[[Appendix:Proto-Indo-European/kh₂eyd-|*kh₂eyd-]]

I'm not sure what deleted entry you're actually referring to. In any case I didn't really look at who created it, and it's nothing personal. There's just a lot of bad etymological stuff around and it's hard to tell between usable stuff and junk. So I would rather err on the side of caution. I won't mind at all if you restore stuff I delete, as long as it's improved of course.

Cool, cool. Could I also ask, as you move inflected stems into the main root articles (e.g. *gʷʰer-), that you add the conjugation tables in with them? I think that they are useful and am sorry to see them disappear.

I'm wondering about that myself. The difficulty is that a root by itself doesn't have any kind of conjugation. But where else can we put it?

Yeah, I was wondering that myself. You could put it under each stem's bullet point; though, that would going against normal practices and divisions. You could also have an Inflection header with subsections for each stem. It's an interesting dilemma, but as I say, I'd still love to have the tables.

I guess this would be material for BP or ID.

Yes, yes, yes

Wait, what is "ID?" "Information Desk?"

Yes. I was using the WT: shortcut name. WT:ID.

I thought ID was just for noobies. I've never actually read any discussions there.... Which would you suggest as the optimal location for this question?

I guess BP has more active people.

Howdy, Code. Sorry about the Celtic stuff at *steh₂-. I am perfectly aware that Italo-Celtic is not completely accepted, and I've only used it twice in the past (here and in *bʰudʰmḗn) where the evidence for the proposal seems most convincing. As for the Goidelic/Brythonic business, I wish that had been told to me earlier. I've been using that schema for a little while now because I find it clear; though I take your point about OI being the only Goidelic language. And with Brythonic, I was just using Wikipedia's standard, which created the error. Oops.