Disputatio:Civitas Fluvii Magni Australis

I think we can (and should) live with alternative Latin versions of the names but I don't think corrections should simply ruin other people's previous contributions.

Acho que podemos (e devemos) conviver com versões alternativas dos nomes, mas não concordo que correções simplesmente arruinem a contribuição de pessoas que contribuíram antes. D Ambulans 02:23, 25 Februarii 2006 (UTC)

Since there is already a source for "Rivus Magnus Australis" (Egger), and I have found another here in the "Acta Apostolicae Sedis", I propose to move to that name. OK? Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 15:03, 14 Martii 2015 (UTC)

Meridionalis, according to L&S, is postclassical, presumably (one would guess) modeled after septentrionalis, and meridianus & australis would appear to be the appropriate classical forms. ¶ But, pace D Ambulans, the process of correcting doesn't always & necessarily "ruin" prior texts. IacobusAmor (disputatio) 17:04, 14 Martii 2015 (UTC)