More on Protocols/Procedures/Courtesy 

Hi Bov,
Thanks so much for your kind reply. Our discussion was getting so long it was unwieldy to scroll though, so I thought I'd continue under a new heading. Hope you have no objection.
I'm still under the gun with that project I mentioned and am amazed that my last note was as long as it is!! Wanted to reply to a few points for the moment...I'm using numbered points because it makes it easier for you (and me) to refer back to.
1. Regardingn my making a clear distinction between me/us and "your editorial colleagues", yes, you're right. I guess I don't know enough about WikiP yet, but I clearly don't have access to the same "additional facilities" (which I take to mean "tools") as you, so I don't have the same control.
Sure, I could put a Copyvio on someone's page, but I rather doubt it would stay there any more than my {db}s did  I assume Copyvio notices are either 1. sent to all admins (or those who deal with Copyvios specifically), and/or 2. posted to the Copyvio page for you and your colleagues to make some sort of determination on. From what you say above, it appears that some Uber Admin(s) makes the final determination.
2. Also regarding "tools" I and, I suspect, most WikiP contributors have no power to Lock and page to insure it doesn't get Reverted by anyone else. Nor can we Delete a page, even our own. Nor do we have access, as I assume you do, to EB and other pay services to check for likely infringements.
There are even several services used by educational institutions which faculty regularly use to check for plagiarism in term papers, theses, etc. Perhaps you also have access to those? You didn't indicate how that EB page was accessed since the public can only get the "teaser" entry for Crapsey.
Thus, to paraphrase your quote and the old axiom: "we are all peers, with equal power to edit, but some of us are more equal than others!"
3. Regarding your statement that it's "actually relatively rare for a copyvio to be contested, and most pass without comment," are you saying that once a Copyvio is pointed out, the "offending contributor" simply concedes the point and allows the page to be removed without so much an objection?!! That's truly astouonding  I'd imagine that most folks do not deliberately borrow from others, however similiar the contents might be.
Have no idea what you mean by "the ones that are contested often end up in the sections at the top of the page." Can you point me to a sample of this?
4. Regarding your statement that "he EB page I'm referring to is , the one originally referenced  what do you mean? Referenced by whom? By your colleague?
Or are you obliquely saying that WikiP has the means of reading contributor hard drive caches and Recent URL lists to determine where they've been?! I know I didn't reference EB and don't know how you access their pay service, but if you're in fact suggesting that WikiP can somehow monitor member hard drives, I'd find that VERY disturbing...an outright privacy violation. Will run AdAware & Spybot S&D; just to see if anything they regard as "malicious" turns up with WikiP fingerprints on it! ;-) 
5. On your reply to 3 above that "Wikipedia does not, in general, use text 'with permission,' " I'm confused. The passage I quoted suggests that the authors are granting WikiP a GFDL "license," which, from my understanding of the law, means "with permission." The author still "owns" the material and, presumably can make whatever other use s/he wants of it but cannot expect payment from WikiP, restrict the editing of, or, for that matter, even withdraw permission for work submitted to WikiP.
6. Regarding your answer to 5 above that you "don't have access to any special posting info. It's all available to everyone, although some of it is better hidden or harder to use," this sort of relates to my #1 immediately above, and I guess I'm confused again. How in the world would Admins and other "watchers" like you (still don't know what your title is) know "what's new" on WikiP if you don't get notices or have some list you can comb through? Are you saying there's an actual public list of all new articles? If so, where is it, and what prompts you folks to check one article vs. another?
Again, thanks. Will try and get back later or tomorrow.