The Demopædia Encyclopedia on Population is under heavy modernization and maintenance. Outputs could look bizarre, sorry for the temporary inconvenience

多种语言人口词典 根据1982年出版的英文第二版翻译

“Talk:21”的版本间的差异

来自Demopædia
跳转至: 导航搜索
215-9
214-4
 
(未显示2个用户的2个中间版本)
第10行: 第10行:
 
* en-ii: [[:en-ii:21#214|privately baptized infant]]
 
* en-ii: [[:en-ii:21#214|privately baptized infant]]
 
* zh-ii: [[:zh-ii:21#214|非正式受洗的婴儿]] I added the translation of the new term 214-21 according to the demopaedia Chinese version ii.  
 
* zh-ii: [[:zh-ii:21#214|非正式受洗的婴儿]] I added the translation of the new term 214-21 according to the demopaedia Chinese version ii.  
By the way, I have noticed that the Engish version is "summary baptized infant" which is an error. --[[User:Feinuo Sun|Feinuo Sun]]([[User talk:Feinuo Sun|讨论]]) 2023年12月27日 (三) 01:25 (CET)
+
: By the way, I have noticed that the Engish version is "summary baptized infant" which is an error. --[[User:Feinuo Sun|Feinuo Sun]]([[User talk:Feinuo Sun|讨论]]) 2023年12月27日 (三) 01:25 (CET)
 +
:: Could you have a look at the [[:en-ii:Talk:21#214-5| English Talk page]] because it has been deeply discussed, and explain why you disagree with this expression proposed by Stan Becker? --[[User:Nicolas Brouard|Nicolas Brouard]]([[User talk:Nicolas Brouard|讨论]]) 2024年6月11日 (二) 11:26 (CEST)
 +
::I checked and understood it now. No problem anymore.--[[User:Feinuo Sun|Feinuo Sun]]([[User talk:Feinuo Sun|讨论]]) 2024年6月11日 (二) 13:28 (CEST)
  
 
= [[21#215|215-9]] =
 
= [[21#215|215-9]] =
第31行: 第33行:
 
* fr-ii: [[:fr-ii:21#215|relevé nominatif]]
 
* fr-ii: [[:fr-ii:21#215|relevé nominatif]]
 
* en-ii: [[:en-ii:21#215|nominal roll]]
 
* en-ii: [[:en-ii:21#215|nominal roll]]
 +
* zh-ii: [[:zh-ii:21#215|实名册]] add tranlation for word 215-10.--[[User:Feinuo Sun|Feinuo Sun]]([[User talk:Feinuo Sun|讨论]]) 2023年12月28日 (四) 00:33 (CET)

2024年6月11日 (二) 13:28的最新版本



214-4

By the way, I have noticed that the Engish version is "summary baptized infant" which is an error. --Feinuo Sun讨论) 2023年12月27日 (三) 01:25 (CET)
Could you have a look at the English Talk page because it has been deeply discussed, and explain why you disagree with this expression proposed by Stan Becker? --Nicolas Brouard讨论) 2024年6月11日 (二) 11:26 (CEST)
I checked and understood it now. No problem anymore.--Feinuo Sun讨论) 2024年6月11日 (二) 13:28 (CEST)

215-9

215-10