Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gallon challenge (2nd nomination)

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 delete. MBisanz ^talk 21:26, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Gallon challenge[edit]

This article violates WP:NOT (for things made up one day). This isn't a notable game or challenge in the encyclopedic sense. coccyx bloccyx_(toccyx) 21:19, 28 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Drmies (talk) 22:38, 28 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. This has had a very long time to establish that it's not something made up one day. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire - past ops) 10:41, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - this type of milk-drinking contest has been covered in newspaper articles like these. [1], [2], [3], [4]. Note that a google news search for "milk chugging" with gallon turns up lots of these results, many behind pay walls. -- Whpq (talk) 17:06, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Yes there are incidents that have been reported like Milk bet turns sour for Marlins bat boy and Teacher Fired For Milk-Barfing Experiment but these aren't quite what this article is about. For gross-out and juvenile fun you need to rise to phonebooth stuffing, goldfish swallowing and fart lighting. If there is movement to recreate this may I suggest milk chugging as a title? -- Banjeboi 04:41, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment - the first article I linked to has the gallon challenge specifically as it's primary subject with a statement of the usual rules followed and isn't a report on an incident. -- Whpq (talk) 13:03, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  - In thinking more on this I'm open to a wp:Heymann rewrite if the article is written encyclopedicly about Milk chugging rather than as a challenge. In this way we veer off of college/sophomoric hazing rituals and focus on the activity, variants, actual notable cases, scientific basis, etc. rather than being a repository of rules so you can organize a group of friends. There can be a good article unearthed here but like many pop culture subjects or articles about words, we need to find the encyclopedic aspects and focus on those. If there are notable usages in media they can be included after the notability and other elements have been discussed. -- Banjeboi 15:58, 1 February 2009 (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.