lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Disputatio Categoriae:Iuventus Hitlerana

message: Quaestiones tres mihi in mente veniunt: 
* Cur "Hitlerana"? Pagina enim de hac societate Iuventus Hitleriana appellatur. Vocabulum "Hitleriana" an iam alibi Latine legitur nescio, sed certe a lingua Italica mutuari potest. "Hitlerana" rarissime reperitur.
replies: text: :Certainly Hitleriana is likelier to be productive in modern Latin, but I was leaning on the rule in the International Code of Botanical Nomenclature, which, in the formation of genus names commemorating men, treats final er uniquely: "when the name of a person ends in a consonant, the letters ia are added, except when the name ends in er, when a is added (so the i would be intrusive in suffixes); also, in species epithets, "the letters ii are added, except when the name ends in er, when i is added" (so again the i would be intrusive in suffixes). By this rule, you might be able to get Hitleriana regularly if the surname is Hitlerus, but is it? IacobusAmor (disputatio) 14:00, 1 Ianuarii 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: ::Those are good rules for botanists, but Wikipedians start from sources. The creator of Iuventus Hitleriana was (I think) closer to a source, even if it's an Italian source, than the creator of :Categoria:Iuventus Hitlerana, but either could perhaps be justified. Maybe there are Latin sources I haven't found. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 16:56, 1 Ianuarii 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: ::: Utrum Hitleranus an Hitlerianus? In mentem mihi venit alterum nomen, quod etiam exemplis carere videtur. Nunc igitur video, cur tu, Iacobe, in Augustus Schleicher "fabulam Schleicheranam" scribas (ego autem ipsam fabulam tractans "fabula Schleicheriana" scribo). Tu auctoritate codicis Code of Botanical Nomenclature nixus Schleicheranus scripsisti. Sed mihi parum liquet, cur nomina in -er cadentia tantam faciant exceptionem. Praeterea apud botanistas Schleicherianum inveni adiectivum in honorem Iohannis Chr. Schleicher (1768-1834) factum. Neander (disputatio) 17:22, 1 Ianuarii 2023 (UTC)
* An sodales ipso facto membra factionis Nazisticae erant? Hanc rem supercategoria proposita (rubra) suggerit, sed testimonia usque adhuc non repperi.

text: :That's how the English & Portuguese wikis do it; the German wiki is vaguer, with Jugend im Nationalsozialismus. IacobusAmor (disputatio) 14:00, 1 Ianuarii 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: ::Let's find a reliable source, then. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 16:56, 1 Ianuarii 2023 (UTC)   
* Si bene intellego iuvenibus omnibus stirpis Germanicae, Germaniam habitantibus, necesse erat ab anno fere 1938/1939 huic societati adhaerere. An adhaesio notabilis est? Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 09:49, 1 Ianuarii 2023 (UTC)

text: :All youths (except Jews and others judged undesirable) were required to join, but not all complied. The Edelweißpiraten, for example, "consisted of young people, mainly between the ages of 14 and 17, who had evaded the Hitler Youth by leaving school (which was allowed at 14)" (says the English wiki). IacobusAmor (disputatio) 14:00, 1 Ianuarii 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  An utilis?
Disputatio:Reactorium Aqua Pressionis Magnae

message: Res categoriam latinitatis -6 accepit. Sed mea opinione non latine facta est commentatio. Nonne moveamus lucubrationem istam (machinae translatoriae) ad istam categoriam? - Giorno2 (disputatio) 19:03, 18 Ianuarii 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Tibi consentio: "Non latine" scripsi. Sed omnis pagina (nisi quis emendet), tam "-6" ut Iacobus quam "Non latine" ut ego, post septem dies delenda est. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 19:42, 18 Ianuarii 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Non Latine!!
Disputatio:Horti Longwood

message: Sine dubio commentationis istius originalis versio orta erat machina translatoria iuvante. Rem paulo emendare temptavi et iterum theoria (mea?) evidens facta est: laborem in emendando maiorem esse quam in rebus novis scribendis. Mirum, sed ita est. - Giorno2 (disputatio) 07:30, 21 Ianuarii 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Rectissime dicis. Ne tempus nostrum his ludis perdamus. Nemo dissentit, mea mente. Talibus paginis, mi amice, formulas  vel "" impone (sic iam interdum fecisti). Quo facto, nisi auctor ipse aut alius quis intra 7 dies in veram Latinitatem convertat, paginae delendae sunt. Quando deleo ego, rationem interdum inscribere soleo: "Melius erit novam paginam creare." Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 09:34, 21 Ianuarii 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Pugnare contra machinam translatoriam...
Disputatio Categoriae:Continentes praehistoricae

message: Vocabulum continens [scil. terra] est femininum. IacobusAmor (disputatio) 22:11, 24 Ianuarii 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Recte dicis. Mutationem petivi. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 09:17, 25 Ianuarii 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  De titulo "Continentes praehistorici"
Disputatio:Otho Müller

message: Meyers Großes Konversations-Lexikon, tomus 14. Lipsiae 1908, p. 235 (hic in interreti)
thread_title: Fons primae recensionis

message: Rex Aurorum pagina ab “Otto Müller” ad “Otho Müller” movit (#1, #2), sed “Otto” et “” sunt duo nomina dissimiles: nomen Germanicum Otto, verisimiliter nomen Etruscum Otho. --Grufo (disputatio) 11:49, 29 Aprilis 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Vicipaedia de hac re interdum erravit; alii etiam errant! Pauci enim sibi praenomen "Otho" Latine dederunt, praenomen vernaculum Otto vel Ottone gerentes.

text: Cum te autem consentio: "Otto" et "Otho" sunt nomina Latina differentia. Sine fonte Latino commutare non debemus. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 13:12, 29 Aprilis 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Otto an Otho?
Disputatio Vicipaediae:Dump/qc and ec

message: Where the report is "has more parameters than just the id parameter" I am checking that the id parameter works. If It does, I delete the entry.
Where the message is "qc has no corrresponding ec" I am adding the missing ec. If this is for some reason impossible I will usually delete the qc from the article or replace it with an alternative reference. Having done one of these things I will then delete the entry.
When I have completed the series, any remaining cases of "has more parameters than just the id parameter" could be corrected by simply deleting the superfluous last parameter. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 19:26, 20 Martii 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Progress
Disputatio:Georgius Leancă

message: Nomen eius "Georgius" latine est. Credo nos debere paginam movere (Georgius Leancă). P0tato112 (disputatio) 23:27, 22 Martii 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Iurie (ro) -> Юрий (ru) -> Georgius
Disputatio:De pace (Isocrates)

message: Per errorem nexus cum Demosthenis oratione de Pace iunxi. Removendi suntː in aliis vicipediis nihil de Isocratis oratione adhuc invenio. Marcus Terentius Bibliophilus (disputatio) 20:03, 23 Martii 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nexus cum aliis linguis
Disputatio:Laser

message: It seems that the word laser in Latin existed already, although it meant “silphium juice”.
Now, the funny thing is that we have no idea what “silphium” was, and so lāser, -ĕris (n.) for us basically means “mythical juice”. In my opinion this vague word is a very good candidate for translating the modern optical device. At some point we will also have to create a voice for the other electromagnetic device, the maser. --Grufo (disputatio) 16:54, 24 Martii 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lāser, -ĕris (n.)
Disputatio:Stella neutronica

message: I started to integrate the page with translations from en:Neutron star. I left the previous article, reorganized in paragraphs, as second part. Probably the imprinting of the English prose is still visible in the Latin; feel free to improve it. More translated paragraphs can be imported as well in the future. --Grufo (disputatio) 13:29, 28 Martii 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Page expansion
Disputatio:Kennethus Norton

message: e.g. Saint Kenneth (en) -> Sanctus Canicus (la) P0tato112 (disputatio) 13:15, 3 Aprilis 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Alias versiones huius nominis vidimus. An fontem citare potes? Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 13:34, 3 Aprilis 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: :Paeniteo, non vidi nomen Kennethus, sed id existit  P0tato112 (disputatio) 23:15, 3 Aprilis 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nomen eius estne Canicus?
Disputatio Categoriae:Personae Divinae Comoediae (Inferna)

message: Vocabulum "persona", hoc titulo adhibitum, approbo ego, sed alius (vide Vicipaedia:Taberna#Persona) dubitat. Si vis, o editor anonyme, commenta tua ibi scribe! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 20:19, 8 Aprilis 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Gratias tibi ago, Andrew, propter disputationem inceptam. At, paginis categoriae huius visis, quae multas fabulas mythologicas comprehendunt, iam non dubito. --Grufo (disputatio) 22:30, 8 Aprilis 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: :Sed partes poematis Latine indicare possumus: Inferna, Purgatorium, Paradisus. Demetrius Talpa (disputatio) 23:11, 8 Aprilis 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: :: Maxime consentio. --Grufo (disputatio) 15:40, 9 Aprilis 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  De titulo
Disputatio:Accumulatrum (energia)

message: De: 
replies: text: Ita, sed hic commentarius (en: "rechargeable battery") a commentario de accumulatro (en: "battery (electric)" distinguendus est. Onerabile hic '(re)chargeable' significare conatur.  IacobusAmor (disputatio) 21:45, 19 Aprilis 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: : I have changed the interwiki link (before it was actually confusing). So now it is not limited to electric energy (although it can be electric too). I believe that if we model this page on the English Wikipedia we will solve all our problems. --Grufo (disputatio) 22:45, 19 Aprilis 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  De lemmate
Disputatio:Libro del conocimiento de todos los reinos

message: The articule is not in a readable language for common people 83.97.155.231 17:40, 21 Aprilis 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: 9 versions in other languages can be found on the Wikimedia site. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 19:17, 25 Aprilis 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  The language
Disputatio:Ponto Spatialis

message: Corbeil & Archambault have ponto spatialis for "space shuttle" – cfr. . I feel that ponto spatialis captures better the English name (at least concerning specifically d:Q48806 – while navicula sideralis could simply be a diminutive of d:Q40218). --Grufo (disputatio) 19:02, 24 Aprilis 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I have actually found the solution. Navicula sideralis circumvolans can be the Latin translation of d:Q1414565, while Ponto Spatialis (the title should be capitalized) must be the Latin translation of d:Q48806). --Grufo (disputatio) 20:47, 24 Aprilis 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: :An ingenious solution, but wouldn't aeroplanum spatiale be apter for 'spaceplane' (that is, assuming that spatialis, -e is an acceptable adjective)? And yes, the English title is a proper noun and therefore invites capitalization. IacobusAmor (disputatio) 21:40, 24 Aprilis 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: :: In the Latin page for d:Q1414565 we could write “Aeroplanum spatiale vel Navicula sideralis circumvolans vel Spatiiplanum vel ....” (I chose a random order). --Grufo (disputatio) 00:06, 25 Aprilis 2023 (UTC)

text: "Ponto spatialis" is much clearer, I agree. Demetrius Talpa (disputatio) 08:52, 25 Aprilis 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: : I have moved this page and created the Spatiplanum page as well. Feel free to improve it. --Grufo (disputatio) 11:11, 25 Aprilis 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Navicula sideralis → Ponto spatialis 

message: As two of us have agreed, both words should be capitalized. Its a proper noun. It's the Space Shuttle, not a space shuttle. IacobusAmor (disputatio)
replies: text: Indeed. Fixed. --Grufo (disputatio) 12:22, 7 Iunii 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Capitalization
Disputatio:Pulsar enormium radiorum Roentgenianorum

message: I wasn't sure what to choose between the poetic Greek accusative (i.e. anomalon Roentgenianos radios pulsar) or the more native ablative of quality (i.e. anomalis Roentgenianis radiis pulsar), and given the intellectual topic I felt that the Greek way would work well. But the genetive of quality? Are we sure it fits with the adjectives chosen (anomalos/enormis)? I don't have the answer yet. But see Allen and Greenough, Latin Grammar § Genitive of Quality: “In classic prose, however, the genitive of quality is much less common than the ablative; it is practically confined to expressions of measure or number, to a phrase with êius and to nouns modified by māgnus, maximus, summus, or tantus. In general the genitive is used rather of essential, the ablative of special or incidental characteristics.” --Grufo (disputatio) 18:22, 27 Aprilis 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: No need to reach into Greek when, according to Traupman, Latin has enormis for English 'anomalous'. Perhaps the aptest English synonym of 'anomalous' is 'irregular', for which, beyond enormis ('shapeless'), according to Cassells, Latin has incompositus ('rough'), inaequabilis, inaequalis ('not uniform'), and anomalus (but only as a technical term in grammar). ¶ The phrase 'anomalous X-ray pulsar' is itself ambiguous, as it could refer to an anomalous pulsar of X-rays or to a pulsar of anomalous X-rays. To this native speaker, the latter sounds likelier, structurally analogous with 'spotted pig wallow', a wallow for spotted pigs, not a spotted wallow for pigs. 'X-ray' here in English is an objective noun. IacobusAmor (disputatio) 20:33, 27 Aprilis 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: : I was referring to the declension case that we use more than the actual adjective chosen (i.e. gen. “pulsar enormium radiorum X”? or instead abl. “pulsar enormibus radiis X”? or instead acc. Gr. “pulsar radios X enorme”?). As for the actual adjective chosen, I had kept anomalos only to make the “AXP” acronym recognizable. --Grufo (disputatio) 21:53, 27 Aprilis 2023 (UTC)

text: Accusativus Graecus in a scientific term is completely unthinkable. The rest is not excluded, in my opinion gen. qualitatis most understandable. Demetrius Talpa (disputatio) 22:13, 27 Aprilis 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: : Ok, I have renamed the page. In case in the future we find a better name we can always come back here. --Grufo (disputatio) 00:53, 28 Aprilis 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  De nomine Latino
Disputatio Formulae:In progressu

message: Haec nova formula utilis est. De nomine dubito. Fortasse "Pars augescit"? Fortasse etiam bene erit "" ad "Pagina augescit" movere? Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 14:47, 28 Aprilis 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Andrew, I think that the biggest confusion comes from the fact that at the moment

text: *  is the Latin version of d:Q13567068 (Anglice )

text: *  is the Latin version of d:Q5617064 (Anglice ), and

text: is not my favorite title either, but why exactly do you find it problematic? --Grufo (disputatio) 16:39, 28 Aprilis 2023 (UTC)

text: Addition:  is actually used only by about fifty pages. I think that we can manage to rename it to  and replace all the occurrences in the articles as well. At that point we can rename  to . --Grufo (disputatio) 17:01, 28 Aprilis 2023 (UTC)

text: 2nd addition: I am also not completely sure that both expressions in progressu and in usu are good Latin. --Grufo (disputatio) 17:07, 28 Aprilis 2023 (UTC)
 I have now renamed  to . Someone will need to remove both Formula:In progressu and Disputatio formulae:In progressu if we want to rename this template to . Both pages are freshly created redirects with no backlinks left (, ). --Grufo (disputatio) 22:18, 28 Aprilis 2023 (UTC)

text: Yes, in usu is better, because it implies that if you edit, someone else may be editing at the same time, leading to a waste of time for both. It annoys me that I haven't been able to think of an existing Latin phrase with the intended meaning. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 15:48, 29 Aprilis 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: ::Traupman says "in progress" is in motu and in progressu. IacobusAmor (disputatio) 16:26, 29 Aprilis 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: :::Thanks. I'd trust Traupman on this! And I think Cicero, if he was browsing Vicipaedia, would grasp the meaning of "in usu". We're OK then. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 18:21, 29 Aprilis 2023 (UTC)

text: : Ok, I have renamed this template to  now. The text displayed is still the same, but changing that is pretty straightforward. --Grufo (disputatio) 16:05, 29 Aprilis 2023 (UTC)
On a different note, if we visit  we will find pages that have been “in use” for years, like the page Eduardus Burns, last edit December 2021 (ignoring my last technical edit)… --Grufo (disputatio) 16:57, 29 Aprilis 2023 (UTC)

text: A lot of them were created by me: I tend to work on a whole group of articles at the same time. But clearly I had quite forgotten some of these, and thank you for pointing it out! I'd better get to work. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 18:13, 29 Aprilis 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  De nomine
Disputatio:Transsexualitas

message: (Ignoscite mihi, sed lingua Anglica explicabo, nam latinitas mea non solidast). Part of the section Historia says hormonal therapies started in the last century, neglecting to mention the practice (reported by Greek historians) that Scythians had: drinking urine of a pregnant mare to absorb estrogen. Considering this was (and maybe still is) for a long time where estrogen was extracted from for modern pills, it seems inaccurate to says hormonal changes were only accessible in modern times. 193.207.201.132 09:00, 5 Maii 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Hmm, which historians? Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 12:55, 5 Maii 2023 (UTC)

text: Ah, I see now, the claim you're talking about is discussed here. According to that page, which cites both ancient and modern sources around this issue, the claim was first made by Timothy Taylor in The Prehistory of Sex (1996). He had no ancient source for it, he was just fantasizing. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 14:47, 5 Maii 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  De Cura hormonale
Disputatio:Balduinus (rex Belgarum)

message: Une pièce commémorative a été frappée en 1998 sur laquelle se trouve se trouve « l'inscription latine BALDVIN REGIS MEMORIALE ». Coin-coin (disputatio) 11:49, 12 Maii 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Alii, qui hoc praenomen habuerint, "Balduinus" in paginis nostris appellantur. BALDVIN idem est atque "Balduin". Utile erit alios fontes quaerere: si re vera "-us -um -i -o" nunquam nomini suo adiecit, possumus ad "Balduin" movere, sed, ad interim, "Balduinus" praetuli. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 17:48, 12 Maii 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: :Fontem "Balduini" iam repperi et in pagina citavi. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 17:56, 12 Maii 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Baldovinus aut Baldvin
Disputatio:Aulaeum ferreum

message: The Latin word aulaeum is definitely a good word for English “curtain”, however the Latin word  – although not exactly classical – meant “curtain” already in the Vulgate (cfr. “decem cortinae de bysso retorta” in ). And so, cortina is the word used in Spanish (:es:Cortina de Hierro), Italian (:it:Cortina di ferro) and Portuguese (:pt:Cortina de Ferro) for “Iron Curtain”.
I am perfectly aware that Cicero would not have used cortina, however I was wondering if a case like this, in which several languages use a word derived from your language to mean something, a word that you understand, might justify adopting a less favourite word for the sake of international understanding and uniformity (i.e. cortina instead of aulaeum). I am basically wondering if we should treat cortina as an Interlingua word and not just as a Latin word. --Grufo (disputatio) 18:20, 21 Maii 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Thomas Pekkanen, ornatissimus Latinitatis professor et olim praeses Academiae Latinitati Fovendae, locutionem "aulaeum ferreum"  hic attestatur. IacobusAmor (disputatio) 20:22, 21 Maii 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: :"Aulaeum ferreum" pluribus fontibus satis bonis attestatur. Haud intellego, quomodo propositio "cortinae ferreae", sine fontibus, cum politia Vicipaediarum congruat. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 08:39, 22 Maii 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: :: It was more me thinking out loud… Indeed, everything is true about attestations. And what goes even more against cortina ferrea is that it appears in a book from 1790 with the meaning of “iron pot” (p. 519): “si hic fragmentis lichenis conspersus in cortina ferrea coquitur” (which is probably the most immediate meaning that a Roman would have understood). --Grufo (disputatio) 23:58, 22 Maii 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Aulaeum contra cortinam
Disputatio:Mutius de Tommasini

message: Haec forma nominis Romani antiqui mihi inusitatissima videtur. Propono "Mucius". Bis-Taurinus (disputatio) 21:43, 2 Iunii 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Est una ex illis permixtionibus inter c et t quas ab Medio Aevo invenimus (e.g. “condicio” et “conditio”). Enim Mucius est forma recta. In interrete inveni tantum unam attestationem “Mutii de Tommasini” (, p. 186), sed tres attestationes “Mucii de Tommasini” (, , ). Cum tuo proposito concordo. --Grufo (disputatio) 03:06, 3 Iunii 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: : Sine dubio, "Mucius" rectior est, movendum. Demetrius Talpa (disputatio) 22:58, 3 Iunii 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Praenomen "Mutius"?
Disputatio:Zenith

message: For vertex caeli, Traupman has just plain vertex. For figurative uses, such as (I'd guess) "she was at the zenith of her career," Traupman recommends fastigium. IacobusAmor (disputatio) 12:10, 7 Iunii 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: The quotation from Lucretius is mentioned by David Morgan. For “zenith” he gives verticale punctum, polus horizontis, zenith, caeli vertex, and apex caelestis – cfr. ). --Grufo (disputatio 12:30, 7 Iunii 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  De lemmate
Disputatio:Capricornus (astrologia)

message: I have reverted  as spam, but it might have actually been done in good faith. The real problem though is that Svetlana Radionova is not a famous person (and her government is more infamous than famous). --Grufo (disputatio) 06:08, 9 Iunii 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Recte fecisti. Tales mutationes in aliis paginis astrologicis iam revertimus. Gratias tibi ago. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 07:27, 9 Iunii 2023 (UTC)

text: @Grufo: Salve, mihi frater. Please see :en:WP:LTA/CONST. I'm currently going through the links, there's probably more spam out there. A09 (disputatio) 10:29, 8 Augusti 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: : Thank you, . If you go through the history of zodiac signs in Latin Wikipedia you will find a lot of these spam edits. --Grufo (disputatio) 11:27, 8 Augusti 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Svetlana Radionova