User talk:John.Toth.uk..essex

Welcome!

Hello, John.Toth.uk..essex, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of your edits to the page Age of the universe have not conformed to Wikipedia's verifiability policy, and may be removed if they have not yet been. Wikipedia articles should refer only to facts and interpretations that have been stated in print or on reputable websites or other forms of media. Always remember to provide a reliable source for quotations and for any material that is likely to be challenged, or it may be removed. Wikipedia also has a related policy against including original research in articles. As well, all new biographies of living people must contain at least one reliable source.

If you are stuck and looking for help, please see the guide for citing sources or come to the new contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type   on your user page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Simplified Manual of Style

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 Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! —Torchiest talkedits 21:01, 23 December 2012 (UTC)

December 2012
Hello, I'm TheArguer. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Age of the universe, 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,  TheArguer  SAY HI! 21:16, 23 December 2012 (UTC)

Please do not add original research or novel syntheses of published material to articles as you apparently did to Age of the universe. Please cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. Thank you. - MrX 21:41, 23 December 2012 (UTC)

Please do not add unsourced or original content. Doing so violates Wikipedia's verifiability policy. If you continue to do so, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. TheArguer SAY HI! 22:01, 23 December 2012 (UTC)

Your recent edits
Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126; ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button or  located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when they said it. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 22:28, 23 December 2012 (UTC)

Talkback
TheArguer SAY HI! 22:40, 23 December 2012 (UTC)

John.Toth.uk..essex, you are invited to the Teahouse
i dont need to cite a Reliable sources im telling you the age of the universe is wrong if you cant understand that you should not be allowed to edit this page...

January 2013
Welcome to Wikipedia. We welcome and appreciate your contributions, including your edits to Age of the universe, but we cannot accept original research. Original research also encompasses combining published sources in a way to imply something that none of them explicitly say. Please be prepared to cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. Thank you. Ryan Vesey 15:24, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Reliable Sources
Actually do you require reliable sources to post what you are attempting to post on the Age of the universe page or any page. Reliable Sources are a cornerstone of Wikipedia and User:Ryan Vesey is allowed to edit any page as he obeying the rules of Wikipedia. -  Neutralhomer •  Talk  • 15:40, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes, and for this and your other edits, you won't find any (for starters, there is no "outside the universe"--but Wikipedia is not for discussing philosophy). Besides, those edits you made were not very well written; continuing to reinstate them will lead, as Neutralhomer says, lead to a block, since it's disruptive to edit-war against the consensus of other editors... Drmies (talk) 16:46, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of The Age of The Universe is Wrong
Hello John.Toth.uk..essex,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged The Age of The Universe is Wrong for deletion, because it seems to be vandalism or a hoax.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Thanks, Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 16:51, 9 January 2013 (UTC)


 * I agree with what everyone else has to say above, but, to give you something to think about: your ideas on this seem to be based on the idea that our concept of time is based on the Sun. That's not true: time is actually based on the radioactive decay of cesium atoms, which is constant throughout the Universe (and throughout the past of the Universe, as well). Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 16:56, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
 * That's not what Benny says. Seriously, John, don't continue this vein: Wikipedia is not for original research or musings. Drmies (talk) 17:05, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Your recent edits
Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126; ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button or  located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when they said it. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 17:01, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Nomination of The Age of The Universe is Wrong for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article The Age of The Universe is Wrong is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/The Age of The Universe is Wrong until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article.  Kinkreet ~&#9829;moshi moshi&#9829;~ 17:43, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
 * John, final warning. One more such article, or one more such edit to Age of the universe or anywhere else in an article or on an article talk page and I'll block you indefinitely (however long that may be). Drmies (talk) 17:56, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Moved from Teahouse talk
 The Age of the Universe Wikipedia page is wrong 

The Age of the Universe Wikipedia page is wrong

The Universe is not 14 billion years old.

whoever or whatever the "Universe" is.Time is a meaningless factor created by humans in relation to 1 spinning object in a "Universe" of billions and trillions of spinning objects.So time has no real relavance to the real age of our "Universe".And Its impossible to ever know how long the "Universe" has exsisted.

i tried updating the age of the universe page 2 weeks ago to make sure that everyone knows the age is wrong but someone kept removing my edit from the page

the age of the universe is wrong its as simple as that i want to edit the page and add my information without people removing it.

John.Toth.uk..essex — Preceding unsigned comment added by John.Toth.uk..essex (talk • contribs) 15:03, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Do you have a reliable source which disagrees with the reliable sources in that article? -- Jayron  32  15:17, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Our unit of "1 earth year" may well be arbitrary as you say, but the age of the universe can still be considered in relationship to it ("however many times as long as our arbitrary unit"). DMacks (talk) 15:55, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Here is not the correct venue to discuss this. Talk:Age of the universe is the correct venue, and the correct thing to do is for the OP to present reliable sources which can be used to verify the changes he wishes to make.  -- Jayron  32  16:17, 9 January 2013 (UTC)