Draft:Spider-Man 4: Fan Film, a page which you created or substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:Spider-Man 4: Fan Film and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Draft:Spider-Man 4: Fan Film during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. silviaASH (inquire within) 00:51, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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 reason left by Robert McClenon was: This topic is not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia. The comment the reviewer left was:

This draft or article is about an unreleased film. The film notability guideline identifies three stages in the production cycle for films:

• 1. Planned films that have not begun production (principal photography or animation). These planned films do not satisfy film notability.
• 2. Films that are confirmed by reliable sources to have begun production, but have not been released. These films are only notable if production itself satisfies general notability in terms of significant coverage. Mere mention of the start of production does not satisfy notability.
• 3. Films that have been released, whose notability is determined by reception and reviews, or a major notable award for excellence in some aspect of filmmaking.

This film draft must, at this time, be evaluated based on general notability of production.

The best practice with regard to unreleased films is usually to wait until the film is released, and then update the draft to include review information, and resubmit when the film is released and reviewed.

This draft has been Rejected by a reviewer in the Articles for Creation review process. DO NOT resubmit this draft or attempt to resubmit this draft or prepare or submit a draft that is substantially the same as this draft without discussing the reasons for the rejection. You may request a discussion with the rejecting reviewer, or you may request a discussion with the community at the Teahouse. A discussion will not necessarily agree to a resubmission. If this draft is resubmitted, or an attempt is made to resubmit this draft or an equivalent draft, without addressing the reasons for the Rejection, a topic-ban or a partial block may be requested against the submitting editor, and the draft may be nominated for deletion.

You may ask for advice about Rejection at the Teahouse.

Robert McClenon (talk) 04:23, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Chance997! 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! Robert McClenon (talk) 04:23, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How come my article gets declined? Chance997 (talk) 05:26, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please see all of the messages about this at Draft:Spider-Man 4: Fan Film, which this message is pertaining to. This has already been explained to you by multiple editors. Trailblazer101 (talk) 05:33, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your disruptive behavior, whatever its intentions, is likely to result in sanctions against your account. Blanking your talk page does not hide your previous actions; we can all see the page history and it will be relevant to us if this pattern of behavior continues. Please heed the warnings that have been repeatedly brought to you. silviaASH (inquire within) 06:16, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I would add to this that requesting your earlier draft to be deleted, before straight away recreating it, does not 'reset the clock' in any sense. A record of your edits and draft creations/deletions/etc. remains in the log, and even deleted pages can be seen by administrators. Your behaviour is rapidly getting into the areas of tendentious editing and gaming the system, neither of which is helpful, and I must warn you you're closer to being sanctioned than you probably realise. Please stop this now. Thank you. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:16, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Stop wasting people's time, or you will be blocked. Cullen328 (talk) 07:57, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

They are already on a final warning. Have they already violated it? Sergecross73 msg me 14:43, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

All right. Chance997 (talk) 14:49, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'd say whether or not Chance has crossed the line is up to you. They have definitely pushed the limits of my patience though. silviaASH (inquire within) 17:35, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know about you guys, but I had to explain to Chance that an hour is the same as 60 minutes in this discussion: Draft talk:The Flash (1990 film)#Notability?. (The draft, like a few of their other ones, is a WP:CONTENTFORK.) Trailblazer101 (talk) 04:47, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The likelihood that Chance is a minor seems fairly strong to me. Obviously whether or not that is true is none of our business and they are not required to tell us that (and if this is so, then I hope all the identifying personal information they've posted on their userpage(s) is mostly or entirely fictitious, for their own sake), but we should nonetheless keep that possibility in mind and be patient with them, even if it is a little bit annoying.

Chance, if you are in fact under 18, I recommend you read Wikipedia:Guidance for younger editors. silviaASH (inquire within) 05:05, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm weary of their willingness to listen. They bypassed the AfC rejection of Draft:The Flash (1990 film) and created it separately in the mainspace at The Flash (1990 film). I have marked the latter for speedy deletion, but it does not seem they are here to understand how Wikipedia works. Trailblazer101 (talk) 04:31, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

They also re-forked their Spider-Man 4 fan film draft to their sandbox (edit: they blanked the sandbox after I mentioned this). I didn't do anything about it because I wanted to avoid biting, but this pattern of editing definitely speaks to a serious inability to take a hint. I'd prefer this wasn't necessary, because I do still genuinely believe they mean well and don't want to discourage them, but unfortunately I think that Chance may need to be blocked again until and unless they make clear that they understand the problems with their current editing and will not do anything like this again. silviaASH (inquire within) 04:51, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your contributions. It seems that you have added Creative Commons licensed text to one or more Wikipedia articles, such as Men in Black: International. You are welcome to import appropriate Creative Commons licensed content to articles, but in order to meet the Wikipedia guideline on plagiarism, such content must be fully attributed. This requires not only acknowledging the source, but acknowledging that the source is copied. There are several methods to do this described at Wikipedia:Plagiarism#Compatibly licensed sources, including the usage of an attribution template. Please make sure that any Creative Commons content you have already imported is fully attributed. The text you copied to that page in this edit came from the contributions of another editor on Men in Black: International (score). Copying text from other Wikipedia articles is not against policy, but if you copy text from other Wikipedia articles or other freely licensed sources such as Fandom wikis, please acknowledge the source of this text in the edit summary. Also, please make sure that whatever you copy is in fact freely licensed, so as to avoid copyright violations. silviaASH (inquire within) 20:33, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

All right. I'll look it up, but thanks for the heads up. Chance997 (talk) 21:33, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop adding cast sections to the Rings of Power episode articles. I have explained why this should not be done, continuing to do it is disruptive. - adamstom97 (talk) 17:16, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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

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.

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of films). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

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:Superman: The Last Son of Krypton 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 or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 09:57, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I noticed that you recently created a new page, The Flash (1990 film). First, thank you for your contribution; Wikipedia relies solely on the efforts of volunteers such as you. Unfortunately, the page you created covers a topic on which we already have a page – The Flash (1990 TV series). Because of the duplication, your article has been tagged for speedy deletion. Please note that this is not a comment on you personally and we hope you will continue helping to improve Wikipedia. If the topic of the article you created is one that interests you, then perhaps you would like to help out at The Flash (1990 TV series). If you have new information to add, you might want to discuss it at the article's talk page.

If you think the article you created should remain separate, 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. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Additionally if you would like to have someone review articles you create before they go live so they are not nominated for deletion shortly after you post them, allow me to suggest the article creation process and using our search feature to find related information we already have in the encyclopedia. Try not to be discouraged. Wikipedia looks forward to your future contributions. Trailblazer101 (talk) 04:27, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, its been a week and I'm not seeing any improvement in your conduct. You're still submitting incomplete drafts repeatedly, and seem to have made no effort into understanding of our notability standards. And now you've moved into publishing rejected drafts. Not good. It's a drain on the community to constantly have to clean up your bad decisions.

Your account is blocked indefinitely. That doesn't mean "forever", it just means that, to edit again, you'll need to write up an unblock request that convinces an Admin that you're ready to edit Wikipedia. Right now it's quite apparent you're not ready.

See WP:UNBLOCK and WP:GAB for guidance on writing an unblock request. Please note that creating a new account (as you've done before) is not allowed, and will only make getting unblocked more difficult to accomplish. Sergecross73 msg me 13:53, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]