Template talk:apdx-l

Somewhat heavily used in our appendices, but I can't fathom why. Isn't this the same thing as, but with slightly different parameter names? —Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 06:42, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Not quite. and  both have a serious shortcoming: they don't work for reconstructed terms in attested languages. We have  as a counterpart to, which solves this problem. But  has no such counterpart yet. I've been wanting to create it but I don't know what name to use.  is still free, though.  15:41, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
 * could potentially conflict with a future language code. --WikiTiki89 15:45, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
 * I don't think any new two-letter codes are being created, are they? —Angr 15:53, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Right. I think a lot of the uses of currently could be  just as easily, but there might be a few that in fact ought to be . If you create, then we'll really have no reason to keep this. —Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 17:32, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
 * I think using and  is more desirable than  and  because the latter are a bit more complicated.  18:25, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes, new two-letter templates are still created, for languages that don't have any kind of code yet, like for Montenegrin. -- Liliana • 18:44, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
 * I was referring to ISO 639 codes, not to Wiktionary templates. Of course can be used for whatever Wiktionarians want it to be used for, but I don't think   will ever be an ISO 639-1 code, nor will  . There hasn't been a new 2-letter ISO 639-1 code in almost 10 years, and I'm pretty sure they aren't assigning any new ones. —Angr 18:56, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
 * That's what I was just talking about... They could request it, if they wanted. -- Liliana • 19:14, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
 * We'll cross that bridge when we come to it, I think. There are many potential ISO codes but not that many are actually used or are ever going to be used. 19:28, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
 * If this is deleted, what would replace it on pages like Appendix:Pokémon items? 00:19, 23 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Kept as widely used, and not breaking anything. --ElisaVan (talk) 09:10, 28 October 2013 (UTC)