Reconstruction talk:Proto-Indo-Iranian/čárma

@Aryamanarora, माधवपंडित I thought we agreed that it was misleading to not indicate the NIA languages as descendants of Sanskrit, especially when taking it to refer to all OIA. I also very much agree with the idea of making the Sanskrit borrowings collapsible, because they are far too many and it is unnecessary to show the long list. DerekWinters (talk) 18:57, 15 August 2017 (UTC)

@DerekWinters: No admin has bothered to look at the discussion and change anything... pinging @Metaknowledge, Chuck Entz, JohnC5 can you please look at Wiktionary:Beer_parlour#Sanskrit_vs._Old_Indo-Aryan and add all the Indo-Aryan languages as descendants of Sanskrit? —Aryaman ^{(मुझसे बात करो)} 19:03, 15 August 2017 (UTC)

@DerekWinters: Yeah I was waiting for consensus. Never mind, this suits me. Like the collapsible table too, but does everyone know what a tatsama is? I'm thinking the earlier "learned borrowing" is more apt. -- ɱɑɗɦɑѵ (talk) 01:52, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

@माधवपंडित: I kept it as "tatsama" because it's only for Indo-Aryan and Dravidian learned borrowings. Maybe it should be linked to tatsama —Aryaman ^{(मुझसे बात करो)} 19:45, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

@Aryamanarora: No problem!. -- ɱɑɗɦɑѵ (talk) 12:08, 17 August 2017 (UTC)