Talk:List of Latin phrases

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Languages (Rated List-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Languages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of standardized, informative and easy-to-use resources about languages on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 List  This article has been rated as List-Class on the project's quality scale.
WikiProject Latin (Rated List-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Latin, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Latin on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 List  This article has been rated as List-Class on the quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.
WikiProject Lists (Rated List-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lists, an attempt to structure and organize all list pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
 List  This article has been rated as List-Class on the project's quality scale.

Links and redirects...[edit]

Now, that redirects can link to anchors, how about making the often used redirects link to the exact entry. I tried doing something like this for vice versa by adding a <span id="vice versa" /> at almost the right spot and making the redirects go there. I say almost, because currently you have to scroll up slightly to see the entire definition, but in my opinion this is still infinitely more comfortable than being thrown to the beginning of V or even worse the beginning of (P-V). PS. If redirects to anchors don't work for you, you might have to shift-reload the page (once!). Anyway, it works for me... Try vice versa... should we do the same for others entires that are redirected here? --Merzul 16:49, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Better to use {{section}} see #template:section below --PBS (talk) 12:16, 28 November 2008 (UTC)


An anon with no previous edit history nominated the whole series of Latin Phrases for transwiki to Wiktionary. Seeing no discussion, and seeing that this has been rejected before, is there an objection to my removing the tag? Robert A.West (Talk) 00:15, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Please remove it. 03:41, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Ad Verbatim[edit]

Isn't this latin? I'm not a Latin scholar so I don't really know, but if it is, should it be on the list? I believe it is commonly translated as "to the word" or meaning "in full". Ra.rochford 02:00, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Verbatim is a Latin adverb meaning "Word for word". Adam Bishop 05:45, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Category sorting[edit]

Regarding the following: [[Category:Latin words and phrases| ]].

Is that verical line followed by a space necessary, or is it a typo?
Yours truly, --Ludvikus 16:33, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
It places the link at the top of the list on the category page. (Otherwise it would be under L.) Adam Bishop 16:39, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Semper Ubi Sub Ubi[edit]

I am a current latin student. This is actually the first phrase we learned, to help us remember the three very common words. The translation is, "Always where under where" a joke that sounds like,"Always wear underwear" This is a good one to say to your teacher, assuming they have a nice sense of humor. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hockadori (talkcontribs) 04:31, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Pro gloria et patria translation error?[edit]

The above entry has as it's translation "for gloria and fatherland"; this seems rather incomplete/incorrect. I suspect it should be "for glory and fatherland", based on other occurences of 'gloria' in this list, but I do not speak a word of Latin and am therefore hesitant to make any correction myself. If a Latin-speaker would check this, that would be good. (talk) 01:06, 20 December 2007 (UTC)


Unlike {{tl:anchor}} which is limited to ten {{section}} can have many more entries on an page. By adding {{section}} template before the name in the table, it is then possible to point a redirect at the specific phrase. For example dolus specialis redirect so List of Latin phrases (C-E)#dolus specialis. The table entry for doulus specialis starts with "|{{section|doulus specialis}}doulus specialis||..." and as the template contents do not show in the table there is no apparent change to the text. However if the Note is extensive it is probably best to place the template at the start of the Notes cell as the first text in the first cell is centred and the text at the start of the Notes cell will be above the top of the viewing window. --PBS (talk) 12:27, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

I think you misunderstand the restriction of {{Anchor}}: it can have no more than 10 anchors specified in one invocation ({{Anchor|1|2|3|4|5|6|7|8|9|10}}); there is no restriction on how many anchors can be placed on a page. Michael Bednarek (talk) 03:16, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

Per medium[edit]

I encounter this one in stilted English writing occasionally. It it used in place of "via" or "by way of". — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 00:20, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Re: Split[edit]

I split the six articles into 20 because of their relatively large size. (sorry for not clearing up the redirects!) Is it just me, or is the full list redundant? Should we be deleting it? --Woodelf 14:13, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Their size was not a problem; their splitting caused problems. Did you familiarise yourself with WP:SIZE, particularly with "No need for haste", and WP:SPLIT before you proceeded?
Apart from the many orphaned redirects, there were also several errors in the newly created split-off pages (headers missing), and in the full list ("I" missing altogether).
But what's done is done, and there is now no point in post-match analysis.
The full list is not redundant; its purpose is explained in its lead. And "we" cannot delete it; that needs a proposal, a discussion/vote, and administrative action. Michael Bednarek (talk) 14:45, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Canes pugnaces[edit]

Hi, would some of you mind chiming in on this article Canes pugnaces advising them, that Latin phrases, words, terms or idioms are allowed to have their own article for this category. They want to #Redirect it to a similar meaning in English. Thank you. Green Squares (talk) 14:13, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

The discussion is at Talk:Canes pugnaces where there was a clear consensus to turn this into a redirect. including several editors from WP:WikiProject Classical Greece and Rome. I'd welcome more comments to convince Greensquares that "canis, pugnax" (with the comma in several of his sources, which are in fact from the identical non-Classical text) is not a Latin phrase. Dougweller (talk) 18:25, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

Article name[edit]

Given that this page doesn't contain any Latin phrases but a list of such articles, shouldn't the page be moved to Lists of Latin phrases? -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 06:07, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

No. There's still only one list. It's just broken up alphabetically for length concerns. If they were divided by topic or source, then a name change would be appropriate. Reywas92Talk 22:27, 19 March 2011 (UTC)
In addition to the one list broken up alphabetically, there are quite a number of other lists listed in the "See also" section. That makes this part of Lists of lists, and the article name should reflect that. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 07:29, 20 March 2011 (UTC)
No, because the see also is not part of the list itself. Most of those links are either categories or unrelated to either latin or phrases. Reywas92Talk 16:54, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

Proposed link[edit]

There are few external links listed on this page. I would like to see a link to my personal site: Latin quotes, sayings and words of wisdom

The collection I have is more comprehensive. Besides, many sites with Latin phrases replicate each other's errors. I try to keep my list in better shape.

Deses (talk) 12:42, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for asking – it's a nice list. User:Wareh's comments on his and your talk pages notwithstanding, I think your site may fail WP:ELNO no. 5 (too many ads), no. 7 (accessability (the scroll box for the letter "A") ), and most importantly, no. 11 (personal web site). Others may think differently. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 13:10, 16 April 2011 (UTC)
Thank you! For what it's worth, I have streamlined the pages a bit. The scroll box did not work well on mobile devices. Still a useful resource, considering the links presently available. Deses (talk) 17:22, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

Why here?[edit]

Why such list is in Wikipedia, but not in Wikiquote? I think wikiq is better place for it. Did here is some discussions about it? --Basetalkсontr. 11:50, 27 October 2012 (UTC)

At the top of this talk page are three links that point to previous discussions related to your question:
  1. Talk:List of Latin phrases/Archive 1#Move to Wiktionary,
  2. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Latin phrases,
  3. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Latin phrases (2nd nomination).
It seems long-standing consensus is to keep the page(s) here. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 13:42, 27 October 2012 (UTC)
Oh not noticed :( Consensus, consensus, bla-bla-bla... Consensus is highter then idia of WP... Okay, I cant change anything... Thanks for answer! --Basetalkсontr. 20:55, 27 October 2012 (UTC)