Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero/archive1

SqueakBox

- I think the only person who should apologise for his past behaviour is Zapatancasw who is SquealingPig (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

and SquealingPigAttacksAgain (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). I will never apologise to this troll, he must apologise for his thoroughly disgusting, nauseating behaviour. His threats to have me erased if I continue to contribute here is a death threat and should be dealt with as such. His accusations of mental illness show who is the sick person here, etc etc, !!!!

- For evidence of Zapatancas association with SquealingPig is this:

This concerns the behaviour of

Zapatero (talk · contribs)
Zapatancas (talk · contribs)
SquealingPig (talk · contribs)
SquealingPigAttacksAgain (talk · contribs)

Here Zapatancas reverts SqueakBox for the first time at Zapatero's years as an opposition leader as of 09:35, May 5, 2005.
Here as of 10:23, May 5, 2005 Zapatancas reverts a huge amount of SqueakBox's work at José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero.
Here as of 10:47, May 5, 2005 SquealingPig comes along making a simple statement that betrays his non native English speaking origins.
Here as of 10:54, May 5, 2005 squeakBox responds in a civil manner *Here as of 11:00, May 5, 2005 SqueakBox reverts Zapatero's years as an opposition leader back to being a redirect. Instead of debating or reverting.
Here as of 12:02, May 5, 2005 SquealingPig vandalises SqueakBox's user page, and then proceeds to do so another 7 times
here
here
here
here
here
here
and here.

He was then blocked and has now been permanently blocked. It simply is not credible that this nasty troll was not Zapatancas, who already had 2 accounts (Zapatero and Zapatancas, though Zapatancas is nopt a sock of Zapatero), the language used is the same and he has kept up the virulenmt hatred towards me ever since. It is not credible given the timing that zapatancas was not SquealingPig, so iot is indeed zapatancas who needs to apologise ionstead of playing this game with mke. This is the essence of the problem, and this is what needs mediating, SqueakBox 16:40, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

-

Zapatancas attacks against me on his user page

- I am happy to let sleeping pigs lie but Zapatancas must drop his mouthy attutude as demonstrated below, SqueakBox 14:51, 17 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Zapatancas

- If there is some point that can be solved through medation is the following: Should SqueakBox apologize for his past behavior?

Explanation:

First of all, I want to say that I considered that the situation had been solved more or less completely until SqueakBox posted this on my talk page in February: "got thie following letter this morning [telling him his mediation request had been accepted]. If you come online here and want to go for it I say lets go for it, SqueakBox 16:08, 11 February 2006 (UTC)".

However, when I asked him to request mediation some months before, the situation was quite different and the level of aggressivity was huge. In any case, between his request and its acceptance he posted on my talk page a kind of peace treaty that, let's say, stopped the problem.

The problem, from my point of view, consisted in an unjustified, damaging, useless attitude that made to improve the article on Zapatero impossible for months (as I have said this is my view) and that included unpleasant comments about the article and about me. But, currently, SqueakBox's interest and activities on the articles are minimum so, no matter what happened, it can be considered part of the past.

SqueakBox's acts of aggression have been repeated from time to time since his peace treaty proposal although very sporadically and it seems they will peter out sooner or later in a natural way.

In any case, I would really like if he would apologize for his past behavior and he will recognize it was not right (with this I do not claim that I have behaved like a saint, of course); mostly because I believe that it is the only way to ensure it will be not repeated. However, I am not sure if mediation processes were created to discuss the past or to solve, let's say, "personal problems" between users, especially if they can be considered to exist no longer. Zapatancas 13:42, 17 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]