Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Synergology

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. Cirt (talk) 06:52, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Synergology[edit]

Original research Wuhwuzdat (talk) 20:39, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is going to be one of the rare cases where I vote keep. The article seems to be a translations of fr:Synergologie, where quite a few sources are provided. Google turns up a few hits for the concept, so it does exist. Although I personally cannot say if it is notable as a concept, as I have no indication to the contrary I say we should keep it for now. Passportguy (talk) 20:52, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Neologism and advertising masquerading as science. No hits for this word in Google scholar; ergo it is not a recognized subject of scientific inquiry. —David Eppstein (talk) 04:58, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This AfD nomination was incomplete (missing step 3). It is listed now. DumbBOT (talk) 12:07, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, weakly. One man's non-notable neologism for something akin to body language, the best that I can figure; which would make this a content fork of an already covered subject that seeks to call attention to his newly coined word. Judging from the list of references, they appear to be generally about communication, gesture, or body language generally, which would make this article original research to the extent that it is about one person's trademarked theory: Since (name( wishes that synergology be taught methodically and with firmness, he has established a trade name for his method. French language Google Books search leads to two passing mentions which might support a very short stub, but not this article; the rest are either the inventor's own texts or lists of recently appearing books. The English form yields nothing significant. - Smerdis of Tlön (talk) 14:06, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Having looked at the sources cited in the French article, and having looked for sources myself, I agree with Ihcoyc. M. Turchet's idea has apparently simply not yet escaped its creator and entered the general corpus of human knowledge. I can find no independent documentation of the concept.
I observe as an aside that the German article was discussed and deleted in 2007. Uncle G (talk) 23:44, 8 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, \ Backslash Forwardslash / {talk} 04:55, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions. -- TexasAndroid (talk) 12:00, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. The article itself says: "Since Philippe Turchet wishes that synergology be taught methodically and with firmness, he has established a trade name for his method." All he did really is brand his own version of existing methods. Niteshift36 (talk) 16:37, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Not notable, the term is a neologism, original research. Dawn Bard (talk) 12:25, 17 June 2009 (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.