Talk:Latin conditional clauses
Add topicLatest comment: 3 days ago by ModernDayTrilobite in topic Requested move 14 September 2026
 | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||
Requested move 14 September 2026
[edit]
 | It has been proposed in this section that multiple pages be renamed and moved somewhere else, with the names being decided below. A bot will list this discussion on the requested moves current discussions subpage within an hour of this tag being placed. The discussion may be closed 7 days after being opened, if consensus has been reached (see the closing instructions). Please base arguments on article title policy, and keep discussion succinct and civil. Please use {{subst:requested move}}. Do not use {{requested move/dated}} directly. Links: current log |  |
– Probably better to have consistent titles. 1234qwer1234qwer4 13:23, 14 September 2026 (UTC) — Relisting. Thanks! —1isall (talk | contribs) 16:12, 21 September 2026 (UTC) — Relisting. codelivid 17:32, 28 September 2026 (UTC)
- Note: WikiProject Latin has been notified of this discussion. —RMCD bot 13:55, 14 September 2026 (UTC)
- Keep this article at its current title, but move temporal clause (Latin) to Latin temporal clause to be more WP:CONSISTENT with other articles on Latin grammar. ModernDayTrilobite (talk • contribs) 13:29, 15 September 2026 (UTC)
- Move Temporal clause (Latin) → Latin temporal clause per WP:NATURAL. —Myceteae🍄🟫 (talk) 14:09, 15 September 2026 (UTC)
- Comment: Temporal clause is listed at RFD. Warm Regards, Miminity (Talk?) (me contribs) 13:34, 21 September 2026 (UTC)
- Relisting comment: Give some more time for the RfD as well. Thanks! —1isall (talk | contribs) 16:12, 21 September 2026 (UTC)
- I've notified Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Linguistics and Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Languages about both the RM and RFD discussion. One consideration is whether temporal clause is used only (or primarily) in descriptions of Latin grammar or whether it is commonly used in grammars of other languages. —Myceteae🍄🟫 (talk) 20:23, 22 September 2026 (UTC)
- Question. This seems to be trending toward Latin conditional clauses and Latin temporal clause. Is there any reason why one of the titles should be plural and the other singular? Dekimasuよ! 06:24, 26 September 2026 (UTC)
- Good question, I hadn't focused on that. The article as written treats Latin conditional clauses as a category or class having at least three distinct types. This seems justifiable per WP:PLURAL. Similarly titled articles include Latin tenses, Latin numerals, Arabic numerals, English conditional sentences, and English verbs. This is obviously not exhaustive and perhaps some of these could plausibly take a singular title, but the pattern is sensible. Temporal clause (Latin) treats the subject as one type of clause that may be further subclassified but doesn't have a discrete set of types. Latin grammar is not my area so I'm relying on the articles themselves. —Myceteae🍄🟫 (talk) 19:52, 26 September 2026 (UTC)
- I agree with this interpretation; it's been many years since I last studied any Latin myself, but this description aligns with how I recall these types of clause being presented in Latin pedagogy. That being said, I wouldn't object to the singular "Latin conditional clause" if there's consensus for it. ModernDayTrilobite (talk • contribs) 18:59, 29 September 2026 (UTC)
- Good question, I hadn't focused on that. The article as written treats Latin conditional clauses as a category or class having at least three distinct types. This seems justifiable per WP:PLURAL. Similarly titled articles include Latin tenses, Latin numerals, Arabic numerals, English conditional sentences, and English verbs. This is obviously not exhaustive and perhaps some of these could plausibly take a singular title, but the pattern is sensible. Temporal clause (Latin) treats the subject as one type of clause that may be further subclassified but doesn't have a discrete set of types. Latin grammar is not my area so I'm relying on the articles themselves. —Myceteae🍄🟫 (talk) 19:52, 26 September 2026 (UTC)