Disputatio Categoriae:Paginae scripturis non-Latinis intitulatae

message: Nescio, an haec omnia transliteranda sint. Mihi hic mos (si versio incerta est, nomen sine versione etiam sine transliteratione manet, nam  transliteratio omnis claudicat) insolitus videbatur, sed iamdudum hic institutus est. (Graeca et Cyrillica transliterare potero, si necesse erit, Arabica et hieroglyphica non potero.) Demetrius Talpa (disputatio) 15:33, 5 Decembris 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: De translitteratione

message: Vide Usor:Mykhal/Mixed-script-named-pages. --UV (disputatio) 23:11, 18 Decembris 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  De indice 

message: :Vide etiam disputetionem praeviam in pagina Disputatio:Summa facultatum diversarum plantarum. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 17:46, 16 Aprilis 2024 (UTC)
== Hidden? ==
I have placed this under "hidden categories" because (as far as I can see) it is very useful for housekeeping but I don't think it helps the ordinary user to find anything. If I'm wrong, it will be easy to revert my edit!
Any editor or user can see categories of this kind by making a change at "Modi/Preferences". Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 09:03, 13 Augusti 2019 (UTC)
== A second group ==
I had forgotten, but there are also some pages about "locutiones" that have pagenames in Greek. (There may even be some other group, still forgotten!) Evidently, if we're listing some, all should be listed. Since the point of this listing is not the subject ("Opera litteraria"/"Locutiones") but the pagename, I suggest simplifying this category name to be more inclusive. Maybe :Categoria:Paginae scripturis non-Latinis intitulatae"? Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 11:31, 13 Augusti 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Or put this category into the one you suggest? (But for me it's fine either way.) Sigur (disputatio) 14:47, 13 Augusti 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: :That could be also an option. It just dpends if we think that a generic category on untransliterated pages with a sub-category of untransliterated works of literature feels redundant.--Xaverius 09:34, 14 Augusti 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: ::Thanks to you both. For the present it was quicker to do what Sigur suggested, so I've done that. I made the new category a sub-category of "Corrigenda", not because these pages all have to be renamed (let's see what we think) but because they should certainly be renamed if a Latin name can be found. OK? Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 13:12, 14 Augusti 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: :::That is absolutely fine, Andrew. The question will still remain, however, if transliteration falls under  or :VP:TNP and our noli fingere policy.--Xaverius 13:30, 14 Augusti 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: ::::Exactly.

text: ::::I'm fine with transliteration for names, but for a whole phrase or sentence, even if there is a standard transliteration, people wouldn't necessarily know it or search for it -- especially not speakers of the language concerned, who usually don't use transliterations. So, if you head an article with a string of words in transliteration, it looks ugly and nobody at all can read it easily; while if you head it with the original script, at least those familiar with the language can read it. That was my opinion when we originally decided this, agreeing, I think, with Alexander Gerashchenko (and possibly others). Back then, I don't think anyone was against. Latinists are all multilingual, after all, and Latin reference books are usually at ease with multiple scripts. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 13:51, 14 Augusti 2019 (UTC)

text: ::::... OK, continuing to think about it, "Corrigenda" was the right impulse. There are strong reasons to convert these titles as soon as we can. By my own logic, if no one can easily read a sentence in transliteration, and only a few people can read it in the original script, that's not good enough! We want every Vicipaedian to be able to read it. So your earlier suggestion -- a descriptive title in Latin -- may often be the solution. Let's discuss some examples. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 08:51, 15 Augusti 2019 (UTC)
*I would have imagined that something like 紅樓夢 could be Somnium cubiculi rubri with a  rather than a direct transliteration (Hónglóu mèng), as they do in other wikis. I think that there is a tradition to do this. For instance, there is :ca:El somni del pavelló vermell even if the book has not been translated into Catalan.--Xaverius 09:27, 15 Augusti 2019 (UTC)
*::Case in point: the beginning of Somnium Cubiculi Rubri: "Hónglóu mèng, litteris Sinicis 紅樓夢 (scilicet "Somnium cubiculi rubri" vel "Somnium aedium rubrarum")." IacobusAmor (disputatio) 11:14, 15 Augusti 2019 (UTC)
*:::Yes, in a case like that where the title has been widely translated into other languages already, a Latin translation is justified. Somnium cubiculi rubri would certainly work for me. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 13:12, 15 Augusti 2019 (UTC)
*I think a translated pagename with  would also be best for Russian titles like Братья Карамазовы. It's translated into many other languages in the same way. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 13:27, 15 Augusti 2019 (UTC)
*For the page that started this discussion, كتاب الجامع لأشتات النبات, it's not quite so easy. (But I'm not saying it's impossible.) There's no other Wikipedia article; there's no translation of the book. The title has been translated into English or French by the academics who have written about it, but they all did it in their own way! In a case like that, maybe a purely descriptive pagename such as a Latin encyclopaedist of the past might have used -- like "Edrisius de plantis et medicamentis" -- would be best? That's very much what Xaverius suggested on the relevant talk page, if I remember correctly. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 13:12, 15 Augusti 2019 (UTC)

text: ::For most people, كتاب الجامع لأشتات النبات will be read as something like "Squiggle squiggle, squiggle, squiggle." The same problem turns up in the Chinese titles listed in Categoria:Sericae scripta (which itself might be reviewed in the light of Litterae Sinarum). IacobusAmor (disputatio) 13:34, 15 Augusti 2019 (UTC)
I have begun by moving all the "Locutiones Graecae" pages. It was not too difficult to find a Latin version for all of them. Improvements welcome. If others want to do any of the remaining pages in this category, feel free. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 15:57, 30 Augusti 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Disputatio de usu huius categoriae 

message: I have placed this under "hidden categories" because (as far as I can see) it is very useful for housekeeping but I don't think it helps the ordinary user to find anything. If I'm wrong, it will be easy to revert my edit!
Any editor or user can see categories of this kind by making a change at "Modi/Preferences". Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 09:03, 13 Augusti 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hidden? 

message: I had forgotten, but there are also some pages about "locutiones" that have pagenames in Greek. (There may even be some other group, still forgotten!) Evidently, if we're listing some, all should be listed. Since the point of this listing is not the subject ("Opera litteraria"/"Locutiones") but the pagename, I suggest simplifying this category name to be more inclusive. Maybe :Categoria:Paginae scripturis non-Latinis intitulatae"? Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 11:31, 13 Augusti 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Or put this category into the one you suggest? (But for me it's fine either way.) Sigur (disputatio) 14:47, 13 Augusti 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: :That could be also an option. It just dpends if we think that a generic category on untransliterated pages with a sub-category of untransliterated works of literature feels redundant.--Xaverius 09:34, 14 Augusti 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: ::Thanks to you both. For the present it was quicker to do what Sigur suggested, so I've done that. I made the new category a sub-category of "Corrigenda", not because these pages all have to be renamed (let's see what we think) but because they should certainly be renamed if a Latin name can be found. OK? Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 13:12, 14 Augusti 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: :::That is absolutely fine, Andrew. The question will still remain, however, if transliteration falls under  or :VP:TNP and our noli fingere policy.--Xaverius 13:30, 14 Augusti 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: ::::Exactly.

text: ::::I'm fine with transliteration for names, but for a whole phrase or sentence, even if there is a standard transliteration, people wouldn't necessarily know it or search for it -- especially not speakers of the language concerned, who usually don't use transliterations. So, if you head an article with a string of words in transliteration, it looks ugly and nobody at all can read it easily; while if you head it with the original script, at least those familiar with the language can read it. That was my opinion when we originally decided this, agreeing, I think, with Alexander Gerashchenko (and possibly others). Back then, I don't think anyone was against. Latinists are all multilingual, after all, and Latin reference books are usually at ease with multiple scripts. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 13:51, 14 Augusti 2019 (UTC)

text: ::::... OK, continuing to think about it, "Corrigenda" was the right impulse. There are strong reasons to convert these titles as soon as we can. By my own logic, if no one can easily read a sentence in transliteration, and only a few people can read it in the original script, that's not good enough! We want every Vicipaedian to be able to read it. So your earlier suggestion -- a descriptive title in Latin -- may often be the solution. Let's discuss some examples. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 08:51, 15 Augusti 2019 (UTC)
*I would have imagined that something like 紅樓夢 could be Somnium cubiculi rubri with a  rather than a direct transliteration (Hónglóu mèng), as they do in other wikis. I think that there is a tradition to do this. For instance, there is :ca:El somni del pavelló vermell even if the book has not been translated into Catalan.--Xaverius 09:27, 15 Augusti 2019 (UTC)
*::Case in point: the beginning of Somnium Cubiculi Rubri: "Hónglóu mèng, litteris Sinicis 紅樓夢 (scilicet "Somnium cubiculi rubri" vel "Somnium aedium rubrarum")." IacobusAmor (disputatio) 11:14, 15 Augusti 2019 (UTC)
*:::Yes, in a case like that where the title has been widely translated into other languages already, a Latin translation is justified. Somnium cubiculi rubri would certainly work for me. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 13:12, 15 Augusti 2019 (UTC)
*I think a translated pagename with  would also be best for Russian titles like Братья Карамазовы. It's translated into many other languages in the same way. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 13:27, 15 Augusti 2019 (UTC)
*For the page that started this discussion, كتاب الجامع لأشتات النبات, it's not quite so easy. (But I'm not saying it's impossible.) There's no other Wikipedia article; there's no translation of the book. The title has been translated into English or French by the academics who have written about it, but they all did it in their own way! In a case like that, maybe a purely descriptive pagename such as a Latin encyclopaedist of the past might have used -- like "Edrisius de plantis et medicamentis" -- would be best? That's very much what Xaverius suggested on the relevant talk page, if I remember correctly. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 13:12, 15 Augusti 2019 (UTC)

text: ::For most people, كتاب الجامع لأشتات النبات will be read as something like "Squiggle squiggle, squiggle, squiggle." The same problem turns up in the Chinese titles listed in Categoria:Sericae scripta (which itself might be reviewed in the light of Litterae Sinarum). IacobusAmor (disputatio) 13:34, 15 Augusti 2019 (UTC)
I have begun by moving all the "Locutiones Graecae" pages. It was not too difficult to find a Latin version for all of them. Improvements welcome. If others want to do any of the remaining pages in this category, feel free. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 15:57, 30 Augusti 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  A second group