"Age of consent 17-18==
I wanted about six months ago to add info that many states, at least 19 if I'm remembering correctly, have an age of consent of 17 or 18 but Flyer22 would not let me include the info next to the age range, only as a footnote. I think the information is important because simply stating the age range is 12-15 gives a misleading impression that all 50 states allow children 16 and older to consent to sex with adults, which is not true. Is it at all possible that the statement that not all states have an age of consent of 16 can be included next to the age range. I'm not edit warring I'm taking it to the talk page to see if I can get consensus.   
This matter was already settled after extensive debate. Refer to #Age of consent above. It wasn't about me not letting you do anything. It was about WP:Consensus being against you, and for valid reasons. I'm not about to repeat much of what was stated by me and various other editors on this matter. Furthermore, the lead is currently very clear that it's only the age range on the show that is designated as 12-15. I compromised more than enough with you on this. The current wording isn't even the agreed-upon consensus wording, but it is wording that I compromised with you on upon your return to Wikipedia. And once again, the lead of this article is not for mentioning age of consent laws, and your concern is no longer valid since the lead explicitly states ""on the program, the range is usually ages 12–15.""   
It would only take one sentence to clarify that issue, its not like it would take a paragraph. And Malke's whole point against me was that the edit gave a false impression that the age of consent in the USA is 16. So I think its worth having one sentence clarifying that. Also I disagree that the lead should not mention laws, because the only reason the show exists is because these men are breaking the law.   
The issue is already clarified. And, like I stated, I am not repeating to you what was made explicitly clear to you by me and several other editors last year. Oh, and WP:LEAD is clear about what the lead should mention. Off-topic material is not a requirement or advised. And age of consent laws in the lead is off-topic.   
And changing the lead back to the contested, consensus-violation wording, which I again reverted, after you've repeated your contested view on this talk page, is something that you should never do. You should wait until the discussion is over. And if you see that the discussion is over, and you still haven't gotten your way, then too bad. We go by consensus when there's been a dispute that couldn't be settled between two or more editors, and consensus is clear on this. Do you think I'm suddenly going to agree with you? That is not going to happen, and, as stated, I've compromised with you enough on this. Your recent restoration of that contested edit is exactly what I was complaining to you about when I mentioned how you revert and revert, hoping to tire out the opposing editor and/or have the opposing editor finally agree with you. If I were to ask the Wikipedia community to weigh in on this again, the outcome would be the same. No doubt. So you need to move on from this discussion. See WP:DEADHORSE.   
I restored the note in a better way, ""age of consent varies by state"", because it does. And this way it doesn't look like its editorializing, unlike the previous ""it should be noted in some states it is 17"". The age of consent in Virginia is fifteen, for example, at least according to Hansen's book.   
Yes, you added the note in a way that still violates WP:CONSENSUS on the issue. Thank goodness Zadignose stepped in and reverted.   
I've just stepped into this conversation, at by the look of it there's been some edit warring over what looks like a non-issue. The text:

""It was devoted to impersonating underage youth ranging from 11 to 15 years in age, and detaining adults who contacted them over the Internet for sexual liaisons.""

is entirely unambiguous, and requires no qualification or elaboration. It doesn't need any explanation of the various state laws regarding age of consent, as it doesn't even mention such laws, which seems entirely appropriate to the articl