Svoboda | Graniru | BBC Russia | Golosameriki | Facebook
Jump to content

Talk:Thomas Watson (bishop of Lincoln)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
WikiProject iconEngland Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject England, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of England 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.
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconLincolnshire Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Lincolnshire, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Lincolnshire 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.
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Untitled

[edit]

This article looks like it's been copied verbatim from somewhere else. Possible copyright infringement?

There is no doubt in my mind that this is copyrighted and taken verbatim: where else do the first four or five letters of an article appear in all capitals? Someone really needs to look into this. Kakashi-sensei 15:25, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I agree, but it'd be hard to prove. Google searching doesn't turn up anything but this article. It could concievably be legit, so I guess it's innocent until proven guilty. Uttaddmb 20:08, 15 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Both the wikipedia article itself and this site imply that this text was originally authored by someone named John T. Wilford connected with the University_of_Lincoln. The IP address of the original post resolves to pc059151.lincoln.ac.uk. Therefore it is plausible that the wikipedia article was created by mr. Wilford himself. Unfortunately, I have not been able to find his email address or contact him. Rb82 13:40, August 10, 2005 (UTC)

I changed the heading and pulled the florid, biased and obfuscating text into something more legible and immediately readable. This article still needs a lot of work, though. It sounds like there's some rallying happening here, and the style seems informal in some places and dated.