Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hypergeometrical Universe - Theory of Everything


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.  

The result was Speedied as copyvio. -- Run e Welsh | &tau;&alpha;&lambda;&kappa; 12:00, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Hypergeometrical Universe - Theory of Everything
Original research abakharev 05:00, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete Original Research. Quaint and perhaps amusing, but not for wikipedia LinaMishima 06:04, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete Original Research. Quaint and perhaps amusing, but not for wikipedia LinaMishima 06:04, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete Original Research. Quaint and perhaps amusing, but not for wikipedia LinaMishima 06:04, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete Original Research. Quaint and perhaps amusing, but not for wikipedia LinaMishima 06:04, 1 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete, OR per nom until Dr. Marco Pereira gets it published. Right now it looks like it's probably just someone's class notes.  It might be a candidate for Wikibooks. HGB 06:38, 1 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete I would hate to be the one to break it to Dr Pereira, but the idea of an extra (fifth) dimension is nothing original (although it might have been an original idea to him). Anyway, it certainly looks like WP:BOLLOCKS...and it looks like we might be in for another treat some time soon (quote from the article): "The Hyperspherical Expanding Universe has profound Cosmological implications which will be discussed in another paper of this series". Can't wait!  Byrgenwulf 07:59, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete Someone needs to tell this guy what Wikipedia is not. Morgan Wick 09:37, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
 * If we repolarize the neutron capacitor, we can delete the article - listening to technobabble on Star Trek makes more sense than this fine example of WP:BOLLOCKS. Ruaraidh-dobson 11:36, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:NOT, but it seems to be a copyvio from anyway. Sarah Ewart (Talk) 11:43, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.