Template talk:inc-oaw-pos

RFM discussion: August–September 2024

The following discussion has been moved from Wiktionary:Requests for moves, mergers and splits ([[Special:PermanentLink/81658418#Template:oaw-pos_→_ _and_Template:oaw-sc_→_Unspecified script form of bʰo|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.

---

{{oaw-pos}} → {{inc-oaw-pos}} and {{oaw-sc}} → {{inc-oaw-sc}}

These are two Old Awadhi templates, which has the language code inc-oaw. It's not a good idea to use shortened versions of language codes like this, even if oaw isn't currently in use, because (a) it could get assigned, and (b) it will confuse bots and modules that rely on templates starting with the correct language code. Tagging @Svartava and @Kutchkutch, who created these a couple of weeks ago. Theknightwho (talk) 16:14, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

@Theknightwho This is an established convention of removing inc- from template names but it is a valid point that it will confuse bots and modules. How much problematic is it to keep these, since this would also mean moving a few more like {{apa-pos}} as well (though I am not opposing this move). Svartava (talk) 16:55, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

@Svartava Well I think we can solve a major one (Prakrit) by simply changing its code to pra, since that's no longer needed as a family code, but we can't chop off parts of language codes like this because you'll immediately run into problems with anything that tries to interpret the language from the template name, as some of the documentation templates do. Theknightwho (talk) 17:00, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

@Theknightwho OK, that will do, I will try to clear out uses of pra as possible. Svartava (talk) 17:07, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

@Svartava There also exists {{ohi-noun}}. Kutchkutch (talk) 17:49, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

• RFM-passed Svartava (talk) 21:25, 4 September 2024 (UTC)