Talk:पयोहिम


 * Does this pass the CFI? There are no attestations, not even as a neologism. Only spokensanskrit.de has this word, which makes me think this is a made-up word. -- माधवपंडित (talk) 15:58, 7 May 2018 (UTC)
 * ٰ I found some stuff definitely: (pretty funny actually),, and  (I wonder if any people read Sanskrit recipes). Also this tweet by a Sanskrit poet makes me wonder if existing New Sanskrit usually uses this word. Anyway, I think New Sanskrit qualifies as an LDL like New Latin, so only one cite is enough. —AryamanA (मुझसे बात करें • योगदान) 19:12, 7 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Lol, never read a Sanskrit joke before. Thanks for checking! -- माधवपंडित (talk) 02:00, 8 May 2018 (UTC)

So could words like at |Monier-Williams page 1332 have entries as New Sanskrit?
 * न पुनः शर्मण्यदेशं, समग्रमपि विश्वमेकनीडायन्ती भाषा विश्वस्मिन् विश्वे केवलं संस्कृतमेव विद्यते।

or ?
 * सर्वासु दिक्षु पातालदेशपर्य्यन्तम्। Kutchkutch (talk) 02:20, 8 May 2018 (UTC)
 * There is no consensus that New Latin counts as an LDL and that one cite suffices. I certainly disagree with that view for Latin, as well as for Sanskrit. —Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 02:25, 8 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Technically, yes, I guess. But as Metaknowledge said, this is a grey area. -- माधवपंडित (talk) 04:29, 8 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Well, it has more than three cites, I just linked to whatever was convenient to access.
 * Theoretically yes, I think. But yeah, what Madhavpandit said. —AryamanA (मुझसे बात करें • योगदान) 13:48, 8 May 2018 (UTC)