A note recensere

Your contributions have been really useful, and we hope they'll continue.

As you realise, we try to maintain politeness (even in Latin). In principle, messages from others on your talk page should not be deleted. Always feel free to ask (see Legatio nostra and the list of Magistratus) for help or guidance. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 09:07, 14 Iunii 2007 (UTC)Reply

The good Dr. Dalby speaks wisely. We thought it would be best just to archive the whole mess, and start fresh. Just a word about me: Though I may sometimes act in a hurry, I'm always trying to improve Vicipaedia, and never hurt it. If I do something that seems crazy at first, bear with me, sometimes I actually know what I'm doing. =] All in all, I just hope we can work together in the future, as no one wants to lose you as a member of the Vicipaedia community. Cheers.--Ioshus (disp) 11:31, 14 Iunii 2007 (UTC)Reply
Thanks for your message! Glad to help whenever I can. Are there any languages you don't speak, by the way? Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 19:41, 14 Iunii 2007 (UTC)Reply
Yes, usually, at a minimum, people put a babel box on their user page, so that people may know in what language to communicate. Look at Vicipaedia:Babel formulae for templates. Then you can put {{Babel-X|en|la-1|etc}} on your page. --Ioshus (disp) 19:44, 14 Iunii 2007 (UTC)Reply

signature recensere

If you click on praeferentiae meae at the top of your screen, you can input the font changes you want for your signature to be automatic. Just click on subscriptio cruda. --Ioshus (disp) 17:40, 14 Iunii 2007 (UTC)Reply

Thanks ----Harrissimo 17:48, 14 Iunii 2007 (UTC)Reply

io recensere

Seems that you wanted to use io-1 ... I have created it. --Rolandus 20:27, 14 Iunii 2007 (UTC)Reply

Carolinae Veteris recensere

Hi! Yes it was me who made the change. The adjective vetus is a bit exceptional, because it's inflected like holus, -eris 'vegetable'; so, vetus, veteris (3rd declension). The reason for this is that vetus has originally been a substantive noun, its Indo-European cognate being Greek (w)etos 'year'. By the way, I've noticed that you've done a great job in preparing articles on Finnish and Swedish towns and localities. In some entries you use the word comitia which means 'assembly'. I suggest you use either regio or provincia. In some pictures, the noun situs has the genitive form siti. Because situs belongs to the 4th declension, its genitive is situs (with long u, which doesn't appear in writing). --Neander 21:19, 15 Iunii 2007 (UTC)Reply

On Neander's page you ask if you should use siti or situ. If you mean "of the location" then you want "situs" with a long u. Nom. situs, acc. situm, gen. situs, dat. situi, abl situ and we can worry about the plural later. Comitia does mean "assembly," so provincia would be better. I suspect the word you have in mind is comitas "county," but so far as I can tell that isn't the right word anyway. --Iustinus 21:45, 15 Iunii 2007 (UTC)Reply
I think comitatus is the precise word for "county"; and I think it is 4th declension, like situs. But, yes, provincia serves fine as a general word for "top-level administrative division". Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 08:31, 16 Iunii 2007 (UTC)Reply
Ooops! You're right! --Iustinus 21:38, 16 Iunii 2007 (UTC)Reply
Tabula situs Sueciae --Iustinus 22:12, 15 Iunii 2007 (UTC)Reply

Spiculorum ludus recensere

BTW, Harri mi Harrissime, it occured to me that I should have probably mentioned something else to you about the game of darts. Namely, it is quite common in Latin for the name of a game to be a plural noun (the name of the game piece in the plural), e.g. latrunculi, calculi, dominae, scrabulae and so on. In the context of latrunculos ludere it is clear what you mean. But outsid of context, such as in the title of an article, it makes sense to use the more formal ludus latrunculorum contruction. But wait, there's more: since Latin has free word order, it makes sense for our purposes to start with the more important word (if you imagine a print Encyclopedia, you'll want to look up calculi under c, not under l). So in conclusion, my suggestion for the title for your proposed article on darts is spiculorum ludus. --Iustinus 21:37, 16 Iunii 2007 (UTC)Reply

Cur non lusus, mi Iustine?--Ioshus (disp) 21:39, 16 Iunii 2007 (UTC)Reply
Nescio, I've usually seen ludus in that context, but lusus occurs as well. I could speculate as to the difference, but I can't honestly say I know. --Iustinus 22:01, 16 Iunii 2007 (UTC)Reply
In my, admittedly limited, experience, I have noticed ludus to mean "game", and lusus to mean "a particular game". . . --Ioshus (disp) 22:09, 16 Iunii 2007 (UTC)Reply
The more I think about this, the more I think my original impression was correct (but since I was and still am too lazy to look it up I didn't say anythign). Namely: ludus = game, lusus = "playing, gaming, gameplay." --Iustinus 00:04, 4 Septembris 2007 (UTC)Reply

Spiciludium (but not *spiciludus) is a perfectly acceptable formation, and I would not bat my eye at it at a Conventiculum. But I'm thinking the article really should be under Spiculorum ludum, possibly with spiciludium listed as an alternate name. Keep in mind that you don't need to repeat the whole phrase every time you mention the game: "I play darts" = Spiculis ludo, "Darts is a fun game" Spiculorum est lusus iucundus! (I.e. "[the game] of darts is a fun game" -- no need to say "game" twice in Latin), "I like darts better than chess" Me arrident spicula magis quam scacci, and so on. --Iustinus 23:56, 3 Septembris 2007 (UTC)Reply

Thank you, Iustine. --Harrissimo 12:14, 4 Septembris 2007 (UTC)Reply

Salve a Alexander recensere

Salve mi Harrissime!

thinsp recensere

thank you. I hope I'll rember it. Ciao--Massimo Macconi 05:11, 22 Iunii 2007 (UTC)Reply

English links recensere

It is not necessary to add links to English wikipedia in the text as you did for instance in Ioanna Rowling, because these links are via interwiki already there, see left margin of articles. --Alex1011 18:57, 22 Iunii 2007 (UTC)Reply

(Replies on Alex1011 and Xaverius' talk pages). --Harrissimo 21:23, 24 Iunii 2007 (UTC)Reply

nnapulitano recensere

2 if the noun, one if an adjective:


--Ioshus (disp) 23:35, 22 Iunii 2007 (UTC)Reply

Gratias tibi ago--Harrissimo 08:09, 23 Iunii 2007 (UTC)Reply

SALVE!! recensere

salve mi harrissime! How goes plan ks? Alex rex 19:21, 24 Iunii 2007 (UTC)

furchtbar.--Harrissimo 21:22, 24 Iunii 2007 (UTC)Reply

Darts recensere

In case you're writing about darts, I thought I'd mention the page Petrus Montius which I noticed today. It might deserve a "Vide etiam", at least. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 14:22, 27 Iunii 2007 (UTC)Reply

Oh, cool! Didn't see you guys had noticed this. But I reverted your changes, Harissimo, for two reasons: 1. The word Da Vinci himself uses is dardi, which is cool enough that I would like to leave it in. 2. I'm not 100% certain this actually refers to the game of darts. Something we would need to look into. You know, now that we have the capability to footnote, I really shoudl track down the original quote about that. --Iustinus 00:00, 4 Septembris 2007 (UTC)Reply
"The man who taught Leonardo darts: Pietro Monte and his 'lost' fencing book," from the Fontes section was what made me write this. It is now footnoted. --Harrissimo 08:14, 4 Septembris 2007 (UTC)Reply
Yes, but see my comments at Vicipaedia:Taberna/Tabularium_5#Darts: nowadays when someone refers to a "dart" they pretty much always mean the little things we throw in this game, but the word originally refered to some sort of javelin. The latter meaning is sometimes seen in poetic and academic English to this day. So when Da Vinci speaks of dardi and Anglo speaks of "darts," I'm not sure how many of them are talking about the game. WHen I get a chece I'll find my copy of the article and see if there are any clues there. --Iustinus 16:27, 4 Septembris 2007 (UTC)Reply

lexicum recensere

that's because a lot of users don't speak french i've add other columns. I'll try to add english words. -- Thoma D. 17:41, 3 Iulii 2007 (UTC)Reply

Finnia recensere

I copied your text into {{Finnia}} ... as Amphitrite suggested. You need no special rights to do that. --Rolandus 14:17, 7 Iulii 2007 (UTC)Reply

Thank you very much. --Harrissimo 15:19, 7 Iulii 2007 (UTC)Reply

Linguistae specialisati Fennougrii appellantur. Ergo nomen traditionalem genti Soumis contemporaneae Fenni esse creo. Ergo pagus Fennia appellari debet.--Agnus 02:26, 2 Decembris 2007 (UTC)Reply

Videte: "Vandali, Venedi, Fenni, Sclavi, populus Septentrionales, qui olim tenere. Germaniam ad oram maris Baltici, ubi Ducatus Megalopolitanus est, Vandalia ... homepage.uibk.ac.at/~c61705/DISSERTATION-Volltext.pdf "--Agnus 02:29, 2 Decembris 2007 (UTC)Reply

Tirolis recensere

I wonder why you put "Tyrolum vel Tirolum" into the text. We just got rid of those forms (see Disputatio:Tirolis), because they seemed to be mistakes. Do you have a source for them? Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 12:35, 8 Iulii 2007 (UTC)Reply

I see you changed the version in the Formula to Tirolis. I'm with you 100% on that: I ought to have done it myself! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 12:38, 8 Iulii 2007 (UTC)Reply
Thanks for your reply, Harrissimo. Nice work on the Finnish names, by the way. Meanwhile I am doing the praefecturae or départements of France. They never seem to come to an end! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 12:48, 8 Iulii 2007 (UTC)Reply

Leodis recensere

You don't give in easily, do you? Yes, I quite agree with you, those forms out of the school anthem can't possibly derive from Ledesia. I copied your comments to Disputatio:Ledesia and added a footnote on the page. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 13:47, 11 Iulii 2007 (UTC)Reply

Nice try. Sorry, but what that website says is false; I think we're pretty sure of that. It's the opposite: the form Leodis is invented on the basis of the English word Leeds, possibly with some help from the British Celtic word Loidis. The question still remains, has anyone used the form "Leodis" in a Latin text? Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 14:40, 11 Iulii 2007 (UTC)Reply

Very sorry to have been so slow to reply. My impression is that your new source finally confirms Loidis as a name that some people have used for Leeds (the name is in Bede, as we know; the only question is what exactly Bede meant). I think you now have enough to put Leodis up in the first sentence as well. I suggest the footnote I already made can remain attached to Leodis, and you could make a new footnote for Loidis citing your evidence. Or, if you don't do this, I will. I have been a bit busy (trying to make some money -- not enough of it around at present!) or I would have done it already, I expect.

Nice new article on Horsforth and its pubs. Even a photo of a typical English shopping street complete with "To Let" sign. Magnificent. Is it your photo? I didn't check. But I just wonder whether famous residents are best put in a table ... is that too many tables? What do you think? (a) it seems boring to have a box saying nulla if we mean either they aren't that interesting, or we haven't bothered to write anything yet; (b) because tables are more difficult than ordinary text for people to edit. I don't know, I'm only thinking aloud ... Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 09:03, 26 Iulii 2007 (UTC)Reply

Suomalaiset paikannimet recensere

Harrissimo, mukava huomata, että osaat jonkin verran suomea. Onnittelut hienosta Suomi-portaalista. Olet nähnyt kovasti vaivaa sen eteen. Olen imarreltu kaikkien suomalaisten puolesta. --Neander 02:31, 14 Iulii 2007 (UTC)Reply

All right, first I said it's good to see you know a bit Finnish (which you do); then I applauded the trouble you've taken for the Finnish portal which looks promising. It's kind of flattering for a Finn. And the title is: Finnish place names. --Neander 18:51, 14 Iulii 2007 (UTC)Reply

Well, yes, koski does mean 'rapids', but I doubt that cataracta is the proper word for "koski" / "rapids". As far as I understand, cataracta means 'waterfall; cataract', which is scarcely a place for "koskenlasku" ('rapids shooting'(?), please google for "koskenlasku" in the pictures mode). In fact I don't know what koski would be in Latin ('aquae rapidae, aquae torrentes, deiectus fluminis',..? There seems to be no stock and trade word for 'koski'.). As to Jämsänkoski, I doubt it's a good idea to translate it into Latin. Let's take Jämsä first. English and French wikis have Jämsä, although neither language has "ääkköset". Maybe this should be treated in the Taberna, but according to me, it savours kind of hyper-legalism to rule out the written form "Jämsä" on grounds of the fact that Latin has no /ä/ or /j/. In my mind at least, to render Jämsä as "Iamsa" seems a bit strange. As to, Jämsänkoski, I would leave it as such. In the text I should perhaps speak of oppidum Jämsänkoskiense. Issues of some importance to Vicipaedic mores seem to be involved here, and I can give my personal opinion only. Well, now that I'm at it, I'd like to butt in the town name "Tammisaari / Ekenäs". "Ecenas" as a 1st declension word seems rather abrupt. I'm not sure but maybe I'd put "Ekenäs" as the lemma and say "Ekenäsii" in the genitive and refer to the inhabitants as "Ekenäsienses". Graesse gives "Quercuum peninsula" which translates "Eke-näs". (Nowadays we'd write "paeninsula".) --Neander 19:41, 15 Iulii 2007 (UTC)Reply

I'm afraid we're going to have to declare K a fully available letter in modern Latin. Speakers of "church Latin" are going to mispronounce every instance of Ecenas, but they might have a fighting chance at getting Ekenas or Ekenäs right. They'll mispronounce Tocio as to-cho (tō-čō), but will do better with Tokio or even Tokyo. They'll perpetually mispronounce Vicipaedia, of course. ¶ In Finnish, what does the umlaut do to the vowel? and is it really necessary in Latin? IacobusAmor 19:42, 18 Iulii 2007 (UTC)Reply
Thanks very much for your comment on my page. About Franciscopolis, I'm really glad you found a source (as I have said on the disputatio page). About the accents/diacritics ... Like you, I like to get on and get things done; but it's possible other people are still going to comment, so you might feel like waiting a day or so. In the past there has been a preference for doing it exactly the way you did -- k > c and so on. My impression is that Vicipaedia is shifting a little bit in the direction that Neander is arguing for, above. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 13:19, 17 Iulii 2007 (UTC)Reply
Re ä" and other such characters in Finnish.—My instinct would be to look in old (fifteenth-century? sixteenth-century?) Finnish writings in Latin and see what those writers did. If they regularly rendered a phoneme that we know must have been ä as, say, e, then that's what we should do; if they rendered ä as ä, then that instead is what we should do. In other words, look for attestations and then generalize from them as necessary. Latin itself, remember, can have diacritics, and it had several finicky letters two thousand years ago (the long-I and the apex come to mind, and don't the Vindolanda tablets sometimes have a macron that looks something like an acute accent mark?), but most Latin writers (native speakers and others alike) have ignored them, and so, in general, we ignore them here. Similarly, I'm ignoring orthographic macrons when converting Polynesian words, not least because Polynesians themselves usually ignore them. IacobusAmor 17:45, 20 Iulii 2007 (UTC)Reply
Re "In my mind at least, to render Jämsä as "Iamsa" seems a bit strange."—The problem there is that ä isn't a genuine Latin stem-vowel, so the forms Iämsäe and Jämsärum would be confusing. IacobusAmor 17:45, 20 Iulii 2007 (UTC)Reply
I would like to add my opinion here. The problem with attestations from the 16th century is that they even spelt Latin ae as e. (E.g. Jacob Ziegler's Carta Marina). Since the letters ä/a, ö/o, y/u are complementary due to vowel harmony, the question would be not "ä or e" but "ä or a". However, even though there is "kyla" rather than "kylä" several times in the aforesaid map, I think it would today -tempora mutantur- look strange to have y (which is no problem in Latin) but not ä and ö. Therefore I would greatly favour using the umlauts, as, by the way, does Tuomo Pekkanen in his Kalevala translation. Anyway, great to have a Porta:Finnia. Gens parva bene meruit. --Iovis Fulmen 15:00, 30 Iulii 2007 (UTC)Reply

Unsourced place names recensere

I have read your suggestion ... I agree, that we have to cope with words which do not have a sourced translation. But I do not know at the moment, what a good technical solution for this would be. --Rolandus 17:14, 20 Iulii 2007 (UTC)Reply

Ut nomina Finnica latinizes, vide Lingua Finnica, ubi invenies:
Latinizatio solita nominum Finnicorum:
Finnice -o → Latine -o, -onis
Finnice -a → Latine -a, -ae
Finnice -i → Latine -i, -is
Finnice -en → Latine -en, -is
Somewhere, similarly, I've made a chart specifying a regular method of converting Polynesian names to Latin names. Since all (all, all, all) Polynesian nouns end in a vowel, the process can be made simple, regular, and predictable, just as the Finnish–Latin conversion can apparently be. In contrast, other languages (e.g., English) may prove nearly intractable, and they may not admit of any regular & systematic method of making the conversion. IacobusAmor 17:25, 20 Iulii 2007 (UTC)Reply
You found it! Thanks, Iacobe. --Harrissimo 17:30, 20 Iulii 2007 (UTC)Reply
Hello Harrissimo, have you ever seen Ziegler's Carta Marina? Not that the 16th century Latinisations are the best, but it's still quite instructive, and also nice to look at. [1] --Iovis Fulmen 19:37, 31 Iulii 2007 (UTC)Reply
I've glanced at it when I was reading its article, but I never realised it had such good information. It solves the Närpes problem, too. Danke schön! --Harrissimo 19:45, 31 Iulii 2007 (UTC)Reply

Categories recensere

A useful rule -- in many Wikipedias -- is that if something belongs to a more specific category, it doesn't need to be in the parent category as well. So, if there's a new category Categoria:Reges reginaeque Angliae, when adding people to it you can normally (unless history demands otherwise) take them out of Categoria:Reges Reginaeque Britanniae. I wish I'd noticed your editing of cities this afternoon, because the same would apply to Categoria:Urbes Angliae versus Categoria:Urbes Regni Uniti! But never mind ... Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 19:14, 26 Iulii 2007 (UTC)Reply

Hold on, I see you haven't created Categoria:Reges reginaeque Angliae yet. Were you about to? I expect so. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 19:17, 26 Iulii 2007 (UTC)Reply
Well, I sort of got confused with it, since the British Kings & Queens category, there are loads of English ones who never ruled over the whole of Britain, who shouldn't strictly have been in that category, so I just left them there and in the England category. Do you mean that the English cities category shouldn't be in the UK cities category, or that I shouldn't have made it in the first place? --Harrissimo 19:37, 26 Iulii 2007 (UTC)Reply
OK, I understand now. I'll remove the UK categories for all the cities. --Harrissimo 09:20, 27 Iulii 2007 (UTC)Reply
It was confusing, I agree. Someone (even maybe me) probably should have made an "English kings" category before: but it wasn't wrong the way it was -- because it is true that those people were kings/queens in Britain. It's best to understand categories as being descriptive and inclusive rather than as being fixed definitions and exclusive lists. If you want an accurate list, you make a list (as an article or a Formula) rather than rely on a category page.
Having said that, the new categories you have made are appropriate, just what was needed! And thanks for clearing out the UK categories from those city entries. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 12:48, 27 Iulii 2007 (UTC)Reply

Declension of Finnish names recensere

Yes I have. Good idea to check there (I didn't realize...) There is Hälläpyörä somewhere in the text, according to the index, but unfortunately it doesn't give the canto and line numbers so it will take me some time to look that up. Unless, of course, you happen to know where Hälläpyörä appears in the Kalevala (and it is declensed there!)--Iovis Fulmen 15:30, 30 Iulii 2007 (UTC)Reply

Tuomo Pekkanen's solution is this: He uses the proper Finnish names when possible (e.g. Tyrjä); if declension is involved he gets rid of vowel harmony (Tyrjae torrens (=Tyrjän koski) cantio IX versus 378). A useful and down-to-earth solution. --Iovis Fulmen 15:40, 30 Iulii 2007 (UTC)Reply
Oops, thanks for the hint re Hallapyora. I was quicker ;-)--Iovis Fulmen 15:44, 30 Iulii 2007 (UTC)Reply
Sorry, no idea as to -aa/-ää yet. It's an irksome business at some point, somehow, isn't it, I've been through something similar last summer holidays and then just stopped. Now I really liked Pekkanen's way of dealing with the ä, but then why does he have to say Lempo, Lempis rather than Lempo, Lemponis, as you suggest? I think this sounds so much better. Systems: At the end of the day all you can say is summum ius summa iniuria, don't you agree? Oh, and thanks for the invitation.--Iovis Fulmen 18:29, 30 Iulii 2007 (UTC)Reply

(Fen/Fin)nia recensere

There's absolutely no differentia in re between Fenni and Finni, or Fennicus and Finnicus. Both Fen[...] and Fin[...] are in use but I think Fin[...] is gaining ground, partly because Finnish top Latinists (Pekkanen, Pitkäranta) favour it, obviously because it sounds more familiar in an international context. I suggest your follow their suit. As to me and Fenni, well, I guess it's a matter of personal taste. In Swedish, the word finne has two meanings, viz. 'Finn' and 'pimple, pustule' (homonymy!). As a Finnish-Swedish guy, I find this association a bit annoying and try to avoid it at least in Latin! --Neander 01:19, 20 Augusti 2007 (UTC)Reply

You'll always be better than a pimple to me, Neander ;) I'll add Finni to Victionarium some time later today with Fenni as a redirect and alternative. I may as well ask you if you agree with the table in Estonice (and its talk page), since only one person replied to my previous plea. --Harrissimo 01:32, 20 Augusti 2007 (UTC)Reply
"You'll always be better than a pimple to me ... ;)". Thanks, Harrissimo, I'll keep that in mind. :-) Re Estonian, I'm afraid I haven't much to offer. Haapsalu is of course the same as Fin. Haapasalo 'aspen wilds'. But I've got no idea as to how it should be treated in Latin. The Finnish town Salo 'wilds' (a very unbecoming name at least nowadays), some 50 km from Turku/Åbo, is Sala, but I daren't suggest Haapsalu be rendered as Haapsala in Latin. Hope you'll find a better source. --Neander 03:32, 20 Augusti 2007 (UTC)Reply

Porta:Finnia recensere

1)I added three pages I thought ought to be written, I might try myself later this week (the range of people likely to do so being very limited) 2)what exactly do you mean by Paginae Volumus? Since it means "We, the pages, want" as it stands I changed it to "Paginas Volumus" (We want pages), but I don't think that this is what you intended...--Iovis Fulmen 19:45, 31 Iulii 2007 (UTC)Reply

Ha! sorry for my awful Latin, I'm not very good at the accusative. It was meant to be 'Pages we want' would Paginas nos requirimus be better? That means 'want', 'need' and 'ask for' which is pretty much what I intended. --Harrissimo 19:49, 31 Iulii 2007 (UTC)Reply
is "Pages we want" the same as "pages that we want" or "pages which we want"? Then I would suggest "Paginae(!!!), quas volumus" or perhaps just "paginae desideratae"?--Iovis Fulmen 19:59, 31 Iulii 2007 (UTC)Reply
It is the same, but paginae desideratae looks better to me. I'll change it now. --Harrissimo 20:10, 31 Iulii 2007 (UTC)Reply
Errr, emmm, we might suggest commentatio praeter paginam.--Ioscius (disp) 17:31, 21 Augusti 2007 (UTC)Reply
I genuinely thought it was right at the time! I'll be a bit more careful in the future. P.S. Does the Finnia portal work in your browser (i.e. is there are huge space between the two boxes). If so, I may have to ask somebody for help. It is meant to look like the Philosophy portal on EN. --Harrissimo 18:26, 21 Augusti 2007 (UTC)Reply

And now for something entirely different: What about the administrative divisions? We have provinciae as the main division, which is good (same as used for Germany), and what's below that? Pagus? Orbis (probably not)? Regio is not an administrative division, right? I was wondering as I start dealing with Carelia.--Iovis Fulmen 20:23, 31 Iulii 2007 (UTC)Reply

Well... regio does have a very loose definition, but on WikiEN it does clearly say that it is an administrative division. Under that I use sub-regio for the sub-regions, which will be a very tedious task if I ever decide to do them. Under that is muncipium (muncipality, city). BTW, for C/Karelia, see the talk page of "Pages we want" - I'm not sure which aspect of it you want to write about. --Harrissimo 20:34, 31 Iulii 2007 (UTC)Reply

Inspice, quaeso, nomina, quae locis quibusdam Careliae dedi. Nescio, an tu non aliae.--Iovis Fulmen 07:31, 17 Augusti 2007 (UTC)Reply

Chartam Careliae inserui--Iovis Fulmen 17:27, 21 Augusti 2007 (UTC)Reply
Est contubernalis bonus paginae. --Harrissimo 18:21, 21 Augusti 2007 (UTC)Reply

Carelia Meridionalis recensere

On a point you raised elsewhere: if Carelia Meridionalis says all that there is to be said then it's not a stub any more. One question arose in my mind when reading (being a historian and all): in what year was the region set up? What if anything did it replace? If that is answerable and you add a sentence about it, you have an article that's better than the English and Finnish equivalents, and definitely not a stub. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 14:45, 22 Augusti 2007 (UTC)Reply

Same with Finnia Meridionalis. With the city articles, my rough idea would be that about 3-4 sentences of useful text would take an article beyond the stub category. It's just a matter of judgment, really. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 15:05, 22 Augusti 2007 (UTC)Reply
I will try to add a bit more, especially on provinces and regions, since they are all either lists or sentences copied across from other P+R pages. Do you think that my latin is beneath green button standard? --Harrissimo 16:04, 22 Augusti 2007 (UTC)Reply
Ha! I am putting an {{L?}} on my own new pages; I think that's what we should all do. When I look at one of your pages, OK, I can usually see one or two changes that I would want to make before changing it to L1; others might well say just the same about mine. It's partly for the same reason that journalists and authors use editors and proof-readers: you tend to miss your own mistakes. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 17:13, 22 Augusti 2007 (UTC)Reply
I never dreamed of rating myself as green button standard... I was just wondering if I would have one of those ugly red hammer ratings on some of my pages. --Harrissimo 18:17, 22 Augusti 2007 (UTC)Reply
Before the modern provinces and regions there were counties and before that, historical provinces (which all have latin names [HOORAY!]) so I suppose that can be one thing I could add. Also if I'd continued French in school I would have been able to take some facts from their Finland articles, which seem very well made. But never mind. I could probably write about the Coats of Arms too. --Harrissimo 16:06, 22 Augusti 2007 (UTC)Reply
I created a new Formula:Data nationis simplificata. To use it just add the word simplificata after nationis in the formula call on the page. THe inputs are the same as for Data nationis. The only difference is that the new formula call does not display: independentiae, PBD, % aquae.--Rafaelgarcia 01:15, 23 Augusti 2007 (UTC)Reply
I just got rid of the international rankings too. Thanks for all the help you've given me, Rafael! --Harrissimo 09:37, 23 Augusti 2007 (UTC)Reply

Ulāmbatār? recensere

It always shocks me when people don't get that double-vowels usually mean long vowels. But then the Vatican Latinists aren't really the best at world linguistics. Anyway, alas, Egger doesn't appear to have Ulan Bator, and neither does Burke. --Iustinus 23:02, 23 Augusti 2007 (UTC)Reply

Or Vicipædia could translate it, presumably as Heros Ruber. ::nictonicto:: IacobusAmor 15:40, 24 Augusti 2007 (UTC)Reply
I guess we shouldn't just translate it because, as Baldur said, we shouldn't get out our "English-Latin dictionary and loan-translate the hell out of it!" should we use the more P.C. Ulaanbataar -is - or less "shocking" ;) Ulānbatār -is? --Harrissimo 16:41, 24 Augusti 2007 (UTC)Reply
That's why I was winking! IacobusAmor 17:11, 24 Augusti 2007 (UTC)Reply
Call me pedantic, but it's Ulaanbaatar (not Ulaanbataar)! Also, if you look at the phonetics at en:Ulan Bator, they are not simply long vowels. There's some sort of glottal thing in there between the a's. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 19:01, 24 Augusti 2007 (UTC)Reply
Yeah, I realized I'd screwed that up, but it was too late. I figured I'd let some other pedant catch me. More embarassing, however, is the glottalization thing! But if the phonetic transcription you're referring to is the one that says [Ulaɣan Baɣatur], well ɣ represents the gh sound, like in Spanish fuego, and sorta the Arabic غ, so not a glotal thing so much as a voiced velar fricative. But even so, notice that it says "Classical Mongolian," so I took this to be an archaic pronunciation. Think of how gh disappears, often causing vowel contractions, in Turkish, Maltese, etc. En:Mongolian language, if I read it right, confirms that we are dealing with a length distinction here. --Iustinus 22:37, 26 Augusti 2007 (UTC)Reply
Sorry, that was my mistyping. Well I guess that sends us to the Ulaanbaatar (-aris) conclusion - unless Ulan Bator (-oris) would be better. Do Latinists avoid the glottal stop? --Harrissimo 19:07, 24 Augusti 2007 (UTC)Reply
The diocese site for Ulaanbaatar says an alternative name is Urgaensis and Urga was a previous name of the city. Is it usable? --Harrissimo 11:31, 25 Augusti 2007 (UTC)Reply
Why not? Nice and short. Cite the site, and who's going to complain? Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 17:46, 26 Augusti 2007 (UTC)Reply
It is done. --Harrissimo 22:01, 26 Augusti 2007 (UTC)Reply
I had seen the name Urga but had some misgivings about using it, since they deliberately changed the name (and not just the transcription) in this century, but really how many out-of-date names do we use every day without comment? We are speaking Latin afterall. --Iustinus 22:37, 26 Augusti 2007 (UTC)Reply

Gratias recensere

Thanks for the wide formula assist on the Terrae motus page. Looks much better!--Rafaelgarcia 15:31, 24 Augusti 2007 (UTC)Reply

Caiania recensere

I had a go. I am full of admiration for the way you set out the alternative etymologies. My changes are mostly quite minor: I hope they are OK. Sometimes it's just a matter of choice: for example, although "controversiosa" is OK, I said "controversa" because it's shorter and means the same. And sometimes, when you start editing, you can't stop ... Obviously, change back anything you don't like. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 12:32, 25 Augusti 2007 (UTC)Reply

I see now that Rafael had already had a go! Therefore my admiration must be shared half-and-half ... Just to explain a change I made in the Infobox: Vicipaedia editors often get this wrong, but words like "Finnice" and "Suecice" can't serve as names of languages. They are adverbs meaning "in Finnish", "in Swedish". So I changed to "Finnica, Suecica". These are adjectives; there was no need to repeat the noun "Lingua" because that word is already present in the left column. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 12:49, 25 Augusti 2007 (UTC)Reply
Oh :S. I always thought that they were just the way you said Finnish, Swedish in a less formal way than Finnish Language. I'll update the pages later. --Harrissimo 13:11, 25 Augusti 2007 (UTC)Reply

Imagines recensere

Quote: "Would you like any of the maps to be translated from the English Wikipedia, Iovis? --Harrissimo 21:58, 26 Augusti 2007 (UTC)"Reply

Do you really know how to do that, Harrissimo? Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 11:36, 27 Augusti 2007 (UTC)Reply
Optime mehercle amicum nostrum posse puto, o Andreas. Vide Carelia --Iovis Fulmen 14:29, 27 Augusti 2007 (UTC)Reply

Gratias ago recensere

Gratias quoque ego tibi ago. Latine longe non scripsi, sed haec lingua mihi carissima est. "Vita brevis, ars longa": quamquam tempus ad scribendum multum non habeo et linguam latinam meam non optimam esse puto, laborem incipiam. Vale --Proto-iaponicus 14:57, 30 Augusti 2007 (UTC)Reply

Carlismus recensere

Salve, Harrisimo. Could you help me puting the Carlist anthem into two columns? I do not really know how to do it...--Xaverius 17:13, 3 Septembris 2007 (UTC)Reply

Rem suscepi ob te. Vale! --Harrissimo 17:28, 3 Septembris 2007 (UTC)Reply
Gratias ago! potesne partem latinam meam carminis scire?--Xaverius 17:30, 3 Septembris 2007 (UTC)Reply
Sunt nonnulli errata. Fortasse defendans defendentes est melior quam defendamus et "Regem Hispaniae in palatium Matriti pervenire." melior sit si fit "Reditus Regis Hispaniae/Hispanici in palatium Matriti." Autem reliquum bene scripsisti. --Harrissimo 17:56, 3 Septembris 2007 (UTC)Reply
Gratias multas. Puto melior defendentes quam defendamus esse sed Reditus regis Hispaniae oratio cum substantivo est dum Hispanice venga el rey de España oratio cum verbo, tunc fortasse melior pervenire--Xaverius 18:35, 3 Septembris 2007 (UTC)Reply
Me penitet. Translationes meae erant e Versione Anglica ubi "Present Active Participle" utitur (in union, Defending the flag). Naturaliter, translatio e Versione Hispanica (qua non possum lego, triste) est valde melior. Vale pro nunc! --Harrissimo 18:46, 3 Septembris 2007 (UTC)Reply

Waltharius recensere

gratia tibi ago, ciao--Massimo Macconi 11:49, 30 Septembris 2007 (UTC)Reply

Mihi est quidem volup. Harrissimo.

Why the Somme? recensere

Ah, I think I see now. You're going to do the Battle? Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 21:04, 4 Octobris 2007 (UTC)Reply

Yes :) I'll be writing about WWI for a while. P.S. Have you seen my plea in the taberna? Is "Battle of X" Pugna apud Xem? Harrissimo.
See L&S, sense II.A (http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/cgi-bin/ptext?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.04.0059%3Aentry%3D%233251), which includes relevant examples from Ovid (Pugnabant alii tardis apud Ilion armis) and Tacitus (bellatum apud Actium), though they don't fully answer your question. IacobusAmor 23:33, 4 Octobris 2007 (UTC)Reply

Diminutivum recensere

Notulam addidi in disputatione de suffixo diminutivo. Opinionem tuam libenter legam! --Fabullus 14:32, 20 Octobris 2007 (UTC)Reply

In the new table I made for Suffixum diminutivum (click here) I would like to emphasize some of the gridlines: those separating the 'exempla' from the exceptions, and those separating each 'classis' from the next. Could you show me how to do this? Feel welcome to add other features (like background colours etc.) as well that might improve or clarify the table: you're the expert. By the way I am also thinking about whether to divide the table into several smaller ones. What about that? --Fabullus 11:56, 25 Octobris 2007 (UTC)Reply

I will see what I can do. I'm not sure if I used the right sort of table for doing this (the one I used isn't very practical, it just looks pretty). As you can see from the code when you edit the page, it is very tedious. I suggest that we have a table for each of the five declensions in different sections with a couple of sentences and then the tables below and also sections for diminutive verbs and adjectives (rather than squashing them all into one). Brilliant research on all the stirpes by the way! I'll put a new table format onto the page and then (hopefully) it will be easy to edit and have harsher gridlines. Harrissimo.
I have been experimenting with tables in my personal harenarium (vide hic). I think I have managed to create a table format that is somewhat clearer to understand. You are right however about the code: it is tedious and might easily frighten away those that might have something useful to add, but don't understand how to edit such a table. Do you think it would be possible somehow to standardise this code in some kind of template? Thanks in advance and bye for now, --09:50, 10 Novembris 2007 (UTC)
Ecce! I tried to simplify it, but the first part of the code including the titles seems to be beyond help. At least in the new table you can read the contents rather than having to see the background colour all over the place. Harrissimo.

Hello! I just wanted to tell you that I am very impressed by your tables at the Diminutivum (Latinum) article! They are so much better than my Latin Diminutives. Thank you very much! -- Diaphanus 24:00, 24 Decembris 2007 (UTC)

Well... I'm not going to wallow in somebody else's glory - I'd say usor:Fabullus did at least 80% of the work on that page and definitely did most of the research! Your site looks pretty good - especially the text. Maybe you could add some to our diminutive page :D ? (And merry christmas!) Harrissimo 00:04, 25 Decembris 2007 (UTC).Reply
You're right about Fabullus. I appreciate what you all have done there. There is one thing about the article that concerns me. It might be a very good idea to categorize the different rules in terms of the actual stems of words (puella-, puero-, turri-, cornu-, spe-) rather than the bases of words (puell-, puer-, turr-, corn-, sp-). Sometimes the term "stem" is used when the user of the word really means "base." (That really confused me when I first got into Latin.) The reason for that kind of categorization is that words are normally grouped that way rather than by their bases, and it's the stem (often weakened or elided), not specifically the base, that is attached to the diminutive suffix. (Thank you and Merry Christmas to you too!) -- Diaphanus 22:34, 26 Decembris 2007 (UTC)
I think you should probably copy and paste what you have just said into the disputatio:Diminutivum and give Fabullus a message telling him to have a look. Does this use of the stems work all across the declensions? Harrissimo 22:39, 26 Decembris 2007 (UTC).Reply
I don't think I understand what you are mean about the use of the stems. I think that the inclusion of the actual stems of the words (not just the bases) gives a better indication of how the stem coalesced with the suffixes. I mentioned in the disputatio:Diminutivum that it might be a good idea to make a distinction between, for instance, a "pure p" mute stem substantive like princeps and a mixed i-stem substantive that is a p-stem in the singular but an i-stem in the plural like trabs. Now that I think of it, the "Stirpes in -p- et -b- exeuntes" part of Diminutivum (Latinum) probably should be reworked to include mixed i-stems (like fons and pars). -- Diaphanus 01:47, 27 Decembris 2007 (UTC)
By "stems", I meant the (puella-, puero-, turri-, cornu-, spe-) parts that you called the stems above. What I meant by going to its disputatio was just make a new heading called format and propose your use of the (puella-, puero-, turri-, cornu-, spe-) rather than the (puell-, puer-, turr-, corn-, sp-) and whichever other changes you would like. (It is not as productive to discuss on a user talk: when we can just go to the talk: . Harrissimo 02:05, 27 Decembris 2007 (UTC).Reply

Thank goodness recensere

Thank goodness you have disposed of Manchester Maritus PS! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 18:22, 30 Octobris 2007 (UTC)Reply

Any day! Harrissimo.

author, year recensere

Because the authors and years in brackets are on the actual linked pages and it is a bit of an eye-sore to look at the scientist's name all the time. If it is usual practice to put them there, I didn't realise. You can revert me if you like. Harrissimo.
just asking. Hendricus 23:08, 30 Octobris 2007 (UTC)Reply
As long as the author & year are retained somewhere. After all, that's important historical information. IacobusAmor 23:18, 30 Octobris 2007 (UTC)Reply

Moving pages recensere

Please see Vicipaedia:Movere#What if the target page already has content? (I just corrected a problem with Consociatio Nationum). Thanks for your contributions! --UV 20:22, 4 Novembris 2007 (UTC)Reply

Thanks, I'll remember that in the future. Harrissimo.

kalendar recensere

Hi, i've forgotten what juni was in Latin, is there a calendar translation somewhere?Hendricus 16:56, 11 Novembris 2007 (UTC)Reply

Iunius; formula:menses. Harrissimo.

translate biographia?? recensere

Goodevening, Harrissimo, is it common use to translate a biographia of a person, or do you keep the original titles? see Goldfuss ? Hendricus 19:52, 12 Novembris 2007 (UTC)Reply

Keep the original titles normally. If you like, you could give a description of the books (see Radulphus Thoresbeius) but that is voluntary. Harrissimo.

Hatch recensere

Useful. But I hope his spelling in the list is better than his spelling in the preface: "Until the Modern Ear", indeed! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 21:26, 12 Novembris 2007 (UTC)Reply

Finlandia → Finnia recensere

Amice, while you're at it, are you going to change the title of Sibelius's composition Finlandia too? And don't forget Finlandia University (http://www.finlandia.edu/)! ;) IacobusAmor 22:48, 13 Novembris 2007 (UTC)Reply

No stone shall be left unturned! Harrissimo 11:51, 2 Decembris 2007 (UTC).Reply

De locis Finnicis recensere

Salve, Harrissimo! Most of those communia and urbes mentioned in the table are from Pitkäranta. Some of the non-Pitkäranta proposals look as weird as the attempt, in the last summer, to render the town Cork as "Suber". These places aren't mentioned in Pitkäranta:

Acas || Akaa OK with me.

Aquila || Kotka The "Cork/Suber" case. The town Kotka doesn't even have a Swedish name.

Caput lacus || Järvenpää A literal translation; Swedish Träskända would translate "Finis stagni". Maybe it's best not to translate this at all, I don't know.

Espo || Espoo OK with me.

Forssa || Forssa OK

Granivicus || Jyväskylä Very OK Kuopio || Kuopio OK with me

Quercuum paeninsula || Tammisaari OK (we've talked about this)

Sala || Salo I wonder what's the real extra-wiki source for Sala (instead of Salo, -onis); but maybe Sala is mentioned in some old map?

Sinus || Lahti Oh, no (a Cork/Suber case again!)

Sipo || Sipoo On the model of Espoo? Well, maybe. I like more the Swedish name Sibbo, though.

Vantania || Vantaa OK with me.

All the others come from Pitkäranta's lexicon. The other source is unavailable to me. --Neander 23:01, 13 Novembris 2007 (UTC)Reply

According to the Nordisk familjebok (http://runeberg.org/nfcd/0267.html), there are two geographical places called Salo, of which the Salo parish (pitäjä; socken) in the Oulu province (lääni; län) was more important in the 19th c.: "Salo kallades särskildt en i socknen belägen, vida bekant hamn och marknadsplats, der P. Brahe 1649 grundlade en stad, hvilken först kallades Salo stad och från 1652 Brahestad." ('Especially, Salo was the name of a widely known harbour and market place, in the parish, where P[er] Brahe founded, in 1649, a town which was first called the Salo town, and from 1652 on, Brahestad '). -- The Salo near Åbo/Turku was at that time only a small market place (kauppala; köping).
As to the Salo/Sala affair, it fell upon me that the old districts Munsala and Pensala (which now belong to Nykarleby) are Swedish names of some older Finnish coumpound names in -salo (Zacharias Topelius etymologised Munsala as "Muni-salo" ('Egg island'). --Neander 22:00, 14 Novembris 2007 (UTC)Reply
So I should have Sala (Uloa) and Sala (Finnia Occidentalis) - and a disputatio? Harrissimo.
Well, whynot, but Sala (Uloa) is nowadays called Saloinen. That was the Finnish name given in the Nordisk familjebok too. --Neander 22:22, 14 Novembris 2007 (UTC)Reply
Sic Saloinen ad paginam Sala (Uloa) redirigam. Harrissimo.

Sowerby (familia) recensere

Goodevening Harrissimo, how do i translate a pece of tekst as in Sowerby (familia), is the title translated properly, Sowerby is also a name of a place in Yorkshire (England)? Hendricus 22:02, 14 Novembris 2007 (UTC)Reply

Well, there's nothing we can do about a surname (even if a town is named after it) so you would just have to leave Sowerby indeclinable. I would suggest that you use familia (family) or familiares (family members) - as in Sowerby Familia fuit familia Britannica cuius familiares (saepe) pictores (etc.) erant - The Sowerby Family was a British family of which the family members were (often) painters (etc.) Harrissimo.

Your signature recensere

Did you know your remarks and comments on discussion pages and in the taberna are all without date and time? The correct way to sign is with ~ ~ ~ ~ (without the spaces), which will cause your comments to be signed automatically with your name + date and time of composition. Vale, --Fabullus 14:56, 15 Novembris 2007 (UTC)Reply

Yes, thank you! I was using three squiggles before, but I'll use four now. Vale! Harrissimo 19:54, 15 Novembris 2007 (UTC).Reply

Delenda? recensere

Esne Elkus? 22:34, 22 Novembris 2007 (UTC)Reply

Interdum. Harrissimo 22:34, 22 Novembris 2007 (UTC).Reply

Categoria:Correction needed bucket recensere

Goodevening, i've created this bucket - wich i will be placing at several users, hoping one of you have some sparetime to give a look at it, for some articles which need some attention about some corrections and translation help, the corrections made will be used for example for future addings, thanks for your help, Hendricus 19:19, 23 Novembris 2007 (UTC)Reply

I'll help when I can. Harrissimo 19:25, 23 Novembris 2007 (UTC).Reply
  • Thanks, i created this category to put those articles of wich i'm certain some attention is needed, mostly about places and persons, (maybe it's wiser to give this category a latin name?) Hendricus 19:28, 23 Novembris 2007 (UTC)Reply
I'd recommend you use Categoria:Latinitas -4 (corrigenda) (for plain badly written latin) or Categoria:Paginae tironum (for beginners' latin). Corrigenda is actually (part of) the word from which we get correction (korrektie in dutch?), so they are essentialy the same category. Harrissimo 19:39, 23 Novembris 2007 (UTC).Reply

escimaeus recensere

Where'd you find this adjective, Harri?--Ioscius (disp) 13:12, 24 Novembris 2007 (UTC)Reply

Ahhh, sorry, Morgan, gotcha.--Ioscius (disp) 13:17, 24 Novembris 2007 (UTC)Reply

zoologia recensere

Goodday, Harrisimo, i having some difficulties to get some of the following translated the right way, maybe you can help out with it, thanks :

D.L. recensere

Harri, salvus sis. Iustinus, me hortante, Davidem rogavit quidnam inferorum significat "D.L.". Nunc tibi fero responsum:

Iustinus:Quid significat Egger D.L. in adumbrationibus lexici tui? Nullum in operis Egger titulum idoneum video.
David Morgan:D.L. est Diurnarius Latinus (Opus Fundatum Latinitas, Romae, 1980), quem librum ipse in bibliopolio Vaticano aliquot abhinc annos emi. Eiusdem modi liber est ac "Omnia Dici Possunt Latine" et "Sermo Latinus Hodiernus" -- hi tres libri nuntiis continentur qui iam editi erant in "Latinitatis" fasciculis. Vale in proximum, David

Ahhh interretem mirabilem! Vale, nunc! --Ioscius (disp) 21:21, 26 Novembris 2007 (UTC)Reply

Gratias Multas! Harrissimo 21:50, 26 Novembris 2007 (UTC).Reply

Rhodesia et Zimbabua recensere

Salve Harrissimo. Cur importavisti vexillium Rhodesiae non Zimmbabuae?--Agnus 11:52, 29 Novembris 2007 (UTC)Reply

Non importavi illud vexillum. Illic erat ante paginam adveni - additor erat usor ignotus Vale! Harrissimo 13:03, 29 Novembris 2007 (UTC).Reply

Havana? recensere

Harrissimo I cannot confirm in your source the Latin Havana....I think that is wrong. Havana is English. Can you correct the reference to show where you got Havana?--Rafaelgarcia 01:41, 30 Novembris 2007 (UTC)Reply

Nevermind. It seems from your source that in 18th century spanish it was also often spelt Havana, which suggests both forms existed in Latin, which is reasonable. I'll edit the page to indicate that this is the case.--Rafaelgarcia 01:51, 30 Novembris 2007 (UTC)Reply
Thanks, sorry for not responding quicker - I've had a bit of a virus. Harrissimo 17:23, 30 Novembris 2007 (UTC).Reply

s et z recensere

Salve Harrissimo, nomen secundum hierusalemmae urbis in lingua Latina ligua Graecaque non Zion sed Sion. Cur Vicipaedia Latina Civitatum Africaanarum unam Zambiam diset non Sambiam?--Agnus 21:56, 30 Novembris 2007 (UTC)Reply

Nescio... non illam paginam feci. Ut dixi, non hos fontes ego creo itaque non praesto nomina cum litteris quibus malis vel falsis sunt. Si sit (fortasse) mala littera z (aut s) in fontis nomine, nobis tamen eo uti. Harrissimo 22:22, 30 Novembris 2007 (UTC).Reply

Pagina mensis recensere

Ciao! Sorry but I do not understand what do you mean with updating the "pagina mensis", I have also some doubts I'm able to do it. Ciao--Massimo Macconi 10:32, 1 Decembris 2007 (UTC)Reply

If recensere

No, sorry, I've tried but I can't get it right. Why don't you ask UV. He can usually do this kind of thing in seconds. If he does it for us this time, and we see what he's done, that ought to teach us how to make a line optional next time. Possibly. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 12:51, 10 Decembris 2007 (UTC)Reply

This time even UV hasn't managed it (yet). Meanwhile maybe we can solve the problem the other way, by finding a phonetic transcription of the native name for the language! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 12:58, 12 Decembris 2007 (UTC)Reply

forename: Colin recensere

Goodday Harrisimo, do you know of a Latin form of the English forename: Colin?? Hendricus 23:24, 26 Decembris 2007 (UTC)Reply

Well, the first name Colin is colandus. However, we do not need latin forms of surnames at Vicipaedia, so just change the forename. Vale! Harrissimo 23:44, 26 Decembris 2007 (UTC).Reply
Ok, thanks, i've meant forename yes, it should be mentioned at Index nominum, Hendricus 23:50, 26 Decembris 2007 (UTC)Reply
It shall be! Harrissimo 23:53, 26 Decembris 2007 (UTC).Reply

?? recensere

Is it: categoria:Fauna Australiana or categoria:Fauna Australiae ?? Hendricus 21:45, 27 Decembris 2007 (UTC)Reply

-Australiana. Sorry about that, I must have missed it when I was looking in Categoria:Australia. Harrissimo 22:29, 27 Decembris 2007 (UTC).Reply

portal recensere

Salve Harrissimo, do you still need the following pages or can they be deleted? If you would like to keep them for whatever reason, that's no problem – maybe you could move the three templates to your user namespace?

Greetings, --UV 20:39, 29 Decembris 2007 (UTC)Reply

I think everything in Porta2 is in Porta:Finnia's history anyway and the others are of no use to me now, so please delete them. Harrissimo 15:32, 30 Decembris 2007 (UTC).Reply

Non stipulae recensere

You are right, some pages are really poor. But as long as they are correct, I think we should not worry about them. There is a category of pages, I would consider to delete: Pages with very poor content, which nobody wants to improve within the next 5 years AND which might not have a corresponding page in an other Wikipedia within the next 5 years. ;-) --Rolandus 13:45, 1 Ianuarii 2008 (UTC)Reply

non - stipula's recensere

Salve Harrisimo, going trough the marsupials again, i think that when we can get a second tekstline (with detailed information about distribution and bodysize - avaible at the english project) the stipula's can get out, Hendricus 19:45, 1 Ianuarii 2008 (UTC)Reply

I'll see what I can do about a second line for some of them - it will be nice to see some second sentences on those pages. But sadly that doesn't make them non-stipula. There is no official criteria forn what a stub actually is but I'm sure that it needs to be at least 5 or 6 lines of pure text including reliable references. But these will open possibilities for later editors - something w:en:WP:STUB says is one of the main purposes of a stub. Harrissimo 20:47, 1 Ianuarii 2008 (UTC).Reply
I think they're quite informative even right now, when you look close you (i do) count 10 points of information, even within 1 tekstline and a taxobox, or do you like to write a novel about them (- i don't), Hendricus 21:01, 1 Ianuarii 2008 (UTC)Reply
Maybe this is not explicitly written down on a policy page, however, there have been several discussions which show that we do not follow all policies of other Wikipedias and I think it is a good idea to have our own policy. We definitly have a more relaxed practice concerning the amount of text of "valid" stubs. --Rolandus 21:15, 1 Ianuarii 2008 (UTC)Reply
OK. I do realise that latin and vicipaedia are slightly different. But I don't know about making it too relaxed - I think we should at least try to follow the bigger rules of English wikipedia (of which I consider w:en:WP:STUB one). Then our specialised rules and better community spirit come in on the lower levels. One of the things that we will need on Vicipaedia:Stipula, then, is an actual definition of how long a stipula should be (and what it includes) to avoid confusion like this (and even my own :o). Should we continue this discussion at Disputatio Vicipaediae:Stipula ? Harrissimo 21:46, 1 Ianuarii 2008 (UTC).Reply
Yes, let's discuss it there. :-) --Rolandus 22:14, 1 Ianuarii 2008 (UTC)Reply
I think it's wrong to think that the amount of tekst is equal to the shown information, english like to write novels about a subject while in Latin tekstline fullfill the same amount of information in one or two tekstlines, but ofcourse - i'm just beeing Dutch, Hendricus 21:34, 1 Ianuarii 2008 (UTC)Reply
Not at all, Hendrice! The infobox and pictures certainly give a lot of easy information but the subtleties and more relevant facts about the life of the species should be included in the text. Anyway, we shall discuss how much is necessary at Disputatio Vicipaediae:Stipula where it is more communal. Harrissimo 21:46, 1 Ianuarii 2008 (UTC).Reply
That's what i've ment with a second tekstline, within it detailed info about what they eat, look like (difference from other species) and the exact distribution of where they live, this info can be found on the english, and at wikispecies even about typo locality, Hendricus 22:47, 1 Ianuarii 2008 (UTC)Reply

De porta recensere

Salve, Harrisime. Volo portam de Historia Hispanica scribere (Usor:Xaverius/portal de historia). Te peto si me adiuvare vis cum formulis, quod nescio modo eas creandae. Fortasse formulas tuas posum simulare aut transscribere, sed nolo formulas identicas creare. Gratias ago et sit annus novus tibi felix et prosperus!--Xaverius 20:35, 1 Ianuarii 2008 (UTC)Reply

Fortasse Porta de Hispania sit melius? Sic possis scribere de et historicis et ceteris rebus Hispanicis sicut ceterae vicipaediae. UV fecit faciles novas formulas creando portarum... vidistine eas? Eo nunc ad paginam tuam et spero te felicem annum quoque habere! Harrissimo 20:47, 1 Ianuarii 2008 (UTC).Reply
Etiam scripsisti multa de urbibus et linguis, ergo fortasse melius ut una porta. Quid cogitas tu? Harrissimo 20:55, 1 Ianuarii 2008 (UTC).Reply
I even managed to salvage your introduction ;)

Haec est Porta Hispaniae, ubi omnes de Hispania scribere possumus

Harrissimo 21:00, 1 Ianuarii 2008 (UTC).Reply
Certe Porta Hispaniae (vel fortasse melior Porta de Hispania) melior quam porta historiae Hispanicae sit, etsi puto propostio tua maior quam mea erit! Et gratias ob veteram introductionem meam!--Xaverius 21:41, 1 Ianuarii 2008 (UTC)Reply
Incipio nunc! Harrissimo 21:48, 1 Ianuarii 2008 (UTC).Reply
Iterum gratias ago! Cum in Oxonia pervenias, tibi pintas pendam! Cras in porta laborabo.--Xaverius 22:50, 1 Ianuarii 2008 (UTC)Reply

Tx recensere

Amice, thanks for cleaning up after me! Could you make a categoria for Vici Samoani? and another for Pagi Samoani? (I don't know how or I'd do it myself.) One vici category can be added to Falealupo, and more villages & districts will come later. IacobusAmor 00:56, 2 Ianuarii 2008 (UTC)Reply

Sure! If you want to learn, there is an explanation at VP:CAT of how to make them (which will mean that I can't make a Categoria:Pagi Samoani until you create a page on one). Good night (or day), Harrissimo 01:04, 2 Ianuarii 2008 (UTC).Reply

Tx from me too recensere

Thanks very much for your comments at Disputatio:Mitjeel Yoshamya (about "praetendit", you are exactly right). I have added something too. I hope, on reflection, Dr Lovric will not think I libelled him too severely by calling him a botanist rather than a molecular geneticist. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 13:35, 2 Ianuarii 2008 (UTC)Reply

You're welcome! Dr. Lovrić's response was certainly agressive (and mysterious - the Yugoslav secret police part especially). It looks set to be quite a biography (if we can back any of it up). But let's just hope we don't get sued first! Harrissimo 13:49, 2 Ianuarii 2008 (UTC).Reply

IUCN into taxobox recensere

Goodday Harrisimo, i realy like to see to 'somehow' get the information about IUCN status within the taxobox, like it is shown at the English and French project, do you know how to do this, or know someone who can? Hendricus 22:15, 3 Ianuarii 2008 (UTC)Reply

It is a lot of work, but if I copy text from the english template and implant it into our {{Taxobox}}, it is possible. But it is going to be a lot of work, meaning I'll have to translate all of those pictures. On English Wikipedia (w:en:IUCN Red List), it gives 9 possibilities:
   * Extinct (EX)
   * Extinct in the Wild (EW)
   * Critically Endangered (CR)
   * Endangered (EN)
   * Vulnerable (VU)
   * Near Threatened (NT)
   * Least Concern (LC)
   * Data Deficient (DD)
   * Not Evaluated (NE)
But if the animal you're writing about is in the last two, you could just leave it out. So I will try to have uploaded 7 status pictures by tomorrow evening. But adding the bits of template is going to be more complicated. Harrissimo 23:11, 3 Ianuarii 2008 (UTC).Reply
Well - it's no hurry, thanks, Hendricus 23:21, 3 Ianuarii 2008 (UTC)Reply
We'll need some article to go with it as well - i think - Indicem rubrum IUCN or something like it, to explain what the info in the box is about, Hendricus 23:24, 3 Ianuarii 2008 (UTC)Reply
(That would be Index Ruber IUCN - Indicem rubrem in the accusative which comes after prepositions like apud) I'll see what I can rustle up for the red list. I'm currently doing the translation of the images here, but I'm having some problems with my downloads at the moment :S. Harrissimo 00:51, 4 Ianuarii 2008 (UTC).Reply
Actually ruber is a 1st and 2nd declension adjective, so the accusative would be Indicem rubrum. ;-) Fabullus 06:32, 4 Ianuarii 2008 (UTC)Reply

IUCN status info recensere

Goodmorning Harrisimo, some time ago we´ve discused the possibility to add the IUCN status information into the taxobox, i was curious if you have made some progres= Hendricus 07:21, 8 Ianuarii 2008 (UTC)Reply

I did the translations last night, actually. I'll probably ask UV to try putting in the bits of English template to our {{Taxobox}} - it would be a big one for me to mess up. Harrissimo 14:48, 8 Ianuarii 2008 (UTC).Reply
Sounds great, can't wait to use it, Hendricus 17:52, 8 Ianuarii 2008 (UTC)Reply
Salve Harrissimo, at commons:Template:Pengo IUCN/la you wrote: "The 1994 images will not be translated into latin, as they are currently of no use." Still, there is at least one page that needs a 1994 image (the 1994 image is in use on the English page as well). Could you translate this one more image? Thanks, --UV 13:56, 13 Ianuarii 2008 (UTC)Reply
Egi. Harrissimo 00:24, 14 Ianuarii 2008 (UTC).Reply
Gratias ago! --UV 21:50, 14 Ianuarii 2008 (UTC)Reply

Ursus JJ1 recensere

Wow, thanks so much for translating the bear map! :)--Ceylon 08:28, 18 Ianuarii 2008 (UTC)Reply

Torrens recensere

I do own a Kalevala Latina, however I'm out of town at the moment. If you don't hear from me within a couple days, then please remind me to look this up. --Iustinus 20:52, 22 Ianuarii 2008 (UTC)Reply

Formula:Movenda ad scriptorium recensere

I think, this template is a good idea. Additionally we could have a template saying "This page is part of the Scriptorium", which categorizes the pages into Categoria:Scriptorium and could be used like {{tiro}} or {{in progressu}}Nomen formulae mutavit --Grufo {{in usu}}. --Rolandus 22:55, 27 Ianuarii 2008 (UTC)Reply

Thanks :-) --Rolandus 23:10, 28 Ianuarii 2008 (UTC)Reply

Data nationis recensere

I changed privatae to officiales. Did you make a mistake there? I think the original sollemnes was supposed to mean "official" (i.e. officiales or publicae). Or have I misunderstood something? Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 15:03, 30 Ianuarii 2008 (UTC)Reply

celerrime recensere

Dude, that's great, thanks. I woke up jolted out of a dead sleep, realizing/remembering I wrote celerissime and I rushed to my computer to fix it, but you already got it. The horror! Thanks, man.--Ioscius (disp) 13:50, 9 Februarii 2008 (UTC)Reply

Thanks recensere

Thanks for picking up some of those defaultsorts that I forgot. The modern ones are fine, and I'm glad you've got them.

The medieval ones (before about 1400) are a bit more doubtful. At that stage they often weren't really surnames, more place names used as identifiers, and it's usually the custom not to reverse them. It may be best to leave those. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 22:20, 12 Februarii 2008 (UTC)Reply

With these de and d' and da names (the ones you are talking about?), the English Wikipedia was reversing with de, d' or da as a middle name. But I'll go and change them back, there can't have been many anyway. Would you rather they're listed in the 'D' or under their first name? Harrissimo 22:25, 12 Februarii 2008 (UTC).Reply
I guess -ensis counts too. Harrissimo 22:25, 12 Februarii 2008 (UTC).Reply
Yes, exactly, it's another way of doing the same thing -- adding a geographical term to the Christian name. It's hard to give a standard for medieval names, but it is commoner (I think) to sort them by the first name; i.e. not to treat the de or the -ensis as a surname.
I've changed those four back already. What I've done is to leave the defaultsort there, but to write the name out straight in it, beginning with the first name. I guess, if I do this, other editors won't come along and think the defaultsort was forgotten! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 22:33, 12 Februarii 2008 (UTC)Reply
Thanks, Harrissimo 22:35, 12 Februarii 2008 (UTC).Reply

a recensere

Categoria:Cardinales Austrici ... a? --Rolandus 20:54, 13 Februarii 2008 (UTC)Reply

Quid rogas? Harrissimo 20:56, 13 Februarii 2008 (UTC).Reply
Shouldn't it be Categoria:Cardinales Austriaci? --Rolandus 21:28, 13 Februarii 2008 (UTC)Reply
I'm on it. Harrissimo 22:22, 13 Februarii 2008 (UTC).Reply

Wilhelmshaven recensere

Wilhelmshaven is the german name. In Latina there is no W. The City is named by Gulielmus I (Imperator Germaniae), so the correct name must be Portus Gulielmus. Please move it. Martinvoll 19:40, 25 Februarii 2008 (UTC)Reply

Bundesliga recensere

The Bundesliga is the first german soccer league. Is it Pediludium Foederalis Liga? Martinvoll 20:06, 25 Februarii 2008 (UTC)Reply

Trade Unions / Gewerkschaften recensere

Is it Societas labori? Martinvoll 20:13, 25 Februarii 2008 (UTC)Reply

I'd guess it's societas mercatoria, an organization having to do with trade. IacobusAmor 20:51, 25 Februarii 2008 (UTC)Reply

Minor formatting things recensere

Ok. :-) But - honestly speaking - I do not like this stub tag. Once I wanted to discuss whether we should completely omit it. Like they did in the German Wikipedia, however, I fear because of other reasons than I would have in mind. --Rolandus 21:31, 26 Februarii 2008 (UTC)Reply

It is not an important thing for me as well, but what reasons do you see? I am really interested. :-) In the German Wikipedia, this formula had the main reason to protect articles against being deleted. They argued that the formula should be omitted since it "looks ugly". I assume these German deletionist just wanted to have the articles "unprotected". Since we are rather tolerant with stubs here, these short articles do not need a protection and it just looks ugly ;-) In the German Wikipedia I would have voted for keeping the stub formulas, of course ;-) But here we might consider to omit them. I was just thinking about this. It is not important, but it might save some amount of work. Or do you think the stub formulas are useful? --Rolandus 22:48, 26 Februarii 2008 (UTC)Reply
I responded :-) --Rolandus 20:15, 28 Februarii 2008 (UTC)Reply
nice! --Rolandus 22:20, 28 Februarii 2008 (UTC)Reply

ref name recensere

I know that trick, but my idea is, that a red link will become a page later and the reference will be removed from the list in Austria to avoid redundances. Given that, it might be comfortable to have the link ... or maybe could we have both? I mean: the link and the name? ... Oh, I see you have removed the links. --Rolandus 16:15, 1 Martii 2008 (UTC)Reply

Concerning redundancy: I think that translations and references should be given in one place. So, if we have a page XX we should provide this "Theodosce xx" and the reference (only) on page XX. A page YY (like Austria) which has just a link to page XX should keep a reference (and a translation) near the link only for the time while we do not have page XX. When page XX will be created, the translation + references should be moved to there. However, I know that we have many lists which keep references near the link ... ;-) --Rolandus 16:31, 1 Martii 2008 (UTC)Reply

Gratias recensere

Gratias consilio tuo!--Leardeia 16:34, 1 Martii 2008 (UTC)Reply

Britanniae recensere

I've used those sources you found on the new page Britanniae, which I have (for the present) set up as a discretiva. It's very interesting. I didn't previously know that Ptolemy used "Britanniae" in that way (British Isles). It strikes me now that George III (or his advisers) probably were well aware of this. This would have been the reason why they were happy to use the Latin plural in their name for the United Kingdom -- which did at that time include the whole of both islands. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 21:41, 3 Martii 2008 (UTC)Reply

ling-stipula recensere

I really forgot it this time ;-) Since I am using "#stipula" in my Usor:Rolandus/monobook.css, stipulae are not an optical problem for me any more. :-) I would like to have a smaller image, but I do not have an idea how this could work via CSS in this case. --Rolandus 11:19, 8 Martii 2008 (UTC)Reply

Batpersons recensere

Here's something to take your mind off the Vicipaedia namespace. When, if ever, do we merge the new Vir Murcielagus with Vir vespertilio, currently in the scriptorium? Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 13:27, 8 Martii 2008 (UTC)Reply

Trauma recensere

I hope this statement makes my former yackety-yak better understandable. Thank you for your initiative and let's start ... --Rolandus 08:46, 9 Martii 2008 (UTC)Reply

The new list recensere

I have answered on my page. --Rolandus 07:05, 10 Martii 2008 (UTC)Reply

auxilium recensere

tibi gratia ago propter pretiosissimum auxilium, vale--Massimo Macconi 19:22, 10 Martii 2008 (UTC)Reply

Gygax recensere

Not sure if that was your fault or mine, but in either case, these things do happen ;) --Iustinus 21:54, 11 Martii 2008 (UTC)Reply

Britannia recensere

It seems to me that since Britannia can mean several things, the redirect page Britannia ought to point to the discretiva page Britannia (discretiva) rather than to Britanniarum Regnum. How do you feel about that? Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 15:07, 16 Martii 2008 (UTC)Reply

Sounds good. I'd think that if someone was searching for Britain they'd want the UK, but with this being Latin, Britannia's obviously a lot more ambiguous. Harrissimo 18:50, 16 Martii 2008 (UTC).Reply

Consilia recensere

Salve Harrissimo! While you're at it, what would you think about the following fusions: 1. Gradus Latinitatis & Latinitas 2. Praefatio & Ops nexusque usoribus novis (Opes usoribus novis) 3. Auxilium paginarum recensendarum & Commendationes paginarum recte scribendarum & Pagina (De paginis bonis) I think they're obvious, but probably not everyone does (the English wikipedia has hundreds of funny help pages for very limited points)? If not, we seriously need to rename them to clarify how they're different, and I'm ready to offer suggestions once it's clear how many pages we'll keep. By the way, have you noticed two of the pages (Opes and Pagina) don't even have the same title as the link says?--Ceylon 20:01, 16 Martii 2008 (UTC)Reply

  1. I see no problem with a merger of these two
  2. Yes, as long as the merged page wouldn't be so flooded with links that it is not user-friendly (as I think Ops nexusque is at the moment)
  3. Yes and no. No in the way that I think the first two should stay separate, but with new titles. Since Auxilium is focusing on how wiki syntax works and Commendationes is focusing on style they should have, I think, shorter more accurate titles. And you're head of the title department so I'll leave those to you. Yes in the way that Pagina is an odd one, which I think can be merged with Commendationes (they are both style guides). Harrissimo 20:12, 16 Martii 2008 (UTC).Reply
I happened to notice this, and just want to say that on that last point I agree with Harrissimo: Auxilium paginarum recensendarum is "mechanically" different from the other pages mentioned because it's a direct equivalent of an English page (and no doubt German and others too) so we don't need to offer translations of it: we just need to make it as good as we can in Latin. Therefore, yes, re-title it rather than merge it! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 20:18, 16 Martii 2008 (UTC)Reply
Suggestions for new titles for all pages contained in the box: Somehow the "De ..." style seems to suit the consilia pages (reminiscent of a manual), but I've added alternative versions in brackets in case you don't like it:
Vicipaedia:Auxilium paginarum recensendarum & Vicipaedia:Pagina -> Vicipaedia:De recensendo (Recensio)
Vicipaedia:Commendationes paginarum recte scribendarum -> Vicipaedia:De orthographia (Orthographia)
Vicipaedia:Latinitas & Vicipaedia:Gradus Latinitatis -> Vicipaedia:De Latinitate (Latinitas)
Vicipaedia:Translatio nominum propriorum -> Vicipaedia:De nominibus propriis (Nomina propria)
Vicipaedia:Ops nexusque usoribus novis & Vicipaedia:Praefatio -> Vicipaedia:Index consiliorum (or: Subsidia) (This one could also contain the links to place names and online dictionaries - now, in order to access Morgan, you have to click your way through 3 links at least.)--Ceylon 20:48, 16 Martii 2008 (UTC)Reply
I prefer the idea of having a user-friendly introduction to having a list of consilia. But I suppose having both wouldn't hurt. A note on why it's hard to get into Morgan's lexicon via a common page: Disputatio:David Morgan#Links. It is permitted to put his home page on as a link but not permitted to directly link to either part of his lexicon. Harrissimo 20:54, 16 Martii 2008 (UTC).Reply
I agree with all your other suggestions though. Harrissimo 20:54, 16 Martii 2008 (UTC).Reply
Do it or put it up for discussion on the Taberna?--Ceylon 21:08, 16 Martii 2008 (UTC)Reply
Put it in the taberna. Rolandus and UV (and others) might have something to say. Harrissimo 21:09, 16 Martii 2008 (UTC).Reply

Silva imbrica recensere

Thanks :-) --Rolandus 23:06, 17 Martii 2008 (UTC)Reply

Message recensere

When next on line, Harrissimo, please check your email ... Thanks Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 20:12, 18 Martii 2008 (UTC)Reply

magistratus recensere

Salve, Harrissimo, quaeso eas ad Vicipaedia:Petitio magistratus#Usor:Harrissimo, et proferas responsum.--Ioscius (disp) 14:45, 19 Martii 2008 (UTC)Reply

Ecce nunc magistratus es! Adam Episcopus 15:14, 27 Martii 2008 (UTC)Reply

Tibi, Harissime, gratulamur! --Iustinus 15:45, 27 Martii 2008 (UTC)Reply
Nice to see you back! I think the main news item is the above ... All the best Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 11:48, 5 Aprilis 2008 (UTC)Reply

Belisarius recensere

Salve Harrissimo, Belisarius sum; puer italicus sedices annos natus. Thank you for your welcome! I hope I'll help all of you to edit new page in VICIPAEDIA! --Belisarius 18:58, 13 Aprilis 2008 (UTC)Reply

Aquila recensere

You added a wikilink to the non-existant article Aquila (Finnia) in Aquila (discretiva). I couldn't find any reference to such a town. If I look at the Aquila article in fi.wiki it mentions the roman eagles, not a town with such a name.

Do you have any sources for the existance of such a town?

--Lou Crazy 02:36, 17 Aprilis 2008 (UTC)Reply

See if you like how I rearranged it... --Lou Crazy 21:23, 27 Maii 2008 (UTC)Reply

Ex Taberna ad Harrissimo paginam recensere

Meam collaborationem praebere vellem corrigendo paulatim omnes paginas corrigendas, et has paginas reperire cogitarem in una categoria collectas, sicut iam puto eas invenisse distinctas in "Maxime corrigenda", vel "Maxime dubia" vel "Dubia", vel "Inspicienda"...Sed nunc si imprimo "corrigenda" in "quaerere", dirigor ad paginam quae nondum extat et invitor ad eam creare si volo. De rebus interretialibus expertus non sum et saepe me perdo. Quodsi magis expertus fiam, paginas novas conabor creare, potius eas transferendo ab aliis Wikipediae paginis sicut italianis et gallicis. Mihi patet quod latina lingua post permultos annos adhibenti de die in diem facilior est et gratum mihi erit adiuvare.Vale. Lio 08:17, 19 Aprilis 2008 (UTC)

Quoniam tuum commentum non vidi, Harrissimo, hic transfero quod in Taberna scripseram, expectans a te aliquid novi.Gratias. Lio 21:49, 21 Aprilis 2008 (UTC)Reply

Optime nunc inveni quod quaerebam. Gratias mille. Lio 23:09, 21 Aprilis 2008 (UTC)Reply

Nicolai aliique recensere

You were right about Nicolaus. Maybe the same should be done for Constantinus and Constantinus (nomen). I was wondering whether to merge them, but chickened out. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 08:53, 13 Maii 2008 (UTC)Reply

Maps recensere

I remember a rumour that you knew how to edit image files. Supposing that a better form of the map of Greek dialects (currently visible at Lingua Graeca Antiqua) were wanted, could you make one?


It may be that the best form to start with is this one here. My suggestion would be to remove the numbers, possibly to make the colours a bit lighter (though that's not essential) and then to add Latin names, which Neander might well specify, or else I could. How about it?

Incidentally, the map "Image:AncientGreekDialects.png", used on the English page, has nice colours but is much less accurate. It takes in a lot of territory that probably was not Greek-speaking at all. Nationalist agenda, possibly. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 09:25, 28 Maii 2008 (UTC)Reply

I'll work on it. Harrissimo 22:11, 16 Iunii 2008 (UTC).Reply
Nice to see you back, by the way. Hope you're OK. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 08:53, 17 Iunii 2008 (UTC)Reply

Happy New Year recensere

-- Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 13:16, 11 Ianuarii 2009 (UTC)Reply

Thanks, you too! Harrissimo 13:17, 11 Ianuarii 2009 (UTC).Reply

Nos ille............... Nosotros los hispanohablantes debemos aprender inglés como lengua secundaria, ¿por qué tú no haces lo mismo con el español? --[[Usor:Molinumdeventum.|Molinumdeventum ''Te escucho, hermano''.]] 00:26, 4 Iunii 2009 (UTC)

Inactivity and administrator rights recensere

Dear Harrissimo, it has been a while since you last contributed actively to Vicipaedia. Recently, it was discussed on Vicipaedia that, as a precautionary measure to reduce the risk of an admin account to be compromised (as has happened on en.wikipedia on at least one occasion), the administrator rights of inactive administrators could be temporarily suspended until the admin returns and wishes to resume activity.

So, I would like to invite you: Do come back and continue to contribute to Vicipaedia, a free encyclopedia in the Latin language! Even if you do not have much time to spare for Vicipaedia at the moment, please just log in to your account and reply "hello" to this message on your user talk page, and your admin rights will be secured for the next couple of months.

If we do not hear from you, your administrator rights will be temporarily revoked one month from now, but this should not hinder you to come back later, say "I'm here again" and get back your administrator rights instantaneously.

(If you do not intend to contribute to Vicipaedia any more, which we would regret very much, you can request removal of your admin status on the appropriate page on meta.)

Please do not hesitate to contact me or anyone in the Vicipaedia:Taberna with any question on Vicipaedia you might have. Thank you for all your past service, and hope to see you soon again! Greetings, --UV (disputatio) 20:01, 14 Septembris 2012 (UTC)Reply

I have sent an e-mail to Harrissimo asking him to read the above message. --UV (disputatio) 20:02, 14 Septembris 2012 (UTC)Reply

Dear Harrissimo, your administrator rights have now been temporarily suspended. Please do come back to Vicipaedia whenever you would like to (and you will be given back admin rights immediately if you like). Again, thank you for all your past service, and hope to see you soon again! Greetings, --UV (disputatio) 23:46, 17 Octobris 2012 (UTC)Reply