Talk:Burzyńska

RFC discussion: April 2019
Something tells me that this is not the intended way to use the  parameter... —Rua (mew) 18:39, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
 * I updated the entry so that it mirrors the masculine version. -Mike (talk) 22:09, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Ok, that's one entry. But there are sure to be lots more that misuse  on this template alone, and even more that misuse it on other entries. Also,  there's no such thing as "feminine personal". —Rua (mew) 22:10, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Good to know. I had never seen that before. -Mike (talk) 22:43, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
 * To make it easy to find misuses of the dot parameter, I made an updated list of form-of templates with dot, using the that Benwing2 gave me. Most of them have a single punctuation mark in dot. (Here are instances for which that isn't true.) But with the recent changes in template names, probably the list is incomplete.... — Eru·tuon 00:10, 6 April 2019 (UTC)
 * But the template here is, not a form-of template. —Rua (mew) 10:24, 6 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Whoops. Not sure what I was thinking. Here's the list of all dot in, and these are the cases with a lengthier dot parameter (not empty and not just a single punctuation mark). There are quite a few Polish surnames in there. — Eru·tuon 19:09, 6 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I figured there would be more. Should we start moving away from the   parameter? —Rua (mew) 19:30, 6 April 2019 (UTC)