of the late Roman Empire". Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 11:10, 4 Iunii 2007 (UTC)

de lingua graeca[recensere | fontem recensere]

Spem teneo ut quasi amicus amico fraterque fraterculo hoc interpretes: Magna cum voce te exhortor ut tibi occasionem des linguam Graecam discendi. Non est necesse Hellenista esse ut lingua fruaris, et mi tecum dico culturam Graecam non placere. Promitto, autem, lingua est valde iucunda. Non esse Latinum sermonem, plane fateor, at ut, dixi, te ea promitto fructurum esse. Timeo ne ignosces valores nonnullas linguae Latinae, Anglicae, Hispanicae, et, vere, omnium Linguarum Occidentalium, si praeter Graecam supervideas. Vale, Xaveri.--Ioshus (disp) 23:07, 2 Iunii 2007 (UTC)

Si tam strenue tu me exhortore quasi amicus amico fraterque fraterculo, puto fortasse in temporibus futuris tempus habebi ut linguam Graecam discam et nihilnominus puto tandem ob studeos meos Graecam discere debebi. Timeo linguam Graecam ob "polysemiam" suam et quod Graeca habet structuram liberiorem quam Latine.--Xaverius 09:12, 3 Iunii 2007 (UTC)

de figura paginae primae[recensere | fontem recensere]

Salve Xaveri. A few of us were discussing the layout and content of our pagina prima, and some expressed desire to rehaul it. This might include color changes, content changes, layout changes, and who knows what else. Could you join the discussion at Disputatio:Pagina prima/Nova? Give us a list of things you want a main page to have, what you dont want a main page to have, and what specifically you might think to do differently with ours. We will then try to come up with a design that meets as many of these requests as possible, based on content from everyone. Thanks, and regards.--Ioshus (disp) 20:36, 3 Iunii 2007 (UTC)

Aniversarium[recensere | fontem recensere]

Tibi Xaveri gratulor, libumque libenter (cum libatione) accipiam. Vale. --Iustinus 09:54, 5 Iunii 2007 (UTC)

Ut creemus annum Vicipaediae meliorem opem strenue dabas, Xaveri, et pro omni ago gratias!--Ioshus (disp) 11:44, 5 Iunii 2007 (UTC)

ut/indirect[recensere | fontem recensere]

Take a question, not yes or no...say:

"Did you know that I was an Administrator of Vicipaedia?"

In Latin we have two options:

"Scin tu me Magistratum Vicipaediae esse?"


"Scin tu ut Magistratus Vicipaediam sum?"

--Ioshus (disp) 21:02, 6 Iunii 2007 (UTC)

So direct question takes double accusative and infinitive, probably because it is subordinated to a dicendi verb-or so we call it in Spanish. And in the same way, with ut is just a subordinate by ut with indicative. I do not understand why vicipaedia would take the accusative in the latter.--Xaverius 21:21, 6 Iunii 2007 (UTC)
After studies on Google, and Perseus, I am quite compelled that the accusative/infinitive construction is preferred.--Ioshus (disp) 04:08, 7 Iunii 2007 (UTC)

Harrissimo/Ledesia[recensere | fontem recensere]

This whole business stinks. Thanks for keeping a watch out.--Ioshus (disp) 12:41, 12 Iunii 2007 (UTC)

Cicero dixit; Fvit qvondam proprivm popvli Romani longe a domo bellare et sociorvm fortvnas defendere (I had to do this translation for my Latin class). Something similar could be applied to us vicipaediani (changing fuit for est and without the quondam, I guess)!--Xaverius 12:46, 12 Iunii 2007 (UTC)
Well quoted. =] --Ioshus (disp) 19:52, 12 Iunii 2007 (UTC)

nexus carentes[recensere | fontem recensere]

Just a quick grammatical note and sugestion: we change {fn|[nexus carentes}} to {{nexus desiderati}} because, technically, careo demands ablative: nexibus carens, not even carentes implying that the page was missing nexus.--Ioshus (disp) 11:50, 14 Iunii 2007 (UTC)

Congratulationes[recensere | fontem recensere]

¡Felicitaciones en el primer Scintu, Xavieri! ¡Me tomó hoy de sorpresa!...--Rafaelgarcia 12:35, 18 Iunii 2007 (UTC)

Bueno, de eso se trata!--Xaverius 15:08, 18 Iunii 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for welcoming me to Vicipaedia[recensere | fontem recensere]

I thank your kind welcome. Please communicate with me in English. I read and write Latin much more slowly than English, and do not want to make a struggle out of reading a message.

Thanks again, Screen stalker 14:50, 21 Iunii 2007 (UTC)

What did I do wrong as far as the Babel stuff? Screen stalker 21:25, 21 Iunii 2007 (UTC)
I've tried to help with this question: see my note at Disputatio usoris:Screen stalker. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 12:15, 22 Iunii 2007 (UTC)
Well, Andrew was already answered...--Xaverius 19:44, 22 Iunii 2007 (UTC)

interwiki[recensere | fontem recensere]

I was told by Andrew to just add links to the relevant Wikipedias (Madrid to Spanish, English People to English) etc. --Harrissimo 19:15, 22 Iunii 2007 (UTC)

Well then, if he said so, he muyst have a reason. However, I strongly disagree with this. It would seem that we just translate articles from other wikis and that there is no original work here! do you see my point? (PS: the genitive vocative of nouns in -ius is plain -i =])--Xaverius 19:23, 22 Iunii 2007 (UTC)
So is the vocative. ::winkwink:: IacobusAmor 19:31, 22 Iunii 2007 (UTC)
Sic transit gloria mundi...--Xaverius 19:37, 22 Iunii 2007 (UTC)

Do you think I should stop adding them then, Xaveri?--Harrissimo 20:00, 22 Iunii 2007 (UTC)

Actually this is what I said:
  • Note that we don't add English names for places (unless the basic/original name for the place or person is in English). Native names (and classical Greek names where relevant) yes indeed. If you see an added English name for non-Anglophone places or things, it's because it hasn't been edited out. English names can be found by clicking the interwiki link to English Wikipedia. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 19:14, 8 Iunii 2007 (UTC)
I said that we add English names (for English-speaking things and people). I didn't say we add interwiki links in the text: the interwiki links are already there (or should be) at the very bottom of the editing page, and at bottom left of the screen when you look at the finished page. There isn't usually a need to add them in the text as well. However, having said that, I don't see any harm in doing so, and I have done it myself sometimes. I don't quite understand your point about translation, Xaveri. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 20:43, 22 Iunii 2007 (UTC)
I have done it on rare occasion, so, I too, can't wholly rule it out. It should be a function of absolute necessity, in most cases a red link will be, for us, more useful. That being said, I encourage the interwiki linking of an article title when it is translated and blatantly linked to a different language. E.g. Londinium (Anglice: London). I'd say use it very sparingly, past that. --Ioshus (disp) 05:46, 23 Iunii 2007 (UTC)
I was thinking that if we had "XYZ (Anglice: [[:en:XYZ]])" I feel as if we were just a translation office, translating all of our articles from other wikis. It is true that we need some translations, but the use of this phrasing seems, in my opinion, to ignore personal work and own articles here--Xaverius 08:39, 23 Iunii 2007 (UTC)
Yes, I see now. I guess I have sometimes thought it out differently: on topic X, which has a special relationship with country Xa or language Xb, the best article will probably always be in language Xb. The editors over at Xb are likely to make sure of that. Therefore, it might really help our users to have a link to the article at Xb.
It's a matter of opinions, preferences, and guesswork, really, I suppose. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 09:34, 23 Iunii 2007 (UTC)
For my part, Javi, I don't really think it gives that impression, at least it doesn't need to. I just think it's useful, especially on a Latin wikipedia, where everyone is, by nature, a polyglot. I have found it helpful to me when reading an article on for instance Trisceles, "what do the scilians think of all this?" and sure, I could click on the left hand side of the screen, but I could, also, just click on the first sentence which is where my eyes and mouse usually are when I start reading.--Ioshus (disp) 12:48, 23 Iunii 2007 (UTC)
Re "on topic X, which has a special relationship with country Xa or language Xb, the best article will probably always be in language Xb."—Probably, but not always: our article about the Polynesian god Tangaloa, incomplete though it may be (to my anthropological sensibilities), is at the moment the best in Wikiland, and the Polynesian wikis don't even seem to have articles about that subject yet! IacobusAmor 13:36, 23 Iunii 2007 (UTC)
I knew you would come back at me on that! Quite true, Iacobe. Incidentally, if I think the Vicipaedia article is likely to be one of the most useful, I have sometimes made interwiki links to Vicipaedia in the text of articles in other languages. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 14:41, 23 Iunii 2007 (UTC)
Good point: I'll bear it in mind! IacobusAmor 16:53, 23 Iunii 2007 (UTC)

alexander sockpuppotest[recensere | fontem recensere]

Thanks, as usual, for being useful in this matter. You did the right thing with a level head. Macte!--Ioshus (disp) 05:47, 23 Iunii 2007 (UTC)

A veces me han dado ganas de darle un guantazo a más de uno, pero hay que ser prudente, e hice lo que creí correcto--Xaverius 08:41, 23 Iunii 2007 (UTC)

I need your help[recensere | fontem recensere]

Potesne mihi help, potesne videre conlationes meas in pagina mea ut correct what i've done?? -- Thoma D. 13:00, 28 Iunii 2007 (UTC)

Lexicum meum[recensere | fontem recensere]

Thanks a lot for the words you've added. If you want to add other words which are not in the lists, you can (I'd have more words to learn). I've read what you've written in the article Ultimi Philipinarum and i'll answer to some questions. If you have some ideas about lexicum meum, let's go!!!!

Something else, do you if groups of pages like "portail" and "projet" in french exist in Vicipaedia??-- Thoma D. 15:34, 3 Iulii 2007 (UTC)

There are no "custom namespaces" like "portail" and "projet" in Vicipaedia. "Projects" can be organized in the Vicipaedia: namespace, and portals … well … we do not have any portals yet. If you look at the pages linked from the Pagina prima, box "Encyclopaedia", you will notice that we lack good overview pages for almost every (scientific and non-scientific) field. Greetings, --UV 20:18, 3 Iulii 2007 (UTC)
We were thinking of something like "portals" when we were designing the new pagina prima, but we did not get very far, mainly, as UV says, because we lack of content in the main articles--Xaverius 09:04, 4 Iulii 2007 (UTC)
Maybe articles would come after the creation of those portals pages. e.g.: if you create a portal like "Opus:Politica Franciae", first, there would be few articles and, after few weeks or months, you would find more and more articles. if you create a part in this page called "articles to create (in latine of course)" with Gasto Doumergue, Paulus Ramadier, ..., that would help people who would like to create those pages but doesn't know how to begin. -- Thoma D. 09:23, 4 Iulii 2007 (UTC)
Why don't you make an experiment and try to create a portal? if the structure works, we could definetly expand the portals to toehr topics. You should first check the disputatio of the pagina prima, in the section on portals to see what has been said already -I have to say that I was keen in portals, but the issue did not went any further. --Xaverius 09:30, 4 Iulii 2007 (UTC)
OK, i'll try it, probably this afternoon or tomorrow -- Thoma D. 09:58, 4 Iulii 2007 (UTC)
Could you give me the words in latin i've put in "Opus" in my lexicum, in order to create my tentative of opus:Politica franciae. Please I need it and i have no dictionary. -- Thoma D. 17:10, 4 Iulii 2007 (UTC)
I've done what I can. There is the problem that i cannot remember if opus is opus, opi or opus, operis. Why don't you post a "cry for help" in the taberna? It tends to work.--Xaverius 17:23, 4 Iulii 2007 (UTC)
Opus, operis n. Good idea to try and create a portal! --UV 20:58, 4 Iulii 2007 (UTC)

Praesidentes[recensere | fontem recensere]

of course I will change what is in those pages but I work with an other user (Usor:Massimo Macconi) and I tried to show him what we have to do. This is just an experiment i've done to see if my formula was OK. that will change and we have added some informations to some prime ministers. -- Thoma D. 11:52, 5 Iulii 2007 (UTC)

to delete[recensere | fontem recensere]

i'd like to delete a page i've made and I don't know how. this page is Exemplum:dynastia. -- Thoma D. 13:04, 5 Iulii 2007 (UTC)

You just have to add the {{delenda}} formula. However, for any experiments, you should not create a new page, but use the Vicipaedia:Harenarium--Xaverius 13:40, 5 Iulii 2007 (UTC)

De clipeo[recensere | fontem recensere]

Gratias ex intimo ago, Xaveri, pro proposito a te facto. Attento animo praestolor consecutionem: nisi leporem, irim (= irenaceum) tamen tenebo (cf. Plautus, Capt. 184). --Neander 00:17, 7 Iulii 2007 (UTC)

Grates gestians gemino, quod clipeum mihi dandum curasti!!! --Neander 19:17, 12 Iulii 2007 (UTC)

Ave Xav[recensere | fontem recensere]

Se te saluda, agradecemos vtra. colaboración

--Penarc 17:08, 7 Iulii 2007 (UTC)

de salutatione tua[recensere | fontem recensere]

Gratias, Xaveri, tibi propter salutationem tuam. Cor meum gaudet. Mihi tamen necesse est -- aut, vere dicere, me retinere non possum! -- hoc tibi sribere: novus apud Vicipaediam non sum. Editor plusquam duobus annis sum. Forsitan Latinitas mea adeo fracta sit ut tiro videar— qua de vitia accipe, quaeso, apologiam meam. Bene. Valeas, Doops 18:16, 7 Iulii 2007 (UTC)

Scin tu ...?[recensere | fontem recensere]

Yes, Xaveri, I'll do it with pleasure. Enjoy the dig! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 11:35, 15 Iulii 2007 (UTC)

Fine, I'll do the next one too. Don't worry about it, just keep on digging. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 14:34, 30 Iulii 2007 (UTC)

welcome back!!!![recensere | fontem recensere]

How was the dig, man? --Ioscius (disp) 16:00, 30 Iulii 2007 (UTC)

It was awesome! We found a floor of Romano-Gothic hydraulic concrete opus signinum which clearly points towards a high status area. We found in the top levels two coins in arabic dating to the eighth century (the moslem conquest), but we are sure now that we were dealing with the Visigothic palace. Now I have to say that I'm going for three more weeks to dig up the (un)defeated Numantia...--Xaverius 17:47, 30 Iulii 2007 (UTC)
Man, that sounds so cool. Here I've been in the states all summer. Although, the area where I'm living now is absolutely littered with souvenirs from the American civil war, which completely fascinates me, even as an Italus. I live literally 50 meters from an old road, and another 100 meters to the en:C&O Canal
When do you leave? It hasn't been the same around here, without you. Cheers.--Ioscius (disp) 18:05, 30 Iulii 2007 (UTC)
The day after tomorrow! I'll have to work hard these two days to keep up the two weks I've been absent.--Xaverius 18:21, 30 Iulii 2007 (UTC)

imperatores[recensere | fontem recensere]

de nada, yo tambièn creo que la wikipedia latina tenga que haber paginas de todos los emperadores y me extrañò de ver que asì non era. Ciao--Massimo Macconi 16:55, 31 Iulii 2007 (UTC)

Keep on excavating[recensere | fontem recensere]

Nice to hear from you, Xaverie! I hope the dig is interesting. I changed the SCIN TV again today, and will reckon to do it again in two weeks' time unless you reappear. We miss you, but I'm sure you're doing something almost as useful (!). Vicipaedia will be quite a lot bigger by the time you return ... Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 20:33, 12 Augusti 2007 (UTC)

I'm back[recensere | fontem recensere]

ALthough you all though you got rid of me (=]) I'm back! I see that vicipaedia has grown these two months and I have to finish the last details on Hispania Visigothica before september. During semptember I'll try to work in Ultimi Philippinarum, which I would like it to be a pagina mensis at some point, though it is largely unfinished and I doubt it could be something that could be as interesting as to be a pagina mensis. What do you think?

And to finish; has anything important happened here while I was away that I should know?

It's good to be back!

PD: Have the rest of you also recevied an email from a guy in the Wall street Journal? --Xaverius 11:19, 29 Augusti 2007 (UTC)

Oh, Andrew, how long ago did you last change the SCIN TU? section?--Xaverius 11:25, 29 Augusti 2007 (UTC)
I did it two days ago, thank goodness! A few hours late ... but it was still Sunday in Hawaii. Glad to see you are keeping an eye on us, Xaveri! Hope the archaeology is going well.
[Later:] I see you are back now. A hearty welcome! You have been missed. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 11:46, 29 Augusti 2007 (UTC)
Gratus regressus es!!--Ioscius (disp) 15:13, 29 Augusti 2007 (UTC)

Nuevas ediciones en la pagina Hispania[recensere | fontem recensere]

Xavieri, por favor, si puedes, mira la pagina Hispania que ha recibido nuevas ediciones por usuario anonimo en el infobox de los idiomas espanoles.--Rafaelgarcia 13:57, 30 Augusti 2007 (UTC)

Hecho. Problemas con regionalismos valencianos que no quieren que el valenciano y el catal'an sean lo mismo. Pasa algo parecido en la disputatio de Christophorus Columbus.--Xaverius 09:26, 31 Augusti 2007 (UTC)

Hispania Visigothica[recensere | fontem recensere]

Dear Xavier, I added a few more lines to the first paragraph of Hispania Visigothica so that it would be a little longer. I also did a minor edit to the second sentence. If you don't like it feel free to undo.--Rafaelgarcia 01:12, 1 Septembris 2007 (UTC)

NO problem at all, I guess it is Ok, and after all, the article is not mine and as far as it is improved I have nothing against it!--Xaverius 09:42, 1 Septembris 2007 (UTC)

Anthem[recensere | fontem recensere]

Dear Xaverius,

my Latin is poor (I do always a lot of misstakes) therefore I'm not sure if my opinion could be important. I believe that you have to ask Iacobus Amor, Iustinus, UV and Andrew Dalby to receive a well-founded appreciation. In any case from your text I've had a good impression. Ciao--Massimo Macconi 17:45, 3 Septembris 2007 (UTC)

Massimo, you let me down! :p --Xaverius 20:53, 4 Septembris 2007 (UTC)

Revisión de un artículo[recensere | fontem recensere]

He empezado un nuevo artículo, quería que le echaras un vistazo y me dijeras si el formato está bien. Gracias--Gundisalvus 17:42, 4 Septembris 2007 (UTC)

Ya lo he adaptado a nuestro "formato estándar", con el nombre en negrita al comienzo, he añadido "vínculos azules" y algunos rojos, además de añadir el link a la es:wiki. También, recuerda que siempre que hagas un artículo tienes que añadir la fórmula {{latinitas}}, que es un indicador del nivel de Latín que tenemos, de -5 (que está apunto de ser eliminada) a +5 (Cicerón). En la portada hay un apartado sobre la latinitas. Creo que eso es todo. Deberías echar también un vistazo a nuestro listado de fórmulas y a nuestras "tradiciones": Vicipaedia:Mores Vicipaediae.--Xaverius 18:16, 4 Septembris 2007 (UTC)
Bien, también quería referirte a la redacción del artículo. He intentado usar un vocabulario más exclusivamente funcional, como corresponde a una enciclopedia, que adornado. ¿Está bien la escritura? Gracias, de nuevo, por la atención.--Gundisalvus 18:29, 4 Septembris 2007 (UTC)
Yo lo veo claro y directo, excepto por un ille homo Brocensis que me ha parecido rimbombante y he quitado, si te parece bien. Por lo demás lo he visto genial. Claro que para gramática no soy yo el más indicado a quien preguntar. Los que cortan el bacalao en este aspecto por aqui son usor:Ioscius Rocchius, usor:Andrew Dalby, usor:Neander y usor:UV. Y siempre que necesites ayuda, puedes pegar un bocinazo de ayuda en la Vicipaedia:Taberna--Xaverius 19:39, 4 Septembris 2007 (UTC)
Gracias, cuando lo tenga preparado, subiré el resto. Un saludo. Por cierto, no sé dónde está lo que falta de las obras completas suyas editadas por Mayáns Síscar en Ginebra.
Una pregunta: ¿Estudias Historia en Universidad?--Gundisalvus 19:57, 4 Septembris 2007 (UTC)
Estudio arqueologia en la universidad de Oxford, ¿y tú estás en la Complu o vas a empezar ahora?--Xaverius 20:52, 4 Septembris 2007 (UTC)
Empiezo ahora segundo de Bachillerato tecnológico y en el siguiente año espero entrar a Arquitectura en la Politécnica de Madrid.--Gundisalvus 20:55, 4 Septembris 2007 (UTC)

Index Urbium Hispaniae#S[recensere | fontem recensere]

Hola, Javier. Yo vi el nombre "Samura" en Index Urbium Hispaniae#S. ¿Que piensas? --Ioscius (disp) 21:34, 6 Septembris 2007 (UTC)

Nunc dubio, ahora compruebo--Xaverius 21:37, 6 Septembris 2007 (UTC)
Vidamus: la página del ayuntamiento de Zamora [2] dice que en tiempos visigodos era Semure. La diócesis se funda en 1121 [3] pero no veo ningun nombre. Las crónicas medievales que tengo ya dicen "Zamora"--Xaverius 21:48, 6 Septembris 2007 (UTC)
Este dudoso documento dice que se llama Sentica [4]--Xaverius 21:57, 6 Septembris 2007 (UTC)

Latín como lengua internacional[recensere | fontem recensere]

Hola, mi pregunta no tiene nada que ver con esta wikipedia. No sé si estarás familiarizado con las ideas y proyectos de una lengua franca mundial, tal como el esperanto, el ido, etc. El problema es que estas lenguas son artificiales, han sido creadas de manera que son muy simples y fáciles de aprender. Pero esto resta naturalidad a la lengua, algunas como el esperanto llegan a ser extremadamente simplificadas. Debido a esto, otras personas opinan que lo mejor es adoptar una lengua muerta, como el latín. ¿Crees que el latín puede servir como lengua franca internacional? ¿Es muy difícil aprenderlo? ¿Cuál es tu opinión?

Muchas gracias de antemano por tu atención. Saludos.

Spanish name changes[recensere | fontem recensere]

Xaveri, I reverted some changes to Catalonia and Hispania made by an anonymous user, and blocked the address for a day. Maybe you could look at the changes and see whether they were good after all. If so, revert me, and I can unblock the address. (I have also asked Rafael -- whichever of you sees this first -- ) Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 08:56, 19 Septembris 2007 (UTC)

The changes in Hispania seem to have certain basis, some of them - which I am about to correct. Regarding Catalaunia vs Catalonia, I have always been for Catalaunia, but as both forms are widely used in Mediaeval texts, both are acceptable. As we have been using Catalonia this time long, it may be beter to stick to it.--Xaverius 13:33, 19 Septembris 2007 (UTC)

hispania visigothica ultima[recensere | fontem recensere]

Hey, Xavi, sorry to take so long to get back to you. I will take a final look at Hispania Visigothica this weekend, and I will start to look at Ultimi Philippinarum, as well. Witht he semester starting, I've been rather overwhelmedly busy, and I've been slacking around Vicipaedia. O hail the weekend!!! cheers.--Ioscius (disp) 12:33, 28 Septembris 2007 (UTC)