Disputatio:Parallelus 5 septentrionalis

It's not obvious why we need this page. English, oddly, has pages for every integer parallel of latitude and meridian of longitude, showing the countries they cross; that's sort of neat, but hardly a must-have set of pages. We have only this one, rather orphaned. Either we should delete it (and remove the link in Oceanus Pacificus that seems to have motivated creating it), or we should do the thing right: make the full set and implement the map-line template. I propose deletion. A. Mahoney (disputatio) 16:52, 15 Aprilis 2016 (UTC)

There's also Parallelus 38 Septemtrionalis. IacobusAmor (disputatio) 18:27, 15 Aprilis 2016 (UTC)

Yes, but that's actually about the DMZ in Korea. It doesn't follow the model of the pages in English. A. Mahoney (disputatio) 15:57, 19 Aprilis 2016 (UTC)

This page seems to have been copied over in haste, leaving it reliant on templates that weren't wanted here for any other purpose and that the editor didn't copy over along with the page. Those templates will probably have changed or been superseded on en:wiki meanwhile. One could try reverting the last edit, and then copying the templates over from en:wiki to see if they still work, but that's a slow and frustrating task and in my view it would be time wasted.

When translating a page containing templates we don't have and don't clearly need, one has to remove the templates, replacing them with Latin text. Often that's an easy and obvious process: if you look at the English page itself (not the editing screen) you see what text the template produces, and you can copy it straight from that page into your draft. If it only produces little flags or other non-textual stuff or an infobox, then you delete the template from your draft and include any extractable and useful information in the Latin text instead.

Here, I'd say, the quickest way is to forget this current version of the page, which doesn't amount to a stipula. If the page is really wanted, it can be re-translated from the current English page. Unless anyone wants to do that right now, I favour deletion. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 08:59, 20 Aprilis 2016 (UTC)

Thinking again, this could be redirected to Circulus parallelus, which is one of the 10,000 and well worth expanding. The true notability of the articles about every single parallel is tacitly called into question by the table in the article en:Circle of latitude, which is headed "Other notable parallels" and includes only the ones that are used as frontiers. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 16:26, 21 Aprilis 2016 (UTC)

Surely Vicipaedia should have all five major circles of latitude, and an article on the roaring forties is desirable—which vicissim implies news of 40° and 50°. IacobusAmor (disputatio) 18:52, 21 Aprilis 2016 (UTC)

We already have articles on all the "major" ones, linked by a Navbox. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 09:14, 22 Aprilis 2016 (UTC)

I think that the notability of any of these articles could be demonstrated by someone writing full stipulas on them, with good sources, but until then, it might just be best to list them in one main page. Lesgles (disputatio) 19:06, 21 Aprilis 2016 (UTC)

Yes. Well, even if we disagree on whether the "minor" parallels are inherently notable or not, this page could easily be turned into a stipula. The discussion above would then become academic :) Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 09:14, 22 Aprilis 2016 (UTC)