Talk:hasbien

hasbien
This is not a common misspelling of "hasbian". In fact, AFAICT, not a single one of the 30 Google Books hits is of this as a misspelling of "hasbian", and most of the hits aren't even actually of this string at all (they're scannos of "has been"). We do not include rare misspellings. Ergo, delete. - -sche (discuss) 06:01, 29 July 2015 (UTC)


 * Google books has only one hit - on the plural, hasbiens, but if you do a search on News rather than books, there are more hits (7 on the singular, 2 on the plural). Where I really see this one a lot, however, is on blogs and such. Kiwima (talk) 20:46, 29 July 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete as a rare misspelling (WT:CFI): does not find "hasbien";  gives 46 results;  gives around 2000 results;  gives 20,600 results. Furthermore, as -sche pointed out, the Google books finds are often scannos. --Dan Polansky (talk) 17:50, 31 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Ok, I am a bit confused (which is not surprising as I am a relative noob). There are sufficient citations that I could have entered it as an alternative form because it meets our attestation criteria, but they were such a small percentage of the actual number of usages, that it was clear to me that it is a mispelling. How can something common enough to meet the attestation criteria be too rare to be a mispelling?
 * Firstly, there's more merit to recording intentional alternative spellings than misspellings or typos (errors an author would likely correct if they were pointed out); gets 3+ hits, but it's such a vanishingly rare error for "women" that I'm not aware of any Wiktionarian so inclusivist that they would include it. Secondly, I see no evidence that "hasbien" would meet CFI if it were an intentional alternative spelling — you're aware that blogs and websites are not considered durably archived, right? - -sche (discuss) 00:16, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
 * @Kiwima: Re: "be too rare to be a mispelling": This is not too rare to be a misspelling; it is too rare to be a common misspelling. Editors do not seem to want to include all attested misspellings, only the common attested misspellings. This follows from WT:CFI, whose key statement was made official in Votes/pl-2014-04/Keeping common misspellings, which had two opposes, one of which agreed with the substance of the vote but had issues with wording and its placement. --Dan Polansky (talk) 09:25, 8 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Deleted. —Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 06:14, 28 August 2015 (UTC)