Talk:Vetus Latina

message: Does anyone know why accents were used in the text representing the Vulgate Bible and not the older text?  In other words, is there a reason why it isn't consistent?  It might give people the impression that Jerome used accents in the text whereas the other did not (which is not the case as far as I know).  Does anyone have a problem with me taking the accents off sometime? AliaGemma 22:08, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The accents are there only because when I cut-pasted the text from the Vulgate to Wikipedia, the accents came with it. I haven't bothered to remove them. You can remove them if you want. Rwflammang 13:28, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Vulgate Accents

message: Umm...the "Da Vinci Code" as a source for the second footnote? Really!?108.20.41.15 (talk) 23:19, 10 April 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Look again. The source is a website debunking a famous hoax, which was one of the Da Vinci Code's inspirations. Rwflammang (talk) 00:04, 11 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Dan Brown

message: It seems Itala is another name for the Vetus Latina (see for example http://books.google.de/books?id=inMuAAAAYAAJ&pg=PR16&dq=itala&hl=en&sa=X&ei=5UDTT9jaIo7ktQaNy6CRDw&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=itala&f=false ). Can someone with more knowledge on the subject confirm this and maybe add it to the article, if confirmed?95.90.42.196 (talk) 12:42, 9 June 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Itala 

message: I don't think that the average Wikipedia reader, such as myself, will know enough latin to make the comparison chart relevant.  Maybe add additional columns to paraphrase in English the sense in which each version reads, highlighting the differences?
Bgovern (talk) 04:40, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  comparison of Luke 6:1–4 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Vetus Latina. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20060215183514/http://www.erzabtei-beuron.de:80/kultur/vetus_latina.php to http://www.erzabtei-beuron.de/kultur/vetus_latina.php
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:52, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The entry mentions that the oldest surviving manuscript is from ~350, but of course there is a difference between the age of a manuscript and the age of the text copied. The latter is more interesting and important, so this bit of information should be added to the entry. To my (unprofessional) knowledge, parts of the Vetus Latina at least are dated to the 2nd century. Thank you.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.206.132.11 (talk) 12:14, 13 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  To what period are the oldest Latin translations dated? 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Vetus Latina. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090107060716/http://www-user.uni-bremen.de/~wie/Rennes/ to http://www-user.uni-bremen.de/~wie/Rennes/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:28, 11 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Is it that hard to add citation. Look at the replacement section, 2nd paragraph. Stop adding to wikipedia without citation !  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.167.80.171 (talk) 14:16, 6 December 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Citation needed on sections