Talk:Kilmeny of the Orchard

Novels Low‑importance

	Novels portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Novels, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to novels, novellas, novelettes and short stories on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and contribute to the general Project discussion to talk over new ideas and suggestions.NovelsWikipedia:WikiProject NovelsTemplate:WikiProject Novelsnovel articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Women writers Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women writers, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women writers on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Women writersWikipedia:WikiProject Women writersTemplate:WikiProject Women writersWomen writers articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Copyright Concerns

I temporary reverted the edition because the copyright status of the photo taken from Flikr Web page is not clear. Unless these are not declared to be licence under Creative Commons, I believe it can't use for Wikipedia. Please read following talk.

Also see Help / FAQ / Photos http://www.flickr.com/help/photos/#87

you are automatically granted copyrights to your photos. However, the nonprofit Creative Commons offers six default licenses as an alternative to full copyright so you can choose the one that best suits your needs.

The image http://static.flickr.com/91/267198886_34ab397931_o.jpg was tagged as "Non-free", it's suspicious that this photo was really licensed under Creative Commons by person who post it. I will back the edition as soon as the photo is clearly explained to be contains no copyright problem. -- Tolena (talk) 12:18, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Created new image with new rationale and replaced in article; hope new rationale suffices...GrahamHardy (talk) 01:36, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]