Only the ascender of the l in evil is extant in ๐, but since this ascender could also belong to a d, we have to consider the possibility that ๐ actually read wicked. The small lacuna in ๐, however, argues against the longer wicked. And although Oliver Cowdery initially wrote wicked in ๐, he virtually immediately corrected it to evil (the level of ink ๏ฌow for the supralinear evil and for the crossout of wicked are unchanged). Here the 1830 edition, proofed against ๐, reads evil. The critical text will therefore accept the corrected reading in ๐, โthe evil oneโ, as the original reading as well as the reading in ๐.
Elsewhere the text has six examples of โthe evil oneโ but none of โthe wicked oneโ. On the other hand, the King James Bible has only โthe wicked oneโ (four times). Here in Alma 46:8, Oliver Cowdery initially wrote โthe wicked oneโ in ๐ probably because the following text has two instances of the morpheme wicked: โyea and we also see the great wickedness one very wicked man can cause to take place among the children of menโ (Alma 46:9). The critical text will therefore accept the corrected reading in ๐, โthe evil oneโ, as the reading of the original text as well as the reading in ๐.
Summary: Maintain in Alma 46:8 the corrected reading in ๐, โthe evil oneโ.