This article is within the scope of WikiProject Food and drink, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
food and
drink related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Food and drinkWikipedia:WikiProject Food and drinkTemplate:WikiProject Food and drinkFood and drink articles
Delete unrelated trivia sections found in articles. Please review
WP:Trivia and
WP:Handling trivia to learn how to do this.
Add the {{WikiProject Food and drink}} project banner to food and drink related articles and content to help bring them to the attention of members. For a complete list of banners for WikiProject Food and drink and its child projects,
select here.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the
United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
Is there a way to suppress the "Amusement rides by name" category? I would not consider this subject an amusement ride by any means. ---
Another Believer(
Talk) 19:44, 27 December 2019 (UTC)
I am not sure how to get rid of it as it doesn't appear in the source for the page, yet I can still see it in the article.
Ambo100 (
talk) 00:52, 6 January 2020 (UTC)reply
Issue is the type of infobox used.
Template:Infobox artifact is for amusement park rides or attractions. I've put in the field to mark it as not a ride, but that defaults it to putting it in the 'amusement park attraction' category. I'm having a look here
WP:IB to see if there's a more obvious template but nothing's jumping out.
219.88.68.195 (
talk) 02:57, 6 January 2020 (UTC)reply
Easter 2020 sighting
I saw a copy of this in
Shoreline tonight along 175th St. (30 streets north of Seattle.) Trying to find the location via satellite maps & street view (which are from some time ago & don't show the machine) it looks like the parcel on the northwest corner of N 175th St & Ashworth Ave N.
Heading west & uphill, it was glowing outside a fence on the right side of the street, set back from the road in a little grassy field. It's an old Coke machine, but not the same as the photographs in the article. One large button for Coke on top and a couple of "Mystery" buttons below, and a link for the old machine's Facebook page. Price was still 75 cents.
Foliage Green (
talk) 11:03, 13 April 2020 (UTC)reply
@
Alexis Jazz: I went back & found the location again. Turns out it's not Ashworth, it's several blocks further east, NE 175th St & 8th Ave NE. The Coke machine outside the house on the NW corner of the intersection is visible on Google Street View, although not close enough to see the "Mystery" buttons. (Position yourself in 8th Avenue looking west up the lot's driveway, it's only visible from one spot that's 3 clicks north of the place in the middle of the intersection where you get 4 arrows. If you drag the little yellow guy onto the crosswalk you should be in the right spot.) I took some closer pictures & will upload them once I get the adapter I need.
Foliage Green (
talk) 06:41, 17 April 2020 (UTC)reply
It's a vending machine. And likely a PR attempt by Coca Cola.
Recommend deleting this article. — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
203.166.254.215 (
talk) 23:44, 31 July 2020 (UTC)reply
given that most vending machines are equally "mysterious" in the sense that they do not advertise who stocks them [cuz nobody cares...], this is not even a remarkable vending machine -- although in this case it's rather self-evident and obvious who the owner/stocker is, as is their motivations for keeping up the "lore". agreed this article should be deleted.
Mcslinky (
talk) 02:47, 3 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Should “mystery soda machine” be capitalized?
As in Mystery Soda Machine
DogsRNice (
talk) 20:55, 25 September 2021 (UTC)reply
DogsRNice, probably not.
MOS:CAPS requires it to be capitalized in a substantial majority of independent, reliable sources, which does not seem to be the case (e.g.,
[1] and
[2]).
Rublov (
talk) 11:23, 26 September 2021 (UTC)reply
More?
Is there any more to this story? It couldn't have just disappeared. Please do tell if you know to where else it may be. — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
50.54.138.111 (
talk) 20:45, 19 October 2021 (UTC)reply
It really did just disappear one day. The locksmith is adamant that they have nothing to do with it and have kept to their story this whole time. When asked directly they claim that the city asked for the machine to be removed because the sidewalk was being rebuilt with a new
bus bulb, shelter, and lights. I can't find any interviews with them saying that so there's nothing I can cite. I can't really add it to the article without a citation needed. It's a much nicer sidewalk now but the machine still hasn't returned.
Blueal (
talk) 23:47, 9 March 2022 (UTC)reply
Did you know nomination
The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as
this nomination's talk page,
the article's talk page or
Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was: promoted by
Bruxtontalk 14:49, 21 December 2023 (UTC)reply
This is my third DYK nomination, so no QPQ (yet). Thanks to
Epicgenius for the hook idea! —
TechnoSquirrel69 (
sigh) 06:36, 13 December 2023 (UTC)reply
I'm a new reviewer and would like a second opinion:
WP:DYKHOOKCITE: the source says "A rapidly shifting landscape has thrown a Capitol Hill staple, a mysterious and maybe haunted soda machine typically chained up outside Broadway Locksmith, for a loop. [...] Then, it up and disappeared back in June, leaving a sticker that read simply, “went for a walk.”" (
This other source, of higher quality, says the same thing).
This 2023 source confirms the end of the hook ("never returned").
Thanks for the review,
A455bcd9, and for going above and beyond with the source check! —
TechnoSquirrel69 (
sigh) 14:48, 13 December 2023 (UTC)reply
Initial review had it right: this is good to go. Nice work all. @
A455bcd9: please feel welcome to use this review as a QPQ. @
TechnoSquirrel69: I have moved some of your comments to be in appropriate chronological order and to not be beyond the exclusion area at the bottom of this template. Again, great work. Best, ~
Pbritti (
talk) 20:36, 18 December 2023 (UTC)reply