User talk:Octane/Archive Jun 2009

This is an archive of past discussions with User:Octane. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XXXIX (May 2009)

The May 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 03:36, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Constitution of Liberia (1847)

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Constitution of Liberia (1847), and it appears to include a substantial copy of http://onliberia.org/con_1847_orig.htm. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 15:52, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Hey - I've had to delete this article for the time being. The bulk of the article appeared to be a direct copy of the page CorenSearchBot noted which is copyrighted. Since you removed the tag without any kind of edit summary or explanation, I'm not certain if there's a reason that this text would be able to be used in Wikipedia. If I'm missing something, just let me know and I'll be happy to undelete the article. Shell ^babelfish 10:47, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

Just in case, I took a look at the article again. What concerned me the most was the list up top, which accounted for the bulk of the article and was copied directly from the page (which itself appears to be copied out of a book). I understand that there's often few ways you can say the same thing, but there were only 3 words difference in the text (besides things like changing 3rd to third). Perhaps it could have been made into prose instead of the list? Maybe we could list it at Copyright Problems and have a few other editors take a look? Shell ^babelfish 05:09, 13 June 2009 (UTC)