User talk:EuanHolewicz432

September 2021

Please stop injecting your biased American-centric ideology into articles and observe the correct procedure involving talk pages. It is inappropriate to revert information which is under discussion on talk pages. There are places in the world that exist outside the continental united states, and in many of these places, people think differently than you. --GrandmasterLiuHu (talk) 10:08, 17 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

User:GrandmasterLiuHu - I've no idea what in the world you could possibly be talking about, other than a disturbing lack of AGF relating to an issue that I'm utterly unfamiliar with. Work on your tone and perhaps communicate the issue better and only then may we begin to find a solution to this problem you're referring to - whatever it may be. EuanHolewicz432 (talk) 11:16, 17 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

September 2020

Hello, I noticed that you may have recently made edits to Coco Chanel while logged out. Wikipedia's policy on multiple accounts usually does not allow the use of both an account and an IP address by the same person in the same setting and doing so may result in your account being blocked from editing. Additionally, making edits while logged out reveals your IP address, which may allow others to determine your location and identity. If this was not your intention, please remember to log in when editing. Thank you. ☾Loriendrew☽ ☏(ring-ring) 00:46, 27 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This is simply not true? If you mean editor 82.43.236.160, that is not my IP address and does not even point to the country I live in... I would like for you not to make presumptions without first consulting the proper channels to establish my IP address and seeing that it does not match that user's.EuanHolewicz432 (talk) 02:37, 27 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. snapsnap ^(talk) 01:44, 4 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of neutral point of view noticeboard discussion

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Neutral point of view/Noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.

Street trading licence

Poland has street trading licences not dissimilar to the ones in England and Wales, in fact if anything, they are much more sophisticated and thorough than in England, especially if you're selling honey or mushrooms for example with lots of licencing hoops to jump through to obtain permission and then the police and civil guard patrol do spot checks on vendors with heavy fines if you do not conform. The problem lies with the narrow UK-centric scope of the article rather than the redirect itself. I'm fairly sure lost of other countries use a street licencing system too. Abcmaxx (talk) 20:13, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The penalties referred to are related to "illegal street trading" ie. trading outside areas where trade is normally undertaken (markets, usually). Poland does not have a uniform and requisite "street trading license" that the UK has, only permissions to "set up shop" (note - this is strictly related to opening a market venue and not the activity of trading itself) in a certain location normally not used for trade which is a wholly different legal institution mostly stemming from local regulations rather than national law. The exact wording used on the party's website is "The [planned] bill abolishes street trading penalties and broadens the limits of unregistered [business] operation" - nothing related to "street trading licenses" which in the form presented in the formerly linked article are a specific feature of UK law as they are implemented. EuanHolewicz432 (talk) 23:13, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Actio Pauliana has been accepted

Actio Pauliana, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

DGG ( talk ) 09:44, 3 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Community Sanctions Alert

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in Uyghur genocide. Due to past disruption in this topic area, the community has enacted a more stringent set of rules. Any administrator may impose sanctions—such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks—on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on these sanctions. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

— Mikehawk10 (talk) 23:02, 12 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Alert

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in discussions about infoboxes and to edits adding, deleting, collapsing, or removing verifiable information from infoboxes. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

–MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 04:55, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

December 2021

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be repeatedly reverting or undoing other editors' contributions at Gaudie. Although this may seem necessary to protect your preferred version of a page, on Wikipedia this is known as "edit warring" and is usually seen as obstructing the normal editing process, as it often creates animosity between editors. Instead of reverting, please discuss the situation with the editor(s) involved and try to reach a consensus on the talk page.

If editors continue to revert to their preferred version they are likely to lose their editing privileges on that page. This isn't done to punish an editor, but to prevent the disruption caused by edit warring. In particular, editors should be aware of the three-revert rule, which says that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Edit warring on Wikipedia is not acceptable in any amount, and violating the three-revert rule is very likely to result in loss of your editing privileges. Thank you. --Ferien (talk) 19:51, 21 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

3RR. Keep it to yourself. EuanHolewicz432 (talk) 19:53, 21 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I thought it was fair to let both of you know seeing as the IP already broke 3rr with their 4 reverts. Sorry for bothering you.--Ferien (talk) 19:57, 21 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Chinese New Year!

	恭喜发财！
Happy Chinese New Year!

🐯🐯🐯 — Mhawk10 (talk) 02:10, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Azov Battalion

I have started a discussion in which you may care to comment at [[1]] Cheers Elinruby (talk) 02:09, 21 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]