Aeus is a real person

Since Aeus is a real person, I think we should re-name the article to his real name.

Do you know his real name?
 ∙ Zurr  TalkContr 15:46, 6 May 2007 (EDT)
We should go by what most people refer to them as. It is also a matter of personal privacy. User:Kirkburn/Sig3 15:48, 6 May 2007 (EDT)

Aeus is a synonym for the butt.

Here is the evidence: Teabingh 11:09, 7 May 2007 (EDT)

You are not very smart. we need a credible source. Which Urban Dictionary IS NOT  D ♠ T ♣ C ♦  11:11, 7 May 2007 (EDT)

I don't agree with you. As far as I know, it is edited by an edititor - not a madman. Besides, there is no need for insults. Teabingh 11:13, 7 May 2007 (EDT)

The editor in question seems only to have made 1 contribution to the urban dictionary.  D ♠ T ♣ C ♦  11:18, 7 May 2007 (EDT)
Just find a credible source  D ♠ T ♣ C ♦  11:23, 7 May 2007 (EDT)

Dotty, you are not an admin, so it is not your task to decide what is credible and what is not. For your information; the editor is the person who controls the articles of the page and makes sure they are truthful. If I'm not wrong, you think Wowwiki is more credible? At least you're eager to use quotes from it as evidence, though you know that it can be edited by anyone. UD however, has a quality control. I shall try to look for more sources, but there are few other places to look. Teabingh 11:22, 7 May 2007 (EDT)

Clearly you dont know what a wiki is, admin dont have all mighty powers an can do whatever they want. Policies etc get voted on, not just be admins but regular users aswell. I have never said a wiki is credible, i sugested starting with Aeus, if you wanted that confirmed you could dig further [1] i'm sure you can find that the wiki was right in this particulat point.
If UD has the slightest quality control i wonder why there is so much crap on it like [2]? I bet wowwiki has alot more quality control than UD will ever have. But comeback when you got an actual credible source.  D ♠ T ♣ C ♦  11:48, 7 May 2007 (EDT)

What source should that be? Encyclopædia Britannica? We are talking about slang here; - there is no webpage as well-known, popular and encyclopaedic as UD when it comes to slang and urban words. I think we should vote about this. Is UD a credible source or not?Teabingh 12:13, 7 May 2007 (EDT)

No. It isn't. Not in any way, shape or form. If you seriously think it is, there really is little hope for you. User:Kirkburn/Sig3 12:52, 7 May 2007 (EDT)