Owndapwn2

Welcome!

Hello, Owndapwn2, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, like Creation through realm leakage, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines for page creation, and may soon be deleted.

You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles. See the Article Wizard.

Thank you.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on this page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

• Your first article
• Biographies of living persons
• How to write a great article
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Help pages
• Tutorial

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! noq (talk) 01:34, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Creation through realm leakage

A tag has been placed on Creation through realm leakage requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consist only of external links, a "See also" section, book references, category tags, template tags, interwiki links, a rephrasing of the title, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content. You may wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

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. noq (talk) 01:34, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

Original research

I've noted the above-captioned page, which is likely to be deleted in the not-too-distant future, and I thought I'd explain a little bit about why that's likely to happen. Essentially, Wikipedia is not the place for speculations or theories like your original thoughts; we don't publish or retain any of that. Everything on Wikipedia is pretty much a quotation or reference to an expert who has already written about it somewhere else. To quote a piece from Wikipedia's policy on original research: "(Wikipedia does not publish) primary (original) research such as proposing theories and solutions, original ideas, defining terms, coining new words, etc. If you have completed primary research on a topic, publish your results in other venues, such as peer-reviewed journals, other printed forms, or respected online sites. Wikipedia will report about your work once it is published and becomes part of accepted knowledge; however, citations of such reliable sources are needed to demonstrate that material is verifiable, and not merely the editor's opinion." Yours is an interesting idea; it's just that this isn't the right place to post it. If you have any further questions about our original research policy, or any other question of Wikipedia policy, you can trace the link in this paragraph, or click on the word "talk" after my signature and leave me a note with your question. Best of luck with your future contributions. Accounting4Taste:talk 03:12, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

And those places will say the same thing. This is the best a 14yo can get without money. PLEASE just leave it up and flag it with the fact check thing I've seen elsewhere.

No, I'm sorry, that's just not going to happen. Find another place for this; if you want to keep the keystrokes, act quickly because this will be deleted in the very near future. Accounting4Taste:talk 18:16, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Creation through realm leakage

The article Creation through realm leakage has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Blatant original research and perfect example of a fringe theory

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. Nyttend (talk) 05:17, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

You deleted my page. Please review.

On 02:48, 11 February 2010 you deleted the page Creation through realm leakage For reason "A7" (No indication that the article may meet guidelines for inclusion) On that page, it was stated that it was simply an idea that I put out for input from a large audience. If there is a tag you can put up saying that it is just an idea, please do so and un-delete the page. It also showed no indication that it shouldn't be included for the public to have heard all opinions on the matter. I would also like to point out that the most widely-accepted creation theory is based on cloud-man making the human race out of dirt and ribs. You can't do worse than that. --Owndapwn. Thinker, gamer, troll, and ninja. (talk) 22:39, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

Hi Owndapwn,

Unfortunately, the article was "was though[t] up by [you] in math class after being reminded of Camp Lazlo after looking at a cube in [your] math book". Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. It's not a site meant to consist of theories people dreamed up in math class. Probably you can build your own Tripod page (or a similar web site) to show your theory to the world. I do wish you the best of luck. Best wishes, Firsfron of Ronchester 23:37, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

It's also the free encyclopedia anyone can edit. I created a new page so as to not interfere with any other page. Also, the source of inspiration does not make something any less valid.