I think the status quo is to keep common misspellings. We have Category:English misspellings since 10 March 2008 (it was named different before, I think) with 1,594 entries, and we have {{misspelling of}} since 16 June 2006. I merely want to codify the status quo in CFI. --Dan Polansky (talk) 09:40, 5 April 2014 (UTC)
The status quo hypothesis is further reaffirmed by the following sentence in WT:CFI#Spellings: "Once it is decided that a misspelling is of sufficient importance to merit its own page, the formatting of such a page should not be particularly problematical." The sentence implies that some misspellings should be included. --Dan Polansky (talk) 10:55, 5 April 2014 (UTC)
{{misspelling of}}.) I don't see how this helps on this matter. DCDuring TALK 11:33, 5 April 2014 (UTC)
When a user enters a misspelling, it is convenient for them to be soft redirected to the correct spelling rather than merely finding that the page does not exist in the dictionary. A non-native speaker may not readily figure out what the correct spelling is. We could actually include all attested misspellings whether common or rare, but keeping only common ones already serves the purpose fairly well. By keeping misspellings, we do not contribute to their dissemination or to misleading the reader, since we mark them clearly as misspellings. --Dan Polansky (talk) 09:45, 5 April 2014 (UTC)