Disputatio:Trahea

Roland2, I'm a little mystified by your edits:

• What exactly does the {{PONS-Egger}} template signify here? That the word is in the PONS dictionary? If so, do we really need to mention that at all? Surely it's in many dictionaries.
• You note that Virgil uses it to mean "a plank for threshing grain." Even if that's the case, shouldn't this information be given in Latin? And shouldn't a specific reference be given for the Virgil passage? (On this subject, do note the article tribulum).

--Iustinus 20:16, 12 Iulii 2006 (UTC)

Yes. I found Trahea but not Traha. I found a meaning for Trahea which is different from the meaning, the article covers. Maybe this is trivial ...

The cite was from this book which is written in German. The cite should be translated and I agree that it would be better to have a more precise reference or to include the text from Virgil.

I contributed in the hope, that someone will expand and improve my text. Maybe now, maybe later.

I am sure that it is correct, what I have written (in this article), but it can be done better. ;-)

--Roland2 21:03, 12 Iulii 2006 (UTC)

OK, fair enough, but I was unsure what was going on. You might want to use the summarium field, or the disputatio page in such cases. Or maybe if I were spending more time here these days it would have been clear to me anyway ;) --Iustinus 22:10, 12 Iulii 2006 (UTC)

Iustine, we've been trying to make a case for people citing both article content and nomenclature. We have received a bit of flack for being a "pet project" wiki, and we are trying to make it a cited, true scholarly resource. We haven't quite figured out all the details about how to effect our intentions though =].--Ioshus Rocchio 22:18, 12 Iulii 2006 (UTC)

I understand what you mean in broad strokes, but the specifics elude me. Maybe you want to refer me to the discussion logs or policy page? --Iustinus 23:50, 12 Iulii 2006 (UTC)