What do you find inappropriate about the title? There is a bigger issue here than the title of my thread. The issue here is of propagating incorrect words, in a bid to enhance vocabulary.
Examples can be aplenty. I can use an incorrect word and cite it as an example. The word under discussion has a specific spelling. You may choose to select the auto correct feature on MS Word or go by what Wikipedia says, but they aren't the last word on the English language. Wikipedia is built by people like you and me. Auto correct is not correct all the time.
Discretion can be allowed if the dictionaries mention both forms to describe the same thing. Just because a few unknowledgeable people use an incorrect spelling in their writing doesn't make the spelling correct. I can highlight cases where celebrated writers have used 'revert back', 'prepone' or 'cope up' in their writing, but that doesn't make the usage of those phrases correct. If we are out to teach something we cannot rely on our judgement and prudence, for in such instances we have to rely on facts and specifics, not our 'limited' knowledge or understanding.
For example, in one of your recent threads, you have used the word 'economical' to describe the burning problems our country faces. I would have used the word 'economic', for economical means cheap or not costing much. Auto correct on Word would not be smart enough to identify the very significant differences between economical and economic, the same way it doesn't differentiate between waterlogging (inundating) and water logging (maintaining logs).
Umesh has given a different meaning to the word and it in no way defines inundation.
Underestimate me...that'll be fun!