Thread:User talk:Bequw/ etyl:nah

Do we actually want this? Functionality-wise, it doesn't do anything, in that would display the same thing and categorize to the same category and link to the same Wikipedia article even if we deleted it; but maybe we want Category:ISO 639-5 templates to include all of the ISO 639-5 codes? (I ask because a certain widely transcluded template was recently changed to assume that if there's an etyl: template for it, then it's a language family and its only entries are in proto-language appendices. Obviously that change made very problematic. I've reverted that change until discussion has taken place, but it or something like it might end up getting implemented for real, so if we don't have a particular reason to keep, then maybe we should get rid of it. I've already taken care of , which was the other problematic case; aside from those two, there are a few pairs where  and  both exist, but none of them are cases where lang=foo is reasonable anyway.)