lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Disputatio:Fatigatio (symptoma)

message: Apud Nordstedt (Nordstedts svensk-latinska ordbok, 2. upplagan, Holmiae) syndroma  scribitur, ex eo adiectivum chronicum, non chronica, rectius esse, arbitror. Andreas Raether (disputatio) 23:18, 10 Novembris 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: De genere "syndromae" vide s.t.p. Disputatio Usoris:IacobusAmor#Gosh. Norstedt erravit, mea mente, sed non est solus :) Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 12:25, 11 Novembris 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: :Melius ostendas. Tibi, Andrew, gratias ago. At hodie illic aliquid scribo. Andreas Raether (disputatio) 16:35, 11 Novembris 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  ad emendationem recentiorem: syndroma  chronicum seu chronica
Disputatio:Finitor

message: Apud Senecam legimus: "hanc lineam, quae inter aperta et occulta est, id est hunc circulum Graeci ὁρίζοντα vocant, nostri finitorem esse dixerunt, alii finientem." Hoc est ex Sen. Nat. V 11.3 sumptum. Hinc videlicet in contextu: Finitor vel finiens (sc. linea), seu horizon (Graece ὁρίζων).
Hoc est falsum!
Apud eundem Senecam non multo inferius (Sen. Nat. V 11.4) item legimus haec: Ergo ὁρίζων, siue finiens circulus (...). Praeterea videbis Luc. IX 496 ostendit Lybicae finitor circulus orae. Hinc cuivis patebit Latine ὁρίζοντα nec "finitorem" nec "lineam finientem" nec (procul absit) "lineam finitorem", sed circulum finientem vel circulum finitorem appellari. Confer ceterum Vocabularium Oxoniense Latinum, pagina 705, s.v. finitor (3), pagina 703 s.v. finio (1c), p. 318 s.v. circulus (3a).
Patet ex his utique ὁρίζοντα non appellari finitorem; immo ὁρίζοντα appellari aut circulum finitorem aut circulum finientem. [Omnia supra dicta scripsit 46.76.117.189, utens sine nomine, die 14 Novembris 2018.]

message: :Ainsworth (1837): circulus finiens vel finitor
replies: text: White (1938): orbis finiens

text: Levine (1967) orbis finiens, circulus finitor

text: Cassell's (1968): orbis finiens, circulus finiens.

text: Traupman (2007): finiens. IacobusAmor (disputatio) 13:25, 23 Iunii 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Vocabula Anglicum ''horizon'' in dictionariis significantia
Disputatio:Collegium Coquereti

message: "Collegium Coquereti" ab editoribus librorum saec. XVI satis multis nominatur (vide notam nostram et Google). Marie-Madeleine Compère, qui de hac re scripsit, nomen Latinum "[collegium] Coqueretum" fuisse adseverat, sed quo fonte? "Coqueretum" hoc sensu apud Google non reperio, "collegium Coqueretum" omnino nusquam. Ergo, nisi fons coaevus huius nominis reperitur, paginam ad "Collegium Coquereti" movendum suadeo. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 12:44, 6 Decembris 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Tecum concordo. Adiectivus "Coqueretus" mihi quoque dubius, immo non satis certus, videtur. Forsitan an Compère, verba "collegii Coquereti" saepe legens, haec esse pro "collegio Coquereto", non pro "collegio Coquereti" crediderit.  Jeanthorlon (disputatio) 13:57, 6 Decembris 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: :Sic, fortasse! Ergo pro tempore ad "collegium Coquereti" moveo, sed, si plures fontes reperimus, possumus aliud nomen eligere. Nihil apud Vicipaediam immutabile est. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 14:10, 6 Decembris 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  De nomine
Disputatio:LZ 129 Hindenburg

message: "Luftschiff Zeppelin #129" can be found in many recent sources, but I think they are all English sources, and many of them dependent on Wikipedia. The German wiki article (labelled "good article") uses the pagename "LZ 129" and the lemma "LZ 129 „Hindenburg“"; the symbol # doesn't appear anywhere on the German page. In fact I don't remember seeing # (meaning "number") used in any language except American English.
Since the lemma on the German page is identical (except for the German quote marks) to our pagename and lemma, I see no need to write it twice. Our name is the name, in this case, and Latin likes brevity. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 12:51, 22 Novembris 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Aside from that, the "octothorpe" has become a symbol often pronounced hashtag, which in social networks indexes the immediately juxtaposed text, so  that "#129" would list this article in a set of articles containing the number 129. Confusion abounds! IacobusAmor (disputatio) 13:20, 22 Novembris 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: :Ut mihi videtur, aeronavis (theodisce Luftschiff) rigida, anglice rigid airship, est, si et quod constructa a Zeppelin, nominata Luftschiff Zeppelin (i. e. aeronavis Zeppelin), abbbreviatum LZ. Qua re, quia Luftschiff LZ tautologia putanda est. Andreae assentior. --Bavarese (disputatio) 12:52, 24 Novembris 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  German name 

message: The pluperfect of "solere" is very rare, for the same reason that the English had been used to is very rare: a simpler tense serves the purpose.
Of ships, and so I suppose of airships, we may put the name in italics but we don't do it with the number or siglum. Hence we need "DISPLAYTITLE" in this case.
My changes were not mostly corrections so much as tweaks of the word order etc.  I think the Latinitas is now OK. The two sentences about the death of 36 travellers seem to me an unnecessary repetition but I haven't time to fill the space with something new! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 13:35, 22 Novembris 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Adnotatiuncula
Disputatio:Alpes Franconiae

message: Apud Caesarem (de bello Gallico 1.2.3) iam puerilibus annis legi de monte Iura altissimo, et doctus consuetudine tum lingua francica (le Iura) cum theodisca (der Jura) loquentium confiteor mihi nomen Iura generis feminini alienum esse. Quamquam Caesar scripsit de monte altissimo (et de genere Alpium altArum non est dubitandum), tamen puto deliberandum esse, sitne vox mons Iura Franconianus aptior.
Ita. "Jura" verbum masculinum apud Gaffiot Jeanthorlon (disputatio)
thread_title:  Iura FranconiA?
Disputatio:Ricardus Simmons

message: I have semi-protected this page, which was causing useless work because the creator, who does not know what he is writing, inserts false information. We cannot risk publishing false information about living persons. The article can now only be re-created and edited by named accounts. Anyone, of course, can create a named account: my aim is to make it possible to discuss the article so that it can reach an acceptable standard. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 09:41, 29 Novembris 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: IacobusAmor put a lot of work into this page. At his request I have restored a relatively stable version. It remains semi-protected: only named users can edit.

text: Iacobe, your eagle eye will notice that the lemma currently doesn't agree with the pagename; also that two categories ("Alumni ..." and "Iudaei") are not currently supported in the text. I'm sure you'll deal with this -- or, alternatively, if there is a better version of the article somewhere in the history, feel free to restore it over the top of my latest edit. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 12:52, 3 Decembris 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: :OK, I've added sentences about his parentage and education, but it's hardly "a lot of work." In the categories, I've added yet another academic puzzler for you. IacobusAmor (disputatio) 13:48, 3 Decembris 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: ::Let's say "repeated work". Anyway, it's not wasted, that's the main thing! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 14:25, 3 Decembris 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pagina protecta
Disputatio:Matthew W. Taylor

message: Thus later on in the bio in the English wiki. How is Vicipaedia going to accommodate this terminology? IacobusAmor (disputatio) 14:21, 3 Decembris 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: "feminizata"? Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 16:18, 3 Decembris 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: "Trans woman"

message: There seem to be discrepancies between the definition here (and in the English wiki) and the self-description in the internet site, which says: "Matthew W. Taylor is a designer and photographer from San Diego, California now living in Portland, Oregon. After graduating from George Fox University in 2015 with a degree in Advertising and Interdisciplinary Art, he focused on fashion-driven projects for various clients through Aesthetic, an independent design house. He is currently a brand and product designer at Jaguar Land Rover." Are these things true? How to accommodate? IacobusAmor (disputatio) 14:21, 3 Decembris 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Discrepancy

message: Note that this text emanates from a questionable source (see the history of Ricardus Simmons). Can any of it be relied upon? IacobusAmor (disputatio) 14:21, 3 Decembris 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: You're the last editor, so you're the best qualified to answer your own question. As far as I'm concerned, if I'm aware of a new article about a living person added by this automaton, and I notice that it contains serious factual errors, I delete it. If, on the other hand, before I see it, it has been edited by a human (such as you), and has not been marked "Delenda" by this human, I move on. So here's what to do. If a new article contributed anonymously about a living person contains basic factual errors, either edit it and correct the errors, or mark it "Delenda", and explain why! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 16:18, 3 Decembris 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Usor
Disputatio:Sonata clavili 21 in C maiore, op. 53 (Beethoven)

message: Etsi facile sit imaginari, pro idem valere atque Angl. for, Theodisc. für, etc., eiusmodi congruentiam raro habemus. Si "sonata pro clavile" dicatur, pro nullum intellectum conventionalem ad phrasin conferat, quamquam, quae dictio affectetur, sane per Anglicum sermonem coniectari potest. Latine vero potius dativo usi "sonata 21 in C maiore clavili (scripta)" dicere possumus, ut etiam apud Vilborgium suadetur. An quis fonte fide digno pro phrasin confirmare potest? Neander (disputatio) 15:48, 3 Decembris 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Pro instrumentis (1635)? IacobusAmor (disputatio) 17:56, 3 Decembris 2018 (UTC)

text: Sonata pro tabula ab Henrici Ignatii Francisci Biber (circa 1670)? IacobusAmor (disputatio) 17:39, 3 Decembris 2018 (UTC)

text: Interludia musica pro orchestra (1779)? IacobusAmor (disputatio) 17:45, 3 Decembris 2018 (UTC)

text: Theodisca utor lingua materna, ergo germanismum veritus verecundor pro eodem sensu dicere ac für/for. Mea opinione ita scribere solum oportet, si pro für/for mutatis mutandis etiam contra dici potest, e. g. contionari pro foedere aut contionari contra foedus. Alia res sit sane latinitas dubia compositorum operum musicorum; qui per saecula missas pro vocibus (aliquibus) comitante organo conscribunt. (Raro lego etiam ad voces ...) Egoquidem in paginis nostris nonnumquam scripsi dativo usus vel gerundivo secundum exemplum Caroli Orff in suis Carminibus Buranis, quo loco legimus Carmina Burana: Cantiones profanæ cantoribus et choris cantandæ comitantibus instrumentis atque imaginibus magicis. --Bavarese (disputatio) 18:39, 3 Decembris 2018 (UTC)
Utar dativum casum vel gerundivum in titulis paginarum ad brevitatem efficiendam. Vide disputationem "Sonata 29 Beethoven". Iacobus titulum "Sonata pro clavile 29 (Beethoven)" suasit, quamquam "clavile" est nominativus et "pro" ablativum verbum sumit. 
Rex tremendae majestatis (disputatio) 22:45, 3 Decembris 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pro clavile
Disputatio:Negatio calefactionis globalis

message: Climate change denial is a powerful and not inconsequential social force, which has a massive article in the English wiki, with congruent articles in plenty of other wikis, including the Chinese, German, Portuguese, Spanish, and Russian ones. Why, Neander, don't you think Vicipaedia should have such an article? Or was the conversion to a redirect merely a temporary (in)convenience? IacobusAmor (disputatio) 13:49, 9 Decembris 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, I was surprised by that. The original article (see history) was scarcely even a stub, unfortunately, but there should be lots to say. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 14:10, 9 Decembris 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: : Contrary to my habits, I did the changes too haphazardly without getting acquainted with all the articles that have been written on climate change. But yes, the redirection I made was kind of supposed to be "a temporary (in)convenience". I named the article after the Finnish title (ilmastonmuutoskeskustelu), which goes with the English article on climate change denial. The original title negatio calefactionis globalis was connected only to one language, Hebrew, and so I thought it might be better to redirect, for the time being, the stubbie to some bigger article of roughly similar contents. I'm sorry that my clumsy moves caused so much well-earned surprise, and hope that somebody more keen on these issues will do the necessary patchings. Neander (disputatio) 17:32, 9 Decembris 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Esse? aut non esse?
Disputatio:Taricus ʿAzīz

message: Versionem latinam unam habemus pro Ṭāriq: Taric Abenciet.--Xaverius 15:34, 12 Decembris 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: "Taric" non est praenomen Latinum (declinare enim non possumus) sed translitteratio. Translitterationem Arabicam internationalem accipimus. Ergo titulum ad "Taric" movere minime suaserim. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 16:37, 12 Decembris 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Taric
Disputatio:Topeca

message: I don't find any source for "Topeca" or "Topecanus"; I only find "Topekaensis". It's not a beautiful spelling in Latin, but should we move to "Topeka"? Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 12:51, 16 Decembris 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: The spellings of the state capitals come from the article "Civitates Foederatae Americae," where they were added at 06:29 on 13 Decembris 2004‎ by Mycēs, whose editbox explains: "nomina civitatum et capitum secundum Traupman." This probably means that they're found in Traupman's book of conversational Latin, but my copy of it has gone missing, so I haven't been able to check. ¶ The still red state capitals are on my agenda for January, unless someone else gets to them first. If we can indulge in French hamlets with a population of twelve, we should surely tolerate the capitals of the US states! IacobusAmor (disputatio) 13:36, 16 Decembris 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: :Oh, yes, I think we should. A good project. The categories, too, are bound to be useful. For category names, if a disambig is necessary, please prefer the pattern "Categoria:Topeca (Kansia)" rather than "Categoria:Topeca Kansiae". I know we haven't always been consistent but I think we're fairly consistent now.

text: :Helveticus's method was not even to look for Latin, just to use French names at express speed, which has left us with decades of work checking for Latin sources afterwards. If Myces was really using Traupman for all of these cities, that's perfect (we may not always go along with Traupman, but I'd regard him as an unbeatable authority on Latin conversations about US cities). I would just beg you to check the Catholic dioceses (from this page). Not all state capitals are in the list, naturally, but some are. It doesn't give us a noun, but the adjective that it gives is worth footnoting. Doesn't take a minute, see how I did it at Iacsonia.

text: :Maybe someone who has Traupman will verify these names for us. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 14:09, 16 Decembris 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nomen
Disputatio:Perfectum

message: In lingua Germanica idem tempus NON dicitur Praeteritum. Vox praeteritum in lingua theodisca res duas significat: primo idem ac imperfectum, secundo nomen generis est omnium trium temporum, quibus utimur dicentes de rebus praeteritis, imperfecti ergo et perfecti et plusquamperfecti. --Bavarese (disputatio) 17:10, 21 Decembris 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  In lingua Germanica idem tempus dicitur Praeteritum?
Disputatio Categoriae:Scientia

message: I took out the supercategory "Veritas". We could discuss over many drinks whether science is a subcategory of truth, but what seems to be clear is that this addition set up a series of category cycles (see the current state of Vicipaedia:Dump/Category cycles) which create practical difficulties in database handling and are therefore better avoided. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 14:01, 22 Decembris 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Categories
Disputatio Categoriae:Periodica medica

message: Periodica scientifica medica sive brevius periodica medica? Andreas Raether (disputatio) 20:46, 30 Decembris 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Tu creavisti! Sed mea mente recte mones: brevius melius. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 13:29, 31 Decembris 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Categoriae nomen ... ita?
Disputatio:Chromosoma 1 (homo)

message: Fons paginae ostendit: 
 <<Chromosomata hominis>>
 <<DEFAULTSORT:Chromosoma 01 (homo)>>
 <<Categoria:Chromosomata humana>>
Cur categoria Genetica divulgatur? (paginis aliorum chromosomatum (2, 3, 4, ...) hic error non est...) Andreas Raether (disputatio) 19:04, 31 Decembris 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Errorne technicus?
Disputatio:Trina Castra

message: Nomen "Tria castra" ab usore Nuada attractum esse videtur. Salva probanda mutatione ad "Trina ...", difficile factu puto esse, ut vici anno 2014 conditi originale nomen latinum reperiatur (nisi forte administratio ecclesiastica per edictum latinum hunc συνοικισμόν etiam suam fecit). Ceterum si omnino credimus nostrum esse tale nomen invenire, pro "Castra" fortasse "Castelli" (vel "Castella") dicendum erit; nam in duobus saltem horum trium ad unum coniunctorum vicorum aedificia mediaevalia sunt, quae italiane "castelli" dicuntur itaque non castra, sed aliquo arcium genere sint. --Bavarese (disputatio) 11:27, 4 Ianuarii 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: "Trini is used instead of tres with substantives of plural form with singular meaning. Three camps, trina castra ; three letters, trinae litterae ; three letters each, ternae litterae ; three letters (of the alphabet), tres litterae."—Robert Ogilvie, Horae Latinae: Studies in Synonyms and Syntax (London: Longmans, Green, 1901), 279. IacobusAmor (disputatio) 14:43, 4 Ianuarii 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: :Iacobe, timeo, ne non recte intellegar. Non de numeralibus dubito, mutationem a te factam valde probo. Sed hoc unum in mente habeo, ut cogitemus, num pro castra satius sit dicere castelli, si, ut Nuada fecit, omnino nomen latinum invenire volumus. --Bavarese (disputatio) 16:03, 4 Ianuarii 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  De nomine
Disputatio:Bismarcopolis

message: The list of "incolae noti", all of them redlinks, looked like puffery. I removed those that had no source (hence no evidence of notability) and those whose sources did not link them to Bismarck (which would be the only reason for listing them here). That's what I normally do when I encounter a list of "incolae noti" that are redlinks. If I was wrong, by all means restore them. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 13:48, 26 Februarii 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Noti?
Disputatio:Vigil

message: poles, itis m. f. policía, miembro del cuerpo de policía
polió, íuí, ítum, íre pulir
pólis, is f. ciudad-estado en Grecia antigua
politáris, e policiaco, policial
politia, ae f. policía, cuerpo de seguridad pública, arte de vigilar, servicio o profesión policial
polítia, ae [mejor que polítía] f. política, doctrina sobre el gobierno de los estados, actividad política
políticus, a, um político, relativo a la política
politó, áuí, átum, áre servir en la policía
Gertindo (disputatio) 21:06, 5 Ianuarii 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Linguam Latinam non e novo construimus. Sicut in aliis Vicipaediis, a fontibus fidei dignis incipimus. Haec verba accipere possumus si in talibus fontibus reperiuntur. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 12:40, 6 Ianuarii 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Propuesta lexical
Disputatio:Septem dormientes

message: Scribens hanc paginam, tacui de superstitione vetusta e mundo rusticorum oriunda: idem caelum ac die septem dormientium fuerit (praecipue imbriferum), per septem hebdomades sequentes fore. Inscius enim sum, an tantum Theodisci in tales res credant. - Ceterum, omnibus ad paginam amplificandam contribuentibus gratias acta sit. --15:07, 10 Ianuarii 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Res relicta tacita 

message: Num quis earum rerum gnarus velit picturam istorum Septem ecclesiae Rotthof huc transferre?--Bavarese (disputatio) 15:36, 11 Februarii 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  De pictura desiderata
Disputatio:Bylina

message: Iacobe, multa bene correxisti, sed de "populo gratus" dubito. Cum "popularis" scripsissem, non "populo gratus" dicere volui, sed simpliciter "a populo creatus", "sine auctore", ut Volkslied, canto popolare, chanson traditionelle (Anglice nescio). Quomodo hoc dicamus? "Vulgaris", "traditionalis"? Demetrius Talpa (disputatio) 15:44, 12 Ianuarii 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Russicum ('populi Russici') tantum? IacobusAmor (disputatio) 16:00, 12 Ianuarii 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: : Bylinae a populo Russico Russice creatae sunt, chansons de geste a populo Francogallico Francogallice, nimngakan ab Evenkensi etc. Genera varia poeseos epicae "popularis" (a populo creatae) sunt vel "traditiοnalis" vel nescio, quod dicturus sum. Demetrius Talpa (disputatio) 16:09, 12 Ianuarii 2019 (UTC)

text: : "Vulgare", nam ipse creavisti eruditio vulgaris = folklore. Sed fontibus caremus. Demetrius Talpa (disputatio) 16:20, 12 Ianuarii 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: ::Aut "vulgaris" aut "popularis" dixerim. Hanc citationem e Lewis & Short s.v. "popularis" extraho: "popularia sacra sunt ... quae omnes cives faciunt nec certis familiis attributa sunt". Mea mente "populo gratus" aliud sensum habet. NB locutio Anglica popular song sensum quem volumus certe habuit sed nostro tempore binos sensus confundere potest; Anglice etiam folk song, traditional ballad (etc.) dicere possumus.

text: ::Verbum cantilena Latine exstat, tam ab antiquis quam a mediaevalibus adhibitum. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 16:34, 12 Ianuarii 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: :::Russicum (tantum) adiectivum falsum, et vocabulum e Slavis Orientalibus aptius esse videtur. Legite definitionem in enwiki: "Bylina or starina . . . is a traditional East Slavic oral epic narrative poem." = Bylina sive starina . . . est traditionale populorum Slavicorum Orientalium poema narrativum et epicum plerumque ex tempore dictum. IacobusAmor (disputatio) 18:01, 12 Ianuarii 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: :::: Andrea, cum populari locus bonus e L&Sh est. De cantilena cogitandum est. Gratias ago.

text: :::: Iacobe, "La byline ... est une forme traditionnelle de la poésie narrative héroïque de la Russie ancienne...", "Eine Bylina ... ein mittelalterliches russisches Heldenlied", etc. Russia non semper Foederationem Russicam anni 2019 significat. "Russia Kioviensis" de tempore antiquo dicimus, non "Ucraina Kioviensis". Ucraina et Russia meridionalis aliud genus poeseos epicae vulgaris habet, dumas, dumas cozacicas. Sed corrigas, si velis; Slavicum orientale non error est, sed difficilius intellectu. Demetrius Talpa (disputatio) 18:33, 12 Ianuarii 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Popularis
Disputatio:Cuniculi Claudii

message: Fontem locutionis "Cuniculi Claudiales" non reperio. "Cuniculi Claudii" (confer nomina viarum, e.g. "Via Claudia Augusta") in contextu Francogallico p. 42 huius documenti habemus. An movere oportet? Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 18:41, 13 Ianuarii 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Oportet, et quidem variis de causis. Neander (disputatio) 19:29, 13 Ianuarii 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  De titulo
Disputatio:Thoas Aetolus

message: sqqu. est et sequentia, abbreviatio vetus (e.g. 1, 2 etc.) Corrigas, ut velis, Iacobe, si non placet. (Νonnulli q sine u esse non posse dicunt, ergo non sqq., sed sqqu.). Demetrius Talpa (disputatio) 19:22, 18 Ianuarii 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Saepe sqq., nunquam sqqu. vidi! "Nonnulli" ut videtur errant. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 14:24, 19 Ianuarii 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: :Seqq., like English ff, is lazy & vague and is therefore deprecated by styleguides, at least in English. If an author knows the number of the first pertinent page, the author owes the reader the number of the last pertinent page. IacobusAmor (disputatio) 14:37, 19 Ianuarii 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: ::Tibi consentio, Iacobe. Si sqq. videmus, citationem aut emendamus, si possumus, aut emendationem ad lectorem sequentem relinquimus. Talis citatio iam meliorem censeo quam nulla citatio. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 15:34, 19 Ianuarii 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  sqqu.