Talk:One Thousand Years of Trouble

Contested deletion
This page should not be speedy deleted as an unambiguous copyright infringement, because... I don't feel it is infringing. Compared to last time (on the One Thousand Days of Trouble edit that started that page, the same as this except I got the name of the album wrong in the title - Wikipedia wasn't providing the distraction from some particularly bad news so I kept getting jumbled up with things), I don't think there is any issue, whereas there may have been before. The copyvios report identifies a 61.9% confidence that I've infringed on the ireallylovemusic interview source, but it seems to just be several quotes and quotations (certainly not an excessive amount) (one line that wasn't in quotations I've since reworded) and where its picked upon on song names, the band name and the album title, which obviously aren't the copyright of the ireallylovemusic page. The other two sources it has some confidence on are similar stories, i.e .song names, band name, album title and quotes (and not that many of them). I have discussed this with a Wikipedia editor who I thought could help me address the issue but he is puzzled as to why it has been called for speedy deletion too. , please read this. --TangoTizerWolfstone (talk) 17:14, 15 September 2017 (UTC)

...Every plagiarism checker has its problems. Person who formerly started with &#34;216&#34; (talk) 17:17, 15 September 2017 (UTC)

Does this mean the page is okay and you are going to retract the speedy deletion nomination? -TangoTizerWolfstone (talk) 18:12, 15 September 2017 (UTC)

What about the other two URLs? Those have yellow (Above 50%) confidence too... I know it's not the very first URL in the report. Person who formerly started with &#34;216&#34; (talk) 18:14, 15 September 2017 (UTC)

I have checked them and they seem okay to me at least. -TangoTizerWolfstone (talk) 18:31, 15 September 2017 (UTC)