I personally wouldn't have locked the thread, but the title was unnecessarily controversial. Saying "dying Vita" instead of "Vita" does nothing to influence the meaning of the question. It's just there to get a reaction. Moreover, we don't know if the Vita is dying or not. Sure it looks like it's dead, but you cannot make presuppositions about things that we don't absolutely know, especially when the responses to that question is so dramatically influenced by that presupposition. It's a loaded question; any response to the question must assume that the Vita is dying, thereby limiting the Vita's chances of passing the Wii.
So, not only is the inclusion of "dying" solely to provoke a hostile reaction, it also makes a presupposition that limits the potential answers, and we cannot say with absolute certainty if "dying" is accurate to begin with. If you're going to make a title so controversial, then there needs be substaintial reasoning behind it. But in this case, I can't think of any decent reasoning to include it. It's unnecessarily controversial.
Again, I wouldn't have locked the thread personally. But it is annoying. The wording is simply unnecessary. It's controversy for the sake of controversy; something we really shouldn't be encouraging. The only possible outcome of including the word is to bait people into a war. If you want to discuss the Vita vs Wii potential sales this holiday, just exclude the word "dying" in the title. In fact, just go ahead and make the thread right now if you were really interested in the discussion, just remove the word "dying." It asks the same question without the presuppositions. You will probably get more interesting responses and a more engaging discussion. But if you insist on using unnecessarily controversial wording, over a more peaceful and potentially thought-provoking wording, then tuff titts to you sir. Just tuff titts.