User talk:Amit6

Hello, please do not mark entry creation as 'minor' apart from inflected forms (plurals, feminine singulars, etc.). Also, it's recommended (but optional) to leave the edit summary blank when creating a page, as that automatically displays the start of the created entry. Thanks, Mglovesfun (talk) 15:13, 31 August 2010 (UTC)Reply

I repeat... Mglovesfun (talk) 08:28, 8 February 2011 (UTC)Reply

These should be created at a lower-case spelling, not capitalized. Latin proper names are capitalized, but not adjectives. Capitalizing Latin adjectives is a modern English editorial convention, and is not followed in Medieval or non-English editions. --EncycloPetey 16:02, 1 September 2010 (UTC)Reply

All Latin adjectives should be lower case. The ones from country names are not capitalized in Latin, and neither are their derivatives in modern Romance languages. As I said, capitalization of those adjectives only happens in editions printed in English-speaking countries. --EncycloPetey 03:24, 2 September 2010 (UTC)Reply

And when you move e.g. Anglicus to anglicus, remember to modify the inflection table and headword accordingly. SemperBlotto 18:17, 4 September 2010 (UTC)Reply

English translations should be simple wikified words (in square brackets). You should not use the {{l}} template here. SemperBlotto 09:45, 8 February 2011 (UTC)Reply

Is there any chance you can slow down on the creation of Latin entries you are making, or at least check them more thoroughly, see . Macron errors are slipping through as well, so if possible please find the correct macrons for each entry, although for some of the later words it may be difficult to find them. Thanks. Caladon 17:04, 9 February 2011 (UTC)Reply

Can you include macrons in related terms please as well, see . Caladon 17:47, 10 February 2011 (UTC)Reply

(deprecated template usage) prelate is not a participle. I have fixed the participle, but the noun is not in my dictionary. SemperBlotto 17:43, 9 February 2011 (UTC)Reply

Latin words can't be antonyms of English words. You need to add the Latin word first. SemperBlotto 17:28, 10 February 2011 (UTC)Reply

Can they be attested in actual Neo-Latin writings, or are they creative neologisms by folks at Latin Wikipedia? If the latter is the case, they cannot be added. See WT:CFI: attestation reigns supreme, and that excludes WMF sister projects. --Ivan Štambuk 16:57, 14 February 2011 (UTC)Reply

• The place to look for attestation is the Vatican website. For instance ... "Beatissimi Patris benedictionem secum fert pro Ecclesia particulari in Pakistania et pro tota illa regione." — This unsigned comment was added by SemperBlotto (talk • contribs) at 18:08, 14 February 2011.

Latin Wikipedia is definitely not acceptable as a source. Vatican website, well, probably. Providing it archives it's stories, articles, whatever, then they are "durably archived". If it deletes them after a period of time, they are not. That would still only count for one citation as it's not a well-known work. Mglovesfun (talk) 17:57, 2 March 2011 (UTC)Reply

Any chance you could find some attestations for these? For example serbocroaticus gets one Google Book hit, and that's in English. Serbocroatica gets a few hundred hits, none of these seem to be Latin of the first 50 or so. Mglovesfun (talk) 17:51, 4 March 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hi,

Why don't you use assisted method for your translations? This page can help with the transliteration. +/- are added by bots later but they are not so important. --Anatoli 08:04, 17 February 2011 (UTC)Reply

The syntax you're looking for is {{also|word goes here}}. Only to be used for very similar titles, not for alternative forms of synonyms, which have their own headers. Mglovesfun (talk) 18:04, 3 March 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hi, could you please use {{infl|bn|proper noun|sc=Beng}} to categorize these? Mglovesfun (talk) 10:13, 25 March 2011 (UTC)Reply

Is there a source for this entry? Where did you get it from? Aulus Sergius Sulla (talk) 13:05, 15 April 2012 (UTC)Reply