User talk:CKCortez

Welcome

Welcome!

Hello, CKCortez, 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! --Philip Baird Shearer (talk) 10:27, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WP:3RR

I presume that the alacrity with which you both talk pages and articles, comes from editing Wikipedia with IP addresses. I have noticed that since you started editing Wikipedia all your edits to date have been about depleted uranium‎. In those edits you have reverted the depleted uranium page four times in just over 24 hours. Although not this is not considered to be a direct breach of Wikipedia policy called the "three-revert rule", please note the sentence "Efforts to game the system, for example by persistently making three reverts each day or three reverts on each of a group of pages, cast an editor in a poor light and may result in blocks". --Philip Baird Shearer (talk) 10:52, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Basis of Big Bang

Has this material been published in a peer-reviewed journal? Please respond on my talk page. CKCortez (talk) 10:33, 15 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This material is a common knowledge among relativists around the world. I discussed this and the related issues with many relativists from many countries (John Baez, Lee Smolin, etc. and also with many from my university where I'm doing my PhD work in general realtivity). None of them had ever any other opinion so I assume it has been published in a peer-reviewed journal.

I myself don't believe it and I believe in strict conservation of energy. It is since I discovered in 1985 that the principle of conservation of energy in Einstein's universe predicts all the relevant observations and their numerical values, confirmed by observations with accuracy better than one standard deviation. I just thought that idea of invalidity of conservation of energy should be popularized by Wikipedia if this is what the mainstream science considers to be the best approximation of the scientific truth to turn attention of physicists to weak points of the Big Bang hypohtesis. Jim (talk) 13:28, 15 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What about hoax images?

Hola CKCortez. I left a message for you at Template talk:Hoax.

--David Göthberg (talk) 17:06, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Homeopathy

Hi, 24 Minutes after you announced a controversial edit on Talk:Homeopathy it was executed by a logged-out user who justified it with "Per talk, restore longstanding version because an unsupported controversial statement was inserted -- there are MANY more "particular" reasons". This happened while I was writing my response. In the interest of transparency I would like to know whether that was you or someone else impersonating you. Thanks. --Hans Adler (talk) 00:20, 31 March 2008 (UTC) OK, I just saw your implied answer on the homeopathy talk page. Thanks. 00:25, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Homeopathy article probation

I just noticed that both of us haven't been warned about this and I can do both of us with a single message:

The homeopathy article and related pages are on article probation, due to past editing problems. Please read the terms at Talk:Homeopathy/Article probation and be sure to comply.

--Hans Adler (talk) 00:40, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Watada Article

I like your compromise. Equinox137 (talk) 02:38, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked

Per Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/LossIsNotMore, I've blocked this account from editing indefinitely. Sorry. – Luna Santin (talk) 09:18, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for deletion of Template:Image hoax

Template:Image hoax has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. funplussmart (talk) 22:45, 14 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]