User talk:SyntheticET

Welcome!

Hello, SyntheticET, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! - Eldereft (cont.) 04:09, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi SyntheticET! I just answered your question on Talk:Ecliptic_pole. Mattj2 (talk) 00:16, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Matt. You're correct of course. SyntheticET (talk) 01:29, 28 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

November 2018

Hello, I'm DVdm. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Time, but you didn't provide a source. I’ve removed it for now, but if you’d like to include a citation to a reliable source and re-add it, please do so! If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. DVdm (talk) 10:36, 10 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

There have been two problems with this account: the account has been used for advertising or promotion, which is contrary to the purpose of Wikipedia, and your username indicates that the account represents a business or other organisation or group or a web site, which is also against policy, as an account must be for just one person. Because of those problems, the account has been blocked indefinitely from editing.

If you intend to make useful contributions about some topic other than your business or organisation, you may request an unblock. To do so, post the text {{unblock-spamun|Your proposed new username|Your reason here}} at the bottom of your talk page. Replace the text "Your proposed new username" with a new username you are willing to use. See Special:CentralAuth to search for available usernames. Your new username will need to meet our username policy. Replace the text "Your reason here" with your reason to be unblocked. In that reason, you must:

Convince us that you understand the reason for your block and that you will not repeat the kind of edits for which you were blocked.
Describe in general terms the contributions that you intend to make if you are unblocked.

If you believe this block was made in error, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here}} at the bottom of your talk page, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Longhair\^talk 10:37, 10 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Prediction and Prophecy (November 22)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Curb Safe Charmer was:

This submission seems to be a test edit and not an article worthy of an encyclopedia. Please use the sandbox for any editing tests, but do not submit for review until you have an article that you want reviewed for inclusion in Wikipedia. Thank you.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Prediction and Prophecy and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Prediction and Prophecy, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 19:23, 22 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, SyntheticET! Having an article declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 19:23, 22 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

November 2018

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. I noticed that your user page may not meet Wikipedia's user page guideline. If you believe that your user page does not violate our guideline, please leave a note on this page. Alternatively, you may add {{Db-u1}} to the top of the page in question and an administrator will delete it, or you can simply edit the page so that it meets Wikipedia's user page guideline. Thank you. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 19:24, 22 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Prediction and Prophecy

Hello, SyntheticET. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Prediction and Prophecy".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. CptViraj (Talk) 16:45, 23 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: sandbox (June 18)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by RoySmith was:

Thank you for your submission, but the subject of this article already exists in Wikipedia. You can find it and improve it at Doppler effect instead.

The comment the reviewer left was:

It seems like this duplicates both Redshift and Doppler effect. It's not clear, however, there's much here that could usefully be added to either of those.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to User:SyntheticET/sandbox and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to User:SyntheticET/sandbox, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

-- RoySmith (talk) 15:59, 18 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, User:SyntheticET/sandbox

Hello, SyntheticET. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "sandbox".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! CptViraj (📧) 10:10, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

User page

As a courtesy I have blanked it instead of nominating it for deletion (WP:U5). Thanks, —Paleo Neonate – 08:35, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comments about an article's subject

Please do not post comments or discussion clearly about the article's subject itself instead of its treatment in the article, as you did here. I have removed them per WP:TALKOFFTOPIC. Fountains of Bryn Mawr (talk) 14:38, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Philosophy regarding wave mechanics: Waves in water versus electromagnetic waves in cosmological "Hubble" Red Shift

Waves in water are absolutely different from electromagnetic waves. It is a philosophical and rational injustice to restrict mankind's understanding of that difference to decisions made by whoever censors Wikipedia. The censorship comes from ingrained obedience to the kings, princes and other monarchs who dominated Europe in the previous millennium.

As a physicist with years of work in light, radar and radio in the Pacific, there is no mooting that difference. The difference is well known to physicists and many other persons.

Of course it was only a few decades ago that all understanding of radio and other waves was secret. Now, practically every child receives an understanding of the differences between water and electromagnetic waves before he or she graduates from high school. Meanwhile, quantum mechanics now presents a "wave" explanation for practically every phenomenon that exists.

One suspects that also is servile obedience to the secrecy of the monarchy. One cannot put the many details of the differences on a talk page. It is a doctrinal decision that will in all probability require considerable time to put into Wikipedia's otherwise wonderful contribution to humankind.Michael Lewis (talk) 23:18, 3 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]