Talk:hyophyllous

RFV discussion: March–April 2018
Is this a common enough misspelling to be entryworthy? My bgc in Germany finds only 10 misspellings to 26,500 correct spellings, which doesn't strike me as a common misspeling at all. —Mahāgaja (formerly Angr) · talk 15:14, 25 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Three citations added - I think that's all we need. SemperBlotto (talk) 15:22, 25 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Did you get a look at the originals? 'Cause I feel like something mentioning "ampbigenous babits" is probably full of scannos. —Mahāgaja (formerly Angr) · talk 15:45, 25 March 2018 (UTC)
 * I've replaced that citation with another from a similar era. More available if you want them. SemperBlotto (talk) 15:54, 25 March 2018 (UTC)

At some point someone told me that for misspellings, the three cites rule does not apply - for misspelling entries, it has to do with a misspelling occurring often enough as a percentage of total uses.... But I am not sure how we go about deciding these things. Kiwima (talk) 21:00, 25 March 2018 (UTC)

It looks like typos more than misspellings, so it's even less useful. --Per utramque cavernam (talk) 19:59, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

RFV-failed Kiwima (talk) 05:32, 27 April 2018 (UTC)