lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Disputatio:Publius Ovidius Naso

message: Prima in linea invenitur "..mortuus inter annos 16/18[1] Tomis", sed ubi "Tomis" est nomen urbis, nonne hic inveniri debet "Tomi" casu locativo? Item eadem in sententia "Sulmone" est locativus Sulmonis.--123.192.69.44 09:34, 21 Augusti 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Nomen Tomi, -orum casum locativum Tomis gignit, sicut Pompeii, -eiorum et Pompeiis. Habemus autem nomen alterum, Tomis, -is, cuius casus ablativus, Tome, fortasse etiam est pro casu locativo. IacobusAmor 11:05, 21 Augusti 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: :Locativum declinationis tertiae et omnium nominum pluralium cum ablativo congruere credo; igitur, nisi fallor, "Sulmone" recte scribitur si casus nominativus est "Sulmo".

text: :Ego sum qui "Tomis" scripsi; e casu nominativo "Tomi" (m.pl. 2 decl.) locativum "Tomis" derivo: id in textibus, ni fallor, reperitur (cf. casu ablativo Statius Silv. 1.2.254 "tristis in ipsis Naso Tomis"). Recte dicis, Iacobe, si a "Tomis" (3 decl.) incipimus, locativum "Tome" possumus creare, sed nullo loco vidi. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 11:20, 21 Augusti 2011 (UTC)

message: Loco laudato (Quintilianus, Institutio Oratoria 10.1.88) vox 'herois' non spectat ad Ovidii opus Epistulae Heroidum vel Heroides (nam aliter Heroisin scripsisset), sed "in herois [sc. versibus]" interpretandum est, i.e. "in hexametris".
Anglice (tr. Butler): "Ovid has a lack of seriousness even when he writes epic".
Vide etiam OLD s.v. herous 2b.
Magrios (disputatio) 18:13, 12 Februarii 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Intellego:  fortasse nimis celere legi.  Recte scribis.  A. Mahoney (disputatio) 13:19, 13 Februarii 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Lascivus quidem in '''herois''' quoque Ovidius"
Disputatio:Anscharius Pistorius

message: * Nomen Oscar est saepe de Anglo-Saxonico Ōsgār, id est ōs (deus religionis antiquae Germanicae) et gār (hasta), et similiter in aliis linguis Germanicis. Et tempore Iulii Caesaris et Ciceronis Germani locuti sunt linguam Protogermanicam, ubi istum nomen esset Ansu-gairaz, quod Romani dicerent Ansugaerus. Anthony Appleyard 10:28, 21 Augusti 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Forma latina nominis "Oscar"
Disputatio:Rodigium

message: Rectus est "Rodigium"; "Rhodigium" est graphia humanista (et humanisti Rhodigini se appellaverunt) sed dictionaria "Rodigium" scribunt. --Achillus 12:33, 26 Augusti 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Per me nihil obstat! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 13:17, 26 Augusti 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: :Nuada mutavit omnia in re, :Categoria:Rhodigium creavit et in disputatione nulla scripsit. Wikipedia:Do not disrupt Wikipedia to illustrate a point? --Achillus 06:49, 2 Septembris 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: ::Nuada rarius in disputationes intervenit! Oportet, Achille, in pagina Nuadae disputationis Nuadam ad hanc disputationem convocare. Sed n.b. necesse est fontes addere pro orthographia "Rodigium" -- et pro "Rhodigium" si habes -- et illa dictionaria, quae "Rodigium" praebent, nominatim citare. Fontibus non iam citatis haud convenit movere. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 08:52, 2 Septembris 2011 (UTC)

text: ::A! sed veniam da. Nunc intellego fontem iam pro hoc nomine citatam, et (si recte distinguo) Nuadam nomen mutavisse sed citationem intactam dimisisse. Id, si re vera fecit, pro certo male fecit! Reverto igitur et egomet in paginam eius nuntium pono. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 09:08, 2 Septembris 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: :::Id nunc feci. Categoriam :Categoria:Rhodigium pro tempore delevi; oportet hanc disputationem ad finem conducere. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 09:17, 2 Septembris 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: ::::Etiam Castiglioni, Mariotti, IL (dictionarium Italiane-Latine) scribit Rodigium. --Achillus 11:59, 2 Septembris 2011 (UTC)
Mi paenitet Nuadam nunquam hic regressum esse post has res dictas; sed quid faciendumst? nisi paginam movere sicut suasisti. Nunc igitur moveo. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 15:38, 9 Septembris 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Movenda: Rodigium neque Rhodigium
Disputatio:Septizonium

message: Censeo "Septizodium" nomen esse communius. An erro? Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 12:25, 28 Augusti 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Et "Septizonium" etiam communius. Lewis et Short "Septizōnĭum (Septemzōdĭum)" dant, sed Oxford Classical Dictionary "Septizodium (or Septizonium)" habet. Lesgles (disputatio) 04:06, 18 Martii 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Movenda
Disputatio:Universitas Indiarum Occidentalium

message: We might not want a fons if it's the natural name of the thing: 'University of XE' = Universitas XL (where XL is a noun in the genitive or an adjective). The dubsig was questioning the use of Indiarum, as that would seem to mean 'Indias', not 'Indies'. (Of course if it's the established term, as it might well be, since Indies is the plural of Indy, which = India, that's fine.) Note that Vicipaedia even at this hour lacks a version of :en:West Indies. IacobusAmor 13:56, 28 Augusti 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: "What we'd really like would be a fons"
Disputatio:Dies memorialis victimarum transphobiae

message: "pro Transgenere" si est res singularis abstracta, aut "pro Transgeneribus" si sunt homines? Grammatica "pro Transgenera" non intellego. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 15:07, 30 Augusti 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Omnis paginae textus--eum legisti?-- latinitate -5 est, non solus titulus.--123.192.69.44 15:22, 30 Augusti 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nomen
Disputatio:Thomas Wolseius

message: Velim in Thomas Wolseius movere (pro hoc nomine fontem nunc citavi). Censeo Wolsa admodum barbarum esse; nescio an Baconus nominativum "Wolsa" (1 decl.) seu "Wolsae" (indecl.) esse voluit.
De Vulsaeo usque adhuc citationem non habemus. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 13:57, 1 Septembris 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Pro Wolsa, sufficit hic locus? "Cromwell postea, ut antecessores Morus atque Thomas Wolsa, causa proditionis patriae accusatus est." Ex hic. IacobusAmor 14:12, 1 Septembris 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: ::Gratias ago: sufficit! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 14:35, 1 Septembris 2011 (UTC)

text: :Pro Vulsaeus, hic fontem habemus. IacobusAmor 14:17, 1 Septembris 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nomen 

message: * Inter annos 1471 et 1476: natus Gippevici
* 10 Martii 1498: presbyter ordinatus
* 1509: decanus Lincolniensis; eleemosynarius regalis et Concilium regalis socius
* 1514: Thomam Morum servus familiaris fecit
* 1515: archiepiscopus Eboracensis et cancellarius Angliae
** 10 Septembris 1515: Leo X papa cardinalem instituitPeter Gwyn, The King's Cardinal, p. 33
* 1516: Obtinuit de Leone papa statum cardinalis-legatus. Proscribit bona ordinum monasticorum et petit officium Pontifex maximus 
* 1518: Episcopus Bathoniensis et Wellensis (in pluralitatem)
* 1522: Dioecesem Bathoniensem et Wellensem deponit 
* 1525: Collegium cardinalis condidit Oxoniae (postea Aedem Christi), collegium maiorem et divem Universitatis Oxonienis
* 1529: Haesitationes et tergiversationes Wolseii, qui noluit papae offensionem, effecit perditionem existimationem regis. Autumni, impulit Anna Bolena Henricum regem mandata ferre contra Thomam Wolseium. Officio cancellarii Angliae dimissus et bonarum suarum privatus est includens domus Aula Alba (vulgo: Whitehall), quam Henricus rex residentia sua fecit loco palatii Vestmonasteriensis.
* 29 November 1530: Obiit de infirmitate abbatiae leicestriensis dum translatus erat in turre Londiniense.
To be continued.--Felix Folio Secundus 08:45, 11 Septembris 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Finis--Felix Folio Secundus 11:50, 24 Septembris 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Chronologia
Disputatio:Moles Xiaolangdi

message: An simplicius "Moles Xiaoliangdi"? Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 14:04, 4 Septembris 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Simplicius, sed melius an non? As is one's custom, one has drafted a couple of short articles to see how they look. We know that Chinese names can easily adapt themselves to Latin morphology because we have Hongcongum, Macaum, Nancinum, Pecinum, Taipeium, Taivania (not Hong Kong, Macau, Nanking, Pekin, Peking, Beijing, Taipei, Taiwan etc.), with attested adjectives hongkongensis, macaensis, nankinensis, pekinensis, taipeiensis, taiwaniensis etc. (Incidentally, note the conflict between C in the nouns and K in the adjectives; but that's a question for another day.) So the pattern is clear: a Latin adjective = a Chinese noun + ensis (sometimes with an alteration in the stem to support Latin phonology). Because most of these adjectives have been coined in the most recent decades, we can grant that the pattern is productive (a technical term & concept in linguistics), with implications for all. IacobusAmor 14:31, 4 Septembris 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: :We have the general rule "noli fingere", don't invent. The adjective here is invented. The pattern in other languages is not to invent an adjective (cf. :en:Xiaolangdi Dam), so I don't see why we need to do so here. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 14:42, 4 Septembris 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: ::So I moved to "Moles Xiaolangdi". Hope that's OK Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 11:45, 20 Septembris 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nomen
Disputatio:Orchestra Urbis Granatensis

message: Formula "Orchestra Urbs Granata" fere nihil significat, nisi fallor. Si nomen fingere licet, fortasse "Orchestra Urbis Granatensis"? Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 10:39, 16 Septembris 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Nomen Hispanicum est Orquesta Ciudad de Granada, quod Anglice in speciem est 'City of Granada Orchestra', non "Orchestra of the City of Grenada." Nomen rei enim est "City of Grenada," ut in locutione Navis Urbs Berolinum (Anglice 'SS City of Berlin') nomen rei est "City of Berlin." Ergo similia habemus exempla: Vehemur in Urbe Berolino 'We'll sail in the City of Berlin ' et, ut videtur, Audiemus Urbem Granatam 'We'll hear the City of Granada'. Tua locutio opinabilis, Orchestra Urbis Granatensis, Hispanice fortasse  erit Orquesta de la Ciudad de Granada. Quid dicis, Xaveri? IacobusAmor 12:45, 16 Septembris 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: :Similarly, the article itself cites the Auditorium Manuel de Falla, 'the Manuel de Falla Auditorium' (e.g., "Let's go to the de Falla"), not Auditorium Manuelis de Falla, 'Manuel de Falla's Auditorium' (e.g., "Lets' go to de Falla's"). IacobusAmor 12:57, 16 Septembris 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: ::Hic autem Latine loquimur. Latine, nisi fallor, "Orchestra Urbs Granata" significat aut "Urbs granulata, nomine Orchestra" aut ... fere nihil. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 14:03, 16 Septembris 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nomen
Disputatio:Praemium principum Asturiarum

message: "Praemium Principis Asturiarum"? Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 21:10, 16 Septembris 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Et nunc principissae (:es:Premios Princesa de Asturias). Lesgles (disputatio) 04:48, 28 Novembris 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: :Ergo melius "Praemium principum Asturiarum"; quidam enim in hac enumeratione manu principis masculi laureati sunt, alii manu feminae, sed princeps est adiectivum utriusque generis. Nos nomen officiale non creamus (neque possumus) sed descriptionem utilem.  Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 08:48, 28 Novembris 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: ::Assentior! Lesgles (disputatio) 03:01, 29 Novembris 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Titulus
Disputatio:Fluctivagatio

message: It would be good to join this article with la:velitabulatio as both seem to be talking about the same, namely surfing. NoychoH 20:22, 18 Septembris 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I have responded at Disputatio:Velitabulatio. -- Ioscius  ∞ 08:48, 19 Septembris 2011 (UTC)
Hadn't seen this article before. "Lapsus" has other senses, and we now have an article about its most obvious sense (see Casus (descensus)). This one should perhaps move to an unambiguous pagename such as "Lapsus (ludus)" or "Lapsus super fluctus"? Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 13:08, 20 Martii 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: merge
Disputatio:Meatus vocis

message: "Non linguisticae sed phoneticae stipula. Sed de stipulorum notis nihil scio." [Neander.]
replies: text: :Phonetics is a branch of linguistics—but now that Mattie has invented a nota for it, let's by all means use it! IacobusAmor 00:05, 19 Septembris 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: :: :D I feel useful.
replies: text: :: I'm a bit concerned, though, about Meatus vocis not appearing in Categoria:Stipulae Phoneticae ... I'm afraid I did something wrong. It was there at some point, but then it disappeared. Do you know anything about this? What I've done so far is write the code for the formula and Categoria:Stipulae Phoneticae; then I added my stipula to Vicipaedia:Stipulae. Is there a step I missed? Mattie 00:44, 19 Septembris 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: :::I have never got to grips with this system. You could try reading the explanation by A. Mahoney at Vicipaedia:Taberna#Nova stipula desiderata, or just asking Amahoney directly, because she has evidently managed to work this out! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 11:47, 19 Septembris 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: ::::Hmm... Disciplinam A. 'Mahoneae' perfecte imitatus esse videor... si causam problematis non ipse invenio, eam quidem rogabo. Gratias pro tuo tempore, Andree! Mattie 21:36, 19 Septembris 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: :::::And yet "Stipulae Phoneticae" appears correctly at the foot of this page (if you have chosen to display hidden categories). What can be wrong? Another good adviser might be Usor:UV. He understands stipulae, I think ... Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 11:59, 20 Septembris 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: ::::::This looks fine, but -- like everybody else -- I don't see why Meatus vocis isn't in the category page.  Love the icon, though!  I'll keep looking.  A. Mahoney 12:03, 21 Septembris 2011 (UTC)
I updated the page (changed nothing, just saved),  and now it is in the category list.  This isn't entirely logical, I admit, but I've seen other index-type things behave this way in the past.  So, congratulations to Mattie:  you've made a successful stipula!  A. Mahoney 14:28, 21 Septembris 2011 (UTC)

text: Hurray, thank you for helping out! Mattie 15:14, 21 Septembris 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Phonetica + linguistica
Disputatio:Quadrum latum

message: Pro "screen," Morgan dat "quadrum" "album" que, generaliter adiectivo "visifico" secuto. Pro "wide," "amplum" aut "latum" bene meis oculis videntur. Quid igitur dicitis de "quadro lato" pro widescreen? Mattie 23:14, 20 Septembris 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Is "visorium-amplium" grammatically correct anyway? [me excuses, mi Mattie, sed commentarium tuum non plene legi] Amplium does not even appear in my dictionary -- it only has amplius as an adverb and amplus, -a, -um as an adjective.--Xaverius 10:47, 8 Februarii 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: :Yes, and the hyphen was just the cherry on the Latinity cake! (-; Mattie 16:41, 8 Februarii 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: "Widescreen"
Disputatio:Vegetarismus

message: iura animalium|iruibus aminalis
iruibus et aminalis errores esse visus est. --Hans Eo 17:53, 22 Septembris 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Correxi ... sicut tu ipse corrigere potes. Gratias agimus! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 18:37, 22 Septembris 2011 (UTC)

message: Cur pagina mota sit, incertus sum. Iam habuimus fontem orthographiae "vegetarismus": fontem alterum nuper addidi. Tres ergo habemus inter dictionarios Latinitatis hodiernae recentissimos. Certe melius erit fontem textualem, fortasse scientificum, reperire, sed usque adhuc non repperimus. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 15:16, 28 Aprilis 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Primo me nescioqua alucinatione captum errasse credidi. At nunc me quadam editione obsoleta eiusdem lexici (LHL) usum esse intellego, nam lemma de quo hic agitur ita praebetur: "Vegetarismus, m victus proprius frugivororum, m [NLL p.391,1]; victus more frugivororum, m [NLL p.391,1]." Itaque de falso fonte agi temere iniusteque credidi. Mea maxima culpa! Neander (disputatio) 17:45, 28 Aprilis 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: :Atque ego de aliis editionibus huius dictionarii nihil scio. Haud "maxima" culpa, mi Neander: res enim est minimi momenti! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 16:05, 29 Aprilis 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  De pagina mota
Disputatio Categoriae:Mathematici saeculi 19

message: You're proposing to delete this category. The equivalent category in the English wikipedia has 369 entries. Have you proposed deleting that category? If so, it might be useful to know here what responses you got there! IacobusAmor 19:04, 26 Septembris 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Categories as tags, rather than as a hierarchically ordered system
Disputatio:Negev

message: “dinae centesimae” minime intelligo: decem centum, forsitan? [Scripsit usor sine nomine]
replies: text: Fortasse mendum pro locutione denae centesimae, sed fortasse melius decima pars (Anglice one-tenth, 10 percent). IacobusAmor 16:35, 27 Septembris 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: "Dinae centesimae"
Disputatio:Mactridae

message: Neander, thanks for fixing the text, especially the typo luculent- for lutulent-! A couple of questions. ¶ For your solum, the original English is the technical term substrate, so why wouldn't the Latin substratum be better? ¶ You've changed examples of valve, -is (n.) to the classical valva, -ae (f.). The name of the taxonomic class Bivalvia (n. pl.) implies bivalve, -is (n.), which in turn might suggest valve, -is (n.)—a form that examples discoverable in scientific publications via Google attest. (Search for valvibus.) Whether the correct term in biology is valva, -ae or the attested valve, -is remains to be resolved. Maybe professional malacologists will make themselves known here and resolve this question. IacobusAmor 13:31, 29 Septembris 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I think bivalvis (adj., n.pl. bivalvia) might stand to valva -ae as bilinguis (adj.) stands to lingua. But, I readily admit, I don't know. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 13:56, 29 Septembris 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: : I didn't know that substratum is here a technical term. To tell the truth, I believed that you had put an English learned word to its obvious Latin clothes, as it's so easy, for a learned Anglophone, to do. If solum will not be respected by Naturwissenschaftler in this context, it must of course be changed back. Though substratum would probably have denoted 'litter' or something like that for Cicero, I confess that I have myself, unclassically, used substratum as a philosophical term. ¶ As Andrew already explained, res cui binae valvae sunt is res bivalvis, etc. Valve is of course a shrewd back-formation for those who know their professional subject better than Latin derivational morphology. Neander 17:22, 29 Septembris 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Miscellanea
Disputatio:Shakesperius Latinus

message: :"Annos 1751–1756, Gulielmi Shakesperii opera Latine multum numerabatur Gulielmo Hawkins, Professor Poeticae Universitatis Oxoniensis."
An quis aliis verbis explicare potest? Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 13:40, 30 Septembris 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Non intellego ...
Disputatio:Elizabetha I (regina Angliae)

message: In nummis suis, Latine scriptis, nomen Elizabeth habet (sicut lemma nostrum) sed haec forma Latinitatis haud olet. Vide imaginem in pagina nostra (sed minime "officialem") cum nomine Elisabetha. In documentis an Elisabetha, anne Elizabetha reperitur? Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 12:26, 3 Octobris 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Iam "Elizabetha" in fontibus coaevis confirmavi. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 14:51, 13 Iunii 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nomen 

message: Nonne Grenovicum caso locativo utitur, id est ' grenovici' Terrymonkey (disputatio) 13:16, 20 Iunii 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Hoc correxi. Gratias tibi ago! Lesgles (disputatio) 13:33, 20 Iunii 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Grenovicum 

message: The page on Elizabeth l uses frugalitas for economy. Most of the dictionaries at the bottom of the Wiktionary page for that word list economy as a translation of frugalitas, but, I believe, in the old fashioned value positive sense of the word, synonymous with 'economy, temperance, thriftiness, frugality; and in gen., worth, virtue (the Gr. σωφροσύνη; class.). Quoted from Charlton Lewis.
Not in the modern value neutral sense. I propose economia, or to change the clause to ' the country was poor'.
Ideas welcome Terrymonkey (disputatio) 14:17, 20 Iunii 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Latine tibi respondeo, Terrymonkey, ut alii aequaliter colloquium intellegant. Recte dicis! Legere possumus paginam "Oeconomica", ubi usum hodiernum "oeconomiae, oeconomicae" etc. videbimus. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 14:47, 20 Iunii 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Economy in Latin
Disputatio:Garri Kasparov

message: qui sequuntur removi e pagina. An relevant? Si sic, oportet in textu sive in rubricis explicare. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 14:59, 5 Octobris 2011 (UTC)
* The Other Russia, Civic Coalition for Democracy – Official site
* Другая Россия – Official site
*  http://namarsh.ru/ Сайт «Марш несогласных»] – March of the Discontented
Sorry, Jondel, I didn't realise that you only started the page today. If you're still expanding it and wish to put these links back on the page, please do so! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 15:04, 5 Octobris 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Mea culpa, me paenitet. I will work on this later.--Jondel 11:40, 6 Octobris 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: :No problem, Jondel, and feel free to re-include those links if they are useful. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 15:43, 6 Octobris 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: ::Sitibus non oportet hic esse. Gratias.Vale.--Jondel 12:33, 7 Octobris 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nexus politicos ...
Disputatio:Vincentius Monti

message: The name actually is Vincenzo Monti, and not Vincentius Monti, otherwise in the en.wiki the article should be named a ridiculous "Vince Mountains", and so on...
I'm not familiar with the la.wiki name guidelines, but please discuss and rename, if agreed.
Best regards, 
Accurimbono
replies: text: Thanks for your interest. This isn't special to Vicipaedia: it's been normal in Latin writing, ever since medieval times, to adopt the Latin form of forenames that happen to have a Latin form. Different languages handle these things in different ways; this happens to be what Latin does.

text: Our guideline can be read in English at Vicipaedia:De nominibus propriis/en, but this particular case needn't depend on our guideline. As with many other 19th century people, Vincenzo Monti's name had a Latin form as well as an Italian one. The Latin form can be seen, for example, in this document of 1819. Having found it, I'll cite it in a footnote. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 11:13, 6 Octobris 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vincenzo Monti
Disputatio:Proelium apud Monam

message: Secundum Vicipaediam Cambricam atque saltem unam commentationem nostram, Mona nomen est insulae quae Anglice :en:Anglesey appellatur. Hoc nomen autem in nostra commentatione de "Isle of Man" usurpatur. An redirectionem debeamus delere, ut pro "Anglesey" nomine "Mona" utamur? Mattie 19:00, 7 Octobris 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Delevi. Vas-y ... Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 19:12, 7 Octobris 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: :Merci à toi, comme toujours. Et c'est déjà fait (; Mattie 19:14, 7 Octobris 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  De nomine "Mona" 

message: Quae appellatio Latina recte adhibeatur pro Anglico "governor," quaeso? "Legatus"ne? Mattie 19:04, 7 Octobris 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Fuit "legatus pro praetore". Si id prima sententia dicis, potes postea simpliciter "legatus" dicere ... Sed fortasse alii aliter censent ...? Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 19:16, 7 Octobris 2011 (UTC)

text: Et vide categoriam :Categoria:Legati Britanniae provinciae. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 19:19, 7 Octobris 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: :Si "governor" est "legatus pro praetore," nonne haec categoria (ubi ego "legatus" primo inveni) transnominare debeat? Mattie 19:22, 7 Octobris 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Governor of Britain"
Disputatio Categoriae:Dalmatia

message: Quomodo est Dalmatia "Terra Italiae"? (scio, olim habuit supercategoriam "Italia" ... etiam de ea re volui quaerere).
Pro certo, pars Dalmatiae olim sub gubernio Italiae fuit; sed ea res historica fortasse melius in paginis respectivis categorizare oportet (aut categoriis historico-politicis usis, quas usque adhuc non habemus). Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 13:40, 10 Octobris 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Terra _historica_ Italiae. Categoriam novam creavi et hanc categoriam movi. --Achillus 14:01, 10 Octobris 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  De supercategoria