Guy, I understand where you are coming from, but NPOV more or less says we shouldn't let our personal views figure into deletions. The fact that ED is composed almost exclusively a bunch of complete shitheads who probably get laid even less often than I do and will go shoot themselves in a few years when they realize they haven't contributed anything to humanity at all shouldn't factor into our decision. JoshuaZ (talk) 23:02, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
On a serious note, the deletion review appears to be heading towards a relisting of the ED article at AFD - even Sceptre (the self-professed "poster child of ED") has advocated a relisting.
Relist at AFD, but keep the article permanently full-protected if it is kept - even as Wikipedia's anti-ED poster child, I think the source just pushes it into notability. Just. The problems with an ED article now are troll attacks - the former can really only be dealt with by protecting, as any Grawp-basher knows - trolls from the 4chan family of websites are the most persistent. Do note, that even if the article is kept, the site can not be linked to directly - Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/MONGO explicitly disallows any links to the site, and the remedy (and enforcement) was upheld two months ago (annoyingly, using my ED page as a reason for denying links). Sceptre (talk) 19:43, 8 May 2008 (UTC)