lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Disputatio:Certamen cantionum Eurovisionis

message: Scripsit homo ignotus 84.9.34.219: "Titles of things in English take Capital Letters At The Beginning Of Every Word. I wish foreigners would learn this."—One of the reasons "foreigners" haven't learned this is that it's false: in English-language publications, little words—articles, prepositions, often the word as—are usually lowercased unless they're the first or last word in a title; but some English contexts, such as bibliographies in scientific publications and the catalogue of the Library of Congress (try it and see:
http://catalog.loc.gov/cgi-bin/Pwebrecon.cgi?DB=local&PAGE=First), employ what 84.9.34.219 suggests is a style "foreign" to English. That said, there's a larger question here: why should nonnative speakers of English (when writing in Latin) follow English models? IacobusAmor 00:51, 14 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Capital letters

message: Is Eurovisionis Certamen Musicalis really the best translation of Eurovision Song Contest ? IacobusAmor 19:21, 28 Februarii 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: melius: certamen musicum, verbum "musicalis" non inveni, sed "musicus" etiam "musikalisch" (=modus canendi) significare potest. Teutonius 22:10, 13 Septembris 2008 (UTC)

text: anglice "Song", francogallice "chanson", latine: "cantus, canticum vel et cantilena..." Teutonius 22:17, 13 Septembris 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: :Everybody does understand that Cantus here is genitive (Cantūs), right? Is Cantus Eurovisionis Certamen the best word order? One wonders whether the title might be clearer if it were Certamen Cantus Eurovisionis, or even Certamen Cantuum Eurovisionis. IacobusAmor 14:11, 15 Februarii 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: ::I agree! Lesgles (disputatio) 19:51, 24 Maii 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: :::Eurovisionis Certamen Cantuum ... ? Andreas Raether (disputatio) 18:14, 28 Ianuarii 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: ::::Surely one of the radiophonic sites has attested it by now? IacobusAmor (disputatio) 11:27, 14 Maii 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Title
Disputatio:Hamburgum

message: Amici, adeste. Imaginibus tantum spatii consumitur, ut species paginae laedant. Poteritne aliquis imaginum minuere magnitudinem, non autem numerum?--Irenaeus 14:27, 14 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)

message: Cives Hammoniam nomen amant. Vicipedia civitatem Hammoniam appellare debet.--Agnus 03:03, 2 Decembris 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hamburgum / Hammonia 

message: I think Usor:AurinKo is right: the name "Ole" is not connected with Olavus. Its origin is explained on de:wiki. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 11:10, 25 Februarii 2009 (UTC)
Further he is nu more the head of the senate. --80.171.1.237 18:44, 29 Martii 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[:de:Ole von Beust]] 

message: Nescio quando, sed proxima electio futura non erit anno 2008...--Stef.muc 18:34, 7 Martii 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Electio
Disputatio Formulae:Attestatio

message: So do we want this <ref> style? Or something at the top? Or like  where it's a little dot with a stipula looking indexed notebox at the bottom?--Ioshus (disp) 18:56, 14 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Perhaps somethign like :en:template:fact and its related templates. --Iustinus 17:19, 15 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)

message: Should this be moved? Attestor being deponent and all...--Ioshus (disp) 19:35, 14 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Maybe it shoudl just be attestatio.--Iustinus 17:19, 15 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: :works for me--Ioshus (disp) 21:03, 15 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  conprobatur
Disputatio:Ministerium Saeptorum Nationalium (Civitates Foederatae)

message: Translating English 'service' as Latin servitium is suspect in this context: servitium is 'servitude, the condition of being a slave'. Some other concept might be better here, perhaps Ministerium. IacobusAmor 20:36, 14 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Uuuum... to say nothing of parcorum (not to belabor the obvious). --Iustinus 17:39, 15 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)
OK, almost there ;) --Iustinus 22:46, 8 Iunii 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: :I am only asking out of interest: Where is parcus for park attested? I always thought that was horti. Or am I missing something?--Iovis Fulmen 18:45, 31 Iulii 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Titulus: "Servitium Parcorum Nationalium (Civitates Foederati)"

message: OK, I'm drawing a blank here. What does this phrase mean? And what's a unitus? It's not in my dictionary. (Alii Uniti Famosi 'Other Famous Unituses')? IacobusAmor 02:18, 9 Iunii 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It might not be correct Latin, but "unitus" is "unit". --KedemusKedemus 05:38, 13 Iunii 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: :I think, mi Kedame, that that is Dr. Amor's point, here... it's not "correct Latin".--Ioshus (disp) 05:43, 13 Iunii 2007 (UTC)
Ministry of National Niggards...well, an institution perhaps very much called for nowadays, but still ...   :–)   --Neander 03:15, 30 Octobris 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Alii Uniti Famosi in Ministerio Parcorum Nationalium
Disputatio:Georgius Stiernhielmus

message: Sorry for writing in English. He calls himself in genitive Georgi (with one i) Stiernhielmi in the heading of Hercules:
Georgi Stiernhielmi
HERCULES
Wouldn't that be Georgus Stiernhielmus in the nominative?
Skvattram 20:38, 15 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)

message: Isn't imperfect (erat) a better verb form than perfect (fuit) when you tell who somebody was, since it is does not describe an event or action but rather a state?
Skvattram 20:50, 15 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, it is legal to contract -ii to I (though I think in general we should avoid it in article text). Furtermore, Georgius is an ancient, well attested name, whereas I will be surpised if anyone who knew what they were doing ever used *Georgus. --Iustinus 20:58, 15 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: :Instämmer. (N. B. mitt nick.) Georgius B 21:49, 17 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Erat/Fuit
Disputatio:Martinus Lutherus King

message: Since the original guy seems to have been Martinus Lutherus, why is his namesake here being called Martinus Lutherius? IacobusAmor 01:01, 16 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It's been a while since I researched this, but I seem to recall that his name showed up in several forms, but that Martinus Lutherus seemed to be the one with the most authority. But again, it's been a while. --Iustinus 01:10, 16 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: :Melius autem fuit nomen Germanicum Anglicumve Luther solito more Latine verti, ita ut vir gravis Martinus Lotharius King factus sit.--Irenaeus 20:53, 15 Maii 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Luther(i)us

message: Why don't you call him Martinus Lutherus Rex??? Would be more latinised! -- Usor:Marcus Venetivs
replies: text: Because we don't, as a rule, translate surnames. Vide quaeso Vicipaedia:Translatio nominum propriorum. Also, please sign your comments by adding  ~~~~  to the end of  your discussion post. Thanks!--Ioshus (disp) 16:35, 15 Maii 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: :Through the seventeenth century, lots of fluent Latin-speakers translated their surnames (the famous musical composer Heinrich Schütz was sometimes Henricus Sagittarius) or put them into Latin declensions (the famous poet John Milton was sometimes Ioannes Miltonius), but then the fashion changed. IacobusAmor 21:02, 15 Maii 2007 (UTC)
OK thanks, that of course clears things up....Marcus Venetivs 17:52, 15 Maii 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Martinus Lutherus Rex

message: Minor?--Ioshus (disp) 14:18, 10 Iunii 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I wonder if the closer-to-Latin way might be filius? But I am not sure if the word is needed at all. If you look at the interwiki links, in many parts of the world he is simply called Martin Luther King. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 15:11, 10 Iunii 2007 (UTC)

text: But Junior (or Iunior?)is latin.hmmm--Jondel 05:18, 2 Septembris 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: :Junior only appears in that use in Late Latin. I think minor is best, if we need it, though we don't have an article on the father yet, so for now I just moved the page to Martinus Lutherus King. Here's a relevant section from the OLD about minor:
replies: text: ::(distinguishing a person from his older or less recent namesake)

text: ::erus ‥ ~or (i.e. the master's son) Pl. Mer. 112,  Ps. 1268

text: ::~orem Scipionem Cic. Brut. 77

text: ::Balbus ~or  Att. 8.9.4

text: ::alius Micon, qui ~oris cognomine distinguitur Plin. Nat. 35.59

text: ::~or Antonia Tac. Ann. 4.44, Suet. Cal. 1.1

text: :Lesgles (disputatio) 17:02, 26 Aprilis 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Jr. 

message: How do you say (non violent) 'fighter' for peace?--Jondel 23:20, 26 Novembris 2009 (UTC)
It would be nice to have the meaning of something like 'campaigner' instead of the replacement pugnatororator ('speaker')--Jondel 01:26, 27 Novembris 2009 (UTC)
I am replacing orator (speaker !!)with concitor, to mean campaigner.--Jondel 07:43, 13 Decembris 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: pugnator
Disputatio:Flumen

message: Tu "Flumen aqua est quae fluit inter duas ripas" dicere debes.
replies: text: Cur quaeso?! Permaxime dissentio. Vide Disputatio Usoris:IacobusAmor#A B est / A est B et alia.--Ioshus (disp) 15:42, 16 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: :Ergo rivus est fluvius? Scurrilia ista sunt! --Bavarese (disputatio) 21:57, 7 Februarii 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: ::"Fluvius, a river simply as a geographical term ; flumen, not fluvius, is used if the reference is to the stream or current, or if the sense is metaphorical, e.g., adverso flumine (not fluvio), flumen orationis, flumen verborum. Amnis is used of the strength or vastness of a flowing stream."—Robert Ogilvie, Horae Latinae: Studies in Synonyms and Syntax (1901), s.v. "River." IacobusAmor (disputatio) 22:29, 7 Februarii 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Flumen est aqua quae fluit inter duas ripas
Disputatio:Alanis Morissette

message: Isn't Alanis -idis, f more logical? I've certainly always called her that in Latin. And yes, I've spoken of her in Latin before ;) --Iustinus 00:38, 18 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I dunno about logical, but if it's going to be an a stuck on the end, I suspect the etymology should really suggest Alanissa with two letters s.  —Myces Tiberinus 00:52, 18 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)

message: UV, when you say Monaci Bavariae, do you mean for Bavaria to be in the genitive or the locative? If the former, then fine. If the latter, then it should be Monaci in Bavaria, since regions don't have locative forms. --Iustinus 22:25, 21 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Probably I was thinking of the genitive, as e. g. Italian calls Munich "Monaco di Baviera" in order to distinguish it from Monaco "Monaco". My intention was exactly to clarify that we deal with the city in Bavaria here, not the independent State. Btw, the page Monacum starts with Monacum Bavariae… Greetings, --UV 22:54, 21 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Monaci Bavariae
Disputatio:Thomas the Tank Engine

message: Can we delete some of these Thomas articles? I mean...man. Are any of them even in Latin? Alexanderr 01:20, 18 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: See Fabulae de Thomas de Mr. Conductor. Is "man" the reason and the bad Latin another reason? Or are you just referring to the bad Latin and is that the reason why you want to get rid of them? I think we should find a template-solution as mentioned in another place. There are articles which are really bad (and curious), but which we should have. At least on the long run. And it might be opportune to have them now. --Rolandus 07:03, 18 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: :I edited the "res" pages, however I was unable to put a box around my text like you were. Alexanderr 07:04, 18 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)

message: Just in case this gets improved sufficiently so we can keep it:  The English lemma is "Thomas & Friends" and in most languages that have a version of the lemma with "friends" there also is a possessive pronoun. So, shouldn't it simply be:Thomas et amici sui (Anglice Thomas & Friends) est series... The other versions (Thomas The Tank Engine & Friends; Thomas the Tank Engine; Thomas & Friends: Big World! Big Adventures!) could be mentioned further on.  Only an idea.  It's not going to be me who will revise this one...  Sigur (disputatio) 11:54, 9 Aprilis 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Or just Thomas et sui? IacobusAmor (disputatio) 11:59, 9 Aprilis 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: :In any case the lemma and pagename have to be in English, as they are now, unless a Latin version has been published. I deleted the Latin translation following the lemma simply because the one did not correspond to the other. Reading all the above, it may well be the lemma that should change ... but, I likewise observe, I won't be the one editing this. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 13:12, 9 Aprilis 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lemma
Disputatio:Tributum pro hereditate

message: #There is no such word as mortandum.
#Um, isn't "death tax" a pejorative term only used by opponants of the estate tax?
--Iustinus 07:08, 18 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)
#Whitaker's isn't working for some reason, so I couldn't check...sorry.
#Yeah. Alexanderr 07:19, 18 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: How would you phrase estate in Latin then? Vectigal in propertatem donatam ad filios post mortem?Alexanderr 07:35, 18 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: :Vectigal in hereditatem? (heritage tax) --Alex1011 09:45, 18 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: ::My first guess would be that 'to tax something' would be imponere vectigal + dative of the thing taxed, so: morti vectigal imponere or hereditati vectigal imponere, but of course the correct idiom could be altogether different. No guarantees! IacobusAmor 13:30, 18 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: :::Well, yes, but surely there's a more concise idiom that vectigal hereditati impositum. But I get the impression that taxes weren't much discussed by the ancients, which is why the word we use for tax, etymologically at least, really means Duty. But I'm too lazy to look into it just now ;) --Iustinus 16:20, 18 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)

message: According to this   there were "tributum soli", "vicesima libertatis" (5 % on freeing a slave) and vicesima hereditatium (hereditates, hereditatium, if this is not a typing error) 5 % percent on heritage. Vectigal, I think, is more "contributions" "duties", "customs" etc. --Alex1011 00:25, 24 Martii 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tributum hereditatis 

message: In locutione "Multi civitates systema progressiva utetur," quodque vocabulum est falsum, tribus ultimis dupliciter. Time to check a grammar? IacobusAmor (disputatio) 12:39, 6 Ianuarii 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Quinque vocabula, plus quam quinque menda

message: Recognovi definitionem tributi pro hereditate necnon addidi eius notas. Considerate, quaeso, Latinitatem: utrum corrigenda sit necne. Maximas gratias.Urbanus Ferrarius (disputatio) 15:39, 6 Ianuarii 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recognitio materiae
Disputatio:Ius

message: Re "Ius venit a prisca forma *de-uis vel *de-ois. Ius est quod est contra vires, contra iram."—Is that a folk-etymology? According to The American Heritage Dictionary of Indo-European Roots, 2nd ed., ed. Calvert Watkins (Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 2000), Latin ius reflects the Proto-Indo-European root yewes-, not any de-uis or de-ois, and it seems to have nothing to do with being "contra vires, contra iram." IacobusAmor 14:11, 18 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: They sound like ancient etymologies, but cursory googling doesn't turn up any original source. So I added that little disclaimer. If those are genuine ancient, or even medieval etymologies, they are worth keeping, but labled for what they are. The real etymology can easily be included. If I get a chance I'll check Isidore of Seville. --Iustinus 17:08, 18 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: :I can't find anything in Isidore... check QUid differunt inter se ius, lex, et mores... I figured it would be there.--Ioshus (disp) 18:04, 18 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Etymologia

message: Hello, i have a question regarding the academic grade "Dr. jur." / "Dr. iur.". Which one is the correct version? Thanks --141.53.209.145 19:28, 25 Martii 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Either is correct: it depends on whether you use the letter i both as vowel and consonant, or whether you use i for the vowel and j for the consonant. This is optional in Latin. On Vicipaedia, our rule is to use i for both vowel and consonant, so our standard spelling for this would be Dr. iur. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 19:49, 25 Martii 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: :Thanks for the explanation! --141.53.209.145 20:49, 3 Aprilis 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Iuris vs. Juris

message: Based on my reading at A concise dictionary of greek and roman antiquities, it seems that this article's treatment of ius does not do justice :) to the meaning of the concept to the ancient romans. From what I read, ius means right in the sense of a power granted to a man to perform certain actions in a society, a social principle, a liberty, and in the sense of a general obligation of respect between men. The ajudication of these rights by judges often relied in a way on unwritten traditions and standards which correspond to what today we call common law. These rights when codified (written down) are called Leges. The main distinction that the romans made was between ius (obligation between men) and fas (obligation to the gods).--Rafaelgarcia 23:31, 25 Novembris 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Sounds like we need a good 4 pages to do it justice =] --Ioscius (disp) 00:17, 26 Novembris 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Scholarship on Ius
Disputatio:Mundus occidentalis

message: Surely an abomination for civilizatio (itself presumably a newish word)? The pattern of the infinitive is -izare, from Greek -izein. Zee, not ess. IacobusAmor 14:42, 18 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: There are those who argue for -iso in Latin (there are a number of such words attested), but I am not in that number. But more to the point, we really should use the non-newish word civitas or better yet cultus civilis rather than resort to unnecessary modernisms. --Iustinus 17:06, 18 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: :Iustino consentio, noli me numerare inter illos quibus placet -iso.--Ioshus (disp) 00:01, 19 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: "Civilisatio"

message: Not sure how to categorise this. It certainly isn't geography. Is it Cultura? Or is it rather a political concept? Can it be divorced from POV? I've never used the phrase, and I usually switch off when I hear it, so I'm not sure ... Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 13:34, 31 Maii 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, a problematic stub, in need of improvement. I was mainly focusing on the word cultura so I could make links to it. IacobusAmor 13:38, 31 Maii 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: :Somebody told me that Gandhi, when asked what he thought of the civilization of the West, said he thought it would be a very good idea. Fortunately I'd have thought Latin "civilizatio" would naturally carry the implication on which Gandhi was playing (the task of civilizing, rather than the existence of a civilization). Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 13:46, 31 Maii 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Category
Disputatio:Artemisia absinthium

message: Might I suggest we divide the plant and the drink into two separate articles? --Iustinus 16:44, 18 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with that, but for the moment I've restyled the page a bit to make it more logical. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 10:12, 20 Martii 2008 (UTC)

message: Hanc paginam, inter paginas maxime corrigendas, correxi sed non intellego quid sint verba"Remedium ad dubied venditum est," Potest qui scripsit aliis verbis exprimere quod voluit scribere? LioLio 18:52, 19 Martii 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Dubied is a man's name. The instructions for making absinthe were sold to him. --Jmb 20:39, 19 Martii 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: :Just shows how useful those uppercase initials can be! According to en:wiki, the man's full name is unknown. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 10:12, 20 Martii 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: ::"uppercase initials"="litterae maiusculae"; "Dubied", ait usor Jmb, fuit nomen cuiusdam hominis, cui remedium Absinthium venditum est. Hoc exemplum, ait Dalby, monstrat quam utilis sunt illae litterae maiusculae.--Rafaelgarcia 21:08, 20 Martii 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: De dubied
Disputatio:Michael I Rhangabus

message: Estne Michael Latine, sicut Graece? Nunquam vidi Michaelus. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 20:46, 19 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Est quidem: aut sine inflexione, aut tertiae declinationis. Haud dubium quin exstet etiam Michaelus -i, sed omnino non solitum esset. --Iustinus 20:50, 19 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Praenomen
Disputatio Vicipaediae:Aestimatio

message: Your listed criteria are good. Obviously, rating our articles the same way en: does would cause problems, given that very few of them contain the level of detail en: demands, and that we are generally more concerned with latinitas than content! --Iustinus 17:37, 20 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: <<Ahem>> Vicipaedia:Latinitas =] --Ioshus (disp) 17:41, 20 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: :Yes, we are different. :-) This is why I thought we should have such a page and why I listed Latinitas very near to the top. And I like that you say we are generally more concerned with latinitas than content. I think so, too. This page is just a start. I think we need templates for every aspect where we do not have templates yet. Or maybe a template which combines these aspects. We should at least know what aspects are important for us. There might be even a level of latinitas which is worse than "maxcorrigenda" and where we want to say "that's too bad". Ioshus started a page Vicipaedia:Latinitas where we might discuss what levels of latinitas we want to distinguish and how we want to deal with the really bad articles. --Rolandus 21:51, 20 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: ::Perhaps we could have Latinitas as a third criterion, where English has "article progress" and "priority". Or perhaps both progress and priority could be divided into content and Latinitas, giving us four variables. But there still is the problem that the vast majority of our very best pages still don't go into as much depth as their vernacular equivalents, and so would not be rated terribly high if we end up using the same criteria. And I we probably SHOULD use the same criteria. --Iustinus 22:08, 20 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: :::Could someone point me to where en: rates its articles? and on what basis? I'm not all that familiar with the world over there. IacobusAmor 03:31, 21 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: ::::I am refering to :en:Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Assessment FAQ, which was at some pointed linked on this page, but now has been moved to interwiki. --Iustinus 07:49, 21 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: :::::Some projects try to get an overview about their articles, with templates like :en:Template:Football (link is in vide etiam). However, templates like , , , ... are also a form of classification/rating. In fact classification would be a better term, maybe. ;-) --Rolandus 08:11, 21 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)

message: Speaking of latinitas... Movendan ad Vicipaedia:Aestimatio?
replies: text: Hmmm, not sure what the mot juste is, I guess Aestimatio is probably best. --Iustinus 22:08, 20 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Vicipaedia:Aestimatio]]?