Which plaintext languages to try?

[Stefan Wirtz_2]

[..]
Almost all of the Romance languages spoken in Italy are native to the area in which they are spoken. Apart from You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view., these languages are often referred to as dialetti "You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.", both colloquially and in scholarly usage; however, the term may coexist with other labels like "minority languages" or "You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view." for some of them.You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. The label "dialect" may be understood erroneously to imply that the native languages spoken in Italy are "dialects" 
[..]
Saying 'these are just some dialects pretended as languages' is, I'm sorry to tell you, offensive, both for the languages itself and for their speakers, past and present. 
[..]
I just wanted to make clear that it's not true, at all, that geminated consonants are important for all Romance languages: they actually have zero importance in some.
(*) to be completely honest, some orthographies of Eastern Lombard indeed use two doubled consonants: -cc for the phoneme [ʧ] at word final, and -ss- for intervocalic [s]. 

With just a short glance at it, I find doubled consonants at every corner of today's Friaulian, Lombardian and Venetian. 
The quite flat claim "they have (nearly) no double consonants" it's just not true, otherwise I should eat some baccalà at a venetian campièllo after a Lobardian primavera strabella, and so on.
About dialects: how could I ever have imagined that Italians are so easily to offend...? 
But earnestly -- these may not be dialects from Italian, but a quite similar thing from their Latin base, with some Langobardic or other influence. The dialect question is by far not finally cleared, and totally irrelevant here.
(By the way: how is your word "dialetti" written in Venetian and Lombardian...?)

You both can dump lots of Wikipedia links for this, but it will not change anything and will not answer
- when these north-italian idioms developed this way 
- when and how the writing/spelling was "degeminised" as a standard to all(!) writers

---

I don't mind some off topic, but as far as my investigation goes, the double consonants or vowels are not a problem at all. Most kinds of one to many ciphers can and will hide their presence.

The urbino court ciphers had glyphs for doubles that were variations of the singles, so I agree that it would've been easy for "normal" ciphers of the time to disguise double consonants. I don't think the absence of double glyphs in the VM can be taken at face value as a proof that it isn't a romance language.

If there is a simple way to encrypt/code double consonants: why was there never any valid deciphering/decoding of them in the last 500 years? And we have computers meanwhile...
At this point, we meet again the "magic cipher" and have to wait for the wonder of finding a "key" somewhere.