lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Disputatio:Theoria catervarum

message: So many languages have thrown in the towel and adopted a form of the term group that one almost wonders if :la: shouldn't, at least in this technical sense, and have grup(p)us, -i. Confer: :ca:Teoria de grups, :de:Gruppentheorie, :en:Group theory, :es:Teoría de grupos, :eo:Teorio de grupoj, :fr:Théorie des groupes, :hr:Teorija grupa, :id:Teori grup, :it:Teoria dei gruppi, :nl:Groepentheorie, :no:Gruppeteori, :nn:Gruppeteori, :pl:Teoria grup, :pt:Teoria dos grupos, :ru:Теория групп. IacobusAmor 00:24, 14 Augusti 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Putasne illud: Du Cange vel De mercatura, cambiis, sponsionibus, creditoribus, fidejussoribus ... Von Benvenutus Straccha? --Alex1011 09:23, 14 Augusti 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: :Gratias, amice. Nunc vide lemma. IacobusAmor 11:52, 14 Augusti 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: ::I agree especially given the duCange attestation for the meaning of the gruppus term that it makes sense for gruppus to translate algebraic group. --Rafaelgarcia 12:39, 14 Maii 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: :::What's the state of our knowledge now? As it is, the notes give attestations of the existence of the word "gruppus", but not its modern mathematical sense. If we do change to theoria grupporum, which might be best, we could maybe include a "convertimus" note or the like. Lesgles (disputatio) 20:59, 16 Decembris 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Nomen
Disputatio Categoriae:Pagi Portugalliae

message: Secundum commentarium Districtum, pluralis huius nominis forma in casu nominativo est districtus, non districta. Ergo recte: "Categoria:Districtus Lusitaniae." IacobusAmor 02:39, 14 Augusti 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: ... aut, Usor:Jfilipemo adnuente, "Districtus Portugalliae". Vide Disputatio:Lusitania. Movere tandem oportet? Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 08:54, 14 Augusti 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: :Movenda mihi videtur. Alex1011 09:14, 14 Augusti 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: ::Ita, movenda. IacobusAmor 12:15, 28 Septembris 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: ::: Movi. --UV 21:51, 3 Octobris 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  ex pagina ''Disputatio Categoriae:Districta Lusitaniae''
Disputatio:Tabacum

message: Addidi plures libros, in quibus hoc verbum in poematibus exstat; nempe "tăbācum" apud omnes eorum legitur. Sed quidam auctores primam syllabam acuere volunt, e. gr. Adler, Riddle & Arnold, Boudot. Hoc tamen dubitandum est, puto, nam, quamquam strenue conatus, hoc verbum eo modo a poetis neo-Latinis adhibitum invenire non potui. Sodales, quid de hac re sentitis? --Alatius 15:04, 14 Augusti 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vocalium longitudines
Disputatio:Linum xylinum

message: Habemus nos commentationes tres xylon, xylinon, et gossypium (genus). Incertus sum num sit necesse habere omnes tres. Xylon habet nexus intervicios tantum cum fr: et oc:. --Ioscius  ∞ 14:31, 15 Augusti 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Fortasse commentarios Xylon Xylinonque commiscendos esse, Gossypium (genus) conservandum. IacobusAmor 14:36, 15 Augusti 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: :Exscpectare verba Fabulli debemus. --Ioscius  ∞ 15:48, 15 Augusti 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: ::Ita, tribus commentationibus a Fabullo inceptis. Vide et Disputatio:Xylon. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 08:50, 17 Augusti 2010 (UTC)
Haec tres paginae hanc inter se habent dissimilia:
*Gossypium est genus botanicum.
*Xylon (vel gossypion) est frutex 'lanigerus' (Anglice 'cotton plant', Francogallice 'cotonnier) in genere Gossypio; non omnia tamen Gossypia 'lanam' gerunt, et eam ob rem non omnia Gossypia 'xyla' appellanda videntur.
*Xylinon (Anglice cotton) est lana et linum e xyli seminibus productum.
Assentior Iacobo: de xylo et xylino legendum est sub eodem titulo (ita in pagina Anglica de xylino agenti etiam de xylo scribitur). Si vos ceteri consentitis, quo nomine principali de xylo et xylino scribamus? 'Xylon', nomen simplex, an 'xylinon', nomen quidem derivatum, sed res magis nota? --Fabullus 09:01, 17 Augusti 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: tres paginae sunt
Disputatio:Triticum (genus)

message: Zea is a Classical Latin word. Maize was not known to the Ancients. How to resolve this paradox? Well, for a starter, pace tua, Iacobe, we can remember that biological Latin need not supersede the normal use of Latin words. Zea refers to Maize in botanical Latin (and presumably in some forms of Neo-Latin), but in Classical Latin it refers to hulled wheats. In other words, Zea = tiphe et far (or to put it in your terms, Triticum monococcum and T. dicoccum.) I may be losing the fight to refer to species, especially those known to the ancients, by their common Latin name, but if we are not going to list biological entities under their normal appellation, we have to at least remember that these terms exist. --Iustinus 16:39, 13 Augusti 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Cur scripsit Iustinus triticum ex maizo evolutum fuisse?

message: The same things has happened to "wheat" that happened with Homo sapiens and Gens humana.  English WP has various overlapping articles, and the List of 1000 Pages in Meta has changed which one it points at.  In this case I think it's right:  the change is from :d:Q12106 (which is :en:Triticum, the genus) to :d:Q15645384 (which is :en:Wheat, the staple grain).  But this leaves us missing an article.  I propose, therefore, to rename this page to "Triticum (genus)" and create a new page called something like "Triticum (alimentum)" or perhaps just "Triticum."  Another possibility would be to change Wikidata so the present page relates to the English article on Wheat-as-food, but I'm not sure that's right.  Comments?  A. Mahoney (disputatio) 14:28, 12 Februarii 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: The English articles do indeed overlap: there's quite a lot of taxonomy at :en:Wheat. But we won't have much overlap: there is very little about wheat-as-food in this article, and evidently there's lots to say. So, yes, start another article and I'll try to help with it if necessary! I would go for Triticum (alimentum) I think. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 15:11, 12 Februarii 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  botanical vs. culinary articles
Disputatio:Bonsound

message: I don't have time to work on this right now, but if they "book" (i.e. "hire"?) musicians or performances, that would possibly be "conduco" ... Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 08:34, 20 Augusti 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: :en: reads "Bonsound is a Montreal-based company that manages, books and promotes music" alors que :fr: a comme sous-titre "Gérance, promotion et booking" et puis "Booking et Promotion." I'm under the impression they're talking about booking the concerts for the bands and whatnot. ('booking' sur :fr: aurait donc le sens de 'réservation.') Would that make sense? Mattie 19:58, 20 Augusti 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: :A "company that manages, books and promotes music" doesn't make sense. Such companies traditionally manage & book acts (or bands or performers), not music itself. I'd guess Andrew is right (except that the hiring is hiring out, not just plain hiring, or is it?), and the company perhaps greges musicos procurat, locat, adiuvat, 'manages, hires out, and promotes musical bands'.  IacobusAmor 23:14, 20 Augusti 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: ::Looks good to me. I'm fixing it right now. Thank you both for the help! Mattie 14:07, 22 Augusti 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Temp
Disputatio Formulae:Comitatus Novi Eboraci

message: New York State has sixty-two counties; New York City has five boroughs (coterminous with five counties, but lacking functioning county governments). What the best Latin word for the latter concept might be is in doubt, but it might want to be the same as whatever Latin word serves for the twenty arondissements municipaux of Paris and the fourteen regiones of the City of Rome under Augustus. IacobusAmor 11:49, 22 Augusti 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: : I agree with you. I have taken the name comitatus only because it was the one already used in the two existing pages.--Helveticus montanus 11:59, 22 Augusti 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: :: Burgus would be the obvious choice, though I can't find a source specifically referring to New York. Otherwise, maybe regiones, as in the divisions of Rome. Lesgles (disputatio) 20:52, 1 Martii 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: :::Yes, the regiones of Augustan Rome were regiones, and I would say we can always use that term for a subdivision of a city if we don't happen to prefer another. In this case, the word "borough" has Saxon origins, and the boroughs of king Alfred's Wessex were burgi in Latin sources, hence our :Categoria:Burgi Wessexiae. The same Latin term is used for the boroughs of London, :Categoria:Burgi Londinienses. I would suggest that "burgi" is a natural term to choose for New York too. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 21:57, 1 Martii 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: De titulo: Urbs Novi Eboraci Comitatus
Disputatio:Mummius Faustianus

message: Fausianus aut Faustianus? --UV 13:24, 22 Augusti 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Et Fausianum et Faustianum in inscriptionibus invenies--Schulz-Hameln 15:26, 22 Augusti 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  de nomine
Disputatio:Lex internationalis iurum humanorum

message: Scriptum est in pagina: "... impotentia sunt in una civitate (exampli gratia Iaponia) ..." Non intellego: si commissiones impotentes sunt in civitate una, Iaponia non sit exemplum, cum sola est. Quod si Iaponia exemplaris est, de una civitate non loquimur sed potius de civitatibus. Mattie 20:44, 22 Augusti 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Fortasse melius: sunt in singulis civitatibus? IacobusAmor 20:57, 22 Augusti 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: :Pro venia, sed res est de civitatibus non sola Iaponia. Igitur ut in qualibus civitatibus modificavi. --LilyKitty 14:54, 21 Septembris 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Iaponia
Disputatio:Orectolobus maculatus

message: "In longitudinem" may seemingly cut the Gordian knot; but when I queried, in effect, about "Crescit ad 3 m long(a/um/us)," I was wondering whether the long- should agree with Orectolobus (as the unstated subject) or with m. or what. The model in biological prose (as I now observe) seems to favor agreement with the subject or head of the phrase. Examples from Stearn's Botanical Latin: "Pedunculus carpocephali validus ad 3 cm. longus, nudus, apice paleis filiformibus brevibus barbatus" (p. 179) and "Amenta subpraecocia lateralia divaricata demum pendula, e gemmis ad 9 mm. longis" (p. 191). So is the form with the accusative (in longitudinem) OK in classical style? (Neander, I always enjoy your corrections, so please keep helping!) IacobusAmor 16:30, 24 Augusti 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, technically, it'd be "crescit ... longus", but I doubt that such a proleptic construction is good Latinity. Notice that those examples from Stearn involve an elliptic est or sunt, which is OK. If you use crescit, the normal construction is in longitudinem, in latitudinem, &c. This type of construction is OK in classical style. Even Caesar uses it. :-) --Neander 17:24, 24 Augusti 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Crescit ad 3 m in longitudinem
Disputatio:Italia meridiana

message: Secundum Cassell's, meridionalis non est Latinum Aetatis Aureae verbum. IacobusAmor 19:16, 25 Augusti 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: The Translator's Guide still recommends meridionalis. The question is probably better discussed there.--Chris1981 12:36, 15 Septembris 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: :That was Iustinus's recommendation on 11 Novembris 2004. Cassell's still recommends meridianus (and australis), as does White's. IacobusAmor 12:58, 15 Septembris 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: De: "Suademus haec pagina ad Italia Meridionalis moveatur."
Disputatio:Alimentatio prava

message: Potestne penuria victus apte complecti et statum nimis rerum comedendi? Non melius mala nutritio  velut terminus medicus?--67.228.134.42 05:08, 28 Augusti 2010 (UTC)

message: Neque "alimentatio" Latinum est neque ea videtur posse esse "prava". Id quod dicturi videmini esse videtur "deficiens corporis alimentum".
replies: text: Recte monent, mea mente, ambo supra disputantes. Exstat in Latinitate medica hodierna (certe non classica) verbum "Malnutritio". Theodisca de hac re commentatio definitiones WHO E40-E46 comprehendit, quibus nomina Latina hic habetis. E quibus nominibus, sicut Theodisci Mangelernährung, nos Malnutritio extrahere possumus. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 09:46, 12 Novembris 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Barbara dicta 

message: Haec verba legimus in dissertatione Clementis Orsetti in bibliographia huius paginae citata (in pagina 10]. Nonne haec verba titulus aptus neque fictus essent? Bis-Taurinus (disputatio) 21:18, 21 Novembris 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Prava nutrimentorum conditio
Disputatio:Camera Repraesentantium Civitatum Foederatarum

message: The searchbox shows 212 instances of this locution. Am I missing something, or isn't the correct form Camera Repraesentantium? Can a bot fix it? ¶ Did anyone consider Camera Repraesentativorum? The latter word is apparently a well-attested (albeit medieval) term and its meaning more obviously evident to native speakers of English, the language used by all representatives in the said chamber. IacobusAmor 11:14, 30 Augusti 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Mendum hodie iterum observatum (sed nunc 214 "instances"). IacobusAmor 12:09, 6 Iulii 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: "Camera Repraesentantum [Civitatum Foederatarum]"

message: Latin for this 'speaker' is given as rogator comitiorum and senatus praeses and senatus princeps in Ainsworth, compiled in an age when the Speaker of Parliament might actually have been expected to break out into Latin from time to time. IacobusAmor (disputatio) 18:46, 4 Decembris 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Prolocutor camerae
Disputatio:Cassis Agrisiensis

message: I couldn’t find a source for Agris. Please move the page if necessary.--Chris1981 05:16, 4 Septembris 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: There almost certainly will be a medieval Latin name for the village, but it doesn't seem possible to find it on line. Maybe someone will come by and tell us. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 12:14, 4 Septembris 2010 (UTC)

text: Is it really coral? I wonder where they got that from. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 12:31, 4 Septembris 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: :Some redish stuff that either the Greek or the Phoenicians scratched off their boats and sold to the Celts for a very reasonable price I would guess.--Chris1981 02:48, 5 Septembris 2010 (UTC)

text: :I can't see the difference between the old and the new lemma by the way.--Chris1981 04:37, 13 Septembris 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: ::Nor can I: it was just that the old one, for some reason, couldn't be easily found or linked to. UV explained on the Vicipaedia:Taberna#Font puzzle what the problem appeared to be. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 07:23, 13 Septembris 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: :::OK, thanks. I guess I accidently switched my keyboard settings.--Chris1981 12:23, 13 Septembris 2010 (UTC)

message: Might be OK actually. Found this.--Chris1981 15:23, 21 Novembris 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fons nominis loci
Disputatio:Melodrama (musica)

message: Iacobe, terminum q.e. ars exsecutiva ipse finxisti? Quamquam puto formam "exsecut-ivum" recte compositam esse, de exsistentia adiectivi q.e. exsecutorius monere velim. Re vera mea non magni refert nec te reprehendere volo, nam mea opinione nulla lingua etiamdum vocabulorum abundantià submersa est. :-) --Neander 15:43, 4 Septembris 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Haec pagina re vera optima est et mihi placet eam legere. Attamen, nomen eius conspicio habere problemata. (1) opera Latine sensu singulari praecipue significat Anglice "job" (labor of a freeman); (2) opus autem  (cui opera plurali sensu) significat Anglice "work" (sensu concreto, res  ipsa facta ab operario).

text: A. Oportet autem hanc Vicipaediam paginam habere de opera (:en:Job (role)) et mihi videtur titulum verum eius "opera" aptior est.E.g. apud Lewis et Short legimus de sensu principali: "ŏpĕra, ae, I service, pains, exertion, work, labor (opus is used mostly of the mechanical activity of work, as that of animals, slaves, and soldiers; opera supposes a free will and desire to serve)."Movemusne hanc paginam ad quid? : "opera in musica", "opera (ars theatralis)"??

text: B. In paginis "theatrum lyricum" et "theatrum prosae" (prava latinitate) et "ars scenica" et multis aliis apud Viciapediam video usum phrasis "theatri lyrici" sensu hodierno "opera" (in sensu adhibito in hac pagina), et video conatum ad verbum "theatrum" adhibendum sensu Anglice "theater" ad "theatrum" dividere in "theatrum lyricum" sensu "musical theater" et "theatrum prosae" sensu "non operatic theater". Quod ad nomina et terminologiam spectat, confusionem mihi videtur regnare hic quia haec divisio contradicit quod dicitur in pagina praesente nomine "opera".

text: Honore omnibus--66.171.178.34 10:25, 28 Octobris 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: :B.—De theatro lyrico recte mones, amice sine nomine. Locutio theatrum lyricum apte =  aedificium Francice Théâtre-Lyrique appellatum et societas operatica quae id administravit, atque per metonymiam genus spectaculi ibi datum. (Vide Index generum operarum, commentarium iam imperfectum.) Falsum nomen Latinum—falsum quia omnia genera operarum in musica significare conatur—ut videtur ex Italico cuiusdam scriptoris calamo iam dudum venit, qui quid sui consilii sit fortasse proponet. IacobusAmor (disputatio) 14:07, 28 Octobris 2012 (UTC)

message: De: "sive moderne constructum nomen melodrama." Sed melodrama est genus dramaticum quod argumentum personasque in maius extollit: melodrama non est opera. IacobusAmor (disputatio) 20:46, 16 Maii 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: :Salve Iacobe. Bene quidem. Nesciebam. Gratias ago. -- Donatello (disputatio) 13:42, 17 Maii 2013 (UTC).
replies: text: ::Iam removo. -- Donatello (disputatio) 13:43, 17 Maii 2013 (UTC).

text: :Sensu verbi hodierni "mélodrame" omnino aliud sensum habet quam verbum latinum "melodrama", immo opera omnino non est latinum.--Viator (disputatio) 09:29, 9 Maii 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Melodrama
Disputatio:Musica classica

message: The text here currently refers to the Classical period of music, not the classical genre of music. I am moving the text to Aetas Classica (musica) and writing a new article. --SECUNDUS ZEPHYRUS 04:42, 10 Septembris 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Curious terms indeed. A naive reader might think that classical music must be the music of the classical period—but noooooooooo! The classical period was the time from roughly 1760 to roughly 1828, which later listeners looked back to as a standard of excellence; this attribution by a later age is a historical fact, so just reporting that news isn't problematic. Classical music, however, is such a vague concept, with so many cultural ramifications, that making a reliably comprehensive definition is exceedingly difficult. It has been regarded as "art music" (thus Wikipedia), but that attribution ignores that almost all of it was made for practical purposes, and hardly any of it was made according to an ideal of "art for art's sake." It has been regarded by some as "music of the upper classes," but that definition rests on another problematic idea, that of social classes. It has been held to be more "complex" than other kinds of music, but that notion too has been challenged. IacobusAmor 12:39, 10 Septembris 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Classical music vs. classical period

message: I've added a timeline of composers, taken from the Dutch page.  I want to record here a curious fact:  the <timeline> tool does not handle redlinks.  It makes a link to the page even if the page doesn't exist -- see for example Gulielmus Machaut, on whom we don't at the moment have a page.  A. Mahoney (disputatio) 12:11, 20 Aprilis 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: He was hiding at Gulielmus de Mascandio. Lesgles (disputatio) 21:44, 23 Septembris 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Timeline
Disputatio:Ars viaria

message: "ars urbana est motus artificiosus..."="urbane skill/art is artficial movement/motion..."--123.192.64.184 12:53, 13 Septembris 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Wiki Anglicum: "Street art is any art developed in public spaces," quod fortasse = Ars viaria est quaelibet ars in propatulis exhibita. One doubts that "developed" is the best concept in the English, since street art could well be developed (conceived, excogitated, planned) in private. Also, the notion of "public spaces" includes exteriors & interiors of sacred & secular public buildings (e.g., churches & libraries), many of which were & are ornamented by art—but not of the kind said to be "street art." IacobusAmor 13:11, 13 Septembris 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: :I got ars urbana from the Spanish/Portuguese/French expressions, which I found more appropriate since it's not necessarily done in a street, as such. I wouldn't mind if it was changed as per the English one, though. Also, I got motus from Motus romanticus, so if we decide against that word for 'movement', we'd need to check out that page as well... Mattie 15:43, 13 Septembris 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: ::Where did you get the idea of a "movement" (as part of the definition) from? ¶ The Spanish wiki specifically says the term was originally English: street art. ¶ Urbanus presents two difficulties: (1) most important artists throughout the past many hundreds of years have lived in cities and can rightly be called urban ; (2) according to Cassell's, the adjective urbanus easily gets extended to mean 'refined in manner, elegant' and 'urbane', somewhat different from the rough-and-ready ethos of street art. IacobusAmor 16:40, 13 Septembris 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: :::I got "movement" from the French article: "Le street art ou art urbain est un mouvement artistique." Also, the Italian aticle has a section called "Movimento street art in Italia," and the Portuguese refer to it as an "underground movement." I think referring to street art as a movement's nice, as it is something that's been growing, right? Of course, it's always existed, but street artists weren't selling for a million dollars before, as one of them's now doing. Also, art supplies (spray paint, etc) are cheaper and more available to the public than during, say, the Renaissance. What do you think?

text: :::As I said, I have no objection with something like ars viaria. :) Mattie 21:35, 13 Septembris 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Definitio
Disputatio:MIDI

message: vuott dicit: praefero "musicus -a -um"; mihi verbum classicius esse videtur quam "musicalis -e".
replies: text: Musica Instrumenti Digitalis Interfacies sic explicatur:
replies: text: :Musica = nomen adiectivum, casu nominativo

text: :Instrumenti = nomen substantivum, casu genetivo

text: :Digitalis = nomen adiectivum, casu genetivo

text: :Interfacies = nomen substantivum, casu nominativo

text: Ordo adj. + sub. genetiv. + sub. nominativ. = ordo Latine usitatus, 'a musical interface of a digital tool' (vide Bradley's Arnold). Vel fortasse melius, secundum significationem Anglicam: Musici Instrumenti Digitalis Interfacies 'a digital interface of a musical tool' (si digitalis revera sit verbum Latinum). IacobusAmor 12:10, 15 Septembris 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: ::sed hic  interfacies potius dicatur digitalis quam musica; sunt quidem instrumenta musica quae per hanc interfaciem data electronica communicare possunt--123.192.64.184 13:33, 15 Septembris 2010 (UTC)
Praefero secundam significationem:  Musici Instrumenti | Digitalis Interfacies.--Vuott16:35, 15 Septembris 2010
             
Noli totam locutionem et textum mutare, si rectum iuxta grammaticam ! Sed errata corrige --Vuott 02:25, 15 Septembris 2010

text: In Vicipaedia, computator est "homo qui computat"; machina autem quae computat dicitur computatrum vel computatorium. IacobusAmor 20:05, 17 Septembris 2010 (UTC)
* armatura electronica = hardware (vide: computatralia ) --Vuott 00:42, 18 Septembris 2010
* claviatura = vide: computatralia --Vuott 01:18, 20 Septembris 2010
* serialis = vide: computatralia --Vuott 01:05, 21 Septembris 2010
* sonus = vide etiam: computatralia --Vuott 01:19, 21 Septembris 2010
Non utile est Midi paginae solum dubitare de eius latinitate, melius errata indĭcare immō corrigere !  --Vuott 16:40, 21 Septembris 2010
thread_title: Nomen