Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Diet Coke button

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 no consensus. That is, there is consensus to not delete the article, but no consensus about whether to merge it (or where to). This can be further discussed on the talk page. Sandstein 15:24, 31 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Diet Coke button[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

I don't think this warrants a whole article, per WP:GNG. I suggest merging it with either Oval Office, Resolute Desk, or Presidency of Donald Trump. ChipotleHater (talk) 21:59, 23 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. ChipotleHater (talk) 21:59, 23 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, the page is well sourced and provides an "inside baseball" look at an interesting desk-accessory used by a U.S. president. Nothing wrong with keeping interesting articles on minor yet notable topics. Randy Kryn (talk) 22:19, 23 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note - there was a brief discussion about including this button in the Resolute desk article a few days ago. We landed on not including it but just ever so slightly. With all the additional cites here I could see it being a merge of a few sentences into Resolute desk now but am on the fence about that vs leaving it as a stand alone article. Basically I feel if we had more info on the button and its use in other administrations I'd be happy to keep it as a second article. If it is really just a Trump or Trump and Obama thing it may be better served in the article about the desk.--Found5dollar (talk) 23:24, 23 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Also, I just dug up images of the button on the desk under Obama, W. Bush, and Clinton. They can be found here. --Found5dollar (talk) 23:53, 23 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  - Good finds. With these new additions worked in the page could be a fuller history of this interesting feature used by at least four presidents. Since all four used the Resolute desk, a mention there would be a good addition and link to this fuller page. Sometimes little things fill in the patterns of history. Randy Kryn (talk) 03:48, 24 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Merge(d) per WP:TRUMPNOT, good god we don't need articles for every mundane little thing. I've added a paragraph (and one of the pictures) about the button to Resolute desk#Presidential desk. The idea this should be a stand-alone article is absolutely preposterous. Just because it "is well sourced" it does not need its own page, just because it's WP:INTERESTING does not mean it should have its own page. We can cover sourced, interesting topics in main articles in context! Additional information can still be added to Resolute desk#Presidential desk or Oval Office (which also has fine coverage of the much-better-discussed furniture and artwork) much more approprately than this. Reywas92^Talk 04:46, 24 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The page is very well sourced. Quoting two essays doesn't negate that. Randy Kryn (talk) 05:06, 24 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your point is??? I'm not trying to negate the fact there are sources, even if there were a thousand sources, when the content that we can write from them is limited to something trivial that can be adequately written in another page, it should be merged. Reywas92^Talk 09:04, 24 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep all of the reasons to delete or merge brought up are irrelevant as this meets GNG. SK2242 (talk) 06:28, 24 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- It seems you haven't read the rest of WP:N, because passing GNG does not mandate a separate article and does not forbid merging content.
Merge - it meets GNG but not all things that meet GNG have their own pages. A neologism (it was not called this despite existing in prior administrations) for a button on a desk should be part of either the desk's page if it's interesting because it's part of the desk, or part of the Trump administration's many pages if it's interesting because it was yet another wacky thing Trump did.49ersBelongInSanFrancisco (talk) 07:51, 24 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 08:16, 24 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Merge What a frivolous article. I'd say WP:NOTNEWS applies but not quite sure it does, but really just seems like one of those stories that gains a bunch of coverage because it's Trump and it's also ridiculous (imagine that). JayJay^{What did I do?} 09:15, 24 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It's just an intercom that presidents have used to direct the household staff of the White House. It's not really ridiculous, although the press coverage of it (and ipso facto our coverage) makes it look so. Hölderlin2019 (talk) 10:06, 24 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Merge - why on Earth does this have an article? Foxnpichu (talk) 11:56, 24 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Furthermore, I strongly back up what Seagull123 says. Foxnpichu (talk) 22:47, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep just because the topic is somewhat humorous doesn't mean we shouldn't have an article. It's received significant sustained coverage and should be kept. Elliot321 (talk | contribs) 12:48, 24 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - it now has a small paragraph and picture in Resolute desk (see above). Sciencefish (talk) 12:50, 24 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

As it should, as a related topic and link. Doesn't mean that the page on the notable well-sourced topic is then null and void, but just that it is noted on other pages. Randy Kryn (talk) 13:45, 24 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: The article is informative, well-cited, and interesting. Any delete votes really just seem to find it too silly, yet I'll remind that there's scores of articles on Pokémon anime, and worse. No, this article won't do as a mention in Resolute desk. People won't care to read about it there, and it barely relates at all to the history and design of the famous work. It's much more relevant to Donald Trump's public image now, as well as his personal health. $ɱ$ (talk) 16:26, 24 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Just because there are silly Pokemon articles doesn't mean we should tolerate silly articles elsewhere. If I see those articles I'll suggest to merge/delete them too.49ersBelongInSanFrancisco (talk) 06:15, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Merge As per above reasons. Sliekid (talk) 19:07, 24 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Merge: per 49ersBelongInSanFrancisco, and also because although there are sources about it (which seem to be fairly in depth) - and so I don't think there shouldn't be any mention of it anywhere in Wikipedia - I just don't think that giving it its own article is appropriate, for a mixture of reasons #3 and #4 at WP:MERGEREASON: the article is unlikely to get any longer than it is now, and it is given much more context if merged into Resolute desk. Seagull123 Φ 21:43, 24 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete The fact that we have no actual indication of whether this button existed even as recently as George W. Bush indicates that it is not notable.John Pack Lambert (talk) 15:55, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- @Johnpacklambert:We actually do have a ref for it existing in the George W. Bush presidency. It just hasn't been folded in to the article yet.[1] --Found5dollar (talk) 16:11, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  - Which does not at all change the fact that it is a super trivial thing and none of the coverage rises about passing news filler items, or POV-pushing biases.John Pack Lambert (talk) 16:26, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep but rename and expand I think what likely makes the most sense is to expand the article to encompass all presidential call buttons, not just this one. while I was digging around trying to find info on this specific button I found that Johnson had a call button that would say when his wife was approaching, other presidents had issues of their children pressing the call buttons at meetings, and Obama had many different call buttons in different offices. I think this expanded topic has merit with the specific "Diet Coke" button being one of many through out the history of the presidency. --Found5dollar (talk) 16:29, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Merge I started the article and at the time I started it, I didn't know that the button was used by (at least) three former presidents. Victor Grigas (talk) 00:24, 26 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep but rename and expand Merge would be OK if there were a suitable page to merge the article with. However the object of the article should be about the button, not just its recent use by President Trump. None of the proposed pages for merge appears to be suitable. Not Presidency of Donald Trump: It has been used by at least 3 other presidents, and visitors to the Oval Office have been worried that it might be the nuclear button, not just during Trump's tenure. Not the Resolute Desk: It has not always been on the Resolute Desk, and even if it had, it is not part of the Desk. Not the Oval Office: The button has been used in rooms other than the Oval Office, for example President Obama used it at least once in the Oval Office Dinning Room, which is a separate room. Tango Mike Bravo (talk) 08:56, 26 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This approach (also suggested by Found5dollar), seems right. The button (or the practice of having a button, as it seems likely the physical object has changed over time) seems both interesting and notable, unlike each specific use; there's no need for one "Diet Coke button" article, one "Approaching-wife button" article, one article for whatever Biden is now using it for, and the like. Perhaps this could be renamed Oval Office call button or similar, with space given to each president/use as appropriate. --Usernameunique (talk) 19:36, 26 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep but rename and expand as above, but I'd add WP:NOTPAPER as an argument against the suggestions that this should not be included as it's "mundane" or "frivolous". Expanding into the button's use by other presidents counters these suggestions too. Jonathan Deamer (talk) 22:21, 26 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. I can't believe I didn't put this together earlier, but LBJ had 4 buttons, or keys, in the Oval Office for beverages; Coffee, Tea, Coke, and Fresca. This button isn't even the first soda button in the office. The article should be expanded in scope and kept.[2] --Found5dollar (talk) 23:03, 26 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. I think the Donald Trump Coke Button is interesting enough to warrant its own article. Other "frivolous presidential buttons" could also be referenced on this page without renaming it. If we proceed with deletion, then I suggest a Redirect to Resolute desk which already contains a paragraph describing the button. RoxySaunders (talk · contribs) 00:51, 27 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep but rename and expand This is exactly the type of article that people come to Wikipedia for. A well-sourced article on a little known but fascinating subject. Thriley (talk) 01:46, 28 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
We should keep this. It is an interesting article. Super Virginian (talk) 18:48, 29 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, but rename and expand per reasons listed above (by Found5dollar, Tango Mike Bravo, etc.). Could easily be renamed to "Oval Office call button" and expanded to that scope. Paintspot Infez (talk) 01:30, 30 January 2021 (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.