Ethan van Sciver – Out of scope - this a a content dispute in which one editor removed material from an article. No article was deleted. This isn't a dispute resolution venue or a place to complain about other editors. – Hut 8.5 10:24, 15 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The following is an archived debate of the deletion review of the page above. Please do not modify it.
JasonAQuest deleted sourced information about Ethan van Sciver. When he first asked for a source, it was provided. But then he even deleted the source. I request that his administrator privileges be revoked, since he is abusing his power to ignore sourced information.
Update: Why was this message deleted? This is where people come to explain situations, right?
WP:NOTAVOTE, WP:CHEAP, and "J" and "N" are next to one another on a keyboard, making it a plausible typo. Jax 0677 (talk) 17:36, 14 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
This exact argument was made at the AfD, and apparently failed to convince people. So, fails WP:DRVPURPOSE. Anyway, if you followed that argument to its logical conclusion, you would get that there's 8 letters in the title, and (ignoring end effects), each letter has 8 immediate neighbors on a keyboard, so there's 8 * 8 such one-key-away typos. Surely you're not arguing that we should create all 64 of those? -- RoySmith(talk) 21:54, 14 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Reply - There were equal arguments on both sides for keep and delete, which defaults to "No Consensus". Since "Anal Cujt" was created, there was no reason to delete it. --Jax 0677 (talk) 22:01, 14 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
FWIW, I provided a bit of an explanation of the close on my talkpage, but suffice it to say I did not find the arguments on both sides to be "equal." Regarding process, I think RoySmith is right that this nomination appears to fail WP:DRVPURPOSE. ~ Amory(u • t • c) 00:49, 15 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Endorseish - really says something that anyone bothers to nominate such a redirect to be deleted in the first place, can't see the existence making much difference one way or another, it's hardly making space for something more important. It also really says something that anyone bothered to try and debate keeping, where as noted it's not going to help anyone since the search function sorts it out anyway. And it says something that we (and I include this comment) waste so much time discussing the point. The deleting admins reading of the discussion to give more weight to the delete arguments doesn't seem fundamentally unreasonable and since having the redirect or not seems to make no difference to the encyclopaedia's utlity - so endorse. --81.108.53.238 (talk) 08:53, 15 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Endorse given it's profanity and given that it's an unlikely typo (though not impossible) it's not unreasonable for others to suspect Wikipedia is somehow attacking this person. So deletion is both reasonable and what the majority felt was appropirate. Hobit (talk) 13:21, 16 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Not seeing it myself, the target is Anal Cunt, how is Anal Cujt somehow attacking them? Their real name is hardly prim and proper, and arguably more profane than the typo version. (I endorse above so reach the same opinion of the outcome, but really don't understand the opinion you are expressing) --81.108.53.238 (talk) 18:54, 16 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I read the redirect backwards. In that case, I'm more of an "eh". Endorse by !vote and because I really don't think it matters. Hobit (talk) 20:21, 16 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Endorse. It's possible for anybody to mistype any title by hitting the wrong key anywhere in the process, and there are eight possible wrong keys for every single letter on the keyboard. Which means that if this is warranted just because j happens to be next to n on the keyboard, then every title that exists at all always has to have dozens or hundreds (eight times the number of letters in its title) of redirects in place from every possible typo. And then we have to start creating redirects from every possible inversion typo, such as "Alan Cnut" and "Aanl Cutn", and every possible variant of "reader put their fingers on the wrong home keys and thus typed the whole name shifted left, right, up and/or down from the correct letters" (e.g. "Sms; Vimy" or "Qhqo D7h5") — so where does this rationally end? Absent any evidence that an n→j error is somehow uniquely common among all the possible "Anal Cunt" typos, or any evidence that this typo is actually commonly seen in the wild in reference to this band, it is simply not necessary for us to preemptively anticipate and create redirects from every single typing error that anybody on the planet might ever conceivably make. Bearcat (talk) 15:53, 21 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Endorse per RoySmith and Bearcat. Newyorkbrad (talk) 22:06, 21 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The above is an archive of the deletion review of the page listed in the heading. Please do not modify it.
