Where is this attested? DTLHS (talk) 00:34, 2 June 2020 (UTC)
it might be reconstructed
Is this actually attested? Only attested words are added on Wiktionary (see WT:ATTEST and WT:About Gothic) — Mnemosientje (t · c) 08:12, 2 June 2020 (UTC)
Sorry to bother you again, but this word is also unattested and there is no good basis for inclusion even as a reconstruction. Köbler simply mentions it as being a hypothetical Gothic form corresponding to Crimean Gothic ada, but Crimean Gothic is not sufficient basis for a Gothic reconstruction (as Crimean Gothic is not considered a direct descendant of 'Wulfilan' Gothic). So unless there is a compelling argument for inclusion that entry, too, will have to be deleted. (If you are looking for attested words that have not yet been added - Category:Gothic romanizations without a main entry is full of them.) — Mnemosientje (t · c) 11:21, 6 June 2020 (UTC)
{{top3}} from Iranian entriesPlease desist from removing {{top3}} from Iranian entries. It's not only not how we format Iranian entries, but also an improper use of templates leaving a {{bottom}} template with no corresponding {{topN}}. --{{victar|talk}} 21:18, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Hey Ευγένιος69, if you're going to contribute etymologies, please include sources, especially for reconstructions. You also had linked to the wrong term on 𐎠𐎼𐎭𐎿𐎫𐎠𐎴 (a-r-d-s-t-a-n). --{{victar|talk}} 03:25, 5 October 2020 (UTC)
{{victar|talk}} 05:46, 5 October 2020 (UTC)requires gumption. You should not just create red-links, even if they are from me or Profes.I. they should be rethought, in particular due to the introduction of Proto-West Semitic as a language on Wiktionary after some, nor blindly believe starred forms from literature (it actually contains more forms which should not be created, them not being written for a likely lexicon as Wiktionary). As for *tannīn- you have created, if you had read the Arabic page you would have been informed that the terms are borrowed into Northwest Semitic from Akkadian and thence into Arabic; the Ethiopian Semitic terms may or may not be related, but for the case they are, Wolf Leslau, no less, considered them borrowed from Arabic. The sound change was then because this consonant order is very unusual in Semitic: There are some constraints which consonants can follow each other: Vernet i Pons, Eulàlia (2011 March 1) “Semitic Root Incompatibilities and Historical Linguistics”, in Journal of Semitic Studies, volume 56, number 1, , pages 1–18, Greenberg, Joseph Harold (1950) “The Patterning of Root Morphemes in Semitic”, in Word, volume 6, number 2, , pages 162–181, and the Arabic word at least reveals itself as a borrowing due its vocal patterning even, moreover.
So I politely request that you mark your entry *tannīn- for speedy deletion. Your *naḥaš- I have saved (not even mentioning all the cases where words for lion come to mean a snake or fish). Fay Freak (talk) 20:14, 1 September 2021 (UTC)
{{speedy}}, and its synonym {{d}} is even shorter. Fay Freak (talk) 14:17, 2 September 2021 (UTC)You're still creating Proto-Semitic reconstructions that are unreferenced and full of problems. You've got to stop. When you don't know what you're doing, you just make a mess that takes the rest of us lots of time to clean up. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 18:22, 19 September 2021 (UTC)