User talk:Matthew Benesi

Speedy deletion of The Theory of Orthogonality
A tag has been placed on The Theory of Orthogonality 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, "See also" section, book reference, category tag, template tag, interwiki link, 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.

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 article 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 article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. TrulyBlue (talk) 08:17, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of 7d Physics
A tag has been placed on 7d Physics, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to have no meaningful content or history, and the text is unsalvageably incoherent. 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.

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 article 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 article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you.  Im per a t § r (Talk) 19:30, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of 7d Physics
I have nominated 7d Physics, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Articles for deletion/7d Physics. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. TimothyRias (talk) 15:55, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

To late, arrived after deletion. I don't think that the whole article qualifies as OR, in fact, very little of it does (perhaps the hypothesis about bosons, charge/demicharge, etc., but even these are simply small parts of the main point of the article). I suppose that at the very least, the mathematical parts of the article should be kept (such as note to astrophysicists portion, all the trigonometric relationships in the beginning of the article) as these are not available anywhere else on wikipedia, and they are all correct (just check the math).

As math is simply a set of rules and language, and all the math follows from existing theories and mathematical rules/equations, also accurately corresponding to the values of existing theories with the mathematical conclusion of additional dimensions (which are what the math describes), the mathematical parts of the article are not OR. Of course, maybe nobody has put it this way before, but math is math: it's only language used to describe something, and putting it this way could help the understanding of those who don't understand it when it's put another way. I've never seen the trigonometric relationship between de Broglie and Compton wavelengths explained anywhere (or brought up for that matter) and it definitely should be mentioned somewhere on wikipedia.

Additionally, the other trigonometric relationships should be mentioned somewhere as well. They aren't OR, they just are. Perhaps any reference to 7d physics as a theory should be removed, and it should simply be an article or category to hold the indisputable mathematical relationships that were described in the article.

wikiversity conversation
Hi, yes the page would be fine at wikiversity. I am an admin there and can use a feature called import to copy it. I would just need a wikipedia admin to undelete the page for a short time while I do the copy. It is preferable to use import since this preserves the edit history of the page. Just have a wp admin contact me. --mikeu talk 01:31, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Replied. --Aqwis (talk – contributions) 15:00, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
 * The deleted page and history has been transwiki imported to wikiversity at 7d Physics where you may continue to work on it. If you have a unified login you can use the same account and password at Wikiversity.  Feel free to drop me a note here or there if you need any help.  --mikeu talk 23:00, 4 January 2009 (UTC)