Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/George H. W. Bush vomiting incident

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep but in no way was this nomination disruptive or inappropriate. Barkeep49 (talk) 03:46, 11 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

George H. W. Bush vomiting incident

[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)

WP:SENSATIONAL, and not WP:LASTING and not WP:CONTINUEDCOVERAGE. Just a WP:BURP. Note that George W. Bush pretzel incident was deleted. --- C&C (Coffeeandcrumbs) 06:42, 2 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of News media-related deletion discussions. --- C&C (Coffeeandcrumbs) 06:42, 2 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. --- C&C (Coffeeandcrumbs) 06:42, 2 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. --- C&C (Coffeeandcrumbs) 06:42, 2 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. --- C&C (Coffeeandcrumbs) 06:42, 2 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. --- C&C (Coffeeandcrumbs) 06:42, 2 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note discussion in 2009 at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/George H.W. Bush vomiting incident. --- C&C (Coffeeandcrumbs) 06:48, 2 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

What we note in that previous discussion is that the outcome was Keep. Per WP:DELAFD, "It can be disruptive to repeatedly nominate a page in the hope of getting a different outcome.". Andrew🐉(talk) 15:52, 2 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Andrew Davidson:, it's tendencious of you to claim that the nominator is being disruptive. Two nominations in 11 years, seriously? Assume good faith. —Brigade Piron (talk) 16:15, 2 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I attended that previous discussion and so consider it disruptive to have to go through this again. As the nomination presents no fresh evidence, being based only based upon false premises and vague waves, it does not make a case for the matter to be reconsidered. Andrew🐉(talk) 16:20, 2 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds like Russell's teapot. The nom has acted perfectly reasonably since it is logically impossible to prove that a subject isn't notable. All the policies seem perfectly relevent to me. —Brigade Piron (talk) 16:44, 2 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The nomination doesn't cite any policies; just waving at irrelevant guidelines and the crude essay WP:FART. It is certainly possible to prove that the coverage has been continuing and is not confined to tabloids; I have done so by providing a counterexample. Andrew🐉(talk) 17:34, 2 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
WP:SENSATIONAL and WP:LASTING are "policies". So is WP:NOTNEWS cited below by another. --- C&C (Coffeeandcrumbs) 20:08, 2 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

WP:SENSATIONAL and WP:LASTING are guidelines not policies. The first says that "Tabloid or yellow journalism is usually considered a poor basis for an encyclopedia article" and the latter says that "An event that is a precedent or catalyst for something else of lasting significance is likely to be notable." The topic has long since left the newspapers and is now to be found in numerous books. These typically report that the incident has passed into the Japanese language as Busshu-suru (ブッシュする). So, these guidelines do not indicate that we should be deleting this page; quite the contrary. The appeal to them is begging the question contrary to WP:FORCEDINTERPRET. Andrew🐉(talk) 09:50, 3 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
All of which can be covered in Presidency of George H. W. Bush. --- C&C (Coffeeandcrumbs) 14:58, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No, that presidency article is about 100K and currently seems to say nothing about this incident. Lots of details are bound to be crowded out of such a long article and so oddball items such as Bush legs, the Chicken Kiev speech and Decade of the Brain have to be covered separately. Per our policy, WP:NOTPAPER, we can have as many spin-offs as we want and need. Andrew🐉(talk) 15:47, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The presidency article is 48K and can spare to add 2K from merging this article into it. --- C&C (Coffeeandcrumbs) 21:30, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

BTW, it is not Bush legs that is notable it is either the Washington Summit (1990) or the Helsinki Summit (1990) from which it originates that is notable. The other two articles have good and viable WP:SCOPE. --- C&C (Coffeeandcrumbs) 02:57, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It's not clear what that 48K number is. The current size of the presidency article is reported in its history as "99,847 bytes". That's way beyond the limit suggested by WP:CHOKING while WP:TOOBIG indicates that it should be split rather than expanded. Andrew🐉(talk) 10:09, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
You do not know what WP:PAGESIZE means. Page size refers to the size of the prose which is 48K. --- C&C (Coffeeandcrumbs) 12:28, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, if we expand the readable prose from 48K then this would push that article into the category: "> 50 kB May need to be divided (likelihood goes up with size)". Bloating a big article is not sensible. It is generally best to keep our articles small and specific so that readers can easily find what they are looking for rather than having to scroll through long, rambling compendia. Andrew🐉(talk) 09:45, 8 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

FYI, I have only been around for about 3 years. I foolishly attempted to redirect the page and take it to RfD in August 2018‎, at which time I was told an AfD was the proper venue. Yet, I waited 2 more years after that before nominating here.

If that is disruptive, I should just quit editing Wikipedia. --- C&C (Coffeeandcrumbs) 19:59, 2 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom, but more so for WP:SENSATIONAL and WP:BURP; I do think that it has been covered in multiple reliable sources for almost 30 years, the Meacham bio and that CNN '90s doc semi-recently. Not to be too argumentative, but this was a lot more public--and was covered as more of a "real" medical issue--than his son's pretzel incident. Caro7200 (talk) 13:09, 2 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, per nom and Caro7200. —Brigade Piron (talk) 15:48, 2 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The nomination is false as there has been plenty of continuing coverage, decades after the incident. Numerous books report the details and here's an example published this year: A User's Guide to Democracy: How America Works. In any case, notability does not expire, especially for US Presidents. Andrew🐉(talk) 15:50, 2 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Widely noted in press and books. SPECIFICO talk 17:23, 2 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oh I don't know Lightburst (talk) 18:07, 2 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete This is a violation of not news. Some mention of it might be worth having in the article on George H. W. Bush, but it does not merit a separate article.John Pack Lambert (talk) 19:01, 2 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
NOTNEWS does not refer to incidents that have been referenced years afterward. It's not a world war, but it easily passes GNG. SPECIFICO talk 20:09, 2 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Time has shown this event was of fleeting importance and can easily be covered in Presidency of George H. W. Bush. --- C&C (Coffeeandcrumbs) 20:32, 2 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Andrew. Idan (talk) 21:48, 2 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Grant. Grant Faber (talk) A record of notable medical issues/incidents afflicting sitting U.S. Presidents is a topic of public interest. 01:54,3 October 2020 (UTC)

— Grantfaber (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

Keep: This was a big deal at the time, and contributed to the public opinion of Bush and his presidency. There was continuing discussion of the incident for many years. — Toughpigs (talk) 05:07, 3 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per above BlackholeWA (talk) 13:32, 3 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. I'm also very disappointed that longtime veteran editors are accusing the nominator of being disruptive with no evidence to support to their claims. Please assume good faith because otherwise, it looks like a case of WP:BOOMERANG to me. Jdcomix (talk) 15:39, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per above. I'm not a wikipedia registered user but this was a critically important piece of international news at the time. It was referenced for years on internationally popular television shows like Saturday Night Live & The Simpsons. Please do not destroy this important piece of both regular history and comedy history. 18:30, 6 October 2020 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.114.77.64 (talk)
Keep Coffeeandcrumbs has been trying to merge or delete this for awhile from a quick check of the article history. I really cannot fathom why. The article easily passes WP:GNG and had substantial and lasting coverage. It's a very easy keep. SportingFlyer T·C 20:41, 8 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Trying to delete an article after there is clear consensus to keep it is not conducive to progress. Every few years, this incident gets trotted out again in the media, most recently in light of trump's Covid-19 diagnosis. Bearian (talk) 19:06, 9 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as per Andrew's comments. Hughesdarren (talk) 23:56, 9 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep At the time it happened it was very notable and extensively covered. It is not different from the time a rabbit "attack" Jimmy Carter. Plus per previous consensus was to keep, so this repetitive deletion request is not helpful. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 12:56, 10 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Foreign_policy_of_the_George_H._W._Bush_administration#Japan or another appropriate article and briefly mention there. Human interest story of little significance in th context of a presidency, WP:NOTNEWS. I shudder to think about the number of articles of this kind we'd need for the current presidency, which seems to largely consist of incidents. Sandstein 19:52, 10 October 2020 (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.

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/George H. W. Bush vomiting incident

George H. W. Bush vomiting incident

zproxy.org