Wiktionary talk:About Pali

Criteria for Inclusion
What are the criteria for inclusion of a word? Pali seems to be exempt from the 3 reference requirement of the standard criteria for inclusion, but this page doesn't nominate any single sources. I can see several different cases: RichardW57m (talk) 11:26, 7 September 2018 (UTC)

Word in Roman Script
Does an entry not expressing doubt in the Pali Text Society dictionary count as adequate attestation? We have a template set up for using that dictionary - R:pi:PTS. RichardW57m (talk) 11:26, 7 September 2018 (UTC)

Equivalents of Words Attested in Roman Script
Does a plausible single source in the non-Roman script which is a plausible equivalent of a Roman script entry count? For example, I am considering using attestation in a Tai Tham manuscript plus citation of the word as coming from Pali in a Northern Thai dictionary (e.g. MFL) plus a Roman script entry as evidence. RichardW57m (talk) 11:26, 7 September 2018 (UTC)

Devanagari Form Matches Sanskrit
There are quite a few words where the automatically generated Devanagari alternative form points to a word which is only recorded on Wiktionary as Sanskrit. What should we do in these cases? As they are, they make Wiktionary look broken. In some cases, they meet the Sanskrit rules for inclusion.

My intention is to simply add the Pali word to the entry as I notice these cases and worry about the challenges if they happen. Is this unwise? I'm not a bot writer, so there may be quite an investment of my time in such augmentations.

Reciprocally, there are a fair few Roman-script entries which are also unrecorded transliterations of Devanagari Sanskrit entries. I'm inclined to handle these by a remark in the etymology section such as 'also in Sanskrit'. (It is fairly well-known that Pali does not descend from Sanskrit, but distinguishing borrowing in each of the two directions and common inheritance is difficult.) RichardW57m (talk) 11:26, 7 September 2018 (UTC)