Talk:quibus auxilus

RFV discussion
This appears to be a misspelling of quibus auxiliis, possibly used in homeopathy to indicate concomitant symptoms. The etymology appears bogus and I suspect this is not Latin esp. in its misspelled form; I can't find any evidence of its use in Latin text rather than in English, Italian, etc. Benwing2 (talk) 00:38, 28 August 2019 (UTC)


 * In his article “Ein Beitrag zur Beurtheilung des charakteristischen Werths der Symptome” (Part 1), Allgemeine Homöopathische Zeitung 60:10 (1860) pp. 73 ff., Boenninghausen definitely writes quibus auxiliis, in a hexameter line he ascribes to theological scholastics, dating from the same period as the poem . (According to this source, the poet was, penning the verse line down in 1170.) In Google Book Search, auxilus is a common scanno for auxiliis. When the entry was created, it was created with the title quibis auxilus but started with a line “quibus auxiliis”. The term was classified as an adjective, and the etymology explained: “Quibis originated from latin word queo means I am able.” [sic]. (Fortunately the creator did not create or touch other pages.) Later editors moved the article to its present title and removed the quibis etymology, but the part of the etymology relating this to the cognomen remained, even though it is obviously totally bogus. I see no value in an isolated entry quibus auxiliis; in any case, the meaning of the phrase in Latin is a question: “with which aids?”. Maybe it means ”concomitant symptom” in homeopathic vernacular, but not in Latin.  --Lambiam 02:09, 28 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Hahahah! The part about queo is just the start - the punchline comes right after. Brutal Russian (talk) 05:57, 28 August 2019 (UTC)


 * RFV deleted. —Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 20:11, 28 September 2019 (UTC)

RFC discussion: September–October 2016
Is this salvageable? It seems to be an obsolete term in homeopathy. Equinox ◑ 13:39, 25 September 2016 (UTC)


 * 4. ref has "Boenninghausen classified the characteristic symptoms into seven categories. They are: [...] 4. Quibus Auxilus (Concomitant Symptoms)". That should be an error. In caps quibus auxiliis is QUIBUS AUXILIIS and could be misread as QUIBUS AUXILUS, i.e. quibus auxilus, like [books.google.com/books?id=lc9zfg_dLF8C&pg=PA302&dq=%22quibus+auxilus%22 here] where a GBS gives QUIBUS AUXILIIS while searching for quibus auxilus. The correct spelling and a literal meaning can be found in the 2. ref: "Quis, quid, ubi, quibus auxiliis, cur, quomodo, quando? - Who, what, where, with what, why, how, when?". As the 4. ref should have an incorrect spelling, it could also have an incorrect meaning or an interpretation or something like that. The literal meaning however could be SoP (Sum of Parts), and so maybe the entry should be deleted. -84.161.40.144 11:04, 7 October 2016 (UTC)