Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alcohol without liquid

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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 DavidLeighEllis (talk) 01:52, 29 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Alcohol without liquid[edit]

Alcohol without liquid (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-neutral OR with a negligible amount of salvageable content. References are wanting. Ringbang (talk) 19:47, 22 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: Article is currently at Alcohol inhalation. Peridon (talk) 19:48, 24 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep but rename & rescope to e.g. Alcohol vaporizer or Alcohol inhalation. The broader topic of "alcohol smoking" is notable means of alcohol/drug administration, and presents a health concern. Apparently, AWOL was just one, possibly the first, who marketed the practice, and was eventually banned across a range of U.S States. Here's a short list of news articles dealing with the broader topic:
    • Robert Glatter (June 21, 2013), The Dangers Of "Smoking" Alcohol, Forbes.com
    • Jeff Gordinier (January 11, 2013), Vaportini, Alcohol Vaporizer, Lets You Inhale Alcohol, Huffington Post
    • James Nye (14 January 2013), Parents' horror as new $35 device lets you INHALE alcohol goes on sale in U.S., Daily Mail
    • Michelle Castillo (June 5, 2013), Inhaling alcohol vapor puts you at risk of overdose, CBS News
    • Alexandra Sifferlin (June 5, 2013), Smoking Alcohol: The Dangerous Way People Are Getting Drunk, TIME
Not directly on topic, but in clinical research of alcoholism, "male mice were made physically dependent on alcohol via 72 hours of alcohol vapor inhalation." (Samir Zakhari; et al. Stress, Gender, and Alcohol-Seeking Behavior. p. 183.). I didn't find any medical research on humans smoking alcohol, possibly because the practice is rather novel. No such user (talk) 11:49, 23 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • Done, now. The article still needs work, but I think that the afd can be withdrawn now. No such user (talk) 11:49, 23 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, I'm not withdrawing the AfD nomination. What you have now is a coatrack article almost entirely about one product. The article title is ambiguous, the main points of the lead section are unsourced; the "History" section is all about two products in the US; the coverage of the Vaportini is OR; the "Marketing" section is unencyclopedic; and the "Medical applications" section is an improper synthesis of scientific research, in which you imply that recreational use of an alcohol vaporizer or nebulizer has documented medical benefits. An AfD nomination doesn't necessarily imply that a topic is unencyclopedic. In this case, the topic is still indeterminate, and I contend that having no article is preferable to having an article like this one. Ringbang (talk) 13:55, 23 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
As you wish. I'm not claiming I made a good article in this short time, but one passable on Afd. The rest of the debate is more suitable for its talk page. I'll just refute your main points:
  • Per WP:LEADCITE, "Because the lead will usually repeat information that is in the body, editors should balance the desire to avoid redundant citations in the lead". What is exactly contested in this lead, and not cited in the article?
  • The AWOL was the first product of this type, and one that created most fuss. Even the 2013 Forbes makes a reference to it, and 2013 Capital Bay article has "AWOL" in the title.
  • Vaportini is explicitly named in no less than 3 refs: 2 cited in the article (Capital Bay, Forbes) and Huffington Post, above
  • Apart from these two marketed devices, there is a range of DIY methods, which should be mentioned when the article is expanded
  • Yes, Marketing is bad. Should be removed, or put in context. Effects section is now empty. That is a reason for editing, not for deletion.
  • Any WP:SYN readings are entirely yours. The section just briefly enumerates legitimate medical uses of alcohol inhalation, not of recreational alcohol abuse.
    No such user (talk) 14:35, 23 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000(talk) 17:04, 23 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yeah, I wish people would stop changing the name of the article, especially when it's at AfD. It's confusing. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 19:09, 23 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Somehow you moved the talk page but not the article page; it is still at Inhalation of alcohol vapor. Let's see if we can find an admin to straighten this mess out. --MelanieN (talk) 19:30, 24 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
There we go - User:Peridon fixed it. --MelanieN (talk) 19:45, 24 January 2014 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Alcohol_without_liquid&oldid=1071336948"