Submission declined on 9 November 2024 by SafariScribe (talk). This draft is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Wikipedia's verifiability policy requires that all content be supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources include: reputable newspapers, magazines, academic journals, and books from respected publishers. Unacceptable sources include: personal blogs, social media, predatory publishers, most tabloids, and websites where anyone can contribute. Replace any unreliable sources with high-quality sources. If you cannot find a reliable source for the material, it should be removed. If you would like to continue working on the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window. If you have not resolved the issues listed above, your draft will be declined again and potentially deleted. If you need extra help, please ask us a question at the AfC Help Desk or get live help from experienced editors. Please do not remove reviewer comments or this notice until the submission is accepted. Where to get help If you need help editing or submitting your draft, please ask us a question at the AfC Help Desk or get live help from experienced editors. These venues are only for help with editing and the submission process, not to get reviews. If you need feedback on your draft, or if the review is taking a lot of time, you can try asking for help on the talk page of a relevant WikiProject. Some WikiProjects are more active than others so a speedy reply is not guaranteed. How to improve a draft Wikipedia:Contributing to Wikipedia – a basic overview on how to edit Wikipedia. Help:Wikitext – how to use the markup Help:Referencing for beginners – how to include references Wikipedia:Article development – how to develop your article Wikipedia:Writing better articles – how to improve your article Wikipedia:Verifiability – make sure your article includes reliable third-party sources You can also browse Wikipedia:Featured articles and Wikipedia:Good articles to find examples of Wikipedia's best writing on topics similar to your proposed article. Improving your odds of a speedy review To improve your odds of a faster review, tag your draft with relevant WikiProject tags using the button below. This will let reviewers know a new draft has been submitted in their area of interest. For instance, if you wrote about a female astronomer, you would want to add the Biography, Astronomy, and Women scientists tags. Add tags to your draft Editor resources Easy tools: Citation bot (help) | Advanced: Fix bare URLs Declined by SafariScribe 18 months ago. Last edited by Peter Kelford 2 months ago. Reviewer: Inform author. Resubmit Please note that if the issues are not fixed, the draft will be declined again.

Donald John Netolitzky KC is a Canadian researcher in law and microbiology, specialising in pseudolaw, lawyer, and former civil servant. His research is centred around frivolous and abusive litigants, especially so-called "OPCA litigants" and analysing courts and court processes. He is known as one of the leading experts on pseudolaw in Commonwealth jurisdictions^[1][2][3]. Before becoming a jurist, Netolitzky was a microbiologist.

Netolitzky initially trained as a microbiologist at the University of Calgary between 1984 and 1988, where he obtained his BSc, working as a summer intern at the Defence Research Establishment Suffield (DRES) in Alberta^[4]. Upon graduating, Netolitzky continued to work with DRES^[5] on the subject of Newcastle disease whilst working towards his PhD, which he obtained in 1995^[6]. Upon graduating, Netolitzky took up various academic positions at the University of Alberta and at Medicine Hat College^[7] over a period of several years, whilst continuing to work sporadically for the Canadian Department of National Defence, conducting microbiological research^[8], where he published several frequently-cited^[9] articles^[10][11] in this time.

In 2002, Netolitzky returned to the University of Alberta to study law, gaining a law degree in 2005^[12][8][13]. He subsequently joined the Alberta Court of King's Bench as a staff lawyer, working at the court since 2007, serving as Complex Litigant Management Counsel^[14][15] between then and 2024. He took silk in 2022^[16][3], becoming King's Counsel in recognition of his research^[17], and claims himself to be "not really interested in law [or] legal theory^[8]" but instead "targets quantifying court processes and investigation of pseudolaw phenomena."^[18][19] He eventually gained an LLM in 2020^[12]. He retired from the Court of King's Bench in September 2024^[20].

Netolitzky is best known for his research into pseudolaw and in handling other types of "complex litigant", writing in detail on the subject in numerous academic articles^[21][22]. Netolitzky's work on pseudolaw has been widely cited by academics^[23][24], as well as by courts across common-law jurisdictions, including outside of Canada, such as in New Zealand^[25], Australia^[26], and has been submitted to the United States Congress as part of a congressional inquiry into the January 6 Capitol riot^[27]. He is regarded as "the world’s foremost expert on pseudolaw"^[28][29], ^[30]. He is also regularly interviewed and cited by the press on subjects relating to pseudolaw^{[31][32][33][34]}.

Netolitzky is known for assisting judges of the Alberta Court of King's Bench in the preparation of judgments into pseudolaw and other unrepresented and complex litigants, including Meads v. Meads, a well-known and frequently-read^[35] case which has been cited throughout the English speaking world as a leading case on pseudolaw, such as in the United States^[36][37] and England and Wales^[38], as well as in guidance issued to judges^[39]. Netolitzky later explored the significance of Meads in an academic article^[40]. He has also participated in the preparation of other well-known judgments on the subject of complex litigants^[41].

^[42].^[43]

Netolitzky has argued for an improved understanding of pseudolaw, which he describes as "a collection of legal-sounding but false rules that purport to be law"^[44], not dissimilar to a form of "memetic virus"^[45]. He has proposed a six-prong theory of pseudolaw. Netolitzky has also written widely on the history of pseudolaw^[46], as well as researching judicial responses to pseudolaw.

Beyond the field of pseudolaw, Netolitzky has also written widely on a range of other "complex litigants", especially self-representing litigants (SRLs)^{[47][48][49][50]}. He has also spoken and written about litigants with mental health issues^[51], advocating for better understanding of such situations.

Some of his other research has involved different facets of court administration and business such as analysis of court deadlines^[52], or the evolution over time of litigation activity^[53].