Adielniv

Welcome

Welcome to Wikipedia. Take a look at the welcome page. To stay in Wikipedia, an article has to be about something notable, that is, of general interest. Click on Notability for an explanation of what that means. Also, it must give independently verifiable sources. Articles that don't meet these requirements are likely to be deleted.

• For advice about creating articles, read the Introduction and the Guide to creating your first article.
• You should not write articles about yourself, your band, your client, your boss or your best friend - that's a conflict of interest.
• Wikipedia is not an advertising service. Before writing about your own organization, read FAQ/Organizations.
• For experiments, please use the sandbox.

JohnCD (talk) 08:28, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of United nature theory

The article United nature theory has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Reads too much like an essay, and not at all like an encyclopedia article.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the Proposed Deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The Speedy Deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and Articles for Deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Favonian (talk) 08:29, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of United nature theory

A tag has been placed on United nature theory, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to have no meaningful content or history, and the text is unsalvageably incoherent. If the page you created was a test, please use the sandbox for any other experiments you would like to do. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard. Feel free to leave a message on my talk page if you have any questions about this.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Eeekster (talk) 07:57, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Removing Speedy at United nature theory

Hi there Adielniv! I saw that you added a {{hangon}} tag to a page which you created, United nature theory. This is good, but in the process you removed the tag requesting deletion under CSD G1. Even though there is a hangon on the page, the deletion template should remain there. But don't worry, this doesn't mean that the page is going to get deleted. Make sure you edit the talk page of the page nominated for deletion, located at Talk:United nature theory, administrators will look at your reason why the page should remain before they decide what to do. Thanks - SDPatrolBot (talk) 08:10, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

To answer your question:

"We tried a few times already to add this article that shortly explains the Grand united theory. Again and again the article we wrote was deleted automaticlly, altough we tried to do our best in writing just what it takes to explain the theory. This theory, of Grand united theory, was accepted in many universitis all over the world as an important one in all the departments of physics (a short search in google will show how much interest it's raised). We will be more than glad if the article wil remain as it is, or at least we will tald about it's deletation from the editor with an explanation."

Basically we've discussed this already at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chaim Tejman, which has a different title but is partly identical to the deleted version (so you might know about it). My suggestion is to just wait till the theory is really discussed more widely and then let others pick up on it. --Tikiwont (talk) 18:54, 1 October 2009 (UTC)