User talk:Rebekahmae

Copyright problems with Thom edward keith
Hello. Concerning your contribution, Thom edward keith, 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). As a copyright violation, Thom edward keith appears to qualify for deletion under the speedy deletion criteria. Thom edward keith 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 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 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.

However, for textual content, you may simply consider rewriting the content in your own words. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with our copyright policy. Wikipedia takes copyright concerns very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. Thank you. Woogee (talk) 02:46, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Your note at Thom edward keith
Hi, the template above tells you everything you need to know about copyright difficulties and gaining permission for copyright. It's worth reading. The copyright issue is a bit moot, really, since the entry as it currently stands will have to be rewritten anyhow. And Wikipedia is a community-run project: whenever possible, communication is done in the open, not through phone calls. Cheers. Hairhorn (talk) 03:03, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Note, besides copyright issues, the article was essentially a self-promotional piece of a person who may not meet Wikipedia's inclusion guidelines. I suggest you read over the wording at: WP:BLP, WP:N and WP:COI prior to attempting to re-add any information pertaining to this. NJA (t/ c)  10:55, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

YouTube links
Linking to YouTube, as you did at Royal Crown Revue, is generally frowned upon since YouTube is a hotbed of copyright violations. Woogee (talk) 03:09, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Conflict of interest
Please read Wikipedia's Conflict of interest guideline at WP:COI. Woogee (talk) 03:10, 5 January 2010 (UTC)