Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ryne's Theory

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 of the debate was Delete. Enochlau 12:22, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Ryne's Theory

It is original research as defined by AFDP, Section 3 --Bchociej 21:32, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

• Delete yep, non verifyable for either Ryne's Theory or Ryne Hess on the oracle of the modern age, Google. --Syrthiss 21:34, 29 November 2005 (UTC) Changing vote to Speedy Delete G3 (pure vandalism) based on the user's other contributions (past and today). --Syrthiss 21:45, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

I am the originator of the theory. I dont not understand how it cannot be a theory? Also, I made this page at school so I am not the one who has edited and added bogus material to other pages, ever computer at school has same IP.

Wikipedia has a policy of no original research, so this material is not appropriate as an article here. In addition, I find it dubious that you are the creator of the article as (1) your ip is different than the article creator's and (2) they aren't even in the same range. The article was created by someone on cox.net, and you are on US West Internet. --Syrthiss 22:11, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

The IP addresses don't prove a lot. This is me 86.137.204.73 00:08, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

And this is me, too. 192.18.1.5 00:09, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

Just shows that unregistered users can be confusing... (this is also me). As for the article, unless the author can produce some verifiable evidence of these "people all over the world" who are "fiercely debating" what looks like an aspect of multiverse theory, Delete. Tonywalton  | Talk 00:13, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

I created this article at school and submitted it 10 minutes before the bell rang. I am now at home.

• Speedy delete - the anonymous poster (who should sign his entries on Talk pages) admitted that it was his original "theory" (actually in scientific terms, it is a hypothesis or conjecture, not a theory, until it has been tested). I doubt that the "theory" has been peer reviewed in any scientific periodical; the lack of attributions (there wouldn't be any for an original conjecture) and lack of Wikification do not help the cause here. If the anonymous poster didn't create the hypothesis, the article should be deleted as fiction. 147.70.242.21 23:13, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
• Speedy delete - This is just silliness really. Kreydon 00:27, 30 November 2005 (UTC)
• This article is not speedyable. It is, however, deletable. So delete. Denni ☯ 05:32, 30 November 2005 (UTC)
• Delete --pgk^(talk) 20:52, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

Im at my university now, should be same IP as the original article

• Delete per nom. Izehar 23:51, 30 November 2005 (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.