User talk:Hvn85

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 appears to be a duplicate of another submission, Panini Kabob Grill, which is also waiting to be reviewed. To save time we will consider the other submission and not this one.

 The comment the reviewer left was:

Please don't create multiple drafts on the same subject.

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.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to User:Hvn85/sandbox and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:05, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

Hi @DoubleGrazing, my apologies, that was done by mistake. I will continue editing only on the Panini Kabob Grill draft moving forward. Thank you. Hvn85 (talk) 15:33, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello Hvn85. 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:Hvn85. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Hvn85|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) 06:08, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

Hi @DoubleGrazing, thank you for your guidance. I’ve added the disclosure to my user page as suggested. Hvn85 (talk) 15:30, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello @DoubleGrazing, I edited all that needed. would you please review it again. Thank you. Hvn85 (talk) 15:47, 9 September 2025 (UTC)

I've already reviewed it. We normally try to avoid reviewing the same draft multiple times. You've submitted it successfully, so another reviewer will come along at some point and evaluate it. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 15:54, 9 September 2025 (UTC)

@DoubleGrazing Thank you very much for your guidance. Hvn85 (talk) 15:57, 9 September 2025 (UTC)

To follow on to this, you are claiming that you personally created and personally own the copyright to the company logo. Is that the case? 331dot (talk) 17:20, 1 December 2025 (UTC)

Hello @331dot, Thank you for responding. Yes I personally wrote this article and as I mentioned, I work for this company and on behalf of the owner, I have copyright to use the logo. Hvn85 (talk) 17:25, 1 December 2025 (UTC)

If that's the case, then you need to go to Commons and work with the editors there to change the copyright information to indicate that you are not the creator of the logo and do not personally hold the copyright, but are uploading it as a company employee- because you personally do not hold the copyright. (it would be legally unwise for your company to permit an employee to own the logo as the employee could leave the company and take the logo with them)

By uploading the logo to Commons you have made it available for anyone to use for any purpose with attribution- this includes competitors, who (theoretically) could use your company logo for any purpose, say, printing it on clothing and selling it- and your company would not be entitled to any money from the sale of its own logo. Logos are not typically uploaded to Commons for this reason- they are usually uploaded to this Wikipedia locally under "fair use" rules; this does carry some restrictions(like being unable to be used in a draft) but does allow limited use in articles.

Images are actually not relevant to the draft process, which only considers the text and sources. Images are an enhancement, not a requirement. Images can wait until a draft is accepted. 331dot (talk) 17:37, 1 December 2025 (UTC)

Thank you so much @331dot for your help. I am going to remove the logo. Hvn85 (talk) 17:50, 1 December 2025 (UTC)

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Panini Kabob Grill. Thanks! Valereee (talk) 12:48, 15 November 2025 (UTC)

Hi @Valereee Thank you so much. I replied to comment. Hvn85 (talk) 18:24, 16 November 2025 (UTC)

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:

• Promotional tone, editorializing and other words to watch
• Vague, generic, and speculative statements extrapolated from similar subjects
• Essay-like writing
• Hallucinations (plausible-sounding, but false information) and non-existent references
• Close paraphrasing
  

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.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Panini Kabob Grill and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

—pythoncoder (talk | contribs) 13:57, 20 November 2025 (UTC)

Hi @Pythoncoder I've used AI for better structure and Grammar, so I rewrite it by my self and submit it again. Thank you. Hvn85 (talk) 17:07, 20 November 2025 (UTC)

Your recent article submission has been rejected and cannot be resubmitted. If you have further questions, you can ask at the Articles for creation help desk or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help. The reasons left by Pythoncoder were: This topic is not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia. This submission is contrary to the purpose of Wikipedia. The comment the reviewer left was: Submitter has been unable to provide sources to show notability, and the draft is still AI-generated, which is not allowed.

—pythoncoder (talk | contribs) 03:54, 1 December 2025 (UTC)

Hi, I have already removed all content that was assisted by AI to improve the structure of the article. This article is entirely written by me, based on all the valid references. Thank you. Hvn85 (talk) 16:58, 1 December 2025 (UTC)

Apologies for reverting you at the Teahouse – that was a misclick when I went to go to another page on my watchlist. (Courtesy ping to Piñanana, who beat me to restoring your comment.) Dylan620 (he/they/she • talk • edits) 20:40, 12 December 2025 (UTC)

It is fine. Thank you. Hvn85 (talk) 20:42, 12 December 2025 (UTC)

Hi, why have you removed the paid-editing-disclosure from your userpage? You have resubmitted Draft:Panini Kabob Grill (which you shouldn't do, since it has been rejected already), so your disclosure is still pertinent. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 17:19, 16 December 2025 (UTC)

Hi, Actually after talking in WP Teahouse, I found that I should put COI in the article talk, because actually I don't paid for this article. I am the employee of this company and this is my idea to create the article and there is no payment for that. Hvn85 (talk) 17:48, 16 December 2025 (UTC)

Okay, that's fine; whether you disclose on your userpage or on the draft talk page makes no difference.

However, you have not used the correct template, you should use the {{Connected contributor (paid)}} one.

Since you are an employee of the business you're writing about, you are automatically considered a paid editor, regardless of whether you're explicitly paid to edit Wikipedia. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 18:25, 16 December 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for your help. I am going to put that one. Hvn85 (talk) 18:34, 16 December 2025 (UTC)

Hi. Don't submit this article again. Its entirely non-notable. If you submit it again then I'll need to speak admin about it. scope_creep^Talk 08:02, 19 December 2025 (UTC)

Hi. With respect, I disagree with you. Based on relevant WP guidelines and the reliable sources cited in the article, the subject meets the notability criteria. Also, there are multiple comparable articles currently existing on WP that demonstrate established precedent for this type of topic. Hvn85 (talk) 16:46, 19 December 2025 (UTC)

@Hvn85: No it doesn't. The process is, if the draft is rejected then its rejected. Move onto something else. This is warning. Your becoming disruptive. If you submit it again, then its WP:ANI. Its a becoming a WP:CIR issue. scope_creep^Talk 09:43, 20 December 2025 (UTC)

I would like to clarify that I didn't submit the same article, and I revise it each time based on the rejection reasons and feedback provided. Hvn85 (talk) 16:40, 22 December 2025 (UTC)

@Hvn85: Your now also a WP:UPE because your not declaring your a paid editor. Add the declaration back into the user page. scope_creep^Talk 09:47, 20 December 2025 (UTC)

I've disclosed my conflict of interest on the draft’s talk page, and you can review it there. There is no policy violation, and I've also requested assistance at the Teahouse to ensure everything complies with Wikipedia guidelines. Hvn85 (talk) 16:49, 22 December 2025 (UTC)

Hello, Hvn85. This message concerns the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, "sandbox".

Drafts that go unedited for six months are eligible for deletion, in accordance with our draftspace policy, and this one has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission, and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you read this, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the draft so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! DreamRimmer bot II (talk) 06:25, 22 February 2026 (UTC)