" 
 :Firstly, I don't enjoy to be screamed at. Like I told you, I do not care about the article. I was not in the know of copyright procedure at the time, I have a learning curve. I haven't denied for one second my approach to topic was flawed, I should have aquired and presented copyright info before ""writing"" the article. Do not bite newbies applies as I was a newbie back then. I asked her if I could use it. She said yes. No one told me how to ask for permission so I asked for it with best of my abilities and knowlege which is far from perfect. It doesn't create a positive enviorment when a bunch of people scream at you as ""thief!"" ""thief!"", rather than an explanation.    3 July 2005 23:00 (UTC) 
 :Sorry for bothering you, it wasn't intentional.  I am a victim in the only sense that I didn't know how to ask for permission no one assisted me. I am not an arch-angel either. Sorry for all the trobble I caused you.    3 July 2005 23:00 (UTC) 
 ::I can't still explain you what website this came from becuase: 
 ::a) I do not have the text in question, us non admins cant access deleted material.   3 July 2005 23:00 (UTC) 
 ::b) I do not remember the urls either.   3 July 2005 23:00 (UTC) 
 :I will NOT try another administrator. I do NOT care if it stays deleted or not. What part of this do you not understand? You asked to resolve the issue not me. You innitiated the discussion not me. I was wrong yes, I later made it right, or at least tried.   3 July 2005 23:00 (UTC) 
 :I am not going to respond to the 3rd bullet. Frankly words are too strong for me to respond politely, so I wont. However, like I said above I apologise for causing you a mess. I would not want an apology in return as you haven't done anything wrong aside from biting the ex-newbie (at the time). Dealing with so many copy vio cases you just dont want to deal with newbies which is understandable, but still breaks my heart.   3 July 2005 23:00 (UTC)"