Talk:semper paratus

semper paratus, semper eadem, semper fidelis
Sum of parts (in Latin). As always, mere examples would suffice. -- Romanophile ♞ (contributions) 03:40, 1 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete. Motto should not be dictionary entries, if you want to know what they mean, look up the individual words and/or look them up on Wikipedia where of course they belong as they are topics of interest, not idioms. No Dieu et mon droit for example. Renard Migrant (talk) 13:10, 1 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep the first and third: I also dissent from Renard's point that we shouldn't have mottos. Pur ple back pack 89  13:41, 1 April 2016 (UTC)
 * It’s not mottoes per se that should be eliminated. It’s phrases that are easily discernible to anybody with a competent command of the language. I don’t think that they merit entire entries, but using them within entries is a good compromise and a good idea (in my view). would probably agree with me on that. -- Romanophile  ♞ (contributions) 14:36, 1 April 2016 (UTC)


 * I think keep as well, possibly as English. I have seen the third used plenty of times in English texts in a manner that presumed understanding of the phrase. I am not as familiar with semper eadem, and the Coast Guard is just smaller than the Marines, so its motto gets out less. - TheDaveRoss 14:20, 1 April 2016 (UTC)
 * This is a delete vote as the English entries aren't being nominated for deletion. Renard Migrant (talk) 14:39, 1 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Maybe I am missing something, but when I look at those entries I see only Latin sections. - TheDaveRoss 13:16, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep. Familiar Latin phrases found in English texts should be included in dictionaries (and usually are). You shouldn't have to be able to parse Latin grammar to figure out what English speakers mean when they use these phrases.  P Aculeius (talk) 14:29, 1 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Like you say, they are in English dictionaries. This is logic for keeping in English, not Latin. Renard Migrant (talk) 14:39, 1 April 2016 (UTC)
 * If we're thinking of creating all attestable ones, I suggest which is ' motto. Renard Migrant (talk) 14:41, 1 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Since we're not including these for lexical reasons, per P Aculeius, do we include them for notability? Do we need WT:NOTABLE to decide which sum of parts phrases are notable enough to be included, or do we just include all mottos in all languages? Do were merely need to show use as a motto for the motto to be included. Renard Migrant (talk) 18:20, 1 April 2016 (UTC)
 * How about All the News That's Fit to Print? Chuck Entz (talk) 18:59, 1 April 2016 (UTC)


 * I honestly have almost no idea what the hell that phrase is supposed to mean. What news is ‘fit’ to print? Rich gringos dying? Gringo children being kidnapped? The crimes that poor people commit to survive? -- Romanophile ♞ (contributions) 21:11, 1 April 2016 (UTC)
 * I'm guessing you're better educated than most. If you don't know what it means, that probably means most people don't know what it means, which it turn probably means we should have it. Pur ple back pack 89   14:45, 2 April 2016 (UTC)


 * What a particular newspaper deems to be fit (suitable) to print isn't lexical information, though: you clearly know what the phrase means in the lexical sense, just not which news it would apply to in the real world (which varies by newspaper of course). So not dictionary content. Equinox ◑ 15:04, 2 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Seems kinda disingenuous to me to have an English definition for a Latin phrase, but not a Latin one. Pur ple back <font color="#CC33CC">pack <font color="FFBB00">89  14:45, 2 April 2016 (UTC)
 * I agree. It is odd but it's a way of complying with CFI (and some people care about that). The only argument apparently for including it in Latin is because it's used in other languages which to be honest I find even more odd. A further question for P Aculeius. Is Latin a special case or should we include mottos in other languages other than Latin? What about English ones? Just Do It (Nike) Impossible Is Nothing (Nike or Addidas or something like that). Renard Migrant (talk) 12:00, 5 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete. Andrew Sheedy (talk) 21:01, 1 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Comment: it's absurd to have well-known Latin phrases defined as English, merely because English speakers use them, and not defined as Latin. Moreover, as much of the significance of these phrases is how, why, or by whom they're used; something easily explained in a single sentence, without the need for an encyclopedia entry.  And that you can't get from parsing each word to figure out its function in the phrase.  There's a difference between a well-known phrase that's been widely used for hundreds or even thousands of years, and a corporate advertising slogan that vanishes from popular use within a few years of the ad campaign that created it.  I think that Wiktionary editors wouldn't have too much trouble distinguishing between them.  If you want to create a notability guideline for phrases like this, go ahead, but it'll result in more "keeps", which clearly you're opposed to.  P Aculeius (talk) 12:58, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
 * There's not a lexical distinction (as you freely admit), it's just which are more 'notable' than others. While it's absurd, surely including a Latin entry only for non-Latin speakers is even more absurd. Imagine an English entry aim only at non-English speakers like Just Do It because non-English speakers may come across it. Renard Migrant (talk) 13:31, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
 * In case anyone cares what WT:CFI says, an I do, believe it or not, this is as straightforward a delete as it gets. But a vote to have CFI trump voting failed, so it literally is just a vote. Renard Migrant (talk) 17:02, 5 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep -- They are more than mottoes, and should definitely stay. A silly debate. 86.132.37.179 16:36, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
 * So what are they, then? Renard Migrant (talk) 18:33, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

Keep: Any foreign language phrase that is frequently used in documents written in English should be documented in some glossary within the Wikipedia Foundation. If rigid rules prevent them from being documented here, then put them in a separate wiki. Also, having entries for these mottoes document prominent organizations using them is welcome information to find. Fred Holmes

First and third closed as no consensus to delete. It is not entirely clear whether there is a consensus to delete the second. <i style="background:lightgreen">bd2412</i> T 19:56, 9 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep semper eadem: since it consists only of two words and is a motto of multiple counties and schools per the mainspace entry, it is going to be cool to enter this into wikt and find what it means. Thus, err on the side of usefulness at the risk of redundancy. --Dan Polansky (talk) 10:39, 3 September 2016 (UTC)

Keep: other dictionaries have them, listed as foreign terms, with the pronunciation as used in English. That's the key point: a Latin phrase like, say, pro bono or ad lib has a different pronunciation and meaning in English than it might have had in Latin. When I make stuff up, I /ADD_LIB/, I don't /AHD-LEEB/. When I work pro bono, it implies I'm a professional doing normally-paid work for a charity or good cause, not that I'm merely working "for the good". Similarly, these mottos have meaning and probably also pronunciations that go beyond the Latin. They belong in an English dictionary. Eric TF Bat (talk)

Closing as no consensus to delete as to all. <i style="background:lightgreen">bd2412</i> T 16:29, 8 September 2016 (UTC)