User talk:31.204.150.246

Stop wasting your time by removing content you don't like from articles. 03:20, 10 November 2019 (UTC)
 * You seem very rational to me! I did not realise rationlwiki was under the leftist brigade... I'm outraged, half of your references in the articles don't even reference anything substantial or don^t even work. it's all just to discredit a Ph.D.'s work to further your own political agenda, how dishonorable. you are still young mario you might learn with time that silencing your ideological opponents is maybe not the best way to solve problems. I'm leftwing by the way, you are probably not even born from "workers" parents you just try to have a moral high ground lol have fun in live I'm going to be back to delete the diffamations
 * 03:36, 10 November 2019 (UTC)
 * 03:38, 10 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Oh because I point out irrationality in an article now I'm a homeopathic promoting female rapist menrights activist alt right white nationalist, how great is that. probably need to STOP DRINKING I think--31.204.150.246 (talk) 03:44, 10 November 2019 (UTC)
 * 1st reference didn't work, but I found a one that does. Updated link.
 * 2nd reference supports the claim he writes for VDARE.
 * 3rd reference is broken, but note that the post has been suspended for a violation of a term of service. There's an archive. Doesn't have the specific reference in question, but it's still there in case the claims in the article don't line up with that site overall.
 * 4th reference goes to a Reddit community that has been quarantined, but even past that wall, Sexual Utopia in Power is listed as an essential reading.
 * 5th reference works and is verified a work by F. Roger Devlin.
 * 6th reference works and backs up the claim that he identifies as "alt-right"; sample quote: "we on the Alt Right".
 * 7th reference doesn't work, but I've updated it. Anyhow, it mentions in passing that "alt-right" is "white advocacy", but it's still there, so that's still an appropriate reference.
 * 8th reference works and is directly supporting the claim.
 * 9th reference works, but seems slanted since it's "anti-fascist news", might have to look more into it. But still, supports the claim F. Roger Devlin was at least there.
 * 10th reference also supports the claim though same source.
 * So... judgement calls to update references and verify a few of them, not delete them. Even if I cannot update the references, references should have broken link template. But otherwise, this doesn't call for content removal.
 * Anyhow, why do you think this man's own work and views constitute as just an irrational axe grind against him? How is linking articles and book work by him "dishonorable" and "irrational"? Do you not like his own views that were hosted in sites such as r/redpill, Richard B. Spencer's Radix Journal, VDARE, TOQonline, heartiste, and Occidental Observer (which we referenced) that are sympathetic to his views? This isn't my political agenda, F. Roger Devlin makes it clear what his political views are. Why are you doing him a disservice by removing the very things he says? 03:58, 10 November 2019 (UTC)