lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Disputatio:Universitas

message: Non credo hanc paginam esse fontem Universitatum per orbem diffusarum. Explicet mores et vitam apud Universitatem, Categoria debet vitam et Universitates enumerare.--Ioshus (disp) 03:36, 8 Octobris 2006 (UTC)
Dubio verbum peritus(theodisce bewandert) praepositionem "in" cum accusativo regere oportere, sed potius genitivum. Secundum dictionarium meum, sed "audiatur et altera pars". Estne corrigenda expressio "periti in iure..." et scribenda "periti iuris..."? Sapientiorum opinionem exspecto Omnesvulnerantun 08:59, 26 Aprilis 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: An sapientior sim, nescio! Sed recte dicis, ut credo. Aut genitivum "iuris periti" aut ablativum sine praepositione "iure periti" praeferenda. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 11:43, 26 Aprilis 2008 (UTC)

message: How to write London School of Economics and Stockholm School of Economics in Latin?--83.249.178.85 09:45, 1 Augusti 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: This source Congregation of the Regent House on 25 June 2007 has "schola rerum oeconomicarum", accordingly London school of Economics "schola rerum oeconomicarum Londiniensis", Stockholm: "schola rerum oeconomicarum Holmiensis". --Alex1011 09:59, 1 Augusti 2008 (UTC)

text: In the source mentioned "at the London School of Economics and Political Science" is translated as "apud Londinienses in schola rerum oeconomicarum scientiaeque politicae". --Alex1011 10:24, 1 Augusti 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Latina 

message: Cur verbo tamen "universitas" usi sumus, cum verbo "academica" utere possumus? Nonne "universitas" locus extra orbem vacuus significat?--Nielsheur (disputatio) 20:10, 27 Decembris 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Et "universitas" et "academia" verba ambigua sive polysema sunt; significatio, qua schola superior aut "universitas studiorum" denotatur, in utraque notione a Medio Aevo repetit - saepe sine ullo discrimine; plurimae universitates studiorum sive academiae per saecula se ipsas "Universitas" vocant (sicut "Universitas Cantabrigiensis", "Universitas Oxoniensis").--Utilo (disputatio) 21:19, 27 Decembris 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: : Recte, ita est ut dicis. Multas gratias tibi ago. --Nielsheur (disputatio) 23:08, 27 Decembris 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Universitas aut academica? 

message: Hodierne iocum est eruditio superior occidentalis, ut ego video. De hac scribere maxime oporteat VinniusCaesar (disputatio) 00:52, 12 Iulii 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vae!
Disputatio:Rubeae promunturium

message: estne Promontorium? titulo Promunturium legitur. Puto errorem esse.
--Alexis Hellmer 00:34, 12 Octobris 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sic, ut dixi. Verbum accuratum est promontorium.  IacobusAmor 02:08, 12 Octobris 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: :Besides, isn't there any other word which would more accurately translate the meaning of "cape"?. We should delete this article and start a new one--Alexis Hellmer 02:26, 12 Octobris 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: ::Meas fontes nunc in pagina addidi. In Stowasser etiam promontorium invenitur, sed lector statim ducitur ad "promunturium". Pagina mea opinione (primum cum stipula) continuanda est. --Alex1011 07:13, 12 Octobris 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: :::1. The Google ratio of promontorium to promunturium is about 75 to 1---which means that on the internet, promontorium is the usual form, and promunturium is rare. If, as some sources suggest, the word comes from minere 'jut, project' (and not from pro + mons, montis), then it's possible that the vowels were indifferent, and all sorts of spellings might be available to reflect the realities of pronunciation, e.g. prom(i/o/u)nt(e/o/u)rium. Unless there's solid evidence that makes promunturium the only acceptable spelling, wouldn't it be best to follow the overwhelming preference of Latin-users worldwide? IacobusAmor 13:37, 12 Octobris 2006 (UTC)

text: :::2. Also, in reference to the Prom(o/u)nt(o/u)rium Septentrionale, which form did Medieval & Renaissance Latinists prefer? What's the traditional word for this particular promontory? IacobusAmor 13:40, 12 Octobris 2006 (UTC)
On vicipaedia 2 : 1 for promunturium (up to now):
Promunturium Cannaveralium

text: en:Promunturium Lacinium
versus
Promontorium Viride
Google:
Promunturium: 1000 versus
Promontorium 75 000
--Alex1011 15:07, 12 Octobris 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: :Re: "On vicipaedia 2 : 1 for promunturium (up to now)":—at the moment, the searchbox ("quaerere") shows that promunturium appears in four articles, but promontorium appears in nine. IacobusAmor 15:15, 12 Octobris 2006 (UTC)
Thesaurus Anglicus Latinus "Smith-Hall" apud "cape" promontorium habet. Mihi videtur in latinitate classica promuntorium/promunturium (ex prominere) et in latinitate seriore vi montis verbi promontorium in usu fuisse. --Alex1011 21:02, 12 Octobris 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  PromUntUrium???
Disputatio:Mare Germanicum

message: Alex1011 aexistimat utrasque paginas contribuendas. Libris consultis, invenio eum rectum habere. Quas enim scripsi de mari Britannici, mari Germanico sane conveniunt. In aliquis tamen planisphaericis invenimus auctores mare Britannicum ad occasum Galliae, et in meridione Hiberniae locare ; quod mare Mela in septentrione Europae locat, Tacitus vero nusquam adludit. Haec diffinitiones non divertunt et sentio paginam de mare Britannico emendendam, licet dicere ab ovo rescribendam, quas autem in pagina ista ad «mare Germanicum» transferendas.
Si adsentiamur, sic faciam.--Verbex 09:26, 14 Octobris 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  De contributione maris Britannicis cum mari Germanici 

message: * Pagina dicit "Electrides Insulae et Suevorum fines in oriente". Plinius scripsit de Electridibus Insulis, id est Anglice "the Amber Islands". Sed locus originis electri est aliquae terrae circum Balticum Mare, id est Lituania et aliae, et haec terrae non sunt insulae sed partes continentis Europae (praeter Gotland insulam), sed tempore Romani Imperii mercatores navigantes procul errore putaverunt eas insulae. Anthony Appleyard 16:23, 11 Novembris 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Electrides Insulae?
Disputatio:Noviodunum

message: Novioduna sunt duo : unum apud Helvetios, quod ibi describitur ; aliud in Gallia Belgica, ubi Calvinus natus est, et hodie Noyon vocatur. Propono nomina minuter reddere, verbi gratia Noviodunum Helveticum, vel Noviodunum Belgicum.--Verbex 18:36, 5 Novembris 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Noviodunum duplex
Disputatio:Chlodovechus I (rex Francorum)

message: Franci Ripuarii colebant praeter Rhenum, circum Aquisgranum. Confiteor vero me Ripuarii in thesauro verborum non invenire. Cui nomini si tale nominativum (id est Ripuarii) tribuamus, concedo Francorum ripuariorum scribendum est. scripta a 17:09, 17 Octobris 2006 Verbex
thread_title:  Francorum Ripuarium 

message: Intendo ex libris X scribere, nam latini auctores sic titulos operum signabant, id est Gregorii Historiae libri decem. Nec possum subito discriminare si solum decimus liber Historiae de Ludovici vitae tracteat (quod potius dubito). scripta a 17:09, 17 Octobris 2006 Verbex
replies: text: Depends are you saying from the tenth book? Or from the ten books? The former might be written like ex libro Xo. The latter ex libris X.--Ioshus (disp) 17:16, 17 Octobris 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: :Exactly. The present wording indicates that the evidence appears in all ten books—which seems like a lot of verbiage for such a small story. IacobusAmor 00:09, 18 Octobris 2006 (UTC)
Vita Ludovici in secundo libro Historiae tractatur.--Verbex 19:12, 20 Octobris 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  "ex libris X" vel "ex libro X"? 

message: Puto Clovis nomen optimum non esse: habemus nomina latina, qua historici ussi sunt. Fortasse Chlodovechus aut Clodoveus meliora nomina sint.--Xaverius 13:55, 19 Septembris 2007 (UTC)
----
"…Ita Thuringos et 596 Alamannos vicit…", error, no ? -- G. Calabria 08:54, 31 Augusti 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Clovis
Disputatio:Decimus Silanus

message: What do you others think of the abreviated praenomen? Normally I've been writing names out in full, and this seems most logical to me. However, the praenominal abreviations were very much standard in ancient times, and in fact, the Romans rarely wrote such names out. So one could make an argument that the abbreviated form is actually superior. --Iustinus 07:42, 18 Octobris 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Mihi Decimus Silanus plus placet, quod tum differentiam inter feminas et vires habemus. --Alex1011 08:47, 18 Octobris 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: :Since this is a Latin project, not a Roman one, we should probably write out the formerly standard abbreviations, just as we prefer arabic numerals to Roman ones (except where they're still standard, as in enumerating monarchs, movies, popes, superbowls, and so on). Part of the in-joke fun of studying Latin is learning things like what we mean when, "a.d. XV Kal. Nov.," we say "s.p.d." to "M. Tullius M. F. M. N. M. Pr. Cor. Cicero"; but since pixels aren't in short supply, we might want to spend a few to help unlearned readers. IacobusAmor 12:33, 18 Octobris 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: ::Fair enough. I had simply followed the practice in an article I recently consulted (M. Porcius Cato maior I think) without looking further. I'll move the page, shall I? Andrew Dalby 09:50, 19 Octobris 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: De Praenomine
Disputatio:Keane

message: latine o'cahain?--Ioshus (disp) 03:04, 19 Octobris 2006 (UTC)
The more correct Latin version would be Cahaenus. That is a Latinization of the original Gaelic. -KedemusKedemus 04:03, 17 Septembris 2007 (UTC)

message: It is OK to Latinize proper names (add Latin endings, change a couple of the letters, etc.), but proper names should not be litterally translated. Tom/Thomas, even though it means twin, should not be translated into the Latin word for twin (geminus). Latinization is the common convention when it comes to names, but literal translations just make things awkward and unnecessarily confusing. -KedemusKedemus 04:03, 17 Septembris 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: To whom are you speaking?--Ioscius (disp) 05:18, 17 Septembris 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Geminus?
Disputatio:Armorica

message: Censeo Armoricam numquam proprie Romanam provinciam fuísse, nisi ut partem Galliae Lugdunensis. Armorica quidem pagina servanda est. Nonne vero qualitas provinciae Romanae huic paginae tollenda? --Verbex 18:01, 19 Octobris 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Armorica pars Galliae Lugdunensis
Disputatio Vicipaediae:Index obstructionum

message: both of these, sorry, UV...are they supposed to be an index of obstructions before 23 Decembris, or "since".
replies: text: sorry if I did not make this clear.
old logs (until 23 Decembris 2004)	new logs (from 23 Decembris 2004 until now)	new logs (from 23 Decembris 2004 until now)
old logs (until 23 Decembris 2004)	interface message                          	log page
Vicipaedia:Bureaucrat log         	MediaWiki:Rightslogtext                    	Specialis:Log/rights
Vicipaedia:Index deletionum       	MediaWiki:Dellogpagetext                   	Specialis:Log/delete
Vicipaedia:Index obstructionum    	MediaWiki:Blocklogtext                     	Specialis:Log/block
Vicipaedia:Index protectionum     	MediaWiki:Protectlogtext                   	Specialis:Log/protect
Vicipaedia:Notatio onerati        	MediaWiki:Uploadlogpagetext                	Specialis:Log/upload

text: Greetings, --UV 22:18, 21 Octobris 2006 (UTC)

message: Is this more supposed to be an index obstructionum?--Ioshus (disp) 22:46, 21 Octobris 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: de nomine
Disputatio:Nomen pontificale

message: Massimo, purtroppo non capisco come leggere "tabula nominum paparum". Che significa? Per favore, scriva una spiegazione?--Ioshus (disp) 14:11, 21 Octobris 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Ho preso la tavola dalle altre wiki. La tabella indica la frequenza (Latine frequentia?) dei diversi nomi utilizzati dai papi, che ne pensi di "tabula frequentiae nominum"--Massimo Macconi 21:13, 21 Octobris 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: :Cosi...erano 21 pape col nome "Iohannes", ma non Iohannes 16 o Iohannes 20? (et ita, latine frequentia)--Ioshus (disp) 21:29, 21 Octobris 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Tabula
Disputatio:Theatrum lyricum

message: Gratia gratia gratis, Massime! GiovaneScuola2006 05:35, 23 Octobris 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Imago "La Scala" 

message: Estne melodrama item vocabulum theatri lyrici? --BiT 04:19, 22 Iunii 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Melodrama
Disputatio:Opus Dei

message: [ replacing one POV by another POV?] --UV 23:00, 23 Octobris 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sure looks like it. Although, I'd agree with the pessima addition =].--Ioshus (disp) 23:38, 23 Octobris 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: :Jean-François scripsit :
replies: text: ::Hanc sententiam adjunxi : "Doctrina hujus institutionis docet omnes homines ad sanctitatem attingere posse si occursum cum Deo in ordinario labore quaerunt", enimvero est haec notio permagna conspicuaque in spiritualitate Operis Dei.
Jean-François scripsit :
Decet quoque de Álvaro del Portillo, successore sancti Iosephmariae, loqui etenim permagnum officium suum fuit in extentio Operis Dei. Causam beatificationis et canonizationis Ecclesia aperuit.
Nonne itidem noxius probrosus contrariusque Operi Dei quando de vituperationibus inimicorum ejus loquitur ? Vituperationes istae saepe nec seriae neque probabiles sunt.
Hanc sententiam etiam legi in hac re : "Id quidem nonnulli vituperabant". Atque qui sunt isti nonnulli ut nollem ?!

text: Si vis, potes facere sicut ego nunc feci: adde    ad sententiam quam dubitas.

text: Sed meminisse oportet: hic facimus encyclopaediam. Si re vera nonnulli disputant vel vituperant, id possumus dicere. Tu etiam, cum hanc paginam amelioras, potes addere citationes et pro et contra. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 19:32, 2 Iulii 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  POV? 

message: Jean-François Escourrou scripsit :
Ita, gratias ago tibi pro hac respontione. Dic quaeso mihi quomodo possum novam rem creare ? Opportet quoque de Álvaro del Portillo loqui.
replies: text: Salve. Ambo te primum lege Vicipaedia:Porta communis; tunc quaere paginam illius nominis in loco ad latus laevus. Imprime "Ire", tum sequere directiones datas ut paginam crees.--Rafaelgarcia 15:20, 3 Iulii 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: rogatio

message: -- Hanc rem ad Disputatio:Iosephus Maria Escrivá movi: ibi praecipue relevat. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 17:32, 1 Iulii 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Nomen
Disputatio:Labacum

message: La fonte per tutte le città europeane cui voci ho scritto oggi si trova qua: http://www.osservatoriolibri.com/luoghi.html
Vi prego, per cortesia: non farmi ad aggiungere quella "footnote" su OGNI pagina che ho fatto! Pazienza ... GiovaneScuola2006 00:48, 24 Octobris 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Nostra culpa, ma si, faremmo ti aggiungerla... Perche credi lo essere una mala idea? Solamente da informazione, a chiunque la legge. Puoi copy/paste http://www.osservatoriolibri.com/luoghi.html.--Ioshus (disp) 03:03, 24 Octobris 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fonte 

message: I observe that the catholic church for the diocesis of Lubjana uses the name Archidioecesis Labacensis. Aemona?--Massimo Macconi 07:49, 3 Februarii 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: True; so does the university (Universitas Labacensis); and I think that words derived from Aemona weren't used much in the past centuries when there was a need to refer to Ljubljana in Latin documents.  Note that there is no continuity between the ancient Aemona (ruined in the 5th century) and the present-day Ljubljana (established in the 13th century), although they are located on the same site. 89.142.136.55 21:31, 30 Augusti 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: :Labacum seems to be much more regular as this site would comfirm. Graesse also chips in with about 10 alternative names (including Labacum and Aemona) as does Hofmann (prefers Labacum, with Emona as an alternative). --Harrissimo 21:42, 30 Augusti 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fons 

message: UV HELP! I see that because of auto-correct settings (j=>i), in lingua Slovenica this capital is spelled Liubliana. This is simply not right, and should not be displayed as such. Is there any way to override the setting? --Ioscius (disp) 03:01, 17 Iulii 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The system should not automatically display j as i, since j is used as a foreign letter; and per our rules we never have a j that needs converting to an i.--Rafaelgarcia 03:11, 17 Iulii 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: :Well... I don't know. I've only had a couple drinks tonight, haud sum ebrius. And I see on the page liubliana and in the wiki markup I see ljubljana. Do you know what's going on if it's not auto-correct? --Ioscius (disp) 03:39, 17 Iulii 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: ::I just have the default settings so things appear as they are to me. --Rafaelgarcia 03:40, 17 Iulii 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: ::::That's a very nice way of saying "I'm sane". I'll remember it for future use :) Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 08:05, 17 Iulii 2009 (UTC)

text: :::I wonder what perverse settings I have then. Either way, one would hope to be able to distinguish between someone's use of j as in jam or jocus and in foreign words. Maybe not. Hence my appeal to UV ;] --Ioscius (disp) 03:51, 17 Iulii 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  auto-correct
Disputatio:Mus (computatralis)

message: Shouldn't it be "qui" instead of "quo" (which I believe is the ablative)? Alexanderr 02:51, 25 Octobris 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No. It is supposed to be ablative. Read it "A mouse is a manual tool by which data is entered into a computer."--Ioshus (disp) 03:00, 25 Octobris 2006 (UTC)

message: Utrumst melius? IacobusAmor 12:11, 25 Octobris 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sine dubio.--Ioshus (disp) 12:17, 25 Octobris 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: :Quid est sine dubio? --Alex1011 14:12, 20 Ianuarii 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Computralis ~ Computatralis?
Disputatio Categoriae:Urbes Europae

message: # (Index deletionum); 23:28 . . UV (Disputatio | conlationes | obstruere) (delevit "Urbes Europaeae": contenta erant: '#REDIRECT Categoria:Urbes Europaeae' (et contributor unicus erat 'GiovaneScuola2006') - was a redirect from the article namespace to a category)
# (Index deletionum); 23:27 . . UV (Disputatio | conlationes | obstruere) (delevit "Disputatio:Urbes Europae": contenta erant: '== Mea maxima culpa! ==Non sapevo che già esistesse quella pagina. I didn't know that that page already existed. Stasera, ci trasferirò tutte le...' (et contributor unicus erat '[[Special:Contri)
Recreating a page that an admin deleted is risky business, Giovane...--Ioshus (disp) 03:45, 25 Octobris 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: :Whoa!  What page are we talking about?  I meant no harm ... Please let's discuss.  GiovaneScuola2006 04:18, 25 Octobris 2006 (UTC)

text: The page I just copied Urbes Europaeae... we do not like redirects from namespace to category.--Ioshus (disp) 11:14, 25 Octobris 2006 (UTC)

text: Lists are different from categories. There should not be any redirect from an article to a category, as the redirect would show up as a blue link (like an existing page) and people would not notice that there the page is actually missing and needs to be written (as would usually be indicated by a red link). Greetings, --UV 19:47, 25 Octobris 2006 (UTC)

message: Friends,
How come under "F", there are some cities listed which do NOT begin with F?  There is no other letter which has this problem.  What went wrong?  GiovaneScuola2006 21:27, 25 Octobris 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It seems that the problem arises due to the use of  instead of .... These  are used for including formulas or the source of other pages. Then, a second thing: I think, we should not use supercategories, please see Vicipaedia:Categoria#Supercategories. --Roland (disp.) 21:44, 25 Octobris 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cities begining with F
Disputatio:Index urbium Italicarum

message: Since the list of cities in Italia is sooo long: Wouldn't it be better to move the list from Italia to Urbes Italici or - maybe better - Index urbium Italicarum or Index urbium Italiae? --Roland (disp.) 18:28, 25 Octobris 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Good idea. --UV 19:34, 25 Octobris 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: :Yes.--Ioshus (disp) 06:56, 9 Aprilis 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Contribuenda
Disputatio:Dyrrachium

message: Is this the same city as Dyrrhachium? Amphitrite 19:41, 26 Octobris 2006 (UTC)

message: Secundum rationem recte scribendi receptam huius oppidi nomen Dyrrhachium scribi oportet.--Irenaeus 22:39, 24 Decembris 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  aliter scribendum est!
Disputatio Categoriae:Estonia

message: Was like that before I got to it. If someone has a moment to clean it up -- otherwise I'll try to get to it. GiovaneScuola2006 08:49, 27 Octobris 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: What languages are out of order? --Roland (disp.) 08:56, 27 Octobris 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Languages out of alphabetical order
Disputatio:Gens

message: Does the image show what the Romans understood by "gentes"? What is a tribus? Is a "gens" an ethinc group? --Roland (disp.) 12:08, 27 Octobris 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Gens and tribus are different concepts: a gens was a 'house', a clan of families "united together by a common name and certain religious rites" (says my dictionary); a tribus, as its name conveniently indicates, was originally one-third of the Roman people, so grouped for political purposes. Tacitus used gentes (pl.) to mean 'non-Roman people, foreigners'; the Vulgate uses it to mean '(foreign) nations'. IacobusAmor 13:14, 27 Octobris 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Imago
Disputatio:Vantania

message: 1. Aside from the tardiness of est, is "Urbs Vantaa numero civium quattuor maxima urbs in Finnia est" legal in Latin? It seems to be Not Quite Right: "With regard to the number of citizens, Vantaa City the four biggest city in Finland is." The Latin construction seen in "four biggest city" turns up in several articles. IacobusAmor 13:01, 27 Octobris 2006 (UTC)
2. Re: Vantania est una ex quattuor commune regionis capitis = 'Vantaa is one of the four with regard to the community of the capital region'? Do you mean ex quattuor communibus = 'of the four communities'? IacobusAmor 19:55, 19 Novembris 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Grammar question