Talk:icthyoid
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
The following information passed a request for deletion.
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.
I believe this is just a misspelling of ichthyoid, but I know nothing about the subject. Ewweisser (talk) 06:12, 16 June 2014 (UTC)
- icthyoid,ichthyoid at Google Ngram Viewer does not find "icthyoid". google:"icthyoid" finds 12,600 hits, while google:"ichthyoid" finds 29,500 hits. google books:"icthyoid" finds no more than 61 results (after clicking right), while google books:"ichthyoid" finds 2,780 hits. The ratio of Google books hits is approximately 45, so I think this could be ranked as common misspelling. --Dan Polansky (talk) 17:39, 16 June 2014 (UTC)
- ichthy- words would seem to be a likely source of those. Still, the incorrect version should definitely be marked as a misspelling and referred to the correctly spelled form. There's no need for a vote to do that, so I'll take care of it now. I would keep the entry as such, though, There's a genus Icthyophaga that formally propagates this error. bd2412 T 17:53, 16 June 2014 (UTC)
- WP has the genus as Ichthyophaga, are we sure our Icthyophaga isn't itself a misspelling? - -sche (discuss) 18:03, 16 June 2014 (UTC)
- It looks like there are some pretty high-level sources for either spelling of that one, both going back hundreds of years (though "Ichthyophaga" predominates". bd2412 T 18:18, 16 June 2014 (UTC)
- WP has the genus as Ichthyophaga, are we sure our Icthyophaga isn't itself a misspelling? - -sche (discuss) 18:03, 16 June 2014 (UTC)
- You may be amused by these hits at Google Books for Icthyophaga ichthyaetus. DCDuring TALK 18:36, 16 June 2014 (UTC)
- They are amusing, but also a reason to keep some form of this entry. bd2412 T 20:26, 19 June 2014 (UTC)
- You may be amused by these hits at Google Books for Icthyophaga ichthyaetus. DCDuring TALK 18:36, 16 June 2014 (UTC)
- ichthy- words would seem to be a likely source of those. Still, the incorrect version should definitely be marked as a misspelling and referred to the correctly spelled form. There's no need for a vote to do that, so I'll take care of it now. I would keep the entry as such, though, There's a genus Icthyophaga that formally propagates this error. bd2412 T 17:53, 16 June 2014 (UTC)
- Anyway, keep as a misspelling. - -sche (discuss) 16:56, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
- Since the definition has now been reformed, I think it would be uncontroversial to close this as kept as a misspelling. Any objection? bd2412 T 13:56, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
- Boldface keep, to remove any doubt about my stance. --Dan Polansky (talk) 14:13, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
- Since the definition has now been reformed, I think it would be uncontroversial to close this as kept as a misspelling. Any objection? bd2412 T 13:56, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
Kept as reformed. bd2412 T 18:15, 27 June 2014 (UTC)