User talk:The real BDHN

January 2021
Hello, I'm Equine-man. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions&#32;to Office of the Former President have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse. Thanks. Equine-man (talk) 15:56, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Office of the Former President. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Equine-man (talk) 16:05, 26 January 2021 (UTC)


 * +1. The statement that you added to this page:  lacks WP:V. Please include references the next time you create such bold statements and see policies like Do not create hoaxes. Avindra  talk / contribs 16:13, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Office of the Former President. Equine-man (talk) 17:54, 26 January 2021 (UTC)


 * While you might have a point that Trump's "Office of the Former President" entity needs covered, either in the article on Trump or stand-alone, this edit to Former Presidents Act is unacceptable. —C.Fred (talk) 18:11, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

Your tendentious editing constitutes vandalism, and has been reported as such. Drdpw (talk) 18:16, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

Welcome
Hello The real BDHN and welcome to Wikipedia! We appreciate encyclopedic contributions, but some of your contributions do not conform to our policies. For more information on this, see Wikipedia's policies on vandalism and limits on acceptable additions. If you'd like to experiment with the wiki's syntax, please do so in the sandbox (but beware that the contents of the sandbox are deleted frequently) rather than in articles.

If you still have questions, there is a Help desk, or you can to ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. You may also find the following pages useful for a general introduction to Wikipedia.


 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Contributing to Wikipedia
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * Task Center – need some ideas of what kind of things need doing? Go here.

I hope you enjoy editing and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes ; this will automatically produce your name and the date. Feel free to write a note on the bottom of my talk page if you want to get in touch with me. Again, welcome! Equine-man (talk) 16:06, 26 January 2021 (UTC)
 * I am not a bot
 * Then you need to start discussing why your edits are constructive and not just repeatedly blanking pages on unrelated topics. —C.Fred (talk) 18:44, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

January 2021
 You have been blocked from editing from certain pages (Office of the former President and Former Presidents Act) for a period of 72 hours for vandalism and flagrant disruption. 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:. —C.Fred (talk) 18:39, 26 January 2021 (UTC) The definition of the office of the former president is factual and exists, no related topic extensions or redirects are warranted. to change or redirect is only censorship of the factual existence
 * Just because it exists does not mean it is notable enough for a stand-alone article. It could easily be covered in the article about Trump. —C.Fred (talk) 18:51, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

I see so you discount multiple newsworthy organizations declarative articles upon what basis?
 * The point is that you have failed to demonstrate that Trump's office is any more significant or important than any other former president's office. —C.Fred (talk) 19:00, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

No I believe that in your own artilce https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/President-elect_of_the_United_States you aknowledge the existance of the the office of the president elect which can oly in history be atributed to Joe Biden as it never in history existed without any demonstration that it was significant than any other president elect's, yet here we are. this is history and the choice to ignore it is tantamount to fascism and book burning by WiKi
 * There have been presidents-elect as far back as I can remember. Your claim is without merit. —C.Fred (talk) 19:12, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

Refer to the article and the Talk on the article referring to the creative text regarding the "Office of the president Elect" and how it was added anf you will clearly see the double standard
 * I don't see any discussion about adding that to the article, nor can I find a section heading about it. —C.Fred (talk) 19:17, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

Starting at this article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/President-elect_of_the_United_States  in the body the "office of the president elect is noted in bold then the talk tab at top this article leads here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:President-elect_of_the_United_States where it specifically says how this term was added as creative text in 2017. sine the only president Elect after 2017 is Joe Biden it could only be applied to him, this however does not negate the validity or future preposition. Just because Obama or previous presidents didn't have the foresight to declare an Office of the former president doesn't negate it's existence or relevance.
 * The body of the article indicates otherwise. —C.Fred (talk) 19:50, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

So what you are saying is to present this as an addendum to a separate article to legitimize it because it will ne be legitimized otherwise
 * I wouldn't phrase it that way. I am saying it is not notable enough for a stand-alone article, but it may warrant one sentence in the article on Trump (or, when created, the post-presidency of Trump). —C.Fred (talk) 20:03, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

I don't disagree with the methodology, or the process. I believe this will eventually become a stand alone article given time and unavoidable relevant exposure and the origin of this office that I believe will pass along to other former presidents. I will review other articles that this unprecedented action deserves mention in just like the article I referenced regarding "Office of the president elect". Thank you for the interaction and advice. Thank you C.fred
 * One other note about the bolding. Because Office of the President-Elect of the United States is a redirect to President-elect of the United States, that's why it's in bold. —C.Fred (talk) 20:45, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

The only redirect of this new and unprecedented Office has been to the former presidents act which I believe to be completely unrelated. The president elect status has no legislature to legitimize the Office of the president elect but instead is a construct legitimized through consensus. which is where my frustration begins and sadly ends. finding non personal relations to legitimize this will be more difficult than de legitimizing the office of the president elect, but this isn't the goal in my opinion that would be censorship of tis momentous creation.


 * Apart from the fact you are incapable of editing the page correctly, you deleted other page contents as well. If you feel so strongly on the topic, carry on with your draft of a page you already started and ask for it to be reviewed. Equine-man (talk) 21:05, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

User:Equine-man Will it be considered to be constructive? Who determines legitimacy or constructiveness? Is there discourse after publishing other than editing? I am passionate about freedom of speech and the hijacking of language, and I appreciate "constructive criticism" I would love to collaborate on an article that highlights this Office of the former president, are you interested, I'm willing to learn
 * I'm not an American, so I would not be able to help you with any specifics. If you continue with your draft, make a compelling article, with sources, written neutrally, then you could submit it for review. If it is accepted, other editors would also help contribute and flesh it out more. If it is not accepted, very often you would be given a constructive reason why it is not accepted. I am however, willing to have a look at it once you think it is ready for submission and I would be able to give you some points. Read some of the links I posted above in my welcome message to you for pointers. When you think it is ready for submission, click on the "talk" link next to my name to leave me a message on my talk page. Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes Equine-man (talk) 22:50, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

How will you resolve an editing dispute in the future? 331dot (talk) 21:08, 26 January 2021 (UTC)
 * I will Follow the outiled policies listed here Dispute resolution — Preceding unsigned comment added by The real BDHN (talk • contribs)

Concern regarding Draft:"The office of the Former President:
Hello, The real BDHN. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:"The office of the Former President:, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Draft space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for article space.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion under CSD G13. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it. You may request userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available here.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 17:02, 28 June 2021 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:The office of the Former President
Hello, The real BDHN. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:The office of the Former President, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Draft space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for article space.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion under CSD G13. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it. You may request userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available here.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 15:25, 3 July 2021 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:"The office of the Former President:


Hello, The real BDHN. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, ""The office of the Former President:".

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 deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz Read! Talk! 18:59, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:The office of the Former President


Hello, The real BDHN. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "The office of the Former President".

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 deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz Read! Talk! 19:38, 26 July 2021 (UTC)