User talk:Shadowvslight

Copyright problems with COMPLICATIONS
Hello. Concerning your contribution, COMPLICATIONS, 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.facebook.com/complicationsfilm?sk=info. As a copyright violation, COMPLICATIONS appears to qualify for deletion under the speedy deletion criteria. COMPLICATIONS 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:COMPLICATIONS 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:COMPLICATIONS 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:COMPLICATIONS.

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. The Mark of the Beast (talk) 02:40, 3 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Please also note that Wikipedia is not a place to promote your (friend's) film. Even if copyright were not a concern with the article you created, it could have been deleted for blatant advertising. Wait until the film has been covered by reliable sources, and then base the article on what those independent reporters and reviewers say. —C.Fred (talk) 02:46, 3 January 2012 (UTC)