User talk:MarioFan294

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by Curb Safe Charmer were:

This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:

• in-depth
  (not just passing mentions about the subject)
• reliable
• secondary
• independent
  of the subject
  

Make sure you add references that meet these criteria before resubmitting. Learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

This submission seems to be a test edit and not an article worthy of an encyclopedia. Please use the sandbox for any editing tests, but do not submit for review until you have an article that you want reviewed for inclusion in Wikipedia. Thank you.

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:Scary logos 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.

Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 08:21, 21 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, MarioFan294! 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! Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 08:21, 21 March 2023 (UTC)[reply] ==

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of Honest Game Trailers episodes is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Honest Game Trailers episodes until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

BuySomeApples (talk) 03:34, 3 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:34, 4 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You are welcome to contribute content that complies with our

Thank you. BetterthanCLGWiki. 04:41, April 10, 2023.

An article you recently created,

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Robertsky was:

This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:

• in-depth
  (not just passing mentions about the subject)
• reliable
• secondary
• independent
  of the subject
  

Make sure you add references that meet these criteria before resubmitting. Learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

 The comment the reviewer left was:

See

WP:NBUILDING

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:SM City Roxas 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.

– robertsky (talk) 11:58, 23 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia.

Hey, I noticed you made an edit copying a section of

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Proof of Life, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A "bare URL and missing title" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Roman J. Israel, Esq., may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A "bare URL and missing title" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a

Please do not add or change content, as you did at The Social Network, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. DonIago (talk) 13:48, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please review

This user continues to indiscriminately add soundtrack information to articles([1]) and does not appear to be paying any attention to talk page warnings. -- 109.77.195.253 (talk) 10:38, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for pointing this out. If it continues along with their other disruptive editing patterns, exacerbated by their failure to engage here, opening a

WP:ANI case is probably the next step. DonIago (talk) 16:16, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply

]

Requesting a

WP:SOCK check might be more expedient, this pattern of edits is weirdly familiar. (I am very reluctant to engage with the admin process and be told again that very exact and precise formatting is needed for them to even bother looking into an issue.) -- 109.77.200.213 (talk) 20:10, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply

]

I wouldn't personally be comfortable doing so as I'm unfamiliar with the background. I checked their contributions since yesterday and I'm not seeing anything that sticks out as problematic. If/when they make more problematic edits and

diffs are provided here, I'm certainly willing to consider escalating the matter. DonIago (talk) 20:31, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply

]

Tagging your own edits as citation needed is pretty weird, and something I've rarely seen, which is why I thought this might be a sock puppet. He seems to stopped doing that at least for now. He does seem to still be adding Track listings that do not seem appropriate, see February 2 (diff). -- 109.79.65.192 (talk) 20:24, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Combined with their failure to acknowledge any of the messages here, this has become a problem. I'll put together an ANI filing. DonIago (talk) 20:41, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I sincerely believe this is a repeat offender. They are starting to seem increasingly familiar, and might be one of the people I had difficulty with before because they absolutely refused to acknowledge the guideline

WP:OVERSECTION and were subdividing already very small sections into even smaller ones (see this diff for example). This could all be resolved if they were simply willing to explain their changes with meaningful edit summaries, and discuss occasionally and try to edit collaboratively. -- 109.79.65.192 (talk) 20:50, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply

]

Please leave any further commentary you might have on this, including your above comment if you wish, at

WP:ANI. I don't have enough information to comfortably suggest that they're a sock; if you do, you should present it there. Thanks. DonIago (talk) 21:59, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply

]

Just stop. Don't do it again. (diff) Either provide proper sources or do not add to this encyclopedia. You should not be marking your own edits as {{Citation needed}}. -- 109.79.66.13 (talk) 14:35, 27 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Seriously (diff) -- 109.79.66.13 (talk) 14:36, 27 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I hope you are not the same person as anon editor 24.111.55.7 who had this exact same bad habit for many years. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:24.111.55.7#Do_not_tag_your_own_edits_as_Citation_needed -- 109.79.66.13 (talk) 14:57, 27 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop. If you continue to harm Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing.

This user is clearly not listening and hours after being asked nicely continues to tag their own edits as citation needed.(diff) I do not want to have to report them to administrators, I want this user to stop, or better yet include proper sources when they add to this encyclopedia. -- 109.77.195.253 (talk) 12:49, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Deleting archive URLs? (diff) What do you think you are doing? How is that constructive?

You really need to follow the

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. DonIago (talk) 21:01, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing the article-space for abuse of editing privileges.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.

You have been indefinitely blocked for persistent failure to heed warnings on user talk page, or discuss your edits on article talk pages. Please engage with the editors at either the article talk page, or at

Admins - happy for the editor to be unblocked (without checking with me) if/when they start participating on article and/or user talk pages, and preferably at the ANI thead also to explain their actions. Daniel (talk) 22:09, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]