User talk:Saturn Explorer

I would like to learn how I can edit a section of a page that is not normally accessible for edits by the public. I am relatively new as a registered editor. Please adviseSaturn Explorer (talk) 13:36, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
 * I'm guessing you are talking about the lead section of an article? You can edit it, you just need to open the "edit" tab that is above the page title. This will open the entire article in the edit window. Hope that helps. Beeblebrox (talk) 18:59, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

Welcome!
Hello, Saturn Explorer, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful: Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or and a volunteer will visit you here shortly. Again, welcome! Beeblebrox (talk) 18:56, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Introduction and Getting started
 * Contributing to Wikipedia
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page and How to develop articles
 * How to create your first article
 * Simplified Manual of Style

October 2014
Welcome to Wikipedia. We welcome and appreciate your contributions, but we cannot accept original research. Original research refers to material—such as facts, allegations, and ideas—for which no reliable, published sources exist; it also encompasses combining published sources in a way to imply something that none of them explicitly say. Please be prepared to cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. Thank you.

See also WP:COI in case it might apply. --Ronz (talk) 20:39, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

Thank you Beeblebrox for the warm welcome. I appreciate it. Being new (and very busy)it will take me some time to learn.Saturn Explorer (talk) 02:20, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

Ronz, thank you also. Again, this will take me some time.Saturn Explorer (talk) 02:20, 30 October 2014 (UTC)


 * While the article certainly needs work, I think it would be best to follow the consensus to use chronological order. Please join the discussion on the talk page if you disagree or have other comments that would help us make progress. -Ronz (talk) 18:18, 22 November 2014 (UTC)


 * Ronz, thank you for your message. It seems a bit out of context to me; I'm not quite sure of your meaning.


 * Also, wonder if you can help me with something re: this page: Someone repeatedly takes down some of my text and multiple citations and replaces them with a baseless comment. This has happened a number of times. I would like to know how a stop can be put to this, and also how I might restore my copy without fully retyping it. Thank you for your advice.Saturn Explorer (talk) 23:26, 22 November 2014 (UTC) (talk) 23:23, 22 November 2014 (UTC)


 * I'm guessing that you are unaware of editing histories, edit summaries, and article talk pages discussions. I wish I had the time to introduce you to all of this, but I do not. Basically, there have been multiple discussions on your and others' edits, detailing how those edits violate our policies (as you were notified at the start of this discussion) and the general consensus on how to address controversy sections in articles. --Ronz (talk) 15:30, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

November 2014
In the interest of balance in the article on EMDR, I think the citations of several meta-analytic studies that have concluded that EMDR is equally effective as CBT should remain in the section, "controversy over mechanisms and effectiveness." The repeated removal of these citations while leaving in the report of the one meta-analysis that found EMDR to be less effective and in fact questionable may rise to the definition of sabotage. Likewise, I think that the World Health Organization commentary on the relationship between EMDR and CBT, found in the same section of the article, should also remain. These portions have been repeatedly removed. If there is legitimacy in the removal of the list of meta-analyses that conclude EMDR is equally effective as CBT, then I do not wish to engage in an edit war. If their removal does amount to sabotage, then I would like this to be noted and have appropriate action taken. Thanks much.Saturn Explorer (talk) 20:25, 24 November 2014 (UTC)
 * As long as you aren't aware of, nor participating in any of the discussions, why comment at all? --Ronz (talk) 21:14, 25 November 2014 (UTC)
 * This is the talk page for the article. Please note the discussions related to your concerns and editing.
 * This is one way to access the editing history of the article, in this case showing the last 50 edits.
 * Please join the discussions on the talk page. --Ronz (talk) 21:54, 25 November 2014 (UTC)