Talk:hopologist
Latest comment: 11 years ago by -sche in topic RFV
RFV
[edit]
The following discussion has been moved from Wiktionary:Requests for verification.
This discussion is no longer live and is left here as an archive. Please do not modify this conversation, but feel free to discuss its conclusions.
Books results are scannos, or "hip hopologist". DTLHS (talk) 22:30, 23 November 2012 (UTC)
- Well, there's this one. It seems to be a real word, but rather specialized- and thus very rare online. There are hits for hopology, and a few non-durable web uses for the word itself, but I'm not finding enough for CFI. Chuck Entz (talk) 23:21, 23 November 2012 (UTC)
- Just found the real reason it's so rare: the correct term is hoplology, which does have cites. Looks like it needs to be moved, and an entry created for hoplology (see w:Hoplology). Chuck Entz (talk) 23:29, 23 November 2012 (UTC)
- Meh, moved to RFD as a rare misspelling. Wiktionary is not a list of all possible errors. Mglovesfun (talk) 19:04, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
- I'd say keep. The misspelling gets enough hits on Google, and many people are unlikely to realize it's a misspelling due to the correct form's rarity/non-inclusion in spellcheckers. Hence keeping "hopologist" as a misspelling entry might be helpful. Astral (talk) 20:06, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
- Meh, moved to RFD as a rare misspelling. Wiktionary is not a list of all possible errors. Mglovesfun (talk) 19:04, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
- Just found the real reason it's so rare: the correct term is hoplology, which does have cites. Looks like it needs to be moved, and an entry created for hoplology (see w:Hoplology). Chuck Entz (talk) 23:29, 23 November 2012 (UTC)
- Meh, kept. Change it into a hard redirect if you like. - -sche (discuss) 05:30, 7 February 2013 (UTC)