Talk:FQDM

Delete misspelled acronym?
The proper spelling of this acronym is FQDN and it is never good style nor acceptable to use the misspelling despite what Google's statistics show. Should WP include misspellings like this for the sake of providing access to information, or should it be excluded, which conveys the information that this is not a proper acronym to use? Kbrose (talk) 14:20, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
 * There are lots of redirects that correct spelling mistakes. So, while there shouldn't be anything linking to this article, I don't see any problem keeping it.  I tagged it as a redirect for spelling, but I guess that showed up as "alternate spelling" (like color vs colour).  Wrs1864 (talk) 15:49, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes, there should be a template for an "unacceptable spelling" tag, as not to give any additional credibility to bad spellings and copycats. Perhaps there is. Kbrose (talk) 15:56, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Ah, I see. Problem is this only seems to attach a category at the redirect page. What I think should happen is that the page should be marked at the title, and the header of the destination page should have a mention of the misspelling too. Kbrose (talk) 16:03, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I don't think the real FQDN needs to list any and all misspellings. I corrected the template on this article to use the "misspelling" form instead of "spelling".  I *think* there are bots that go through and make sure nothing links to these redirects.  I while back, I went through and flagged similar articles, such as domain name service with the "misspelling" tag.  Wrs1864 (talk) 16:21, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I agree, the real article shouldn't need to list any misspellings, the trick would be to automatically include a warning when a redirection occurs from an appropriately tagged redirect. Kbrose (talk) 17:11, 13 April 2009 (UTC)