Talk:ad locum

RFD discussion: December 2020–August 2023

The following information passed a request for deletion (permalink).

This discussion is no longer live and is left here as an archive. Please do not modify this conversation, but feel free to discuss its conclusions.

---

ad locum

Latin. Tagged by 2003:de:373f:4069:b534:361e:8aeb:9907 on 22 December, not listed: “SOP?”. J3133 (talk) 04:01, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

• Abstain. I wasn't familiar with this one before, but If I hear convincing arguments to keep, I'll take a closer look. — Dentonius 17:40, 27 December 2020 (UTC)
  • It's standard textual critics' jargon that's found its way into many if not all European languages together with things like q.v. and op. cit.. Google "grotius ad locum" and you'll find plenty of occurrences in early Latin prints. Brutal Russian (talk) 00:33, 4 April 2021 (UTC)

  Struck per our previous discussion. Imetsia (talk (more)) 21:11, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

Keep as Translingual???? This, that and the other (talk) 09:27, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

• Keep as is. It's not SOP in any obvious way. Following Brutal Russian's Grotius suggestion, we have [1] "Respicit Grotius ad locum Deut. XXIV. qui secundum fontes ita habet […] ": it would need to be "with respect to" or "at the place where he deals with" here to be understood in English, not just the literal "at the place [of]". Similarly here. If not SOP in Latin then I don't see the point of making it Translingual. —Al-Muqanna المقنع (talk) 01:00, 3 November 2022 (UTC)

Keep. Imetsia (talk (more)) 21:11, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

RFD-kept. Imetsia (talk (more)) 21:11, 3 August 2023 (UTC)