Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Softvision/Triplets Paradox




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

The result of the discussion was  Speedy Delete per WP:CSD. (non-admin closure) A Stop at Willoughby (talk) 21:37, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

User:Softvision/Triplets Paradox
Fringe theory which the editor has previously been prevented from incorporating into Twin paradox. He would like Wikipedia to provide a forum for discussion of his fringe theories. Somehow, I don't think so. Elen of the Roads (talk) 21:53, 6 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete it. Softvision (talk) 22:07, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Didn't see Softvision's !vote, which makes it WP:CSD. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 11:14, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete as nominated. TimeCube ftw! :) Crafty (talk) 22:36, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
 *  Premature . There are better ways to resolve good faith misapprehension.  I recommend getting User:Softvision to talk about the meaning of WP:NOR.  These things should be resolvable without resorting to a deletion.  Come here when the problem won't resolve.  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 00:17, 7 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Sorry Joe, should have added that I had had some conversation with Softvision, and this seemed the right process to me, rather than demanding he get rid of it or speedy tagging it. Apologies if it cut across another discussion.  No intention to be pointy.--Elen of the Roads (talk) 08:46, 7 November 2009 (UTC)
 * I'd prefer reference to failed discussions to be in the nomination. If the discussions are failed, yes, this is the right venue.  This sort of page is not OK, even in  userspace, unless, perhaps, the editor is extremely productive in mainspace on similar material, which he is not.  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 21:30, 7 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Speedy Softvision said earlier in the debate that we can just delete it. I get where you are coming from SmokeyJoe but that sounds like G7 to me. Gigs (talk) 02:51, 7 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep if softvision had remained silent on the matter I would say keep, but since the above !vote, confirmed as being genuine it should be Speedy deleted. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 10:55, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Speedy Delete G7 per Softvision's request above --  Phantom Steve  ( Contact Me, My Contribs ) 14:13, 11 November 2009 (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 page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.