Talk:keytone

RFD discussion: February–August 2017
This appears to be a vanishingly rare misspelling. —Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 05:19, 15 February 2017 (UTC)


 * This says the misspelling is common in relation to diabetes. If you search Google for keytone diabetes there are indeed quite a few hits. Mihia (talk) 21:20, 20 February 2017 (UTC)


 * I have been thinking about creating a vote to get rid of the more egregious misspellings, but I mostly end up doing actual useful stuff, like creating words. I am happy to discuss such a vote by e-mail with anyone else who is annoyed by shit like this. Equinox ◑


 * But why not discuss it on-project, why, why not do that? "Because of you" is the response to all those people. HTH. Equinox ◑ 22:49, 20 February 2017 (UTC)
 * My main problem with including misspellings is that they can end up on word lists or indexes appearing as valid words. Otherwise, I see no reason not to include the common ones. If someone reads the word "keytone" and comes here to find out what it means, isn't it more helpful to tell them? Mihia (talk) 23:24, 20 February 2017 (UTC)


 * Ideally that's part of the work of the search engine. If someone types NAIT then they might mean night or knight, sure. That's an argument for having phonetic search suggestions. I don't think there's any good argument for having entire entries, on the same level as "real" word entries, that only serve to deal with people's spelling errors. Equinox ◑ 00:28, 21 February 2017 (UTC)
 * I would advocate a more positive response than "did you mean?" for spelling errors that are commonly encountered. If someone types in a word that they have read, and believe to be a word, and they are told "did you mean ...?" then they might think, no, I meant what I typed, and then assume that their word was not entered in the dictionary. I do agree, though, that misspellings and errors being, as you say, "on the same level" as real entries is not very satisfactory. Mihia (talk) 00:36, 21 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Personally, if I am looking something up which I read in a non-edited source and I cannot find it in any dictionaries, I assume it is not a word. I am in favor of paring back significantly the misspelling entries. - TheDaveRoss 13:34, 24 February 2017 (UTC)
 * So am I, in principle, but in practice, it can sometimes be very difficult to distinguish between a misspelling and a rare alternative spelling; and over time, something that started out as a misspelling can become an alternative spelling (often not a rare one), like, , and . —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:39, 24 February 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep as a common misspelling (WT:CFI): suggests a frequency ratio of 1000, which is good enough for common misspellings by my calibration at User talk:Dan Polansky/2013. Since we expressly mark the item as a misspelling, any downstream reuser who does not want misspellings can easily filter it out. Editors who want to tighten the misspelling filter can consider a lower shreshold for the frequency ratio. I think common misspellings are a usability tool: I find it much more friendly to land on a page that expressly tells me that what I was searching for was a misspelling, and what it was a misspelling of. --Dan Polansky (talk) 12:58, 25 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Please look at . Most of the uses are not actually this misspelling, so the frequency you quoted is a gross overestimation. —Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 01:53, 10 March 2017 (UTC)
 * @Μετάknowledge: GNV distinguishes capitalization, unlike Google Books: check e.g. . Admittedly, when I ignore the uppercase occurrences in the Google Books search, I also find the likes of "The central tone in a key is called a keytone", but even if these would drive the frequency ratio to 2000, that would still be acceptable for a common misspelling by my lights. --Dan Polansky (talk) 07:49, 11 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep the OP's argument really is more of an RfV one than an RfD. Pur ple back pack 89  11:03, 23 June 2017 (UTC)
 * RFD kept. 2 keep, 1 delete, no consensus to delete. PseudoSkull (talk) 19:59, 13 August 2017 (UTC)