Talk:šq

, could you please create this entry? —Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 00:45, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Sure! Having looked into it further, though, the word is apparently only attested in the plural; I’ll lemmatize it at and remove the hypothetical singular from . (Readings with initial  rather than  seem to be based on treating Late Egyptian transliteration differently from Old/Middle Egyptian transliteration, so for Wiktionary purposes I’ll ignore them.) — Vorziblix (talk · contribs) 19:01, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Thank you! As for variant readings, my view is that since we use romanisation in pagetitles for Egyptian, we should also account for other romanisation systems (and that's why I support robust usage of ). But it's by no means a priority. —Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 01:53, 17 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Sure; I usually try to create entries whenever there’s a difference of interpretation/glyph reading for a particular word (e.g.  vs. ), but when the difference is just one of general transliteration scheme (e.g.  vs.  vs.  vs.  vs.  vs. …) I’ve been less diligent due to the sheer number of such schemes historically used for Egyptian. Of course, creating them eventually would still be nice. In any case, I’ll make an alt-form entry for this word. — Vorziblix (talk · contribs) 02:28, 18 November 2017 (UTC)