We propose a method to determine whether a given article was entirely written by a generative language model versus an alternative situation in which the article includes some significant edits by a different author, possibly a human. Our process involves many perplexity tests for the origin of individual sentences or other text atoms, combining these multiple tests using Higher Criticism (HC). As a by-product, the method identifies parts suspected to be edited. The method is motivated by the convergence of the log-perplexity to the cross-entropy rate and by a statistical model for edited text saying that sentences are mostly generated by the language model, except perhaps for a few sentences that might have originated via a different mechanism. We demonstrate the effectiveness of our method using real data and analyze the factors affecting its success. This analysis raises several interesting open challenges whose resolution may improve the method's effectiveness.