User talk:Dilka

The article Schlafen P. Michhaufen has been speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This was done because the article seemed to be about a real person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), or web content, but it did not indicate how or why the subject is notable, that is, why an article about that subject should be included in Wikipedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the notability of the subject may be deleted at any time. If you can indicate why the subject is really notable, you are free to re-create the article, making sure to cite any verifiable sources.

Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, and for specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for musicians, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. NawlinWiki (talk) 19:55, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

September 2008
Welcome to Wikipedia. The recent edit you made to List of mosques has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thank you. –  iride scent  19:10, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

April 2009
Welcome to Wikipedia. The recent edit you made to the page Taktayan has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, please ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thank you. —DerHexer (Talk) 16:48, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

The recent edit you made to Taktayan constitutes vandalism, and has been reverted. Please do not continue to remove content from articles without explanation. Thank you. SD5 (talk) 16:49, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

The recent edit you made to Taktayan constitutes vandalism, and has been reverted. Please do not continue to remove content from articles. Thank you. Recon Unit (talk) 16:51, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Taktayanism
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Taktayanism, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process&#32; because of the following concern:
 * Probable hoax. This is the only instance of the word "Takayanism" on the web.

All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Pontificalibus (talk) 16:53, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Taktayan
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Taktayan, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process&#32; because of the following concern:
 * Probable hoax, see Taktayanism

also: http://www.google.com/search?q=Taktayan

All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Pontificalibus (talk) 16:53, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Taktayanism
A tag has been placed on Taktayanism, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion debate, such as at articles for deletion. Under the specified criteria, where an article has substantially identical content to that of an article deleted after debate, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  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. Pontificalibus (talk) 17:04, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia. We welcome and appreciate your contributions, but we cannot accept original research. Original research also encompasses novel, unpublished syntheses of previously published material. Please be prepared to cite a reliable source for all of your information. It's either original research or a hoax, and thus doesn't belong on wikipedia Pontificalibus (talk) 17:07, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

About wikipedia
Please be aware, if it becomes clear that you're here to create hoaxes rather than to improve the encyclopedia, someone will come along and block you from editing. Your claims are very dubious- a legitimate researcher would publish their findings in some legitimate journal, not here. At any rate, all questions of legitimacy aside, please stop simply recreating content when it's been deleted for good reason. Take some time to learn what we do here before making new pages. Friday (talk) 17:21, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I have deleted the article; please don't re-create it. If what you say is true, the page is original research, which is outside the scope of Wikipedia. This is not to say that I believe your claim; rather, I believe that you have made the article up from the whole cloth. - Mike Rosoft (talk) 17:45, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

I've gone ahead and blocked you from editing since you show no signs of listening to anything that anyone is telling you, and you've recreated these pages many times now. If you want to contribute usefully, say so and perhaps someone will unblock you. Friday (talk) 17:47, 2 April 2009 (UTC)