User talk:Licks-rocks/Archives/2021/December

J. K. Rowling: "as well as (for) ..."

Hi,

I think either version is fine - actually I think the old version was slightly better. Including "for" ("as well as for her relationship with the press") clarifies that "her relationship with the press" is not an aspect of "her views on UK politics", but a distinct attribute for which she is also known. The context makes that clear, but the "for" is grammatically correct and clarifies by giving the same structure to both clauses. Would you mind if I revert?

Jean-de-Nivelle (talk) 14:43, 15 December 2021 (UTC)

Of course not! I'm not a native speaker and english has a lot of wierd constructions like that that I just won't know about. It just looked wrong to me, which is why I took it out.--Licks-rocks (talk) 15:02, 15 December 2021 (UTC)

AE

Just for the record, I hadn't read Pyxis' misgendering comment and don't see it as relevant for action at this time, but see (if you haven't) my contextualizing comment here. Newimpartial (talk) 18:33, 16 December 2021 (UTC)

I have less experience with these editors than you do, so I figured I'd give the benefit of the doubt, leaving them the opportunity to do something about it if they so chose. But I did think it was a little sus. I know from reading their statement that you guys go back somewhat. --Licks-rocks (talk) 21:20, 16 December 2021 (UTC)

World-class edit summary

Just had to say so. --Kent G. Budge (talk) 15:22, 23 December 2021 (UTC)

Thank you! Thank you! it is appreciated ^^ Licks-rocks (talk) 15:32, 23 December 2021 (UTC)