Mythologia fuit pagina mensis Septembris 2023.

Est index,at non est articulus. [Scripsit scriptor ignotus.]

Thanks, Neander, for the welcome improvements in the text. In the bibliography, however, your ministrations have obliterated a distinction cultivated in academic editing over here:

A: Author. Year. Title. Title.

B: Author. Year. Title. In Title.

In A, the italicized thing is a serial publication (most probably a journal or a newspaper); in B, the italicized thing is a one-off (most probably a book). Such a quantity of information conveyed in a mere preposition! IacobusAmor (disputatio) 12:32, 27 Maii 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I have a feeling that even the people over there are not unanimous on this: some make that distinction, some don't. I never saw the point in it myself. The nature of the italicized thing is evident in any case from other compulsory and distinctive details (editor and place of publication if it's a book; volume number if it's a journal; precise date if it's a newspaper). Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 13:08, 27 Maii 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Iacobe, I give you that my changes in the bibliography section were idle chores. Indeed, there's nothing wrong in B, though I am scarcely alone in thinking that the A vs B distinction isn't too important. I'd point out though, in the wake of Andrew, that there's no such uniformity in actual editing practices in academic journals, not even over there. Witness e.g. Language, published by the Linguistic Society of America. And after all, Vicipaedia is scarcely bound to cling to prescriptions issued in the hope of being observed in anglophone writing. But of course this doesn't justify those changes I made. Neander (disputatio) 17:45, 27 Maii 2015 (UTC)[reply]