Disputatio:Catillus iactabilis
Latest comment: abhinc 5 annos by Neander in topic cum causale aut iterativum?
Titulus recensere
Lemma est Catillus iactabilis, sed titulus est Catullus iactabilis, et rem movere nobis non licet. Quid est? IacobusAmor (disputatio) 19:45, 17 Martii 2019 (UTC)
- There must be a nicer way, but now it's in the right place (just lost the history). Sigur (disputatio) 21:22, 17 Martii 2019 (UTC)
- Losing the history isn't allowed: it contravenes our CC license. If the move cannot be done without a substantive deletion -- a purely technical problem -- it's necessary to ask a magistratus to perform the move. I'll revert the copy-and-paste and do the move properly. If you made any edits after the move, they'll have to be done again. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 14:42, 18 Martii 2019 (UTC)
- I have done that now, and I don't think there were any subsequent edits. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 14:54, 18 Martii 2019 (UTC)
- Losing the history isn't allowed: it contravenes our CC license. If the move cannot be done without a substantive deletion -- a purely technical problem -- it's necessary to ask a magistratus to perform the move. I'll revert the copy-and-paste and do the move properly. If you made any edits after the move, they'll have to be done again. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 14:42, 18 Martii 2019 (UTC)
Sorry for the inconvenience. You know what they say about the road to hell and good intentions... Sigur (disputatio) 15:07, 18 Martii 2019 (UTC)
- It's OK, no problem. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 19:02, 18 Martii 2019 (UTC)
cum causale aut iterativum? recensere
" ... quae volat per aerem, cum lusores eam manu torquant et ad caelum iaciant". Nonne de actione iterum ac saepius repetita agitur? Ita puto pro "torqueant" et "iaciant" melius, insuper observata consecutione temporum, "torserunt et ... iecerunt" dicendum esse. Quid putant alii? --Bavarese (disputatio) 17:06, 18 Martii 2019 (UTC)
- Ita. Iterativo utamur. Neander (disputatio) 16:58, 20 Martii 2019 (UTC)