lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Disputatio:Factio Whig (Civitates Foederatae)

message: I deleted the redlink category name "Destituta 1856". We don't a present have a series of categories for the years when things shut down or stopped happening. We could, of course, if anyone has the energy to set them up and apply them. This particular page may not be the ideal case on which to decide, because the dates when this party was founded and dissolved sound vague, both here and in en:wiki. But what do I know? Very little :) Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 14:57, 4 Septembris 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: End of US Whiggism
Disputatio:Robertus Franciscus McDonnell

message: And here are the appropriate categories for him (from Wikipedia), if any such unhappy lists can be found in Vicipaedia:
replies: text: American people convicted of mail and wire fraud

text: American politicians convicted of bribery

text: American politicians convicted of federal public corruption crimes

text: American politicians convicted of fraud

text: Politicians convicted of extortion under color of official right
The "counts" of an indictment are capita. IacobusAmor (disputatio) 21:56, 5 Septembris 2014 (UTC)

text: On the fact that he's American, and a politician, we have him bang to rights already :) As for his other faults (if faults they be) I think :Categoria:Fraudatores would cover most of them; but it may be, to be fair to our subjects who are often very nice people really, that we should now rename it either :Categoria:De fraude quaesiti (compare the existing :Categoria:De magia quaesiti), or maybe, thinking further, :Categoria:De fraude convicti, because we probably only want to group people in such a category if they have been not only accused but convicted, as I gather he has. What do you think? Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 11:35, 6 Septembris 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: His corruption categories
Disputatio:Vaccinum

message: Traupman habet "vaccinum". Habemus ne fontem "vaccinae"? Lesgles (disputatio) 19:59, 6 Septembris 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Moveamus ergo nisi inveni possit fons Vaccina post pauco tempore. Bene in hoc curas et animadvertis tu, o Lesgles.Jondel (disputatio) 02:11, 8 Septembris 2014 (UTC)

text: Emmendata, mota ad vaccinum.Jondel (disputatio) 08:11, 12 Septembris 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nomen
Disputatio:Ruanda

message: As was discussed in some taberna or pagina disputationis here several years ago, the English idiom is to be conceived in Latin as if it's "149th from the biggest" = "149a a maxima," not "149a maxima." IacobusAmor (disputatio) 17:31, 10 Septembris 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Good to know: I was doubtful about the best way to express that. Anna's "inter" also seems to be a good fix. ¶ In defense of my °, I thought that it was the same as the degree sign, and genderless, but it now I see it is in fact the ordinal indicator º with a corresponding ª (and I suppose we would add um, etc. too). Lesgles (disputatio) 18:06, 10 Septembris 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: :I suppose so, but the superscribing seems unnecessary; certainly in bibliographies, "2nd edition" is being rendered "ed. 2a," at least by yours truly. IacobusAmor (disputatio) 18:23, 10 Septembris 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: ::I do it that way too, or maybe sometimes "2a ed.", but word order is free :) The simpler the formatting, I think, the more likely that other users will follow suit. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 09:12, 11 Septembris 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: 'Second-biggest' doesn't = ''secunda maxima'' (and so forth)

message: Thanks for that hint Iacobe!Jondel (disputatio) 13:47, 11 Septembris 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: You're welcome! According to L&S, specialis is post-Augustan, for which the classical terms are singularis and proprius. IacobusAmor (disputatio)
thread_title: speciale ==> 
singulia
*singularia
Disputatio:Pathologia

message: Pathologia (Graece πάθος 'dolor' + λογία 'studium') est disciplina biologica, praecipue in medicina, qua tractat modum aegrendi et quo modo textum et corpus mutat in sensibus structura et functione et anatomia quorum operum causas rationibus peritus pathologiae, saepe medicus, retur et probat et investigat.
How does one say in Latin
Pathology is the biological discipline, specially in medicine that deals with how (one) gets sick and how the tissue and body mutate in the sense of structure, function, and anatomy whose causes of action, an expert of pathology, often a doctor, speculate, examines and investigates in (educated)theories.
? Jondel (disputatio) 00:15, 11 Septembris 2014 (UTC)
changes:
retur=>adsumit (postulate)
thread_title: Latinatas
Disputatio:Fekete Pákó

message: Nota devia est. Error CDIV apparet. SiGe91 12:34, 12 IX 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Auctor celeriter errorem notavit reparavitque. SiGe91 12:40, 12 IX 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Nota

message: Pronomina demonstrativa utuntur non est necesse in appelationem de cantu. SiGe91 13:33, 12 IX 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: De appelatione

message: Nobis necesse erit fontes fideles independentesque citare de hoc homine et de nomine "Lapite Oludaious".
The page will be deleted unless we have reliable, independent sources about this person and about the name "Lapite Oludaious". Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 12:37, 12 Septembris 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pagina delenda? 

message: Sorry but there is nothing but hungarian sources about this musician. (But the sole existence of the hungarian wiki should be enough I guess)
replies: text: No, our rule is that Wikipedia is not a reliable source. Independent Hungarian sources are fine, if accurately cited: reliable online sources are best, naturally. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 14:41, 12 Septembris 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: :OK, the page is just about passable, though it wants more text. I guess someone must have thought that "Oludaious" is a possible Latin form. It isn't :) Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 08:40, 29 Septembris 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Only hungarian sources
Disputatio:Antiopa

message: Lewis and Short give "Antiopa". From their citations I found the following: Cicero: Antiopam; Persius: Antiopa; Hyginus: Antiopa (4x), Antiopam (2x), Antiopes (1x). This all seems to point to Antiopa as the preferred classical spelling, unless I'm missing something? Lesgles (disputatio) 17:10, 14 Septembris 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: This is a discretiva, and one or two of the pages listed probably should remain at "Antiope":

text: * the satellite asteroid, whose official name we would normally adopt unchanged

text: * possibly the Euripides play, if I'm right in thinking that editors (editing in Latin) have called it "Antiope"; but I might be wrong, I haven't checked, and you could argue that the name of the play should agree with the name of the lady! Anyway,

text: Your argument holds good, as far as I'm concerned, for Antiope (Amazon) and for Antiope (Amphionis mater) whenever written. Therefore, yes, I guess this page should be at "Antiopa" with a redirect from Antiope. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 18:17, 14 Septembris 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: : Consentio. Apud Ciceronem (nat.deor. 3.54) etiam Antiopā (abl.sg.). Certe Antiopa secundum Latinam declinationem dicta est a Cicerone et aequalibus; Antiope a poetis doctis argenteae quae dicitur aetatis. Neander (disputatio) 18:50, 14 Septembris 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: :: Feci, et fabulam asteroidemque ad tempus immutatos relinqui. Ex Anglico aliquarum aliarum Antioparum mentiones faciendae videntur. Lesgles (disputatio) 23:36, 15 Septembris 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: :::Iam scis, mi Lesgles, Vicipaediam Anglicam haud librum sacrum esse :) Hanc paginam olim creans, cito me certiorem feci (si recte memini) Antiopam Amphionis matrem non eandem esse atque Antiopam Amazonem, sed fontes aliarum Antioparum neque requisivi neque repperi. Si enumerationem longiorem facere vis, fortasse oportet eodem tempore fontes citare? -- aut fortasse, omnium Antioparum amator, paginas gradatim creare vis -- optime igitur :) Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 08:49, 16 Septembris 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Movenda
Disputatio:Gens Bachia

message: Hmm. Perhaps those moves were too hasty. Certainly the modern productive adjectival suffix is -iana, while the modern productive nominal suffix is -ia (as in genus Bachia), and this differentiation would be recognized today as such; but ancient usage, not required to distinguish taxonomically like this, may have differed (see Gens Cornelia etc.). Likewise with the analogous changes just made. ¶ The adjective Bachiana is well-known, and not just in biological nomenclature, being seen, for example, in Bachianas Brasileiras and Orquestra Bachiana Filarmônica Sesi-SP and Bachiana ~ Music by the Bach Family and Scala bachiana and many other places. IacobusAmor (disputatio) 12:29, 15 Septembris 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Locutio "Gens Bachiana", mea mente, haud cum usu antiquo congruit: cf. e.g. "Gens Claudia" cuius viri nomen "Claudius" gerebant. Motibus a te effectis, tibi licet fontes Latinos verborum "Bernoulliana, Breugeliana" &c citare ... aut, si dubitas, commenta aliorum manere ... aut rursus movere ... :) Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 12:47, 15 Septembris 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Suffixum ''-ia'' vs. ''-iana''

message: What's the intended difference between familia, as seen in Familia Breugeliana & Familia Darwiniana, and gens, as seen in Gens Bachiana & Gens Bernoulliana? Perhaps gens would best be reserved for the ancient concept and familia for the modern one? But more precisely, a clan (gens) is a collection of families (familiae). For these considerations and to distinguish between ancient & modern suffixes (see above), I propose changing the last two to Familia Bachiana and Familia Bernoulliana. IacobusAmor (disputatio) 12:37, 15 Septembris 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Ita, fortasse "Familia ..." praeferenda est. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 12:47, 15 Septembris 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: :Etiam apud antiquos fiebat confusio inter verba Gens et familia in primo saeculo, quia lente "gentes" ut societates religiosae disparuerunt. Praetuli "familia" quia hoc est usus magis modernus, et nulla fit confusio cum "populo" quia "gens" habet duplicem sensum "nationes" et "familiae" patrilineares. Igitur melius est loqui de "familiae ingenio praepollentes" quam de "gentes ingenio praecellentes" quia confusio fieri potest cum "nationes ingenio..." quod aliquatenus "racismo" redolere potest. Valete optume.--Viator (disputatio) 16:03, 15 Septembris 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: ::Dicitur secundum grammaticam classicam : gens (sive familia) Iulia, gens Cornelia etc... Filii adoptivi Iuliani erant non Iulii. Terminatio -anus est adiectiva, e. g. ars pingendi Breugeliana, ars musica Bachiana, concentus Bachianus, sed familia Bachia, familia Breugelia etc....--Viator (disputatio) 16:08, 15 Septembris 2014 (UTC)

text: Videsis : Gentes Romanae--Viator (disputatio) 16:10, 15 Septembris 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: ''Familia'' vs. ''gens''
Disputatio:Familia Breugelia

message: Breugheliana (non Breughelia) est pellicula documentaria de vita Petri Breughelii. IacobusAmor (disputatio) 12:46, 15 Septembris 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: :"Breugheliana" est nominativum neutrale plurale quod idem significat quam "res Breughelianae". Ibi est adiectivus.--Viator (disputatio) 16:15, 15 Septembris 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Adiectivum: ''Breugheliana''

message: Nonne pagina moveatur, ut titulus sit "Gens Breugelia"? Gens enim aptior vox videtur quam familia. Laurentianus (disputatio) 19:42, 21 Februarii 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  gens pro familia
Disputatio:Familia Darwinia

message: Adiectivum Darwiniana est vetus nomen; vide Darwiniana (1888) et alii fontes in interrete inventos. Darwinia autem est nomen substantivum; vide hic. IacobusAmor (disputatio) 12:52, 15 Septembris 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: :Videsis Gens Iulia, legito grammaticam tuam et omnem thesaurum linguae latinae. Vale optime. darwinianus non pertinet ad gens sed est adiectivus ut cornelianus, iulianus (calendarium Iulianum etc..)--Viator (disputatio) 15:54, 15 Septembris 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Adiectivum: ''Darwiniana''
Disputatio:Alexander Lukašenko

message: Ad similitudinem lemmatis movi, sed si rursus ad Alexander Łukašenka movere suadetur, non abnuo! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 15:44, 16 Septembris 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Secundum ISO, Belorussice Lukašenka, Russice Lukašenko. Fortasse nobis oportet scriptura Belorussica uti; ł autem Polonicam non congruentem censeo; solum in hoc alphabeto desueto apparuit. Fortasse Alexander noster Gerashchenko opinionem praebere vult? Lesgles (disputatio) 20:07, 17 Septembris 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: :Lukašenko est translitteratio e linguis Russica et Ucrainica. Quia Lukašenko ipse ut plurimum Russice, non Albarussice, loquitur, et nomen familiae eius originem Ucrainicam habet, modum scribendi cum o finali praeferendum esse puto. -- Alexander Geraščenko (disputatio) 16:05, 18 Septembris 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: ::Bene! Lesgles (disputatio) 17:59, 18 Septembris 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Movi, sed ...
Disputatio Formulae:Gubernatores civitatum sociarum Unionis Europaeae

message: I moved this back to "Gubernatores civitatum ..." because the difference between this term and "Duces civitatum" is more eyecatching. I am not sure that either "Gubernatores civitatum" or "Duces rectionum civitatum" is an ideal term to correspond to English Heads of government ... of states, but if we agree on the best term, we would then probably want to apply the change generally.
I took off the links from the title of the navbox because I think we should avoid having links in that line. A reader is tempted to click the link to open the navbox, so putting a link there wastes a reader's time. Instead, whatever links are needed can be put inside the navbox. "Unio Europaea" is linked from the coat of arms (escutcheon), as is standard in our political navboxes, and other links appear at the bottom of the box. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 12:26, 17 Septembris 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: FYI: For Samoa, I've translated 'head of state' as caput civitatis because the writers of the modern constitution chose to designate this title by a Samoan word for 'head' (ao), deliberately & explicitly avoiding words for 'chief' (ali'i), 'leader' (ta'ita'i), and such. An anonymous IP address has made a redirect from there to Dux civitatis. IacobusAmor (disputatio) 14:29, 17 Septembris 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Movi et emendavi
Disputatio:Ioanna Clitori

message: We have no reliable source for this page. As with other Wikipedias, it depends on the work of TJ Britannicus, who has added stuff and removed it so that little is left. Even the image, now removed but still on commons, is by him. IMDB is a user-created resource. The thing could be libellous or a hoax and we wouldn't know. I propose deletion. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 12:59, 21 Septembris 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Sine fonte, delevi. --UV (disputatio) 14:06, 28 Septembris 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Delenda
Disputatio:Also sprach Zarathustra

message: ... an Nietzsche verba iam scripta accommodavit ad titulum huius libri. In Bibliis nihil utile reperio, sed libri De bello Iudaico Fl. Iosephi (4.4.4) versionem Theodiscam "Also sprach Jesus" habeo  et versionem Anglicam eiusdem loci "Thus spake Jesus". Alii quid censent? Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 12:22, 26 Septembris 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: "Also sprach" semel tantum in Bibliis Lutheri invenio, in Prophetia Zachariae 7:9: "Also sprach der HERR Zebaoth: Richtet recht, und ein jeglicher beweise an seinem Bruder Güte und Barmherzigkeit" (Vulgata: "haec ait Dominus exercituum dicens iudicium verum iudicate et misericordiam et miserationes facite unusquisque cum fratre suo"). Sed "also sprach" haud rara est locutio; vide e.g. hos locos (in quo numero sunt aliae Bibliorum versiones). Lesgles (disputatio) 19:11, 26 Septembris 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: :Bene, bene! Debui et ego locos "ante annum 1882" scriptos postulare! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 19:24, 26 Septembris 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nescio ...
Disputatio:Alienora Gwyn

message: I took out the links to the title page of "Remaines concerning Britaine" and to the homepage of "Burke's Peerage". There was no indication why they were being cited, and the links did not lead to any detail about Nell Gwyn that I could see.
The link to Cracroft's Peerage makes sense -- it links to the page about Nell Gwyn's son. But it is pointless to copy the url (internet address) into the text part of the link. That usually tells the reader nothing. The text part of the link should contain something readable and useful, in the original language or in Latin. Often the quickest thing is to copy the webpage title or relevant subtitle if there is one. So, in this case, I copied in the subtitle, and surrounded it with quote marks to show that it is a title.
If there is a source for the surname "Scribanius" it needs to be cited: otherwise, his surname is Beauclerk. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 11:51, 28 Septembris 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Varia
Disputatio:Charto

message: I wonder whether "charta crassior" in Traupman may be intended as an explanation (of an English term) rather than a Latin name? ... But, having said that, there is perhaps no better name available. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 12:25, 28 Septembris 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Apud Vilborg et apud Pekkanen & Pitkäranta charta densata praebetur. P & P etiam succinctum praebent vocabulum q.e. charto, -onis m. Quod vocabulum suffixo augmentativo praeditum mihi quidem placet idcirco quod hac ratione etiam succinctum adiectivum q.e. chartoneus derivare possimus. Neander (disputatio) 19:03, 8 Februarii 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: :Macte! IacobusAmor (disputatio) 21:26, 8 Februarii 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Nomen

message: Iacobus myriadas commentationum ex lingua Anglica convertit. Quod opus pertinax omnes laudamus. Interdum tamen in quaestionem vocari potest, num certae commentationes quas incohavit re vera dignae sint, quae ex Anglica conversiones esse notentur. Itaque facere non possum, quin hoc rogem: iustumne est notare hanc commentationem ex lingua Anglica conversam esse, cum paucae tantum sententiae ex initio conversae sint? Praeterea mea quidem opinione prima tantum sententia digna est, quae in Vicipaedia nostra adhibeatur. Quae sequuntur sententiae quasi Latina veste indutae terminologiam Anglicam ponderare videntur. "Vocabulum in commercio et industria raro adhibetur". Quod vocabulum ad cardboard refertur (vide notam 2, qua Illustrated Glossary of Packaging Terminology indicatur). Cetera quoque potius de condicionibus Anglophonorum tractant, quamvis specie Latina assimilata sint. Neander (disputatio) 08:40, 9 Februarii 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: His verbis de paginae origine tantum loquimur. Necesse erit omnes tales paginas, tam Iacobi quam aliorum, recensere ... et interdum rescribere. Ergo formulam non in pagina ipsa ponimus sed aut in summario aut in pagina disputationis. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 10:01, 9 Februarii 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: :Verba huius formulae leviter rescripsi: ita melius fortasse? Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 10:04, 9 Februarii 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: :: Profecto melius est! Gratias ago! Sed si quis hanc commentationem, puta, ex pagina Francogallica convertendo continuaverit, quomodo attributio facienda sit? Neander (disputatio) 18:53, 9 Februarii 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: :::Potest aut in summario, aut in hac pagina disputationis, verbis humanis id quod fecit dicere :) Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 20:52, 9 Februarii 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  De attributione
Disputatio:Iaroslaus Pelikan

message: An re vera lector vel professor fuit apud universitatem Vallis Paradisi? Id intra categorias inserere volui, sed verificare non potui. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 15:02, 28 Septembris 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Bene, bene! Iam apud Germanos reperio ... fuit Valparaiso in Indiana. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 15:06, 28 Septembris 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Curriculum vitae
Disputatio Categoriae:Institutum Smithsonianum

message: Fortasse melius ":Categoria:Institutum Smithsonianum," q.v. IacobusAmor (disputatio) 23:46, 30 Septembris 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Recte mones. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 08:52, 1 Octobris 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Nomen

message: This needs attaching to Wikidata Q8755143, which would not open for editing when I tried. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 11:52, 1 Octobris 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, a mere edit conflict, done now. Usor:Chobot did it for us! That's ironic Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 12:05, 1 Octobris 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wikidata
Disputatio Categoriae:Musici Iaz

message: Cur Musici Iaz et non Musici iaz ? Genera musica usitate non capitalizanda sunt. IacobusAmor (disputatio) 13:35, 1 Octobris 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Nescio cur :) Sed antequam movere conabor nos oportet de nomine ipso certiores fieri. Vide Jazz, ubi titulus cum lemmatibus non consonat. Quid de ea re dicis, amice? Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 14:18, 1 Octobris 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Nomen
Disputatio Categoriae:Sepulturae in Coemeterio Père Lachaise

message: Vel melius "Sepulturae in Coemeterio Patris Lachaise"? IacobusAmor (disputatio) 14:39, 2 Octobris 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Nomen

message: Lachaise est viculus Francicus. Quid significat locutio Pater Lachaise? Quendam clericum Catholicum? vel aliam rem? Confer Père Noël, Patrem Christi Natalem. IacobusAmor (disputatio) 14:39, 2 Octobris 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Lachaise
Disputatio:Tallinna

message: Mihi videtur nomen "Castrum Danorum" nusquam in fontibus Latinis reperiri. E speculatione etymologica venit: "Tallinn" enim versionem Estonicam "castri Danorum" esse praetenditur, sed nos e speculatione etymologica nomina paginarum non constituimus. Origo huius hypothesis repperi, nisi fallor, in textu Henrici de Lettis vide p. 188 l. 33. Ibi auctor locutione "castrum regis Danorum" utitur (neque "castrum Danorum"). An sit nomen proprium haud liquet. Igitur ad "Revaliam" movere suadeo. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 19:02, 2 Octobris 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Quidquid etymologia sit, nexus ad Anglicum Tallinn falsum est, quia Castrum Danorum arx, non urbs, videtur. IacobusAmor (disputatio) 20:41, 2 Octobris 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: :Fons citatus, textus Henrici Letti (Henrici de Lettis), primum editus est ut videtur anno 1740 (vide p. 153), ubi locutio est castrum Danorum, non castrum regis Danorum. Fortasse locus (tractus terrestris) ubi castrum constructum erat Revalia appellabatur. IacobusAmor (disputatio) 20:53, 2 Octobris 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: :::Certe castrum ≠ Revalia: vide p. 176: "Et inde abiit ad castrum Danorum in Reuelim." Vide etiam p. 144: "postquam Reualiensem provinciam totam baptizauerant" nobis dicit Revaliam esse provinciam (regio? oppidulum? vicinia? tractus?), vix urbem hodiernam ex omni parte. IacobusAmor (disputatio) 11:41, 3 Octobris 2014 (UTC)

text: ::Ergo, Tallinn ≠ Revalia ≠ Castrum Danorum. Tres habemus res distinctas. IacobusAmor (disputatio) 21:23, 2 Octobris 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: :::Revalia (Eston. Reval) est nomen Tallinnae obsoletum hodieque insuetum, vix gratum Estoniensibus. Nomen Tallinna apud Pekkanen & Pitkäranta (Lexicon hodiernae Latinitatis Finno-Latino-Finnicum. Societas Litterarum Finnicarum, 2006) invenitur. De Castro Danorum nihil certi scio, sed videtur in etymologia incerta sed populari positum esse. Forsitan, ut indicat Iacobus noster, ad arcem mediaevalem Toompea (Eston. Toompea loss [Theod. Schloss] = Toompea linnus ['arx']) in centro historico Tallinnae sitam relatum sit. Neander (disputatio) 07:54, 3 Octobris 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: ::::Gratias ago ambobus. De "correctitudine politica" Revaliae ego iam dubitavi. Perutile est igitur nomen "Tallinna" a Neandro repertum. Propositionem meam rescribo. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 10:01, 3 Octobris 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: De nomine
Disputatio Categoriae:Magnae Planities

message: I'm not sure if this category name works. I guess the "P" indicates it's a proper name (though we are now and then inconsistent), but nothing indicates what continent or planet these Planities would be on! It's different for English, many of whose speakers have heard of the Great Plains. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 18:44, 6 Octobris 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nomen