Question re: unattested forms of determiners

Hey! Sorry about that little fail you cleaned up after me with the forms of sa, I took the hint and did the sah forms right :) Was wondering though, I accidentally created an entry for 𐌸𐍉𐌶𐌿𐌷 (þōzuh) which, judging by the lack of a romanization, is probably unattested - should entries like that be created? (If not, feel free to delete it.)

Adding to that, should 𐌹𐍄𐌰 (ita) (it) and 𐍃𐌹 (si) be their own lemmata or link as forms to 𐌹𐍃 (is)?

The feminine and neuter forms should probably link to the masculine form, as they form a single paradigm that is clearly similar to that of adjectives. I think the first and second person pronouns should be kept separate though. Some people treat the singular (I) and plural (we) as part of one lemma, but I don't know if that makes sense.

We shouldn't have entries for unattested forms, at least that's the norm we've stuck with for Gothic. I deleted the entry.