User talk:ARainbowofHues

Welcome!

Hello ARainbowofHues! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking

or using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! XLinkBot (talk) 05:39, 6 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Getting Started
Wikipedia Tutorial • The five pillars of Wikipedia How to: edit a page • upload an image
Getting Help
Frequently Asked Questions Where to ask questions or make comments Request administrator attention
Policies and Guidelines
Neutral point of view • Reliable sources Verifiability • Citing sources • No original research What Wikipedia is not • Biographies of living persons Manual of Style • Three-revert rule • Sock puppetry Copyrights • Fair use • Image use policy External links • Spam • Vandalism Deletion policy • Conflict of interest • Notability

The Community
Build consensus • Resolving disputes Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette No personal attacks • No legal threats Community Portal • Village pump Signpost • IRC channels • Mailing lists
Things to do
Be bold in editing • Help develop an article Pages needing attention • Peer review Join a WikiProject • Translating articles Cleaning up: General • Spam • Vandalism
Miscellaneous
Useful templates • Categories • Stubs User pages • Talk pages Tools • User scripts

April 2020

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, your addition of one or more external links to the page Jonathan Gallivan has been reverted.
Your edit here to Jonathan Gallivan was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove links in references which are discouraged per our reliable sources guideline. The reference(s) you added or changed (https://www.discogs.com/David-Usher-The-Mile-End-Sessions/release/2617739) is/are on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia.
If you were trying to insert an external link that does comply with our policies and guidelines, then please accept my creator's apologies and feel free to undo the bot's revert. However, if the link does not comply with our policies and guidelines, but your edit included other, constructive, changes to the article, feel free to make those changes again without re-adding the link. Please read Wikipedia's external links guideline for more information, and consult my list of frequently-reverted sites. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! --XLinkBot (talk) 05:39, 6 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: David Cohen (military)

David Cohen (military), which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

1292simon (talk) 01:18, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Anmol Narang moved to draftspace.

An article you recently created, Anmol Narang, does not have enough sources and citations as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. GPL93 (talk) 12:02, 15 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@GPL93: Thank you for taking the time to reply to me and for putting the article in draft space rather than just deleting it. I have a question that I've wondered before and would love your input. As I wrote this article on Anmol Narang I recognized that there wasn't extensive coverage of her for anything other than being the first observant Sikh to graduate from West Point. This was an impressive enough feat, however, to be covered in the New York Times and it was groundbreaking. When something is groundbreaking, even if it's only covered by a few sources (albeit very impressive ones) doesn't that make it enough to define it as Wiki worthy? It seems that we would want, in this encyclopedia to record groundbreaking moments in history, even if that person doesn't go on to be newsworthy at other times or to have a large, fleshed out article. I was debating this when I wrote it because I knew there weren't many articles and she's only known for one thing - but I'm not sure where we draw those lines. Love to hear your thoughts. ARainbowofHues (talk) 06:34, 16 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Currently, it is likely a case of WP:BLP1E as similar "firsts" generally do not continue to maintain persistent coverage going forward. The event of Narang's graduation is most likely worth a mention in Sikhs in the United States military though. Best, GPL93 (talk) 11:09, 16 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

thanks so much for the advice and help @GPL93:

Phil McGraw

I removed a sentence that you wrote in a good faith edit about "inappropriate contact". I think the basis of your edit is a misunderstanding about "dual relationship". Dual relationship is a broad term that includes more than physical contact between psychologist and patient. It doesn't necessarily involve physical contact. It can be as simple as the psychologist selling an item to a patient or as complex as a sexual relationship. In the Texas Psychology Board's document the only dual relationship discussed is McGraw's hiring a former patient without "proper separation between termination of therapy and the initiation of employment". If the complaint included inappropriate physical contact that is not mentioned in the Board's documents that are cited. Additionally, if he had in fact had inappropriate physical contact, the sanctions imposed by the Board likely would have been much more severe. Sundayclose (talk) 19:26, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there @Sundayclose: I appreciate and want to thank you for removing that sentence. I was going to eventually remove it as well, you just beat me to it. I am not sure why you think I added it. That sentence that you took out seems like its been there a long time, before I began editing here, I am pretty sure. Thanks again. ARainbowofHues (talk) 08:39, 3 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies for the misattribution. Indeed the sentence has been there for quite a while. I don't know why I didn't notice it earlier. Thanks for your improvements to the article. Sundayclose (talk) 17:03, 3 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Margaret Boyle

Hello ARainbowofHues,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Margaret Boyle for deletion, because the article doesn't clearly indicate why the subject is important enough to be included in an encyclopedia.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Thanks!

Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Darren-M talk 11:11, 29 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:57, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Anmol Narang

Hello, ARainbowofHues. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Anmol Narang".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! UnitedStatesian (talk) 18:59, 15 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked as a sockpuppet

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abusing multiple accounts as a sockpuppet of User:Changingguardsatbuckinghampalace per the evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Changingguardsatbuckinghampalace. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. GeneralNotability (talk) 23:28, 1 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]