lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Disputatio:Ioannes Iacobus Russavius

message: Neander indicia nativitatis et mortis removit, fortasse quia iam in capsa reperiuntur. Puto autem haec in primo paragrapho manere debere, quia lector ea ibi sperat et quia capsa nexus non habet. Quid dicunt alii? Lesgles (disputatio) 14:36, 17 Augusti 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Ita, indicia removi, quia iam in capsa sunt, et putavi nativitatis decessusque indicia, cum nexibus, in corpore commentationis (ubi de vita agetur) aptius commemoratum iri. Sed per me sit ita ut voluisti, cum nondum nihil nisi praefationem habeamus. Neander (disputatio) 15:15, 17 Augusti 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: :Per me necesse est indicia "vitalia" aliasque res notabiles in textu retinere ... textumque augere! Si res in capsa relatas utiles esse censemus, maneant, sed (nexibus fontibusque fidei dignis carentibus) ne locum textús usurpare praetendant. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 16:50, 17 Augusti 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: :: Quae cum ita sint, non satis utilis esse videtur capsa, cuius retinendae causa imaginem repetitam dempsi. Itaque pristinam imaginem restitui. Neander (disputatio) 06:00, 18 Augusti 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: ::: Parvo et circumscripto usui capsarum semper faveo ego. Lesgles (disputatio) 13:33, 18 Augusti 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Indicia duplicia
Disputatio:Tarracina

message: In hac et aliis paginis vidimus "nati, victi, mortui". "Victi" eos significet qui in hac urbe superati sunt. Num id, Nuada, voluisti? Melius puto scribere "qui hic vixerunt" vel "habitaverunt". Lesgles (disputatio) 19:09, 20 Augusti 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Victi
Disputatio:Lex Humiana

message: Neander, why do your edits keep suppressing the place of publication? (Since this article isn't one of the 10,000 articles on whose length Vicipaedia is to be judged, this question doesn't matter here, but it might elsewhere.) IacobusAmor (disputatio) 21:16, 13 Octobris 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Place of publication
Disputatio:Narratio picta

message: This commentary links to en:Comics, but only about one-fourth of its text, and none of its (five) illustrations, refer to the concept generally understood as comics. IacobusAmor (disputatio) 14:43, 4 Septembris 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: There was a discussion of this at the time when the article was developed. But where? I can't remember. Maybe Anne can. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 15:00, 4 Septembris 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: :Some of the discussion is at Disputatio:Liber nubeculatus, which is specifically the "comic book" (and that page links to :en:Comic book).  Some theorists (Scott McCloud e.g.) do take "comics" to be the broader category discussed here, or at least a subset of it.  I took a quick look at the English page just now and I think our page is correctly connected with it.  A. Mahoney (disputatio) 13:40, 5 Septembris 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Topic
Disputatio:Fanum Sancti Cassinii

message: Nuada amice, titulum "Fanum Sancti Cassinii" innumerabilibus tomis Godefridi Casalis dictionarii confirmare voluisti. Pro lectoribus nostris obsecro, ut benevole indices, quo in tomo "Fani Sancti Cassinii" mentio facta sit. An dicisne istam nominis formam in omnibus tomis reperiri? Neander (disputatio) 16:28, 15 Septembris 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  De fontibus proferendis
Disputatio:Arnor

message: Beast 78, amice ignote, quando tu "Fixed grammar," ut dicis, imaginem, lemma, definitionem, et plus delevisti, haec verba:
Arnor seu Regnum Septentrionale (ex locutione Sindarin Terra Regis significante) est locus in Legendario Tolkien inventus, unus ex duobus regnis hominum in Terra Media creatum post submersionem Numenoris in terra Eriadoris inter flumina Bruinen et Gwathló, et Montes Caeruleos, atque capite Annúminas.
Certe hoc factum erat imprudens? IacobusAmor (disputatio) 11:07, 16 Septembris 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: "Fixed grammar"
Disputatio:Croton

message: Litterae "Q D O" non sunt sententia nec talem significant. In Vicipaedia Italica explicatur, quod sunt litterae initiales nominis urbis in alphabeto Graeco archaico scriptae. (https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stemma_di_Crotone ) Bis-Taurinus (disputatio) 23:45, 17 Septembris 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Sententia urbis
Disputatio:Fanum Sancti Christophori de Valenis

message: Apud commentarium legimus "Fanum Sancti Christophori de Valenis est commune," sed secundum nomen attestatum, res est ecclesia: "Ecclesia Sancti Christophori de Valenis." Infeliciter, ecclesia non est commune. IacobusAmor (disputatio) 13:45, 23 Septembris 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Nomen
Disputatio:Fanum Sancti Christophori (Utraeque Separae)

message: Ubi in hoc textu invenimus nomen Fanum Sancti Christophori? IacobusAmor (disputatio) 13:53, 23 Septembris 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Ego quoque hoc nomen in eo textu reperire conatus sum sed frustra. Feliciter tamen evenit quod Sanctus Christophorus (p. 348) praebetur, cuius formae toponomasticae testimonia etiam alibi leguntur. Qui hoc nomen emendationis specie in "Fanum Sabcti Christophori" mutavit lectores suos fallit. Neander (disputatio) 17:40, 23 Septembris 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Ubi
Disputatio:Romeus (persona)

message: (Sorry I write in English here, I think it is permitted on talk pages.I would definitely write in Latin if I knew it a bit more.) A better picture could have been chosen for the article, such as Romeo from Frank Dicksee's painting (1884) or  Ford Madox Brown one (1870), if you keep to older adaptations, or maybe Leonard Whiting from the film by Zeffirelli if you don't mind newer ones. The picture that is used is just a portrait of an actor, not in Romeo's part but just as an actor, and he looks absolutely nothing like a young man/teenager in love.
replies: text: :As the caption explains, it's a portrait of the actor who perhapsWikipedia says: "Richard Burbage was probably the first Romeo, being the company's actor." (as theater people say) created the role—always a matter of historical importance. The exact date of the premiere is unknown, but Burbage would have been around 30 years old at the time, most definitely not a teenager. IacobusAmor (disputatio) 13:30, 24 Septembris 2016 (UTC)

text: Thank you, interesting point. I can't look for images right now, maybe someone else can. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 13:17, 24 Septembris 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: :I added Brown's painting; there's no reason we can't have two pictures. I wonder about the name though; should it not be Romaeus? Lesgles (disputatio) 21:16, 26 Septembris 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: ::That's good. I agree "Romeus" doesn't look so good but I feel sure we had a Latin source. Evidently we should have cited it on this page ... I'll try to track it down. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 11:40, 27 Septembris 2016 (UTC)

thread_title: Notae
Disputatio Categoriae:Ars actionis

message: De "Suadetur ut haec commentatio cum Categoria:Ars acroamatica contribuatur."—Cur? Haec categoria, Anglice Performance art (ars actionis), est subcategoria categoriae Performing arts (ars acroamatica = ars activa). IacobusAmor (disputatio) 11:28, 4 Octobris 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you, that makes it clear, I had thought that both categories would cover the same topic, Performing arts. I have now removed the contribuenda template. Greetings, --UV (disputatio) 21:14, 4 Octobris 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Contribuendum?
Disputatio:Fanum Divi Blasii (Mulhusa)

message: Cur ecclesiam - et a quo tempore - fanum nominamus? --Bavarese (disputatio) 11:33, 27 Decembris 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Nuada his temporibus obstructus est quia hoc verbum in multas paginas introducebat fontesque falso citabat. Moribus nostris nihil mutatur. Necesse est (sicut semper) fontes verificare et locos secundum fontes Latine appellare. Si fons Latinus non reperitur, ego de hac pagina "Ecclesia Sancti Blasii (Mulhusa)" suaserim. In rebus Christianis "Fanum" et "Divus" sunt (mea mente) circumlocutiones; nobis oportet verbis simplicibus uti, praesertim in titulis paginarum. Sed tu quid dicis? Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 12:52, 27 Decembris 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: :Tibi plane assentior. Ut mihi videtur: Fanum vel templum non nisi improprie dicitur pro vocabulo solito et integro ecclesia. --Bavarese (disputatio) 13:32, 27 Decembris 2016 (UTC)

text: Minime consentio! Albertus Sleumer in glossario Kirchenlateinisches Wörterbuch anno 1926 in p. 327 in lemmate fani etiam conversionem Kirche, Kapelle proponit. Insuper non paucae urbes Latinizatae vocem fani in nomine suo portant: multitudo eorum non deos paganos significant sed scilicet patronos christanos! - Giorno2 (disputatio) 10:08, 29 Octobris 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: :Nuada autem non "fanum = ecclesia" sed "fanum = urbs" saepissime, sine fonte, nobis imposuit; nonnumquam fontes nominum urbium, iam ab aliis citatos, aut delevit aut falso emendavit. Sicut iam dixi: "Necesse est (sicut semper) fontes verificare et locos secundum fontes Latine appellare." Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 14:48, 29 Octobris 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fanum?
Disputatio:Liverpolium

message: I inserted the erroneous reference to  now flagged up by UV. It seems to me highly likely that I intended , because I don't think I would have looked on Catholic Encyclopedia for the Latin name of a city. If that's the case, I was also wrong in thinking that "Liverpolitanus" (the form to be found on Catholic Hierarchy and in many Catholic documents) supports Liverpolium: in fact it would support Liverpolis. Meanwhile independent support has been found for this name, so I have now corrected the footnotes where necessary and moved Liverpolis to pole position. I now suggest moving the page to Liverpolis ... but maybe someone else has a better suggestion? Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 12:03, 9 Octobris 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Hos fontes et Liverpolium indicantes inveni:

text: *Geographicum

text: *Liverpolii : Ex typis Rockliff Fratrum, [1867?]

text: *Imprimatur: Liverpolii die 13 Sep. 1931, + Ricardus Archiepiscopus Liverpolitanus

text: *R. P. Augustinus Clark (1887-194-9)

text: --Alex1011 (disputatio) 17:08, 9 Octobris 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: : Fontes ab Alexandro inventi nomen "Liverpolium" favent. Paeterea sensus linguae meus contra "Lioverpolis" votat, quia nomen hoc etymologiam monstrare videtur, quae de verbo graeco "πόλις" traheretur. Credo autem suffixum "pool" cum "πόλις" relationem non habere. Bis-Taurinus (disputatio) 18:11, 9 Octobris 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: ::Quae cum ita sint, non necesse est paginam movere. Gratias ago ambobus! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 09:02, 10 Octobris 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  De nomine
Disputatio Vicipaediae:Paginae quas omnibus Wikipediis contineri oportet/Expansio/Geographia

message: Hae paginae inter paginas quas omnibus Wikipediis contineri oportet non numerantur?
# Planities Europaea Orientalis
# :en:North European Plain :fr:Plaine d'Europe du Nord
# Pyrenaei
# :en:Scandinavian Mountains :fr:Alpes scandinaves :it:Monti Scandinavi :de:Skandinavisches Gebirge
Re vera? IacobusAmor (disputatio) 11:19, 15 Octobris 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Melius est tales rogationes apud Meta rogare, ubi est tabula officialis (ut ita dicam):  ecce paginam -- :m:Talk:List of articles every Wikipedia should have/Expanded.  A. Mahoney (disputatio) 13:13, 17 Octobris 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: :That would be pointless: these four articles remain "official" at Meta, but someone deleted them from the list here in Vicipaedia. IacobusAmor (disputatio) 13:28, 17 Octobris 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: ::Check Wikidata, then.  I haven't had time to update the lists here, and probably won't for another week or so.  When I do update them, my program looks at the master list in Meta, and then the associated Wikidata items, and the the pages linked from there.  If it's not in Wikidata, it doesn't go onto this list, and it won't count when the scoreboard is updated in Meta either.  Also check whether pages have been deleted as non-stipulae:  people are getting much more aggressive about cleaning those up, generally a Good Thing but it has meant some teeny-tiny pagelets have disappeared from this list.  A. Mahoney (disputatio) 17:54, 17 Octobris 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: :::As long as your program starts with Meta, fine. Someone deleted from your current list two articles that are in both Vicipaedia and Meta, so if you were to start from your current list, it'd be missing two extant 10K articles. Presumably your program will restore them when you run it again. Or take the extreme possibility: if someone were to delete all the contents of "Paginae quas omnibus Wikipediis contineri oportet/Expansio/Geographia," your program would restore them when it runs again, right? IacobusAmor (disputatio) 00:38, 18 Octobris 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: :::::Correct: any manual edits to this page, whether right or wrong, will be effaced by Anne's next update. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 14:21, 18 Octobris 2016 (UTC)

text: ::::It was Usor:Schulz-Hameln who removed the entries. Let's see what he says; it may have simply been a mistake. Lesgles (disputatio) 11:07, 18 Octobris 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: :::::You are right, that was my mistake! Shall I restore it?Schulz-Hameln (disputatio) 14:00, 18 Octobris 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: ::::::You could do that, Schulz-Hameln, although, as explained above, any such edits are regularly replaced anyway, so it's not very important :) Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 14:21, 18 Octobris 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Quaestio
Disputatio:Portus Narentae

message: Nomen civitatis latine est Metchovich. Antiquissimum fons, acta Curiae Ragusinae ex A.D. 1422, habet "flumaria Narrenti subtus Metchovich..." situs periculosus?; Ivan Jurić (ed.): "Prošlost Metkovića od najstarijih vremena do danas : (u povodu prvog spomena i 40. obljetnice oslobođenja) / The history of the city of Metković from the oldest times to the modern times : (on the occasion of the first mention of the name and 40th anniversary of liberation) : 1422-1984 : [izložba]", Metković : Centar za usmjereno obrazovanje "Petar Levantin", 1984.
thread_title:  Nomen civitatis
Disputatio:Terra Laboratoria

message: Ubi apud Graesse invenire possumus nomen Estotilandiam?  Hic abest, ut videtur. IacobusAmor (disputatio) 15:03, 19 Octobris 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: It does appear on this page of the 1972 Graesse.

text: But that doesn't mean we have to choose it. Yours was a fortunate question, because when I tried to answer it Google showed me that the name appears on this map alongside the much more useful "Laboratoris terra". So we could choose the latter, unless something even better turns up. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 16:03, 19 Octobris 2016 (UTC)

text: This book  has "Estori Land ... Terra Laboratoris" again; see again . I don't know how or in what language the name Estotilandia originated. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 16:12, 19 Octobris 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: :Estotilandia may have originated in the :en:Zeno map: "'Estotiland' appears on the Zeno map, ostensibly on the western side of the Atlantic Ocean in the location of Labrador"; it sounds rather vague, and the map may have been a hoax. I guess at some point it started being used for Labrador, but I would also prefer something closer to the English, either the "Terra Laboratoris" that you found, or "Terra Laboratoria" (cf. Dioecesis Rivuli Angularis et Terrae Laboratoriae). Lesgles (disputatio) 12:15, 20 Octobris 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: :: Also Tuomo Pekkanen & Reijo Pitkäranta, Lexicon hodiernae Latinitatis Finno-Latino-Finnicum (Societas Litterarum Finnicarum, 2006) has Terra Laboratoria. ¶ Lexicon Auxiliare by Christian Helfer (Societas Latinas, Saarbrücken 1991) has Terra Labratoria (p. 338). Neander (disputatio) 13:13, 20 Octobris 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: :::"Terra Laboratoria" seems to be slightly ahead. That's fine by me. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 17:24, 20 Octobris 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Ubi
Disputatio:Damnum corporis

message: Damnum corporis[1] est noxa corpori inlata.[2] Haec cadi potest per accidentes, cadentes, ictos et alias causas.[2] Ictus severus (trauma) est damnum quod infirmitatem vel mortem inferre potest. Anno 2013, 4.8 millio populorum plus mortui sunt corporis damnis quam 4.3 millionem anno 1990. Plus quam 30 per centum haec mortuarum pertinet ad iniurias ex transportatione. Anno 2013 liberi non plus quam 5 annos habentes mortui sunt ex iniuriis minuente ex 766.000 anno 1990.[3]
thread_title: Redditio

message: Injury is damage to the body.[1] This may be caused by accidents, falls, hits, weapons, and other causes.[1]
Major trauma is injury that has the potential to cause prolonged disability or death.
In 2013 4.8 million people died from injuries up from 4.3 million in 1990. More than 30% of these deaths were transport related injuries. In 2013 367,000 children less than five died from injuries down from 766,000 in 1990.[2] (Injuries are the cause of 9% of all death and are the sixth leading cause of death in the world.)--Jondel (disputatio) 06:41, 22 Octobris 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Origo ex Wiki anglice:

message: The text, with links, as of this morning:
replies: text: Injury is damage to the body. This may be caused by accidents, falls, hits, weapons, and other causes. ¶ Major trauma is injury that has the potential to cause prolonged disability or death. ¶ In 2013, 4.8 million people died from injuries, up from 4.3 million in 1990. More than 30% of these deaths were transport-related injuries. In 2013, 367,000 children under the age of five died from injuries, down from 766,000 in 1990. Injuries are the cause of 9% of all human deaths, and are the sixth-leading cause of death in the world.

text: Notes
Hope this helps. IacobusAmor (disputatio) 10:45, 22 Octobris 2016 (UTC)
Thank you Iacobus.--Jondel (disputatio) 12:45, 22 Octobris 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Commentarius Anglicus
Disputatio:Medellium

message: Il nome originale di questa cita è METELLINUM non è MEDELLINUM !!! si chiama così per una cita a la Spagna fondata da QVINTVS CAECILIVS METELLVS PIVS quindi si utilizza la lettera T.
replies: text: Thanks for your comment. The origin of the name is exactly as you say, but the Latin sources we have found make a difference in name between the town in Spain and the city in Colombia. This often happens -- it is not an error. Vicipaedia works from reliable sources. We have cited Latin sources for the name "Medellium" for this city in Colombia. If you can find Latin sources for your preferred name for this city in Colombia, please cite them.

text: As yet we have no article about the town in Spain. You could write it, and you could cite sources for the Latin name of that town too. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 08:35, 26 Octobris 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Il nome originale di questa cita è METELLINUM non è MEDELLINUM !!!
Disputatio:Urbs Conceptionis

message: Fons citatus, nisi oculi me fallunt, Concepionem non Conceptionem dicit. Neander (disputatio) 10:51, 31 Octobris 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Mendum profecto, quia plenum urbis nomen Hispanicum est Concepción de la Madre Santísima de la Luz (Conceptio Sanctissimae Matris Lucis); hoc est Immaculata Conceptio. IacobusAmor (disputatio) 12:01, 31 Octobris 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: :Fontem securiorem repperi nominis utilioris. Paginam movebo. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 12:11, 31 Octobris 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Nomen
Disputatio:Provincia Cantuariensis

message: This is part of the Province of York (but not part of England): cf. Joyce M. Horn, David M. Smith, Patrick Mussett, "Ripon" in Fasti Ecclesiae Anglicanae 1541-1857: Volume 11, Carlisle, Chester, Durham, Manchester, Ripon, and Sodor and Man Dioceses (Londinii, 2004) p. 125 ff., British History Online.--Johnsoniensis (disputatio) 10:37, 20 Decembris 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: English WP: "As stated above, the Isle of Man was included in the Southern islands ("Sudreys"); the addition of "and Man" may have been made in the 17th century in ignorance of the proper application of the name of Sodor to the bishopric of Man.[11] It is suggested that St Patrick's Isle, being the location of the cathedral for the Norse diocese of Sodor, by some confusion itself became known as Sodor.[12] By the late 16th century the terms "Sodor" and "Man" had become interchangeable, the bishopric being named in legal documents as "Sodor" or "Man" or "Sodor and Man", or sometimes all three, for the avoidance of doubt (e.g. the grant of the lordship of the Island to the Earl of Derby in 1610 included "the Patronage of the Bishopricke of the said Isle of Mann, and the Patronage of the Bishopricke of Sodor, and the Patronage of the Bishopricke of Sodor and Mann").[13]
Until 1604 the bishops signed themselves "Sodorensis"; from 1604 to 1684, sometimes they used "Soderensis" and sometimes "Sodor and Man"; between 1684 and 2007 all bishops signed "Sodor and Man" or "Sodor and Mann". However, the present bishop signs "Sodor as Mannin", the Manx Gaelic equivalent, as did his predecessor." --Johnsoniensis (disputatio) 15:18, 23 Decembris 2020 (UTC)

text: OK, but does that require any change to this page? Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 17:59, 23 Decembris 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Sodor & Man"
Disputatio:Ioannes Holpenius

message: The present name "Iohannes Holpenius" seems to be a misreading by Blocher in this newspaper article http://www.bernaktuell.ch/documents/ba_199.pdf, it's also in my opinion no high quality source. He makes another mistake: it says "BASILEENSIS" in the inscription, not "Basilensis". The page should be moved back to "Ioannes Holpenius" or "Iohannes Holbenius" (as he is called in Hofmann, "lexicon universale"). The information in the description page on Wikimedia/Commons is much better, it's sourced to John Rowlands, Holbein : the paintings of Hans Holbein the younger, Boston, 1985, p. 239
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Hans_Holbein_the_Younger,_self-portrait.jpg
--Archifabulo (disputatio) 14:19, 11 Novembris 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: You are right, and I am sorry that I didn't pay heed to the inscription. My only worry was that no source was cited for Ioannes Holpenius. Please, feel free to move the page back. Neander (disputatio) 19:43, 11 Novembris 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: :I'll move it back to "Ioannes Holpenius" then, though "Holbenius" seems to be more common, so I don't know which would be better. I found another source here: "Vita Joannis Holbenii, pictor Basiliensis", in: Mōrias Enkōmion = Stultitiæ Laus / Des. Erasmi Rot. Declamatio, Cum commentariis Ger. Listrii, & figuris Jo. Holbenii. 1676 http://diglib.hab.de/wdb.php?dir=drucke/li-2207&pointer=61 --Archifabulo (disputatio) 20:05, 11 Novembris 2016 (UTC)

message: Meyers Großes Konversations-Lexikon, tomus 9. Lipsiae 1907, S. 469-471 (hic in interreti)
thread_title: Fons recensionis mense Maio 2020
Disputatio:Cibus viarius Mexicanus

message: The Latinity didn't deserve -5, but revision is certainly desirable! The second sentence treats a whole string of Spanish words as if they were declinable Latin. There is also some translationese (English-based?). Anyway it's L-1 for the present. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 15:33, 15 Novembris 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Latinitas
Disputatio Categoriae:Ostentatores televisuales

message: Nomen: "televisuales"? Traupman nomen adiectivum attestatur televisifici. IacobusAmor (disputatio) 22:40, 16 Novembris 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Diccionario auxiliar offert "televisorius, televisualis"  Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 09:46, 17 Novembris 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Nomen
Disputatio:Anna Elissa Radke

message: Salve! Tibi assentior scribenti "primùm est forma classica", - sed significans the first time / per la prima volta; puto egoquidem hic non de uno (et primo) carmine edito agi, sed de primis sive carminibus sive libris: initio ergo vel primo.
De nominibus urbium iterum tibi assentior: vocem urbs adposito nomine in casu genitivo (ut reperimus in Vergilii Aeneide 3,293: celsam Buthroti accedimus urbem) legimus, - sed solum apud poetas. Nostrum autem hic non est carmina componere. Ergo: vel in urbe Hamburgo vel Hamburgi (casus locativus) in urbe (celeberrima) vel (ut nunc lego) simpliciter Hamburgi. Si tibi nota sunt testimonia earum rerum a me neglecta, mecum quaeso communices. --Bavarese (disputatio) 14:36, 19 Novembris 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  de mutatione ab anonymo (IP 94.111.47.58) die 19 Novembris 2016 facta