Disputatio:Factio conservativa (Britanniarum Regnum)

Latest comment: abhinc 14 annos by Andrew Dalby

I seriously disagree (and I'm sure many Conservatives would) with calling the party the Optimatium Pars! It sounds ridiculously condescending and is a strained attempt at using vocabulary from the politics of ancient Rome which does not fit today's politics.

Is there any viable source to back up this translation? Ericbateson 11:55, 10 Augusti 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I don't quite understand your comment. The article heading is "Factio Conservativa" and that form is used throughout the article. "Optimatium Pars" doesn't occur anywhere in the article. We give "Optimatium Partes" as an alternative: we do this specifically because a printed source has used it (see footnote 1).
This is what we often do, because there is little standardization in Latin terms for 21st century life. We try to work towards a standard, and if in the process we disagree with some existing sources, we cite them. That's reasonable, surely?
Incidentally, I don't myself see "Optimatium Partes" as ridiculously condescending, though I agree that it's a strained attempt at using vocabulary from the politics of ancient Rome! But if a particular alternative term seems so inaccurate or inappropriate that it doesn't merit being placed in the first sentence of the article, another method we sometimes use is to put the term itself in the footnote, followed by the reference. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 12:56, 10 Augusti 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Revertere ad "Factio conservativa (Britanniarum Regnum)".