Talk:ཁོང

A couple of questions:
 * Is actually part of the lemma?
 * Is the Tibetan cognate as our translation tables claim or  as zh.wikt claims...

—Aryaman (मुझसे बात करो) 23:10, 20 August 2017 (UTC)
 * The tsheg should only be placed between syllables, and is not part of the spelling. See WT:ABO. Also, before you start creating a bunch of entries, we should have a conversation about whether we want to merge it into bo altogether. —Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 23:15, 20 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I was going to wait for Wyang (or anyone) to respond, since I'm not too comfortable with the script. And a lot of Sikkimese lemmas seem identical to Tibetan lemmas. Thanks btw, I'll move it. —Aryaman (मुझसे बात करो) 23:46, 20 August 2017 (UTC)
 * nvm, I see you moved it. —Aryaman (मुझसे बात करो) 23:47, 20 August 2017 (UTC)
 * As noted at RFV, there seems to be a history of spelling it as Classical Tibetan (like other Tibetan dialects). —Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 23:48, 20 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Ethnologue claims 42% "lexical similarity" with Tibetan, weirdly. —Aryaman (मुझसे बात करो) 23:52, 20 August 2017 (UTC)
 * The languages are quite divergent, but their individual words are just spelled similarly. DerekWinters (talk) 00:50, 21 August 2017 (UTC)
 * zh.wikt ends the title of their Tibetan entries with the tsheg (zh:Category:藏语) ... a practice I introduced; zh:ཁོང་ was also created by me. With Sikkimese, I would be in support of its merger into Tibetan (before I see any evidence of phonetically written Sikkimese). Wyang (talk) 08:42, 21 August 2017 (UTC)