User talk:Neutrality/workshop III/archive

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Neutrality: Here is some miscellaneous evidence on User:Netoholic for your WP:RFAR:

1. see comments at User talk:Itai, and especially User talk:Itai#Netoholic/Sister project templates
2. his Redirects after losing WP:TFD nominations for Template:Sisterproject and Template:CatAZ. He then creates a new use for Template:Sisterproject, which breaks the wikisource template [1]. (How many other shenanigans has he been involved in related to templates and Templates for deletion?)
3. User:Mintguy (and how many other missing Wikipedians, at least partially, can be attributed to Netoholic?)
4. not to mention temporary Wikivacations (e.g. User talk:Snowspinner/Archive 5#Departure)
5. various User:NetBot arguments here Wikipedia talk:Bots/Archive 5, and here User talk:Brockert#Improper block
6. the calling of anyone who disagrees with him a troll, a fool, or some other insult. (Wikipedia:What is a troll and Wikipedia:No personal attacks).
7. edit wars galore (How many page protections has he forced? Here's one of the latest: Template:Sockpuppet.)
8. using Wikipedia policy as blunt weapons to "win" edit wars, See User talk:Bkonrad/3RR and WikiEN-l More thoughts on the 3-revert rule. (Has he used WP:3RR in other edit wars (yes--User:Itai)? You might check the archives at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/3RR to see if there are more examples.) [The Arbitration Committee needs to endorse a policy that Wikipedia rules should not be used as blunt weapons in disputes.]
9. the creation of a thinktank article (Wikipedia:Meta-templates considered harmful) which he then cites in edit wars as if it is Wikipedia policy rather than something he recently created, even though it has no consensus and he reverts anyone who tries to edit the page. (Wikipedia:Ownership of articles)
10. Talk:2004 U.S. presidential election controversy and irregularities#Please Be On The Lookout For Major Unilateral Changes, historically by User:Netoholic
11. User:Amgine/Netoholic
12. How often has Netoholic used incomplete or disingenuous edit summaries? How many times has Netoholic used the edit summaries to handle disputes instead of discussing issues on an article's talk page?

Past dispute cases involving Netoholic:

1. Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Netoholic
2. Wikipedia:Requests for mediation#Netoholic and Raul654
3. Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Netoholic
4. User:Vacuum/Netoholic RfC (see also Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/User:Amgine/Maureen's RfC)

BTW: Here is some of Netoholic's "fan club" which you probably should try to enlist in supporting your RfAr against Netoholic: Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Netoholic

My suggestion: Go through Wikipedia:Policies and guidelines and Wikipedia:Semi-policy point by point, and show all the different Wikipedia rules that he regularly violates. It shouldn't be too hard to find plenty of evidence, although since he is less blantant about his violations than the average problem editor, searching for everything and building a solid case may be more tedious than the average arbitration.

Why have I written this? Because although I think that Netoholic does do some good work on the Wikipedia, I feel that since he doesn't work well with others, that his net effect on the Wikipedia has been negative.

Why have I written this anonymously? Because I've seen that all too often Netoholic retaliates against those that he has disputes with.

Good luck. 4.233.14.9 10:33, 13 Mar 2005 (UTC)

While I'm no fan of Netoholic myself, I think it's unfair of you to deny him a right of reply while you amass evidence against him, regardless of whether the reply is "trolling". Kind regards, Vacuum c 22:15, Mar 14, 2005 (UTC)

Crossed the cabal once too often. Burn the witch!