Talk:Latin Library

Libraries Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Libraries, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Libraries 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.LibrariesWikipedia:WikiProject LibrariesTemplate:WikiProject LibrariesLibraries articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

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.

Quality of texts

Latest comment: 8 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

In A solis ortus cardine I found the following errors, obviously caused by scanning:
lign 42 "cekstis" => "celestis"
lign 55 "plurirnus" => "plurimus"
lign 56 "febriurn" => "febrium"
lign 62 "Titam" => "Vitam"
lign 71 "gressihus" => "gressibus"
lign 73 "carnifcx" => "carnifex"
Too much in my opinion. --Rabanus Flavus 12:05, 1. Jan. 2009 (CET)

Simultaneously with this comment I wrote to the editor of The Latin Library. And a few hours later, only, I received the friendly answer: Thank you so much. Please let me know if you find additional blemishes - and the text is already emended! So, every user of The Latin Library is invited to collaborate! --Rabanus Flavus 09:30, 2. Jan. 2009 (CET) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.201.242.240 (talk) 08:31, 2 January 2009 (UTC)Reply

Yeah, I mean this article is correct in stating "The texts are not intended for research purposes nor as substitutes for critical editions." The Latin Library is a super convenient resource for finding texts, especially stuff that's not on the Perseus Digital Library, but if you want a professionally edited text, look elsewhere. Great site, but take it for what it is. 69.166.47.111 (talk) 18:28, 26 July 2016 (UTC)Reply

Add topic