How is this not autological? --Ivan Štambuk 03:03, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
- It is not a word; only words can be autological. We do not categorize misspellings except as misspellings. We have consistently not treated misspellings as true entries, but rather as a soft redirect. We don't even count misspellings in the statistics. --EncycloPetey 01:48, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
- Well, I don't understand how exactly mispelling is not a word (or how misspellings are not words). The only difference between misspelling and mispelling is that the former spelling is considered "standard" or "literate" by some predefined criteria. The only misspellings that could be autological are the misspellings of misspelling itself. C'mon, it's just one entry in the entire Category:Misspellings ^_^
- Btw, is there a policy page about treating misspellings as "not-words", or it's this one of those unwritten practices? WT:CM contains nothing useful. --Ivan Štambuk 02:03, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
- The closest I can find off-the-cuff is the talk page for the
{{misspelling of}}template. But there, the issue is merely mentioned in passing. It does, however, show that other people are uncomfortable with the idea of granting full status to misspellings. --EncycloPetey 02:43, 24 June 2008 (UTC)- So there is no policy/guideline page. Oh well. --Ivan Štambuk 05:01, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
- I am uncomfortable as well, to put it mildly. Bogorm 20:20, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
- The closest I can find off-the-cuff is the talk page for the