Edge Rewrite
// HTMLRewriter · presentation

This page was redesigned at the edge.

Cloudflare fetched the original article and streamed it through HTMLRewriter to apply an entirely new visual system without rebuilding the source page.

// request.cf · coarse context

A page that knows where it met you.

Only coarse request metadata is shown. This demo does not display or persist visitor IP addresses.

Country
US
Cloudflare location
CMH
Connection
HTTP/2
Language
Not provided

Ray ID: a22dea5c8a24f4e0

Jump to content

Talk:Oculesics

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Add topic
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Latest comment: 3 years ago by ConM1881 in topic Changing minds.org?

Untitled

[edit]

Hello-

My fellow University of Oklahoma students and I are working on starting this page on Oculesics for our assignment.

We are not experts in oculesics, nor- as you can see- are we experts in the wiki format. However, we did post references for each section.

This is very much a work in progress, so please feel free to edit as necessary.

Our logic on making a page for oculesics rather redirecting to eye contact (as it did prior to this edit) are the theories that say oculesics also deals with pupil dilation, eye movement, and gaze. We also include the term "oculist" as a doctor or professional in eye health care.

Thank you,

Richard Suttles rs3262@hotmail.com

Mention eyes rolled back in disbelief

[edit]

There is also a look that is not mentioned. It is a combination of

to communicate "can you believe this guy?", "are you kidding?", "awful". Jidanni (talk) 10:47, 15 August 2016 (UTC)Reply

Ah: eye roll. Jidanni (talk) 14:11, 15 August 2016 (UTC)Reply

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 11:38, 8 January 2019 (UTC)Reply

Changing minds.org?

[edit]

I doubt the changing minds.org citations. I'm not sure how true the things are and in general, I think it would be better to have a more credible citation. 18.29.7.134 (talk) 23:41, 14 May 2022 (UTC)Reply

I agree - I have concerns about the accuracy of the latter half of this page, from the changing minds reference onwards. It seems very poorly referenced, and reads like an advertisement for a pseudoscience rather than an objective reflection of it. I also agree with Balnibarbarian (21/10/22) that it might be split due to differences in definition - the medical study of eye kinesics separated from the social (pseudoscience) aspects. ConM1881 (talk) 23:38, 9 December 2022 (UTC)Reply

Should this page be split?

[edit]

Balnibarbarian (talk) 19:20, 21 October 2022 (UTC) I'm wondering if this article should be split up into medical and social science parts, since there are different definitions.Reply