Template talk:pt-superseded-hyphen

Scope of the template and possible merging with pt-superseded-hyphen-Brazil
Hi,. I've noticed you've created Template:pt-superseded-hyphen-Brazil. I was actually thinking about proposing a similar thing that I've being studying in my Sandbox. Anyway, I was making some tests in the Template:Sandbox and I think pt-superseded-hyphen-Brazil could be easily incorporated in this template, thus avoiding the need to have three different templates (since another one for European Portuguese would have to be created), simply by adding a "dialect" parameter. Tell me what you think of the proposal.

I would like to discuss the what was the scope you intended for this template. I've being used in being using it in terms that were superseded by AO1990, like the case of the infra-estrutura to infraestrutura, but I noticed some uses like in cara-de-pau. I thought it was a mistake at first, but I'm now wondering if that was your intended use instead. So I was wondering if it wouldn't be better two have two different templates for this two different situations, with this one reverting to your initial intended usage and a new one would be used for the hyphens after prefixes. - Sarilho1 (talk) 13:20, 9 November 2021 (UTC)


 * The intended scope was words that lost their hyphen through AO1990, but were not used in Portugal prior to the Acordo.
 * The main problem was that the normal template displays “Still used in countries where the agreement hasn’t come into effect, and as an alternative spelling in Portugal”, which is very much wrong for . As for cara-de-pau, that was probably a mistake on my part. I have a program that fetches all alternative forms in a given language and pre-generates entry text. For Portuguese forms, it tries to guess the correct template based on the word’s spelling but some wrong guesses went unnoticed when I created the entries. Feel free to fix any of these.
 * About parameterising the dialect, I support it. Having read your ideas on the sandbox page, one thing that crosses my mind is that the dialect parameter, categorisation, need for gloss and possibility of multiple reasons would have to be added to all pt-superseded templates. Maybe the way forward is to have a single template with a data module that controls the display text and categorisation. — Ungoliant (falai) 23:45, 9 November 2021 (UTC)
 * I no longer think to  was a mistake, but the rule is not very clear, as some dictionaries or linguists don't acknowledge the change, while others do. I think that we should distinguish between two uses, then source:
 * the removal of hyphens in locutions with connectors (e.g., or ). This case corresponds indeed to words that are sometimes still used in Portugal (Priberam suggests  and  as the correct European Portuguese spellings, where Infopédia or Portal da Língua Portuguesa state the correct ones lost the hyphens).
 * the removal of hyphens in words formed by prefixation and that are followed by r, s or a vowel (e.g., , ). This is the way I've being using the template.
 * The dialect parameter can be used to distinguish between words that wouldn't be used in Portugal or Brazil, regardless, but still changed under AO1990 (like ).
 * Finally, I like the idea of having a data module, but that's something beyond my capabilities. For the moment, I think I will reapply this template to the first case and create one for the second usage. In the future, when a module is completed we can just replace them with the unified template. - Sarilho1 (talk) 11:43, 10 November 2021 (UTC)
 * I didn't separate the two cases after all. It would be useful if we were to categorize the reason why it was superseded, but I'm not sure it is necessary at the moment. - Sarilho1 (talk) 13:49, 10 November 2021 (UTC)