Disputatio:LZ 129 Hindenburg

German name

"Luftschiff Zeppelin #129" can be found in many recent sources, but I think they are all English sources, and many of them dependent on Wikipedia. The German wiki article (labelled "good article") uses the pagename "LZ 129" and the lemma "LZ 129 „Hindenburg“"; the symbol # doesn't appear anywhere on the German page. In fact I don't remember seeing # (meaning "number") used in any language except American English.

Since the lemma on the German page is identical (except for the German quote marks) to our pagename and lemma, I see no need to write it twice. Our name is the name, in this case, and Latin likes brevity. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 12:51, 22 Novembris 2018 (UTC)

Aside from that, the "octothorpe" has become a symbol often pronounced hashtag, which in social networks indexes the immediately juxtaposed text, so that "#129" would list this article in a set of articles containing the number 129. Confusion abounds! IacobusAmor (disputatio) 13:20, 22 Novembris 2018 (UTC)

Ut mihi videtur, aeronavis (theodisce Luftschiff) rigida, anglice rigid airship, est, si et quod constructa a Zeppelin, nominata Luftschiff Zeppelin (i. e. aeronavis Zeppelin), abbbreviatum LZ. Qua re, quia Luftschiff LZ tautologia putanda est. Andreae assentior. --Bavarese (disputatio) 12:52, 24 Novembris 2018 (UTC)

Adnotatiuncula

The pluperfect of "solere" is very rare, for the same reason that the English had been used to is very rare: a simpler tense serves the purpose.

Of ships, and so I suppose of airships, we may put the name in italics but we don't do it with the number or siglum. Hence we need "DISPLAYTITLE" in this case.

My changes were not mostly corrections so much as tweaks of the word order etc. I think the Latinitas is now OK. The two sentences about the death of 36 travellers seem to me an unnecessary repetition but I haven't time to fill the space with something new! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 13:35, 22 Novembris 2018 (UTC)