Andrew Dalby

Hic sunt tabularia! Veteres disputationes ad specialia tabularia motae sunt (auxilium). Si vis, hic infra scribendo in talibus tabulariis quaerere potes.

Disputationes anteriores hic habes: Tabularium 1, Tabularium 2, Tabularium 3, Tabularium 4. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 13:04, 27 Martii 2009 (UTC)

Άρης Neograece

Pars accepta a: Disputatio:Andreas Dalby § Άρης Neograece

Salve, Andrea, dubius sum, quomodo verba Neograeca apud nos tractanda sint. Videas quaeso commentationem quam de Μήλα (pellicula 2020) nuper scripsi. Utrum Latine Mila an Mela and Mēla scribam? Et Άρης Σερβετάλης histrio: Utrum Aris Servetalis an Ares Servetales? Neander (disputatio) 17:34, 10 Ianuarii 2025 (UTC)

Quamquam ego Andreas non sum, nolo silere de modo quo Theodisce res tractatur: Neograeca (nomina propria praesertim) saepissime modum in antiquum transscribi solent. Inde ego praeferrem res Neograecas modum in veterem Latine reddere Giorno2 (disputatio) 18:39, 10 Ianuarii 2025 (UTC)

Vide etiam hanc paginam: Vicipaedia:Translitteratio. Lesgles (disputatio) 16:55, 12 Ianuarii 2025 (UTC)

Date veniam: pro tempore rarius apud Vicipaediam versor. Tribus rationibus translitterationem classicam nominum Neograecorum commendo: primo quod lingua Latina utimur atque hoc modo antiqui lingua nostra utentes verba Graeca in Latina convertebant; secundo quod nullam translitterationem hodiernam sine ambiguitate, sine incongruitate, sine inconsistentia reperire possumus; tertio quia eruditi scientifici, qui etiam hodie neologismos Graecos vel Graecolatinos creant, saepius translitteratione Latina uti solent. Salvete! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 21:13, 12 Ianuarii 2025 (UTC)

Gratias omnibus vobis ago. Ipse quoque ita ut dicitis faciendum esse cogitavi. Neander (disputatio) 14:34, 13 Ianuarii 2025 (UTC)

Foods in Latin questions

Hello, I wrote a couple of questions on different pages related to food (Disputatio:Capsicum e carne, Disputatio:Salsa alba, Disputatio:Gruellum Bretonicum, Disputatio:Brodium, Disputatio:Iuscellum, Disputatio Categoriae:Embammata, Disputatio Categoriae:Pastilla_panicea, Disputatio:Ius (cibus), Disputatio:Botulus) and then saw that you had worked on all of the pages, so linking the questions to you directly might be better. I understand this topic is difficult because medieval authors were very inaccurate with their terms and rather stole words from their own languages, and even the Latins themselves seem to have used the words to mean a wide range of things that don't quite match the terms moderns use and it's difficult so cypher foods/dishes from text anyway, but it would be nice to at least have some consistency on Vicipaedia. Krken (disputatio) 07:32, 15 Aprilis 2025 (UTC)

It's difficult finding convincing names. I commented at Gruellum Bretonicum: I gave quite a bit of thought to that, and chose the medieval term intentionally, but I may not have reached the ideal conclusion after all! I'm too busy just now to spend long on Vicipaedia, but please write about food, please improve where you can. Pages can be moved easily: as a rule, a changed or new lemma should be justified with a footnote. I added a footnote to your well-justified addition of "lupus" under Esox lucius: "lupus" is in fact more classical, so I moved it up to second place. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 16:32, 15 Aprilis 2025 (UTC)

Attestations of lemmata may also help. Where attestations are missing, the formula "{{FD ref}}" may want to be attached to lemmata. IacobusAmor (disputatio) 17:49, 15 Aprilis 2025 (UTC)

Greetings, @IacobusAmor you're quite right. I found attestations for the previous lucius and the lupus that Krken added -- if I'd had no time to do that, adding {{FD ref}} would have been my fallback position. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 18:09, 15 Aprilis 2025 (UTC)

Create an article for Peshkopi (Penestae - in Latin)

@Andrew Dalby Hi Andrew! I am LevaneNevale who has communicated with you last year regarding a request made by me to create an article for Peshkopi: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peshkopi on Latin Wiki. The title for it should be "Penestae" in Latin. Please can you create the article for Peshkopi on Latin Wiki with short content? Then add it to its corresponding Wikidata page. I would thank you so much if you will create it. Thanks NevaleLevane (disputatio) 10:58, 17 Aprilis 2025 (UTC)

@IacobusAmor Please can you create the article for Peshkopi - Penestae in Latin yourself. Since Andrew isn't responding. Thanks NevaleLevane (disputatio) 20:09, 19 Aprilis 2025 (UTC)

@Andrew Dalby Hi dear Andrew! Please can you create the article for Peshkopi - "Penestae" on Latin Wiki? Thanks NevaleLevane (disputatio) 11:00, 21 Aprilis 2025 (UTC)

De nova formula citationum

Hi Andrew. If I don't remember wrong, you did not like the {{Cite book}}, {{Cite link}}, {{Cite journal}} templates due to their lack of flexibility. I am creating our own version, a single template that should be able to replace all of them. It's called {{Opus}} (sorry, the documentation is still minimal), and we can make it do whatever we want. I would like to know what exactly were the shortcomings of our {{Cite ...}} templates according to you; maybe that will help me improve the {{Opus}} template accordingly! --Grufo (disputatio) 16:28, 19 Aprilis 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for asking, Grufo. My objections were practical, not a matter of principle. 1. I felt it would be better to agree, if we could, on a format, before designing a template ... but I don't know whether we really could ever agree! 2. I feel that bibliographical templates encourage users who are unfamiliar with citations and bibliography to include too much information, to try to fill all the boxes (examples: on English Wikipedia, citing an unsigned news or periodical article, editors often write "staff" in the author space -- without evidence -- so as to fill the box; and sometimes, when citing a periodical, they add details of the publisher. In both cases, a editor who knows about citations would leave those boxes empty). It's hard to give concise advice on things like that, and the result is that Wikipedia bibliographies tend to be padded with unnecessary and distracting detail. However, if you want to make a suitable template, I still say, go ahead. Since I am currently busy elsewhere, I can't offer to help. (But watch out, this may well change!) Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 13:30, 20 Aprilis 2025 (UTC)

Hi Andrew, I would be very happy to discuss the format! I am not really a big fan of using dots to separate the various fields, although after working on the template, I must admit that it solves several practical obstacles – but I am open to anything. As for filling too many fields, well, in the {{Opus}} template the only mandatory field is the title. And so

{{Opus
	| titulus = Divina Comoedia
}}

will produce

Divina Comoedia

Everything else is optional. Maybe we could emphasize this aspect! --Grufo (disputatio) 15:25, 20 Aprilis 2025 (UTC)

@Grufo: If you are developing a citation template why would you name it "Opus"? Sure, a citation should refer to some work but unpublished works are not really that useful unless they are well known ancient manuscripts so wouldn't a better name be "Citationem" or even "Publicatio" (excuse my lack of Latin knowledge). It just seems to me, something named "Opus" might be better for something like an Infobox template for creating infoboxes about works or a Navbox about topics related to works, etc. Maybe "Citatio opus" or "Opus cita" would be okay but even something like "Citatio publicatio" (a la {{citatio libri}}) or maybe "Publicationem citare" sounds better to me. The Opus/work can then be the article/chapter, etc. referred to in that publication (be it a book, magazine, etc.). So then you might have a publication title and a work title (of course they are sometimes the same like novels that are typically published in books with the same title as the work contained within). —Uzume (disputatio) 13:00, 20 Iulii 2025 (UTC)

Hi Uzume. The latin word “opus” simply means “work” (noun). The idea is to have a template as generic as possible. Rather than “publicatio”, classical Latin would prefer “editio” (“edere” means “to publish” – for an English speaker it is a bit of a false friend). But as you mentioned, that would limit the template to published works. It would not be much of a problem, really; it is just that “opus” is the most open and generic name that came into my mind. Of course it could also indicate an infobox, but usually here on Latin Wikipedia we add “capsa” (“box”) to infobox templates (e.g. {{Capsa hominis Vicidatorum}}, {{Capsa insulae}}, and many others). “Citatio” could also work, but we have already the old {{Citatio}} template, and the two will need to coexist for a while. --Grufo (disputatio) 00:08, 21 Iulii 2025 (UTC)

@Grufo: So can I cite a sculpture, a building, or canal? These could all also be considered works or "Opus" I suppose you could do something limit it via something like "opus litterarium". I just think "opus" is too general and as a citation it should contain "citation" somehow like "Opus cita" or some such. —Uzume (disputatio) 00:21, 21 Iulii 2025 (UTC)

@Uzume: Exactly, the idea was exactly that (I just love Postel's law)! You can cite a sculpture, a building, or canal :-) It is an experiment, but so far it seems to be working well! I have not finished writing it however. I still have to differentiate the current |series= parameter into two different parameters: one for the case in which the series is a minor detail (e.g. a collection of books belonging to the same series) and one for the case in which the series is a more important feature (e.g. a journal). I have still to find the right wording, but it is in the back of my mind. Other capabilities will need to be implemented too. As you can see, the nomenclature is left open and generic on purpose. --Grufo (disputatio) 00:28, 21 Iulii 2025 (UTC)

Wikipedia in Ancient Greek

Hi, I have seen that you speak Ancient Greek and I wanted to ask you whether you could please help us improve the Ancient Greek Wikipedia, which we have been reviving for the past months. --Caro de Segeda (disputatio) 10:42, 27 Novembris 2025 (UTC)

Currently I have too little spare time even to work on the Latin Vicipaedia -- so, sadly, I cannot help with ancient Greek right now. I wish you good luck and success! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 13:48, 27 Novembris 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for the answer and good luck with the Latin Wikipedia, you are all doing a great job here. Caro de Segeda (disputatio) 17:15, 28 Novembris 2025 (UTC)

Mensis Martius adest

Salve, Andrea. Spero te bene valere. Iam mensis Martius adest; velisne Paginae Mensis nostrae opem ferre? Vale! --Grufo (disputatio) 14:21, 26 Februarii 2026 (UTC)

Cito respondeo -- Salve optime, mi Grufo! hoc tempore non iam possum sed inter duos menses revenire cupio -- Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 19:04, 27 Februarii 2026 (UTC)

Gratias tibi ago ob alacre responsum, Andrea. Gestio te videre in Vicipaediam revenientem! Vale. --Grufo (disputatio) 11:15, 28 Februarii 2026 (UTC)

Dining with the Caesars: written source and collective memory in Suetonius

Dear Andrew Dalby, I found your paper "Dining with the Caesars: written source and collective memory in Suetonius” on academia.eu. It is said to have been published in the proceedings of the Oxford Food Symposium, but I cannot find the precise bibliographic details (year and place of publication, page numbers etc.). Could you help me? I would like to cite your paper in a bibliographic overview of Suetonius. Kind regards, Marijke Crab ~2026-21490-69 (talk) 11:41, 7 Aprilis 2026 (UTC)

Dear Marijke, I am glad you found my paper useful. Here is a full citation:

Andrew Dalby, ”Dining with the Caesars” in Harlan Walker, ed., Food and the memory: proceedings of the Oxford Symposium on Food and Cookery (Totnes: Prospect Books, 2001. ISBN 978-1-903018-16-3) pp. 62-88.

Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 15:03, 7 Aprilis 2026 (UTC)

nofendare

;kokkshin0@1234|#crfpinkae ~2026-24722-75 (talk) 08:13, 22 Aprilis 2026 (UTC)

You may be an eligible candidate for the U4C election

Greetings,

The Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) seeks candidates for the 2026 election. The U4C is the global committee responsible for overseeing enforcement of the Universal Code of Conduct. Elections are held annually, if elected a committee member serves for two years.

This year the U4C requires candidates to hold administrator rights on at least one wiki, which is why you are being contacted as you appear to hold this right. There are other requirements, such as candidates must be at least 18 years old and may not be employed by the Wikimedia Foundation or other related chapters and affiliates. You can find more information in the call for candidates on Meta-wiki. Additionally, the committee's working language is English; some ability to communicate in English is required.

The election opens on 18 May, if you are eligible and interested you have until 10 May to submit your candidacy. There will be a week in between for candidates to answer questions from the community. Voting takes place privately in SecurePoll, successful candidates must receive at least 60% support. More information is available on the 2026 Elections page, including timelines and other candidacy information. If you read over the material and consider yourself qualified, please consider submitting your name to run for the committee. If you think someone else in your community might be interested and qualified, please encourage them to run.

In partnership with the U4C -- Keegan (WMF) (talk) 20:06, 28 Aprilis 2026 (UTC)

Latina

Hello. I'm looking for Latin translation of descriptions of a few items for Wikidata. Would you help? Eurohunter (disputatio) 08:18, 16 Maii 2026 (UTC)

Sub alia subcriptione his diebus me observabis

Revenire in Vicipaediam his diebus volebam, sed superiores mihi dicunt nomen bina authentificatione dare necesse erit quia magistratus grapheocrates sum. Quomodo et cur inter methodos multiplices huius authentificationis seligam, quomodo efficere, haud iam intellego. Fortasse amicus quis inter vicinos me adiuvare poterit. Ergo pro tempore non Andreas Dalby sed sub hoc nomine (multos annos desueto) videbor ... Andronicus Comnenus 13:07, 21 Maii 2026 (UTC)

Salve, Andrea! Bene est, quod certiores nos fecisti, ut Andronici subscriptio tua est. De bina authentificatione nescio, qui modus melior sit, numquam hoc temptabam. Sed non magistratibus illa necessaria est, solum grapheocratis. Adam Bishop iam non est grapheocrates, nemo, nisi tu, iura magistratuum mutare potes. Demetrius Talpa (disputatio) 08:32, 22 Maii 2026 (UTC)

Recte dicis, mi Demetri. Diebus proximis de methodis me certiorem facere possum, sine dubio. Quo facto, nomen solitum (et verum!) resumere potebo. Andronicus Comnenus 12:47, 22 Maii 2026 (UTC)

Salve, Andrea! Infeliciter neque ego de duplici authenticatione quicquam scio (eamque odi). Fortasse potes tertium nomen Vicipaedianum creare atque per id periclitari? Spero te solutionem mox inventurum esse. --Grufo (disputatio) 14:42, 22 Maii 2026 (UTC)

Salvete amici! Vicino quodam adiuvante, in Vicipaediam nostram bina authenticatione plenaque potestate revenio. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 15:49, 26 Maii 2026 (UTC)

Euax! --Grufo (disputatio) 03:52, 27 Maii 2026 (UTC)

Io! IacobusAmor (disputatio) 12:50, 27 Maii 2026 (UTC)

Is that Yo? as in Bush's greeting to Tony Blair, "Yo, Blair!" Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 15:22, 28 Maii 2026 (UTC)

Etiamnunc, sed rarius, nomen Andronici Comneni subscribo, quando paginas Vicipaedicas e telephono mobili aut e tabula in rebus minoribus emendo. His "mediis" facilius nomen sine duplici authenticatione dare possum. (NB: de tabula electronica, non cuneiforma, scribo.) Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 13:57, 14 Iunii 2026 (UTC)

Alius mensis adest

Salve Andrea! Alius mensis adest et adhuc paginā mensis caremus. Visne adiuvare ad novas paginas mensium inveniendas? --Grufo (disputatio) 23:44, 27 Maii 2026 (UTC)

Propositionem feci: vide VP:Pam. Alias paginas in mente habeo proponere: enumerationem ad approbationem aliorum ibidem addere volo. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 14:56, 28 Maii 2026 (UTC)

Gratias tibi ago, Andrea! --Grufo (disputatio) 18:23, 28 Maii 2026 (UTC)

About the confusing warning

Hi Andrew! I saw your comment (via Andronicus Comnenus) at Disputatio Usoris:Jondel § Pagina “Spider-Man” facta est adumbratio. I am sorry if that warning confused you. The idea is that if there is an “adumbratio” there shouldn't be a page at the same time. So if that happens and you edit the page, it simply tells you that there is an “adumbratio” that shouldn't exist (basically it invites you to inspect it, and in case, turn it into a redirect, although this second part is not explicitly written). If you want I can make it more explicit. At the moment the warning says:

“Etiam pagina “Adumbratio:Bla bla bla” exsistit! Suademus ut illam inspicias prius quam hanc paginam recenseas.”

I could make it become

“Etiam pagina “Adumbratio:Bla bla bla” exsistit! Suademus ut illam inspicias et, si opus est, ad redirectionem vertas prius quam hanc paginam recenseas.”

What do you think? --Grufo (disputatio) 20:33, 2 Iulii 2026 (UTC)

Nova. Sententiam sicut supra scripsi mutavi. --Grufo (disputatio) 21:48, 2 Iulii 2026 (UTC)

[I'm travelling at present, therefore logging in this way!] I see what you intended, Grufo. I expect it worked well, and I wouldn't have pressed you to change it -- but the change you have now made seems a good idea. When I saw that Jondel was at work at that moment, it was clear to me why the two pages temporarily existed and I retreated. There's plenty of time for editing, and lots to edit! Andronicus Comnenus 15:45, 3 Iulii 2026 (UTC)

Courtesy Call

Just saying hello! :) and let's get back to work, renew the daily wiki grind here at vicipaedia! All the best!---Jondel (disputatio)

Here is an Andrew replying, even if not the Andrew you expect. I'm glad to see you around, Jondel. All the best Andronicus Comnenus 15:46, 3 Iulii 2026 (UTC)

Thank you. Nice to see you guys. Are you (still) studying German?--Jondel (disputatio)

No, Jondel, I don't really do German (though I sometimes have to try to read it). I did take some lessons from a neighbour a few years ago: maybe I told you that?

By the way, to be clear about it, "Andronicus Comnenus" is a name that I use when travelling -- because as "Andrew Dalby", a bureaucrat on Vicipaedia, I have to do double authentication, and I haven't learned how to do it on my phone or tablet. I am addicted to Vicipaedia, so I have to log in somehow! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 08:28, 20 Iulii 2026 (UTC)

Vandalismus

Exemplum: Malaesia > Malaysia, etc... Specialis:Conlationes/NDG - 100% lingua latina destructa est. Kalligraphiemonk (disputatio) 17:28, 25 Iulii 2026 (UTC)

Ne vandalismum citius impute, amice. Tibi licet apud "Disputatio:Babylonokia" utilitatem paginae suadere. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 19:11, 25 Iulii 2026 (UTC)

wikidata:Q28114063#sitelinks-wikipedia Babylonokia - 19 linguae rectae sunt. Kalligraphiemonk (disputatio) 06:55, 26 Iulii 2026 (UTC)

w:en:Babylonokia - articulus non reprehensibilis est. Kalligraphiemonk (disputatio) 10:02, 26 Iulii 2026 (UTC)