User talk:Dubdogs

Welcome!

Hello, Dubdogs, 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: Dubdogs (talk) 08:10, 2 October 2010 (UTC)edit before the question. Again, welcome! Groomtech (talk) 08:07, 2 October 2010 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia

A tag has been placed on Omnieficacy, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the page appears to have no meaningful content or history, and the text is unsalvageably incoherent. - nice feel free to delete it.. ty

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion. To do this, add  on the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag) and leave a note on the page's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself.

If the page you created was a test, please use the sandbox for any other experiments you would like to do. Feel free to leave a message on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Groomtech (talk) 08:06, 2 October 2010 (UTC)



A tag has been placed on Monodextricity, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article that does not provide sufficient context to identify its subject. 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.

Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. If you plan to expand the article, you can request that administrators wait a while for you to add contextual material. To do this, affix the template  to the article and state your intention on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Groomtech (talk) 08:11, 2 October 2010 (UTC) I would request more time to expound but my elaboration would come in an order unforgiven by the template mod of poor emo wikiality. So please be extremely patient with my uneducated participation & simply transfer debatable eliterations to the disambiguation prooflessnessicities on the principal of their sheer metaphisicality.Dubdogs (talk) 08:24, 2 October 2010 (UTC) -obviously incoherent. please grow up.

New articles
Let me suggest that you work on your articles in a "sandbox" in your own user space: for example, User:Dubdogs/Sandbox until they are ready. Then you can move them into the article space. By the way, it makes it easier for others to follow discussion on a talk page if you reply underneath rather than in the middle of other peoples' comments. Please remember to sign your comments with four tildes (~). Groomtech (talk) 10:48, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Omnieficacy
I very much doubt that this is a concept known to the rest of the world. There are essentially zero independent Google hits, for example. Please read No original research if it's an exciting new idea you want to share with the world. Please read Wikipedia is not a dictionary if you just want to add a dictionary definition. And please read Wikipedia is not for things made up one day and Do not create hoaxes if you have just invented it for fun. Groomtech (talk) 10:53, 2 October 2010 (UTC)