Category talk:Quechuan derivations

Request for deletion

The following information passed a request for deletion.

This discussion is no longer live and is left here as an archive. Please do not modify this conversation, but feel free to discuss its conclusions.

---

Incorrectly named duplicate of Category:Quechua derivations -- Prince Kassad 19:42, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Move entries, and delete. --Bequw → ¢ • τ 06:17, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Ditto, Mglovesfun (talk) 08:54, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

So, are you saying that {{etyl:qwe}} shouldn't exist, and that all references to it should be changed to refer to {{qu}}? If so, why does {{etyl:qwe}} exist? I assume it wasn't just created for the heck of it … —Ruakh_TALK 17:16, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

I can't see how {{etyl:qwe}} can be used in a productive manner. Until SIL came up with their classification, Quechua was regarded as a single language with various dialects, so there's no need to refer to the collective language family. In fact, many of the uses of that template are plain wrong since they clearly refer to standard Quechua. -- Prince Kassad 17:30, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Good point; maybe this is a beer parlour issue rather than a simple deletion one. Mglovesfun (talk) 06:57, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Kept, usurping an active ISO 639 code would require a vote (IMO) so there's no point it being listed here. Mglovesfun (talk) 10:47, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

As I recall (it was nearly a year ago, so I may recall incorrectly), I created it so that I could differentiate between Quechua and Quechuan, assuming the two words to be meaningfully different. I know absolutely nothing about the language(s) in general, so I will certainly refrain from expressing any opinion on the matter. However, it seems to me that if Quechua(n) is better treated as a single language, then the 639-5 code should probably go, elsewise it should probably stay. -Atelaes λάλει ἐμοί 00:35, 22 January 2010 (UTC)