User talk:WikiMaintenance

While it may turn out that the material you added to Castle doctrine and I reverted, is not actually subject to copyright I removed it for two reasons:
 * 1) One source specifically asserts copyright. In the US, it is common for the exact wording of law is not to be subject to copyright so I'm surprised to see the copyright notice but until we sorted out were going to err on the side of caution.
 * 2) Even if we can get clarification that the material can be used without getting specific permission, when we use exact wording from a source even if public domain, we always include the material in quotation marks, or a quote box and include a reference.-- S Philbrick  (Talk)  21:52, 25 September 2016 (UTC)