lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Disputatio:Mate

message: I made some changes as I was converting this to real Latin.
* Mate is an infusum; tea is also an infusum, but mate is not thea. We have no justification, I believe, to call it thea.
replies: text: :You'll find a reference (though nothing more) to "Thea paraguaiensis (Matté)" at this site from 1848. IacobusAmor (disputatio) 03:46, 4 Octobris 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: ::That's a great find, Iacobe! Then maybe we should move the page to that name. What do you think? Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 21:04, 5 Octobris 2021 (UTC)
* As far as I know, mate is not a Latin word and herba matis does not exist as a Latin phrase. But maybe someone will find them in a Latin pharmaceutical work?
* I didn't understand "plerumque his amarus potus est". Please correct if necessary.

text: :I'd guess the attempted idea, the words being interpreted completely out of context (I haven't attempted to read the article), is "it's usually drunk unsweetened," but you never know. IacobusAmor (disputatio) 15:51, 3 Octobris 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: ::Thanks, Iacobe. I agree, and I think my text gets this across. I had to leave it unfinished and eat my dinner, hence it was still hard to read, but better (with luck) after my next edit. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 18:26, 3 Octobris 2021 (UTC)
* The illustration surely shows a calabash-shaped metal cup, not a calabash? Or is there a calabash inside it? If so, that needs to be explained. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 15:29, 3 Octobris 2021 (UTC)

text: :No, I was wrong there: the reflection on the surface confused me. I have changed the image to one that is possibly easier to interpret. Is that OK? Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 18:42, 3 Octobris 2021 (UTC)
Yes, of course, it is not necessary to call all drinks from the leaves "tea" (I should not have added the category "tea"). Demetrius Talpa (disputatio) 17:48, 3 Octobris 2021 (UTC)

text: Thanks to both of you. Following a clue in en:wiki I was able to cite a relevant article, so I think, finally, our page is OK now. Hope you agree! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 18:52, 3 Octobris 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: :The claim that the Tupi and Guarani invented or discovered this drink is perhaps bold, but, considering the recentness of human habitation in southern South America, not as bold as it would be in other regions. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 19:14, 3 Octobris 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edidi
Disputatio:Ismail Qemali

message: I removed the section "honores": Vicipaedia doesn't generally do this. Honours that are notable should be explained in the biography, with a footnoted source.
I replaced the infobox with our regular one. We have agreed not to accept new infoboxes that require local input. That's the old method, and would be a big step backwards for Vicipaedia.
I replaced the succession box with navboxes for Albanian prime ministers and foreign ninisters. I know that the navbox for foreign ministers does not go back as far as Ismail Qemali yet! Now that we have this article, I think that the navbox should be extended to cover all foreign ministers. Anyone could do that, and if necessary I will do it. Succession boxes give dates, but the dates are notable and should be in the text anyway. Some succession boxes exist here on Vicipaedia, but they require more coding in the edit window and more maintenance: again, they are the old method. Navboxes are nearly always better.
What readers of Vicipaedia want, according to our current consensus, is to read good Latin text with well-cited sources. I say this because the text is not yet in good Latin, and is very long. It will take you a long time to convert this text. If you are prepared to go on working on it, Klein Muçi, that's fine, but be aware of the effort you will have to devote to it! If you do wish to do this, add the formula {{In progressu}} at the top. If not, it might be best to shorten the text. It's your choice. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 17:35, 3 Octobris 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  A few edits 

message: It's a very good idea in principle to quote a source text in the original language -- at least I hope it is, because I often do it myself -- but this quotation seems to me unusually long. Could we either give a Latin translation, or shorten this quotation to the most important details, or maybe both? Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 18:10, 3 Octobris 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Greek quotation in footnote
Disputatio Formulae:Penna

message: Hello, @Andrew Dalby! Can I help you with the importation you're trying to make here, assuming it is from FrWiki? I happened to see it through the nuper mutata. - Klein Muçi (disputatio) 12:53, 5 Octobris 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks, Klein Muçi, but I think it's done! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 13:01, 5 Octobris 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: :@Andrew Dalby, it's good as it is. FrWiki uses it through the invocation of a module though but the module page type should be changed before being used, else it will give you an error and won't let you save. If you want to go through that way, tell me and I can show how it is done, maybe for future situations (only admins can change page types). If not, it's good as it is. - Klein Muçi (disputatio) 13:05, 5 Octobris 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: ::I don't see any need. Fr:wiki had a good idea but it's better still if we keep it simple. Wait and see. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 13:08, 5 Octobris 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Help
Disputatio:Harrius Potter et Ordo Phoenicis

message: * Ephemeris est fons tituli Latini, et eam indicavi; sed nescio, an hoc satis sit, ut pagina Latine nominetur. Demetrius Talpa (disputatio) 18:00, 7 Octobris 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Fons tituli Latini
Disputatio:Vigilia Natalis Christi

message: "Vesper Sanctus" in Harry Potter does not mean Christmas Eve, but Halloween. Furthermore, there's no evidence of "Vesper Sanctus" being used prior to the 21st century, and no evidence of its connection to Christmas Eve. This article should be renamed Vigilia Christi Natalis. Navarretedf (disputatio) 17:45, 13 Octobris 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: I took "vigilia" as plural and therefore gave it a plural verb. But I realise it can be taken as singular or plural. So others can decide If I did a good thing or not! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 19:41, 13 Octobris 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: :Both Cassells (1968) and Traupman (2007) say it's singular. IacobusAmor (disputatio) 19:59, 13 Octobris 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vesper Sanctus?
Disputatio:Basilica Sancti Gavini, San Proto and San Gianuario

message: Nunc Basilica Sancti Gavini, Sancti Proti, et Sancti Ianuarii. Melius Basilica Sanctorum Gavini, Proti, [et] Ianuarii? IacobusAmor (disputatio) 10:33, 14 Octobris 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Nomen
Disputatio:Colles ad Velinum

message: Inter categorias celatas numerantur "Pages with maps," sed tabulas geographicas non videmus. Ubi sunt? IacobusAmor (disputatio) 16:51, 15 Octobris 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Intra capsam reperis quando in verba "Tabula aut despectus" imprimis. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 08:58, 16 Octobris 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: "Pages with maps"
Disputatio:Namibogenius confusus

message: Ait Andreas: "I would have liked "Namibio-", but "Namibo-" seems to be what the sources say. I think we should be moved to "Homo confusus", incidentally)"
replies: text: Indeed, and since the holotype is from Namibia, it's obvious that confusion reigns! :D IacobusAmor (disputatio) 16:46, 16 Octobris 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: LOL
Disputatio:My Hero Academia

message: "Boku no hero est manga Shōnen (Iaponice: ad pueros destinatus)" aut "Boku no hero est manga ad pueros destinatus (Iaponice: shōnen)"? 201.21.235.224 17:29, 25 Octobris 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  " ... est Manga Shonen..;"
Disputatio:Insulae Palauenses

message: The species epithet palauensis is well attested across a nontrivial range of lifeforms, including:—
replies: text: a monocot (Hydriastele) among the Arecaceae

text: a monocot (Ponapea) among the Arecaceae

text: a dicot (Peperomia) among the Piperaceae

text: a dicot (Horsfieldia) among the Myristicaceae

text: a dicot (Bikkia) among the Rubiaceae

text: a green alga (Cladophoropsis) among the Boodleaceae

text: a sea cucumber (Actinopyga) among the Holothuriidae

text: a coral (Coelastrea) among the Merulinidae

text: a coral (Goniastrea) among the Merulinidae

text: a reptile (Eutropis) among the Scincidae

text: a snail (Assiminea) among the Assimineidae

text: a crab (Enosteoides) among the Porcellanidae

text: a weevil (Phloeotrypetus) among the Curculionidae

text: a beetle (Brontispa) among the Chrysomelidae

text: a cricket (Duolandrevus) among the Gryllidae

text: an ant (Leptanilla) among the Formicidae

text: a hoverfly (Dissoptera) among the Syrphidae

text: a fish (Doboatherina) among the Atherinidae

text: a reptile (Eutropis) among the Scincidae

text: a bird (Megazosterops) among the Zosteropidae
—not to mention several subspecies epithets. And that's just the masculine & feminine genera. Among the neuters, described as palauense, we have a bacterium (Mycobacterium), a dinoflagellate (Spiniferodinium), an arboreal crab (Parasesarma), a beetle (Ceresium), a blackfly (Simulium), and several other genera, including a mammal (the bat Emballonura). Ergo, Insulae Palauenses could be a respectable name. IacobusAmor (disputatio) 12:34, 29 Octobris 2021 (UTC)

text: We could do that, and it's definitely a handy, declinable phrase to use in our text. On the other hand, if the common name in many languages is "Palau", we can just use "Palau" in Latin too. Easy to read and pronounce. You can actually find "Palau" in the Acta Sanctae Sedis, but as yet I have only found it there in Italian text, not in Latin text. Anyway I'm moving the category at last. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 15:36, 5 Novembris 2021 (UTC)

text: I have now edited the text, chasing out Belavia and making intermittent use of your "insulae Palauenses". Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 15:54, 5 Novembris 2021 (UTC)

text: I also agree with changing the name to Insulae Palauenses and have the article begin thus:
replies: text: : Insulae Palauensesut adiectivum in nominibus biologicis utitur sive Palau sive lingua vernaculari Belau est parva...

text: --PastelKos (disputatio) 12:20, 21 Novembris 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Nomen  insularum
Disputatio:Raptus

message: Haud bene paginam feci nec scio, quomodo bona facienda sit, sed redirectio ad stuprum hic impossibilis est (nam nexus huc ducentes non de eo sunt). Demetrius Talpa (disputatio) 20:09, 1 Novembris 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, pagina discretiva est bona, sed raptus = 'a tearing off, rending away; a carrying off, abduction, rape ' (Cassell's), et Sabinae raptae Anglice = "The Rape of the Sabine Women." IacobusAmor (disputatio) 21:40, 1 Novembris 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: de redirectione
Disputatio:Ioannes Raius

message: * See  and 
"Nutlea Nigra" and "Magna Raines" can both be found in The Place-Names of Essex but i do not have page references. "Magna Raines" can also be found in the Cambridge Dictionary of English Place-Names on p78. References to Nutlea Nigra can be found in other books on Google Books. --JimKillock (disputatio) 17:48, 11 Novembris 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Braintree and Black Notley: Magna Raines and Nutlea Nigra
Disputatio Formulae:Capsa taxinomica/doc

message: You've got an extra in here: "Experiri oportet in in subpaginis." IacobusAmor (disputatio) 20:54, 11 Novembris 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: @IacobusAmor, thanks! Fixed. - Klein Muçi (disputatio) 20:57, 11 Novembris 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: in in
Disputatio:Status regni

message: Lesgles, you changed "[[prima Europa moderna|primam Europam modernam]]"—which perhaps could better have been [[nova Europa moderna|novam Europam modernam]]?—to "primum [[aevum modernum]]" ('the first modern age'?). This may or may not be a distinction without a difference, but 'early modern Europe' is a concept that'll someday want to have its own article in Vicipaedia. IacobusAmor (disputatio) 16:33, 13 Novembris 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Early modern Europe
Disputatio:Lingua Prussica

message: An pagina protecta est? Non possum linguam Borussicam huc movere (secundum Gesnerum, fontem unicum citatum). Demetrius Talpa (disputatio) 11:56, 14 Novembris 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Non protecta erat; historiam autem habuit quattuor fere editionum (sed nullo momento!) Paginam nunc delevi: move ergo sicut vis, Demetri. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 13:35, 14 Novembris 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: De protectione
Disputatio Categoriae:Eruditio vulgaris

message: Duas categorias pro unam habemus (hanc et :Categoria:Scientia popularis), sed pagina principalis iam secundum fontem ad tertium nomen mota est. Puto ambas nunc coniungendas esse in :Categoria:Gentilicii mores. Demetrius Talpa (disputatio) 23:08, 15 Novembris 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Gentilicii mores
Disputatio:Lacus Lemannus

message: Lemannus is a proper name. In french lac léman would be a pleonasm, although widely used. In latin it might be adequate to drop "lacus"? [Scripsit 2001:171B:227C:5680:8926:95D0:C2F6:CA5D.]
replies: text: Julius Caesar called it Lacus Lemannus (see footnote 1, where it's in the ablative as lacu Lemanno). Who are we to correct him? IacobusAmor (disputatio) 21:00, 21 Novembris 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Lemma
Disputatio:David Humius

message: What is "qs."? is it perhaps supposed to be "q.s.", that is, ?
Using abbreviations is definitely cool, because it makes you look really smart. And it also saves you a second or two of your oh, so valuable time. 
But, except for the most common abbreviations, it is also, in a sense, disrespectful to the reader. (Or so it seems to me, at any rate.) Toddcs (disputatio) 14:00, 1 Novembris 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree, although it is not easy to decide what abbreviations are “common”. To solve the problem at the root we can use . E.g.

text: * 

text: *: ↳

text: *  Sen., Ep., 87, 5.

text: *: ↳  Sen., Ep., 87, 5.

text: * 73.5 

text: *: ↳ 73.5

text: --Grufo (disputatio) 18:09, 1 Novembris 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: ::I agree with Toddcs. Furthermore, people often misuse abbreviations; they commonly deploy cf. (or in parts of Europe, cfr.) 'compare' when they actually mean v. 'see'. IacobusAmor (disputatio) 20:49, 1 Novembris 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  "ex singulis ideis qs. 'mons' et 'aureus' composita est"
Disputatio:Putridum mare

message: Sed limen non est nomen masculinum. IacobusAmor (disputatio) 14:57, 8 Decembris 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Limen (discretiva) et limen (sinus) videas. Limen, liminis generis neutrius, limen, limenis masculini, nam λιμήν est Graecus, "portus" et "stagnum". Ipse diu dubitabam et gratias ago, quod correctione tua distinguere coegisti. Demetrius Talpa (disputatio) 15:08, 8 Decembris 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: :Hoc vocabulum limen, -enis non invenitur in Ainsworth (1837), in L&S (1879), in White's (1928), in Cassell's (1968), in Traupman (2007). Res aliquantulum inusitata videtur! IacobusAmor (disputatio) 15:18, 8 Decembris 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: ::Nusquam vocabulum utile est, nisi litora Ponti Euxini describere temptas. Proxima sunt lacuna et aestuarium, sed in lacunas raro fluvii magni effunduntur, aestuaria raro longo vallo harenoso (lingua terrae) a mari paene separata sunt. Demetrius Talpa (disputatio) 15:36, 8 Decembris 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: :::Exstat et toponymum Leucos Limen ("sinus albus") ad oram Maris Rubri. Iacobus recte dicit: hoc vocabulum, quamquam nonnullis nominibus geographicis adhibetur, a lexicographis Latinis fere omnibus oblitum est! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 09:33, 9 Decembris 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: ::::Et Calos Limen urbs Taurica (Hofmann, Vicidatum). Demetrius Talpa (disputatio) 00:59, 10 Decembris 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Verba "maximus paludis Maeotidis limen"
Disputatio:Limen (sinus)

message: Vide verba in limine portus (non "in limene portus") apud Vergilium. Nomen limen, -inis non est masculinum. IacobusAmor (disputatio) 15:09, 8 Decembris 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: "In limine portus" Vergilianum est "in introitu in portum" (cf. hanc translationem· "at the very entrance of the haven"), non in "sinu generis λιμήν Ponti Euxini". Demetrius Talpa (disputatio) 15:17, 8 Decembris 2021 (UTC)

text: P.S. Sed -e- breve habet ("limĕnis"), hic error meus erat. Demetrius Talpa (disputatio) 15:20, 8 Decembris 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: De lemmate ("Limen (-ēnis, m.")
Disputatio:Scotti

message: Just in case the anonymous editor with an interest in the languages of Scotland sees this -- 
replies: text: In general, on all the Wikipedias and certainly on this one, anonymous edits that might appear to have a sort-of-nationalist agenda and are made without discussion are almost certain to be reverted. The way to succeed with a change of that kind is to explain and discuss it.

text: The reason I have been reverting these changes is not just that: it's because Latin is an international language and Vicipaedia is an international resource. If we give foreign names for things at all, alongside Latin ones, we will want to give them in a language that is both relevant to the subject and widely known by potential readers. Scots fills the first of those requirements but not the second. English (much as some of us might regret it) fills both.

text: So if a particular article that lists foreign names comes under that sort of attack, and no consensus seems to be possible, the shortest way will be to remove all the foreign names from the initial sentence, just leaving the Latin. There's always plenty of room in following paragraphs for various names with etymologies and explanation in Latin. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 10:03, 12 Decembris 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Just in case
Disputatio:Monstrum lacus Nesae

message: Nesa (vel Nisa etc.) fluminis (et lacus) nomen Latinum est (Orbis Latinus; cf. Adamnanum in textu); originis, ut videtur, Celticae, vel aliae, sed non tam clarae. Unde haec de lacu Agnetis? Facete est, sed cuiusnam Agnetis? Demetrius Talpa (disputatio) 16:40, 12 Decembris 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Nessie esse nomen (Anglicum) per ludibrium pro Agnete datum dicitur, sed fiant novae investigationes! IacobusAmor (disputatio) 18:04, 12 Decembris 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: de lacu
Disputatio:Evangelus Moutsopoulos

message: Care 2a02:587:cc3c:5b2:c095:d289:ad37:501e, utens ignote, June non est vocabulum Latinum, et homo mortius non est, sed fuit. IacobusAmor (disputatio) 14:43, 14 Decembris 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: "June"
Disputatio:Volodimiria (Ucraina)

message: Cur non Volhyniensis, Jafaz carissime? Etiam in situ urbis proprio Volhyniensis, et in Vicidatis. Demetrius Talpa (disputatio) 19:38, 15 Decembris 2021 (UTC) — Inveni, cur. Demetrius Talpa (disputatio) 22:05, 15 Decembris 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Volodimiria Volhyniensis
Disputatio:Statio laophoriorum

message: De: "(Ipsi "dependens in" desidero, quamquam cum "a", et etiam aliis methodis, quod in lexicis notavit, quoque euntur. De nexibus internis aedificii et adi. industriae, referebam ad ipsud "bus shelter" et "...in statione "activa"." "Industria" ut hodie praeclara est, ut in temporibus antiquis item non est, nisi fallor...)"
*1. Re "2a": Neander told us to spell it out.
* 2. "Dependens in" sounds weird: basically, the verb dependere means 'hang down from' (which according to Cassell's wants a or ex, not in). Alternatively, Cassell's has the idiom "in re (or homine) positum or situm esse." Other idioms for this idea may be more common.
* 3. "Nexus interni" still works, but it's obsolete & inefficient, having been superseded by "" years ago. IacobusAmor (disputatio)
replies: text: Now when I look up this word again, seems like I've lost some memories with time, hehe. Yes, my Nordstedt's la-sv also mentions dependere (verb type 2) a re, where this verb has in this context a figurative meaning. It also mentions pendere 2 [ex/in] re. Also, my sv-la dictionary, whith dependere excluded, mentions a couple examples, like pendere [ex/in] re as well, and the same idiom you mentioned. - Donatello (disputatio) 18:44, 16 Decembris 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Three things
Disputatio:Corpus humanum

message: Klein, why are you replacing the (new) NexInt formula with the (old) "Nexus interni" wording? IacobusAmor (disputatio) 01:57, 20 Decembris 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry, I also remove it everywhere, it is broken and does not function as a heading (does not allow opening the article in this place), and what advantages is not clear.  Demetrius Talpa (disputatio) 07:13, 20 Decembris 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: :@IacobusAmor, because it doesn't provide any added benefit beside removing the edit section possibility for that section. We've talked together about that here. I don't agree with its use personally but I'm not removing it everywhere. At least not intentionally. I only removed it here because I wrote the article myself and was one of the many small modifications I was doing while dealing with it. I believe I removed it when I was dealing with the links in that section and I got frustrated that the edit link "kept disappearing" or that I kept losing track of what I wanted to edit when I had to edit the whole page or the closest section to it.

text: :But for what my words are worth I really believe you shouldn't use that template at all. Like Demetrius says, it's technically broken with no added benefit. - Klein Muçi (disputatio) 11:10, 20 Decembris 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: ::The only benefit is adding a tracking category, which again, in my opinion it's not needed. Not with the cost of removing the edit link. Even if it came without that cost I'm still not sure why we would need to track articles that use nexus interni. - Klein Muçi (disputatio) 11:14, 20 Decembris 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: :::Generally, we rely on lists of internal links to make up for the brevity & incompleteness of articles. (The major exception is biological articles, where lists of subjects at the next taxonomic level down are useful, even if they're red.) Ideally, according to a long-standing consensus as I remember it, lists of internal links are as short as possible, or even nonexistent. ¶  Is a disputation page for  available, so that we might see why it was invented? My memory is that it was hailed as an improvement at the time it was created. "Removing the edit section possibility" has never seemed like a problem: go to the section just above it and scroll down! IacobusAmor (disputatio) 11:48, 20 Decembris 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: ::::The edit history of the template shows exactly that: new formula, to make the "internal links" sections uniform and to facilitate finding them (and eventually eliminating them), by user Amahoney in 2016. But... Why? Why do we want to eliminate the "see also" section? What's the rationale behind that? - Klein Muçi (disputatio) 11:56, 20 Decembris 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: NexInt
Disputatio:Alicia in Terra Mirabili

message: @IacobusAmor, can you help me translate in Latin this title: The Nursery "Alice"? I'm having difficulties finding the Latin expression for nursery songs or nursery rhymes. - Klein Muçi (disputatio) 12:11, 20 Decembris 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Even if we devise a Latin translation, we must remember to tell the truth: the books published in 1871 and 1890 had English titles. This is why I edited your last sentence. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 19:30, 20 Decembris 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nursery songs
Disputatio:Alvi profluvium

message: Hodie 2800:810:42B:EB2:147A:BA6C:381A:5BEC, editor ignotus, has inserted foria as an alternate lemma and has tried to make it the main word for the thing throughout the text; however, it may be a rare word: it's not in White's (1938), or Cassell's (1968), or Traupman (2007), and L&S specify that it's only diarrhoea of swine, so I've adjusted the text accordingly. Ainsworth's (1837), does, however, have it in a general sense, under "Dung . . . thin." IacobusAmor (disputatio) 13:06, 22 Ianuarii 2022 (UTC).
thread_title: Foria
Disputatio:Wannsee Conventus

message: Die Vokabel "ariani" ist meines Wissens schon belegt für die frühchristliche Glaubensgruppe der Arianer. Wer weiß, wie man Arier auf lateinisch übersetzt hat oder übersetzen kann? Bis-Taurinus (disputatio) 23:51, 29 Ianuarii 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: Arier/ arisch