I put [[Thomas Sutpen]] on the [[Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/copyvio]] page because it is a word-for-word copy from [[http://www.uic.edu/depts/engl/projects/dissertations/kdorwick/engl214/juan/gloss.html]]. [[User:Stevertigo]] rolled back the copyvio boilerplate I'd put on the page and said in [[Talk:Thomas Sutpen]]: "I rolled the copyvio deletion back because this little text --even if copied from an edu site does not constitute a problem for us. There was no copyright notice on the source page, it was not copied in full, and theres no reason why the effort placed in calling this a copyviolation cant be better put toward changing the text to make it unique."

I'm certainly not qualified to do anything to this article. I had no idea who Thomas Sutpen was until I read this article. Am I then not allowed to discuss the article because I can't change the text? I don't know what to change it to, I don't have the background to do so. In the meantime, does that mean that I have to leave all texts alone that I know are copyright violations because I don't have the expertise to change them?

Is Stevevertigo correct that, because the page doesn't specifically have a copyright on it, it's fair game to be stolen and incorporated onto Wikipedia? I can't believe that.