Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Studnet

This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was ambiguous. 5 clear "delete", 5 "merge". Failing to reach a clear concensus to delete, the decision defaults to merge. Rossami (talk) 00:35, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Studnet

Seems to be an advert of some type, capitalizing on a misspell, something that could be done about a billion times, Delete .--User:Boothy443 | comhrÚ 04:46, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)

• Keep. Okay, I'm new to this. This is my first contribution, so please forgive the protocol. I entered this because I've seen the phenomenon countless times on slashdot and other boards and found it interesting, as interesting as cow orker definitely. It is certainly not an advert (what would it be advertising?) Furthermore, a simple google search on the word reveals the commonality and fortuitousness of the typo word: "Results 1 - 10 of about 33,600 for studnet" is what I get. I feel this is a valid and entertaining contribution to the wikipedia. --User:redfenix
  • Welcome to Wikipedia. No one disputes this is a common typo, but so what? There are lots of typos, shall we create articles for them all? Why? What use would that be to anyone? Delete.. Gamaliel 05:02, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)
    • Consider the term cow orker. What use is it? It's a typo as well (with only 18,900 google hits, I should add.) and it's a valid wikipedia article. The use for both of these terms are for amusement and internet culture. Also, they both demonstrate the amusement that can be derived from common interactions over the net and common mishaps from which many entertaining conversations have sprung. Sure, they're both typos. Sure, thousands upon thousands of typos can be found online. However, not many offer some form of humor--some respite from the droning of articles, conversations, and listings that appear before us daily. If other typos have been witnessed and chuckled over by as many netizens as studnet or cow orker then perhaps they should have articles as well. These words are not just typos, but recurring humorous tidbits seen throughout the internet. Frankly, I personally was so surprised that it wasn't in the wikipedia already that I actually decided to become a participant just to add it. --User:redfenix
• Delete or Merge with some article discussing common "mis-spells" that really aren't. For example, "cow orker" is a way of subtly offending one's co-worker. However, what import is there to 'studnet?' --BenWilson 19:39, Feb 7, 2005 (UTC)
• Merge on Typographical error page. — RJH 21:23, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. GRider\^talk 22:06, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Delete (couldn't think of a clever typo). Josh Cherry 01:39, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Merge and redirect to Typographical error. Megan1967 05:44, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Okay, merge and redirect to typo. I can agree with that. --Redfenix 06:39, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• I condensed it slightly, to enable myself to vote merge/redirect. Kappa 19:26, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• merge/redirect Bart133 (t) 05:17, 12 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Deltee. I don't beleive every tpyo should haev its own aritcle. Carrp | Talk 15:01, 12 Feb 2005 (UTC)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.