Vicipaedia

Vicipaedia:Taberna/Tabularium 5

< Vicipaedia:Taberna
Redactio 04:39, 26 Novembris 2005 a conlatore Jmb~lawiki (disputatio | conlationes) facta (Gesta Hammaburgensis)

Latest comment: abhinc 19 annos by Jmb in topic Gesta Hammaburgensis

Hac pagina taberna vicipediae est. Nunque sunt 139 698 articuli. Hodie : dies Mercurii December 2024

Tu quoque adiuvare potes

Novus apud Vicipaediam?

General Wikipedia-Infos
How to start a page. How to edit a page. Even more How-tos.

Latin Wikipedia-Specifics
Auxilium pro editione (anglice), Auxilium pro editione (latine)

Ave, taberna condita est ! Treanna 16:51 dec 24, 2003 (UTC)

==========================================================


Fermats theorem

Latest comment: abhinc 19 annos1 comment1 person in discussion

Cubum autem in duos cubos, aut quadrato-quadratum in duos quadrato-quadratos, et generaliter nullam in infinitum ultra quadratum potestatem in duos eiusdem nominis fas est dividere cuius rei demonstrationem mirabilem sane detexi. Hanc marginis exigitas non caperet.--213.234.195.243 12:16, 22 Novembris 2005 (UTC)

Please, help!

Latest comment: abhinc 19 annos1 comment1 person in discussion

Could anybody move the article Unio Rerum Publicarum Socialisticarum Sovieticarum to this location: Foederatae Civitates Socialisticae Conciliaris? The former is inproper!--213.234.195.243 12:18, 17 Novembris 2005 (UTC)

The message for a non-existant page says

(In hanc paginam ullas litteras nondum est)

Shouldn't that be "nullas litteras"?
Jorge Stolfi 20:37 mai 14, 2004 (UTC)

I suppose the negation is already in nondum, though the text seems strange to me anyway. I would suggest In hac pagina (abl.) nondum litterae sunt (pl.). Or something like that. What do you think? --Catullus 20:43 mai 14, 2004 (UTC)
There are plenty of errors in the MediaWiki messages, because I translated them when my knowledge of Latin was even worse than it is now...I was trying to say "there is not yet any text in this page". I'll go fix that one, and if you find any more errors just let me know! Adam Episcopus 00:50 mai 15, 2004 (UTC)
Thank you, Adam! --Catullus 18:57 mai 15, 2004 (UTC)

Flauto Dolce and I have been discussing the focus of the Latin Wikipedia. There are many articles here that are really quite useless for a Latin encyclopedia - things like two-letter abbreviations, National Hockey League teams, ISO codes, etc. What kind of articles should be here, and which ones should be removed? It is useful to have an article about electricity, if the original speakers of Latin did not have electricity? Should this be an encyclopedia of English (or any other modern language) that happens to be translated into Latin, or should it be an encyclopedia of ancient, classical and medieval culture, a reflection of the people who originally spoke and wrote in Latin?

(sIG): I think it's ok to have a general article about electricity for example, because latin as a language, however antique, is still an object of interest and is being developed and extended (for example the nuntii latini). I don't see that this should be some sort of historical recontruction of ancient knowledge...

I know that there are French, Dutch, and Greek speakers here as well, so I apologize for writing this in English...I'm not sure what language we should use in the Taberna. As far as I can tell from the quality of the articles here, there are very few people capable of conversing in Latin (especially me!). Adam Episcopus 03:37 feb 6, 2004 (UTC)

My opinion? The Latin Wikipedia should contain a full treatment of classical and mediaeval culture, but important modern topics (I mean things like modern history, geography, and the sciences) should not therefore be excluded. We can construct the best of both worlds.

I have run across things that definitely do not belong. Abbreviations (which seem to make up a great percentage of the articles) should either be combined all into a single article or deleted outright. Dictionary entries should be expanded into articles if it is possible, and if it is not possible they should be deleted. As to the full-text books of the Bible, I'm inclined to think they, too, need to go -- replaced with summaries, perhaps.

Another issue (I don't like to say "problem", though perhaps it is) is that of stubs. It seems the Latin Wikipedia does have a stub boilerplate text, though only a couple of articles are using it right now. It is {{stipula}} and reads:

Haec pagina stipula est. Amplifice si possis.

(Possibly the reason it isn't used is that it's ungrammatical or unclear; my Latin isn't good enough for me to tell.)

Sashal 07:59 feb 17, 2004 (UTC)

I don't want to lay blame on anyone, but I think all of the abbreviations, and most of the other extremely stubby and probably inappropriate articles have been created by 67.60.27.122 (also known as Pumpie on the English Wikipedia). I'm not sure how to communicate with him though, and I don't want to unilaterally delete things (we should be a Republic :)).
The stub message looks right, I guess (maybe it should be "amplifica")...people probably just don't know about it. Adam Episcopus 22:34 feb 17, 2004 (UTC)
I've looked it up: Yes, it should be "amplifica". I'll go ahead and change it.
For that matter, why not go through the articles and slap stipula on stubs that look ready to improve (i.e., those that are neither already growing nor beyond help)?
Sashal 05:01 feb 20, 2004 (UTC)

That would be almost every article though...I wonder if there is a way to do them all at once. Adam Episcopus 15:46 feb 21, 2004 (UTC)

The LanguageLa.php file seems to have been updated - does anyone see any new problems, or is everything fine now? I think there are still things that aren't translated properly, so if you find something wrong I will try to fix it. Adam Episcopus 18:16 feb 28, 2004 (UTC)

CalRis25 12:19 mar 10, 2004 (UTC): I suggest that we try to systematically refurbish la.Wikipedia. On my user-page I've written a few things, proposals, ideas, and suggest that we discuss these (and also decide and do something, of course). Perhaps we should create several sub-pages for this very purpose?

  • I've glanced over what you've written and it makes sense. La.Wikipedia needs more content and more systematization. When can we start? - Sashal 19:38 mar 10, 2004 (UTC)
    • P.S. I'm taking the liberty of commenting on a couple of your suggestions.
  • CalRis25: Let's start now, of course. We should remove those items from the list on the propals-page once we have reached an agreement. I've created this page as a temporary repository for a new editing- and style guide (see my proposals) to be created jointly by us.

From what I remember, de in titles does have the meaning of about (like in de bello gallico) -- so shouldn't it better read a Wikipedia? --Atom3000 14:34 mar 29, 2004 (UTC)

"De" could also mean "from" though, which would be a literal translation of the English...and "a" would mean "by", wouldn't it? but that's a good question, what does "from Wikipedia" mean anyway? Adam Episcopus 20:34 mar 29, 2004 (UTC)
e(x)? --Atom3000
Indeed e or ex would be more correct. Cat 19:59 mar 31, 2004 (UTC)
That makes sense I guess, I will change it. Adam Episcopus 01:26 apr 1, 2004 (UTC)

Salvete! (Anglica: Is there any way I can get my name showing on each page? My other Wikipediae all show something at the top of every page like this: "Robin Patterson (Talk)" Robin Patterson 01:21 apr 23, 2004 (UTC)

This should be the case if you are logged in. Try clearing your cache. Are you using a different skin here? (Specialis:Preferences) Angela 03:09 apr 23, 2004 (UTC)
angela, Angela! - Aspectum "Norma" bonum est. Robin Patterson 02:33 mai 1, 2004 (UTC)

There is now a Wiktionary in Latin, for those of you that are interested, and if I can say this in Latin correctly, nunc etiam "Wiktionary" in Latina est. http://la.wiktionary.org Adam Episcopus 17:45 mai 2, 2004 (UTC)

  • Iei! Urei!! (ie 3 cheers) - now THERE is the place for those stubs etc that were being complained of at the top of this page, eg "things like two-letter abbreviations" Robin Patterson 22:14 mai 5, 2004 (UTC)

Orthography

Pagina prima still says "Super mille articula apud Vicipaediam Latinam!" - update? Robin Patterson 22:14 mai 5, 2004 (UTC)

Fixed...but is "articula" a Latin word? Elsewhere I used "res" for "article" when I couldn't find a better word. Adam Episcopus 00:32 mai 6, 2004 (UTC)
CalRis25 18:05 mai 6, 2004 (UTC): my neo-latin dictionary makes the following suggestions (I favour articulus):
  • articulus, -i m [cum de scriptionis alicuius vel de sermonis partitione agitur]
  • commentatio, -onis f; commentatiuncula, -ae f [ cum de brevi agitur scriptione]
  • merx, mercis f [cum agitur de re mercatoria]
--68.78.74.22 19:01 mai 6, 2004 (UTC) The word favored at the Conventiculum Latinum Lexintonianum seems to be symbole, -es (or -ae) f., which has the added benefit of literally meaning "contribution." Note also, Adam Episcopus: once you put mille into the plural (milia) it requires a genitive, in other words, we need to say articulorum/commentationum/symbolarum on the front page.
Oh yeah - I forgot about the genitive...I would favour "articulus" or "symbole" I guess, so which should we use? And while we're on the topic, has anyone noticed any other grammar/vocabulary that needs to be fixed? Adam Episcopus 20:27 mai 6, 2004 (UTC)
I'm favor of "articulus". It's better understandable than symbole IMO. KIZU 14:36 mai 18, 2004 (UTC)

CalRis25 10:26 iun 4, 2004 (UTC): There are often made errors, e.g. planeta, -ae is thought to be a feminine word. However, it is a masculine one (I checked three dictionaries). Shouldn't we make a page with some of the most common errors? Any ideas where to put it? By the way, we seem to agree on articulus for article. Shouldn't we (or rather one of the demiurgs of la.Wikipedia) remove that part of the discussion (perhaps briefly stating the end-result)?

Deletio

I moved Shikoku, an Japanese island to Sicocum. I want to delete the former, but I don't know how-tos. Is there anything tool to delete such sorts with msg? Aphaea 17:47 mai 18, 2004 (UTC)

Don't care, just leave it as it is. I guess many people would first look up the entry under "Shikoku" instead of "Sicocum", so the original names should always redirect to the latinized ones. --Catullus 18:45 mai 18, 2004 (UTC)
Right - I think we agreed to make redirects from the non-Latin names, so you can leave Shikoku there. Adam Episcopus 23:47 mai 18, 2004 (UTC)
Aha. It sounds reasonable and user-friendly. OK, we leave it. Gratiam ago. Aphaea 06:55 mai 19, 2004 (UTC)

New Design

CalRis25 20:51 mai 28, 2004 (UTC): What the ?$!% is going on? I almost thought that I had "gone" to the wrong web-site. Does anybody know what this new design is all about? Not all Wikipedias seem to be affected, at least not the main (English) one. But not only the "small" Wikpiedias are affected. A "big" one like the German version has also been "hit". All in all, I cannot say that I'm positively impressed. Does anybody have some informations? Thanks.

Ah, you'll get used to it :) The English one will be changing as well, it's just bigger than all the other ones so it will take longer, I guess. I see it has added some new MediaWiki messages that need to be translated...apparently that is a problem everywhere though. You can read about it here, it has been discussed for awhile. Adam Episcopus 22:52 mai 28, 2004 (UTC)

CalRis25 10:17 iun 4, 2004 (UTC): Right now the index sort of destroys the uppermost bit of this page ("Tu quoque adiuvare potes" and "Novus apud Vicipaediam?"). Any ideas how to change that?

I'm not sure that can be changed, unless we stop using new headings (or change the "tu quoque" and "novus" table somehow). Adam Episcopus 22:11 iun 5, 2004 (UTC)

Index rerum quae omnibus linguis necesse sunt

In Metapedia, a project named meta:List of articles all languages should have started. It will contain 1000 basic topics which an Encyclopedia should have. I would like to import it to the Greek Wikipedia, but I can't translate the title into prper Latin X-)(Tabula articulorom quus omnis Wikipedia devit possudere?) Your help will be appliciated. Some Wikipedias imported it under Wikipedia namespace and has begun to work. KIZU 14:53, 1 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Maybe "Index articulorum quos totae linguae habeant"? Adam Episcopus 19:24 iun 1, 2004 (UTC)
Sounds good. However, I think "totae" means "the entire...", and that "cunctae" would be better. I'm not sure, though. --Catullus 19:47 iun 1, 2004 (UTC)
Now that I think about it, perhaps I was over-enthusiastic about my newfound knowledge of subjunctives...should it be "Index articulorum quos totis (or omnibus or cunctis) habendos sunt"? With a passive periphrastic rather than a subjunctive? Or does that sound too much like "must have" instead of "should have"? Adam Episcopus 22:11 iun 5, 2004 (UTC)
Index articulorum,quae in cunctis linguis assint(ad-sint).

Vide Vicipaedia:Articuli quos omnes Vicipaediae habeant - Robin Patterson 03:36 aug 17, 2005 (UTC)

Cur vane disceptare? Verbum "index" optimum est; "articula" iam "res" appellantur; recte non verbo "totae" sed verbo "omnes" uti debemus; deinde titulum correxi, qui non probat mutet - Scripsi 05,September,2005 Italicus Regis ---

pileus linguae

There's a link here from today's Language Hat. Marnanel 16:45 iun 9, 2004 (UTC)

articuli de numeris

I began to make interlang links in LAWP and found there are plural articles on same subjects in particular about numbers. we have 1, Unus and I. IMHO it's better to leave one of them and turn others to redirections. I have put tables and interlang links on each arabic number article less than 15, but would like to restart after the concensus will be built. We don't have now the style for these articles either. KIZU 15:06 iun 18, 2004 (UTC)

CalRis25 10:45 iun 25, 2004 (UTC): I suggest using 1 (number) for articles about the number, and 1 for articles about years. See w:en:1_(number) and w:en:1. By the way, once we have agreed on something, we should add this procedere to the auxilium-guides.

Please make the difference between years and numbers like Wikepedias in other languages. The Arabic numbers are needed for the years, we must redirect the "plain" numbers to unus, due, tres etc.Gbust 14:25 iun 25, 2004 (UTC)

CalRis25 13:40 iun 30, 2004 (UTC): Hello, KIZU. Hello Gbust. I've thought about this problem. In my opinion it requires some serious thinking. I've created a (temporary) page for discussing it. Have a look at here. By the way, the fact that I created it as a sub-page of my user-page doesn't mean that I think that I'm the leader of this project. I just didn't know how to put it in a special page (like the project pages of en.Wikipedia). I'm counting on you. Bye, CalRis.

milestone

I've found just now we have 2507 articles. What is the 2500th article btw? Aphaea.

Sub-encyclopedia?

CalRis25 13:58 iul 30, 2004 (UTC): Recently I had the following idea. Why not create special articles containing only definitions, i.e. something like a monolingual dictionary or similar to very compact pocket encyclopedias? That could have several benefits:

  • Beginners could do something without having to write a whole article which may be somewhat strenuous at the beginning.
  • Perhaps the creation of not-even-stubs could be allayed.
  • These articles or lists could serve as repositories for Neo-latin words. That way the use of certain words could be standardized.
  • Such lists could facilitate the use of la.Wikipedia because the search-functionality isn't really useful here as in most cases the correct article name won't be found. We need indices and lists anyway. Therefore such a sub-encyclopedia/dictionary could be really worthwile.

If we decided to adopt such lists or whatever several questions would have to be answered, e.g.:

  • What scheme should we adopt?
    • alphabetical
    • subjects: e.g. astronomy, persons, technology (I would prefer this system as it makes it easier to scan the vocabulary of a field)
  • What naming convention should we use?
  • Template for the lists?
  • Special conventions for the entries in these lists

Bye, CalRis

We already have something for definitions, the Latin wiktionary. Adam Episcopus 15:07 iul 30, 2004 (UTC)
Yes, the "Victionarium" could really use more contributors. Already it's bigger than Esperanto's ;) though about half the entries are for Japanese words. However lists probably work better here. (The lists I've seen on en.wiktionary get kind of haphazard--and even more so after the introduction of categories--while they seem to make more sense on en.wikipedia.) An about page for neolatin words might be more useful than en's wiktionary:neologisms page though. —Myces Tiberinus 17:34 iul 30, 2004 (UTC) (la.wiktionary temp sysop)

CalRis25 10:41 aug 3, 2004 (UTC): Perhaps I didn't make myself clear enough. What I'm thinking about is not a dictionary like la.Wiktionary but rather a sub-encyclopedia. Have a look at this page where I've tried to create a demo-page for an astronomy-related sub-encyclopedia.
As far as la.Wikitionary is concerned I've got no real hopes. Because of the subtle nuances of a language a dictionary requires far too much real scholarly skills if it wants to be a reliable source.
Having such a sub-encyclopedia would be really useful, both as a repository for special vocabulary, as a list of wanted articles and as a list of existing articles.

So is your intent that all the articles should be essentially vocab lists like that one? What do you think, Mycēs, is that consistent with the spirit of a Wikipedia, or does it crash into Wiktionary's sphere? Because that's the sort of thing I could get into. Iustinus
Well, there are a pages like this already, both on Wiktionary and Wikipedia. CalRis's example is most like (identical to, actually) Wiktionary's requested articles pages, e.g. wiktionary:en:Wiktionary:Requested articles:Latin, but that is the kind of thing that gets broken down and assimilated, not left to stand for itself which is what appears to be wanted.
This kind of thing stands better on wikipedias. Actually, the only real difference the example has from Wikipedia's multitudinous lists (such as en:list of astronomical topics) that I can see, is that it is better annotated—which is only fair, given that we're not most of us native speakers, and there's much more obscure terms out there than 'planeta'. We already have lists kind of like this anyway, e.g. Gladius or maybe Index locorum in Regno Unito. I suppose the point is bringing them all together, kind of like en's en:List of lists ? Or maybe a concerted effort towards creating more list-type articles? What exactly is the benefit in calling it a sub-encyclopedia? —Myces Tiberinus 22:58 aug 3, 2004 (UTC)

CalRis25 08:06 aug 4, 2004 (UTC): Hm, we're getting closer to what I'm trying to say. First of all, let's forget the word sub-encyclopedia as that seems to be somewhat misleading. However, "list" isn't entirely correct either, because what I suggest is more than a mere list or collection of lists. The above mentioned lists like en:list of astronomical topics don't have definitions, which may be okay for English and even for some lists in Latin (e.g. lists of moons). But in my opinion in Latin a list with definitions is preferable because there are many words that may be very unfamiliar to novices of the Latin languages (like me), especially neo-Latin ones. Words requiring at least a basic definition may range from the easy like columba internuntia (carrier pigeon), terrae motus (earthquake) to somewhat more difficult ones like stannum (tin), exorbitatio (eccentricity of an orbit), interrete (internet), ludi pedifollici (soccer games), operistitium (workers' strike), not to mention really exotic words like hamaxostichos (train [railway]).

Of course I don't think that "all articles should be essentially vocab lists". Not at all, the contrary is the case. Articles should be articles, ideally in size and quality like en.Wikipedia's "featured articles" which isn't very realistic right now, however. The lists or sub-encyclopedias I'm suggesting would act as tables of content for specific subject matters (like astronomy, places in the United Kingdom, people of Ancient Rome), but would be more useful because they provide a first glimpse of what the subject is about. Ideally the head word of every entry in these indices should point to a full-blown article that really deserves that name instead of merely containing ...civitas in....
My suggestions:

  • Let's call these annotated lists index/indices
  • Create a naming scheme for index-articles
  • Decide which indices we should create (perhaps using en.Wikipedia's category scheme, especially the main categories, as a starting point)
  • Create specific rules for the annotations/explanations in these indices, e.g.
    • People:provide birth and death dates?
    • Countries/Cities etc.: always add translation of Latin name in modern language (which one: the local language or in English?)

If we agree on this, I suggest creating a list-of-lists-page, e.g. Index principalis and move the discussion to its disputatio-page. What do you think? Bye, CalRis.

Bible books

We seem to have the entire Vulgate Bible here, chapter by chapter, see Liber Genesis, and the links at the bottom of that page, for example. We should come to a decision about what to do with these - they would be better off at Wikisource, I think. Adam Episcopus 21:17 aug 5, 2004 (UTC)

CalRis25 06:24 aug 6, 2004 (UTC): I think that it would be best to completely remove them without leaving behind any traces like redirects. Instead we should expand the article Biblia. There's no la.Wikisource right now, if I'm correctly informed, and personally I think that we shouldn't bother with the Bible as there are so many web sites containing Latin versions. We should rather provide links to different versions (Hieronimus, Nova Vulgata etc). I shall do that.
Wikisource is translingual; all we'd have to do is make a Pagina prima to organize it with, no need for a la.Wikisource. There is already Latin there (at the very least, there is the Magna Carta). I think that the Vulgate does belong there though (and in any case the Bible page they have already links to Biblia here). —Myces Tiberinus 17:26 aug 6, 2004 (UTC)
I agree. Please move the bible articles to Wikisource. They can be well looked after over there. Nicolus 10:29 oct 28, 2004 (UTC)
BTW, I've written the Latin Main page, so if you do add any new Latin texts to Wikisource, please list them there. --Iustinus

Translation of moon?

CalRis25 09:42 aug 19, 2004 (UTC): Which is the correct/better translation of "moon": luna or satelles? This is important for naming articles about moons and headings inside articles about planets, e.g. Phobos (luna) or Phobos (satelles)? I suggest using satelles because it prevents confusing the general term luna with the specific name for Earth's moon. The Finnish Nuntii Latini also use satelles. What's your opinion?

satellitem lunae praefero. Sergius 20:55 aug 19, 2004 (UTC)
Is not "Moon" / "Luna" the name for the satellite of the earth and all others just satellites, (all with diffrent names)? For comparsion: Sun = Sol, star = stella. // Solkoll 16:30 sep 23, 2004 (UTC)

Satelles may be less ambiguous (until we start writing extensively about artificial satellites, at least), but luna does apparently occur in the relevant scientific writings: in 1656 Christian Huygens wrote a piece called De Saturni luna observatio nova --Iustinus 16:47 nov 5, 2004 (UTC)

==> it is luna Belgian man 21:45 nov 29, 2004 (UTC)

HELP PETITION - PEDIDO DE AYUDA

I need help to translate into Latin the Spanish Wikipedia article "consciente", which looks at least to me as very important for both science and philosophy info seekers. Yet I find my latin insufficient (starting by the title name: conscientia? mens?) Cordially, David (reardon (at)operamail.com)

Translation of the week

Currently we have started a project on meta.wikipedia to get an article translated in as many wikipedias as possible every week. The article will be about a subject that usually gets rarely translated and has a lot of links to other subjects. Currently we have no-one to translate in your language. If someone is interested to participate please see: meta:Translation of the week You can also submit articles from your own languages there that you think deserve translation, but have a small chance of it. The articles must not be to short and not to long and have lots of links to possible other articles! en:user:Waerth

Sounds cool. I've signed up to help. —Myces Tiberinus 23:28 nov 5, 2004 (UTC)

Latin

Hello: This thing’s supposed to be in Latin! i.e. no English‼ – 217.233.112.211 20:02 nov 11, 2004 (UTC)

Modo violis regimen! (w Ashibaka 04:29 nov 14, 2004 (UTC)

Tunisia/Tunesia

Latine "Tunisia" aut "Tunesia" dicitur? - Mustafaa 15:12 nov 19, 2004 (UTC)

Tunes, -ētis nomen urbis capitalis est. “Tunesia” (vel potius Tunetia!?) esse debet. —Myces Tiberinus 16:35 nov 19, 2004 (UTC)
Cito Caroli Egger Lexicon Nominum Locorum: --Iustinus 00:20 nov 20, 2004 (UTC)
Tunesia, ae, f.
Nomen huius Civitatis novatum est; est autem a Graeco fonte deductum, nam, ut 
Stephanus Byzantinus docet, adiectivum ad Tunetem (v. Tunisi) pertinens, est 
Τυνήσιος vel Τυνησαῖος (cfr. Ethnicorum quae supersunt, Berolini 1869,
p. 641). Recentes quidam minus probabiliter ponunt: Tunetum vel Tunesium.
Tunesienses, ium; Tunesiensis, e.

Gratias vobis ago. - Mustafaa 01:19 nov 20, 2004 (UTC)

User

What means "user" in Latin?

  • "utens" (Italian: utente)
  • "utilisator" (French: utilisateur, Rumanian: utilizator)
  • "usuarius" (Spanish: usuario, Portuguese: usuário)
  • English and Russian: irrelevant (no successors of Latin).

195.93.60.10 22:42 dec 16, 2004 (UTC)

Equidem user nihil Latine significat (nisi "frequentativam" figuram alibi non attestatam fingamus *usor -are), sed se bene perlegis Wikipediam Latinam, videbis figuram solitam nostram non esse user sed usor, quae est forma bene latina. Licet "usor" nusquam attestestatur apud fontes classicos (sed cf. usio), sed verbum—etiam deponens—cum suffixo -tor vix est res magna et nova! Alibi apud nos fortasse istud user (ex errore, et sine dubio mutandum) invenies, et sine dubio utentem (nam olim haec figura apud nos erat solita), etiam monstruosam utatorem (phy!).
Quod attinet ad alias figuras quas citas, verbum temporale quod est utilizare nusquam invenitur apud classicos, proveniens ex verbo utilis cum suffixo graecanico -izare. "Usuarius" autem est bonae Latinitatis -Iustinus 23:57 dec 16, 2004 (UTC)

Good Day, i see that you often discuss about new latin Words, there is a huge list in which Prof. Morgan has compilated neo latin Word from various Sources: http://alpha.furman.edu/~dmorgan/ And btw: "User" i couldnt find there, but i know that it is "Usor". Regards, Klaus Scholl.

Yes, I used to have that linked from lexica Neolatina, but Professor Morgan asked me to remove it. He seems to be under the mistaken impression that nobody knows about it ;) --Iustinus 06:56 apr 4, 2005 (UTC)

Templates

Scusate se scrivo in italiano, anche se credo che molti degli autori di queste pagine siano italiani, ma secondo me i titoli dei template non devono essere in inglese, ma in latino. Provo scrivere in un cattivo inglese:

I write in a bad english: I think that the templates should be in latin, and not in english 212.171.242.61 18:59 nov 28, 2004 (UTC)

Your English translation cuts a lot of your Italian out, but otherwise it's not all that bad. At any rate, are you saying the word "Template" should be in Latin? Because the names and texts of the templates are generally in Latin. This is a problem throughout the wikipedia- cf. the word "category." Honestly it doesn't bother me all that much, but I wouldn't be adverse to changing it, provided that it wouldn't ruin any pre-existing templates. But then the problem becomes what Latin word to use: exemplum/exemplar won't really cut it, nor will simulacrum. I'm not so sure that proplasma is the mot juste either. Perhaps forma/formula (mold for wax figurines) or taking a cue from stamp-seals impressio, signum? I'm really not sure.
I can read Italian fine, but I can't write it very well, so I hope my English doesn't give you trouble. --Iustinus 19:55 nov 28, 2004 (UTC)

Searching Morgan's lexicon for "model" produces this useful-looking pair of lines:

  • standard (criterion) norma, regula; (model) exemplum, archetypum; - usitatus, consuetus; (definite) ratus, probatus <obrussa> (Lev.)
  • standard / exemplar, modulus (LRL)

Maybe a search on "skeleton" has possibilities too? Robin Patterson 05:15 nov 29, 2004 (UTC)

I came up with some good ones over the last few months, but at the moment the only one I can come up with is character, as its original meaning was "imprint," "stamp" or more frequently (in Latin at least) "brand" (as in for cattle) but later on it came to mean "character." I'm still not certain this is the best way to do it though. --Iustinus 15:04 dec 23, 2004 (UTC)
Hmm. I should think if not "exemplum" then probably "form[ul]a". Should it really be so hard to find a word meaning "a text intended to be copied, sometimes including blanks to be filled in on individual copies"? (Not entirely sure, but intuition suggests exemplum to be without blanks, and formula with them...)
But as for the original poster I think he meant the template titles should be in Latin. Some of them were created in English [by me] mainly as they are carryovers from taxoboxes on en, making cut-and-paste easier (so that, e.g., one doesn't have to stop and figure out what the Latin name for Template:Taxobox section subdivision was). —Myces Tiberinus 19:22 dec 23, 2004 (UTC)
"exemplum archetypum" nimius est? --Purodha Blissenbach 21:33 iun 16, 2005 (UTC)
Iam Formula: utimur. —Myces Tiberinus 03:35 iun 17, 2005 (UTC)

Recentchanges

With the upgrade to 1.4, Wikipedia:Recentchanges is no longer functional. An admin will need to move it to MediaWiki:Recentchangestext [which is protected from us peons]. —Myces Tiberinus 06:41 dec 23, 2004 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you mean. Of course the text currently at recentchangestext is in dire need of editing, in any case. Also you did technically win the vote (though I don't know if a quorum is required) so perhaps you shouldn't be a peon anymore. --Iustinus 15:00 dec 23, 2004 (UTC)
It's unfortunate that the new page is protected, but I've moved the text, so it should look fine now. Adam Episcopus 16:21 dec 23, 2004 (UTC)
The new page is protected. It is a bit inconvinent. I propose two solution; 1) anyone who want to edit Recentchanges is recommended to request sysopship or 2) in Mediawiki:Recentchanges we will write {{Wikipedia:Recentchanges}} and invoke the content of the latter - so everyone can edit the content. --Aphaea 09:34 dec 28, 2004 (UTC)
Um, the page can be unprotected, just like any other page. On the Victionarium (wikt:Mediawiki:Recentchangestext) I unprotected it (if the original could be unprotected, doesn't seem to be a reason for this one to be). —Myces Tiberinus 18:27 dec 28, 2004 (UTC)
Paginam deprotexi. Adam Episcopus 22:11 dec 28, 2004 (UTC)

Quid hae sunt?

STh I Proemium; STh I q14 a15; Thomas Aquinas; Summa Theologiae
Articulii volamus? hae non volo. Nicolus 18:49 dec 28, 2004 (UTC)

Scilicit haec sunt materiae Wikifonti potius aptae, et nisi fallor iam adsunt... non autem vaco talia hodie inspicere. --Iustinus
Ab Usore:Johanne pragensi creatae sunt. Apud disputatum meum eas Wikifonti movere possumus.
Obiter dico me Paginam primam Latinam Vicifontianam scripsisse. Si igitur novos textus Latinos Vicifonti adderis, titulum et auctorem quaeso ibi subscribeto. --Iustinus

Maris motus?

What is the Latin word for "seaquake"? In an online dictionary I found "terrae motus" for "eathquake" and created "maris motus" for seaquake. I added this word in Novissima. Is that a correct Latin expression? --Stephanus Leo Geranus 19:31 dec 28, 2004 (UTC)

Well, to me maris motus sounds like it means a rough sea or something. I would go with the clunky but more accurate terrae motus marinus. --Iustinus
"Seaquake" itself is already pretty slangy for English. en:seaquake is just a redirect to en:earthquake, and the event in question is en:2004 Indian Ocean earthquake — is it necessary to create a word saying it's a marine earthquake, when you already state that it happens in Oceano Indico? —Myces Tiberinus 22:30 dec 28, 2004 (UTC)
"Well, to me maris motus sounds like it means a rough sea or something." - yes, that is what happened there! How else would you describe a tsunami? But now - althoug the German Seebeben is not "slangy" for me - also the German article moved to de:Erdbeben im Indischen Ozean am 26. Dezember 2004. So I change the sentence in Novissima to "Terrae motus". --Stephanus Leo Geranus 17:22 dec 29, 2004 (UTC)

Candidates for Page of the Month?

Now that there's a Pagina Mensis box on the front page, should we not have a Candidatus page where people can put suggestions? What do people suggest this page be named?

I have asked the same question on the template's talk page. We should try to get some discussion going on this. --Iustinus 20:05 feb 28, 2005 (UTC)

Empty year/decade/century articles

Has it yet been discussed what we should do with articles like 1872 and 192. decennium which don't have any real content?

Fill them (like any otherwise "dead" link or stub) - translate from the anglice if nothing original to add! Or at least add interwiki links that someone else can use to translate from. See decennium 201 for a hint of what those other than single years can contain. Note agreed change of style to "decennium 192" (which you are welcome to help with) and similarly with the saecula and millennia. However, I agree with not creating many more until we have put a fair amount of content into most of what we have. Robin Patterson 00:59 feb 1, 2005 (UTC)

Quomodo sectio References latine inscribenda sit

Desiderans cuidamdam articulo indicem librorum utilium inserere notavi me ignorare quomodo talis sectio latine inscribenda sit. Adhuc nullus articulus huius Vicipaediae Latinae talem indicem librorum continere videtur. Quis auxilium ferre potest? --Thomas Ruefner 15:34 ian 4, 2005 (UTC)

Vera ut confitiar, diversis modis haec feci: pendet ex usu exacto:
  • "Fontes" si modo de indice textuum latinorum agitur qui rem nostram tractant.
  • "Loci" si de indice textuum latinorum agitur qui rem nostram commorantur.
  • "Bibliographia" si de indice librorum, commentationum, symbolon quacumque lingua scriptorum agitur ex quo textus Vicipaedianus scriptus est, vel ex quo plura disci possint.
--Iustinus 17:19 ian 4, 2005 (UTC)

International Writing Contest

Hello everybody,

In Berlin at Dezember 2004 there was the critique that there is not enough connection in the work of all the different Wikipedias in their different languages. I think, that an internationally linked writing contest should be one possible chance to cooperate and work together. At March 1st there will be the start of the second writing contest in the german Wikipedia so I thought, we can start it as an international project. There had bee contests in the Wikipedia of the Netherlands nl:Wikipedia:Schrijfwedstrijd, the german Wikipedia de:Wikipedia:Schreibwettbewerb and the english one en:Wikipedia:Danny's contest and as far as I could see it, it worked really good.

I hope you will join the Contest, please visit meta:International writing contest to find out more. -- 149.225.56.90 09:02 ian 11, 2005 (UTC) (Achim Raschka aka Necrophorus)

aut Category:Urbis aut Category:Urbes

urbes=cities how to change it?

....est,.....sunt

used in definitions much too often is not necessary.A stroke(-) is sufficient.

e.g."Novaesium - urbs in Germania".

¿legone hanc recte? (linguam anglicam non bene lego.) dicis: noli scribere «est» aut «sunt» sed scribe «-». ¿quod est malum de «est» et «sunt»? --Cimmerianus 06:58 apr 30, 2005 (UTC)

the use of 'de'

the translation of 'de'+ ablativus is 'about',not 'of',as could be suggested by Roman languages(Spanish,French a.s.o.).To translate 'of' you must use the genitive.

i.e. referatus de philosophia = a speech about philosophy

schola philosophiae = a philosophy school (school of philosophy)

Namespace translation vote / Suffragia translationis praefixorum

Vote for one week (till 11 March 2005); if these pass I will suggest them to the developers to be changed. (Myces Tiberinus)

  • Wikipedia: -> Vicipaedia:
    • Wikipedia talk: -> Disputatio Vicipaediae:
  • Template: -> Formula:
    • Template talk: -> Disputatio Formulae:
  • Help: -> Auxilium:
    • Help talk: -> Disputatio Auxilii:
  • Category: -> Categoria:
    • Category talk: -> Disputatio Categoriae:

Support / Pro

  1. Myces Tiberinus 22:34 mar 4, 2005 (UTC)
  2. Iustinus 22:51 mar 12, 2005 (UTC) These seem good in general (though I am ambivalent about changing the wikipedia: domain)
    Well, it seems that the Wikipedia: bit has been in place since before "Vicipaedia" was the accepted name for the project. At any rate... I have posted this (and an equivalent request for Victionarium namespaces) to meta and hope it will be implemented soon. —Myces Tiberinus 00:45 mar 13, 2005 (UTC)
  3. Plutoqueprevus 13:32 mar 13, 2005 (UTC)

Oppose / Contra

Months later... it is done! Woo! The old namespaces appear to redirect transparently to the new ones so nothing should be broken. —Myces Tiberinus 03:06 mai 6, 2005 (UTC)

Wikisource

Please see : New vote on language subdomains. Cato 22:15 mar 12, 2005 (UTC)

Edits by 141.82.170.193

What do you make of this guy's edits? Seems to have created his own categorising system and not returned since. Nicolaus 20:38 apr 11, 2005 (UTC)

In my humble opinion, we are better to remove or at least modify them in the future, though we should do in urgent. Because
  • It seems not beautiful in current form.
  • This type of navigation are more difficult to maintain than categories (Categoriae).

--Aphaea 07:49 apr 12, 2005 (UTC)


Audio template

Hi, I am making audio recordings of the pronunciation of words. Example; Media:Nl-be guy verhofstadt.ogg To include this in a good way in your wiki I need to know what your audio template is and how it works. When I know it i, and many others, can put it directly inside articles on yourr wikipedia.

Can some one please put your audio template on this page;

Greetings, nl:gebruiker:Walter

la:Template:Discretiva and Imago:Disambig.png

 

Halló! I spend a lot of time that most of the disambiguation templates listed at de:Bild Diskussion:Logo Begriffsklärung.png#Vorlagen - Templates should use commons:Image:Disambig.png. The image should give an indication about the nature of the page and avoid linking between "normal" articles and disambiguation pages. I would be very happy if la: would use one of the images listed in that page. 75% of the 60 listed templates using such an image you can find also ka:თარგი:არაორაზროვნება, vi:Template:Trang định hướng, ja:Template:Aimai beside many others using latin or cyrillic type alphabets. Best regards Gangleri 10:20 apr 23, 2005 (UTC)

quanda verba

scio non esse dura regula tamen ¿ad quanta verba in una pagina tendere debeo? --Cimmerianus 07:08 apr 30, 2005 (UTC)

Rogasne quot verba in articulo esse debeant? --Iustinus 07:31 apr 30, 2005 (UTC)
etiam. me paenitet. cerebrum meum non bene operabatur. ☺ --Cimmerianus 12:13 apr 30, 2005 (UTC)
Nescio num sit regula firma, sed in principio necesse est totam rem saltem breviter tractare, ut sit commentatio tua quasi symbole encyclopaedica, neque lexica. Sed in re vera haud rarum est breviorem stipulam scribere (cuius peccati saepe reus sum! ;) ) --Iustinus 16:47 mai 6, 2005 (UTC)

De latinis sententiis in it:wiki

Segnalo che su it:wiki è presente una pagina sulle locuzioni latine. Se qualcuno ha piacere di dare una mano o di stabilire un contatto tra le due Wikipedia ... :) - Twice25
Nuntium a Twice25 primo Italice scriptum, Latine verto.
Paginam de latinis sententiis in it:wiki esse certiores vos facimus, ut, si vultis, adiuvare nos et Vicipaedias nostras coniungere possitis. Valete. Alec

Translation volunteers

Hi there, I'm Zanimum from the English Wikipedia. I'm running an international-entry exhibit of small artwork. I've found volunteers to translate the site into Arabic, Catalan, Italian, Norwegian and Spanish, and I was wanting a translator to write something in this language. The text to translate is around 300 words. Does anyone want to do a quick translation for us? Thanks! -- en:user:zanimum (Interested? Contact nicholasmoreau@gmail.com)

Translation of template

Can someone verify the correctness of my translation in this template it:Template:Utente la-2?
Aliquis meae conversionis integritatem in hac forma it:Template:Utente la-2 spectare potest? --Ilarius 17:39 mai 7, 2005 (UTC)

Habemmus Formula:Usor la-2 in Vicipaedia.--Dubno 11:35 mai 8, 2005 (UTC)

Latin Wikisource

Please note that a Latin Wikisource may be requested here:

A request that is signed by several active Latin users will stand a good chance of being created.

Latin is a central language for classical literature, and as such a Latin Wikisource is extremely appropriate. It would be the perfect complement to Latin Wikipedia, and the articles could be easily interlinked from one to the other. So if several users are interested, please sign up! Dovi 10:23 mai 9, 2005 (UTC)

There is of course already a Main Page in Latin at Wikisource. Could you perhaps run down the advantages and disadvantages of creating an actual Wikisouce language domain for it? I'm not sure I understand the implications. --Iustinus 20:33 mai 9, 2005 (UTC)

You may of course continue adding texts at the current mainpage; despite the recent vote that overwhelmingly supported language wikis, this after all only allows for their creation, but doesn't force them on any language.

Nevertheless, it seems to me that there would nevertheless be some advantages for Latin in a separate Latin language wiki (la.wikisource.org):

  • Language links: Translations of classic texts could link to their Latin sources conveniently ("la:"), and the Latin original could link back to the various translations. The links this way are easy to make and conveniently located in the sidebar. This could be done chapter by chapter, or even passage by passage in certain cases.
  • Project links: There would be a simple one letter code to link back and forth from Latin source texts and Latin wikipedia articles.
  • A way to draw in more Latin users: Some people interested in Latin may not be so comfortable composing encyclopedia articles, but would like to edit classic texts. It is much easier to develope a community of such people in a separate Latin website (just as with Wikipedia). Such people, when linking to la.wikipedia, might eventually be drawn into contributing to the encyclopedia as well.

Possible disadvantages:

  • The need to initially copy pages. If there aren't too many then this isn't much of a problem.
  • There will have to be some Latin users willing to check for vandalism. On the other hand, this true in at the present location as well, but non-blatant trolls may not even be noticed. Dovi 15:16 mai 11, 2005 (UTC)

Hope this helps! Dovi 13:19 mai 11, 2005 (UTC)

Stewards election

Hello,

The stewards election has started on m:Stewards/elections 2005. Anyone can vote provided that he has a valid account on meta with a link to at least one user page, on a project where the editor is a participant, with at least 3 months participation to the project. Stewards can give sysop right on projects where there are no local bureaucrate. Please vote ! Yann 15:19 mai 21, 2005 (UTC)

it.wiki "Progetto Wikifratellanza"

Hello,

In it. wiki it was launched this project: Wikipedia:Progetto_Wikifratellanza. The project is to help all the Wikipedias in the languages near to Italian. --Thom 14:07 mai 31, 2005 (UTC)

PS: Please translate this. Thanks. Yann 15:19 mai 21, 2005 (UTC)

Apud it.wiki nuper profectum est hoc propositum: Wikipedia:Propositum Wikifraternitatis. Auxilium quaeritur ut omnes Wikipaediae quarum lingua propinqua sit Italicae linguae (e.g. Sicula, Sarda, Furlana, Corsa, Latina) communi studio augeantur.

Pagina Mensis (denuo)

I have updated the Pagina Mensis to Ius Romanum. Yes, it has finally been changed. Please go to the talk page to suggest other good pages for next month. --Iustinus 20:30 iun 2, 2005 (UTC)


Quaeso amovere

Amotae. --Iustinus 22:37 iun 27, 2005 (UTC)
Thanks. I've now found the {{delenda}} template. gpvos 16:02 iun 30, 2005 (UTC)

Help on translating O Sanctissima

Can anyone double-check my translation of O Sanctissima into French and English and possibly correct my mistakes ? I'm not an expert on Latin ADM

(Latin)

O Sanctissima

O Sanctissima O Piissima
Dulcis Virgo Maria
Mater amata intemerata
Ora ora pro nobis

Tota pulchraes O Maria
Et macula non est in te
Mater amata intemerata
Ora ora pro nobis

Sicut lilium inter spinas
Sic Maria inter filias
Mater amata intemerata
Ora ora pro nobis

In miseria in angustia
Ora Virgo pro nobis
Pro nobis ora in mortis hora
Ora ora pro nobis

(French)

Ô Très Sainte

Ô Très Sainte, Ô Très Pieuse
Douce Vierge Marie
Mère ayant été aimée sans tache
Priez, priez pour nous

Tu es toute belle, ô Marie
Et la faute originelle n'est point en toi
Mère ayant été aimée sans tache
Priez, priez pour nous

Comme le lys entre les épines
Telle est Marie entre les filles
Mère ayant été aimée sans tache
Priez, priez pour nous

En misère et en angoisse
Priez Vierge, pour nous
Pour nous priez à l'heure de notre mort
Priez, priez pour nous

(English)

O Very Blessed

O Very Blessed, O Very Pious
Sweet Virgin Mary
Mother having been loved without stain
Pray, pray for us

Thou art all fair, O Mary
And there is no stain of original sin in thee
Mother having been loved without stain
Pray, pray for us

Like the lily among thorns
Such is Mary among the maidens
Mother having been loved without stain
Pray, pray for us

In misery and in distress
Pray Virgin, for us
For us pray at the hour of our death
Pray, pray for us

Bot

Ave. Does anyone object to me registering gpvosbot as a bot (so its edits will not show up on a default recent changes screen)? I intend to mainly do interwikis with it, but maybe also some other chores as necessary. You can see how I operate gpvosbot on the Dutch wikipedia. gpvos 20:49 iul 7, 2005 (UTC)

I am seeking for right orthography inside for interwiki links. The question is: Is to correct to write the name of Latin language "Latina" or "latina"? For example, Italian, Serbian, Croatian and Serbo-Croatian would be written with the starting small letter because by orthography of these languages language name is written with the starting small letter. --millosh (disputatum (sr:)) 05:40 iul 13, 2005 (UTC)

There is no standardization for capitalization in Latin. The Ancient Romans used no lower case letters. Later authors used whatever conventions they were accustomed to use in other languages. This continues to this day, and the Latin Wikipedia has not declaired any standard. That said, I think pretty much all of us would agree that the captial L should be kept.
Anyone want to discuss whether or not Latina is the forme juste? ;) --Iustinus 05:46 iul 13, 2005 (UTC)

I knew for Romans, but I didn't know that it is not standardized yet. I consider your answer as negative, but you can change your decision whenever you want. --millosh (disputatum (sr:)) 08:11 iul 13, 2005 (UTC)

Just to say that Thanks I made the page m:Capital and small letters for interwiki at Meta about this question. If you think that you should talk about that more, please write about it there. --millosh (disputatum (sr:)) 16:50 iul 13, 2005 (UTC)

Translation of "Show changes"

Lacking any better place (or not finding it): MediaWiki:Showdiff which was added with MediaWiki 1.5 needs a translation. My Latin is not the best anymore, but I suggest to translate this as Monstrare mutatio based on other translations… — Dapete 10:00 iul 13, 2005 (UTC)

Latinizing the name Lawrence Kudlow

Is latinization of proper names necessary? If so, could someone please help latinize the name of the article Lawrence Kudlow and correct the grammar? 2004-12-29T22:45Z 06:00 iul 16, 2005 (UTC)

The normalized practice is to Latinize the first name(s) if possible, and only Latinize the surname if the person in question a) wrote under a Latin name or b) was published/written about under a Latin name (only normal before about the 18th century, cf. Iustinus' translators' guide). So you'd most likely have Laurentius Kudlow (with Lawrence Kudlow redirecting to that). —Myces Tiberinus 07:23 iul 16, 2005 (UTC)

Salute a omnes

Hi, io es un usator in le interlingua wikipedia, e solmente voleva dicer salute a omnes, le personas que ha le corage a scriber articulos in un lingua altere. Pro vos scriber in le latino es pro continuar le lingua ancian, e pro nos scriber in interlingua es pro facer cultura nove per un forma moderne del latino. Io non pove scriber in le latino, ma le latino wikipedia me place, e io spera que vos continua scriber multa articulos interresante. ia:user:Torquil

Decennium 200 non est "1990s"

Decennium 200: 1991-2000 (incl). 1990s: 1990-1999.

Apologia to those of you who do not read English comfortably. I haven't time today to write Latin comfortably. Expanding on the above: few Wikipedias follow our "precise" numbering and definition of decades "anno Domini". See lt:XX_amžiaus_10-as_dešimtmetis, mi:Ngahurutanga 200, and is:1991–2000 for three that do and http://nl.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=1990-00&redirect=no for one that used to have a compromise but has capitulated. Why I mention it is that numerous interwikis have appeared, from doubtless well-intentioned people and/or bots, that almost all cover just the 1990-1999 "decade".

Are we content to allow such imprecise interwikis, or should they be consigned to a separate "Vide etiam" section in the article or category?

Robin Patterson 01:24 aug 12, 2005 (UTC)

Wikisource in latina

Bonjour,

Vicifons was created here : s:Pagina prima. Cato 13:52 aug 27, 2005 (UTC)

Hoax: The Flowers Of Romance, please delete

Sorry, i don't speak the language of this Wikipedia. However i would like to inform you that the Article The Flowers Of Romance is an hoax, see [1] and commons:Commons:Village_pump#Hoax Article in 57 languages -- de:Benutzer:Kju 19:03 aug 29, 2005 (UTC)

Philippinae(Philippines) in Latin

Salve! Quero aliquid. I am trying to find literature about the Philippines in Latin. I am not sure how to translate place names like Luzon(Luconia), Visaya, Mindanao, etc. I've searched through gutenberg.org and I've seen the maps about the Philippines. If there are any links that can be found, please let me know. Gratias ago. --Jondel 06:10 aug 30, 2005 (UTC)

Localized date formats need to be verified

Dear Wikipedians,

I need your help to look at date formats for your language. I created a large list of formats here. Please take a look and fix any mistakes or add any new formats. This will help interwiki bot to match en:April 1, fr:1 avril, ru:1 апреля, zh:4月1日, and all other sites together.

What's needed: Look here at every format for your language, fix any mistakes, note any exceptions (some languages have 1st, 2nd, 3rd, etc naming schemas, or year 1 is written as '1 (year)' unlike all other years).

Also, I would like to receive a bot status on your site for my bot User:YurikBot. It will be mostly involved in interwikies.

Thank you!!!

You can contact me at en:Yurik (--Yurik 22:22 sep 24, 2005 (UTC))

Rogatio orthographica

Habemusne regulam de usu j et v? Estne scribendum iuuare, iuvare, juvare, uel juuare? --Angr/adloquere mihi 06:22 sep 25, 2005 (UTC)
Habemus: Vide Auxilium pro editione. W.B. Nonis Oct. MMV

"adjutatum ad recensere" eqs.

Cari administratores, potestisne ea verba emendare et praeterea verba Anglica sequentia Latine reddere? Haec verba ego propono:
Auxilium recensendi (aperiens novo in speculari) (Nolite uti fenestra pro window, nam fenestrae ab utraque parte perspectandae sunt.) W. Bohmhammel, Nonis Octobribus MMV

Contact needed

Salvete!

Sorry for the English but I don't know Latin well enough to communicate efficiently.

I am planing on doing a presentation about Wikipedia for the Latin Circle at my university (Adam Mickiewicz University in Posnania, Polonia :)). I'd like to give those people a person they can turn to here on the Latin Wikipedia. If anyone is willing to take on some extra work with a few new people and help them with any questions they might have after they start contributing, please drop me a line at my polish discussion page.

Note, these people include professors and PhD students who can (as I was told) actually converse casually (sic!) in Latin, so they will need little or no supervision language-wise, they just might need some help with getting used to the wiki way of handling things and stuff.

As I will probably only need one dedicated person for this, feel free to remove this section after replying.

Cheers, TOR 20:46 oct 5, 2005 (UTC)

Paginae cui nexit Pagina Prima, sine substantiam

Sequentes paginae sunt exposta in pagina prima, sed paulatim habent substantiae. Puto eas esse amplificandas, sed forsitan topicam amplius elaboratam sit substituendam. Quasi omnes sunt parvae, sed haec parvae sunt et non nexint aliis. Forsitan multae haec sint focus laboris, alterae a pagina prima emovendae. --Tbook 22:54 oct 7, 2005 (UTC)

Linguistica - In wikipedia latina!
Sculptura
Archaeologia
Sociologia
Geologia
Electronica
Biotechnologia
Calendarium
Traditiones (quorum?)
Sententia
Circus
Comica
Politia
Oeconomia
Rete
Res Militaris

Etiam alii nexus habemus valde similes:

Lingua, Linguistica, Linguae Mundi, Littera
Politica, Politia
Informatica, Computator (et computatoris articulum dicit computatorem esse hominem non machinam!)
Calendarium, Mensis Latina
Usus Latinae Lingua, et Latinitas

Decline of Latin in the church

Thought this might be of interest to some here:

http://www.catholicnews.com/data/stories/cns/0506147.htm

I wrote them and suggested that they come participate here. mithridates

Predefinitions

Latest comment: abhinc 19 annos1 comment1 person in discussion

Where i can find the pedefinitions? If i find a vandalized page without any previously usable historic, what should I do to send it for deletion or to put some type of revision tag?

I generally just delete it, but if you want to find a previously written, public domain definition then more power to you. There are a number of places you could look for this... some of them are now listed at Categoria:Fontes Vicipaediae. If you copy a text wholesale, or with slight modification, please note this at the bottom of the page, or use a template that does so. --Iustinus 04:12, 15 Novembris 2005 (UTC)


Some issues

Latest comment: abhinc 19 annos11 comments5 people in discussion

1. Why we use the term Soviet according to Soviet Union and Soviet Power? If does English why should do Latin? The proper terms are Unio Consiliorum and Factio Communistica Unionis Consilicae.

2. We should add here the official titles of the Roman emperors. I've added the title of Carolus Magnus (though it requires description).


3. Also we should add official titles of the Pope, Moscow Patriarch, Russian Emperors. Also we should note that Peter I the Great had title of pater patriae granted him by the Senate--213.135.64.212 13:39, 13 Novembris 2005 (UTC)

1. English isn't the only language that does so. Most languages have addopted this word as a borrowing. Of course as a rule of thumb, one avoids using modern terms in Latin even if they are universal, but there are some exceptions. And most Neo-Latin sources of the Cold War era DO seem to borrow the term. In fact, Egger's Lexicon Nominum Locorum, which is generally considered "almost official" does indeed list the USSR as Foederatae Civitates Socialisticae Sovieticae. If you want to translate the term instead, I recommend Consiliaris rather than *Consilica.
I am Russian and in Russian there is no differece between for example Council of Ministers (Soviet Ministrov, this body already existed in Tsarist Russia) and Supreme Council (Supreme Soviet). Soviet Power is simply Power of Councils.--213.234.195.243 11:31, 15 Novembris 2005 (UTC)
(As a joke ;-) we also could translate the word "soviet" with its cognate - "covox" ;-) )--213.234.195.243 11:41, 15 Novembris 2005 (UTC)
I thought the cognate was "coniunctio" --Iustinus 16:54, 15 Novembris 2005 (UTC)
No. "coniunctio" is cognate for "soyuz".--213.234.195.243 07:25, 16 Novembris 2005 (UTC)
Oh right, I forgot what word we were talking about ;) --Iustinus 07:32, 16 Novembris 2005 (UTC)
But... They are not true cognates, and Greek "syndesmos" - too--213.234.195.243 11:49, 16 Novembris 2005 (UTC)
Unio Rerum Publicarum Socialisticarum Sovieticarum seems improper any way. My choice - Foederatae Civitates Socialisticae Conciliaris with Foederatae Civitates Socialisticae Sovieticae as second name and redirect. Could anybody rewrite and move the article?--Nxx 12:08, 15 Novembris 2005 (UTC)

Well, my "Russian-Latin Dictionary" by Podosinov and Belov gives "Unio Sovetica" for "Советский Союз (Soviet Union)". In this dictionary "unio" is first in the list of translations to the word "союз (soyuz)". I consider that "Foederatae" (as in "Foederatae Civitates Americae Septentrionalis" - the translation for the United States of America given by the dictionary mentioned before) won't do in case of the USSR, because "soyuz" is a noun, not an adjective. "Civitas" is "state", if I'm not mistaken. The USSR is the "Union of Republics", not the "United States". So, in my opinion, "Unio Rerum Publicarum" is much better, than "Foederatae Civitates". (Let the Commonwealth of Independent States be Independentium Civitatum Foederatio) As for "Soviet"... I like the idea that this word should be translated: Unio Concilica" (I'm not sure whether the adjective is correct or not), Concilium Comissariorum Popularium, etc. But if the tradition of using "Soviet" is so strong that it can't be broken, we should use the word not only as an adjective, but also as a noun, the name of governing body (in RSFSR and the USSR in particular and, possibly, Russia in general) in order not to break etymological ties between the organs of government (e.g. the Soviet of the weavers of Ivanovo) and the political system they gave name to. (Leaving the names of foreign parliaments, etc., without translation is not something extraordinary. Take, e.g. Verkhovna Rada or Верховная Рада (not Supreme Council or Верховный Совет) of Ukraine Верховная Рада Украины).) -- Alexander Gerascenco 06:11, 22 Novembris 2005 (UTC)

2-3. Agreed. It is a good idea to add the full titulariy of any monarchs who had an official Latin one. --Iustinus 04:12, 15 Novembris 2005 (UTC)
Certainly, it's a good idea. But will you prompt, where to find these full Latin titularities? -- Alexander Gerascenco 04:16, 22 Novembris 2005 (UTC)

Babel

Latest comment: abhinc 19 annos2 comments2 people in discussion

ecce template [2] compositum a me ad Vicipaedie Catalonice. correctum est? Placidus 80.58.40.170 13:23, 18 Novembris 2005 (UTC)

Est in Vicipadia Latina Formula:Usor la-3, sed nunc nulla Formula:Usor la. --Polyhedron 15:54, 25 Novembris 2005 (UTC)

Why is Respublica Populi Sinarum?

Latest comment: abhinc 19 annos3 comments3 people in discussion

I think respublica = res publica, sing. f., means public thing. Then Chinese is Sinicus, I think? Then why it is not Respublica Populi Sinica (res publica sinica) or Respublica Populi Sinici (populus sinicus)? --Polyhedron 16:39, 25 Novembris 2005 (UTC)

I believe the more usual adjective is "sinensis." I do, however, approve of your moving the language to Lingua Sinica because language names tend to be first declension.
As for what to call the country, I did not name that page, but one could make an argument for "Sinarum" on the basis that it MEANS "the Chinese people." Perseus is no good with proper names, but my impression was that "Sinae" was the form with the best classical attestation... I'm not sure if the adjectives, the singular and so on are attested. If someone can correct me on this pelase do.
I suppose the Romans would have just translated it as Senatus Populusque Sinensis ;) --Iustinus 17:09, 25 Novembris 2005 (UTC)

Respublica Popularis Sinica? Placidus 22:25, 25 Novembris 2005 (UTC)

Gesta Hammaburgensis

Latest comment: abhinc 19 annos1 comment1 person in discussion

The pages linked from Gesta Hammaburgensis Ecclesiae Pontificum look like something that should be in Wikisource. --Jmb 04:39, 26 Novembris 2005 (UTC)

Receptum de "https://la.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Vicipaedia:Taberna/Tabularium_5&oldid=48689"