Template talk:etyl:poz-bop

This is a paraphyletic grouping according to Wikipedia, so it's not a true language family and has no unique common ancestor. 17:09, 25 August 2012 (UTC)
 * I'm assuming that you'll kill the category and all the transclusions as well? --Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 14:09, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
 * I think that changing the Superfamily subtemplate on should take care of most of them. Chuck Entz (talk) 14:31, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
 * The category can probably stay as long as it's made clear in the description and in the way it's categorised that it's just a convenient collection of languages, not a linguistic family. 15:02, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
 * The category can't exist without the template though. -- Liliana • 16:13, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
 * We can type the contents out manually can't we? 16:34, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
 * But the categorization would not work. -- Liliana • 18:26, 30 August 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep per Liliana. The Austronesian and Australian languages are special cases: there are so many of them that we must, practically speaking, use some paraphyletic groupings to sort them. (I used to RFD such groupings myself, but I have since come to see the impossibility of sorting the Austr. languages without them.) - -sche (discuss) 18:33, 30 August 2012 (UTC)