Talk:Thomas Linacre

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

University of Oxford Low‑importance

	University of Oxford portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject University of Oxford, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the University of Oxford 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.University of OxfordWikipedia:WikiProject University of OxfordTemplate:WikiProject University of OxfordUniversity of Oxford articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	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.

Biography: Science and Academia

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
	This article is supported by the science and academia work group.

Latin Low‑importance

	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.LatinWikipedia:WikiProject LatinTemplate:WikiProject LatinLatin articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

Cleanup Needed

I think this article could use a little cleanup and organization. --Alli4000 20:22, 6 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

1) Britannica is NOT and 2) "on this day" NO more

I changed some links and commented "let's say Romanus was Manutius ... same for Ermolao Barbaro. But : ... "

Britannica is NOT to be copy pasted without checking links. Britannica is NOT accurate. The Ermolao page comes from Britannica and this Linacre also where the same guy, as it seems to me, is spelled with an H. Same for Aldus which is Manuce everywhere and Roman here.
"on this day" NO more : I disapprove people putting less known guys as that Linacre here on our "on this day" or in the calendar without checking his page links. So I had to correct some and there are some wrong left. Thank you.-- DLL ^{.. T} 13:29, 22 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Some of this Latin...

1. There is one out-and-out mistake here: "De emendata structure, Latini sermonis" should be De emendata structura, Latini sermonis, which might be rendered as "On the Pure and Correct Stucture of Latin Prose". This is the kind of error that WORD is always helpfully inserting into my own work.

2. Surely the translator into Latin of the work in question was George (not Robert) Buchanan-- I know of no Robert Buchanan active at that period, and the 1974 Britannica does attribute the translation to George.

3. The usual convention in Latin titles (which are often not really titles in the contemporary sense at all, but descriptions) is to capitalize only the first letter, unless a capital is for some other reason called for. When I am writing in contemporary English, however, I prefer consistently to employ contemporary English orthographic conventions, including those concerning capitalization. But what we have in this article is an incoherent mixture of conventions. Why, for example is Usu capitalized, and pulsuum not? Is there an explicit Wikpedia policy on such matters?

4. I am making corrections as per (1) and (2), but leaving the capitals alone pending an explicit policy on the orthography-- my own recommendaton would be to use contemporay English conventions consistently.

Mjhrynick (talk) 17:08, 26 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]