Reconstruction talk:Nepali/पइ

RFD discussion: July–August 2021
As with Reconstruction:Bengali/হন্দর্দ, not entirely clear whether a reconstruction with a corresponding attested term within the same language needs an entry.

There appears to be a convention for *term and **term, but does there also exist a convention for ***term? Kutchkutch (talk) 10:25, 15 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep. The reconstruction belongs to a different chronolect. If the term ‘Early Nepali’ or ‘Old Nepali’ be attested in literature, we can have a language code for’t and then move the page. ·~   dictátor · mundꟾ  07:07, 18 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete. just say ‘corruption of [...] with influence from [...]’ in the etymology of poi and thats enough. Svā rt ava  — 03:25, 19 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete. This is not useful as an entry people would look up; it should be included in an etymology section of an attested term. —Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 22:06, 22 July 2021 (UTC)
 * It’s useful as a reconstruction as it is the original form of the word, not any random stage. ·~   dictátor · mundꟾ  11:51, 24 July 2021 (UTC)
 * RFD-deleted. Imetsia (talk) 15:34, 15 August 2021 (UTC)