| Display title | Scunthorpe Problem |
| Default sort key | Scunthorpe Problem |
| Page length (in bytes) | 74,593 |
| Namespace ID | 0 |
| Page ID | 96298 |
| Page content language | en - English |
| Page content model | wikitext |
| Indexing by robots | Allowed |
| Number of redirects to this page | 1 |
| Counted as a content page | Yes |
| Number of subpages of this page | 3 (0 redirects; 3 non-redirects) |
| Page image |  |
| Edit | Allow all users (infinite) |
| Move | Allow all users (infinite) |
| Delete | Allow all users (infinite) |
| Page creator | prefix>Import Bot |
| Date of page creation | 21:27, 1 November 2013 |
| Latest editor | Just a 1itt1e bit further (talk | contribs) |
| Date of latest edit | 16:34, 9 September 2022 |
| Total number of edits | 53 |
| Recent number of edits (within past 180 days) | 0 |
| Recent number of distinct authors | 0 |
Description | Content |
Article description: (description)
This attribute controls the content of the description and og:description elements. | We all know automatic profanity filters on message boards and elsewhere on the Internet can be ridiculously and unimaginatively strict. But the problem is much worse: Sometimes, it sees swearwords inside other words. Thus, you can get hilarious malaprops—like "hecko" instead of "hello", "poppypenis" instead of "poppycock" or "teasthingy" instead of "teaspoon"—or else you get results like "cl***" instead of "class". |
