Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sodium controversy


 * 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. I was tempted to WP:SALT this article, but that would have been controversial. Mark Arsten (talk) 15:05, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

Sodium controversy

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  Stats )

This subject seems to have been entirely constructed by its author, who may either hold a conflict of interest or a fringe view on the subject, and the article definitely reflects that. The many sources on the article do not seem to mention that there is a "controversy" at hand. At least two of the references are to other articles on Wikipedia, and some may simply be duplicates (I will attempt to use an automated tool to fix the citations after this nomination).

Again, this page simply seems to be the project of its original author, and there are no reliable sources used on the page that state that this controversy is something that exists unto itself, and has not been manufactured by the author from several health articles that say "cut down your salt intake". — Ryulong ( 琉竜 ) 10:39, 10 August 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete This poorly written article does not provide references for many statements. When analyzed, a great many of these statements are contradicted by the published evidence.  As an example the author states our sodium consumption is 55% higher than it was a generation ago.  The published evidence states our sodium consumption has not changes in 50 years [Bernstein AM, Willett WC. Trends in 24-h urinary sodium excretion in the United States, 1957–2003: a systematic review. Am J Clin Nutr 2011;92: 1172–80.]  The remainder of the article is peppered with similar inaccuracies.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Terryfirma (talk • contribs) 17:45, 15 August 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete This article reads like a (bad) high school essay, and adds no information one cannot find in Sodium in biology and Salt; and if one can't, it's these articles that should be edited. The title is also misleading, as there is no actual controversy, all issues being recognized, in a rare coincidence, both by mainstream and fringe health practitioners. complainer (talk) 11:47, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
 * • Gene93k (talk) 16:29, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
 * • Gene93k (talk) 16:30, 10 August 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete as content fork. Mangoe (talk) 18:09, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete Naive effort at OR, ESSAY, etc. EEng (talk) 18:32, 11 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Retitle & re-work - Definite content fork, but looking at the article salt, it might actually be useful to have an article on health effects of salt (rather than sodium controversy. The health effects of sodium are certainly a topic of high interest and notability for several decades now.  And that seems distinct from, say, all the other things one might say about salt -- its chemical nature, its history / salt trade, effects of sodium on ecosystems & in biology more generally.  Sodium in biology was split off appropriately; health effects of sodium seems like something more specific and appropriate.  So, my recommendation:  Briefly summarize the health effects of salt information in the article on salt, create the health effects of salt article, and see if there is any useful content in sodium controversy to merge into health effects of salt.  --Lquilter (talk) 19:16, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
 * 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.