Disputatio:Alfredus Bonanno

message: This article desperately lacks NPOV. --UV 20:34, 26 Aprilis 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I tried to help a little. Pretty laden, yeah. Elegant Latin, though. --Ioscius  ∞ 21:05, 26 Aprilis 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  POV 

message: Nonne Italiane scripsit Bonanno opera sua? Si res ita se habet, nonne titulos Italianos afferre debemus (quamquam sine dubio [wink wink] omnium optima et bellissima est lingua Anglophonica)? --Neander 23:41, 26 Aprilis 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Opera 

message: I'm reverting good old Bonanno to its former state because:
1) The page is not really the one that a "fan" would write; actually, I thought I was spoofing the guy; I hope you'll agree with me, if you read it carefully.
replies: text: I'm sorry, but 3 editors who read Latin quite well smelled it reeking of POV: whether it is honest POV or affected, it's still pretty stinky. --Ioscius  ∞ 11:01, 27 Aprilis 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: : Irony is a difficult genre. You failed the irony test, I'm sorry to say. To be successful, you should leave clearer signs of irony in the text -- and enrich Necyclopaedia with you contribution. --Neander 14:39, 27 Aprilis 2010 (UTC)
2) A latin encyclopedia is a crazy idea and, as such, should be pure fun; if you take away humor and POV, you take away its life; articles should have a certain pantagruelian spirit in them (spirito goliardico in Italian). Take that away, and what remains is pedantism and bad latin.

text: Sorry that most of us don't agree that it's a crazy idea. I personally have devoted thousands of hours to the project, which I certainly wouldn't have done were it crazy.

text: Agree with you 100 percent, we should have our jokes. Vide Explicatio Vitae, Mundi Universi, Omniumque. It should be fun but it's not to be pure fun.
replies: text: :That particular page doesn't really belong here, either, at least not in mainspace. Pantocrator 22:19, 27 Aprilis 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: ::Please don't be a prude on this one. It's been there for years and was agreed at the time to be a good joke and not serious enough to be harmful. --Ioscius  ∞ 08:24, 28 Aprilis 2010 (UTC)

text: Agree with you 100 percent as well that there is a terrible amount of bad Latin here. I don't think it follows that we should be bad encyclopaedists, as well.--Ioscius  ∞ 11:01, 27 Aprilis 2010 (UTC)
3) If you are one of those guys who think that ideologies are serious, I shouldn't even bother to discuss.

text: Some ideologies are indeed serious and dangerous. Say more about your position here.--Ioscius  ∞ 11:01, 27 Aprilis 2010 (UTC)
4) The article, as it stands, is written in a language... Well, the devil knows what language it is. Certainly it is not latin.

text: This is certainly an insult both to me and usor:Neander, who have tried the hardest at cleaning this up. --Ioscius  ∞ 11:01, 27 Aprilis 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: : Could you please be more specific and exemplify those sentences or phrases which make you wonder what language it is? --Neander 14:26, 27 Aprilis 2010 (UTC)
5) If you decide to change it again, I won't object; one cannot discuss with people who take anarchy seriously. But if you want to amuse yourself, write something even more outrageous and, possibly, in a good latin.

text: Your Latin was indeed elegant and pleasant to read. Why do you resist to use such talents for useful articles? --Ioscius  ∞ 11:01, 27 Aprilis 2010 (UTC)
--10:44, 27 Aprilis 2010 usor:Aristofane di bisanzio
replies: text: :Didn't Andrew set up a page for joke-articles? Move this article thither? IacobusAmor 11:31, 27 Aprilis 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: ::No, I think the way the Neander has fixed it up makes it a legit one. Maybe we could add an old version of it thither. --Ioscius  ∞ 11:44, 27 Aprilis 2010 (UTC)

text: ::[Edit conflict:] It doesn't really qualify: this is a serious topic and I'm sure Bonanno is notable. It's difficult in postwar western Europe to spend 18 months in prison for writing a book (the English page says 18 months, ours says 2 years), and I certainly admire him if he's shown that it's possible. But the irony has to be in the selection or concatenation of facts, O Aristophanes. Words of unfootnoted praise or blame will get deleted. Can't be helped. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 11:48, 27 Aprilis 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  come on!