User talk:Washingtonja95

April 2021
Hello, I'm Aerin17. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions&#32;to For the People Act 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. Aerin17 (talk) 18:18, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

Ahh-h-h... my edit “didn’t appear constructive”. Yet, it was constructive. My edit brings the description much closer to the truth. Your edit is deceptive and untruthful. Which edit doesn’t “appear constructive”? Now I know to whom I’m speaking. Your edit has destructive intent.

Washingtonja95 (talk) 18:43, 17 April 2021 (UTC)


 * The article is supposed to contain a neutral overview of the bill. Your edit was clearly POV and also completely unsourced. Criticism of the bill belongs in the Opposition section and clearly attributed to those whose opinions they are. "My" edit (which was in fact the status quo and not written by me) is not "deceptive and untruthful", as it clearly and neutrally states the intended effects of the bill. If you don't believe that the bill is going to have those intended effects, I respect your opinion, but Wikipedia is not a place to promote your personal beliefs.
 * Trying to say that I have "destructive intent" is not going to get anywhere and in fact just makes me laugh. Aerin17 (talk) 19:30, 17 April 2021 (UTC)