Talk:Ice Bucket Challenge/Archive 1

Legado do Tibu

This seems related to "Legado do Tibu", a game with similar rules that went viral in Galicia, Spain around Spring 2014: http://callmedixieflatline.com/blog/o-legado-do-tibu-or-galicia-underwater/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.223.80.128 (talk) 17:25, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

Rules of challenge

Comment- you have the rules of the challenge wrong. If you do the challenge you donate $10 If you don't do it you donate $100

People are under the assumption that you just do the challenge and there is nothing to donate. That is not the purpose and therefore that is why there has been awareness AND money raised.

Please correct your page !!

The challenge is an ultimatum. People lose social status if they don't do the challenge.

Other organizations have created their own challenges like putting a pie in your face or donating to support suicide prevention. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.129.81.162 (talk) 02:52, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

Thanks

Could you please provide a Reliable source to support this statement? If you do I will gladly add it to the article (or, if you can cite such a source, you could do it yourself). Jinkinson talk to me 01:04, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

 Done Never mind, I have found a source that verifies your claim and updated the page accordingly. Jinkinson talk to me 01:16, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

It needs to be noted the original rules of the challenge, which were to not encourage slacktivism. In this, the challenger has to donate $50 to the their chosen charity if the "challengee" accepts. However, the challengee must donate $250 to the challenger's chosen charity of they don't accept. The Challengee then chooses their own charity if they accept the challenge: http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/maddow-accepts-ice-bucket-challenge.

This is the way it was done by participants in July before it became specific to the ALS, ie when Shep Smith challenged Rachel Maddow:

"Here’s how the Ice Bucket Challenge works: if the people Shep Smith challenged choose NOT to douse themselves with ice water, then they have to pay $250 to the charity of the Shep’s choice.

If they DO accept the challenge and get drenched with ice water, Shep donates $50 in their name to that charity."

2001:4930:127:0:AC77:624E:9835:6C3A (talk) 22:54, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

Origins

See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Ice_Bucket_Challenge#Legado_do_Tibu — Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.144.39.201 (talk) 12:42, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

Some articles claim that Pete Frates started it, several articles point out it was a popular trend on Facebook/Instagram before then, I personally witnessed a friend do the challenge back in June, and recently someone has posted that it started in New Zealand in July, so I'm adding a Dubious tag, perhaps it should be Disputed. So far, the earliest information I can find (aside from my friend's facebook video, which I imagine is not a source I can link here) is the Golf Digest article from June talking about Keegan Bradley and others. The New Zealand Cancer Society doesn't seem to even claim to have started the trend, and instead only documents it, so it should probably be removed. But before I did that, I thought I would have a discussion here in case anyone can find an earlier video or story that points to the challenge's true origins. Compsciasaur (talk) 06:41, 16 August 2014 (UTC)

• I deleted the first paragraph of the Orgins section, because I can't seem to find any info on an Ice Bucket Challenge existing in 2004, apart from a single primary source. It is quite likely that the two may of developed independently of each other. Until we can find a source that directly connects the two, I don't think we should be pursuing this line of thought. --Deathawk (talk) 16:57, 16 August 2014 (UTC)

The significance of the ICE BUCKET Challenge replicates for a moment a very small part of what people with ALS actually experience. The involuntary muscles spasm and lost of body control. In essence walking a mile in someones shoe for a brief moment. Isnt that awareness.JD — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.68.180.242 (talk) 06:50, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

• The New Zealand version of the Ice Challenge must have begun prior to 6 July 2014, when an "Ice Water Challenges" page was started on Facebook to "[share] all the best Ice Water Challenges from New Zealand and around the World in support of the Child Cancer Foundation New Zealand." That page is specifically associated with the Child Cancer Foundation, rather than the general Cancer Foundation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.239.213.16 (talk) 03:20, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

Table

I think a table should be added stating

Who was challenged - Who they were challenged by - Accepted/Not accepted - Date of when they were challenged - Comments/notes

Riahc3 (talk) 08:40, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

Notable participants

Is this section not going to be problematic given the very large and growing number of public figures that have done this challenge? This section may need to be deleted to avoid it being a very long or arbitrary list. 68.192.63.36 (talk) 20:37, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

You're probably right (though the list was way shorter when I started it and I didn't think it would grow this fast). I'll delete it now since it's too hard to try to keep up. Jinkinson talk to me 20:56, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

It has been restored. I agree that the list is just going to take over the article. It should probably just be moved to a separate list article. Meters (talk) 22:12, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

If a separate page is made, I think it should be made into a table like I mentioned before. It would give a lot more information about who was challenged, by who, when, who they challenge, any special notes, etc. Riahc3 (talk) 23:07, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

A "Family Tree" type graphical page should be created to show who challenged who where each participant divides into the three that they challenge and whether or not they accepted and the date they accepted. Each person that accepts would then divide into the three they challenge etc. 184.155.126.81 (talk) 23:12, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

Is a separate article with a list or table of "Notable participants" even worth creating? I'm tempted to just remove anyone from the current list that doesn't have a reference. Meatsgains (talk) 18:06, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

I cleaned up the list a bit. Would it be worth semi-protecting this page? IP users are continuing to add non-notable participants to the list-- it is becoming exhausting. Meatsgains (talk) 19:21, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

Maybe it might be worth separating the list with headings that could help distinguish who are considered "notable people" (ie- Political Figures, Film/TV Personalities, Musicians, Sports Figures (sub-categories: football, baseball, hockey, basketball, soccer, wrestling, UFC/MMA), Tech Personalities, Comedians, Reality Stars, etc..., Misc. Celebrities. I'm definitely in favor of a table that includes "challenged by". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.183.71.35 (talk) 14:31, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

Did semi-protect. I have been contemplating doing so for several days, and think the time has come (was waiting for someone else to say it, and you did ). Two weeks should let the hype fade a bit, and then we can resume allowing newcomers to contribute. Go Phightins! 19:25, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

Okay great, Thanks! Meatsgains (talk) 20:29, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

Keith Olbermann also did it, but since I can't make edits I can't add him!

 Done —Mr. Granger (talk · contribs) 23:59, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

You forgot Larry the Cable Guy, Jason David Frank, and David Yost. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.2.69.117 (talk) 23:55, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

 Not done. Please provide citations. —Mr. Granger (talk · contribs) 23:59, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

Larry the Cable Guy: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cb7anVIOeeA

Ron White: http://thebull.cbslocal.com/2014/08/17/must-see-ron-white-does-alsicebucketchallenge-viewers-discretion-advised-profanity/

Charlie Sheen did an AMAZING variation: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qat9gR5nrpM

184.155.126.81 (talk) 04:43, 19 August 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.155.126.81 (talk) 04:36, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

I've added Larry the Cable Guy and Ron White. —Mr. Granger (talk · contribs) 13:57, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

Considering the large and growing number of celebrities that have done it, I think that continuing to add people to this list shows that there is a fundamental misunderstanding of the word "notable." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.19.216.221 (talk) 00:22, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

Rachel Maddow did it in the same souce for Jindal and Shep Smith: http://www.msnbc.com/morning-joe/gov-bobby-jindal-challenges-joe-scarborough-ice-bucket-challenge 184.155.126.81 (talk) 04:20, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

I would love to add Chuck Comeau to the participants list. You can find the video on his twitter account. https://twitter.com/chuckcomeau/status/501492825532293120 And also on band twitter site: https://twitter.com/simpleplan/status/501486937480650753 And also Sébastien Lefebvre - https://twitter.com/simpleplan/status/501834860051578880 & http://instagram.com/p/r4rimgyHzc/?modal=true — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.153.247.28 (talk) 09:18, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

Honestly, I think we're getting into splitting hairs over who's considered "notable." I know we're worried about the list getting bloated, but it seems like some very well known personalities keep getting added to the list only to be taken off shortly thereafter (i.e. Nina Dobrev)

Who is Nina Dobrev? Never heard of her. Googling her doesn't show anything notable. She is an example of a person that should be taken off the list. Walterego (talk) 23:55, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

If we're concerned about the list getting unwieldy, then perhaps we should make it its own article and separate it out into different sections: politicians, journalists, actors/actresses, musicians, sports figures - any other categories I'm missing? Hypnometal (talk) 12:55, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

Derek Jeter of the New York Yankees did this challenge. Citation: http://wapc.mlb.com/cutfour/2014/08/19/90419318/derek-jeter-completes-icebucketchallenge-calls-out-michael-jordan-and-that-guy-from-entourage BronxAKJ (talk) 13:07, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

Radamel Falcao did it too: http://www.elespectador.com/deportes/futbolinternacional/falcao-tambien-acepto-el-reto-ice-bucket-challenge-video-511503

I've just created the list on a separate page : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Ice_Bucket_Challenge_participants — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mimiru123 (talk • contribs) 20:47, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

Formatting

Okay, I don't know how it happened, but when I added Brent Spiner and Gates McFadden, somehow the formatting of the page got all wacky. I tried to fix it, but it's still a problem. If anyone can see what happened and clean it up, thank you, and I'm sorry! Hypnometal (talk) 13:22, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

If you're talking about the extra columns, don't worry, it wasn't your fault. The editor before you had removed a {{Div col end}} template, which I've now replaced. —Mr. Granger (talk · contribs) 13:27, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

Oh, good! I'm so relieved! It's nice to know when something isn't your fault after all. :-D Hypnometal (talk) 14:02, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 19 August 2014

Dr. Dre accepts Tim Cook's ice bucket challenge and nominates Eminem and Snoop next

http://www.theverge.com/2014/8/19/6044101/dr-dre-accepts-tim-cook-ice-bucket-challenge

Semi-protected edit request on 19 August 2014

add steve higgins to notable participants https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b_kdke345NQ 24.188.68.1 (talk) 04:52, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

Done —Mr. Granger (talk · contribs) 13:57, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 19 August 2014

I want to add: Lucy Hale, Ashley Benson, Nina Dobrev, Justin Bieber, Vanessa Hudgens, Cody Simpson and Kevin McHale on "Notable participants".

CandaceDenera (talk) 05:09, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. —Mr. Granger (talk · contribs) 13:57, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 19 August 2014

Grant Gustin is a notable name who did the ice bucket challenge. Here's a link to his video. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TtDHx3q-w_M Cinephan (talk) 05:51, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

Done —Mr. Granger (talk · contribs) 14:09, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 19 August 2014

Please add Mark Fischbach (Markiplier) and Ryan Higa (Nigahiga) to the list of notable participants.

Arceusaurus (talk) 21:56, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. —Mr. Granger (talk · contribs) 13:57, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

edit: Here are the links for proof that they did do the Ice Bucket Challenge.

Mark: https://www.maker.tv/video/veEHPyE3DT6h/channel/polaris/series/markipliergame

Apologies, but apparently the YouTube links do not work and I can't seem to find another way to show you the proof that Ryan did do it, so I suppose I'll show you Mark's link first. I'm new here- if that wasn't obvious enough Arceusaurus (talk) 15:18, 19 August 2014 (UTC)Arceusaurus

edit 2:

Ryan: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5toYTddMp44

Also, please add Charles Trippy. I forgot to add that in just now. He did the challenge as well- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C_TTnuxUDkg&list=UUvphW8g3rf4m8LnOarxpU1A -Arceusaurus (talk) 15:21, 19 August 2014 (UTC)Arceusaurus

edit 3:

David Beckham as well. So many Ice Bucket challenge videos being posted onto my news feed everywhere, haha. https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=10152165877501571&set=vb.84218631570&type=2&theater -Arceusaurus (talk) 15:26, 19 August 2014 (UTC)Arceusaurus

edit 4: Tom Syndicate is also one of those participants- being the most intense i've seen so far and going to the extent of using a bulldozer after being nominated three times. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ngsbVqBYGnQ&feature=youtu.be -Arceusaurus (talk) 02:14, 20 August 2014 (UTC)Arceusaurus

A few members of SourceFed: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y1GG0X-lf0c -Arceusaurus (talk) 02:17, 20 August 2014 (UTC)Arceusaurus

Caspar Lee: https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=667270780008116&set=vb.243510019050863&type=2&theater -Arceusaurus (talk) 02:34, 20 August 2014 (UTC)Arceusaurus

I think I'll stop now

Thank you; I'll add Mark Fischbach in a moment. I think Youtube links are also an acceptable primary source in this situation. —Mr. Granger (talk · contribs) 14:52, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 19 August 2014

another edit for "Notable participants" Virgin Trains https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virgin_Trains

Virgin Trains did the Ice Bucket Challenge on the 19/08/14 TheWezzinat0r (talk) 17:23, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. —Mr. Granger (talk · contribs) 02:22, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

Notable participants

Am I the only one here that thinks this overwhelming list is getting out of control? The page is on the Ice Bucket Challenge, not everyone who has participated in it. Usually, in situations like these, we would split the article into a new page titled something like List of Ice Bucket Challengers but IMO, that subject is not notable enough to have its own article. Seems like everyone wants to be included in the list to show their participation in "philanthropy" or "charity". The list now has 236 participants. If we are to cut down the list, how could we decipher between those who are notable and those who are not? I say we remove the entire list but I know other users would object to that idea. I would like to know what other users think on this issue. Meatsgains (talk) 17:44, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

I would be fine with removing the list altogether, but here's another possible solution: Cut down the list to only participants who have secondary sources discussing their participation. So Susanna Reid, for instance, could stay, because of this source, but all the participants whose references are to Instagram, Facebook, or YouTube would probably have to go. —Mr. Granger (talk · contribs) 18:09, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

Your suggestion is a more plausible solution. I think only including those with a secondary source will not only significantly reduce the list but also keep other "participants" from begin added. If no other users weigh in on the issue soon, I will go ahead and cut down the list. Thanks! Meatsgains (talk) 18:27, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

I decided to be bold and do it—I've removed all the primary sources I could find, and the list is a more manageable size now. —Mr. Granger (talk · contribs) 01:05, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

Good work! Looks much better now. Meatsgains (talk) 01:30, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

I know I said something about this in the previous section, but since it's being discussed here, let me add a little bit more justification for separating the list out into its own article. Sure, the article may be about the challenge itself, the issues behind it, and the charity connection. But I, for one, keep coming back to the article to see who else has done it, to see if there's a name that pops up that I would be like, "Okay, so they've done it too. Cool!" If we want to clean up the main body of the article itself, separating the list out into a separate list would still allow fans of various celebrities to keep tabs on who's done it and who hasn't, and we can still have the list be contributed to by the community at large without having to filter every single name through a small funnel, especially when edits are being made by those who don't even know about the current policy in existence. Plus I'm sure you don't want to be reverting edits all the time.  ;-) Hypnometal (talk) 13:35, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

Creating a separate list page is fine by me. It would certainly make this page easier to maintain. —Mr. Granger (talk · contribs) 14:56, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

No, that list page will not meet Notability guideline. SYSS Mouse (talk) 15:27, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

That was may case, a new "list article" would lack notability. Meatsgains (talk) 15:55, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

---

Removing about a hundred participants who have completed the challenge because it's easier for you is stupid. People come to this page to see who has done the challenge, not to see a list of people which you deem should be allowed on there. If you don't want all of the 'work' of updating it then take it off semi-locked and let users do it who 'can' be bothered!

We are including only notable participants with secondary sources. The name of the page is Ice Bucket Challenge not List of Ice Bucket Challengers. If you feel that "People come to this page to see who has done the challenge" then maybe you should submit an RfC to create a new page with the list of participants but, as already mentioned earlier, the page will more than likely lack notability. If we were to include anyone with an Instagram, Facebook post, or Youtube video of themselves participating in the Ice Bucket Challenge, the list would exceed 500 participants. We are simply trying to make the list more manageable. The list, as it was before participants were removed, was overwhelming and lowered the quality of the page. Meatsgains (talk) 17:25, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

--No not everyone with a instagram, facebook or youtube post, just the notable celebrities. I don't think anyone cares if there are secondary sources or not and it shouldn't be down to 1 or 2 people to decide this. You have removed over 150 celebrity posts from this page because you think they shouldn't be there, the source for each one is clearly there, you can see the celebrity in the video. I came to this page yesterday several times and found it very useful as it was updated by users and it was at 240 celebrities last time I checked which I could use to watch the videos, to cut it down by over half just because it is more manageable is stupid. Also the quality of the page was not lowered as it was subjective, now it is lowered because it is objective of who is deemed good enough to be included. - 18:53, 20 August 2014 (GMT) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.13.61.179 (talk)

Edit: This version from earlier today (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ice_Bucket_Challenge&oldid=621992391) with 300 participants on is much more useful than your current version, I highly suggest you revert back to this and then add on the celebrities who have participated after that. Needing a secondary source is not a requirement. - 19:00, 20 August 2014 (GMT) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.13.61.179 (talk)

If you feel so strongly about including every "notable celebrity", then submit a case to WP:RfC. Otherwise, consensus was reached on included only participants with secondary sources. Meatsgains (talk) 18:06, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

I can read further up the page.. this 'consensus' was reached between just 2 people. 2 People don't decide the rules for the entire page, deleting over 200 celebrity entries. What makes you 2 so important to decide that!? - 19.10, 20 August 2014 (GMT)

Keep scrolling up. There was not just two of us in agreement over "removing participants from the list".

• Myself
• 68.192.63.36
• Jinkinson
• Mr. Granger

I will say it again. Submit an RfC. Best, Meatsgains (talk) 18:17, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

Please add Jacoby Shaddix to the list.

He is lead singer of Papa Roach. Video of him doing challenge: https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=571149689679054&set=vb.100003520842258&type=2&theater — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.149.24.171 (talk) 19:23, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

Not done: A secondary is source is needed. Meatsgains (talk) 04:37, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 19 August 2014

187.166.59.205 (talk) 20:22, 19 August 2014 (UTC) Muere Corey Griffin, pionero del ‘Ice Bucket Challenge’ | url = http://www.tvnws.com/2014/08/muere-corey-griffin-pionero-del-ice-bucket-challenge/ | publisher = Telenews | date = 19 de Agosto de 2014 | accessdate = 19/08/2014}}

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format.--Edgars2007 (talk/contribs) 06:45, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

Why?

Why must there be articles about a phenomenon that won't likely last long. It is like a kind of meme or news, something I recalled Wikipedia seems to discourage it due to its tone incompatibility. --161.200.19.36 (talk) 06:58, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

This phenomenon is remarkable because as of Tuesday, August 19, The ALS Association has received $22.9 million in donations compared to $1.9 million during the same time period last year (July 29 to August 19) attracting 453,210 new donors.Shipsview (talk) 09:29, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

The significance of this is manifold: First and foremost, the Ice Bucket Challenge is the ONLY thing that has EVER resulted in the levels of public awareness and fundraising needed to help people with ALS and their families. This alone makes it important on a level way above other pop culture phenomena. ALS is easily among the worst diseases in terms of suffering and devastates not just the individuals who are diagnosed, but their entire families, often leading to bankruptcy and/or suicide. And a lot of people get the disease, but it is rarely seen in the community because patients quickly become homebound, virtually ignored by the current health system, and then die. Because of the almost total lack of public awareness, fundraising for ALS has always been paltry compared to better known, less devastating diseases. In fact, more money has gone toward finding therapies for attention deficit disorder (ADD) than for ALS. (If Johnny is doing poorly in school, pharmaceutical companies see a market, but few people care about ALS.) The Ice Bucket Challenge changed this, even if temporarily. For the first time in history, public awareness and fundraising grew to a level that matched the disease. Second, it is significant that the change was brought about by a viral social media campaign. This could not have happened even ten years ago, so the Ice Bucket Challenge will likely be analyzed and studied for many years as an unprecedented and historical way in which non-medical, non-political forces brought about a significant advancement in connection with a dire public health issue. Ultimately, this article will have to be edited to reflect what I just said here, but for the time being, people just want to see a list of celebrities who have dumped ice water on their heads, which is OK by me. :-) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.18.191.17 (talk) 20:09, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

And so? I did not object about the ALS pain and suffering, but I remember that Wikipedia itself is reluctant to include a phenomenon which will gradually fade (there is in some articles, but it is subject to dispute). I agree that there will be a social analysis (which some articles already tried to examine) over the impact between the Ice Bucket and ALS, but I do not sure about how this encyclopedic entries be made to comply with its own guideline (otherwise there will be a contradiction of its own guideline and the article; in fact, the statement as illustrated above (first time in history, etc...) is discouraged since there will be someone trying to use in every questionable content). If consensus says it should remain, so be it. I would not like to nominate article for deletion to get a "snowball keep", "speedy keep" or "vandal nomination". --110.168.87.9 (talk) 03:48, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

This is the Woodstock of ALS awareness. It is unprecedented and huge and exceeds all Wikipedia notability standards. The previous scarce attention and paltry fundraising for ALS are essential factors in explaining both the rapid growth and the importance of this phenomenon (this likely would not have taken off if it was started for a worthy cause such as breast cancer that has high awareness and high fundraising), so it needs to be mentioned. It is bad editing to make something less accurate by watering it down.

Semi-protected edit request on 20 August 2014

Just Two requests for Notable Participants that are not on the list

Simon Cowell https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c6RKXFHX6X8 2014-08-19 Secondary: http://metro.co.uk/2014/08/19/simon-cowell-giggles-through-his-ice-bucket-challenge-nominates-fellow-x-factor-judges-louis-walsh-cheryl-cole-and-mel-b-4838959/

Emma Stone https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1xWx5y1H6C4 2014-08-19 Secondary: http://uk.eonline.com/news/570858/emma-stone-and-simon-cowell-do-the-als-ice-bucket-challenge-actress-adorably-nominates-beau-andrew-gar-field-of-dreams

 Not done Please see List of Ice Bucket Challenge participants. — Parent5446 ☯ ^{(msg email)} 21:02, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

Not just ALS

Although ALS seems the most common beneficiary of these challenges, it should perhaps be noted that there are other groups benefiting as well. For example, the sheriff of Washington County, OR and the City of Lone Tree, CO did their challenge for the Officer Down Memorial Page. Amayzes (talk) 12:29, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

In my opinion an interesting fact: In western Ukraine participants of the ice bucket challenge are requested to donate money to the Ukrainian Army to support the war, called "Anti-Terroristic operation" (ATO), against the Donetsk and the Lugansk People's Republic. Here is a source in Ukrainian: http://www.drohobyczer-zeitung.com/2014/08/ice-bucket-challenge.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.231.238.58 (talk) 17:31, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 20 August 2014

please remove "Before the popularity of the Ice Bucket Challenge, levels of awareness, fundraising, research dollars, and overall public support for amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) were extremely low"

The ALS Association had total revenue of $19,690,252 in Fiscal Year 2013, including $17,776,294 in contributions prior to the existence of the Ice Bucket Challenge.

Source

http://www.charitynavigator.org/index.cfmbay=search.summary&orgid=3296#.U_SvX_m-3J8

Additionally, IRS form 990 in prior years reports the following for the ALS Association...

2010 = $18,607,524 2011 = $21,850,929 2012 = $21,211,696

Source

990s.foundationcenter.org

108.3.139.214 (talk) 14:36, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

Done. Nice catch! —Mr. Granger (talk · contribs) 14:47, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 20 August 2014

This page does not include mention of the other national ALS organization, the ALS Therapy Development Institute (ALS TDI), which has received significant media coverage. Edits to text and links to sources below.

The Ice Bucket Challenge, sometimes called the ALS Ice Bucket Challenge, is an activity involving dumping a bucket of ice water on one's head or donating to ALS-specific charities in the United States, such as the ALS Association and the ALS Therapy Development Institute. It went viral throughout social media during the Northern Hemisphere summer of 2014.

Legacy: Before the popularity of the Ice Bucket Challenge, levels of awareness, fundraising, research dollars, and overall public support for amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) were extremely low.[14] After the Ice Bucket Challenge went viral on social media, public awareness and charitable donations for ALS soared to unprecedented levels. On August 18, 2014, the ALS Association announced that it had received $15.6 million in donations compared to $1.8 million during the same time period (July 29 to August 18) in the prior year. These donations came from both existing donors and 307,598 new donors to the Association. The ALS Therapy Development Institute (ALS TDI) is reporting an increase of 10 times the number of donations during the same period last year, typically processing an average of 200 online donations a day. They hit an all-time high on August 19, 2014, processing over 800 donations from the web.

Sources: ALS TDI Wikipedia page: [Therapy Development Institute Wikipedia] August 19, 2014 Matthew Herper, Forbes "Think The ALS Ice Bucket Challenge Is Stupid? You're Wrong." August 18, 2014 Bill Saporito, TIME.com "How the ALS Ice Bucket Challenge Could Change Fundraising Forever" August 18th, 2014 Sumathi Reddy, Wall Street Journal "Charities Seek Their Own Ice Bucket" August 18, 2014 Brion O'Connor, ESPN "How one man accepted the challenge" August 15, 2014 Alex Ungerman, Entertainment Tonight "Nancy O'Dell Takes The ALS Awareness Ice Bucket Challenge!" August 14, 2014 Sumathi Reddy, Wall Street Journal "How the Ice-Bucket Challenge Got Its Start" August 11, 2014 Maya Rhodan, TIME.com "Here's Why People Are Dumping Ice on Themselves and Posting Videos of It"

ALSTDI (talk) 16:10, 20 August 2014 (UTC)ALSTDI

ALSTDI (talk) 14:45, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

Already done seems to have been done already Cannolis (talk) 09:19, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

References

RfC: Are celebrity entries being removed wrongly from this page?

Over 150 notable celebrities have been removed from this page despite taking the challenge because editors believe that they are not notable enough or do not have enough sources, despite the source being a video of the celebrity itself. I recommend that all of the removed celebrity posts are re-added as there was no reason to remove them in the first place. 94.13.61.179 (talk) 18:19, 20 August 2014 (UTC) 19.:19, 20 August 2014 (GMT)

The list of celebrities has been split from this page to List of Ice Bucket Challenge participants, and the conditions for inclusion appear to have become less strict, so I think this RfC is no longer relevant. For this reason, I'm removing the {{rfc}} template. —Mr. Granger (talk · contribs) 16:18, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

You have no right to remove my RfC template, and the rules are not less strict because someone has removed all of the people with only facebook/youtube again, so nothing has changed so do NOT edit away rfc tags! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.203.26.171 (talk • contribs)

I've removed the RfC template again, as the issue no longer applies to this page. If you want to reopen an RfC, do so at the page List of notable Ice Bucket Challenge participants. —Mr. Granger (talk · contribs) 23:49, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 20 August 2014

Notable participants: Simon Lane Brent Copeland EpicInki (talk) 18:20, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

 Not done Please see List of Ice Bucket Challenge participants. — Parent5446 ☯ ^{(msg email)} 21:03, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

What is the 'Notable Participants' section actually for?

I have been looking at this Wiki page for a few days now and I contributed to the list several times and as a new member of Wiki i have been developing my editing skills here. Is this list just for people that did the challenge first or for the most famous people because I find it discriminating how you are choosing to accept some celebrity's and are deleting others. Simon Cowell is probably one of the most recognized people that have done this challenge and you haven't included him even though I made an edit suggestion for it? I know you can't include everyone on this page, but at least include the most recognized celebrity's on here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MichaelOliverHumphreys (talk • contribs) 20:03, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

There is now a new page List of Ice Bucket Challenge participants. We were removing participants that did not have a secondary source. Those with only a reference to Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, or Youtube were removed. Feel free to add Simon Cowell to the List of Ice Bucket Challenge participants page if you can find a secondary source. Best, Meatsgains (talk) 22:03, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

• Note: I realize the list is getting enormous, but per policy, WP:PRIMARY sources are OK for simple incontrovertible facts. ("A primary source may ... be used ... to make straightforward, descriptive statements of facts that can be verified by any educated person with access to the primary source ....") In other words, if someone of the stature of, say, Oprah Winfrey makes a YouTube, Twitter, and/or Facebook video of him/herself doing the challenge, for this simple incontrovertible provable fact we do not need a secondary source. I'm saying this because some of the most notable people do not have secondary sources. Discretion will obviously have to be used in deciding which people are notable enough to admit without a secondary source, but it's not policy to omit them in this case just because they don't have a secondary source (i.e., they didn't seek outside PR or press releases to publicize their participation). Softlavender (talk) 22:21, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

I think it might be best to mention a dozen or so of the celebrities who did it first in this article (as opposed to the newly created list one), since primariness of sources doesn't really matter in this case as Softlavender noted. Of course this assumes we have to mention the celebrities who did this in their own section at all, which we aren't doing now, so maybe it doesn't matter. Jinkinson talk to me 22:40, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

My thinking, which I could be completely wrong, is that if a reliable source published an article of an individual participating in the Ice Bucket Challenge, then it is noteworthy. If it was only posted to Instagram, Youtube, Facebook, Twitter, etc. by the participant, it lacks importance for inclusion. That's not to say that those individuals are not notable or that they did not do it, but that an RS has not covered it, consequently lacking notability. I hope that made sense. Meatsgains (talk) 22:53, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

My question then would be, why are we calling it "Notable participants"? Because right now the criterion of inclusion is not the notability of the participants themselves, but their PR/press (which sort of goes against the nature of the challenge in my mind -- the spirit of the charitable challenge is not to call attention to the participant, but to call attention to the cause). Many or most of those persons notable enough to have a vast social-media following do not seek to call attention to themselves -- only to publicize the charity/challenge. Softlavender (talk) 23:18, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

@Softlavender: You have addressed a very good point and to be honest, I don't have an answer. If we are to include everyone with a Wikipedia page who has done the challenge and has posted it to social media, how big would you expect the list to become? The current list, with secondary sources, is growing by the minute. Meatsgains (talk) 23:25, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

I certainly never said or even remotely implied that "everyone with a Wikipedia page" who has does the challenge should be included. I specifically said "of the stature of, say, Oprah Winfrey". The fact that the current list includes, as someone recently mentioned up above, Nina Dobrev, but doesn't include a variety of people exponentially more notable than her, says to me that our inclusion criterion may be flawed. Softlavender (talk) 00:12, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 21 August 2014

[1]

Under the Origin heading, change "One version of the challenge, which took place in New Zealand as early as July 7, 2014, involved dousing participants with cold water and then donating to a charity; for example, the Auckland Division of the Cancer Society" to "One version of the challenge, which took place in Salem, IN as early as May 15, 2014, involved dousing participants with cold water and then donating to a charity to raise money for Zach Bottorff, a child that had been recently diagnosed with a brain tumor." The change is necessary because this is likely one of the earliest documented examples that gained regional, widespread popularity. Ccoculaw2004 (talk) 02:13, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Cannolis (talk) 09:24, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

|answered=no| I did provide a reliable source. The link provided is from the NBC affiliate in Louisville, KY, WAVE News. This is considered a reliable source according to Wikipedia guidelines. Ccoculaw2004 (talk) 15:46, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

Partly done: I've incorporated some information from the source to the article. —Mr. Granger (talk · contribs) 16:04, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

List of Ice Bucket Challenge participants AfD

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Ice Bucket Challenge participants

Semi-protected edit request on 21 August 2014

External links

• ALS Ice Bucket Challenge Celebrity Participants and Nominees graph

Qetrix (talk) 14:43, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

 Done thanks! -BZTMPS ★ · (talk? contribs?) 15:30, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

Thosed opposed to the Ice Bucket Challange

I dont know that I could refer to any printed or published resources in this request, yet despite its popularity, there are many opponents to the ALS Ice Bucket Challenge in that it is an incredible waste of clean drinkable water-a life-giving resource that many countries do without. I have been hearing comment and reading comments online as well as hearing from some friends on the topic. COuld this opposing view be included in a "Controversy" section or otherwise appropriately titled section giving a nod to those who oppose this?

Also of note, when I logged onto the page, there is currently a stream of profanitities which is somehow visible in the first paragraph....it looks like someone is misusing their editing powers...can you chek this please?216.67.44.129 (talk) 22:37, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

 Done The section 'criticism' now has a brief line mentioning the water waste. --Sofffie7 (talk) 18:13, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 21 August 2014

I propose renaming the section "Legacy" to "Popularity." The word "legacy" refers to how something is remembered after the fact and what effects it is believed to have had on subsequent events. You can't talk about the legacy of something while it's still happening.98.124.54.116 (talk) 00:59, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

Good point. It's definitely too early to talk about the legacy of the Ice Bucket Challenge. I've changed the heading to "Effects". —Mr. Granger (talk · contribs) 01:28, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

No diplomats

US bars diplomats: [2]. Martinevans123 (talk) 10:01, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

Chillin' for Charity

I would like Wikipedia to add to the Ice Bucket Challenge article information about the Chillin' for Charity campaign in US women's basketball. It raises money for the Kay Yow Cancer Fund.

http://espn.go.com/espnw/news-commentary/article/11107406/buzz-was-niya-butts-starts-cold-water-challenge-kay-yow-cancer-fund-gregg-popovich-patty-mills-star-san-antonio-parade — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.18.137.73 (talk) 13:05, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 22 August 2014

Modify the end of the first sentence, where it states "ALS research." so that ALS is a link to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amyotrophic_lateral_sclerosis HabaneroSalsa (talk) 14:15, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

Done. Thanks for the suggestion! —Mr. Granger (talk · contribs) 15:00, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

22-AUG-14 > Please DELETE the penis photo

I don't know how to do it, but would someone please DELETE this image from the Ice Bucket Challenge listing? Thanks! This is the image: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:001-full-erect.jpg

Thanks, BKHERE

I had to revert the vandal who added the inappropriate image 8 times-he continued to add it back to the page. He is now blocked indefinitely. Meatsgains (talk) 20:20, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

History

The origins of the Ice Bucket Challenge itself is not clear. However, Cold Water Challenge is touted as the origin of the birth of the unique challenge it. This challenge was popular in social media, especially in the northern regions in America. This activity is done by challenging participants to donate their money for cancer research or take the challenge of jumping into the cold water.

As reported by Wikipedia, a division of General Sheaves For Christ Youth Division, UPCI is the first community to start spreading the virus throughout the United States. In a video released on April 26, Amado Huizar challenging people to donate $ 100 (USD 1.1 million) for a fund-raising mission Sheaves For Christ or jumping into ice water. The video became viral on the internet and has been imitated by many people.Aloggins1970 (talk) 03:13, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

Response to Criticism

It needs to be mentioned that many charities believe that the Challenge has caused disproportionate amounts of money to be donated to the cause and that this cannibalizes charity that would go to other firms. Also there is the idea of "slacktivism" where people believe that they are doing something, however, they are really not. In psychology, there is a term called "moral licensing" which is essentially the idea that you may do something bad because you did something good. In the case of the ALS Challenge, this means people may not give charity in the future, thinking that they already did their part. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 107.193.32.170 (talk) 09:44, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

In response to the criticism that water is being wasted, employees at a donor company in Burbank, California have begun pouring the donative equivalent dollars in cold quarters (which have been in a freezer) over their employee donor's heads. No quarters are harmed or wasted in this way, and also any risk to the donor is virtually eliminated. The first employee to engage in this new (water saving) method is Robert Stern of Arcadia, California.

Might be useful for the article if you had a good source. Martinevans123 (talk) 12:14, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

Not news

I recently removed some information about Campbellsville firefighters and about Corey Griffin from this article, with the reasoning that Wikipedia is WP:NOTNEWS, and the information, while newsworthy, is not of such significance to the Ice Bucket Challenge that it belongs in the article. I was reverted by Theonlybman in this edit. I would appreciate other editors' input on whether this information belongs in the article. —Mr. Granger (talk · contribs) 11:54, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

Response to criticism section –Any kind of donation, no matter the motivation (e.g. showing off your ice bucket video), is good.

Some of the critics say that people are just being narcissistic attention seekers, and aren’t putting enough attention on the charity.

Any kind of donation, no matter the motivation (e.g. showing off your ice bucket video), is good.

• • Points for contributing to neuromuscular disease (ALS, muscular dystrophy, Parkinson's disease, cerebral palsy, etc.) computing projects**

World Community Grid uses BOINC (Berkeley Open Infrastructure for Network Computing). BOINC is a software platform for distributed computing using volunteer computing resources. One of the World Community Grid projects that you can choose involves investigating protein-protein interactions for 40,000 proteins whose structures are known, with particular focus on those proteins that play a role in neuromuscular diseases. You could probably get more people to donate to nonprofits if more of them would be involved with things like the smart phone charity apps that are available, such as the BOINC app, and Google One Today (for Android and iOS). All points or contributions are recorded on an online profile, and they should eventually connect to something like the leaderboard, and achievements system of Xbox, PS, or Google Play Games. People by nature can be mostly status-conscious, self-interested, and competitive. Reputation and points systems can affect motivation, and may be the only source of motivation for some people to do something charitable.

• • Reddit karma, Stackoverflow points, and blood donations**

Reddit karma is a factor as to why Reddit comments are not like YouTube comments. Whether you think Reddit karma is ridiculous or not, a lot of people value Internet points. They allow people to show off. When people answer my questions on Stackoverflow, some of them might really want to help, but some of them might just care about gaining more points. To me, it doesn’t matter, as long as I get my questions answered. Some people donate blood for the money, and some people donate blood because of a different cause. If I need the blood, I don’t care what a donor's motivation was. If it’s not charity points, people will continue to show off by spending on clothes, cars, jewelry, wearable electronics, wearable gadgets etc.. If you can shift it to a better cause, why not? Sometimes, recognition, a record, and competition are necessary.

Criticism

An Australian newsreader has been critical of the Ice Bucket Challenge live on air, calling it a waste of water and suggesting other ways to support charity. He clarified that the charity itself was worthy, but not the method.[3] 60.242.1.97 (talk) 06:29, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

Article in The Times (UK)

If anyone has a subscription to The Times (I don't currently), an article just published might be good to mine for material: [4]. Softlavender (talk) 08:24, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

Why is the accident during a challenge relevant?

'Shifting focus to ALS' sections seems dealing with the diffusion of the subject. And I don't think the Campbellsville accident has a big impact to the development of the subject's popularity. I suggest deleting the paragraph, or perhaps moving it to a new 'Trivia' section. Junghyeon Park (talk) 11:40, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

I agree. I removed the paragraph earlier and was reverted, but since it seems like you agree with me that it doesn't belong, I'm going to remove it again. —Mr. Granger (talk · contribs) 12:10, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

Corey Griffin

If he's one of the co-founders of the Ice Bucket Challenge and a pioneer of the campaign as it says in his section at the end why isn't he mentioned at all in the Origin and Shifting Focus sections? I have no idea whether it's true that he pioneered or founded the idea or not, I've never heard of him and hadn't heard of the Ice Bucket Challenge until yesterday but it's inconsistent to have one section of the article say no one knows how it got started and another saying this guy was one of the people who started it. One or the other is inaccurate. 86.140.55.188 (talk) 12:59, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

I agree. As I've mentioned above, I don't think the information about Corey Griffin's death should be included in the article at all. It's just news, not an important enough piece of information about the Ice Bucket Challenge to merit an entire section in the article. Unless someone objects, I'll remove the section later today or tomorrow. —Mr. Granger (talk · contribs) 13:51, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

I removed the information from the article, but I was reverted again, without any talk page discussion. I've removed it once more, and I ask that anyone who disagrees please discuss the matter here rather than simply reverting me again. —Mr. Granger (talk · contribs) 11:45, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

I apologize for reverting it without discussion. And I agree completely that putting the section there without proper inclusion earlier in the article is inconsistent. Based on the citations that discuss Griffin he did play a critical though behind the scenes role in pushing the idea forward. I believe the story of his death is especially relevant to this article because it seems he died in a spurt of mania in which he dived off the roof of a two story building in the middle of the night following the initial viral success of the fad.Theonlybman (talk) 13:55, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

How about this: If Griffin was so important to the development of the challenge, he is probably worth mentioning in the paragraph that discusses his friend Pete Frates. Why don't we add a sentence to that paragraph that mentions Griffin's contributions to the challenge as well as his death? —Mr. Granger (talk · contribs) 14:04, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

Congress and critiques

User:Meatsgains has twice reverted (without discussion), as "not-notable," my addition of the following sentence:

The Washington Post reported that twenty-six governors of U.S. states have completed the challenge; one (Governor Peter Shumlin of Vermont) performed the challenge in a suit. A significant number of members of Congress publicized their participation in the challenge, including at least sixteen members of Congress who voted to cut $1.55 billion in funding for the National Institutes of Health in the Budget Control Act of 2011, for which they were criticized by Representative John Dingell and media commentators, who termed it hypocritical.

I'm not sure what is objectionable about either of these two sentences. Both are sourced to reliable sources and bear on the importance of the topic (such as it is). The length (two sentences) seems appropriate and proportionate to the rest of the article. Thoughts are welcome. Neutrality^talk 22:21, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

I removed the material, though well-sourced, because including this information leaves the page open to WP:COATRACK. We already have a page for List of Ice Bucket Challenge participants-you can include the Congressmen and Governors in that list. This quote especially, "including at least sixteen members of Congress who voted to cut $1.55 billion in funding for the National Institutes of Health in the Budget Control Act of 2011, for which they were criticized by Representative John Dingell and media commentators, who termed it hypocritical" is biased and is not related to the subject. Meatsgains (talk) 22:35, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

The point is to summarize the extent to which this phenomenon has become viral. Whether there is another place to individually list people is beside the point.

More importantly, how is this well-sourced material about the challenge itself and the response to it "biased"? This has been reported in a way that bears mention, and we are summarizing it neutrally and simply. Neutrality^talk 22:52, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

I agree with Meatsgains that the information about members of Congress does not belong in this article. The Budget Control Act stuff is not that relevant to the subject of the article, and it reads as if someone is trying to make a political point in an article where it doesn't belong. (I know that's not your intention, but that's how the paragraph looks.)

As for the information about the governors, it feels a little out of place to me as well, but I can see that it might have value in that it demonstrates how widespread the phenomenon has become. So I'm neutral on whether to include that sentence. —Mr. Granger (talk · contribs) 23:33, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

Someone is trying to make a point, but it's not Wikipedia. It's the (numerous) media commentators and others who have made the point, and it is perfectly acceptable to report (neutrally) what others have said. "X critiqued Y on Z grounds" is a perfectly valid thing to include, when relevant. Wikipedia does this all the time, for completeness' sake. In doing so, Wikipedia is passing no judgment on the correctness of the opinion. Indeed, we do the very same thing later on in this very article - we include critiques of the Challenge itself. 23:45, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

I agree that the phrasing is neutral. I'm just saying that it looks like Wikipedia is trying to make a point by selecting that particular fact to include in the article, considering that the Ice Bucket Challenge has very little to do with the Budget Control Act. —Mr. Granger (talk · contribs) 00:19, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

Here's some new wording. It removes the reference to Dingell's comments.

The Washington Post reported that twenty-six governors of U.S. states have completed the challenge; one (Governor Peter Shumlin of Vermont) performed the challenge in a suit. A significant number of members of Congress publicized their participation in the challenge, including at least sixteen who had voted in favor of the Budget Control Act of 2011, which provided for sequestration that cut $1.55 billion in funding for the National Institutes of Health, which conducts medical research. Commentators and medical researchers wrote that the Challenge underscored the politics and policy of medical research, especially the issue of declining public funding for medical research.

I think we'd be hard-pressed to get any more neutral and straightforward than that. Neutrality^talk 01:51, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

The way the paragraph reads is not the issue here. I agree, it is written neutrally. What we are debating is why "a significant number" of Congressmen who voted in favor of a budget sequestration holds any weight on the Ice Bucket Challenge page. The two subjects are far from being related. It seems you are trying to bring politics into a page where it is not necessary. Meatsgains (talk) 05:35, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

You acknowledge that the paragraph is neutral, and it's clearly relevant here. That's why a wide variety of sources (everything from the Washington Post and NBC News to a medical-school prof writing in the News & Observer) have commented about this angle. The challenge is all about raising money for ALS research; how such research is funded obviously plays a role here. It's not "bringing politics" into a page where it doesn't belong; it's acknowledging that the challenge has led to some discussion of the policy of ALS research. Neutrality^talk 23:26, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

I'm starting an RFC to solicit comment, below. Neutrality^talk 23:33, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

RFC

Question for comment: Should the following paragraph, or something similar, be included in this article?

The Washington Post reported that twenty-six governors of U.S. states have completed the challenge; one (Governor Peter Shumlin of Vermont) performed the challenge in a suit. A significant number of members of Congress publicized their participation in the challenge, including at least sixteen who had voted in favor of the Budget Control Act of 2011, which provided for sequestration that cut $1.55 billion in funding for the National Institutes of Health, which conducts medical research. Commentators and medical researchers wrote that the Challenge underscored the politics and policy of medical research, especially the issue of declining public funding for medical research.

Various arguments are outlined in the section above.

• Yes, that governors and congresspeople participated, No on the political opinionizing and pointy extrapolations. This article isn't about politics, although if specific opinions from specific journalists are quoted by name and by publication, those could merit mention. Softlavender (talk) 23:56, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

• Yes, it seems to be a directly pertinent fact since this stupid challenge is about raising money for health research and a number of senators who have engaged in the stupid challenge have voted to reduce funding in health research. Though I think I'd much prefer the page to be nuked. AlanS (talk) 01:10, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

• No There is already a page for List of Ice Bucket Challenge participants where the governors and congressmen's participation can be included. No again because this paragraph is making a connection between a simple charity act and how the Congressmen voted on a budget. It is a farfetched criticism. Meatsgains (talk) 02:56, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

• No For the reasons enunciated by Meatsgains. Duplication of content is unnecessary. DocumentError (talk) 19:22, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

• Comment: Now that we can see the refs (below), I advocate posting that lawmakers who cut funding to ALS but who have done the IBC have been criticized by WaPo, HuffPo, Salon, MSNBC, NBC News, etc., and by fellow lawmakers. Softlavender (talk) 00:51, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

It is a stretch to compare voting in support of sequestration, which cut funding for the National Institutes of Health, and the Ice Bucket Challenge. The National Institute of Health encompasses 27 separate institutes and centers, not just research on ALS. The lawmakers had so many other factors tied into voting for sequestration, not whether or not they support ALS. This type of material does not belong. Meatsgains (talk) 16:09, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

Once again, I agree with User:Meatsgains. The mere fact that something is mentioned in RS is not sufficient for inclusion. The content has to be sensibly related to an encyclopedia entry, which will always be a summary of the key facts of a thing. This level of detail and nuance is more appropriate for a book about the Ice Bucket Challenge. DocumentError (talk) 19:24, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

If something is mentioned in multiple WP:RS, that's not a "mere fact," that's one of fundamental rules that WP uses to establish weight and WP:NPOV. According to WP:WEIGHT:

Neutrality requires that each article or other page in the mainspace fairly represents all significant viewpoints that have been published by reliable sources, in proportion to the prominence of each viewpoint in the published, reliable sources.

This is the reaction that a lot of people whose writing is considered WP:RS had. Many of us here had the same reaction. I think it should go in.--Nbauman (talk) 01:24, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

• No. I concur with Meatsgains. Also, criticism of the Congresspeople is not the same as criticism of the challenge itself, which does seem potentially valid. Metheglyn (talk) 00:10, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
• Yes. These are politicians who are engaging in a publicity stunt, and contributing a small amount of money, which even in the aggregate will have a relatively small, temporary benefit for ALS research, but when it comes to their main job, voting our public tax money, they are cutting significant amounts of money which will harm basic research in medicine. Many people, writing in WP:RSs, think that is hypocritical and raises doubts about the value of the Ice Bucket Challenge. I remember several years ago when Newt Gingrich came to a homeless shelter in Staten Island, New York, on a Thanksgiving to "help" dispense food for a charity dinner. Critics argued that he had just organized a vote to significantly cut welfare, food stamps, housing, and other benefits for the poor, which would do more harm for the poor than any good he could do in a day at the homeless shelter, a photo op anyway, and therefore he was hypocritical. Gingrich finally didn't go to the homeless shelter. I think this is the same situation, with politicians giving pennies to draw attention away from the dollars they're taking away. It seems that many WP:RSs also have that reaction to the Ice Bucket Challenge, which makes it notable under WP guidelines. I think it would violate WP:WEIGHT WP:DUE, WP:NPOV and possibly WP:CENSOR not to include those many WP:RSs. It is not adequate to sequester the issue away on a separate page, which would be a WP:POVFORK --Nbauman (talk) 01:43, 8 September 2014 (UTC)
• No. As I argued above, the inclusion of the information about the Budget Control Act gives WP:UNDUE weight and gives the appearance of trying to shove a political message into an article that it is only tangentially related to. WP:COATRACK is relevant, as Meatsgains said in the section above.

If the information must be included, I strongly oppose this wording. The original wording, which attributes the comments about hypocrisy to a specific commentator, is preferable to using Wikipedia's voice (which should be neutral) to imply that the politicians are being hypocritical. —Granger (talk · contribs) 02:11, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

• Comment: Nbauman, keep your political nonsense off this page. The subject is about the Ice Bucket Challenge and your Newt Gingrich argument is not even relevant here. It just further illustrates your frustrations with politicians. This is not the page for this type of information. Again, please pay a visit to WP:COATRACK. Meatsgains (talk) 04:30, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

• Comment I wince that a passing fad is being given a permanent(?) Encyclopedia article. That said, IF this goes into the article it should be shortened:

The Washington Post reported that twenty-six governors of U.S. states have completed the challenge; one (Governor Peter Shumlin of Vermont) performed the challenge in a suit. A significant number of members of Congress publicized their participation in the challenge..... and then as briefly as possible say that there was notable criticism of those who had voted to cut medical research funding. Don't weigh it down with Budget Control Act of 2011, no $1.55 billion, no National Institutes of Health, no detailing of the argument. Those details are glaringly out of place here. If the reader wants details they can follow the reference. Also please don't chain 8 references onto two sentences. You only need to verify that there were a significant number of congressmen, that there was criticism, and what the criticism was. I expect that at least one of your available sources is good enough to cover all of that using just one ref. Alsee (talk) 14:11, 13 September 2014 (UTC)

• Comment Traffic has significantly slowed to this RfC. An admin should get involved fairly soon for closure. Meatsgains (talk) 23:20, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

References

Participants may only be challenged to the Ice Bucket Challenge once

The original rules of this viral fundraising challenge did in fact mention that, aside from donating at least $10 if you choose to participate and at least $100 if you decide to opt out, participants could only be challenged ONCE. This is to eliminate a single individual from being pressured by peers to donate more money than they are capable and for various other smaller reasons. An individual that has already participated may donate more to the charity as they see fit, but cannot be challenged to the actual "ice bucket challenge" multiple times.

How many people can be nominated?

How many people can you nominate for the challenge??

Someone has put obscene photos of an individual masturbating

These are not relevant to the subject and should not be seen by children who might go to this page.

73.184.66.70 (talk) 00:17, 26 August 2014 (UTC)Bill C

Thanks for bringing it up. The vandalism has been removed and the user who did it has been blocked. Howicus (Did I mess up?) 00:40, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 26 August 2014

the page has been vandalized

Jael Pendragon (talk) 00:17, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for bringing it up—the vandalism has been removed. —Mr. Granger (talk · contribs) 00:31, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

Lou Gehrig fact check

Under the Effects Section....

He "publicly revealed his diagnosis back in the 1940s" is incorrect and somewhat misleading. H71.54.132.20 (talk) 12:40, 26 August 2014 (UTC)e announced his condition in 1939, almost immedatley after being diagnosed. Saying that he publicly revealed his diagnosis can make one believe that he hid it from the public for some time. Thank you.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lou_Gehrig

71.54.132.20 (talk) 12:40, 26 August 2014 (UTC) Joel J.

Risks and deaths should be mentioned

With 2 confirmed deaths directly related to the challenge and more than 10 rumoured deaths, should there not be at least a mention of the danger involved in the challenge?

There is. See the fifth paragraph of the "Criticism" section. —Mr. Granger (talk · contribs) 15:13, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

Currently only one death mentioned relating to a man having a heart attack in New Zealand. Please can someone add information from and a link to this bbc article http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-edinburgh-east-fife-28925759. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.225.243.215 (talk) 18:22, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

It's rather vague. It says "but it is thought the incident is connected to the ice bucket challenge." There's no explanation or even a theory, as to how it is linked. So not sure it should really be mentioned. Martinevans123 (talk) 18:39, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 26 August 2014

Please change "Whether people choose to donate, perform the challenge, or do both varies. In one version of the challenge, the participant is expected to donate $10 if they have poured the ice water over their head or donate $100 if they have not.[24] In another version, dumping the ice water over the participant's head is done in lieu of any donation, which has led to some criticisms of the challenge being a form of "slacktivism".[25] Individual videos have included the participant saying that they will be making a donation along with performing the challenge." to "Whether people choose to donate only or perform the challenge - they should still donate to the cause. The difference in the actions is only a matter of the amount donated. The participant is expected to donate $10 if they have poured the ice water over their head or donate $100 if they have not. There is another version of the challenge where dumping the ice water over the participant's head is done in lieu of any donation, which has led to some criticisms of the challenge being a form of "slacktivism".[25] Individual videos have included the participant saying that they will be making a donation along with performing the challenge."

Echlebek (talk) 19:23, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

Not done: The first sentence – "Whether people choose to donate only or perform the challenge - they should still donate to the cause" – looks like it's telling people what to do. Wikipedia's role is to report what reliable sources have said about the challenge, not to tell readers how they should complete it. —Mr. Granger (talk · contribs) 20:20, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 27 August 2014

change x to y Echlebek (talk) 16:18, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

Not done: Please specify what you want to be changed and what you want it changed to. Jinkinson talk to me 16:27, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 28 August 2014

Please change William Foxton to Willard Foxton.

62.254.103.132 (talk) 09:04, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

Done as per source. thanks. Cannolis (talk) 09:17, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

Should Scams go in Effects or Criticism

I initially put the scams in the Effect section as opposed to the criticism section, my reasoning was that no one was especially criticising the challenge for the scams that arose from it. Rather it's just the effect of something going viral. Someone has since moved the scams to the criticism section. I was wondering if we could get some consensus on the manner? --Deathawk (talk) 20:13, 29 August 2014 (UTC)--Deathawk (talk) 20:13, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

I would support moving the scam information to the "Effects" section. The Challenge is not begin criticized for the scammers. It is instead an effect–scammers took advantage of an opportunity. Meatsgains (talk) 23:40, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

ALS Foundation Netherlands

For the table at the end of the Effects section; ALS Foundation Netherlands: €1m --82.136.210.153 (talk) 11:38, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

References

 Done. Now added, thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 11:52, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

A Werldwayd proposal: Ice Bucket Challenge Video Contest

I find the specific choice of the videos of certain individuals very promotional to the individuals performing the Ice Bucket Challenge. As a neutral medium, we should avoid such preferential treatment. Wikipedia can illustrate the "Ice Bucket Challenge" best by displaying a completely unknown non-famous individual's 30-second video footage. The individual would identify himself/herself by first name only on the video and then nominate three other equally non-famous individuals (again only first name basis). Of course details of full name and contact would be included by sender, but such detail or location would not be used on the page. Note: This is just a suggestion by one single Wikipedia editor (User:werldwayd) on his personal initiative and presently does not have a go-ahead from Wikipedia / Wikimedia. Copy of this will be posted on User talk:Jimbo Wales as well for speeding up the process of approval and conditions. werldwayd (talk) 16:44, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

As the editor who uploaded the three videos currently included in this article, I'd like to say that I did not select the videos in order to promote anyone. I simply uploaded every Ice Bucket Challenge video I could find that (a) featured a notable person and (b) was licensed under a Commons-compatible license. —Mr. Granger (talk · contribs) 16:53, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

With a Wikipedia directly commissioned contest, hopefully with immediate effect, of course the terms would include a Commons-compatible license for using the winning footage on our page. This will create great momentum for Wikipedia / Wikimedia's direct involvement and commitment in aid of a great cause. It is also a great incentive for our readers to be more involved in Wikipedia. werldwayd (talk) 17:17, 31 August 2014 (UTC) werldwayd (talk) 17:21, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

Speeding up? I admire your optimism. But I suspect that Jimbo might well support the completely unknown non-famous approach. How much will Wikimedia donate, I wonder. Martinevans123 (talk) 17:20, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

Now that is a very good idea.--Launchballer 22:31, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

That's a brilliant idea to be honest - Don't get me wrong I appreciate Mr. Grangers work but it's bound to cause shit between everyone anyway, Also there's an editor here who done it & shoved it on YT could always ask him ? I have no idea what his name was but It was Tony something I think, –Davey2010 • (talk) 23:15, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

User:TonyTheTiger's video, which can be found here, doesn't appear to be licensed under a Commons-compatible license. (Of course, we could always ask him to release it under an acceptable license.) —Mr. Granger (talk · contribs) 01:16, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Bingo that's the one, It's worth a shot I guess :) –Davey2010 • (talk) 01:28, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

LOL, fame at last, Tony. Softlavender (talk) 02:23, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

I don't understand the purpose of the request. My video has been removed from this article.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 03:29, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Instead of the link we had hoped you might consider uploading the video to commons or even here so the actual video would be in the article instead of just the YT link :), I will say however The YT link that was added shouldn't of even been removed!, –Davey2010 • (talk) 03:35, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

I have been topic banned for self-promotion in the past, so I am not really anxious to post my video to commons, but I would be pleased if you saw fit to restore my el to the article.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 04:07, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Damn topic bans ought to be banned entirely!, Ah well thanks for replying anyway :), Since you're topic banned I could also be accused of promoting you?, I wouldn't put it past some dick to take me to the dramah board over it, –Davey2010 • (talk) 04:28, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

I think my topic ban may have expired or been undone, but I was topic banned. But, I don't necessarily think wikimedia needs a copy of my IBC. You might end up in a war over my el, but there is no reason for you to be banned unless they feel you are a WP:SOCK of me. If you are an independent person without any conflict of interest toward me (If I were paying you in some form of compensation), you could not be banned.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 04:51, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

I oppose adding an external link to any specific Ice Bucket Challenge video, unless that video is of particular importance to the history of the challenge. There are plenty of freely usable Ice Bucket Challenge videos, so we shouldn't need to use non-free ones as examples. —Mr. Granger (talk · contribs) 10:52, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Is there a way for me to make something on YouTube available under a Commons-compatible license?--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 16:09, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Yes—some Youtube videos are labeled with a Creative Commons Attribution license. Of course, you could always upload the video to Commons yourself instead, but I suppose that would be in violation of your ban. —Mr. Granger (talk · contribs) 17:01, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Although, parts or all of my ban have concluded (I don't recall), I have simply relicensed the YouTube video. I don't know it if makes it any more relevant as an EL, but it is now freely licensed.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 03:08, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. I've uploaded the video to Commons in the category commons:Category:Ice Bucket Challenge, along with a few other videos of non-notable Ice Bucket Challenge participants. I still think that videos of notable people are better for the article than videos of non-notable people, but if anyone other than TonyTheTiger (whose topic ban is apparently still active) chooses to add videos of non-notable people, I won't revert. —Mr. Granger (talk · contribs) 12:43, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

Note that the bans were lifted a year and a half ago according to Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard#Topic_bans (Original edits this and this).--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 20:25, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

Davey2010 and Softlavender I am just callling your attention to the newly available verions of my challenge.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 13:16, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

I would also be happy to find and upload more Ice Bucket Challenge videos if anyone thinks that would be helpful. —Mr. Granger (talk · contribs) 12:43, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

Mr. Granger, how do you rip video from YouTube to .webm format?--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 13:16, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

I usually use http://en.savefrom.net/ . —Mr. Granger (talk · contribs) 13:18, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

Snopes Reference

I removed the Snopes reference of "refuted". If it were properly worded, possibly re-add but it doesn't actually refute the comment, just the particular email that references it. Furthermore, Snopes write-up actually somewhat confirms the email/quote they are "refuting". Since the quote Snopes refute doesn't clearly define "what we donated for" (and the financial statements confirm that 27%/28% of their raised money actually reaches the research phase and that is the assumed reason to donate for a cure) in Snopes referenced financial statements on ALSA's site, it's not actually refuting the claim. To include it here as refuting majority of claims would be incorrect. The financial statements here show the same assertion: http://www.alsa.org/about-us/financial-information.html Thus, the claim that the majority of donations do not go to research is correct, by ALSA's own admission. Seola (talk) 21:38, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

ALSA doesn't claim to be a purely research organization, they also do advocacy, care, and education. However any donor can specify that they want their donation to only be used for research. You can even specify that you don't want it used for animal testing or stem cell research, I believe. --PaulWicks (talk) 09:09, 3 September 2014 (UTC)

While I do not disagree overall with you, the original reference stated Snopes "refuted" the claim that the majority of the money didn't go to research. It doesn't. That's according to the ALSA. Since this is 1) not the ALSA page and 2) the reference doesn't actually refute the assertion, but confirmed it, it was inappropriate in the page. One can state what the ALSA does/claims to do in more detail on their page. Therefore, the criticism that the funding isn't actually going to research also is still upheld. Seola (talk) 20:32, 3 September 2014 (UTC)

Politifact says the claim that 73% of donations to the association go to "fundraising, overhead, executive salaries, and external donations" is "pants on fire" false: [5] I'd say more but I'm in a hurry at the moment. Jinkinson talk to me 12:57, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

Which has nothing to do with the criticism that the majority of funds don't go to research. Politifact doesn't matter in any event. ALSA's own website documents those numbers. Arguing that a 3rd party site "refutes" the claims of the very foundation that we are discussing is absurdity. You don't even need to go into their IRS Pubs, they have a handy pie chart for you. Seola (talk) 21:18, 6 September 2014 (UTC)

Right, most donations don't go to research. But that doesn't mean they don't go to a worthy cause people expect to be donating to when they give to any charity. In this case, the other things the donations are being used for are education and "patient and community services." Jinkinson talk to me 19:45, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

Currencies for amounts raised

Is there a Wikipedia policy on converting / normalizing disparate currencies? I'd like the table to be more easily readable but with fluctuating exchange rates it seems hard to keep this accurate! Thanks, --PaulWicks (talk) 09:07, 3 September 2014 (UTC)

Ice Bucket Challenge

The Ice Bucket Challenge, sometimes called the ALS Ice Bucket Challenge, is an activity involving dumping a bucket of ice water on someone's head (or your own) to promote awareness of the disease amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) and encourage donations to research. It went viral on social media during July–August 2014.[1][2] In the US, many people participate for the ALS Association, and in the UK, many people participate for the Motor Neurone Disease Association[3] as this is the equivalent of the ALS Assocaition in the UK, although some individuals have opted to donate their money from the Ice Bucket Challenge to other organizations.[4] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Esther Fifield (talk • contribs) 16:54, 3 September 2014 (UTC)

Criticism

Here are links for factual information released by the ALS Assocaition about how they spend funding: http://www.alsa.org/news/archive/debunks-article.html

Also facts about funding from the MND Association: http://www.mndassociation.org/news-and-events/Latest+News/thank-you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Esther Fifield (talk • contribs) 16:58, 3 September 2014 (UTC)

Here's a link Questions about the ice bucket challenge to a news story that points out that the ALS Association had revenue of $19 million but only gave $6.6 million in grants for actual research. --Nbauman (talk) 01:47, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

Only? $6.6M out of $19M equates to about 35%. Is there a source that compares this figure with the same spend of other charities of a similar size? A large proportion is investments, it seems, to keep the charity financially stable. And who is to say that the huge influx of funds in 2014 will not mean spending priorities change dramatically? Martinevans123 (talk) 12:25, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

Beneficiaries

The ALS Association and the Motor Neurone Disease Association are far from the only beneficiaries of the Ice Bucket Challenge. It is interesting to note that there has been frequent editing of this article, and of this talk page, to exclude names of other charities. The Motor Neurone Disease Association would like us to think that they are a UK-wide charity. They are not. They only function in England and Wales. I propose a separate section headed beneficiaries allowing listing of all benficiaries. Shipsview (talk) 08:33, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

It is very serious matter if there is a deliberate omitting of other charities through edits. Can you give examples of such edits? And which ones can be reintroduced if they actually receive significant funds themselves because of the campaign? werldwayd (talk) 21:36, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

Finding revisions in an article with so many posts is not easy, but two were on 19th August at 15:37 and 25th August at 22:00.

Two UK based charities are Macmillan Cancer Support http://www.macmillan.org.uk/ice-nominate.html about which there has been much news coverage, and MND Scotland http://www.mndscotland.org.uk The latter is a small charity which has received the equivalent of 80% of last year's fundraising income through the Ice Bucket Challenge, so this income is significant in that context. It is a separate charity from the English and Welsh charity, the Motor Neurone Disease Association. Shipsview (talk) 09:33, 8 September 2014 (UTC)