Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Elements of Interaction

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 delete --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 15:30, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

Elements of Interaction

Elements of Interaction (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

A piece of chaotic original research, probably from the single real refernce, a dr. Wendy Guess. The rest of refs listed have no relation to the article text. - 7-bubёn >t 03:24, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Brontosaurus: thin at both ends, much thicker in the middle.

• Speedy delete. Not only original research, but also:
  
  Elements of Interaction Model was developed to describe the essential and critical elements that should be present in all successful, healthy interaction.
  
  The Elements of Interaction Model, developed by Dr. Wendy Guess, is based upon the construct that there are universal aspects in common with all forms of interaction. These elements, when utilized correctly will promote healthy and successful communication between parties.
  
  a vague and uninformative Elk Theory that is totally and irredeemably confused. "References" to general textbooks on sociology are not helpful. - Smerdis of Tlön (talk) 14:43, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
  • Well, by wikipedia rules, Elk Theories are not speedable. - 7-bubёn >t 15:22, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
• Looks like a hoax. As far as I can tell, none of the "references" mentions either the theory or Dr. Wendy Guest. Aymatth2 (talk) 20:06, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
• Wow. How did we manage to link dancing with police interrogation? I'd say this article reeks of original research, not to mention that the context is too vague to even tell me anything useful about it past a dictionary definition. Delete. Matt (talk) 00:18, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
  • "We" actually did not. See below. Uncle G (talk) 01:46, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
• Delete. Pretty far out there. Reapply when reliable sources actually mention the theory model. – 74  00:19, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

---

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MBisanz ^talk 00:01, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

• Delete. I'm going with synthesis of information. --Dennis The Tiger (Rawr and stuff) 00:18, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
• It's not a hoax, and it's not a synthesis by Wikipedia editors. Wendy Guess, also known as Wendy Guess-Hall, is a real person. According to her autobiography, at least, she has a doctorate in Dance and Health Education, and is a qualified P.E. teacher. And this is, genuinely, what she will lecture the world on, for a fee. However, there is no evidence that anyone other than her has acknowledged this idea and documented it independently of her — no evidence that the idea has escaped her and become a part of the general corpus of human knowledge. And although Guess-Hall may well be Dance Educator of the Year 2006, she claims no credentials in (to pick one example of the varied fields that this purports to link) sociology and this cannot be reasonably said to be a sociology expert speaking in xyr field of expertise. This is, currently, a one-person idea that has not been peer reviewed, accepted, and acknowledged by the rest of the world. And we exclude those. Uncle G (talk) 01:46, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
• Delete - It looks like an elk, and it quacks like an elk; therefore, it's a brontosaurus. Following the link for social dancing brought up an unexpected result, too; this is not sociology as we know it, Anne Jim. AlexTiefling (talk) 02:06, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Social science-related deletion discussions. —94.196.76.190 (talk) 08:40, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
• Delete - vague, confused and essentially meaningless. Reyk _YO! 10:57, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
  • PS- why was this relisted? Consensus was obvious. Reyk _YO! 10:58, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
• Delete While I agree that good social interaction is important this article is not very helpful since it doesn't really explain what it's all about or point us to any sources. Northwestgnome (talk) 12:01, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

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.