User talk:Lakshyadave257

  1. Home
  2. Wiki

Welcome!

[edit]

Hi Lakshyacapitalbox! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Happy editing! DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:21, 16 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: sandbox (September 16)

[edit]
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by DoubleGrazing was:
This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources.
 The comment the reviewer left was:
All the references are wrapped inside 'nowiki' tags for some weird reason, hence why none of them render correctly. Please remove all nowikis from the text, there should be no reason to use them at all.
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.
DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:22, 16 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Teahouse logo
Hello, Lakshyacapitalbox! Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:22, 16 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

September 2025

[edit]
Information icon

Hello Lakshyacapitalbox. The nature of your edits gives the impression you have an undisclosed financial stake in promoting a topic, but you have not complied with Wikipedia's mandatory paid editing disclosure requirements. Paid advocacy is a category of conflict of interest (COI) editing that involves being employed (or being compensated in any way) by a person, group, company or organization to promote their interests. Paid advocacy on Wikipedia must be disclosed even if you have not specifically been asked to edit Wikipedia. Undisclosed paid advocacy is prohibited by our policies on neutral point of view and what Wikipedia is not and is an especially serious type of COI; the Wikimedia Foundation regards it as a "black hat" practice akin to black-hat search-engine optimization.

Paid advocates are strongly discouraged from direct article editing and should instead propose changes on the talk page of the article in question if an article exists. If the article does not exist, paid advocates are strongly discouraged from attempting to write an article at all. At best, any proposed article creation should be submitted through the articles for creation process, rather than directly.

Regardless, if you are receiving or expect to receive compensation for your edits, broadly construed, you are required by the Wikimedia Terms of Use to disclose your employer, client and affiliation. You can post such a mandatory disclosure to your user page at User:Lakshyacapitalbox. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Lakshyacapitalbox|employer=InsertName|client=InsertName}}. If I am mistaken – you are not being directly or indirectly compensated for your edits – please state that in response to this message. Otherwise, please provide the required disclosure. In either case, do not edit further until you answer this message. DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:22, 16 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there,
I just noticed the message, I am new to Wikipedia. I do not work for the employer but used to work for them. Is that an issue still? Any help here would be appreciated. Lakshyacapitalbox (talk) 07:53, 16 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I have uploaded the mandatory disclosure, if there is COI still, I tried be as neutral and factual as possible, and will be more than willing to edit the article further based on your feedback. Apologies for the issues. Lakshyacapitalbox (talk) 07:59, 16 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for making the disclosure. I must say you've chosen an odd username, if you no longer work for this business? But even if that is the case, you clearly have a conflict of interest, which needed disclosing regardless. Thanks, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:01, 16 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah sorry, because I was thinking to add just one article, that's why. Will change the username now. Can I resubmit now? or some other edits are required. Lakshyacapitalbox (talk) 08:04, 16 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
You can resubmit now, since you've resolved the problem with the nowiki'd citations. However, if you do resubmit now, the draft will be declined, because there is no evidence that this business is notable according to the WP:NCORP standard. We need to see significant coverage of it in reliable and independent secondary sources, and we need to see multiple such sources; this draft cites none. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:25, 16 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Understood, let me improve on the citations part. Look deeper. Thanks! Lakshyacapitalbox (talk) 08:42, 16 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @DoubleGrazing
I have improved the article and added more references, especially mentions from local media. Please have a look.
Will wait for your feedback!
Thanks in advance. Lakshyadave257 (talk) 12:16, 16 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If you believe you have addressed the issues I've outlined, please resubmit the draft, and another reviewer will assess it.
I have moved it into the draft name space, you can now find it at Draft:CapitalBox. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 12:32, 16 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: CapitalBox (September 16)

[edit]
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Aydoh8 was:
Your draft shows signs of having been generated by a large language model, such as ChatGPT. Their outputs usually have multiple issues that prevent them from meeting our guidelines on writing articles. These include:
Please address these issues. The best way is usually to read reliable sources and summarize them, instead of using a large language model. See our help page on large language models.
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.
Aydoh8[what have I done now?] 12:40, 16 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: CapitalBox (September 17)

[edit]
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by Pythoncoder were:
Your draft shows signs of having been generated by a large language model, such as ChatGPT. Their outputs usually have multiple issues that prevent them from meeting our guidelines on writing articles. These include:
Please address these issues. The best way is usually to read reliable sources and summarize them, instead of using a large language model. See our help page on large language models.
This submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia. Encyclopedia articles need to be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources, not just to materials produced by the creator of the subject being discussed. This is important so that the article can meet Wikipedia's verifiability policy and the notability of the subject can be established. If you still feel that this subject is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, please rewrite your submission to comply with these policies.
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.
—pythoncoder (talk | contribs) 07:43, 17 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: CapitalBox (September 18)

[edit]
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Pythoncoder was:
Your draft shows signs of having been generated by a large language model, such as ChatGPT. Their outputs usually have multiple issues that prevent them from meeting our guidelines on writing articles. These include:
Please address these issues. The best way is usually to read reliable sources and summarize them, instead of using a large language model. See our help page on large language models.
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.
—pythoncoder (talk | contribs) 08:56, 18 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]