Template talk:la-decl-4th-argo

RFD discussion: September 2016–August 2019
Reasons for deletion: (I recognise that only point 5 is an argument for deleting the template, rather than correcting it.) IMO, this template should be deleted until the paradigm is better worked out and attested, whereupon it can be superseded by a more general template for this whole subclass of nouns. — I.S.M.E.T.A. 11:52, 30 September 2016 (UTC)
 * 1)  is a third-declension noun, not a fourth-declension one.
 * 2) As L&S note, the “dat[ive] and abl[ative are] prob[ably] not used”.
 * 3) The accusative can also be.
 * 4) The table's title states “Only the genitive and accusative are attested. The remaining forms have been reconstructed based on the Greek inflection.” However, if the dative and vocative were unattested and therefore "reconstructed based on the Greek inflection", they would both be * (from the Greek ), and not (respectively) * and *.
 * 5) The template is hyperspecialised.  is one of a sizeable number of feminine proper nouns that are similarly declined (see User:I'm so meta even this acronym/Latin feminine proper nouns of a peculiar Greek-type third declension).

See User:I'm so meta even this acronym/Latin feminine proper nouns of a peculiar Greek-type third declension for that work-in-progress. — I.S.M.E.T.A. 15:35, 6 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Deleted; incorporated into Module:la-noun/data. Benwing2 (talk) 15:12, 6 August 2019 (UTC)