Hi. I can't believe you've managed to avoid talk page notes for so long on Wikipedia. :) I've reverted your changes to Substantial similarity for now, as I would like to discuss some of them. I've left a note at the article's talk page, Talk:Substantial similarity, explaining my concerns. I think some of the edits you made were very good; you expressed things more succinctly. But I am concerned about the diminishing of the lead and the removal of some information and sources. Please come talk about these changes there. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 12:47, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Clement Lincoln Bouvé, and it appears to include a substantial copy of http://www.arlingtoncemetery.net/clbouve.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. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.)

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) 17:57, 1 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Clement Lincoln Bouvé requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a clear copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words.

If the external website belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website but have permission from that owner, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission. You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding ((hangon)) to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. ALI ^{nom nom} 18:14, 1 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Status and Advice

As reviewing administrator, I do not see significant copyvio. One ortwo sentences seem to have been copied, and should be immediately rewritten. Please do not neglect to do this. ` DGG ( talk ) 18:41, 1 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, You cite the Martin article as contradicting the paragraph you deleted. Maybe it does, but it's a long article and I stopped looking after a few pages. Can you point out the part of the Martin article you are referring to? Thanks. Brianwc (talk) 02:17, 25 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed the ((prod)) tag from Public Domain Enhancement Act, which you proposed for deletion. I'm leaving this message here to notify you about it. If you still think the article should be deleted, please don't add the ((prod)) template back to the article. Instead, feel free to list it at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. Thanks! Ipsign (talk) 09:09, 26 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:19, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]