Talk:pro pelle cutem

RFD discussion: October 2021
DTLHS (talk) 21:20, 21 October 2021 (UTC)


 * The term only has a Latin definition. - excarnateSojourner (talk|contrib) 23:34, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Latin entry: should be moved to RFD Non-English. DonnanZ (talk) 23:33, 21 October 2021 (UTC)
 * It has been moved. I think we can strike this. DonnanZ (talk) 09:25, 22 October 2021 (UTC)


 * See further at . --Lambiam

RFD discussion: October–December 2021
DTLHS (talk) 21:20, 21 October 2021 (UTC)


 * The term only has a Latin definition. - excarnateSojourner (talk|contrib) 23:34, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Latin entry: should be moved to RFD Non-English. DonnanZ (talk) 23:33, 21 October 2021 (UTC)


 * I am not a fan of considering mottos chosen by specific organizations as inclusion-worthy lexical items. Otherwise, why not also include &thinsp; and &thinsp;? --Lambiam 20:43, 22 October 2021 (UTC)


 * Oppose: Hi fellows, I am the editor that added the entry. The main reason I added this Latin phrase is there has been historical dispute as to it's meaning.  In addition, this is the motto of Canada's oldest retail company.  HBC has been in existence since 1670 along with their coat of arms with the motto "pro pelle cutem".  The +Cat Category:Latin phrases contains many Latin phrases that have not been deleted from Wiktionary, including, but not limited to:
 * nemo debet esse judex in propria, One cannot be the judge in one's own trial.
 * numquam ponendo est pluritas sine necessitate, Multiples should never be used if not necessary.
 * praesenti fortuna peior est futuri metus, the fear of the future is worse than present fortune.
 * si fueris Romae, Romano vivito more; si fueris alibi, vivito sicut ibi, when in Rome, do as the Romans do.
 * However, I am certainly open to discussions on the definition of the phrase, but I respectfully oppose a deletion of the entry. Thank you! ChanziP (talk) 10:49, 23 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Can you elaborate on your interpretation of our criteria for inclusion that leads you to the judgement that the term should be included? I don't think it is in clearly widespread use; in fact, I only see mentions, not uses conveying meaning. --Lambiam 12:58, 23 October 2021 (UTC)


 * Delete — not lexical material. --Lambiam 17:17, 29 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete per Lambiam. Ultimateria (talk) 03:52, 10 November 2021 (UTC)
 * RFD-deleted. —Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 04:06, 4 December 2021 (UTC)