lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Disputatio:Psammetichus

message: What is the evidence that Psammetichus is a forename? We need to cite someone who has this forename. If it is simply the name of Egyptian kings, there is no need for a separate page about the name.
Also, this is not (yet) a pagina discretiva nominalis, because it does not link to any articles of this name. Once we have at least two of those articles, there would be a reason to keep this page. Without them it is likely to be deleted. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 09:14, 6 Iunii 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry, I made a mistake. If it is so, then this and the Euripides page can be cancelled. When at least two "Psammetichus" pages and two "Euripides" pages will be made maybe those pages will be recreated. Again, I am sorry. (Usor sine nomine) 11:38, 6 Iunii 2020
replies: text: :No need to apologize. We all do our best.

text: :The principal aim of Vicipaedia is to have more pages with good Latin text (like Tertia filia Hamilcaris Barcae). Many other activities, including making category pages and making discretiva pages, assist this principal aim: but pages of the second kind, not containing encyclopedic text, are quite likely to be deleted or to be completely changed, while pages of the first kind, containing good Latin text and citing sources, are likely to last forever. Or, let's say, to last for a long time :) Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 12:14, 6 Iunii 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Praenomen?
Disputatio:Euripides (nomen)

message: This page, like any pagina discretiva nominalis, needs to link to at least two articles on people who have this name. Currently it links to only one, so it is not a pagina discretiva and there is currently no reason to retain it. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 09:26, 6 Iunii 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: What I wrote above is still true. The page does not function as "discretiva" because it links to only one article. It would need more real text about the name and its history to function as an encyclopedic article itself. Whether that text could be written from reliable sources, I don't know. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 08:15, 16 Augusti 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: :I agree on this one. However, as you have also tagged some other articles, let me mention that I don't think they should be deleted once they link to at least two articles.  If anyone feels like making them real "discretivae", that's fine of course, but it would be the last of my priorities, because once someone finds the time to add substantial information, they would have to be changed again anyhow.  Sigur (disputatio) 11:19, 16 Augusti 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: ::Yes, if we have two "Euripides" (or any other name) that's fine, in my view: there is a reason for a discretiva. With just one, there's no reason. In the other cases, it seems, my nudge has worked: they have been turned into true paginae discretivae today. And while I was writing, this page has become a true discretiva as well! Gaudeamus!

text: ::Since some trouble has been taken over this page, I wanted to indicate how it might be made acceptable as an encyclopedia page, although personally I'm doubful about that possibility. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 12:45, 16 Augusti 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Not yet a pagina discretiva 

message: Since the text defines the lemma as a name and then wants to show items to which the name is applied, perhaps it shouldn't omit items like ships that bear the name, questionable universities, and moths, both current and obsolete. IacobusAmor (disputatio) 13:15, 16 Augusti 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Nonpeople

message: The eurocentrism of all these articles on names needs to be abolished. Instead of giving the name in the eight most frequently spoken European languages, these articles should give the name in the eight (or, say, ten) languages most frequently spoken worldwide, which appear to be, in descending order: English, Mandarin Chinese, Hindi, Spanish, French, Standard Arabic, Bengali, and Russian (and Portuguese & Indonesian). IacobusAmor (disputatio) 13:29, 16 Augusti 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Since "Wikipedia is not a dictionary", and Vicipaedia is a Latin encyclopedia, the proper way for us to solve that problem is to delete the lists of foreign forms of names, not to lengthen them. In all other articles that's what we tend to do: remove foreign words, or reduce them to a necessary minimum. Why not here? Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 14:59, 16 Augusti 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: :A excellent idea! IacobusAmor (disputatio) 16:29, 16 Augusti 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: "In linguis frequentibus formae"
Disputatio:Marmore (aquae cadentes)

message: Nomen non de murmure, sed de marmore ductum esse videtur. Extra vicipaediam non reperitur. --Bavarese (disputatio) 12:51, 7 Iunii 2020 (UTC)
Cuius rei etiam Goethe Italiam permigrans mentionem fecit: Von Terni fuhren wir sehr früh aus; Narni kamen wir hinauf (...) alles Kalkgebirg, auch nicht eine Spur eines andern Gesteins. (Italienische Reise, Erster Teil. Città Castellana, den 28. Oktober )--Bavarese (disputatio) 15:22, 8 Februarii 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Murmurantes?
Disputatio:Bulgares (populus Turcicus)

message: I see now that there was an existing article about the modern (Slavic) Bulgarians at Bulgari. That page doesn't have any Latin sources, and since both -es and -i were used for the ancient/medieval (Turkic) Bulgars, we need a better way to disambiguate. We could follow the model of French, German, etc. and say "proto-Bulgares", but I can't find a Latin source for that specifically. Or we could just use a parenthetical disambiguations: (populus Turcicus), (populus Slavicus). Quid dicitis, o amici? Lesgles (disputatio) 15:42, 10 Iunii 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: I went ahead and disambiguated. It seems that the second-declension endings become more common in later periods. Lesgles (disputatio) 16:14, 13 Iunii 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bulgar(ian)s
Disputatio:Systema coordinatarum

message: I have not been able to find the obvious phrase par ordinatum attested;  Gauss certainly has the concept but I haven't been able to find what name he uses for it.  It's also useful to be able to refer to an ordered triple, quadruple, or whatever, generally called a "tuple" or an "n-tuple" in English.  By the time the English term was coined, though, nobody much was writing math in Latin -- until Vicipaedia came along.  So I've coined n-plex by analogy with other languages.  If there does happen to be an actual Latin word already, or if other Vicipaediani would prefer copia ordinata or the like, say so.  A. Mahoney (disputatio) 17:35, 12 Iunii 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Ordered pair" and "N-tuple"
Disputatio:N-plex

message: See note at Disputatio:Systema coordinatarum -- I cannot imagine this concept has been discussed in Latin before, though I'd love to see it if it has.  A. Mahoney (disputatio) 18:10, 12 Iunii 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Why do we specify the word "N-plex" to be masculine? Sevitom (disputatio) 13:52, 5 Maii 2022 (UTC)

text: Another question: it seems that the name "N-plex" will be coincide with that for "N-fold", because we have used the word "multiplex" to translate "manifold".   Sevitom (disputatio) 13:59, 5 Maii 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: :Where do we specify it to be masculine? I would take it to be an adjective: if sometimes masculine, that could be because it agrees with an implied "numerus". If this comment is nonsense, the reason will be that I'm no mathematician :) Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 14:41, 5 Maii 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fons nominis
Disputatio:Res Publica Vimariana

message: Quid? Nonne Germania ab imperatore recta recte et iure res publica appellatur? Rebus novis Novembribus anni 1918 Germania primum "res publica libera" facta est. Censeo ita mutandum esse; nam voce Latina utimur, non theodisca ("Republik").--Bavarese (disputatio) 19:46, 14 Iunii 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: On principle, I'm rather sympathetic towards your suggestion, because I've always felt uneasy about the ambiguity of  "res publica" (the way it's often used), but then logically, "Res Publica Foederata Germaniae" should become "Res Publica Libera Foederata Germaniae" as well, and before we know it, we have a whole avalanche of changes of numerous countries' names.  I think, before starting that avalanche, a discussion in the Taberna would be warranted. Sigur (disputatio) 20:50, 14 Iunii 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  res publica
Disputatio Categoriae:Arcadia

message: Supercategoriam "Loci mythici Graeci" ex hac categoria removi, quia Arcadia est locus verus, non mythicus. Fere omnes paginae hic enumeratae regionem veram, non ficticiam, implicant. Categoriam ergo in paginam "Arcadia (regio ficticia)" inserui. OK? Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 13:28, 17 Iunii 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  De categoria
Disputatio:Theatrum musicum

message: To Latinize the English concept of musical theater, the phrase phantasticum poëma musicum ('fantastic musical poem') seems a rather odd choice, especially since the calque theatrum musicum is readily available and about a dozen links to that formulation are already in place. IacobusAmor (disputatio) 14:19, 17 Iunii 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Is phantasticum poëma musicum ('ghostly musical poem') really the best translation of musical theater? See how other wikis do it: Esperantice muzikalo; Francice comédie musicale; Hispanice, Italiane, Nederlandice, Theodisce musical; Lusitanice teatro musical; Russice mюзикл; Turcice müzikal tiyatro. In American English (the language of the culture in which the modern concept seems to have originated), the genre is called musical theater, and works produced in it are called musicals. So how about Latin theatrum musicum for the genre and just plain musical (to be declined like animal) for a work produced in that genre?  IacobusAmor (disputatio) 11:10, 25 Augusti 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: :Recte dixisti. Movi. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 12:31, 25 Augusti 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: Lemma
Disputatio:Ars nominandi

message: Verbum “onomasticon” (ὀνομαστικόν) puto non hoc sub titulo apud Romanos priscos inveniebatur, sed et Graeci Romanique onomasticon dicebant librum, qui multis e nominibus (ὄνομα) constat veluti lexicon sive dictionarium; quam ob rem titulum emendavi. An quis disserere velit? Aristippus Ser (disputatio) 05:14, 23 Iunii 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Videor ego errasse; titulum vetus non ὀνομαστικά (neutrum plurale) sed ὀνομαστική (femininum singulare, id est τέχνη) dicere velle puto. Nihilominus id quod adfixi titulum novum melius quam illud mihi videtur, cum puram Latinitatem pro Graeco verbo subdiderim, negat quis? Aristippus Ser (disputatio) 05:25, 23 Iunii 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: De Titulo
Disputatio:Opisthocomus hoazin

message: De:: -Categoria:Fauna Guianarum; +Categoria:Fauna Guianae. Nope. The change eliminates two-thirds of the reference. The English is "Birds of the Guianas," and it means "Birds of French Guiana, Guyana, and Dutch Guiana (Surinam) taken together," probably because these countries share similar ecosystems and many birds. IacobusAmor (disputatio) 17:19, 27 Iunii 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Categoria
Disputatio:Alternativa Socialistica Internationalis

message: The name in all the pertinent Romance, Germanic, and Slavic languages, not to mention Finnish and Javanese, uses a form of the word that in English—apparently the official language of the Committee for a Workers' International (about which this article was drafted)—is committee, for which the Latin is consilium (Cassell's 1968; Traupman 2007), so commissio may not have been quite right, but that's a trivial matter in light of the redirect that was created today.
The (3) International Socialist Alternative, to which the (identical) text now refers, is a different organization, one that split off from the (2) Committee for a Workers' International (2019), itself a successor of the (1) Committee for a Workers' International (1974). Today's redirect has made the article, which originally treated group #1, an article about group #3---but its text has remained the same.
Is Vicipaedia being drawn into an ideological squabble? Should the redirect be reversed and new articles be drafted to accommodate versions #2 and #3? IacobusAmor (disputatio) 11:52, 25 Iunii 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Res puto omnino frontem ferire cogit. Atqui nonne sunt illa cuncta admodum plena σολοικισμοῦ atque βαρβαρισμοῦ, quin a testularum suffragiisid est pro ostracismo vix detinear... Aristippus Ser (disputatio) 12:10, 25 Iunii 2020 (UTC)

text: I found "commissio" and "consilium" (even "comitium")as interchangable translation for "committee" in Vicipaedia (Motus internationalis Crucis Rubrae et Lunae Rubrae, Commissio Securitatis Publicae URSS, Commissio virorum taxinomiae internationalis, but you should change it in the case you're right.
I did not find much sense in amking three articles in the latin Vicipaedia abour the one former and current two organisations. I just followed the logical reason, that the CWI renaimed itself on it's 12th ordinary World Congress (https://internationalsocialist.net/en/2020/02/announcement) and the absolute majority of sections (ca. 30 out of 40) are now part of this organisation. You can feel free about writing an extrra article on the split or the refounded CWI.
--Socius sociologicus (disputatio) 15:02, 26 Septembris 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Lemma

message: The first lemma is already translated by us so there's no point in adding a second attempt translated by us. We have to make up our minds on this page and apply the result. This is the text I therefore removed:
replies: text: , sive Alternata Condicio Socialistica Internationalis,"Alternata condicio" in Ioannes C. Traupman, Latin and English Dictionary, ed. tertia (Novi Eboraci: Bantam Dell, 2007), 463, s.v. alternative.
"Alternativus" is a medieval Latin word; "alternatus" may be preferable because as a participle of "alterno" it is potentially classical, but how does "condicio" help? I don't think Traupman had a name like this in mind. In the end I don't see a strong reason to change the current pagename ... so long as we are writing about the International Socialist Alternative. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 21:11, 31 Ianuarii 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Second lemma
Disputatio:Loranthus europaeus

message: Nexum ad "Viscum quercinum" apud Remedia homeopathy puto venditationem esse. --Bavarese (disputatio) 14:10, 25 Iunii 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Recte dicis. Nexum substitui. Gratias ago! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 16:14, 25 Iunii 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Viscum quercinum"
Disputatio:Prospectiva

message: Utilo (disputatio) 12:53, 26 Iunii 2020 (UTC)
proiectio orthographica: https://books.google.at/books?id=KQJFAAAAcAAJ&pg=PA185&lpg=PA185&dq=methodi+projectionis&source=bl&ots=2VUS7Cpt7c&sig=ACfU3U2FQk0vjv70U__3qnAKeM4LsHnn7A&hl=de&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiygsTKydPpAhWTA2MBHXGnCxcQ6AEwAnoECAcQAQ#v=onepage&q=methodi%20projectionis&f=false
Englisch Wikipedia: Orthographic projection: Orthographic projection (sometimes referred to as orthogonal projection, used to be called analemma
de projectione centrali: https://books.google.at/books?id=ubtSAAAAcAAJ&pg=PA38&lpg=PA38&dq=%22de+projectione+centrali%22&source=bl&ots=hmn3XI8htF&sig=ACfU3U3NARvD-cna6ZyZsI-AMtYJPeGNeQ&hl=de&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiP44vY0NPpAhXJiVwKHeEBDOQQ6AEwAHoECAIQAQ#v=onepage&q=%22de%20projectione%20centrali%22&f=false
projectiono centralis + Definition: https://books.google.at/books?id=ubtSAAAAcAAJ&pg=PA37&lpg=PA37&dq=%22projectionem+centralem%22&source=bl&ots=hmn3XI8hCz&sig=ACfU3U0wlIEC06WTSmLO6gH1J3iWvwDnxg&hl=de&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiRhPv_0NPpAhXOi1wKHSH6AeIQ6AEwAHoECAEQAQ#v=onepage&q=%22projectionem%20centralem%22&f=false
Wikipedia / dt: Zentralprojektion
punctum concursus (Huygens): https://books.google.at/books?id=KDBXCvx0-0oC&pg=PA17&lpg=PA17&dq=punctum+concursus&source=bl&ots=u1XB1147Sp&sig=ACfU3U0ykB2vMaaNu8t8sklb0nHc6nbV-g&hl=de&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjc1ICJ0tPpAhVsQUEAHRj3BeIQ6AEwAXoECAsQAQ#v=onepage&q=punctum%20concursus&f=false
punctum concursus (Leibnitz): https://books.google.at/books?id=bRSo2amWEpgC&pg=PA78&lpg=PA78&dq=punctum+concursus&source=bl&ots=V1K3NdPNN2&sig=ACfU3U3QkudrugZZqSS-Ni7cGH79_mu8RQ&hl=de&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjc1ICJ0tPpAhVsQUEAHRj3BeIQ6AEwBXoECAcQAQ#v=onepage&q=punctum%20concursus&f=false
punctum concursus (Gauss): https://books.google.at/books?id=Nj_YC5TeACcC&pg=PA220&lpg=PA220&dq=punctum+concursus&source=bl&ots=xhGqT4rIoO&sig=ACfU3U0vhj8cBwthy-pO6GbQeJzKES6Evw&hl=de&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjc1ICJ0tPpAhVsQUEAHRj3BeIQ6AEwB3oECAMQAQ#v=onepage&q=punctum%20concursus&f=false
Elementa geometriae: projectiones
https://books.google.at/books?id=xC8PAAAAQAAJ&pg=PA179&lpg=PA179&dq=projectio+horizontalis&source=bl&ots=8BMBUJc8Kr&sig=ACfU3U1zi_G6UfUE5pkF2nkbeKKN8SSKKw&hl=de&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjdtqLV1NPpAhVxlFwKHR8SANsQ6AEwAXoECAcQAQ#v=onepage&q=projectio%20horizontalis&f=false
perspectiva militaris = Cavalierperspective / Zedler: https://www.zedler-lexikon.de/index.html?c=blaettern&id=53318&bandnummer=05&seitenzahl=0773&supplement=0&dateiformat=1%27)
thread_title:  Fontes quorundam verborum
Disputatio:Pancreas

message: Errorem feci: duo conlationes meae posteriores non rectae sunt (-33; -799). Quomodo eas revertam? Gratias responsi. Andreas Raether (disputatio) 16:32, 2 Iulii 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Iam ipse correxi. Andreas Raether (disputatio) 17:09, 2 Iulii 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Auxilium, quaeso
Disputatio:Nicolaus Lenau

message: Vox melodrama opus "Don Juan" Richardi Strauss vix iuste describit. Criteriis enim vicipaediae ea voce idem significatur atque opera. Huic autem operi Richardi Strauss omnia desunt, quae artificii scaenici esse debent. Compositor ipse nomine "Tondichtung" usus est, id est "poema tantum sonis expressum".--Bavarese (disputatio) 22:07, 5 Iulii 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Melodrama "Don Juan" Richardi Strauss
Disputatio:Rutabulum

message: Nescio, quo modo versiones "in linguis aliis" mutari possint. Nam puto rutabulum Theodisce accurate non voce Kaminbesteck, sed Schürhaken vertendum esse. Si quis assentitur, mutato quaeso. --Bavarese (disputatio) 16:36, 8 Iulii 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Sic,  Kaminbesteck est genus, Schürhaken species. - Movi in Vicidatis, spero ibi neminem abrogaturum esse.  Demetrius Talpa (disputatio) 18:23, 8 Iulii 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: :Gratias tibi agens:--Bavarese (disputatio) 09:31, 9 Iulii 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  In linguis aliis
Disputatio:Agrigentum

message: In hac pagina et nonnullis aliis urbes Italianas describentibus lego inter cives ibi natos et ibi mortuos etiam "victos"? Quo more nominamus cives, qui satis temporis   - invicti, puto - ibi degerunt? --Bavarese (disputatio) 15:54, 11 Iulii 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dicti "victi"
Disputatio:Pius X

message: No, dear 2a00:f41:1c4c:7997:b9f0:d71d:5dee:86be, you wrote "Fixed grammar," but all you did was capitalize a word, and that was a typographical change, not a grammatical one; however, the word is lowercased in the first cited external link, so reversion has now occurred. IacobusAmor (disputatio) 11:00, 14 Iulii 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Capitalizing
Disputatio:Leonardus Peikoff

message: O Vilho-Veli, care utens, nomen Leonard non est nomen Latinum. Vide lemma, ubi nomen Leonardum videbis, quia nomen rectum est Leonardus. IacobusAmor (disputatio) 12:39, 14 Iulii 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Nomen
Disputatio:Ardesia

message: Quomodo dicetur?
* Metamorphicus (Anglice etc.), sed nusquam reperiri videtur.
* Metamorphosicus in DMLBS, sed de homine.
* Metamorphosigenus (Neograece Μεταμορφωσιγενές πέτρωμα) nusquam reperiri videtur.
thread_title:  Metamorphic rock
Disputatio:Montes Appalachiani

message: Estne nomen huius montium iugi fonte aliquo confirmatum? Appalachianus mihi quidem admodum Anglicum resonat. Ceterum, geographiae huius regionis ignarus facere non possum, quin quaeram, num Apalataeus mons in Hofmanni Lexico universali ad eandem rem referatur. Neander (disputatio) 15:36, 20 Iulii 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Nonne hic videtur? IacobusAmor (disputatio) 16:16, 20 Iulii 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: :Ita vero. Qui adiectivum in contextu veteriore quaeret, hic in prima pagina commentationis videbit. Titulus operis ibi citati (Anglice scripti sed titulo Latino: 1870) est Musci Appalachiani, cuius exemplar hic habemus. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 17:24, 20 Iulii 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: ::Hofmannum scriptori anonymo praefero, sed fons iste de muscis honestior esse videtur. Baudrand autem dicit "Apalachi Montes, Apalataeus Mons". Lesgles (disputatio) 17:35, 20 Iulii 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: :::Et ego in fontibus antiquioribus "Apalataeus mons" etc. nonnumquam reperio. An movere oportet? Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 17:42, 20 Iulii 2020 (UTC)

message: Hac pagina verbum "oculatissimus" in nota subiuncta well known convertitur. Ego autem, notam non iam perlectam, mihi keen-eyed dixi. Quis erravit? Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 17:31, 20 Iulii 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Ille scriptor erravisse videtur, mirum in modum, sed "cuiusvis hominis est errare". :) Lesgles (disputatio) 18:00, 20 Iulii 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nota subiuncta
Disputatio:Opus occidentale

message: Verbum "Westwork" in lexicis Anglicis haud reperitur. Rarissime legimus in textibus recentibus de architectura Germanica. Mea mente melius est verbum "Anglicum" omittere, bono verbo Germanico iuxta Latinum posito. Quid censent alii? Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 19:16, 21 Iulii 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Salve, Andrea! „Westwork“ ex Vicipedia Anglica sumpsi id verbum aptum esse arbitratus. Libenter iudicio tuo (et aliorum, qui linguae Anglicae periti sunt) confido.--Utilo (disputatio) 20:52, 21 Iulii 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  De verbo Anglico
Disputatio:Condatum ad Scaldim

message: Grässe has "Condaeum, Condatum, Condetum, Condate ad Scaldim". "Condatum ad Scaldim" further occurs in Google Books  . Sigur (disputatio) 22:04, 22 Iulii 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't see why "Condatum" is preferable, unless many sources use it. "Condate" is a Latin loanword from Celtic (Gaulish) and is the name of a lot of places in Roman Gallia. You will find many examples of it on Vicipaedia (for example Condate (Carantonus) not far from me here).

text: I wrote the above before verifying, but there is an article about "Condate" [in general] in the source I usually use to help me with Roman place names in Celtic regions: . I don't think it's on line, bad luck, I found it in a second hand bookshop after many years of looking! I'll copy the article for you if you like.

text: As you'll know, Graesse is great for listing Latin names, but not great for choosing between them. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 09:08, 23 Iulii 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: :This briefly confirms the origin of the name. But the spelling "Condatum" has certainly been used, and if it in fact became the usual spelling in this case, then a move would be justified.

text: :I see now that it makes sense alongside Vetus Condatum. Fine. Do it. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 18:24, 23 Iulii 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: ::Unless you find Vetus Condate somewhere (I admit I haven't really looked for it)... Sigur (disputatio) 19:47, 23 Iulii 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: :::Your source for these names in Nord sounds like a very good one to me. I'm happy Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 08:32, 24 Iulii 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lemma
Disputatio:Abbatia Cluniacensis

message: Nescio, utrum ea, quae de hac re scripsi, idoneo loco inserta sint. Si cui aliud placet, emenda quaeso. --Bavarese (disputatio) 17:16, 23 Iulii 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Inferius posui.--Utilo (disputatio) 17:40, 23 Iulii 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  De Musée de Cluny
Disputatio:Rupertus Salisburgensis

message: Adiectivum Latinum pro loco Chiemsee "Chiemense" esse constat, ut e.g. in titulo "Sententia Definitiva ... Super Praetensione Episcopatus Chiemensis in Civitate Salisburgensi" videri potest. Secundum lexicon Alberti Sleumer (Kirchenlateinisches Woerterbuch, p. 205) valent et "Chiemseensis" et "Chiemsecensis". [Usor:Giorno2|Giorno2]] (disputatio)
thread_title: Nomen ''Chiemsee'' Latine