Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Proteans

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. ✗plicit 11:43, 2 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Proteans

[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)

This page about body language and flirting clearly fails to meet Wikipedia:Notability. It has had the notability hat note for 5 years, and in that time no one has disputed it in the talk page, nor substantially modified the page.

There are exactly two books on Google Books that mention it, one of them self-published in 2024 (and probably inspired by this article), and the other uses the term only 3 times. The word "proteans" is used in sociology books sometimes, often about racial identity, but I can't find any remotely legitimate source other than those 2 books to use it how this article does -- INCLUDING the article linked in its references, which does not include the string "proteans" at all, (and although that article uses the adjective "protean" in its discussion, it is far from the core point of the article. Regular internet users do not appear to use the word this way either, as a Google search for '"proteans" body language' returns almost no results. This article appears to effectively be disinformation, to be honest -- many websites appear to have copied this article to define the term.

There are only two books I can find that are relevant at all: Body Language by Glenn Wilson, 2016 (publisher: Icon Books). A self published book from 2024 (that might get the term from this article itself).

nhinchey (talk) 02:24, 23 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Psychology and Sexuality and gender. nhinchey (talk) 02:45, 23 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete: The second source cited in the article might be legit, and maybe the Wilson book (which I can't access...but if it only uses the term 3 times then maybe not). I think we need more than that to have an article. And if the 2024 book (self-published, possibly AI-written) is really based on the WP entry, then this is a textbook example of why we should not have thinly-sourced articles on every concept in existence; we are conjuring up reality, rather than summarizing it. WeirdNAnnoyed (talk) 13:35, 23 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: GScholar brings up several mentions of the term, but nothing about what this article is about. Appears to be associated with proteins. Appears SYNTH Oaktree b (talk) 22:32, 23 February 2025 (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.