User talk:Hagiographer

Rascist

This edit http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:BlackApe&diff=prev&oldid=75905141 shows what a rascist and deeply offensive individual you are. Relator 18:49, 15 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Zapatero page

Hi. Are you saying you are definitely not Zapatancas then? I ask bercause Zapatancas was always trying to get me to apologize too. I can see nothing for which I need to apologize. if you think I am doing anything wrong report me but dont expect an apology for expressing a personal belief politely. Thanks, SqueakBox 14:22, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I havent reverted anything as I am banned from editing the Zapatero articles directly. I am curious that my prediction about yuou converting the article into US spelling did indeed come to pass (I have no psychic proclivities), I would also dispute that you went back to a pre-Zapatancas/SqueakBox version because of the spelling, the sub-articles etc.

I have to express my admiration for Zapatero not turning up to be moralized at by the Pope in Valencia (a city of which I have fond memories). Cool! Que le vaya bien, SqueakBox 14:00, 11 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your vandalism of my user page

Just contaion yourself and leave my user page alone, SqueakBox 15:48, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey leave SqueakBox's page alone. Ras Billy I 15:55, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As you well know zapatancas you have also broken the Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/3RR in your persistent vandalism of my user page. Your removal of my comments is also uinacceptable, SqueakBox 12:44, 14 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your mistake

I am rastafari, the divine presence dwelleth in I. i dont want nothing to do with your puerile conflict with Squeak. I wont edit your edits to zapatero again, but just leave me alone okay as I am not here to be given a hard time by a teenager. I just want to create a better encyclopedia. JAH RASTAFARI. Ras Billy I 16:39, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Editing other people's comments

It's controversial to edit other people's comments. Please don't edit comments on WP:AE again. If there's a problem, please do tell me about it on my talk page and I'll do what I can. --Tony Sidaway 14:05, 14 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think it would also be for the best if you avoided editing SqueakBox's user page. The ban is posted on the appropriate talk page. --Tony Sidaway 14:07, 14 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your mistake

This says that I am in Florida (close enough) and the person editing Zapatero is in London, hence this person cannot be me, SqueakBox 00:45, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your forgery

I will not tolerate you changing my comments on wikipedia to that of another user. Dont do it again or it will be you in front of the Arbcom for behaviour that simply is unacceptable [1], SqueakBox 03:38, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This edit

In fact, this edit, the one Squeakbox is complaining about above, looks bad. May I ask if you had any special reason for it? Bishonen | talk 13:15, 19 August 2006 (UTC).[reply]

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/SqueakBox and Zapatancas

Adopting a commonsense approach to identification, the administrators of Wikipedia have decided to enforce the provisions of this case against anyone who exhibits behavior similar to that of SqueakBox and Zapatancas, to wit: Hagiographer and Pura Paja, and anyone else who engages in warring, tendentious edits, personal attacks and harassment related to José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero and related articles.

Pura Paja has been blocked indefinitely because of his username.

The ban on editing José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero and related articles will now be applied to you, as will the personal attack parole, because your involvement in the mutual harassment campaign closely resembles that of Zapatancas and it is reasonable to treat you, for the purposes of this dispute, as if you were one and the same person. For good reason, any administrator may extend the article ban to other editors exhibiting substantially similar behavior. --Tony Sidaway 10:23, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Edits like this only exacerbate the situation. Don't go looking for conflict. Find something else to edit, other than Squeakbox's user and talk page. Guettarda 11:42, 30 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your obsession with another editor does nothing to improve the quality of the encyclopaedia. Your comments only serve to inflame the situation. Your request for unprotection of SB's user page was denied, because there is nothing on his user page that is an obvious attack on you. Wikipedia is a project to write an encyclopaedia, not a medium for personal vendettas. No one is obligated to tolerate tit-for-tat fighting. The comments made on SB's user page appear to be deliberately provocative - that sort of action is unacceptable. Stop doing so at once! Guettarda 11:50, 31 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Great attitude. Lighten up, lay off the rhetoric, and quit picking fights with people. Feel free to call me "strange" on your user page, if you lay off picking fights with people. If that's what it takes for you to settle down and stop obsessing about SB, then be my guest. Guettarda 15:01, 31 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

ROFLMAO [2] Guettarda 15:36, 4 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

SqueakBox

Check the block log listed on that IP's contributions. It has already been blocked for 36 days. Academic Challenger 07:10, 31 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think you should stop spamming other admins. You can spam me, I'll have a look, but other admins may block you. Thanks, Blnguyen | BLabberiNg 08:06, 4 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Listen to Blnguyen. I looked at your user contributions, and was ready to place you on the Administrator's Noticeboard. Bastique▼^parler _voir 13:33, 4 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Here here. --Baron Larf 20:51, 4 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Warning: In reviewing your complaint at Arbitration enforcement, I find the charge by Squeakbox that you altered his signature to that of a user you suspected of being his sockpuppet. Regardless of your suspicions, this was dishonest bordering on vandalism, and if I had seen it at the time I would have blocked you for it. As it was more than 2 weeks ago, and blocks are supposed to be preventative, not punative, consider this a stern warning. The fact that Squeakbox is blocked does not give you the right to abuse the situation, and your suspicions that he has dishonestly used sockpuppets does not give you the right to be dishonest in return. Thatcher131 (talk) 01:00, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Based on this prod notice, I am posting on WP:ANI requesting consensus that you be blocked until the expiration of Squeakbox's block. Thatcher131 (talk) 01:08, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Until you strike all your false accusations against me at AN/I, do not post to my talk page. And whatever your interest in Squeakbox, do not use Wikipedia to pursue it any further. STOP. NOW. Guettarda 11:11, 6 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In addition DO NOT EDIT MY SIGNED COMMENTS. Please stop your vandalism. Guettarda 11:12, 6 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop abusing templates. I'm still awaiting your apology for your false accusation and your vandalism of my comments. Guettarda 09:45, 8 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your request

I request reference to your captioned request on my talk page. I do not want to involve myself in the issue as I feel helpless like several wikipedians to make the environment here better. In case, you or me want or anyone want to continue here, he/she has to continue and work within the constraints. I do not blame anyone, a large virtual community shall always have many problems. Please face the challenge, and do not care much about personal attacks - if you see my user page, someone has regularly scolded me but I do not mind. Please ignore the personal attacks and please continue to contribute, if you wish to continue and contribute. Regards. --Bhadani 17:14, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My user page

now contains no reference to yourself, SqueakBox 18:01, 28 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]