Talk:Ad fontes
 | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
 | This page has been transwikied to Wiktionary. The article has content that is useful at Wiktionary. Therefore the article can be found at either here or here (logs 1 logs 2.) Note: This means that the article has been copied to the Wiktionary Transwiki namespace for evaluation and formatting. It does not mean that the article is in the Wiktionary main namespace, or that it has been removed from Wikipedia's. Furthermore, the Wiktionarians might delete the article from Wiktionary if they do not find it to be appropriate for the Wiktionary. Removing this tag will usually trigger CopyToWiktionaryBot to re-transwiki the entry. This article should have been removed from Category:Copy to Wiktionary and should not be re-added there. |
2007-01-31 Automated pywikipediabot message
edit| | This page has been transwikied to Wiktionary. The article has content that is useful at Wiktionary. Therefore the article can be found at either here or here (logs 1 logs 2.) Note: This means that the article has been copied to the Wiktionary Transwiki namespace for evaluation and formatting. It does not mean that the article is in the Wiktionary main namespace, or that it has been removed from Wikipedia's. Furthermore, the Wiktionarians might delete the article from Wiktionary if they do not find it to be appropriate for the Wiktionary. Removing this tag will usually trigger CopyToWiktionaryBot to re-transwiki the entry. This article should have been removed from Category:Copy to Wiktionary and should not be re-added there. |
--CopyToWiktionaryBot 21:47, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
Apparently, based on the above, this article has been transwikied to wiktionary twice. Let's try not to do this a 3rd time, shall we? --Xyzzyplugh 14:01, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
English translation
editObviously "use the source, Luke" 
- AnonMoos (talk) 09:34, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
Broken link
editThe link in the first note is broken. i.e. http://www.passionforgrace.org.uk/Erasluther.html DFH (talk) 20:38, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
^ still broken as of 2012.12.28 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.193.131.202 (talk) 19:56, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
External links modified
editHello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Ad fontes. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070207041537/http://www.passionforgrace.org.uk:80/Erasluther.html to http://www.passionforgrace.org.uk/Erasluther.html
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20041009182918/http://www.thelatinlibrary.com:80/classics to http://www.thelatinlibrary.com/classics
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:42, 3 October 2016 (UTC)