User talk:Larsenito

February 2014
Your addition to Danny Rivera has been removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted text, or images borrowed from other websites, or printed material without a verifiable license; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images&mdash;you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. John of Reading (talk) 10:47, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

Feb 27 2014
Hello John of Reading, I do have permit to use the text posted on Danny Rivera. I have been part of writing it myself for his web page. The one on Wikipedia was flawed and inaccurate. I am not aware that this content is copyrighted. I will try to find out how to get some sort of a license, since it is partly from myself. Larsenito (talk) 11:17, 27 February 2014 (UTC) Larsenito
 * OK; the page you need to look at is Donating copyrighted materials. But even then, other editors may decide that the text is not suitable for an encyclopedia article. If you are here to promote this artist, please have a look at the Conflict of interest guidelines. -- John of Reading (talk) 11:49, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

Feb 27 2014
I'll look it up (have to learn this stuff). The bio-pages on the website will be CC today. I myself have been publishing CC since 2007 and also been ambassador for Creative Commons in the Nordic Countries. The bio on this artist (that I have known for years privately) is not meant as a promotional text at all. The purpose id to set the record and do away with incorrect nonsense. Activities to promote the artist's work goes on other places. The purpose is to have at least two places, where data are correct as a reference. That is why I entered Wikipedia with this.

Mar 6 2014
Hello again, the text in question are now marked Creative Commons Sharealike 3.0 Unported License and the GNU Free Documentation License. It is not promotional. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Larsenito (talk • contribs) 23:07, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Thank you. I've made a note on the article talk page. If you put the text back in the article, it shouldn't be treated as a copyright violation. You may find the text is altered by other editors for other reasons, though. -- John of Reading (talk) 07:44, 6 March 2014 (UTC)