Talk:The Systeme of the World: in Four Dialogues

Article title has been changed
The article title has been changed, see here to correspond:\ In all those three places this publication is presented under the title "Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World Systems." -- Mdd (talk) 18:53, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
 * the Wikipedia article,
 * the corresponding section in the Galileo Galilei article, and
 * the external link to the The Archimedes Project.


 * As I wrote on your talk page... Please stop reverting and moving without discussion. The System of the World in Four Dialogues is one specific translation of Galileo's work. I started this article to provide an alternative to having various translations of his work on one page. Other various translations can still be found under the Galileo article. Stilman Drake's (among others) translations are not included in the "System of the World in Four Dialogues" page. Please let me continue to develop this article which I initiated independently of other translations. --  19:50, 11 April 2014‎


 * Let us be clear, that so far it is you who has been trying to put things back, without any discussion. -- Mdd (talk) 19:54, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Let us be clear, that so far it is you that moved the original article to a new article title without any discussion. ELApro (talk) 20:04, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
 * The move was accompanied with an explanation, so that if you don't agree you can first further discuss the matter. -- Mdd (talk) 20:23, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

As I have been attempting to do, the Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World Systems can be redirected to System of the World in Four Dialogues pending further developments.ELApro (talk)


 * There were several good reasons to make the change in the first place.
 * The initial title "The System of the World in Four Dialogues" is not even mentioned once in Wikipedia, while the start did have a dead-link to Wikipedia at the bottom of the article.
 * The title "The System of the World in Four Dialogues" is not listed in Google books
 * Even the Archimedes project present the book under the title "Dialogues on two world systems 1661," and not under "The System of the World in Four Dialogues"
 * The introduction didn't make clear that the lemma was going to offer an alternative translation.
 * Even now that you have explained your intention, it is far from clear to turn it all back. -- Mdd (talk) 20:17, 11 April 2014 (UTC)


 * I don't understand the reason for emphasizing the article as being a Salusbury translation rather than Galileo in translation. There are exceptional situations where it is appropriate to put the spotlight on the translator rather than the originator (e.g. some of Alexander Pope's "translations" of Virgil are considered masterpieces of English literature), but I am not aware that Salusbury's work has that kind of stature. I think the focus should be on Galileo, and his work is certainly best known in the English speaking world by the title used at Wikipedia, Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World Systems. ~ Ningauble (talk) 20:50, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
 * (Aside: Alexander Pope translated Homer, not Virgil.) ~ DanielTom (talk) 21:05, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
 * The translator himself doesn't seem that notable. It (probably) is Thomas Salusbury (1625-1665), see VIAF, and he is not listed at the disambiguation page. -- Mdd (talk) 21:43, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

Intermezzo
I did learn by now some more about the history of the book:
 * 1632. Published in Italian, entitled Dialogo sopra i due massimi sistemi del mondo
 * 1635. Translated into Latin as Systema cosmicum by
 * 1661. Translated into English by Thomas Salusbury, entitled THE SYSTEME OF THE WORLD: IN FOUR DIALOGUES. Wherein the Two GRAND SYSTEMES Of PTOLOMY and COPERNICUS are largely discoursed of: And the REASONS, both Phylosophical and Physical, as well on the one side as the other, impartially and indefinitely propounded: By GALILEUS GALILEUS LINCEUS, A Gentleman of FLORENCE: Extraordinary Professor of the Mathematicks in the UNIVERSITY of PISA; and Chief Mathematician to the GRAND DUKE of TVSCANY.
 * 1953. Translated by Stillman Drake as Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World Systems, revised in 1967, and in paperback in 2001.
 * 1953. The 1661 translation is republished by the University of Chicago Press as Dialogue on the great world systems, in the Salusbury translation, and nowadays listed as such in the library of Congress. See here
 * 2003. The Archimedes Project published the 1661 text under the header: Galilei, Galileo Dialogues on two world systems 1661, tr. Salusbury, Thomas

Now here on Wikiquote: Now in this "mess" of these 8 titles listed, only 2 are the same. -- Mdd (talk) 21:07, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
 * The lemma was started by you, entitled The System of the World in Four Dialogues
 * And moved by me as Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World Systems


 * Reconsidering ELApro's 19:50, 11 April 2014‎ comment, and this "mess", it seems:
 * The most appropriate to follow the most authoritative source, the Library of Congress and VIAF, and rename the article to Dialogue on the great world systems, in the Salusbury translation.
 * This is preferable over the 1661 title The Systeme of the World: in Four Dialogues, because the phrase "Salusbury translation" makes the scope clear in the title itself.
 * The title The System of the World in Four Dialogues is unacceptable because it is made up, not original.
 * If Ningauble or any other think an article like this is inappropriate, they can Prod and/or AfD the article later on.
 * One way or another, the article's protection exceeds tomorrow, and then the editing can continue. -- Mdd (talk) 22:47, 11 April 2014 (UTC)


 * === Refrain ===

Repeat: the article was initiated as "the Book" with "the title as published" in the original 1661 translation by Thomas Salsbury, which I believe is the only translation within the public domain. You can call the wikiquote article "Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World Systems" under the Galileo Galilei article whatever you please, and it can contain as many different translations as you please, even though it becomes muttled and muddy with each additional translation of the same quote. You can initiate a new article yourself under the title "Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World Systems" using the Stilman Drake translation or whatever other translations you please. You may make the English title for Galileo's original publication whatever you please, but the article that I intiated as "The System of the World in Four Dialogues" is the title as published for that particular book, which is the original English translation. You can call Galileo's original book whatever you please in English, but you cannot change its title from the original Italian title. Please, let me get back to work on the article as intitiated and stop wasting time with editing power plays. By the way, the entire title you quoted above, "THE SYSTEME OF THE WORLD: IN FOUR DIALOGUES. Wherein the Two GRAND SYSTEMES Of PTOLOMY and COPERNICUS are largely discoursed of: And the REASONS, both Phylosophical and Physical, as well on the one side as the other, impartially and indefinitely propounded: By GALILEUS GALILEUS LINCEUS, A Gentleman of FLORENCE: Extraordinary Professor of the Mathematicks in the UNIVERSITY of PISA; and Chief Mathematician to the GRAND DUKE of TVSCANY." was mentioned as a sidelight in the article's original introduction and was deleted by you (without discussion) in the process of changing the article, so that part of your research was unnecessary. Your list above also overlooked the Salisbury translation published in 1953 with introduction by Giorgio de Santillana, which is part of the introduction that you didn't delete. ELApro (talk) - 22:40, 11 April 2014‎
 * @Mdd: I think our priority should be to let ELApro continue his work. I don't see a problem in having a page just for this translation in particular—but I do see a problem in preventing the creator of the article to continue editing it, as he thinks best. So, I would unprotect the page, and let ELApro do his thing. (Secondary discussions about the title can still be had, in this talk page, without disrupting his editing.) ~ DanielTom (talk) 23:03, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Ok, if I am not mistaken this article (is unblocked and) can be edited again. -- Mdd (talk) 23:13, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Right, but I think ELApro wants to edit The System of the World in Four Dialogues. He is its creator, so we should respect his wishes, at least until after a consensus is formed here. (We need to be careful not to drive hard-working editors like him away.) ~ DanielTom (talk) 23:30, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
 * The history should be kept intact here, and therefor the article should be moved and not copy/pasted back an forth, and two alternatives are given. As to hard-working or not, as co-worker I think no editor should be allowed to make titles up. -- Mdd (talk) 23:42, 11 April 2014 (UTC)


 * I would have no problem if you would like to move the article to a new article: "The Systeme of the World: In Four Dialogues" since I failed to copy the exact title upon initiation and stand corrected upon that point.ELApro (talk) 23:44, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Ok thanks, the article has been moved and some further rearrangements have been made. I will leave it with that. -- Mdd (talk) 00:09, 12 April 2014 (UTC)