Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/SqueakBox (2nd)


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. All edits should go to the talk page of this case. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.

User:SqueakBox (2nd)
I believe User:SqueakBox has used his sock puppet User:Pura Paja to edit articles related to José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero, something forbidden by the ArbCom as can be found in Requests for arbitration/SqueakBox and Zapatancas.

The reasons that has led me to this conclusion are:


 * 1) He has vandalised the articles in a way typical of SqueakBox. He has redirected sub-articles such as Zapatero and the 2004 General Election, Zapatero's domestic policy, Zapatero's foreign policy , Zapatero's early years (1960-2000) to the main article José Luis Rodriguez Zapatero. Something SqueakBox has done a lot of times. In my opinion, it's absurd to redirect a subarticle to a main article. Redirections are used when several titles are valid for the same article. To redirect a subarticle to its parent article simply prevents other users from reading or editing them. If you don't want an article to be read why don't you ask it to be deleted? I believe isn't likely that two users come to do something so stupid.
 * 2) In the user page of User:Pura Paja, the supposed user claims he's from Britain, grew up in Spain and is from London. SqueakBox is also from Britain, what is a coincidence. What is more important and revealing is that this British user's first edits (see his contributions: ) are so similar to the nonsensical edits by User:SqueakBox in a Spain-related article. Moreover, he's not posted any explanation in any talk page to justify his decision although it supposed a change so depth to five articles.
 * 3) SqueakBox has created sock puppets in the past to circumvent the ArbCom's decision as can be found in Suspected sock puppets/SqueakBox.

In regard to SqueakBox's obssesion with redirecting the articles the following text was posted in the evidence of the Arbitration case:

Hagiographer 08:41, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
 * SqueakBox vandalized the articles Zapatero's years as an opposition leader, Zapatero and the Local and Regional Elections of 2003, Zapatero and the 2004 General Election, Zapatero's domestic policy, Zapatero's foreign policy by redirecting them to the main article (José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero) from May 2, 2005 to January 16, 2006. SqueakBox claimed those articles were unnecessary (here, here) without ever explaining why he did not request their deletion, until he presented an AfD in December 28, 2005 . He resorted to edit warring to keep the redirections (for example, in Zapatero and the Local and Regional Elections of 2003 he recovered the redirects here, here, here, here, here), even after the AfD was rejected and archived. He was only stopped when I threatened to report his behavior (here and here).
 * I will take this to the administrators noticeboard, as I am currently involved in a "dispute" with Squeak and I am the admin who normally patrols this page. Please check Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#SqueakBox sockpuppets. Iola k ana |T  13:51, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

What rot, I am in London not Hondurss81.158.46.131 14:46, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Zapatero isnt on my watchlist any more and I have no interest in the article. probably a Zapatancas sockpuppet but who knows? What is certain is that I am in honduras as I can prove, SqueakBox 22:06, 17 August 2006 (UTC) Here is my IP, SB, 63.245.13.229 22:07, 17 August 2006 (UTC) Hagioghrapher cant claim its a coincidence that 2 people from the UK are editing this internationalo encyclopedia, SqueakBox 22:08, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Also Hagiographer is lying to claim I am vandalising Zapatero articles, I am no vandal and hjis lie, identical to those of Zapatancas, merely shows he is Zapatancas, SqueakBox 22:13, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

This says that I am in Florida (close enough) and the person editing Zapatero is in London, hence this person cannot be me, SqueakBox 00:44, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

This is vandalism, rapidly reverted to the Pura Paja not the Hagiographer version and done quickly. Perhaps Hagiographer would explain why after the ban on Zapatancas and I at Zapatero he reverted to the Zapatancas version if he is not Zapatancas, perhaps Pura Paja was reverting him as a banned user from the article, that would certainly explain his actions while his lack of edit comments may be because he is a new user, unlike Hagiographer who writes edit comments identical to Hagiographer's, an obvious conclusion given they are both from Spain (well that is using Hagiographer's logic). He wonders why anyone else might agree with me yet the afd showed I had a lot of support in my desire to eliminate those unencyclopedic and unnecessary articles so to claim only I want the redirects is evidently false. Hagiographer has already chased one person off the wikipedia with his false accusations, I on the other hand have never used a sockpuppet here at Wikipedia as I am a man of integrity (means honradez, conoces la palabra y su significancia, Hagi?) and for anyone to claim otherwise would be a smear on my character that I am little disposed to tolerate as businessman with a reputation to keep that is important, SqueakBox 00:49, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

It seems to me that either SqueakBox has gone back home on holiday and he's using somebody he knows in Honduras to play the game of the two IPs or he's in Honduras and he's using somebody he knows in Britain. If SqueakBox wants us to believe Pura Paja is not a sock puppet of him he has to make him explain why he repeats his absurdities. What's the use of redirecting a sub-article to the main article?! Why Pura Paja repeats the same attacks that SqueakBox? Why he makes no mention to content like SqueakBox? Hagiographer 07:32, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

It's quite evident SqueakBox has things to hide. If not he wouldn't use lies to defend himself. He claims he had a lot of support in the Afd. Well in Articles for deletion/Zapatero and the 2004 General Election it can be found that simply nobody but him asked the article to be deleted (nobody posted Delete). Hagiographer 07:51, 18 August 2006 (UTC)


 * RFCU came back unrelated. But maet-puppetry is certainly possible here. Iola k ana |T  12:47, 18 August 2006 (UTC)