Talk:-olus

Regarding the RFV:

I can attest that there are a very large number of scientific names in which the "-olus" ending is used for diminutives of adjectives rather than nouns, but the pattern does seem to be almost entirely restricted to adjectives ending in "-eus" - e.g., luteolus, brunneolus, argenteolus, cupreolus, and many others, the one exception being "helvolus". 138.23.68.20 22:55, 1 April 2021 (UTC)

RFV discussion: October 2020–January 2023
Latin. Tagged by GuitarDudeness on 24 January 2018, not listed:

“If not from -lus added to nouns ending in -ius or -eus, is there proof of free use of this suffix?” J3133 (talk) 06:51, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
 * It's pretty clear that -olus is an allomorph of -ulus, and not a distinct suffix: their distribution is predictable and comeplementary aside from the variation between o and u after u/v (as in aquula~aquola~acula, servulus~servolus) which is not specific to this suffix (it's the same phenomenon as the variation between vulgus~volgus) and which does not indicate any difference in meaning. We presumably should still have a page at -olus, but whether or not it should just redirect to -ulus with a full explanation on that page is a question of preference.--Urszag (talk) 22:22, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
 * I have edited the usage note to make the answer to the posed question clear, so I'm removing the RFV. The entry now makes clear that -olus is an allomorph of -ulus. I think it's clear that the entry shouldn't just be deleted, given the presence of descendants and so on; whether it should be rearranged somehow doesn't seem like a question for RFV.--Urszag (talk) 20:32, 13 January 2023 (UTC)