Hello, Wheels of steel0, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} and your question on this page, and someone will show up shortly to answer. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

• The Five Pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Editing tutorial
• Picture tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Naming conventions
• Simplified Manual of Style
• Discover what's going on in the Wikimedia community

We hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, you can sign your name on talk and vote pages using four tildes, like this: ~~~~. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! -- PBS (talk) 12:12, 9 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:

1. Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment; or
2. With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button ( or ) located above the edit window.

This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.

Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 13:30, 9 October 2014 (UTC) Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you tried to give Bitcoin fog a different title by copying its content and pasting either the same content, or an edited version of it, into another page with a different name. This is known as a "cut-and-paste move", and it is undesirable because it splits the page history, which is legally required for attribution. Instead, the software used by Wikipedia has a feature that allows pages to be moved to a new title together with their edit history.[reply]

In most cases, once your account is four days old and has ten edits, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page (the tab may be hidden in a dropdown menu for you). This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at requested moves to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other pages that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Wikipedia:Cut-and-paste-move repair holding pen. Thank you. Gparyani (talk) 22:10, 10 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Gparyani sorry but i didn't get what you are talking about... what a different title? it is a totaly new article which i created by searching "bitcoin fog" and after i didn't find anything like that i clicked on the red link of "bitcoin fog" for creating the article about it. --Wheels of steel0 (talk) 22:18, 10 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Gparyani it seems i accidently put that "for other uses see bitcoin fog", i copy past some code from the article about "silk road (marketplace)" and when i copied i changed the "silk road" to "bitcoin fog".

@Wheels of steel0: Your creation was automatically tagged as a copy-paste recreation. That was just a bad attempt on my part to guess which page it was copied from. Gparyani (talk) 14:27, 11 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

	Hello Wheels of steel0. Replies have been posted to your question at the Help desk. If the problem is solved, please place {{Resolved|1=~~~~}} at the top of the section. Thank you!
	Message added on 12:01, 14 October 2014 (UTC). You can at any time by removing the {{helpdeskreply}} template.

I see you requested help at the WP Help desk just above mine; my request is headed "Editing problem". You will see there that dispute resolution is also suggested, but that there are several kinds. I am waiting advice on which is best. I agree with what you say in your request for help and there are real problems with certain editors in this article. I am not experienced enough to know how to handle this, so we will have to wait for help from the Help Desk. --P123ct1 (talk) 20:49, 16 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

P123ct1 don't you know how these things get resolved in wiki? there is no somebody who can decide what to do and prevent them from edit the article as if it is their own? what is preventing us or anybody else from changing what they are doing?, i am realy confused with how wikipedia works.--Wheels of steel0 (talk) 00:17, 17 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

We cannot do anything until the Help Desk recommends which kind of dispute resolution is most suitable in this case; there are several kinds of dispute resolution. If you look at WP:DR they are described there. --P123ct1 (talk) 00:35, 17 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I am not sure if you are aware that Gregkaye has been taken to WP:ANI for disruptive editing. There is still time for you to join in and contribute to the discussion. --P123ct1 (talk) 15:07, 22 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

P123ct1 dose he going to be blocked from the article/wikipedia? this is some kind of a vote?--Wheels of steel0 (talk) 02:50, 23 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it is a vote. You add "Support" or "Oppose" and give reasons. It looks as if he will be blocked from editing this article and other articles related to the Syrian Civil War, as so far most of the editors agree on this and there are only two who are against it. I see you have done that. By the way, the notice below is fairly standard for editors who edit Syrian Civil War-related articles, of which ISIS is one. There is nothing to worry about and it doesn't mean you have done anything wrong. I have had one and it was fine. --P123ct1 (talk) 04:29, 23 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

P123ct1 something is gona be done on that issue? the admins are committed to do anything according to the vote or its all just a suggestion for the admins?.--Wheels of steel0 (talk) 18:50, 28 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I've no idea what happens next or who does what. This is the first AN/I I've attended. You could try asking Technophant, who brought the matter to AN/I; he is far more experienced in WP matters than I am. Btw, I pinged you, to make your view known on the Talk page here about an edit to the last Lead paragraph. I don't think the alert system (pinging) works with your username, as the red link says your page does not exit. If you go the end of that discussion I have linked to, you will see what edit I am talking about. Editors need to come to a consensus on this and most have given their view now, so I would be grateful if you would add yours. This is not canvassing, but my attempt to get editors come to a decision one way or the other. --P123ct1 (talk) 19:17, 28 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I've looked over the dispute resolution process. It's an informal process to help users either come to a voluntary resolution to the dispute or refer the matter to another forum. The wp:Mediation process is the last step, a place where both sides make their case and neutral experienced mediators make a decision that is binding and should settle the matter. If there's talk page discussions that just won't end, and there doesn't seem to be a possible end in sight I think that's the way to go. See Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Christian terrorism for an example. ~Technophant (talk) 01:41, 30 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Technophant i think we should take that to mediation if they can choose what to do and enforce him and his mate to stop acting as if they own the article, any kind of informal talking are just useless cause gregkaye is to stubber and blind and no body on this infromal vote/talk is willing to stop this "pationate contributer" from doing whatever he wants. anyway if the issue will go to mediation they will also choose if to call the islamic state a "caliphate" or "self-declared caliphate"? i think that we should talk about it to cause is also part of the POV pushing of gregkaye and misleads the readers.--Wheels of steel0 (talk) 18:45, 30 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Do you want to add your view on the edit that we are trying to determine consensus on? We are nearing reaching a decision now. I gave the link above. It concerns the last paragraph of the Lead and whether Muslims should be included in it. Who is Gregkaye's "mate" you refer to? --P123ct1 (talk) 08:28, 31 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

P123ct1 you mean the talk page of the islamic state article? you are choosing some specific edit or talk about the general POV pushing of gregkaye? cause calling them jihadist or not is just the tip of the iceberg her. and by his "mate" i mean that legacypac which sided with gregkaye blindly and he clearly have no real opinion on that matter.--Wheels of steel0 (talk) 04:53, 1 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please read this notification carefully:
A community decision has authorised the use of general sanctions for pages related to the Syrian Civil War and the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant. The details of these sanctions are described here. All pages that are broadly related to these topics are subject to a one revert per twenty-four hours restriction, as described here.

General sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimise disruption in controversial topic areas. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to these topics that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behaviour, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. An editor can only be sanctioned after he or she has been made aware that general sanctions are in effect. This notification is meant to inform you that sanctions are authorised in these topic areas, which you have been editing. It is only effective if it is logged here. Before continuing to edit pages in these topic areas, please familiarise yourself with the general sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.

This message is informational only and does not imply misconduct regarding your contributions to date.

Here's wishing you a belated welcome to Wikipedia, Wheels of steel0. I see that you've already been around a while and wanted to thank you for your contributions. Though you seem to have been successful in finding your way around, you may benefit from following some of the links below, which help editors get the most out of Wikipedia:

• Introduction
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Contributing to Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• How to write a great article
• Editor's index to Wikipedia

Also, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name using four tildes (~~~~); that should automatically produce your username and the date after your post.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! If you have any questions, feel free to leave me a message on my talk page, consult Wikipedia:Questions, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there.

I suggest you get rid of your redlink username by going to User:Wheels of steel0, and add a line or two about yourself (nothing too personal, see WP:USERPAGE) as well as the languages you know using the {{babel}} template and click save.

Again, welcome! ~Technophant (talk) 02:09, 6 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

In content to your recent thread related to the ISIL article I even made voluntary concessions on issues like the presentation of "rebel group". After your use of derailing tactics, walls of text and irrelevant content on threads related to the jihadist question raised I would be quite in my rights not give you the time of day. Please from this point argue fairly on the talk page. Gregkaye ✍♪ 06:20, 30 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

BTW, User:Technophant who you contacted here and who shortly after gave you the related welcome above has since been banned for his manipulations (add: which specifically involved multiple occasions of sock puppetry). Gregkaye ✍♪ 06:26, 30 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Gregkaye"derailing tactics"? "walls of text"? this is what you see when you don't bother to read and understand the text you looking at, and the only "irrelevant content" was the demagogic and desperate rhetoric you used to present irrelevant facts as arguments to support your claim and your POV pushing. so don't tell me where to talk and argue about that, i will talk about it where it needed so don't embarrass yourself with silly treats about "manipulation" and about how some user has been banned for some reason. --Wheels of steel0 (talk) 12:58, 30 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The above request that you argue fairly in your recent thread, specifically: the term "Rebel group controlling territory" is fake term made up in order to replace the term "unrecognized state" (most recent version). Gregkaye ✍♪ 08:04, 1 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The editor was banned. "... for his manipulations" is a WP:PA. ~ P123ct1 (talk) 13:06, 6 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

P123ct1, my self-declared friend, if you take issue with any aspect of my behaviour please be aware that you can always have the option, in regard to any interpreted guideline infringement, to challenge me directly. What was Technophant banned for and in what context? It was worth making it clear that there can be consequences when guidelines are not followed. I am surprised that in your intervention above you gave no support in trying to nip relevant non-guidelines based behaviours in the bud. GregKaye ✍♪ 15:14, 26 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.

Gregkaye ✍♪ 10:18, 4 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

{{subst:an3-notice} {{subst:an3-notice} you are being discussed at edit warring notice board https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Edit_warring#User:175.110.139.126_reported_by_User:Legacypac_.28Result:_.29

Technophant (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Technophant has requested an unblock under the standard offer. As one of about 60 editors who has contributed to User talk:Technophant you may have an interest in this request. Sent by user:PBS via -- MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:48, 18 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]