I've tagged the article for revdel as most of the text appears to be copied from a 1949 Project Gutenberg source. Although I could only find an archive dating to 2015, Earwig shows that the original 2005 version is an exact match of the source, so it is extremely likely that the article is a copyvio and not vise-versa. –dlthewave ☎ 18:57, 4 July 2019 (UTC)Reply
- @Dlthewave: I'm not sure there is a copyvio. The DAB is a 1949 book by an author who died in 1951. Therefore under Australian copyright law the copyright on this work expired in 2001 and was not renewed by the Free Trade Agreement with the USA. So while it's copying it's not a copyvio and I agree it was right to remove it but it's not a case where REVDEL is applicable. Nthep (talk) 21:11, 9 July 2019 (UTC)Reply