User talk:Aoidh

This is Aoidh's talk page, where you can send him messages and comments.

Please place new discussions at the bottom of the talk page. Click here to start a new topic. Please sign and date your comment by inserting four tildes (~~~~) at the end of the comment. Please indent your posts with a colon : if replying to an existing topic (or two colons :: if replying to a reply, and so on). For oversight requests please see Wikipedia:Requests for oversight. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed

Talk page archives (Auto-archiving period: 14 days ) 2011 • 2012 • 2013 • 2014 • 2015 • 2016 • 2017 • 2018 • 2019 • 2020 • 2021 • 2022 • 2023 • 2024

Hi Aoidh,

I hope this message finds you well. I wanted to reach out about a consensus debate currently happening on Donald Trump’s page, as it mirrors a similar situation we encountered during Joe Biden’s presidency. Four years ago, we agreed on a consensus to keep the lead sentence format, which I believe was both fair and sensible. Specifically, the line for Joe Biden was: "...who has been the 46th and current president of the United States since 2021." Looking back, I see that you were in favor of maintaining this as the status quo. Talk:Joe Biden/Archive 15#RfC: Should we say he is "current" president in the lead, or not?

I believe we should apply this same structure to Donald Trump’s page, just as we did for Joe Biden and Barack Obama before him, to ensure consistency and clarity. This format clearly conveys the order ("47th"), incumbency ("current"), and start date ("since 2025"), which helps maintain uniformity across presidential biographies.

Given your involvement and support in that earlier consensus, your insights would be incredibly valuable in the current discussion. It’s important that we uphold the same standards regardless of the officeholder, and I’d appreciate it if you could weigh in, share your thoughts, and cast a vote. Here is the current discussion and vote underway: Talk:Donald Trump, Superseding consensus #50, sentences 1 and 2

Thanks a lot, and I hope you’ll consider contributing. TimeToFixThis (talk) 07:53, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Though it looks like you went back and contacted other participants in the discussion, I have to echo concerns raised in this discussion at Amakuru's talk page (Permalink) about canvassing. This is not a neutrally worded notification of a relevant discussion but is Wikipedia:Canvassing#Campaigning. Any such notifications moving forward should not be written so as to attempt to persuade editors to support or oppose a specific outcome. - Aoidh (talk) 15:47, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, Unsure if this is the right place/person to ask, but I issued warnings to users that vandalised pages, reverting if no action was taken-and I found them using the edit filter logs. I did not research how it works and that it issues a warning immediately, and got myself tagged for LTA 1311.

After asking about the tag at the help desk, I was informed that I am running the risk of getting myself blocked or banned.

Realistically-and not trying to discredit the editor who was kind enough to tell me-how much of a chance do I run right now of getting blocked or banned? (3OpenEyes' communication receptacle) | (PS: Have a good day) (acer was here) 19:48, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@3OpenEyes: I can't speak for other administrators and so I can't tell you what chance you have of being blocked because of that edit filter. However, User:PrimeHunter's advice at that discussion is sound advice that I would also suggest. Editors tripping edit filters that disallow edits see a warning after attempting to save such an edit, so no warning is required nor should one be given. - Aoidh (talk) 20:49, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@3OpenEyes: Don't worry about "discrediting" me. I'm not the least offended that you seek a second opinion when there may be a block risk. I should have added that if you get blocked then you could almost certainly be unblocked by explaining that you issued the warning for an unsaved edit filter hit. I have been an administrator since 2007 and never heard of somebody doing that. The thought didn't occur to me and may not occur to others with the power to block but it's easy to check (log entry) when you hear it. If you want to reduce the risk of problems then you could explain the issue preemptively on your talk page and promise not to do it again. You have done it before without hitting the conditions which trigger the LTA 1311 filter. An administrator examining your edits might see it as a disturbing pattern. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:38, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]