User talk:Speedymcfly

October 2022

Hello, I'm Mako001. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Super Mario Bros. (film), but you didn't provide a source. I’ve removed it for now, but if you’d like to include a citation to a reliable source and re-add it, please do so! If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Mako001 (C) (T) 🇺🇦 08:01, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

November 2022

Welcome to Wikipedia. We appreciate your contributions, but in one of your recent edits to The Super Mario Bros. Movie, it appears that you have added original research, which is against Wikipedia's policies. Original research refers to material—such as facts, allegations, ideas, and personal experiences—for which no reliable, published sources exist; it also encompasses combining published sources in a way to imply something that none of them explicitly say. Please be prepared to cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. You can have a look at the tutorial on citing sources. Thank you. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 13:36, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Speedymcfly! Your additions to The Super Mario Bros. Movie have been removed in whole or in part, as they appear to have added copyrighted content without evidence that the source material is in the public domain or has been released by its owner or legal agent under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license. (To request such a release, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission.) While we appreciate your contributions to Wikipedia, there are certain things you must keep in mind about using information from sources to avoid copyright and plagiarism issues.

You can only copy/translate a small amount of a source, and you must mark what you take as a direct quotation with double quotation marks (") and cite the source using an inline citation. You can read about this at Wikipedia:Non-free content in the sections on "text". See also Help:Referencing for beginners, for how to cite sources here.
Aside from limited quotation, you must put all information in your own words and structure, in proper paraphrase. Following the source's words too closely can create copyright problems, so it is not permitted here; see Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing. Even when using your own words, you are still, however, asked to cite your sources to verify the information and to demonstrate that the content is not original research.
We have strict guidelines on the usage of copyrighted images. Fair use images must meet all ten of the non-free content criteria in order to be used in articles, or they will be deleted. To be used on Wikipedia, all other images must be made available under a free and open copyright license that allows commercial and derivative reuse.
If you own the copyright to the source you want to copy or are a legally designated agent, you may be able to license that text so that we can publish it here. Understand, though, that unlike many other sites, where a person can license their content for use there and retain non-free ownership, that is not possible at Wikipedia. Rather, the release of content must be irrevocable, to the world, into either the public domain (PD) or under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license. Please see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials.
Also note that Wikipedia articles may not be copied or translated without attribution. If you want to copy or translate from another Wikipedia project or article, you must follow the copyright attribution steps described at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. See also Help:Translation#License requirements.

It's very important that contributors understand and follow these practices, as policy requires that people who persistently do not must be blocked from editing. If you have any questions about this, please ask them here on this page, or leave a message on my talk page. Even if it weren't copyrighted it would still be removed as it is just a leak. Thank you. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 14:07, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

)

Copyvios, last warning

If you keep up the close paraphrasing (and edit warring as of your most recent edit), trust that you will be blocked. Deleting warning messages and refusing to engage doesn't exactly bode well. Please discuss content disputes at the article talk page instead of re-reverting. Throast ^{{{ping}} me!} (talk | contribs) 16:16, 6 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Closely paraphrasing again after explicit warning

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 60 hours for violating copyright policy by copying text or images into Wikipedia from another source without evidence of permission. Please take this opportunity to ensure that you understand our copyright policy and our policies regarding how to use non-free content. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.

OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 16:30, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Super Mario Bros. Movie

Please stop adding that the final trailer has been released and audience response has been positive. This violates WP:FILMTRAILER. The sources did not post any reviews or commentary, they just simply posted the trailer. Readers don't come to Wikipedia to simply read about movie trailers. Mike Allen 15:50, 10 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

March 2023

Please stop your disruptive editing.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at The Super Mario Bros. Movie, you may be blocked from editing. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 17:27, 10 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I don't get how I'm disrupting anything by adding information with sources, if you read the second article linked that's where my consensus is, I just don't get it Speedymcfly (talk) 17:40, 10 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You are going directly against consensus. Sources do not override consensus. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 17:40, 10 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You didn't read the article, it literally said the action and trailer was good, how clear cut do I need to be Speedymcfly (talk) 17:43, 10 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

How about I bold it for you? Sources do not override consensus. Give WP:CONSENSUS a read please. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 17:45, 10 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It's only been discussed on the talk page for months now. A website simply saying "the trailer was good" is not a reason to include it. This is an encyclopedia, not a news site aggregator. Mike Allen 17:49, 10 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

All right I understand now, I'll alter what I have written Speedymcfly (talk) 17:51, 10 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at The Super Mario Bros. Movie. You still have not gained any consensus for this. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 18:07, 10 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked

You are blocked for 2 weeks disruptive editing. You need to stop fighting with everyone through reverting, and gain consensus through talk page discussions. I also strongly encourage you take more time learning how to write for an encyclopedia. Your edits, and subsequent warnings you've gotten, seem to suggest that Wikipedia is some sort of dumping ground for content found elsewhere. It isn't. You need to learn to write things in your own words if you're going to be contributing to Wikipedia. We're not here to just dump marketing materials into articles. We're not here to promote the subject. Sergecross73 msg me 18:31, 10 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Speedymcfly (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I feel like I was too brazen with my attempts to make the article and I instead didn't listen and continued to do this, I have realized this was wrong and I apologize for it and I will learn how edit probably and abide by the rules Wikipedia imposes

Decline reason:

I am declining your unblock request because it does not address the reason for your block, or because it is inadequate for other reasons. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that

the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, or
the block is no longer necessary because you
1. understand what you have been blocked for,
2. will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
3. will make useful contributions instead.

Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information. Vanjagenije (talk) 13:27, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.