User talk:DHeyward

Friday

17

May

20:07 UTC

Please add comments to the bottom

A page you started (2016 Nice terrorist attack) has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating 2016 Nice terrorist attack, DHeyward!

Wikipedia editor Pianoman320 just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

Thanks for adding this redirect!

To reply, leave a comment on Pianoman320's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

COI Notice

While this isn't looking at your editing... looking at one of the parties talk pages seems to indicate you might be interested in this.

Roy Moore

Hello, DHeyward. Thanks for trying to help at the article Roy Moore, here, although I would have preferred it if you would have first suggested the change at the talk page. (That was my problem with Anythingyouwant - that he made his edits unilaterally and without discussion, even though there is active discussion at the talk page about the wording of that very sentence.) Anyhow, I would like to request that you replace the odd term "teenage women" with something like "older teenagers" or "teenagers 16 and over". In Moore's case he freely admits approaching and dating 16 and 17 year olds (16 is the age of consent in Alabama) - in other words, high school sophomores, juniors, and seniors. I don't think many people would describe such girls as "women", and as far as I know, no reliable source does. That is exactly what we have been discussing at the talk page - the best wording to get across the notion that he denied dating underage girls (i.e., under 16) but admitted dating girls older than that. You can see several of my suggestions for such a wording at the talk page. Your edit could be at the least a good interim solution while we work out a consensus wording. Would you consider modifying your edit to something other than "teenage women"? --MelanieN (talk) 10:50, 26 November 2017 (UTC)

Not that anyone cares, but I’m the one who started “the active discussion on the talk page about that very sentence”. Anythingyouwant (talk) 02:17, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

Talk:Useful_idiot#WP:BRD

Please re-join the discussion. Your opinion is wanted, since you have not stated it yet. Thanks, My name is not dave (talk) 18:04, 26 November 2017 (UTC)\

WTF

Can you leave my lunch dates out of this, please? Thanks. Drmies (talk) 16:33, 27 November 2017 (UTC)

--and so your colleague is off the hook I think deserves a good "Fuck off, douchebag." --DHeyward (talk) 16:35, 27 November 2017 (UTC)

• I think you misunderstand a few things here, DHeyward. Your example was in incredibly poor taste. If you want to defend your friend, try a better way. I got nothing against Anythingyouwant beyond my disagreements about various Wikipedia things, and I certainly don't bring their personal life into anything, nor have I done that with yours. "Fuck off" by itself isn't usually blockable, but you're going more than one step further. Drmies (talk) 21:52, 27 November 2017 (UTC)

• Calling Roy Moore my "colleague" and insinuating I was condoning sexual contact between Moore and anyone, let alone children, was incredibly poor taste[1]. He is not "my colleague," I never said any of his behavior was "okay" or "more okay." I am not the one that took it the extra step. --DHeyward (talk) 22:34, 27 November 2017 (UTC)

• Unless you're a judge, Roy Moore is not your colleague. Anythingyouwant is your colleague, and mine. The thread wasn't about judge Moore, it was about Anythingyouwant. There is nothing you or I can do to let judge Moore off the hook, if he is on one in the first place; this was an arbitration thread on Wikipedia, where we discussed a Wikipedia editor's edits. Drmies (talk) 01:01, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

• Sorry but it appears you are talking exclusively about Moore until "Besides" when you mention Anythingyouwant. Your choice of the word "your colleague" as opposed to "our colleague" or simply "Anythingyouwant" when you had only mentioned Moore is only generously ambiguous. i don't think my reading of your sentence is farfetched. Here it is: It seems to me you want me to support the notion that between 14 and 16 something fundamentally changes in young women, that biological or calendar age works exactly the same way for every body, that since the judge allegedly didn't rape any of the women it was OK, or more OK--and so your colleague is off the hook. Tell me where I was supposed to divine a switch to Anythingyouwant. --DHeyward (talk) 02:01, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

• Sorry, I thought you read English pretty good. How you get to think that I would consider you a colleague of an old white guy in Alabama who's running for senate, a former judge, I don't know that. And I said your colleague since...well, I think that's clear too. I suppose your "sorry but" is the best I can get--is it common where you're from to retaliate over supposed insults by calling people "douchebag"? Is that making America great again? Drmies (talk) 02:49, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

I read and write very well. Apparently not as well as the tenured professor at the "Center for Kids who can't Read Good." I usually only use descriptive aphorisms when ... they, well, deserve it, Derek. Let's be clear, you insulted me on the AE page. You then took great offense at an allegory that didn't insult you. You then brought it to my talk page with breathless rage. That was when you earned it and you followed up with more innuendo regarding Trump. I'm pretty sure that where you are from is the place where Roy Moore is about to be elected and MAGA is at 80%, not my place. --DHeyward (talk) 03:03, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

I just got pinged here, this page wasn’t watchlisted. I already objected about as strongly as I could at AE regarding Drmies’ odd statement “that since the judge allegedly didn't rape any of the women it was OK, or more OK--and so your colleague is off the hook”. As User:Drmies confirms here at User Talk, he meant me. And I think it was just incredibly insulting and wrong. And I’m very disappointed that Drmies does not see two things. First, that the lead of the Roy Moore lead grotesquesly said he did not deny something that he did partly deny, so it was a dishonest fucking lie in the lead of a BLP, and I’d be just as outraged if the lead of the Obama BLP said he’s a cross-dressing bozo, because I edit Wikipedia neutrally. The second thing I’m very disappointed in Drmies about has to do with the term “sexual assault” and all I’ve ever said about it is that when we use that term to describe something much less than rape, like a butt grab, then we should say what kind of sexual assault, e.g. “Drmies sexually assaulted the dentist by pinching her butt”. Only someone who isn’t paying attention would conclude that I think sexual assault less than rape is okay, which is what Drmies accused both me and Heyward Of believing. It’s total crap. Anythingyouwant (talk) 02:32, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

I would have said "he". Anythingyouwant, sometimes we agree, sometimes we don't. But I don't think what you accuse me of thinking. Best, Drmies (talk) 02:49, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

DRN for Useful idiot

Hi DH, here's a link to the DRN discussion regarding Useful idiot: [2]. All best, -Darouet (talk) 17:30, 27 November 2017 (UTC)

1RR

That one is a 1RR violation, as well as violation of the "consensus required" provision. Here's your chance to self-revert. Volunteer Marek  04:48, 1 December 2017 (UTC)