Deletion of Donald Trump's handshakes

Comment: While absurdly trivial (though perhaps not completely trivial, as this is notable as a power play - just as Hafez al-Assad's bladder diplomacy was in the 80s and 90s (http://www.nytimes.com/2000/06/11/world/hafez-al-assad-who-turned-syria-into-a-power-in-the-middle-east-dies-at-69.html http://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/the-assad-family-nemesis-of-nine-u-s-presidents) - it is a subject that is given quite some coverage in  and has risen to the point where opposing world leaders '''prepare''' scripted responses for said handshake and coverage. Absurdly trivial things, if they received  are notable
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS||WP:SIGCOV)

Comment: From what I gather from the nomination (which could have been more explicit about the concern, even at the expense of actual words) this article violates one or more  criteria (WP:!HERE is an information supplement to ). I have to agree: this article is in violation of NEWS/. Unless a person is primarily (or even particularly) known for his handshakes ''other than momentarily'', his handshakes don't merit a standalone article. This is a  of Donlad Trump. –&nbsp
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOT||WP:NOTNEWS||WP:INDISCRIMINATE||WP:POVFORK)

Comment: involves world leaders, Supreme Court nominees, FBI directors, etc. Unlike Trump orb, not just part of popular culture, but of politics as well. Meets  per review of available sources
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:SIGCOV)

Comment: Are we just giving up on being an encyclopedia? What is the benefit of this trivial article to readers?  is also appropriate in this case
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOTNEWS)

Comment: When I first saw this, my knee-jerk reaction was that it should be deleted. But I was quickly persuaded to reverse my position by the significant number of quality reliable sources where the handshake is the primary topic. It ''easily'' passes , it is inoffensive, and so it should remain
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)

Comment: While a certain shoe-banging incident by Nikita Khrushchev rose to myth level, Trump's handshakes are mere  at this point. In case a merge is preferred by the community, that should be to a new section at Donald Trump in popular culture: topic doesn't qualify for the presidency article
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Manual of Style (WP:TRIVIA)

Comment: The nomination is incomprehensible and the hostile !votes are classic |arguments to avoid like .  On the other side, we have solid policies and guidelines like ,  and .  And there is plenty of precedent as all the other presidents have whimsical articles such as
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:ATA||WP:UNENCYCLOPEDIC||WP:PRESERVE||WP:GNG||WP:CENSOR)

Comment: expanding on my "weak keep" from earlier.   and  (Trump orb) both feel relevant here, but are not acceptable AfD reasons.  The more relevant point is that there's no good merge target.  Foreign policy of Donald Trump may be the best one, as the Trump-Macron handshakes appear to have gotten the most press coverage, and the rituals of staged events involving heads of state are sometimes notable (Socialist fraternal kiss
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:IDONTLIKEIT||WP:OTHERSTUFF)

Comment: Seriously, odd, probably embarrassing, mannerisms of a person deserve an article in an encyclopedia? Have we lost sight of our mission?  , , , , . Sorry, I have yet to create the last three refs
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Manual of Style (WP:TRIVIA||WP:WEIGHT||WP:FODDERFORCOMEDIANS||WP:STUPIDHUMANTRICKS||WP:GETAROOM)