lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Disputatio:Salamasina

message: UV, I see you've imposed the category "Reges" on this illustrious lady, perhaps in imitation of what unknown partisans have done to the English version. The concept is more problematic than you may have imagined. Historians suggest that the notion of kingship was brought to the islands by Europeans; until then, the local (unwritten) constitution recognized the rule of four large families & districts, each with its own highest title. Salamasina's accomplishment was to combine these titles in her person. (IIRC, she didn't acquire a fifth important title, that of Tui Manu'a, way off in the east in the Manu'a Islands, which remained politically remote from the rest of the archipelago). So, from the European perspective, she ruled "all of Samoa" (all that constitutionally counted), and if you're not going to call her a dictator, what's left if not to call her a queen? But the union of the titles dissolved on her death; later historical figures tried to reunite them—and a few succeeded, but, as always, their union dissolved with death. So you see at once how the dynastic element of kingship is missing. ¶ Then too, the Samoan language has developed from the word tupu 'grow, growth, increase' the new concept of 'king' or 'queen', but the word may have begun to be used in this sense only in the nineteenth century, and it almost certainly wasn't applied to Salamasina by her contemporaries, who considered her, rather, to be tafaʻifā, 'sided-in-four', 'four-sided', 'squared'. That's the peak of local honors, not something like a mere "kingship"! ¶ Several subsequent historical figures acquired three of the titles. Does that make them three-fourths of a king? And more acquired just two of the titles. Half-kings?! IacobusAmor 23:14, 5 Decembris 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry, I was lead by (mis?)reading the article at en: into adding this category. I now replaced it by :Categoria:Duces civitatum. Is this acceptable? (Can we consider the land and the people she ruled a civitas?) Please feel free to change or remove this category if it does not cover the concept well! --UV 23:24, 5 Decembris 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: :Yes, it's interesting how freely European-American concepts can be taken over by non-European-Americans. You'll hear Samoans nowadays speaking (with abandon!) of King This and Princess That. One doesn't doubt that something like that attitude has affected numerous websites purporting to give accurate histories. ¶ A European idea that may come close to matching any of the four highest Samoan titles is that of the chief of a Scottish clan. Imagine that Scotland had four such chieftainships, and that every century or two, a man of great character (and good fortune) successfully managed to claim all of them. He might seem a temporary king, but something feels wrong about thinking of him so. ¶ :Categoria:Duces civitatum should be OK for now, though civitas is a bit odd for something that's technically a family, not a state. Maybe the most analogous European concept would be "mafia boss"! IacobusAmor 23:35, 5 Decembris 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Reges
Disputatio:Biblia Vulgata

message: Actually, Andrew, I like to see numbers written out, for otherwise my brain pronounces them as in my native language. Numerals do make for faster reading, but less true to the Latin. If it's of interest, the New Yorker, the most highly regarded magazine published in the United States, spells out all numbers—yes, even sixty-seven trillion four hundred fifty-two billion six hundred seventy-nine million eight hundred forty-three thousand two hundred twenty-one and a half. Sadly, I think it makes an exception for years, both BCE and CE, but I don't have an exemplar at hand to prove my memory wrong. IacobusAmor 14:21, 7 Decembris 2008 (UTC) 
replies: text: Am I the Andrew? I never saw this comment before, but, 8 years and 3 months late, I read it with pleasure :) Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 20:42, 20 Martii 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Spelling out numbers
Disputatio:Vicecomes (familia)

message: Surely the article on the Visconti family should have a disambiguating tag, not the article on the title viscount? --Iustinus 20:00, 11 Decembris 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Don't really understand that. They can both have it, and they both have now. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 14:09, 5 Septembris 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: :I think Iustinus was referring to when it was Vicecomes (titulus dignitatis) for viscount and plain Vicecomes for the Visconti of Milan. They weren't so famous that they should be the default viscounts. Lesgles (disputatio) 13:32, 6 Septembris 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: ::That was true, but in making the last move I think you forgot the discretiva page. "Vicecomes (familia)" was not linked from that page. But it is now, so no problem :) Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 12:49, 10 Novembris 2018 (UTC)

message: The list on this page largely duplicates the lists at Dominium Mediolanense and Ducatus Mediolanensis (which were all on one page until I split them). Having an identical list on two pages is a bad idea, because both have to be edited when corrections and re-spellings are necessary. Logically, the lists on those two pages need not be split by family (since this article exists) and the list in this article could include family members who were not rulers (since those two articles exist). I'll work in that direction.
The images are 19th century redrawings of very low quality (possibly from Sismondi or another similar history). They were copied from 17th century engravings, which are already on Commons and are of better quality, but those in turn were based on 16th century woodcuts (source) which are really nice. I will upload them to Commons and will aim to insert them here. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 13:03, 10 Novembris 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Duplication
Disputatio:Aestiva Romae Latinitas

message: This does not seem an encyclopedic article to me - what do others think?--Xaverius 11:41, 12 Decembris 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Are you talking about style or content? Because as the Latin Wikipedia we definitely need an article on this subject. --Iustinus 20:47, 12 Decembris 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: :Mainly because of the schedule and the contacts, because as it is now, it reminds me more to an ad than to article --Xaverius 19:56, 13 Decembris 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: ::You're right it needs a rewrite, Xavi, but Justin is absolutely right, too. We need this article. I mean if we had to have 100 articles and no more, I'd argue this one would be necessary. I'll work on it (like everything I've promised to work on this semester and haven't had time for...)--Ioscius (disp) 05:54, 14 Decembris 2008 (UTC)

text: Still delenda, Xavi?--Ioscius (disp) 06:53, 14 Decembris 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: :Not any more!--Xaverius 11:05, 14 Decembris 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Delenda
Disputatio:Guity Novin

message: This article has been cross-wiki-spammed. I mark it delenda for this reason and because
# The spammer put it in our disputatio space and failed to create an article
# There is no text at all!
But if anyone would like to create a text in the article space, fine. There is plenty to work from if you look at the German, English or Spanish wiki entries (see link below). Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 10:12, 14 Decembris 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, I think she is interesting enough, so I have written a brief article myself now. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 15:34, 31 Decembris 2008 (UTC)

message: Cross wiki promo try - see here. Already removed on many wikipedia versions. Kind regards, MoiraMoira (discusión) 09:50 31 dic 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Quite true. But en:wiki long ago decided to keep her, so maybe we will too? Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 15:34, 31 Decembris 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: :Hi that's up to you but I suggest you read the english talk page first which enlightened me very much. MoiraMoira 19:12, 31 Decembris 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: ::Thanks for the alert, MoiraMoira. What we usually do, in the case of authors and artists whose work has at least some real exposure in the press, is to retain a short article and add a link to our page Vicipaedia:Propaganda. This includes a list of cross-wiki-spammed articles that have reached as far as Vicipaedia. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 19:32, 15 Ianuarii 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Promo alert

message: The message below was posted on wiki-nl and wiki-de by a colleague administrator on wiki-en:
I am an admin on English wiki. I have blocked en:User:Tiranious and en:User:Bamshadan on the English wikipedia as socks of en:User:Artaxerex, who has just returned after a year's ban. My user page en:User:Tyrenius (global account). Tiranious is an obvious reference to, if not attempt to impersonate, my user name. If there is any reply from you, please post at en:User talk:Tyrenius. Thanks. Tyrenius 18:55, 15. Jan. 2009 (CET)
This is similar to what has been done on wiki-nl - same sockpuppets used. Kind regards, MoiraMoira 19:18, 15 Ianuarii 2009 (UTC)
Usor:Tiranious just registered an account on la.wikipedia. --UV 13:44, 18 Ianuarii 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Update

message: *> Moiramoira was band by Dirk Beestra of the English wiki because of Vandalism ( he wanted to push an article!!). Please see here  and . Please see the warning to her here   
--Tiranious 04:21, 20 Ianuarii 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I have replied on your talk page. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 09:33, 21 Ianuarii 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  About [[Usor:MoiraMoira|MoiraMoira]]
Disputatio Categoriae:Incolae Sericae

message: De nomine huius categoriae vide . --UV 00:17, 17 Decembris 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Maybe the words Serica and Sinae should be explained in the article Sinae itself? --Gabriel Svoboda 12:29, 17 Decembris 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: :"Incolae Serici" est potius scribendum, cum vox "incola" pro nomine masculini generis sit habenda.--MARCVS (disputatio) 04:08, 11 Maii 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: ::Salve, Marce. "Serica" nomen substantivum regionis adhibemus. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 08:16, 11 Maii 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  de nomine huius categoriae
Disputatio:Regnum Asturorum

message: This sems to me as if out of a text book... any ideas?--Xaverius 11:59, 17 Decembris 2008 (UTC)

message: All the original sources of the time (both Christian and Muslim) report of the Kingdom of Galicia [Galliciense Regnum]. Indeed, "Kingdom of Asturias" was a term invented later by the Spanish historiography.
replies: text: That seems to be not exactly true: we have an original source already cited for "Regnum Asturorum". I will add a source for "Galliciense Regnum", since you didn't do that. If you think "Galliciense Regnum" is the commonest term, or for any reason is to be preferred, please explain further and add some more sources here. Thanks. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 16:17, 16 Decembris 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: :The source given to the "Galliciense Regnum" was Gregory of Tours, who died in the 6th century: way before the Asturian Kingdom ever existed. While Asturias is the general modern accepted terminology, Islamic chronicles mentiona ll this region as [the Arabic equivalent to] "Galicia" or "Gallaecia", but this would perhaps be confusing if we consider a) the Suevic kingdom of Gallaecia and b) the later 11th century kingdom of Galicia--Xaverius 20:33, 24 Februarii 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Galliciense Regnum
Disputatio:Ira Marvin Levin

message: De: "Ira Marvin Levin . . . nata . . . mortua . . . fuit scriptrix."—Re vera? Marvin fuit mulier? IacobusAmor 13:58, 17 Decembris 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Commentationem rectificavi. --UV 23:46, 17 Decembris 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Sexus
Disputatio Categoriae:Subdivisiones sui iuris

message: scilicet regioni autonome regiones sui iuris? Vaghi ricordi dei miei studi di diritto, ma non so cosa ne pensano gli altri. saluti e buon Natale--Massimo Macconi 21:42, 17 Decembris 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Fortasse :Categoria:Regiones Autonomae Italiae? Verbum autonomus, licet Graecum origine, utile est Latinizantibus. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 09:53, 18 Decembris 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Titulus categoriae
Disputatio:Saturnus (deus)

message: Care 84.141.227.163, amice ignote, cur haec verba delevisti?
replies: text: De Saturno et re nummaria.

text: -Templum Saturni in Foro Romano infimo clivo Capitolino situm, anno 497 a.C.n. dedicatum,aerarium populi Romani erat in quo pecunia publica, a quaestoribus auctore senatu procurata, custodiebatur necnon tabulae aeneae legum ac signa militaria ibi condebantur. Macrobius scripsit ideo pecuniam populi Romani in templo Saturni custodiri quod regno eius nullum furtum commissum esset. Inventor pecuniae signatae fuisse a nonnullis creditus est : nam vetustissimos asses qui ex una parte caput bifrons Iani ex altera proram navis ostendebant a Iano in honorem Saturni percussos esse scriptores quarti et quinti saeculi (Macrobius, Servius, pseudo Aurelius Victor) crediderunt. Secundum eos navis ibi expressa non alia erat quam ea qua Saturnus in Italiam vectus erat. Sed hodie homines nummorum Romanorum antiquorum periti istos asses tertio demum saeculo ante Christum natum percussos fuisse arbitrantur et navem longam unam ex ea classe qua Romani imperium maritimum Carthaginiensibus vincendis obtinuerunt.

text: - Ut aliis deis qui simul stellae errantes vel planetae erant Saturno dies hebdomadae dicatus est quod etiamnunc in Celticis linguis quibusdam servatur necnon anglice: Satur-day = Saturni dies.
Qua de causa? IacobusAmor 20:47, 18 Decembris 2008 (UTC)

text: Verba restitui. --UV 23:24, 18 Decembris 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Cur?
Disputatio Categoriae:Presbyteri catholici

message: Quid est 'presbyter(-is)'? Scio quia 'presbyter (-i)' sacerdos Christianus est, sed iste michi res nova est.Tergum violinae 20:56, 20 Decembris 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Non possum hanc categoriam movere - sed "presbyteres" non est vocabulum Latinum! Utinam aliquis sollertior quam me eam moveat.82.36.94.228 20:41, 23 Februarii 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: :Recte monetis. Quid igitur oportet dicere? "Presbyteri catholici"? Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 21:44, 23 Februarii 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  mota ex pagina ''Disputatio Categoriae:Presbyteres catholici''
Disputatio:Transubstantiatio

message: Shouldn't the name of this article be Transsubstantiatio (i.e. with double "S" in the middle, trans + substantiatio) ? --94.112.88.52 22:56, 20 Decembris 2008 (UTC)

message: Praeverbium "TRANS", quo Lingua Latina utitur, cum vocabulis quibusdam praecedit, non modo "S", verum etiam "N" amittit, ut per exempla infra demonstratur:
* Trans-itus;
* Tran-scribere;
* Tra-ducere.
Romanus Felix.
thread_title:  Praeverbia Latina 

message: Mos philologicus nobis certe haud despiciendus est. Sed in hac re mihi persuasum est morem theologicum sequi debere. Ex iis enim temporibus, cum de hac conversione disputare coeptum est, a patribus latinis dico, numquam (vide e. g. opera in PL) de transubstantiatione, sed de transsubstantiatione legitur, usque ad definitionem postremam in concilio Tridentino: "[...] denuo Sancta haec synodus declarat, per consecrationem panis et vini conversionem fieri totius substantiae panis in substantiam corporis Ch<risti> D<omini> N<ostri> et totius substantiae vini in substantiam sanguinis eius, quae conversio convenienter et proprie a sancta catholica ecclesia transsubstantiatio est appellata." (Sessio 13, cap. 4). Quae orthographia etiam in omnibus doctorum recentium tractatibus adhibita est. Ergo censeo hanc paginam movendam esse aut hanc theologice semper usitatam vocem saltem referendam. --Bavarese (disputatio) 15:22, 29 Decembris 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Tibi, Bavarese, plene consentio. Bis-Taurinus (disputatio) 17:09, 29 Decembris 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  de nomine
Disputatio:Clavicen

message: Do we have a source for this? -ista being a Greekish root, and clavile being coined wholly from Latin elements it seems a bit unnecessary. Of course if we stick to native morphology, the term will be clavilicen, which I suspect will be unpopular. I suppose there's always clavilarius. --Iustinus 18:05, 21 Decembris 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Noster 82.36.94.228, usor ignotus, verbum clavista ut videtur anteponit, et verbum pianista omnino delevit. IacobusAmor 18:18, 21 Decembris 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: :Iure, mea quidem sententia, pianistam delevit. Tantum quid in loco eius ponendum sit ambigitur. --Iustinus 20:47, 21 Decembris 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: :: Mea quidem sententia clavicen (fem. clavicina) quam aptissimum est verbum. --Neander 21:31, 21 Decembris 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: :::Iam extat nomen 'organista' ex radicibus latina et graeca formatum. Cur non clavilista?82.36.94.228 21:56, 21 Decembris 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: ::::Immo, ὀργανιστής est vox Graeca in toto. --Iustinus 22:39, 21 Decembris 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: :::::Recte dicis. Exemplum aliud invenire conabor!82.36.94.228 23:03, 21 Decembris 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: ::::::Sunt sane talia verba mixta, praesertim in Latinitate nova, neque semper sunt evitanda. Sed, ut supra (anglice) scripsi, hic mihi quidem videmur modum excedere. --Iustinus 00:03, 22 Decembris 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: ::::::: clavicen hic inveniri potest. --Neander 00:32, 22 Decembris 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: ::::::::Michi videtur terminum '-ista' esse vivum et activum in Latina Mediaevali et hodierna, necnon perutilem, cum sententia eius latior sit quam '-cen', qui terminus tantum spectare potest ad eos qui psallunt instrumenta musicalia. Num, gratia exempli 'terrorista' est nomen inveniendum in Latiana hodierna? Non simus omnes Cicerones! 'Clavilista' melius est nomen quam 'clavista', ut opinor, quia psallit clavile non claves. Fortasse 'clavista' est faber clavium?Tergum violinae 18:10, 22 Decembris 2008 (UTC)

message: Clavista ist iam tollita ludis atlethicis. LionhardusCiampa 20:35, 12 Aprilis 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Clavista? 

message: Ave. Addui alia vocabula e Lexico Vilborgiano (editio secunda anni 2009). Tria sunt: clavicen m, clavicina f, et pianista mf. Lexicon dicit omnia tria moderne constructa sunt.
Donatello (disputatio) 16:39, 13 Martii 2013 (UTC).
thread_title:  Alia vocabula
Disputatio:Blues

message: I'm sure I've heard musica caerulea somewhere before. At the very least in the mouth of Stephanus Berard (and hence in Vita Nostra). --Iustinus 14:26, 12 Aprilis 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, but while that catches the color, it misses the semantic evolution: blue = (a color) ---> blue = 'sad' ---> the blues = 'the sads'. So maybe tristia would be a good gloss for the concept, and we can look to Ovid for an attestation of it! IacobusAmor 03:55, 15 Aprilis 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Copied from Rolandus' 1000 paginae

message: How best to translate it?
For from . . . simple narrative rhyming ballads (from en:), the text at the moment has ex . . . simplicibus carminibus narrantibus cuius extrema verba sunt similia sonitu. The last six words accommodate a workaround suggested by Cassell's (since there's no classical word for the concept), but it seems turgid. ¶ For narrative, Cassell's says "render by verb, narrare"; hence the participle, but is that idiomatic? ¶ Suggestions? IacobusAmor 18:19, 22 Decembris 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Well homoeoteleuton is sometimes used for "rhyme," as is consonantia, but neither is technically an exact match. Still, a circumlocution like "cum consonantia homoeoteleutica" just might work, and feel less clunky. As for "narrative," it seems to me that as technical jargon you would be justified in just leaving it as the non-Classical narrativa. Certainly such formations are not alien to Latin. I hasten to mention that that adjective does occur in Servius, though with a somewhat different sense. --Iustinus 19:38, 22 Decembris 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: : You might consider ex ... narrativis cantiunculis extremis verbis consonantibus. --Neander 22:03, 22 Decembris 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Verbum Anglicum: ''rhyme''
Disputatio Categoriae:Clavilistae

message: Pagina est 'Clavilistae praeclari' nuncupata, sed haec est categoria 'clavistae'. Si 'clavilista' potior videtur, potest moveri aut mutari haec categoria?
replies: text: Potest, sed quis eam movebit? IacobusAmor 14:29, 8 Februarii 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: :UVbot (si vult!) Peto igitur. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 14:54, 8 Februarii 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: :: Libenter voluit. ;-) --UV 23:09, 8 Februarii 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Nomen
Disputatio:Franciscus Galton

message: Quae sequuntur a pagina removi pro tempore.
* [[Categoria:Anthropometria]]
[[Categoria:Contraturbones]] <!--en:Anticyclones-->
[[Categoria:Equites Baccalaureati]] <!--Bachelor knights-->
[[Categoria:Eugeneticistae Anglici]] <!--en:English eugeneticists-->
[[Categoria:Exploratores Anglici]]
[[Categoria:Familia Darwin-Wedgwood]]
[[Categoria:Homines de Birminghamia in Anglia]]
[[Categoria:Homines numerorum periti Anglici]] <!--en:English statisticians-->
[[Categoria:Philosophi virides]] <!--en:Green thinkers-->
[[Categoria:Probabilitas]] <!-- the (statistical) theory of probability, about which several articles are desirable-->
[[Categoria:Psychomensores]] <!--en:Psychometricians-->
[[Categoria:Qui Copley Medal abstulerunt]]
[[Categoria:Qui Regium Clipeum abstulerunt]]
[[Categoria:Vestigia Digitorum]] <!--(an attempt at "fingerprints")--><!-- + what would the category "Intelligence researchers" be?--> 
Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 20:03, 27 Decembris 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Categoriae
Disputatio:Hospitium Christi

message: = 'the mightiest master'. Is this for 'headmaster'? For that concept, Ainsworth's gives ludimagister primarius; and for the head of a college, collegii praeses. And if I remember correctly, caput may serve for the head of any such enterprise. IacobusAmor 22:45, 27 Decembris 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: ''Potentissimus magister''
Disputatio:Evangelista Torricellius

message: Salve, mi UV. Laudo tuas emendationes in imagines orthographiam, sed haud intelligo cur delevisti notanda huius commentationis. --Ioscius (disp) 05:21, 28 Decembris 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Notae "" duae erant. Unam solum earum removi. --UV 14:00, 28 Decembris 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: ref
Disputatio Categoriae:Capita

message: Vide Disputatio:Brasilia (urbs)#Categoria:Capitales. --UV 23:45, 28 Decembris 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Iacobum recte dicere censeo. Oportet nos categoria:Capitales ad catergoria:capita movere.--Rafaelgarcia 00:19, 29 Decembris 2008 (UTC)
Vide Vicipaedia:Taberna#Capital cities. --UV 22:48, 17 Maii 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  de nomine huius categoriae
Disputatio:Calvinismus

message: Videbatur mihi articulam scriptus esse ex conspectu Catholico. Et Calvinismus non est universalus de formula duplicis praedestinationis. Vide articula Anglica ut leges descriptionem communiorem. --Flex 16:25, 29 Decembris 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Catholicus?

message: Doctrina, quam hic ostendimus, licet non sit omnibus qui Calvinismum profitentur communis, ex ipsius tamen Iohannis Calvini mente prodiit, ut patet ex eius libris. Debes, si vis, addere quaedam de historia doctrinae Calvinismi. Romanus Felix.
thread_title:  Explicatio
Disputatio:Zingiber mioga

message: "No, no," inquit Iustinus, "the Japanese name is myōga, the Latin name is mioga!"—Quid est "the Japanese name"? Mihi videtur 茗荷!!! Hoc myōga nescio. Quia nomen capitis Tocio scribimus (quamquam aliquando Tōkyō visum), idcirco nobis oportet hanc vocem mioga scribere, non? IacobusAmor 20:02, 29 Decembris 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It's an issue of transliteration vs. translation. Compare Hebrew: שַׁבָּת, Romanized šabbåṯ, Latinized sabbata --Iustinus 01:59, 30 Decembris 2008 (UTC)

text: Oh, and I should have mentioned: Tocio is my fault. It really should be moved to an attested form such as Tochium, Tokium, Tochienum. --Iustinus 03:31, 31 Decembris 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: myōga vs. mioga