This article is within the scope of WikiProject Classical music, which aims to improve, expand, copy edit, and maintain all articles related to classical music, that are not covered by other classical music related projects. Please read the guidelines for writing and maintaining articles. To participate, you can edit this article or visit the project page for more details.Classical musicWikipedia:WikiProject Classical musicTemplate:WikiProject Classical musicClassical music articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Songs, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of songs 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.SongsWikipedia:WikiProject SongsTemplate:WikiProject Songssong articles
This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool because one or more other projects use this class. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the |auto= parameter.
User:Ser be etre shi recently added a transcription from the Latin manuscript to this article. There are several problems with this. First, it adds nothing to the article; if people want to look at the manuscript, they can look at the Codex Buranus, but the text is of course fundamentally the same. Second, the transcription uses a number of Unicode characters from the Latin Extended-D set that are outside what normal fonts can display. I have fonts with extensive Unicode set installed on my computer, and they don't display other than e.g a ꝓ which apparently is a "LATIN SMALL LETTER P WITH FLOURISH"; there are others as well. Third, the edit changed the format of the text which used <poem>...</poem> tags to a tables-based presentation, which lost the strophic information and is generally inferior. Fourth, the edit introduced an unsourced translation. Fifth, the repeated exclamations at the end are not "no" but "Io!". Following the principle of WP:BRD, I partially reverted those changes and started a discussion here. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 07:06, 18 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Michael Bednarek: I agree with all your objections against my edit. When it comes to ClassicalNet's translation, I'm annoyed by the use of "mistress/master" for Latin (h)erus/(h)era, as I don't think many readers will understand these terms refer to the woman and man of authority in a large household, unless they're familiar with those older meanings of "mistress/master". (As a reference of this statement, the DMLBS defines them as "lord, master (of house); the Lord, God" and "lady, mistress (of house); Virgin Mary; concubine"). And I also really doubt nummata vini means "[female] wine-merchant" rather than "a coin('s worth) of wine", particularly due to the following ex hac (lit. "out of it", also interpretable as "out of her"), since I think it'd be a strange use of ex. (Also, the DMLBS defines (the adjective) nummatus as "supplied with money, wealthy", and I don't think this "supplied" can mean a merchant just supplied, but someone already well-supplied, i.e. "wealthy". And Niermeyer's dictionary includes the usage "a pennyworth; the value of one penny" under (the noun) nummata too.)
But I agree that until I find a better translation elsewhere (not easy for me at the moment), ClassicalNet's has to remain, since my changes were original research. Maybe leaving my objections here in the talk page will be of use to someone.
By the way, I just moved the picture to the top, since on a computer screen that's ~1300 pixels wide (like mine) it made the stanzas very misaligned (in a smaller or larger screen it'd be fine). It also appears that my computer can render that Latin Extended-D character with the DejaVu Sans font, if you were curious about that.--Ser be etre shi (talk) 20:38, 18 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
