In Shakespeare's time there was no agreed convention on spelling (& anyway he was an illetterate (sic) peasant who couldn't have etcetera...). You're just strange, Kevin (not that I'm on your case, or anything, tonight...).

I go with Amos (even though he's decidedly strange too) as far as "no-one" is "not anyone", & "no one" is "no single". Your caveat doesn't work, because none of your examples cover the negative - 'anyone' may be one word; 'not anyone' isn't, nor is no-one. There is possibly an argument that no-one ought to be spelt no'one on account of all the missed letters, but people are confused enough already & even I'm not that "wantonly cruel"! ;)