Talk:Indo-

RFV discussion
Rfv-sense: sense 3. Where is this prefix used in that sense? All examples given are senses 1 or 2. -- Prince Kassad 13:26, 22 October 2010 (UTC)


 * I think is used in the names of some proposed superfamilies that include both Indo-European and one or more other accepted language families; see, , even . (Not , though: in that one, the name seems to mean simply "India". That's not a genetic proposal, but more along the lines of "Standard Average European".) We don't have entries for , , or , but I'm confident that all are attestable. We also don't have an entry for , for that matter. —Ruakh TALK 13:42, 22 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes, we're very weak in that area. For that matter, Indo-Hamitic does not seem to be citable, with only two uses and one mention. -- Prince Kassad 14:02, 22 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Hmm, you may be right. Snippet View makes it hard to be sure. Regardless, in this sense is definitely citable. —Ruakh TALK 15:18, 22 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Cited: I've added two independent cites at [[Indo-Semitic]], and two at [[Indo-Uralic]]. —Ruakh TALK 16:23, 30 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Passed (per current criteria, of course). Per Connel's suggestion at [[Wiktionary:Votes/pl-2007-12/Attestation criteria]], I'm listing the score under that proposal of the cites given, which is 16. &#x200b;—msh210℠ (talk) 17:29, 2 November 2010 (UTC)