User talk:Anythingyouwant

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Mention in the news[edit]

Not sure if you've noticed, but you were mentioned in this article. It definitely has some interesting commentary. Can't say I'm surprised by what it says about working on election-related articles. Snuggums (talk / edits) 15:20, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

I hadn't noticed, thanks.Anythingyouwant (talk) 15:38, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
That's pretty cool! Congrats! --Dr. Fleischman (talk) 17:45, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
Grats! Pretty cool.Volunteer Marek (talk) 13:12, 28 October 2016 (UTC)

Constructive suggestion[edit]

If you follow da rulez and work collaboratively with your fellow editors more consistently--not just superficially, but actually--then I posit that the Wikipedia hierarchy will stop attacking you. --Dr. Fleischman (talk) 17:37, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

I disagree with your premise.Anythingyouwant (talk) 17:41, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
Which part? Da rulez or collaboration? --Dr. Fleischman (talk) 16:00, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
Yes. Anyway, have a fun couple weeks, feel free to email, and otherwise I'm away from here.Anythingyouwant (talk) 16:05, 28 October 2016 (UTC)

You're famous[edit]

You have been mentioned and quoted in a Washington Post article (27 October 2016) see this!. Does this mean I have been editing with someone who is famous? When will autographs be available? ---Steve Quinn (talk)

I see someone already told you - oh well. ---Steve Quinn (talk)

Infamous if you believe AE.Anythingyouwant (talk) 04:16, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
I was laughing so hard at the coverage of the photos and the corresponding comments (because this is exactly how we editors are). I think this shows the we Wikipedia editors are excessively nitpicky :-) :-) In any case, I am glad the photo selection process was covered because it shows the work we put into these articles. ---Steve Quinn (talk) 04:32, 28 October 2016 (UTC)

Allegation of disruptive canvassing[edit]

Please stop it with the WP:CANVASing [1]. The policy is clear: "However, canvassing which is done with the intention of influencing the outcome of a discussion in a particular way is considered inappropriate. This is because it compromises the normal consensus decision-making process, and therefore is generally considered disruptive behavior.". This is exactly what you are doing, and on an article subject to discretionary sanctions, barely a few days after your topic ban expired. You are going around basically asking other editors to edit war for you. This is disruptive behavior.Volunteer Marek (talk) 16:40, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

You know very well that the canvassing policy begins with this: "In general, it is perfectly acceptable to notify other editors of ongoing discussions, provided that it be done with the intent to improve the quality of the discussion by broadening participation to more fully achieve consensus." I notified two editors who recently edited the material in question, including one who removed the material and one who inserted the material.Anythingyouwant (talk) 16:45, 14 November 2016 (UTC)
Anything, here's a thought. Since so many folks are telling you to cut out the TE and disruptive editing on abortion and politics, why don't we all agree -- you can draft your own AE complaint and then we'll get it adjudicated once and for all, up or down, one way or another, and then we can all move on ? SPECIFICO talk 16:47, 14 November 2016 (UTC)
You are not "broadening the discussion". You are asking others to revert for you.Volunteer Marek (talk) 16:49, 14 November 2016 (UTC)
Bullshit. I notified other editors to participate in a discussion of their edits. And the edits were diametrically opposed to each other.Anythingyouwant (talk) 16:50, 14 November 2016 (UTC)
I must have missed the part where you notified me. SPECIFICO talk 17:25, 14 November 2016 (UTC)
I contacted the people involved in the edit war that followed the RFC closure.Anythingyouwant (talk) 21:25, 14 November 2016 (UTC)
Very clever. I never edit war, so I was out of the loooop. SPECIFICO talk 21:42, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open![edit]

Scale of justice 2.svg Hello, Anythingyouwant. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. Mdann52 (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open![edit]

Scale of justice 2.svg Hello, Anythingyouwant. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Template:Fred Thompson2[edit]

A tag has been placed on Template:Fred Thompson2 requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion because it is an unused duplicate of another template, or a hard-coded instance of another template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.

If the template is not actually the same as the other template noted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page explaining how this one is different so as to avoid any future mistakes (<noinclude>{{substituted}}</noinclude>).

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page's talk page, where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. โ€“ S. Rich (talk) 07:13, 28 November 2016 (UTC)

Hawaii Five-0[edit]

I invite you to the ongoing RfD discussion. --George Ho (talk) 19:45, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

Merry, merry![edit]

From the icy Canajian north; to you and yours! FWiW Bzuk (talk) 03:09, 26 December 2016 (UTC) Lights ablaze.JPG

Thanks and to you too!Anythingyouwant (talk) 21:43, 26 December 2016 (UTC)

Talk:Donald Trump[edit]

Hi, anything! I was going to reply to your joking comments in the spirit in which you offered them. But I was afraid it might be misunderstood. So about reflexly agreeing with me, I would have said: yes, I've been meaning to speak to you about that, it's been getting embarrassing. As for your Brownie points, I have deposited them to your account. Three more and you get a box of cookies. MelanieN alt (talk) 04:19, 30 December 2016 (UTC)

Thanks Melanie. ๐Ÿ™‚ I don't know why I bother with Wikipedia, but it's generally been nice dealing with you, even when we disagree. Cheers!Anythingyouwant (talk) 05:39, 30 December 2016 (UTC)

BLP violation[edit]

I reverted your revert of my edit. This edit was made by an IP. Just because the source, which is not reliable, is making this association, does not mean Wikipedia should go along with this. This suggests Donald Trump had a hand in this and there are no reliable sources associating him with this event. SW3 5DL (talk) 18:31, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

Please look carefully at your edit. Did it remove anything about a bombing at Canary Wharf?Anythingyouwant (talk) 18:36, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

It's not relevant to that article, and you know exactly what this source is implying. It does not belong on Wikipedia. I don't know if you are attempting to be deliberately provocative or not, but this source is not reliable. SW3 5DL (talk) 18:39, 3 January 2017 (UTC)
I removed the stuff about a bombing. Would you please acknowledge that?Anythingyouwant (talk) 18:41, 3 January 2017 (UTC)
See WP:BLP, WP:RS. SW3 5DL (talk) 18:44, 3 January 2017 (UTC)
Please acknowledge that you have looked at the link I gave in my previous comment. Thank you.Anythingyouwant (talk) 18:46, 3 January 2017 (UTC)
What I saw was that you reverted my removal of the BLP violation and then thought you could just leave off the mention of the Canary Wharf bombing while also leaving in place the source, which leaves no doubt it wants to imply Trump had something to do with the bombing. This is why I said I did not know if you were trying to be provocative. SW3 5DL (talk) 19:13, 3 January 2017 (UTC)
There's nothing provocative about saying Trump attended a fundraiser that he did attend. You're apparently criticizing me for other stuff in the footnoted source that I removed from the text of the article. I have never been criticized at Wikipedia for including stuff when I instead actually removed it from the text of the article. The stuff I removed, by the way, explains that Trump attended the fundraiser before he could possibly have known about a bombing by the beneficiaries of the fundraiser, so I'm not even convinced that the stuff I removed was in any way a BLP violation.Anythingyouwant (talk) 19:20, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

FYI[edit]

I have filed a DRN case at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Dispute_resolution_noticeboard#Talk:Donald_Trump - please add your summary of the dispute there. Thanks! Twitbookspacetube (talk) 00:32, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

Hello! There is a DR/N request you may have interest in.[edit]

Peacedove.svg

This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution. Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! --Twitbookspacetube (talk) 00:36, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

Please correct the formatting at Trumptalk[edit]

I failed. SPECIFICO talk 20:41, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

I wouldn't know what to do except delete the three colons.Anythingyouwant (talk) 20:46, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
So, Doctor you are recommending a colonectomy? Have at it !!! SPECIFICO talk 23:34, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

Protecting the Nation from Foreign Terrorist Entry into the United States[edit]

Hey, I moved this back pending a discussion; this was agreed on (sort of) at the talk page. Do note that the page title will be changed per convention to "Executive Order #####" tomorrow or whenever the Federal Register officially publishes it. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 22:17, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

I commented at your talk page.Anythingyouwant (talk) 22:19, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

Barnstar[edit]

Gabby hayes 1953.jpg The Movie Geek barnstar
For citing "authentic internet gibberish" in a way that would be instantly recognized by fans of Blazing Saddles. (Sorry about the picture; couldn't find one of the real Gabby Johnson.) MelanieN (talk) 18:35, 30 January 2017 (UTC)
๐Ÿ˜Thanks Melanie. I must admit, however, that I walk in illustrious footsteps, namely those of User talk:Baseball Bugs, who has used this same expression at Wikipedia. But it's too late for you take back the barnstar, as I'm sure Bugs would agree!Anythingyouwant (talk) 19:14, 30 January 2017 (UTC)
Good quotes like that deserve to be propagated stolen. I'll probably use it myself. Without attribution, of course. --MelanieN (talk) 19:45, 30 January 2017 (UTC)
Of course. Thanks again.Anythingyouwant (talk) 19:47, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

1RR[edit]

Re [2]. I'm sorry I don't see a "consensus of several editors" for these changes (which actually reflect original wording), all I see is you and G1729 completely disregarding the 1RR active on this page to edit war your preferred warning into the article. G1729 has already been warned about 1RR. You just recently came off a topic ban in this topic area. Please observe the restrictions imposed by discretionary sanctions and self-revert. You're welcome to start a separate section on talk or even file an RfC.Volunteer Marek (talk) 17:27, 4 February 2017 (UTC)

Yeah, I hadn't noticed that 1RR was slapped on this article on January 29. Unfortunately, Wikipedia does not have any corresponding limits on propagandistic edits like yours. The cited sources very obviously attribute the "religious test" characterization to "commentators" so putting that commentary into wikivoice is pretty egregious on your part. Not surprising though. Get sources for your edits, please.Anythingyouwant (talk) 17:40, 4 February 2017 (UTC)

A toast to you![edit]

Export hell seidel steiner.png Beer is the world's most widely consumed and probably oldest alcoholic beverage. It is the third most popular drink after water and tea. Just sayin'. - York12321 (talk) 23:52, 18 February 2017 (UTC)

Thanks!Anythingyouwant (talk) 12:41, 17 March 2017 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 10[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Asena, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page She-wolf (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ โ€ข Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:27, 10 March 2017 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 17[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Trump Entertainment Resorts, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Barron's (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ โ€ข Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:11, 17 March 2017 (UTC)

ANI notice[edit]

Apparently SW3 5DL thinks ANI notices are not required if they refer to you without using your username. See Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#edit_warring_to_close_RfC_just_started_two_days_ago. โ€•Mandruss โ˜Ž 16:44, 24 March 2017 (UTC)

Thanks.Anythingyouwant (talk) 16:46, 24 March 2017 (UTC)
@Mandruss: ANI notices were not required for Anything or you since the ANI thread does ask for blocks, it asks only for an admin to reopen an RfC that had a disruptive close. SW3 5DL (talk) 15:49, 27 March 2017 (UTC)
@SW3 5DL: The notice at the top of WP:ANI reads: "When you start a discussion about an editor, you must notify them on their user talk page." It does not read: "When you start a discussion requesting a block of an editor, you must notify them on their user talk page." If there is something in policy to that effect, please point it out and I'll see about getting the notice updated to reflect it. If not, you're just incorrect. โ€•Mandruss โ˜Ž 15:54, 27 March 2017 (UTC)

1RR violation[edit]

Greetings Anythingyouwant! With these edits you technically violated the one-revert-per-day provision in effect at Donald Trump:

Please self-revert the last edit to get back on track. Thanks! โ€” JFG talk 05:59, 26 March 2017 (UTC)

The first diff did not involve me. I have reverted the second per your request, though I did not revert "Sr." more than once. Cheers pal.Anythingyouwant (talk) 06:08, 26 March 2017 (UTC)
Sorry, I referred to the wrong edit for the first case, here is yours: [3]. Besides, I asked you to undo the last diff, not the second one. The addition of "Sr." goes against established consensus. โ€” JFG talk 06:39, 26 March 2017 (UTC)
Why the hell did you list my "Sr." edit as the second diff in your 1RR accusation above, if you think that edit of mine was covered by the list of consensuses that are exempt from 1RR? You are really pushing the envelope here, User:JFG.Anythingyouwant (talk) 06:44, 26 March 2017 (UTC)
Please don't take my remarks as aggressive; I said you "technically" violated the rule, I'm sure you acted in good faith, which is why I'm notifying you here instead of a drama board. Now, will you please redo your second revert which was consensual and undo the third one which wasn't? โ€” JFG talk 06:51, 26 March 2017 (UTC)
Of course I'm not going to revert my edit at 19:00 on 25 March, because you have not shown that any edit of mine within the preceding 24 hours was a revert within the meaning of the 1RR rule. Have you? What kind of bullshit is this?Anythingyouwant (talk) 06:55, 26 March 2017 (UTC)
Fine, let it be. I removed "Sr" again. Happy Sunday,โ€” JFG talk 07:03, 26 March 2017 (UTC)

โ”Œโ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”˜Why wasn't I notified of this dispute? You resolved it in just an hour and I can't watch these pages constantly. Also you were WAY too friendly here, with only two feeble attempts to escalate this (hell, bullshit). Please try harder next time. โ€•Mandruss โ˜Ž 07:22, 26 March 2017 (UTC)

@Mandruss: I don't see that you were involved in the contested edits, hence I saw no need to notify you or anyone else than Anythingyouwant. I'm friendly, yes, you probably noticed as much over the last year of discussions. โ€” JFG talk 07:33, 26 March 2017 (UTC)
(edit conflict) Or maybe you were saying Anythingyouwant was being too friendly towards me? Well, friendly or not, we did resolve the dispute within an hour, as you noted, so I suppose that's the spirit of Wikipediaโ€ฆ โ€” JFG talk 07:39, 26 March 2017 (UTC)
Sorry, thought you'd recognize satire when you saw it, so I omitted the smiley. โ€•Mandruss โ˜Ž 07:37, 26 March 2017 (UTC)
And I thought you were talking to me instead of Any. I should have known better, it's his talk page not mine. Face-wink.svg โ€” JFG talk 07:41, 26 March 2017 (UTC)

All is well, no worries. I think maybe this recent fiasco in the House of Representatives sent out bad vibes, but the good vibrations shall return. Best wishes to JFG and Mandruss.Anythingyouwant (talk) 07:43, 26 March 2017 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 26[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Sybilla Righton Masters, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page King George I (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ โ€ข Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:27, 26 March 2017 (UTC)

not my president[edit]

I was not aware of this movement. Do you really think that's why editors don't want the word 'current' in the article? SW3 5DL (talk) 16:54, 27 March 2017 (UTC)

Certainly not User:Mandruss. However, I don't know about every editor who ends up having commented on this RFC.Anythingyouwant (talk) 16:58, 27 March 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for the AGF! โ€•Mandruss โ˜Ž 17:00, 27 March 2017 (UTC)

@Anythingyouwant: And I never once suggested he was. Let me rephrase this, Why do you believe this involves "not my president?" I've never seen this on any of the Trump pages I've edited, including the BLP. SW3 5DL (talk) 17:10, 27 March 2017 (UTC)

It may well be coincidence, but by omitting from the hatnote and lead that he is the president, we (perhaps inadvertently) cater to that movement, even if we mention lower in the article or in the infobox that he's the president. Whether it's entirely coincidental will probably become more evident as the RFC rolls along.Anythingyouwant (talk) 17:23, 27 March 2017 (UTC)
That still makes no sense to me to make such a leap in thinking. I've never seen anyone even remotely make such a suggestion in any discussion on Donald Trump talk. Least of all, the editor you apparently leapt to your mind above. SW3 5DL (talk) 17:56, 27 March 2017 (UTC)
[4]Anythingyouwant (talk) 18:06, 27 March 2017 (UTC)

FYI[edit]

You seem to be disrupting your own RfC here. It would be better to use the 'reply' feature in the discussion section to direct a comment to a particular editor. But in any event, it really isn't good form to challenge every editors comment. You started an RfC, editors are now giving you their opinions. They didn't come there for an argument with you. They came there in good faith to answer your RfC. Just a suggestion. SW3 5DL (talk) 17:14, 27 March 2017 (UTC)

Good suggestion, thanks.Anythingyouwant (talk) 17:17, 27 March 2017 (UTC)

Precious three years![edit]

Precious
Cornflower blue Yogo sapphire.jpg
Three years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:33, 7 April 2017 (UTC)

Thanks Gerda, I hope you're doing well.  :-)Anythingyouwant (talk) 07:37, 7 April 2017 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

Brilliant Idea Barnstar Hires.png The Brilliant Idea Barnstar
NPOV...try it you'll like it. Best wishes from your friend, SPECIFICO talk 17:52, 7 April 2017 (UTC)
This may be the first barnstar in the short history of Wikipedia awarded for (allegedly!) not being NPOV. As much as it pains me, I will have to decline this honor from an editor who seems to be engaged in psychological projection. Cheers.Anythingyouwant (talk) 18:01, 7 April 2017 (UTC)

Template-editor granted[edit]

Wikipedia Template editor.svg

Your account has been granted the "templateeditor" user permission, allowing you to edit templates and modules that have been protected with template protection. It also allows you to bypass the title blacklist, giving you the ability to create and edit editnotices. Before you use this user right, please read Wikipedia:Template editor and make sure you understand its contents. In particular, you should read the section on wise template editing and the criteria for revocation.

You can use this user right to perform maintenance, answer edit requests, and make any other simple and generally uncontroversial edits to templates, modules, and edinotices. You can also use it to enact more complex or controversial edits, after those edits are first made to a test sandbox, and their technical reliability as well as their consensus among other informed editors has been established. If you are willing to process edit requests on templates and modules, keep in mind that you are taking responsibility to ensure the edits have consensus and are technically sound.

This user right gives you access to some of Wikipedia's most important templates and modules; it is critical that you edit them wisely and that you only make edits that are backed up by consensus. It is also very important that no one else be allowed to access your account, so you should consider taking a few moments to secure your password.

If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.

Useful links

Happy template editing! โ€” Coffee // have a โ˜•๏ธ // beans // 19:32, 7 April 2017 (UTC)

Now please do ensure that you only use it when absolutely necessary (and according to the rules inside the editonotice at the /consensus page), and if you ever run into an area where a TE is needed (outside of just the Trump-space) please ensure you are editing with solid consensus/policy behind you. I trust we will have no issues, so I've given you this right. โ€” Coffee // have a โ˜•๏ธ // beans // 19:35, 7 April 2017 (UTC)
Thanks Coffee. I intend to use it very sparingly, if at all.Anythingyouwant (talk) 19:36, 7 April 2017 (UTC)
Welcome! And I second Coffee's remarks: be very cautious with these template edits, either when operating on widely-used templates or on emotionally controversial subjects. Face-smile.svg โ€” JFG talk 21:06, 7 April 2017 (UTC)
Like I said, very sparingly, if at all. Cheers.Anythingyouwant (talk) 21:10, 7 April 2017 (UTC)

Signature spacing[edit]

Greetings Anythingyouwant! Just a quick ping to suggest that you add an empty space in front of your signature file. It often looks weird when sticking to the prior sentence like "Here's what I had to say.Anythingyouwant" โ€” JFG talk 22:09, 12 April 2017 (UTC)

I'll look into it, thanks.Anythingyouwant (talk) 23:36, 12 April 2017 (UTC)
Done. Anythingyouwant (talk) 02:50, 13 April 2017 (UTC)

WP:GRAVEDANCING[edit]

If you make a comment like this again, I will blockreport you. You should know better than that.โ€”CYBERPOWER (Chat) 11:12, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

My apologies. I misread your comment. Sorry about that.โ€”CYBERPOWER (Chat) 11:27, 15 April 2017 (UTC)
(talk page watcher) @Cyberpower: If I can just butt in- I don't think it was malicious, CP- I think AYW was quoting Coffee's own edit summary, and being a bit clever with the double negatives. Although I would suggest that playing with such nuances of language in such a delicate matter is probably best to be avoided, AYW- too easily isundestood! (In some languages, a double neg. doesn't cancel itself out, I believe, so it could look like you did say what SP thought you were saying- if you get my drift. Just my HO  :) โ€” O Fortuna semper crescis, aut decrescis 11:29, 15 April 2017 (UTC)
When I made the revert, I didn't pick up on the double negatives. It was after it was pointed out to me, did I realize I misread the statement and retracted my warning.โ€”CYBERPOWER (Chat) 11:32, 15 April 2017 (UTC)
No problem. All's well that doesn't end badly. ๐Ÿ˜Š Anythingyouwant (talk) 17:18, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

Donald Trump: A friendly word of caution[edit]

"Some editors" are editors with whom I have a current content dispute. Please keep that in mind. Anythingyouwant (talk) 01:06, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

@Ad Orientem: His motives most definitely are in question. This is an editor who is only there for disruption. I will bring you diffs of this behavior. You will see. His motivation is to keep this page roiling. Look at the number of edits he makes both on the talk and the article. Dozens of them in a manic editing spree with no regard for opinion of other editors. He goes back over editors and rearranges things, moves content, changes headings, all without a single word on the talk page prior to doing this. He makes cutting, caustic comments. He has flares of anger and obvious fails of AGF. He never modulates his behaviors after having it brought to his attention. Look at the comment he just left you. He blames others, me especially, for calling out his behavior, but it must be done. Look at the mess he made with the RfC. He subverted a gathering consensus. Then he did it again after all the drama he created had ended with your great edit. He opened another thread to get things roiling again. This is clearly WP:NOTHERE behavior and I will keep saying it must be addressed until someone finally takes him to task for this. If he were not there, the page would not have anywhere near the 'contention' it has been claimed to have now. SW3 5DL (talk) 14:14, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

SW3 5DL, I'm not sure how many times I need to repeat this. I am an INVOLVED editor here. Unless it is some specie of naked vandalism, which IMO this does not even come close to, I cannot act as an admin. That said, I am going to caution you as an experienced editor, that IMO you are pushing the envelope in your attacks on Anything. If you accuse someone of deliberately engaging in bad faith editing, which is what your comment above sounds like, then you had better be prepared to defend that position at ANI if they choose to call you on it. I am going to repeat that I STRONGLY URGE everybody to calm down, take a step back and try to sort out your differences rationally with an assumption of good faith. This does not look like deliberate disruptive editing to me. It looks like your run of the mill content dispute on an article whose subject tends to generate a lot of heated opinions. I have already cautioned Anything about aggressive editing on the article. If the temperature of this discussion doesn't get dialed down, I predict that this is going to end up at ANI or some other venue. -Ad Orientem (talk) 14:26, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
Per WP:NPA and about a thousand other Wikipedia policies and guidelines, I am hereby telling User:SW3 5DL to go away from this user talk page, and stay away permanently except as required by Wikipedia policies and guidelines. Be gone. Anythingyouwant (talk) 14:33, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
Ping MelanieN (It looks like this has landed at ANI.) -Ad Orientem (talk) 14:38, 23 April 2017 (UTC)