4 ms·
For well over three years, the Wikipedia article for Wildebeest stated the plural was Wildebai: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wildebeest&diff=484564
by tshtf 12y ago
For well over three years, the Wikipedia article for Wildebeest stated the plural was Wildebai: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wildebeest&diff=484564451&oldid=484343564 http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wildebeest&diff=48...
Of course this was false, but it took well over three years for a correction. In the meantime, many other sources still refer to the plural as Wildebai:
https://www.google.com/search?q=wildebai https://www.google.com/search?q=wildebai
- logicallee 12y agoI don't think your final link justifies your claim - those 8,800 results compare to 441,000 for "wildebeests", 25,700 for "wildebeasts" (a simple typo), or 9,090 for the totally niche joke wildebeets. (Wild beets) And the 8,800 results aren't people using them in sentences (search "wildebai are" or "wildebai have" or "several wildebai" or any other search with quote marks and a good candidate for being a real sentence.) I could personally find only a single page from 2009 that uses that - which is far fewer pages than just about any misspelling however absurd.