Gothic calques -- t:calque does not automatically add to cat:Gothic calques?

It's fixed.

Thank you, that was quick! Another short question - do you think a potential entry for the second element in that word and a couple of others (listed at *fadiz) should be at 𐍆𐌰𐌸𐍃 (faþs) or at -𐍆𐌰𐌸𐍃 (-faþs)? You added it as -𐍆𐌰𐌸𐍃 to the Pgmc. entry and I've used that in etymologies but then there's 𐍅𐌰𐌳𐌳𐌾𐌿𐍃 (waddjus) which seems to be a similar case, which is not added as a suffix but just as a regular old noun.

I think it would be best to show it as a reconstructed term, so with * in front.

I went ahead and did just that. Waddjus should probably also be moved to RC now?

BTW the nominative plural for 𐍅𐌰𐌳𐌳𐌾𐌿𐍃 claims to have the sequence -ddjj- in it. Is this for real (how would it have been pronounced, for example)? is it attested?

Yes, that is a problematic point; none of the compounds containing that word are attested in the nom. plural, the one you see is merely generated by the template. It came up in this discussion, and was not resolved. I personally am not sure how to proceed with those words, they're very irregular to say the least.

I think you should put a ? in place of the word.

Probably a good idea, but I don't think there's a parameter in the template to replace just the nominative plural, or at least I'm not good enough with templates to figure out how to do that :/

Also, just to note, all numbered parameters other than the language code are deprecated for {{calque}}. It's recommended to use the actual morphology template instead, like {{compound}}. That gives you finer control than {{calque}} can.