User talk:Jaing Bing

Welcome

 * }

Copyright problems with The Vancouver feet
Hello. Concerning your contribution, The Vancouver feet, please note that Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted text or images obtained from other web sites or printed material, without the permission of the author(s). This article or image appears to be a direct copy from http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/story/2009/10/28/bc-foot-found-running-shoe-richmond.html. As a copyright violation, The Vancouver feet appears to qualify for deletion under the speedy deletion criteria. The Vancouver feet has been tagged for deletion, and may have been deleted by the time you see this message. If you believe that the article or image is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under the Creative Commons Attribution/Share-Alike License (CC-BY-SA) then you should do one of the following:


 * If you have permission from the author, leave a message explaining the details at Talk:The Vancouver feet and send an email with the message to . See Requesting copyright permission for instructions.
 * If a note on the original website states that it is licensed under the CC-BY-SA license, leave a note at Talk:The Vancouver feet with a link to where we can find that note.
 * If you hold the copyright to the material: send an e-mail from an address associated with the original publication to or a postal message to the Wikimedia Foundation permitting re-use under the CC-BY-SA and GFDL, and note that you have done so on Talk:The Vancouver feet.

However, for textual content, you may simply consider rewriting the content in your own words. While contributions are appreciated, Wikipedia must require all contributors to understand and comply with its copyright policy. Wikipedia takes copyright concerns very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. Thank you. —C.Fred (talk) 17:27, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

The Vancouver Feet
Hi Jaing. Your article on the various feet has been deleted because it was not written in your own words. However, I think the case (or cases) is very interesting, and perhaps should have an article. If you want to work on another draft, I'd be willing to help. The Interior (Talk) 17:38, 17 July 2011 (UTC)