Your article has sources, but all or most of them are:
Blogs
Solution: Remove blogs, as they aren't reliable sources.
Other Wikis (such as Wikia, or Wikipedia itself)
Solution: Remove these as sources, Wikipedia does not consider itself to be a reliable source, nor similarly any other wiki
Forums
Solution: In 99.9% of cases anything that is a forum will not be an acceptable source. The one exeption to this is if the forum is a) run by a company and has very strict regulation about what is posted where.. b) used to show commentary by average people in an article. Otherwise, remove forums.
Sources affiliated with subject
Solution: Wikipedia does not allow sources affiliated with subjects to be used as the only/main sourcing of an article. Find independent, third-party sources before resubmitting.
Sources are to social networks, Facebook, Linked-in, Myspace,
Solution: Social networks are never reliable sources, remove these.
Sources are to local news stations
Solution: I only decline these if the only sources are to a local news station. If only a few are to local news, it's usually acceptable
Sources are op-eds (opinion pieces or letters to the editor, etc.)
Solution: Op-eds are not reliable sources, as they are someone's opinion on a subject.
Exception: If you have a few op-eds as references under a "criticism" or "reception" section, I will overlook them more than likely.
Solution for all sourcing: Find independent, third-party, reliable sources and then resubmit article for review.
Your article has some good sources, but they are bare links.
Solution: Format links with information that can help readers find source even if Link rot occurs.
Some other reason in which I said "sourcing"
Solution: I may have made a mistake. Please review your article and then if you find no problems, post on my talk page. Include a link if possible.
Your article has been declined due to not establishing notability
Solution: Add reliable sources (see above) that establish notability. There isn't a specific number of sources required, to some extent it depends on the qualify of the coverage, but note 'multiple' references to independent significant coverage in reliable sources are required, and your article cannot be accepted without these.
your submission is declined as it reads like an essay
Solution: Rewrite your article with an encyclopedic tone. Use a lead paragraph, and then seperate the information into relevant heading. Add an infobox if applicable.
your submission does not meet NPOV
Solution: Rewrite your submission without having it sound like it is in favor (or not in favor) of the subject. Some words to avoid: Amazing, Awesome, Awe-inspiring, love, hate, best, worst, hottest, passion,best, worst, greatest, noble, inspirational, etc.
your submission sounds like an advertisement
Solution: Rewrite removing any promotional material. An encyclopedia is not a place to try to get sales leads.
your submission is a plot summary
Solution: Add other sections. Some examples include "History", "Cast", or "Reviews" (be careful on reviews to provide both sides, good and bad).
Submission fails WP:NOT
Solution: Your submission is something Wikipedia is not. Go check out that policy for advice on how to fix it.
Solution: Go to the Wikipedia of the language you are posting in
Redirect request
Solution: Go to Requests for Redirects
Already exists
Solution: There is already an article on this subject, it is best if you look carefully at the existing article and add any extra relevant content to that article.
Can be merged
Solution: Your submission is too short to stand alone, but may have a place within an already made article
Duplicate
Solution: Check the other one, it may have been accepted.
