User talk:Netoholic

---

Some thoughts:
"To avoid unkind criticism: say nothing, be nothing, do nothing." – Elbert Hubbard (1856 - 1915)	"There are people who have good sense. There are idiots. A consensus of idiots does not override good sense. Wikipedia is not a democracy." – Jimmy Wales

---

New message from Winged Blades of Godric

Hello, Netoholic. You have new messages at David Eppstein's talk page.
Message added 11:15, 7 May 2019 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

∯WBG^converse 11:15, 7 May 2019 (UTC)

The Great Replacement theory

I came to this from an article about one of the Far-right parties active in Australian politics. I noticed immediately that you’d had some difficulty in getting emotive terms excluded from the beginning of the lede. You may (or may not) be interested in my attempts to do the same, which are currently raising hackles in the Talk page. Honestly, I have no right wing political point to make at all, but there are soooo many editors who seem unable to be unemotional in an article about something of the far right. I’m sure you know what it’s like... Anyway, your input would be valued. Boscaswell talk 07:02, 13 May 2019 (UTC)

Enough

You're sailing close to the wind in several ways at the moment, including with this remark: "Maybe the strategy is to try to get this closed early, at a moment when you think the raw numbers are in your favor?" I posted at AN/RFC for closers "when appropriate". If anyone picks that up, they will decide whether to close after seven days or leave it open. Please read WP:ASPERSIONS, and bear in mind that you've been alerted to the gender-related discretionary sanctions. SarahSV ^(talk) 20:06, 13 May 2019 (UTC)

SarahSV: Let's summarize your, let's say, unusual activity around this RM - things no one else seems to have done. You've been accused, somewhat convincingly, of posting the link to the RM to WikiProjects which represent somewhat known viewpoints on this subject and would be expected to form a voting bloc. You've posted it to WP:NPOVN which, looking in the archives, has only rarely had such notices posted to it... and when they are mentioned, there is usually some additional context and an invitation to discuss NPOV concerns of the article's content on the NPOV noticeboard itself. You've made additions of several images to the article, especially choosing only images which display the very rarely-used term "chairperson", in what could seem like an attempt to sway the views of casual participants that come across the RM. You've now asked for the RM closure two days prematurely - minutes after the nom posted his own "calculation" of voters. I theorized that it was because you might think that the present ratio of voters is the most advantageous. Now, I note, you've taken to editing the RM closing instructions themselves - something not insignificant to this RM. I may be wrong, but this is not an ASPERSION, its the beginnings of recognition of a possible pattern of manipulating the circumstances of this RM, and diff/link evidence to go along with it. I think you'd agree that perhaps taken together it could look bad for you, but I recognize I could be wrong about your intent. -- Netoholic @ 20:33, 13 May 2019 (UTC)

Your "theorizing" is false. Do not engage in any more personal attacks or insinuations. That's all I'm going to say. SarahSV ^(talk) 20:43, 13 May 2019 (UTC)