Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Salt and ice challenge

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep. (non-admin closure) czar · · 17:08, 1 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Salt and ice challenge

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Unlike the "cinnamon challenge", which is well referenced and fairly popular, this article fails notability policy: all the references provided relate solely to people being injured from attempting this "challenge", which implies that they are stupid, not that the challenge itself is notable. These sources apply directly to self-inflicted behaviour which falls under self-harm, with the results of this "challenge" being frostbite, but the act of "sticking your hands in salty ice water to impress people" itself is not a notable event, just as "lighting a match" is not notable compared with the results of arson or burns. Also, because there are no reliable sources to support the medical viewpoints of this trivial "challenge" or examples showing that some people are harmed, whilst many are not, this article presently falls under WP:UNDUE, as it only presents the "challenge" as dangerous, and the risk-factor seems fairly hyperbolically stated. Ma®©usBritish^{chat} 07:38, 24 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Popular culture-related deletion discussions. czar · · 08:52, 24 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. czar · · 08:53, 24 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Health and fitness-related deletion discussions. czar · · 08:53, 24 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep It gets ample coverage in reliable sources such as the CBS report. [1] Dream Focus 09:50, 24 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, educational. — Cirt (talk) 05:55, 26 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Michaelzeng7 (talk) 01:23, 1 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep (reluctantly): I don't see why this is important, but there seem to be multiple reliable sources discussing it in some depth, so it meets basic criteria, I believe. הסרפד (call me Hasirpad) 01:49, 1 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.