lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Disputatio:Alanus Mathison Turing

message: I removed the following embryonic categories pro tem. because if the page is highlighted it's more likely someone will create them, and we should (I think) first be certain that we want them.
*Categoria:Historia Scientiae Artificialis]]
*Categoria:Investigatores Scientiae Artificialis]] -- What is "Artificial Science"? Why is it capitalised? [Added later: I guess that maybe it is what we have later been calling :Categoria:Intellegentia artificialis. I'll add that category to the page.]
*Categoria:Mortes voluntariae in Anglia]] -- He is already in "Homines qui sibi mortem consciverunt": I am not sure of the usefulness of subdividing suicides by country. Obviously his English/British residence is already covered in other categories.
*Categoria:Praefecti Ordinis Imperii Britannici]]
*Categoria:Socii Ordinis Imperii Britannici]] -- I doubt whether membership of such things is in itself notable enough for a category. We no doubt have members of many such orders among our biographies, and so far we haven't been categorising them: should we, or not? I'd like to know what others feel. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 12:42, 28 Maii 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Redlink categories
Disputatio Categoriae:Liber Leviticus

message: Before one goes too far with these biblical categories, one might consider the category :en:Category:Bible and the text at :en:Category:Old_Testament. Putting each book directly in :Categoria:Biblia, seems to skip a categorical grade. IacobusAmor 21:10, 28 Maii 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah, I see at :Categoria:Biblia that lots of lumping has already been done. Not enough splitting! IacobusAmor 21:13, 28 Maii 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: :One has already observed :Categoria:Biblia, one has considered :Categoria:Vetus Testamentum, one has discussed this very issue with IacobusAmor (see Disputatio Categoriae:Vetus Testamentum) and one is working on that basis :) Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 09:20, 29 Maii 2010 (UTC)

text: :... but this might not be obvious to readers, I must admit, so I have now added an explanatory note at :Categoria:Vetus Testamentum. Please correct it if necessary! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 11:47, 29 Maii 2010 (UTC)

text: :... and at the moment the note I refer to can only be seen in the history: Helveticus immediately deleted it. I don't yet know why ... Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 12:01, 29 Maii 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: ::Hic abundant res occultae. IacobusAmor 12:08, 29 Maii 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Skipping intervening categorical grades
Disputatio:Vesuvius

message: : Hic removi -- Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 20:38, 29 Maii 2010 (UTC)
Etiam ex en: Campanian volcanic arc | Volcanoes of Italy | Stratovolcanoes | Visitor attractions in Naples | Geography of Naples | Decade Volcanoes | Active volcanoes | VEI-5 volcanoes | VEI-6 volcanoes | Complex volcanoes
thread_title:  Textum celatum
Disputatio Categoriae:Pelliculae musicae

message: Quid significat musicales, hoc adiectivum arcanum? IacobusAmor 18:32, 29 Maii 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Means you need to fix a few links, that's all ;] --Ioscius  ∞ 21:23, 29 Maii 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: musicales
Disputatio:Praesidium Communicationis Gubernativum (Britanniarum Regnum)

message: A principio verbum "Reipublicae" reieci quia hae officinae absconditae fuerunt; igitur Res Publica nihil a principio de eis scivit. Sed an verbum "gubernativus" accipimus, nescio. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 13:05, 2 Iunii 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  De nomine
Disputatio:Adel

message: Scio nomen "Burgodonum" apud situm interretiale aliquem reperi, sed fontem "infidelem" esse censeo. In indice nominum topographicorum Romano-Britannicorum non exstat. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 13:21, 2 Iunii 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: "Burgodonum" is just weird, anyway.  Non fuisset Burgodunum?  —Mucius Tever
replies: text: :Consentio, et gratias ago ob nexus. Sed et Burgodunum omnino omissum est e fontibus re vera fidelibus et recentioribus. Censeo esse errorem veterum amatorum antiquitatum Eboracensium. E.g. in  "Britannia Septentrionalis" ita lego:
replies: text: :: ADEL Brigantes (Leeds, West Yorkshire) Major settlement on York-Ilkley road. Possible Roman fort. Foundations, possible aqueduct; roof tiles, querns, pottery and coins of 1st to 4th century; life-sized statue (of an emperor?); altars dedicated to the goddess Brigantia ... (sequitur bibliographia solidissima, et sine mentione nominis "Burgodunum"). [n.b. "Brigantes" fuerunt civitas Britannica huius regionis]. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 08:29, 3 Iunii 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: :::Iam de nomine "Burgodunum" explicationem repperi in libro . Paginam igitur movi et aliqua verba addidi. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 18:30, 3 Iunii 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nomen
Disputatio:Ptolemaeus I (rex Aegypti)

message: : Haec e pagina removi: Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 21:04, 2 Iunii 2010 (UTC)
+ ex en: Generals of Alexander the Great | Pharaohs of the Ptolemaic dynasty | Hellenistic Egyptians | Ancient Macedonian historians | 3rd-century BC historians | Ancient Eordaeans | Hetairoi | Somatophylakes | Trierarchs of Nearchus' fleet | 3rd-century BC rulers | 4th-century BC rulers | People from Kozani Prefecture | Satraps of the Alexandrian Empire | Historians who accompanied Alexander the Great
thread_title:  Celata
Disputatio:Virginis mors (Caravaggius)

message: : Haec e pagina removi: Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 12:05, 4 Iunii 2010 (UTC)
Too much lumping; should be "Picturae Musei Lupariensis," analogous to "Antiquitates Musei Lupariensis" & "Sculpturae Musei Lupariensis" &c., as subcategories of "Collections of the Louvre," itself a subcategory of "the Louvre"
thread_title:  Textus celatus
Disputatio:Tuba clarisona

message: ut credo, vocabulum "salpinx" Graecum est (Graece σαλπιγξ); nonne mutandum est in vocabulum "cornu"?  aut potius servandum est Anglicum "trumpet."
replies: text: "salpinx valvata" and "salpingista" have 0 occurrences on Google. Langenscheidt and Georges have "tuba" for trumpet.--Chris1981 04:16, 18 Augusti 2010 (UTC)

message: Apud Du Cange hae inveniuntur formae:
#tromba (var. trombeta), trombare, trombator
#trompa (var. trompeta), trompare, trompator
#trumpa (var. -), -, -.
Quia certe omnia derivativa nobis utilia erunt, aut (1) aut (2) nobis retinendum est (sed non ambo, quod mea quidem opinione nihil expedit in stirpium varietate natare). Neander (disputatio) 19:22, 14 Maii 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  De formis
Disputatio:Imperium Romanum Orientale

message: There are formulae for incorporated sources. Of course such text should have been proofread for factual errors and WP standards, which was not the case here.--Chris1981 03:29, 6 Iunii 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I think the text (is it all from Paulus Diaconus?) should be completely deleted unless there is some specially relevant short quotation. This article has 1000 years to deal with. The new section is far too long, covers only a brief period, and (of course!) takes no account of recent scholarship.

text: I notice this is one of the ":Categoria:1000 paginae" and that the addition makes it into a "long article". The addition may have been intended to increase our score in the ratings. And, yes, it would. But the overriding aim is to make a good encyclopaedia,, and that means having good, well-structured, well-documented, reliable articles, not just long ones. If this was the reason, thanks for trying to help (O anonyme), but, as we said on the Taberna, "all improvements welcome". Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 07:57, 6 Iunii 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: :Probe dicis, amice, et tibi adsentior. IacobusAmor 12:19, 6 Iunii 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: ::If someone is thinking about leaving the anonymus a message: perhaps best in Italian --Chris1981 22:16, 6 Iunii 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Inserting of copied text 

message: Care Viator:
Censeo omni tempore scribere debemus: Saeculum ineuns: Saeculo ineunti dum verbum neutri generis tractemus incondicenter de casu ablativo utrum absoluto an adiectivo. Item, verbum anglice: iconoclast, hispanice:iconoclasta indicant vocabulum rectum potius  esse "iconus est", hinc fortasse possit dici "iconos delemus vel deruimus". Roch01A (disputatio) 00:07, 1 Aprilis 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: : Vale, optime Roche, gratulor tibi pro observatione tua, tamen nemini licitum est mutare neque vocabula neque regulas grammaticas. Participium praesens cum est in ablativo absoluto habet teleuton in -e et non -i. Verbum latinum est "icon" genitivus "iconis", est verbum graecum (εικών- gen : εικόνος) hac de causa habes "iconoclasta" (εικονοκλαστης) formatum cum radicali. Inspicias quaeso bonam grammaticam et dictionnarium satis amplum. (Cicero : ineunte vere) Vale.--Viator (disputatio) 07:43, 1 Aprilis 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  SAECULUM INEUNS:SAECULO INEUNTI , ICONUS EST
Disputatio:Leonhardus Eulerus

message: Reverti hanc recensionem ab usore incognito factam; ille male dicit, quia inusitatius vel pravum in encyclopaedia est scribere "dicitur +acc+inf" (it is said that...X is Y = anglicismus) (who said???) quamquam bene est scribere "nominativus dicitur nominativus" (X is said to be Y) (dicitur = linking verb). Ecce liber grammaticae latinae.--Rafaelgarcia 22:14, 9 Iunii 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Probe dicis, amice. Bradley's Arnold, #44: "For 'There is a tradition that Homer was blind,' we may say either Traditur Homerus caecus fuisse, or Tradunt Homerum caecum fuisse, but not Traditur Homerum caecum fuisse." Ignotus autem usor 66.177.36.232 ait: "Necesse est verbo 'Eulerus' esse 'Eulerum' quod verbum 'Eulerum' constructio recta est. 'Eulerum' subiectum dicti indirecti, ergo necesse est 'Eulerum' accusativum esse." Sed secundum Bradley's Arnold, illud exemplum est falsum: nobis licet scribere Dicitur Eulerus vel Dicunt Eulerum, sed non Dicitur Eulerum.  IacobusAmor 00:51, 10 Iunii 2010 (UTC)

message: Do we really need "saepe"?
(Cf. English Wikipedia: "Euler is held to be one of the greatest mathematicians in history...") Toddcs (disputatio) 01:00, 27 Octobris 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: No, we don't. As such, "saepe ... habetur" looks like being a roundabout way to say that there are people who don't consider Euler one of the greatest, but there are certainly more direct expressions to that effect. Neander (disputatio) 08:05, 27 Octobris 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Saepe unus ex ... habetur"
Disputatio Categoriae:Patres Ecclesiae

message: : disputatio ex pagina Disputatio Categoriae:Pater Ecclesiae

message: Why not the plural like the other categories  (I don't have permission to rename or move this page)? --Chris1981 04:08, 12 Iunii 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: No human being can move categories (not even Fathers of the Church). What has to be done is to delete it, create the new one, and add the new category name to every relevant page. The smart thing to do is to propose the change at Vicipaedia:Automata/Category move requests; UVBot will then (if we're lucky!) do it for us. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 08:50, 12 Iunii 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: :sounds like a lot of labor. Thanks anyway for the response.--Chris1981 07:37, 13 Iunii 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: ::But I didn't mean to say "don't do it". I think you're right, and I will now put the request on that page. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 11:22, 13 Iunii 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  PATRES ECCLESIAE
Disputatio:Symmachus (papa)

message: I found this in the de WP. Is there another rule here?--Chris1981 12:06, 12 Iunii 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Categorization in most of Vicipaedia's biographical articles seems to follow this order: (1) Defaultsort/Lifetime, (2) birthyear, (3) deathyear, (4) miscellany, (5) 1000 paginae. The miscellany is often in random order; I often alphabetize it. The order of presentation of information in the article itself—(1) name, (2) birthyear, (3) deathyear—sets up an expectation that might well deserve to be fulfilled in the categorization, as it is with (1) Defaultsort/Lifetime, (2) birthyear, (3) deathyear. One or two people from the Germanic universe have argued for putting the "most important" category first, but an estimate of importance necessarily reflects a POV. Some other arguments, for & against various traits, may be in the archives somewhere. IacobusAmor 12:13, 12 Iunii 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: :Ok, thanks. I didn't know the en WP had other rules.--Chris1981 12:28, 12 Iunii 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Order of categories
Disputatio:Index bibliothecariorum et directorum Musei Britannici necnon Bibliothecae Britannicae

message: Barry Bloomfield did not hold such a senior post, see http://www.independent.co.uk/news/obituaries/barry-bloomfield-729791.html
--Felix Folio Secundus 14:54, 13 Iunii 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: My faulty memory. Thanks very much for checking. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 18:35, 13 Iunii 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Bloomfield
Disputatio Categoriae:Inventiones

message: OLD:
*Inventio 
1.  The action of finding, discovery.  b  the finding out, discovery (of facts).
2.  The action of devising or planning, invention. b (rhet.) the devising (of arguments, etc.); (esp. absol.) the devising of the subject-matter of a speech.
3.  A thing discovered or devised, invention; a plan, stratagem. qui denique auctoritatis eius et inventionis comprobatores (Cic. Inv. 1.43); --ne de eventu trepidet inventionis suae (Fron. Str. 1.pr.)
*Inventum
1.  A discovery, invention. (...) callidum fuit eius inventum, quem ad modum stans iumentum concalfieri exercerique posset (Nep. Eum. 5.4); (...) Neronis principis inventum est decoquere aquam vitroque demissam in nives refrigerare (Plin. Nat. 31.40)
2.  A thing devised, plan; (esp. rhet.) a subject or argument for a speech, a topic.
replies: text: Yes, it looks as if they should all be changed to inventa or reperta. Feel free to to make the appropriate changes! IacobusAmor 15:09, 14 Iunii 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nomen
Disputatio Categoriae:Series comoediaca

message: This is a useful categoria, but it should probably be named Series comoedicae (that's assuming we like borrowing series back into Latin to mean "(television) series.") 174.29.140.154 18:38, 16 Iunii 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Cassell's: comicus, -a, -um et comoedus, -a, -um. Ergo fortasse :Categoria:Series comicae vel :Categoria:Series comoedae, sed de nomine series, secundum Cassell's, "genit. and dat. [forms] not found." IacobusAmor 19:00, 16 Iunii 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: :Yes, comica is probably even better.  A glance at ancient usage shows comoedus, -a, -um is probably not the best word.  We (I) regularly put words in cases for which no form is attested, most notably nexus.  But at any rate I don't see how this is a problem for using series in a category name.  174.29.140.154 19:11, 16 Iunii 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: ::Comoediaca et comoedica potius quam comica vel comoeda non iam videri possunt. IacobusAmor (disputatio) 13:48, 25 Maii 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Nomen categoriae (nunc ''Series comoediaca'')
Disputatio:Aquila

message: I took these redlink categories out (none of them have ever been created) because I suggest they are better handled as lists, if someone wants to make lists of national symbols. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 14:29, 17 Iunii 2010 (UTC)
[[Categoria:Signa civitatis Afganiae]]
[[Categoria:Signa civitatis Armeniae]]
[[Categoria:Signa civitatis Austriae]]
[[Categoria:Signa civitatis Cechiae]]
[[Categoria:Signa civitatis Civitatum Foederatarum]]
[[Categoria:Signa civitatis Germaniae]]
[[Categoria:Signa civitatis Ghanae]]
[[Categoria:Signa civitatis Hispaniae]]
[[Categoria:Signa civitatis Iraquiae]]
[[Categoria:Signa civitatis Liechtensteiniae]]
[[Categoria:Signa civitatis Nigeriae]]
[[Categoria:Signa civitatis Poloniae]]
[[Categoria:Signa civitatis Romaniae]]
[[Categoria:Signa civitatis Syriae]]
[[Categoria:Signa civitatis Yemeniae]]
[[Categoria:Signa civitatis Zambiae]]
[[Categoria:Heraldic birds]]
thread_title:  Hic removi
Disputatio:Albertus Wendt

message: .. quia nescio an volumus categorias pro ordinibus nationalibus creare. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 14:33, 17 Iunii 2010 (UTC)
[[Categoria:Socii Ordinis Meriti Novae Zelandiae]]
[[Categoria:Socii Ordinis Novae Zelandiae]]
thread_title:  Hic removi
Disputatio:Linus Pauling

message: quod sequitur. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 14:38, 17 Iunii 2010 (UTC)
Etiam ex en: American anti-nuclear weapons activists | American anti-war activists | American atheists | American biochemists | American chemists | American humanists | American medical researchers | American Nobel laureates | American pacifists | American Unitarian Universalists | Biophysicists | California Institute of Technology faculty | Cancer deaths in California | Deaths from prostate cancer | American people of German descent | Guggenheim Fellows | International Academy of Quantum Molecular Science members | American people of Irish descent | National Medal of Science laureates | Nobel laureates with multiple Nobel awards | Oregon State University alumni | Oregon State University faculty | Orthomolecular medicine | People from Corvallis, Oregon | People from Portland, Oregon | People in alternative medicine | Lenin Peace Prize recipients | Physical chemists | Presidential Medal for Merit recipients | Priestley Medal | Time magazine Persons of the Year | Vannevar Bush Award recipients
thread_title:  E pagina removi
Disputatio:Victor Hugo

message: Hic removi. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 14:56, 17 Iunii 2010 (UTC)
==Vita==
Hugo [[Rhodesia]]ni die [[22 Februarii]] anno [[1802]] natus est, filius Iosephi Hugo, imperatori{{dubsig}} in [[Napoleo]]ni exercitum,{{dubsig}} et Sophiae Pedica. Triginti annos natus est, Hugo suae filiae, "Volo conicae canes edere. Mihi eos emere. Iam." His verbis sunt praeclarissimi de gustationibus Hugo. Tres abhinc mensibus, Hugo per Asiam iter factus [[Lolitam]] scripsit.
+ People from Besançon | Victor Hugo | Cao Dai saints | French poets | French novelists | French dramatists and playwrights | French fantasy writers | French-language poets | Romantic poets | French Christians | Writers who illustrated their own writing | Lycée Louis-le-Grand alumni | Burials at the Panthéon | Légion d'honneur recipients | Jersey writers | Guernsey writers | Western mystics | Spiritualists | Rosicrucians | Philhellenes | French anti-death penalty activists
thread_title:  Removi
Disputatio:Inceptum Rosettanum

message: Always said inceptum for "project" but am open to suggestions? Inceptum Rosettanum? --Ioscius  ∞ 18:20, 17 Iunii 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: And to stop any question of whether to leave this in English before it starts, I think the nature of this project demands a Latin translation.--Ioscius  ∞ 18:29, 17 Iunii 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: :I think so too. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 18:33, 17 Iunii 2010 (UTC)
One more time asking for input before I move.--Ioscius  ∞ 08:22, 10 Augusti 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: titulus
Disputatio:Historiae Alexandri (Clitarchus)

message: Titulum Graecum pro tempore praefixi quia incertus sum quomodo optime Latine vertere. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 20:53, 17 Iunii 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Andrea, operis quod attulisti mentio ter apud Athenaei Dipnosophistas fit:

text: * 4.148d Κλείταρχος ἐν τῇ πρώτῃ τῶν περὶ Ἀλέξανδρον ἱστορίων

text: * 12.530a Κλείταρχος ἐν τῇ τετάρτῃ τῶν περὶ Ἀλέξανδρον

text: * 13.586d Κλείταρχος ἐν ταῖς περὶ Ἀλέξανδρον ἱστορίαις

text: Insuper duae mentiones reperiuntur:

text: * Scholia in Apollonium Rhodium 2.904 Κλείταρχος ἐν ταῖς Περὶ Ἀλέξανδρον ἱστορίαις

text: * Stobaeus 4.20.73 Περὶ Ἀλεξάνδρου [sic!]

text: Unde Τὰ περὶ Ἀλέξανδρον inscriptio orta sit nescio (nisi ex Ath. 12.530d conclusa est; quodsi omnes locos respicimus, potius eo loco ellipsis videtur esse). Quae cum ita sint, equidem coniectarim opus Clitarchi Περὶ Ἀλέξανδρον ἱστορίαι inscribi et Latine Historiae Alexandri reddi posse. --Neander 20:42, 18 Iunii 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: :Ita. Recte, Neander. Gratias tibi ago. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 08:40, 19 Iunii 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Titulus
Disputatio:Dominus dixit ad me

message: Immo, "Dominus dixit ad me" est introitus primae eucharistiae Nativitatis Domini Nostri. Vide Liber Usualis (Tornaci, 1963), p. 392. Introitús non sunt hymni. IacobusAmor 01:25, 19 Iunii 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Potesne igitur paginam corrigere? Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 14:33, 29 Iunii 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: "Dominus dixit ad me est nomen hymni catholici."
Disputatio:Paroecia Veterirubrensis

message: Shouldn't parishes be classed under their dioceses? and dioceses then under their metropolitans or national churches or something? and then those categories under the whole church? Why do lumpers like so much to create huge categories, like "Paroeciae Ecclesiae Catholicae," that have many thousands (or in some biological cases millions) of members in them? IacobusAmor 13:37, 21 Iunii 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: This category has two members. You must be looking at a different screen :) Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 13:41, 21 Iunii 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Categoria: Paroeciae Ecclesiae Catholicae
Disputatio:Scriptura Merovingica

message: Nescio si habemus fontem, sed ego puto rectiorem formam esse Merovingia quam Merovingica. Simul censeo Carolina rectiorem quam Carolingica esse.--Xaverius 15:23, 22 Iunii 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Ego puto ambas formas rectas esse. Fons quam in articulo scripsi, dicit "Merovingica". Fortasse "Carolina" melius est quam "Carolingica", sed exemplum invenimus in  Commentationibus Societatis Regiae Scientiarum Gottingensis. Wikibelgiaan 15:49, 22 Iunii 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: :Optime. Fonte ente, igitur referentiam addamus in pagina!--Xaverius 16:28, 22 Iunii 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Nomen
Disputatio:Demetrius Thessalonicensis

message: Fortasse melius "Demetrius Thessalonicensis"? Adiectiva nominum urbium praeferimus; "sanctus" in titulis saepius omittimus. 20:43, 29 Iunii 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Sed, a verbis meis dissentiens (!), nunc addo exstitisse scriptorem saeculi XVI nomine :el:Δημήτριος ο Θεσσαλονικεύς! Igitur nostrum Demetrium, latissime notum, fortasse debemus simplicius "Sanctus Demetrius" (sine nomine urbis) nuncupare? Ita stat in Vicipaedia Neograeca: :el:Άγιος Δημήτριος. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 20:58, 29 Iunii 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: :Forsan, quoniam Demetrius noster illustrissimus est. Sed Vollständiges Heiligenlexikon habet plus quam triginta sancti huius nominis.--Chris1981 01:27, 30 Iunii 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nomen
Disputatio:Res inexplicata volans

message: Cur "volans" nec "volante", substantivo neutro ?
replies: text: Erras: forma neutra (nom. + acc. sg.) est "volans". Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 18:42, 30 Iunii 2010 (UTC)

message: Profecto parmas in caelo visas esse apud Livium legimus. Eo autem loco (a.u.c. 22,1 8-13) et scuta sanguinem sudantia, ardentes lapides caelo cadentes, solem cum luna pugnantem et alias tales res mirabiles reperimus. Ad summam: Series portentorum est visorum in auspiciis ante pugnam ad lacum Trasumenum factam anno 217 a.C.n. Nemo umquam illorum temporum illas parmas ut unidentified flying objects percontari conatus est, sed ut manifestationes deorum pie sunt observatae. Ergo dubito, rectene eis uti liceat exemplo rerum volantium inexplicatarum. Quid aliis videtur? --Bavarese (disputatio) 13:47, 23 Martii 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  de Livii parmis volantibus
Disputatio:Morbus Alzheimer

message: Num "Morbus Alzheimeri" aut "Morbus Alzheimeris" est?
replies: text: Solum si nomen Aloysii Alzheimer sit declinabile. Sed iam Nuntii Latini articulum de hoc morbo scripsit, ubi vocatur "morbus Alzheimerianus".  Paginam movebo.  —Mucius Tever 11:11, 1 Iulii 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Titulo