User talk:John C. Huang

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome!

Hello, John C. Huang, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}} before the question on your talk page. Again, welcome!

Contents

[edit] Your edits have been reverted

Welcome to Wikipedia, and thank you for your contributions. One of the core policies of Wikipedia is that articles should always be written from a neutral point of view. The contributions you made to Status of special relativity and Postulates of special relativity appears to carry a non-neutral point of view, and your edits may have been changed or reverted to correct the problem. Please remember to observe our core policies. Thank you. - DVdm (talk) 20:37, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Might I also add that, as participant of the Relativity WikiProject, you first propose the changes you have in mind on the talk pages of the articles? Thanks, DVdm (talk) 20:45, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Question and reply

(Note: I moved your question from the top of my talk page to the bottom of yours) - please follow the Talk page guidelines - DVdm)

John C. Huang (talk) 01:36, 20 December 2007 (UTC) May I have some explanations regarding that my notes did not provide good reason, please. Thanks.

John C. Huang

Please take some time to find out how the Wikipedia works. The pointers provided in the above welcome message will guide you. If want to take a shortcut, have a look at the policy articles "original research", "reliable sources" and "neutral point of view". Your contributions were not in line with these policies. Good luck, DVdm (talk) 10:09, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Odd edits to special relativity

Hi, please do not add meaningless content, as you did recently to Special relativity. If you want to experiment, you can do it in the sandbox. Cheers, Silly rabbit (talk) 00:40, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Please stop adding your original research to article talk pages

Please do not add original research or novel syntheses of previously published material to our articles as you apparently did to talk:Special relativity. Please cite a reliable source for all of your information. Thank you. Contributions like [1], [2] and [3] do not comply with the policies "original research", "reliable sources" and "neutral point of view". Please take some time to find out how the Wikipedia works by following the pointers in the welcome message. DVdm (talk) 09:59, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did to User:DVdm. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. -- Please do not write comments on other people's user pages. DVdm (talk) 18:09, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

I just tried to let you know personally that you may like to modify your article which represents your main issue. That is your own problem and I have no interest to publish my comment to your user page in public. To prevent others commenting your user page, you could put it as read-only article. :)
But you did publish your comment to my user page, and it is in public. If you want to talk to me, you can use my talk page, not my user page. And please be aware that all pages are in public. You would know that if you had read any of the suggested links in the welcome message.
Anyway, I had a look now at the comment you made. Um..., I'm sorry to have to tell you this and that I can't think of any other way to tell you, but I think you really have no idea what you are (and I am) talking about, and I cannot make any sense whatsoever from what you write. I think we are on entirely different wavelenghts. Sorry. DVdm (talk) 19:22, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

That was the best I could do, I did not have your email address. You could remove whatever in your user page like right now, no one would see it after you removed it. John C. Huang (talk) 19:55, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

I removed your original research from Talk:Albert Einstein. Wikipedia does not accept original research. —teb728 t c 21:26, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
Whatever you call it (discovery or research), you may not post it unless it has been published previously in a reliable source. —teb728 t c 23:02, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Please stop. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's no original research policy by adding your personal analysis or synthesis into articles, as you did to Time, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia.

Please stop. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's no original research policy by adding your personal analysis or synthesis into articles, as you did to Lorentz transformation, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia.

Please stop. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's no original research policy by adding your personal analysis or synthesis into articles, as you did to Galilean transformation, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. - DVdm (talk) 14:46, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Please observe the rules

You have a user page User:John_C._Huang, and this is your "talk" page or discussion page. Please refrain from adding material to the user pages of other contributors. Use their talk pages. Wikipedia is a place to provide readers with secondary materials about the works of established authorities (e.g., in physics), and not a place to publish the viewpoints or speculations of people whose work has not been accepted by experts in those fields. Please go according to the rules from now on. P0M (talk) 20:29, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] 2008 June

This is the last warning you will receive for your disruptive edits.
The next time you violate Wikipedia's no original research policy by inserting unpublished information or your personal analysis into an article, as you did to Talk:Michelson–Morley experiment, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Continuing long term WP:OR on talk pages. Wwheaton (talk) 02:40, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

I say this as a friend: LISTEN TO THEM! Wiki is a great place and if you try I know you can become a contributing part of this wonderful community of people. You just have to slow down and learn all the rules first. If you want to talk please feel free to contact me on my talk page. Skeletor 0 (talk) 16:39, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

John, as numerous people have told you, Wikipedia is not a publisher of original thought, and it is not a discussion forum for original thought. There is no place here for you to post your theories. And other people are not permitted to discuss them with you here. I see from your edit history that you have done nothing here but attempt to discuss your theories; I’m sorry, but if that is all you want to do here, you will have to find a different place. If you broaden your interests to helping to write an encyclopedia, you are welcome to do that. —teb728 t c 00:04, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] In answer to your question...

First off I'm not exactly sure what you are asking but from what I can tell you have forgotten that the reason why the physicists did not find the full amount of expected change is because light is constant. It always traveling at the same speed (300 000m/s) in all reference frames and is not affected by the speed of the observer or in this case of the apparatus. In any case this is the kind of original research that has gotten you in trouble before so please reference next time! Yours truly:Skeletor 0 (talk) 02:53, 6 June 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Skeletor 0 (talk • contribs) 02:48, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

I have done some more reading on the subject and I have found your answer. The reason why they did not find the expected change was because there is no ether. The experiment proved that there was no ether because the change was not enough to support its existence. If it dose exist it is not affected by nor does it affect anything. check this link and you will understand. 19th Century Ether Theory

                                                                                 Yours truly Skeletor 0 (talk) 02:38, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] MfD nomination of User:John C. Huang

User:John C. Huang, a page you created, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:John C. Huang and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of User:John C. Huang during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Tiggerjay (talk) 17:01, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

John, I am glad to see that you have agreed not to post your theories except on your user page, unless and until they are published in a scientific journal. Just to be sure you understand, please see Wikipedia:Reliable sources for the kind of journal where they would have to be published. —teb728 t c 21:07, 10 June 2008 (UTC)