Vide etiam disputationes annorum 2006 et 2007.

Porta:Hispania recensere

Salve UV. Sit tibi felix annus novus! Potesne mihi adiuvare cum Porta Hispaniae? Volo capsas de Politia, Historia, Cultura et Geographia addere. Nescio modo eas creandae! Gratias ago et valete!--Xaverius 11:01, 2 Ianuarii 2008 (UTC)Reply

Salve! Si vis capsas addere, adde parametra
|tituluscapsa1=Politia Hispaniae
|tituluscapsa2=Historia Hispaniae
|tituluscapsa3=Geographia Hispaniae
|tituluscapsa4=Cultura Hispaniae
ad paginam Porta:Hispania, tum crea contenta capsarum harum hic:
Vale! --UV 22:32, 2 Ianuarii 2008 (UTC)Reply
Gratias iterum ago!--Xaverius 22:50, 2 Ianuarii 2008 (UTC)Reply

IUCN recensere

Salve! I have a rather large request. Hendricus would like to add the IUCN conservation status to the plant and animal pages, so I have translated the images into latin (here). Please could you try to incorporate the relevant bits of English template? (I would have tried, but as ever I would have probably ended up breaking something and, as I mentioned to Hendricus, it is not a good one to break). Grates, Harrissimo 21:02, 9 Ianuarii 2008 (UTC).Reply

wow, that template is really complicated. I will try and have a look at it during the weekend. Greetings, --UV 22:24, 9 Ianuarii 2008 (UTC)Reply
should work now. The new template version at {{Taxobox}} contains some items that need translation, such as category names. Greetings, --UV 22:59, 12 Ianuarii 2008 (UTC)Reply
Ow! I'll get on to that and many thanks. Ave! Harrissimo 23:49, 12 Ianuarii 2008 (UTC).Reply

Thanks recensere

Thanks for the rescue on pp-ave! It would have taken me forever to arrive at that, which turns out to be so simple!--Rafaelgarcia 01:43, 22 Ianuarii 2008 (UTC)Reply

No problem! --UV 22:40, 22 Ianuarii 2008 (UTC)Reply

Formula:Dux Venetiae recensere

Dear UV, could you please help me and insert in this formula Formula:Dux Venetiae the space for an image's description. Ciao e grazie--Massimo Macconi 22:28, 1 Februarii 2008 (UTC)Reply

See Leonardus Loredan – is that what you had in mind? Greetings, --UV 22:33, 1 Februarii 2008 (UTC)Reply

CostaValleImagna.jpg recensere

Dear UV, where have I to put Formula:PD-user ? Sorry if I do not use commons but I find it too complicated. --Massimo Macconi 11:34, 3 Februarii 2008 (UTC)Reply

A est B recensere

Cur sic scribendum est? -- 16:36, 5 Februarii 2008 (UTC)Reply

Vide Vicipaedia:A est B et Disputatio_Usoris:IacobusAmor#A B est / A est B. Nonne rationem creare vis? Vide Vicipaedia:Invitatio. Vale! --UV 20:24, 5 Februarii 2008 (UTC)Reply

Dropdown box in Edittools recensere

Hi UV, In the edittools box, I have to change the drop down menu to Litterae_exoticae whenever I want to use a symbol. But on the English Wiktionary they have a function which means that you stay on the same box after you've clicked off an article and gone in to edit a new one, so I could have the Litterae_exoticae on permanently instead of Norma. ours theirs. It's a nasty looking bit of script but please could you look into it? Harrissimo 18:29, 12 Februarii 2008 (UTC).Reply

Luckily UV loves nasty bits of script. Thankfully! =] --Ioscius (disp) 19:05, 12 Februarii 2008 (UTC)Reply
In fact, I hate nasty bits of script, but this one does not look too nasty ;-)
Could have fooled me! ;] Thanks, as usual. --Ioscius (disp) 04:49, 13 Februarii 2008 (UTC)Reply
The English wiktionary uses cookies to save the information on the currently selected character group on the user's computer. I did not enable this for all users, because some users might have concerns about cookies, but I created a gadget so that users can easily enable this if they want. You may need to force-refresh an editing page and/or clear your browser's cache before the feature works. If you encounter any javascript errors (with or without this gadget enabled), please tell me so that I can fix it. Greetings, --UV 22:57, 12 Februarii 2008 (UTC)Reply
I just force reloaded and ticked the preference - it's working like a dream. Thank you, UV! Harrissimo 22:59, 12 Februarii 2008 (UTC).Reply

Imago Stephani Berard recensere

It came from the university website. Stephanus gave me permission, but I suppose technically it's not his. It's kinda out of date anyway. I do have a couple more recent conventicula worth of photos to organize still, maybe there's a good picture of him there. --Iustinus 06:49, 19 Februarii 2008 (UTC)Reply

Temporary access expired recensere

Hello UV. The temporary access you requested on wikibooks has expired (see the request). Thanks. Dungodung 09:57, 27 Februarii 2008 (UTC)Reply

Franciscus Iosephus Strauß recensere

Hallo! Warum werden die Vornamen Lateinisiert, der Nachname Strauß aber nicht? Strauß ist doch gleich dem afrikanischen Vogel Strauß. Lateinischer Name Struthio camelus, italienischer Name Struthio camelus. Auch hier in der lateinischen Wikipedia unter Struthio zu finden. Daher meiner Meinung nach Franciscus Iosephus Struthio. Martinvoll 20:52, 27 Februarii 2008 (UTC)Reply

Hallo Martin, wir verfolgen hier das Ziel, nichts zu erfinden, sondern nur das, was historisch belegt ist, darzustellen. Bei den meisten Vornamen gibt es allgemein anerkannte lateinische Formen; für die Anpassung oder Nicht-Anpassung von Nachnamen gibt es aber keine anerkannten Regeln – das zeigt auch die Vielfalt der Formen, die jene Leute angewandt haben, die sich selbst einen latinisierten Nachnamen beigelegt haben. Unsere Regel ist daher: Wenn für eine Person ein latinisierter Nachname tatsächlich allgemein verwendet wurde oder wenn die Person sich selbst einen latinisierten Nachnamen beigelegt hat, dann verwenden wir diesen, sonst aber wird der Nachname nicht latinisiert. Siehe Vicipaedia:Translatio nominum propriorum, Usor:Iustinus/Translator's Guide#Latin Names of Historical Figures und Vicipaedia:Noli fingere. Herzliche Grüße, --UV 21:28, 27 Februarii 2008 (UTC)Reply

wikipaedia:libri recensere

Nobisne opus est novo magistratu apud vicilibros? Tune iterum candidatus esse velis? --Alex1011 22:49, 5 Martii 2008 (UTC)Reply

I would be willing to do it, but wouldn't you, being a regular contributor to la.wikibooks, like to run for administrator there as well? I put up a petitio at b:Vicilibri:Petitio magistratus#Nominationes and I would be happy if you would accept the nomination. Greetings, --UV 00:07, 8 Martii 2008 (UTC)Reply

Imago recensere

Gratias tibi dico. Sory for me not writing in latin, but my writing tasks have some problems. I didn't know the image policy of, and I'm very sorry abuot it. I thought, as in the other Wikis, that copyrighted images could be loaded as long as unfoundable with a free license. The image I charged is the Coat of Arms of my city, and its copyright is held by the townhall, which gave me the permission to load it into these pages. If possible and necessary, please answer me here Sorry and many thanks,

Vale, --DoppioM 18:48, 8 Martii 2008 (UTC)Reply
No problem. I answered there. --UV 22:30, 8 Martii 2008 (UTC)Reply

Renaming categories recensere

A supplementary question, UV. Would it be possible for this bot to move items that are currently in one category into two new categories? The reason for asking will be seen from the current discussion on my userpage. I think that for literature both linguistic and geographical categories are useful. One way to spread them would be (e.g.) to move Litteratura Franciae into both Litterae Franciae and Litterae Francogallicae (or more explicitly Litterae in Francia scriptae and Litterae Francogallice scriptae; whatever is decided). I would then have to manually delete the irrelevant items (literature from France written in Latin, Occitan, etc.) from that second category.

If it can't do this, no problem! It's just a thought. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 10:45, 31 Martii 2008 (UTC)Reply

Yes, it can. There is an easy way that does the job in two steps (I just tried it out in the sandbox). I suppose there should also be a way to do it in one step, but the two-step method works fine. --UV 21:48, 31 Martii 2008 (UTC)Reply
You were right about Categoria:Litterae Nordicae. I had assumed, without checking, that it was about the Runic alphabet: in fact, just a couple of variants of the Latin alphabet. I might suggest some Litteratura moves next, if that's OK! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 22:34, 1 Aprilis 2008 (UTC)Reply
Sure! Up to now, I find it quite easy to operate the bot. Greetings, --UV 22:36, 1 Aprilis 2008 (UTC)Reply

fasciculos onerare recensere

Pravus est terminus "fasciculos onerare" qui sic videtur ad sinestram paginae partem. Vide Disputatio Vicipaediae:Pagina prima#Proposed Changes to side bar (Summary) et Vicipaedia:Taberna/Tabularium 5#Difficult load. Per disputationes, consensus videtur ut "fasciculos onerare" ad "documenta apponere" mutemus. Sed nescio quomodo hoc comperire et disputare apud Betawiki...Scis tu?--Rafaelgarcia 17:00, 31 Martii 2008 (UTC)Reply

Personally, I like "documenta apponere" much better than "fasciculos onerare", but I am not really sure whether there is consensus about this. It might be wise to ask Usor:Mycēs for his opinion as well, because translations at Betawiki ( will (that is the advantage of Betawiki) affect not only Vicipaedia, but all Latin projects using the MediaWiki software, including Victionarium, where Mycēs is active as well. Once consensus is established, we can go to Betawiki and we well need to update quite a few interface messages (I already have an account there, you may wish to apply for an account there as well). --UV 21:58, 31 Martii 2008 (UTC)Reply
Yes, I made an account there already. I was just wondering how to start a discussion there regarding the change. Thus I was trying to find the relavent discussion page on Betsawiki for this translation. We would of course ask Myces to join in the discussion. Do you know if that is the right way to proceed? --Rafaelgarcia 22:45, 31 Martii 2008 (UTC)Reply
People are more likely to read the discussion if we discuss it here and not on Betawiki. I would therefore suggest that we discuss the proposed change here. Once consensus has been reached, we can make the changes on Betawiki. --UV 22:50, 31 Martii 2008 (UTC)Reply

Formula problem recensere

You are good with these things, UV, so you might be able to pick out what's gone wrong with the formula {{Urbs Birmaniae}}, which used to display properly but doesn't any more. See for example Iangon. I don't see that there have been changes in this formula or the ones that it calls: but something's certainly happened! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 17:08, 6 Aprilis 2008 (UTC)Reply

Fixed now? --UV 19:02, 6 Aprilis 2008 (UTC)Reply
Marvellous! Thanks, UV! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 19:20, 6 Aprilis 2008 (UTC)Reply
No problem! (after having found the cause of the template problem ;-) ) --UV 19:25, 6 Aprilis 2008 (UTC)Reply

Tables recensere

Salve! Is there a way for us to have tables like the English Wikipedia (see w:en:Zeeland and w:en:List of French monarchs)? They are much more attractive than our thick-bordered, black and white ones. It is easy of course to just use a slightly longer bit of code (like at VP:FNL) but I think it would be more practical just to have the grey-topped ones with thinner borders anyway. Vale! Harrissimo 20:10, 6 Aprilis 2008 (UTC).Reply

I added the formatting code now, just use {| class="wikitable" or {| class="wikitable sortable" where the table begins. You may have to force-reload and/or clear your browser cache and/or wait a few hours, I do not see any effect yet before you see the effect:
Table caption
Heading 1 Heading 2
Cell A Cell Z
Cell B Cell Y
--UV 22:03, 6 Aprilis 2008 (UTC)Reply
Many thanks, it's working perfectly now. The icon 'tabulam imponere' above the editing box gives
{| border="border" class="sortable"
! header 1
! header 2
! header 3
| row 1, cell 1
| row 1, cell 2
| row 1, cell 3
| row 2, cell 1
| row 2, cell 2
| row 2, cell 3
Would it be better for it now to be changed to
{| border="border" class="wikitable sortable"
! header 1
! header 2
! header 3
| row 1, cell 1
| row 1, cell 2
| row 1, cell 3
| row 2, cell 1
| row 2, cell 2
| row 2, cell 3
And how can you do that? Harrissimo 22:19, 6 Aprilis 2008 (UTC).Reply
Good idea, I changed MediaWiki:Onlyifediting.js accordingly. Again, you may have to force-reload and/or clear your browser's cache before the change takes effect. --UV 22:27, 6 Aprilis 2008 (UTC)Reply
Thanks! Harrissimo 22:34, 6 Aprilis 2008 (UTC).Reply recensere

I welcomed him to see what happens. He has created a too short page into which I put {{non stipula}}. --Rolandus 00:29, 15 Aprilis 2008 (UTC)Reply

Well, he/she seems to be gone by now … --UV 22:42, 15 Aprilis 2008 (UTC)Reply

Malefactor recensere

What a nasty piece of work! Thanks for helping me revert. Harrissimo 22:56, 16 Aprilis 2008 (UTC).Reply

Sure! Thanks for blocking that IP! --UV 22:57, 16 Aprilis 2008 (UTC)Reply

Categorizing from list recensere

UV, can your bot take a list of pages as input? Could you categorize the pages from Usor:Rolandus/1000 paginae into Categoria:1000 paginae, please? Thanks. --Rolandus 15:01, 19 Aprilis 2008 (UTC)Reply

Done! Greetings, --UV 23:49, 19 Aprilis 2008 (UTC)Reply
Thanks! We should give your bot the flag, BTW. ;-) --Rolandus 06:34, 20 Aprilis 2008 (UTC)Reply
No objections! --UV 22:09, 20 Aprilis 2008 (UTC)Reply

Page format recensere

Hi UV, I noticed that your bot introduced spaces after "===" so that "===name==="->"=== name ===". This is in contradiction to the advice at Vicipaedia:Structura paginae but is consistent with the advice at Vicipaedia:De recensendo

Question: which is the correct way? Does it matter? Should we make the two consilia consistent?--Rafaelgarcia 03:54, 20 Aprilis 2008 (UTC)Reply
The spaces don't do anything but add meaninglessly to the length of the articles, so I cut them when I can. IacobusAmor 15:25, 20 Aprilis 2008 (UTC)Reply
I do not have a strong preference either way. When I edit articles, I usually add those spaces, but they definitely do not influence the way the rendered page looks like, it's just to make the wikicode more readable. The bot came with the ability to make "cosmetic improvements" to a page while editing it (including adding those spaces), and I enabled this feature. I am sure this behaviour can be modified to (a) leaving the spaces alone or (b) removing these spaces where they are present.
If we have conflicting advice in our wikipedia namespace, we should resolve the conflict (or remove the advice altogether), but, as I said, I do not have a strong preference either way (maybe a weak preference in favour of the spaces). Greetings, --UV 22:09, 20 Aprilis 2008 (UTC)Reply

See also Disputatio Usoris:IacobusAmor#Sectiones paginarum. --UV 18:49, 31 Maii 2008 (UTC)Reply

your bot recensere

Is wonderful, but terribly prolific. Have you done enough observation on its function that we might get Adam to flag you? --Ioscius (disp) 13:35, 20 Aprilis 2008 (UTC)Reply

I think it should work alright now. Still, I will continue to check at least some of the bot's edits (and I invite everyone to do so as well) by going to Special:Contributions/UVbot. --UV 22:09, 20 Aprilis 2008 (UTC)Reply

"Bildung auf Französisch" recensere

Hallo, ich habe eine Frage bezüglich Ihrer Anmerkung zum Ausdruck "francogallice, anglice". "Auf Latein" heißt bekanntlich latine (loqui etc.), aber ich war nicht sicher, wie ich "auf Französisch" usw. schreiben soll. Mit der gleichen "-e" Endung? francogallice? Es geht um [1] Verzeihen Sie mir die Sprache der Nachricht, ich getraue mich noch nicht, auf Latein umzugehen. Omnesvulnerantun 09:20, 26 Aprilis 2008 (UTC)Reply

Hallo Omnesvulnerantun, das Du ist schon okay, hier sind praktisch alle per Du untereinander.
"Auf französisch" heißt richtig "Francogallice", aber dieses Adverb (das -e ist die Adverb-Endung) beschreibt, auf welche Art und Weise das Prädikat des Satzes verwirklicht wird: "Francogallice loquor." – "Ich spreche (auf welche Art und Weise? –) auf französisch."
Wenn wir ein Adjektiv brauchen, passt diese Konstruktion, glaube ich, nicht: "Fakultät auf Französisch der Technischen Universität Sofia"?? Aber Du hast das Problem ja ohnedies schon elegant gelöst, mit "ubi studentes francogallice vel theodisce vel anglice instruuntur" passt alles – hier beschreiben die Adverbien, auf welche Art unterrichtet wird. Nähere Infos findest Du hier: Usor:Iustinus/Translator's Guide#Syntax of Language Names. --UV 20:40, 26 Aprilis 2008 (UTC)Reply

Bot recensere

Hallo UV, wo konnte man nochmal Wunschzettel für Deinen Bot aufschreiben? Die Kategorie "Musica rockica" müsste nach Categoria:Musica rock verschoben werden.--Ceylon 21:00, 26 Aprilis 2008 (UTC)Reply

Hallo Ceylon, gerne hier oder auf Vicipaedia:Automata/Category move requests, Kategorie ist verschoben. --UV 21:20, 26 Aprilis 2008 (UTC)Reply

Dankeschön!--Ceylon 21:40, 26 Aprilis 2008 (UTC)Reply

Bot request recensere

Hi UV, could we move Categoria:Litteratura de rebus futuris to Categoria:Litterae rerum futurarum ? PS. Is this the right place to make these requests?--Rafaelgarcia 23:06, 2 Maii 2008 (UTC) Also Categoria:Litteratura utopica to Categoria:Litterae utopicae and Categoria:Litteratura phantastica to Categoria:Litterae phantasticae.--Rafaelgarcia 23:14, 2 Maii 2008 (UTC)Reply

No problem, you can add such requests here or to the page Vicipaedia:Automata/Category move requests. Greetings, --UV 08:43, 3 Maii 2008 (UTC)Reply
Gratias!--Rafaelgarcia 10:53, 3 Maii 2008 (UTC)Reply

Visne deum iterum ciere ex machina, ut notam Categoria:Biographia tollat e commentationibus Categoria:Cardinales attributis? Multi illorum dignorum hominum enim istam categoriam inhabitant... Gratum est. --Iovis Fulmen 15:37, 7 Septembris 2008 (UTC)Reply

Sorry, UVbot found zero pages in Categoria:Cardinales that just have [[Categoria:Biographia]]. All the pages about cardinals in Categoria:Biographia have entries like [[Categoria:Biographia|Sodano, Angelus]] and should therefore (manually) be edited like this for the reasons described at Vicipaedia:Taberna/Tabularium 8#defaultsort. Greetings, --UV 21:24, 7 Septembris 2008 (UTC)Reply
Oh, I see. Yes, you are right, they haven't got the DEFAULTSORT thing yet. So I'll get down to it... Here we go again... --Iovis Fulmen 14:56, 8 Septembris 2008 (UTC)Reply

Stipulae medicinalis recensere

UV, what is the phrase stipulae medicinalis supposed to mean? (Anglice, Theodisce, Hispanice, Francogallice, whatever-ice). What's wrong with stipula medicinalis and stipulae medicinales? IacobusAmor 16:38, 3 Maii 2008 (UTC)Reply

A while ago, Usor:Hendricus created Formula:Medica-stipula, obviously unaware that we already had Formula:Med-stipula. Hendricus' Formula:Medica-stipula pointed to a Categoria:Stipulae Medicinalis that never existed (our Formula:Med-stipula points to Categoria:Stipulae Medicinae). In order to prevent confusion, I today deleted Hendricus' duplicate template, but beforehand, I pasted its contents into your discussion page at Disputatio Usoris:IacobusAmor#translation help so that one can still see what this discussion was about. --UV 19:32, 3 Maii 2008 (UTC)Reply

StigBot recensere

Hi there, I have created the pages required for my bot (StigBot). --Stigmj 00:23, 8 Iunii 2008 (UTC)Reply

Thanks a lot! Your bot is no longer blocked now. Greetings, --UV 08:44, 8 Iunii 2008 (UTC)Reply

{{Trans-super}} recensere

Would you care to glance at this if you have a moment, UV? It seems to work correctly on the one page it is linked to, but there is evidently something incomplete about it, and it disturbs the formatting of other pages on which it is placed. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 08:45, 16 Iunii 2008 (UTC)Reply

This template needs to go with {{Trans-med}} and {{Trans-sub}}. I gave an example of how to use these templates on Vicipaedia:Index formularum Vicipaediae Latinae#Ostentatio. --UV 22:47, 16 Iunii 2008 (UTC)Reply

Here's another question. Can your bot take all the pages that are currently in both Categoria:Abbreviationes and Categoria:Praenomina and put them instead in the new category Categoria:Praenominum Romanorum abbreviationes? Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 11:37, 16 Iunii 2008 (UTC)Reply

Done. Greetings, --UV 22:47, 16 Iunii 2008 (UTC)Reply

Nonexistent image recensere

UV, you deleted the image [[Imago:DSCF1049.jpg|thumb|[[David Millar]] olim socius manus Saunier Duval-Prodir, undecimam [[Circuitus Franciae]] stationem anno [[2006]] parat]]
which doesn't seem to be visible here in Vicipaedia, but it is visible in the English wiki, so it's not exactly nonexistent: it's just not visible! Any idea how to import it so it'll be visible here? IacobusAmor 21:00, 13 Iulii 2008 (UTC)Reply

(To be precise, I did not delete the image per se, I just deleted the reference to this image.)
The image DSCF1049.jpg does not exist on commons nor on the Latin vicipaedia, it just exists on the English wikipedia. In order to make it available to all wikipedias, I now reuploaded it from en.wikipedia to commons (I used CommonsHelper for this purpose). While I was at it, I chose a better filename as well (David Millar 2006 Tarbes.jpg). The image is now for the first time available on commons and can therefore from now on be used in vicipaedia. Greetings, --UV 21:24, 13 Iulii 2008 (UTC)Reply
Woohoo! Thanks!!! IacobusAmor 21:27, 13 Iulii 2008 (UTC)Reply

Thomas Swain recensere

Thanks for your comment on Thomas Swain. You're right, of course. The article cited Bede: the citation is nonsense, so I deleted the page (and even your comment). Hope that's OK. The Latin style is the same as that which introduced us to the British-Trojan hero Vicipaedia:Ioci#Gregos last week. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 09:05, 17 Iulii 2008 (UTC)Reply

Good! I just noticed that both articles actually came from the same IP: Specialis:Conlationes/, Specialis:Conlationes_deletae/ Shall we block this IP outright or shall we first admonish that user, tell him/her about Uncapaedia and hope that he/she will contribute here in a constructive manner? --UV 09:18, 17 Iulii 2008 (UTC)Reply
I just see that you have blocked this IP for one day. Perhaps a longer or indefinite block would be appropriate? --UV 09:21, 17 Iulii 2008 (UTC)Reply
I don't think I had encountered Uncapaedia before. What a useful service -- the ideal spot for material about Nebraskan Eskimos. I have now recommended it to this contributor (I hadn't noticed that it was a fixed IP). If unwanted contributions continue, we can impose an indefinite block. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 11:50, 17 Iulii 2008 (UTC)Reply
Since we're speaking of blocks: hoc molestus usor securi feriat! IacobusAmor 13:19, 17 Iulii 2008 (UTC)Reply
Perfect! --UV 20:40, 17 Iulii 2008 (UTC)Reply

Descriptiones imaginum recensere

Thanks for fixing some problems with images; I'm still "getting the hang" of these things! IacobusAmor 22:01, 17 Iulii 2008 (UTC)Reply

No problem! --UV 22:38, 17 Iulii 2008 (UTC)Reply

Maybe there was a reason recensere

The anonymous remover of information from Arcadius Avellanus may have had a good reason, as it turns out: see Rafael's comment on the disputatio page and my note to Thesaurus. Best wishes Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 11:42, 28 Iulii 2008 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for finding out! It may be difficult sometimes to distinguish between plain facts that are not covered by any copyright on the one hand and editorial choices and selections of intellectual merit that are protected by copyright. --UV 19:05, 28 Iulii 2008 (UTC)Reply
It was Rafael who first noticed the similarity. But, as a former librarian, I'm aware of how the law has been tested in this special area, and I'm quite certain that our editor, while unconscious of the risk and not intending any harm, was indeed plagiarizing.
What's curious is that the anonymous IP that originally removed the material gave no explanation! Hence you restored it, as one naturally would in such a case. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 19:42, 28 Iulii 2008 (UTC)Reply

reduced activity recensere

I will not be able to pop in regularly in the upcoming weeks. If there is anything I can do, please send me an e-mail. Greetings, --UV 22:05, 7 Augusti 2008 (UTC)Reply

Domus Cupri ab Bauschenbergo recensere

Hallo UV, kannst du mal bitte einen Blick auf diesen Artikel werfen. Ich gebe zu, seit mehr als 30 Jahren keinen Blick mehr in ein Lateinbuch geworfen zu haben. Mein Vorhaben, mich durch die lateinische Wikipedia wieder in die Sprache einzuarbeiten, erhielt durch diesen Löschantrag einen herben Rückschlag. Vielleicht fällt dir etwas ein, diesen Artikel in die passende Form / Sprache zu bringen. Vielen Dank! Gruß --BBKurt 05:06, 30 Augusti 2008 (UTC)Reply

Hallo BBKurt, leider kann ich bei diesem Artikel nicht wirklich helfen. Das Problem sind weniger die zahlreichen Grammatikfehler (gleich der Titel ist betroffen: das lateinische Vorwort "a" oder "ab" bedeutet immer "von (etwas) weg", während der Kupferhof ja nicht vom Bauschenberg herkommt), sondern vielmehr das Fachvokabular, das ich zuwenig beherrsche. Über die Messingproduktion gibt es gewiss historische lateinische Beschreibungen, und auch für die im Artikel verwendeten topographischen Bezeichnungen müsste man nach Quellen suchen (siehe Vicipaedia:Fontes nominum locorum). Weder beim technischen Fachvokabular noch bei den Toponymen bin ich bewandert. Vielleicht fragst Du auf Vicipaedia:Taberna, ob jemand Dir helfen kann? Grüße, --UV 22:53, 30 Augusti 2008 (UTC)Reply
Danke für die Info. Vielleicht hätte ich mich vor dem Schreiben besser informieren sollen. Ich denke, in diesem Fall ist das Löschen wohl berechtigt. Zu viel Arbeit sollte man hier nicht investieren. Gruß --BBKurt 05:20, 31 Augusti 2008 (UTC)Reply

Unblock zxabot recensere


Entschuldigung, dass ich einen Edit gemacht habe mit dem Usor:zxabot ohne Userpage. Es wäre nett, wenn du ihn wieder entblockst, ich habe inzwischen eine erstellt. Danke und Gruß JaynFM 14:36, 19 Septembris 2008 (UTC)Reply

kein Problem, gerne! --UV 22:09, 19 Septembris 2008 (UTC)Reply
Danke! JaynFM 22:14, 19 Septembris 2008 (UTC)Reply

Betawiki:MediaWiki:Nstab-main/la recensere

Hello UV,

I noticed that you are a Latin-speaking contributor at Betawiki, and so I wanted to ask your advice. How do you say "Page" in Latin? I thought it was "Pāgina", but Betawiki:MediaWiki:Nstab-main/la says "Res" instead. Which is correct? —Remember the dot (talk) 04:06, 27 Septembris 2008 (UTC)Reply

Hello Remember the dot, "page" means "pagina" (and if you wish to stress that the first a is spoken not as a short vowel but rather as a long vowel, then you can write "pāgina").
But there is a reason why Betawiki:MediaWiki:Nstab-main/la does not contain the word "pagina": In MediaWiki slang, we use "pagina" as a general term, referring to any page (including talk pages, user pages, and the like). Betawiki:MediaWiki:Nstab-main/la, however, refers to pages in the main namespace only. "Res" is a very general word ("thing") and is an acceptable choice for "page in the main namespace", taking into account the vast possibilities of content that could possibly be put in the main namespace of a MediaWiki installation.
Here in the Latin wikipedia, we use "commentatio" for "encyclopedic article", but "commentatio" would obviously be a very bad choice for the Latin wikibooks, for commons galleries when using Latin as the user interface language, and for nearly all other MediaWiki installations. Therefore, in my view, the general term "res" is fine for a general Latin MediaWiki localization.
Ok? --UV 17:52, 27 Septembris 2008 (UTC)Reply
Ah, thanks for explaining the difference between "Pagina" and "Pāgina". I learned a little Latin today :-)
It just seems very odd to me that almost all the Latin-based languages use "Pagina" for this message, but Latin itself does not. For example, at Betawiki:MediaWiki:Nstab-main/es, we have "Pagina" instead of "Cosa", the Spanish word for "Thing". It's the same in Dutch, Portuguese, Catalán, Romanian, and French (although French uses the derivative "Page"). So...while "Res" works, I still don't really understand why Latin should be different. —Remember the dot (talk) 03:04, 28 Septembris 2008 (UTC)Reply
I guess this is mostly a question of whether a translation should rather adhere to the exact wording or whether it should strive primarily to convey the intended meaning (even at the cost of deviating a bit from the original wording). The English localization uses "page" because there is probably no better word in English. An exact translation would require "pagina", but I believe that the Latin word "res" conveys the meaning better - but I am aware that this question of how to translate best is often a tricky one! Greetings, --UV 10:04, 28 Septembris 2008 (UTC)Reply

Bot flag for UVbot recensere

Hello UV, is there a reason why your bot has not got a bot flag yet? --Rolandus 09:24, 13 Octobris 2008 (UTC)Reply

No particular reason (Disputatio Usoris:UV#Categorizing from list, Disputatio Usoris:UV#your bot), I am just hesitant to ask Adam Bishop myself, because I am "party" in this case. Greetings, --UV 10:04, 13 Octobris 2008 (UTC)Reply
Do you want the flag? If yes, I'll ask Adam ... --Rolandus 22:02, 17 Octobris 2008 (UTC)Reply
Yes, why not, if the community thinks my bot (and I who operate it) are reliable enough ;-)
Something completely different: After a long pause, there is finally a fresh Vicipaedia:Dump again! If you have some time, would you mind re-running your dump analysis so that we can see which articles need fixing? Thanks! --UV 22:08, 17 Octobris 2008 (UTC)Reply

No birth date recensere

UV, thanks very much for setting up that category Categoria:Categoria nativitatis desiderata. I have reworded your notice at the head of the page to make it more specific (and also translated it into Latin). Please check that you agree with what I've said there! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 12:17, 19 Octobris 2008 (UTC)Reply

Looks good to me, thank you! --UV 20:28, 19 Octobris 2008 (UTC)Reply

Hello recensere

I added information of my bot. Can you unblock user:GnawnBot?StormDaebak 03:50, 25 Octobris 2008 (UTC)Reply

Please notify in my home language talk page since I am not active here.StormDaebak 03:51, 25 Octobris 2008 (UTC)Reply
Bot unblocked, bot operator notified. --UV 19:53, 25 Octobris 2008 (UTC)Reply

Biographical categories recensere

What I was working on, with your help, for the "Eruditi" categories is now practically finished. I see more clearly now what I was working towards, I think. Each person who is a scholar or a scientist is in (1) one or more subcategories of "Eruditi" to identify their speciality; and in (2) one or more subcategories of "Eruditi secundum civitates digesti" to identify their location.

A similar pattern already exists for "Scriptores/Auctores", and I guess that it can eventually be applied more widely, to "Artifices" of all sorts and to "Politicorum periti" and maybe even to our very numerous religiosi.

I agree with the point you have made, that articles about professions ought not really to be intermingled and confused with articles about people. As yet, in fact, we have very few articles about professions, so this would a good time to decide how to deal with the issue. Yes, perhaps a category-tree of "Munera" should be distinct from a category-tree of "Muneribus praepositi".

If we use distinctions of that kind -- and they could be a good idea -- we probably also need to make more use of the possibility of a "Vide etiam" at the head of the category page. Otherwise, branches and subcategories are bound to perpetuate the confusion we're trying to eliminate. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 14:07, 11 Novembris 2008 (UTC)Reply

Great work on "Eruditi" and its subcategories!
Yes, I would advocate separating articles about professions from articles about persons, just like en:Category:Occupations and en:Category:People by occupation, and possibly to take the former completely out of Categoria:Homines - this would make it much easier e. g. to check for articles about persons that lack a category indicating year of birth and year of death - professions do not usually have that! Note e. g. that en:Fisherman is not a member of en:Category:Fishers. I agree that the head of the category page should then include a link to the main article describing the category (see e. g. en:Template:Catmore). --UV 23:43, 12 Novembris 2008 (UTC)Reply

N.B. recensere

Notice that your last edit to Formula:Pp-vicimedia has been anonymously reverted. Whether for good reasons or for bad, you had better decide! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 12:27, 13 Novembris 2008 (UTC)Reply

Thank you for pointing this out. Well, that site has improved somewhat since I last visited it, although it still has practically no content at all! --UV 22:49, 13 Novembris 2008 (UTC)Reply
The request for creating a Latin wikinews (meta:Requests for new languages/Wikinews Latina) has been denied, so I have now removed again the link to the project (which had near-to-nothing-at-all content anyway). --UV 23:43, 25 Novembris 2008 (UTC)Reply

Klazo, noch einmal recensere

Lieber UV, bitte, schau mal noch hier. Ist es wirklich ganz unmöglich, das Klazo-Bild in die Communia zu verlegen? Gruß, Neander 23:13, 16 Novembris 2008 (UTC)Reply

Hello Neander, I am not at all convinced that the source and license specified on en: are correct: The image itself states near the bottom: “Mint Map by Andrew McIntyre. Satellite map courtesy of NASA.” It appears that Mr. McIntyre added all those place names in white to a freely available NASA map, so the map with the white place names is copyrighted by him. The statement by the uploader, en:User:Andrew J. Maher (“self made”) probably does not imply that Mr. McIntyre used the username en:User:Andrew J. Maher (although this would in theory be possible) and released his map under the public domain, but probably only means that Mr. Maher added one red dot and one red arrow to Mr. McIntyre's map. Consequently, Mr. McIntyre still holds copyright to significant portions of the map. In case someone would propose this map for deletion on en.wikipedia, I am quite sure that it would get deleted. I do not dare to reupload this map to commons. Greetings, --UV 22:27, 17 Novembris 2008 (UTC)Reply
OK, I'm convinced. Thanks! --Neander 22:36, 17 Novembris 2008 (UTC)Reply

Fraktur (& quasi-fraktur) recensere

Is it really necessary to remove the <span style="font-family: 'Lucida Blackletter', 'Old English MT', 'Old English', 'Blackmoor LET', blackletter;"> bit from Panis quadragesimalis? That's kinda one of my favorite things on those pages where I've used it, and certainly other people I've shown them to have singled out the quasi-fraktur bits as cool. --Iustinus 00:22, 20 Novembris 2008 (UTC)Reply

No, not at all! I was mainly hunting down the <big></big> tags pointed out by Vicipaedia:WikiProject Check Wikipedia#HTML text style element, but if you prefer to re-add those to Panis quadragesimalis as well, just go ahead! Greetings, --UV 00:28, 20 Novembris 2008 (UTC)Reply
Well I'll agree that things like sizes, colors, and special fonts are not generally necessary, but in general when I'm reproducing a period quotation I try to reproduce those effects as they occur in the original text. But that is perhaps just a personal habit. On the other hand, in the case of Egyptian quotes, I would strongly recommend keeping red text red: red ink is a convention used in Egyptian to highlight certain words. We can replace it with a more modern equivalent (italics, boldface, underlining) but given that we CAN show the text in red, I don't see why we wouldn't. --Iustinus 02:08, 20 Novembris 2008 (UTC)Reply
Red text in Egyptian quotes: sure, why not keep it red? Did I remove red formatting from Egyptian text somewhere? --UV 10:52, 20 Novembris 2008 (UTC)Reply
Not so far, but you have the quote from apium listed in the table--I assume that any style tags that trigger a listing, but can't be converted to wiki syntax, are to be deleted (as initially happened at panis quadragesimalis)? --Iustinus 18:03, 20 Novembris 2008 (UTC)Reply
Found a way to make apium disappear from the list and keep the formatting. Greetings, --UV 02:00, 21 Novembris 2008 (UTC)Reply

Categoriae incolarum recensere

We've been gradually standardising many biographical categories. I'm thinking that the next task is to unify the basic people-by-country categories: the preferable form may well follow the pattern of Categoria:Incolae Iordaniae, a pattern suggested by Ceylon. I will ask others for comment before doing anything, but I just wanted to check whether you're prepared to help! It will mean changing the names of most of the immediate subcategories of Categoria:Homines secundum civitates digesti, about 70-75 in total. But once we have done this, it should become obvious to editors where to place new biographical pages, and what form any new categories of this type should take; that will be a very good thing! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 18:22, 5 Decembris 2008 (UTC)Reply

Sure I can help! The easiest way for me would be if you simply list each category move individually on Vicipaedia:Automata/Category move requests, just as you did in the past in similar cases. Greetings, --UV 22:18, 5 Decembris 2008 (UTC)Reply

Thanks 2 recensere

UV, thanks for fixing the categoriae! When I work from texts in the big wikis, as in en:Jeff Todd Titon and de:Constantin Brăiloiu, I usually adapt the categorization already in place, figuring that the big wikis will know best. I gather that Vicipaedia diverges from common use in several mysterious particulars. ¶ Btw, could somebody design for Vicipaedia an "acad-stipula" (or whatever), like the stipula for people who are or have been professors, etc., in en:Jeff Todd Titon? IacobusAmor 22:36, 19 Decembris 2008 (UTC)Reply

As to the categories: No problem! ¶ We already have {{scien-bio-stipula}}, but it may need some rewording or moving to a better title. Greetings, --UV 00:09, 20 Decembris 2008 (UTC)Reply

Formula:Antiqua civitas recensere

VIELEN VIELEN VIELEN VIELEN DANK, UV. Du bist echt mein Retter!!! Lang lebest du!!!! Ricardus 22:33, 27 Decembris 2008 (UTC)Reply

faut pas exagérer ;-) --UV 22:38, 27 Decembris 2008 (UTC)Reply
Return to the user page of "UV/2008".