Talk:Williams v. Pryor

This article is part of WikiProject Alabama, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Alabama on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page to join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.AlabamaWikipedia:WikiProject AlabamaTemplate:WikiProject AlabamaAlabama articles

United States Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Law Low‑importance

	Law portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

copyright investigation

It seems this article is correctly flagged for copyright investigation, as its summary and analysis (“Details”) are copied (or closely paraphrased) from the source identified in the copyright tag. To rewrite this article, please refer to the full text of the decision, at

Also refer to the subsequent history, as noted in the “Full rulings” section of this article under the dates of “July 28th 2004” and “February 14th 2007” (as cited in the original version of this article). Bwrs (talk) 20:00, 8 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

We received a complaint, otrs:2012080710007952. This article must be deleted. There is no "good" version to revert to. -Nard (Hablemonos)(Let's talk) 02:42, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

- I have rewritten the offending portion of the article entirely based on text extracted from the 11th Circuit ruling of 2000. (http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/199910798.REH.pdf.) Note that the About.com article also includes many quotes from the same opinion. The last section of our article, "subsequent developments," has been left untouched as it was not copied from the About.com article. --agr (talk) 04:04, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Williams v. Pryor. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/20041213012800/http://www.law.emory.edu:80/11circuit/jan2001/99-10798.ma2.html to http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/jan2001/99-10798.ma2.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 06:10, 24 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]