In the wake of a controversial European high court ruling last month that search providers like Google must remove “inadequate, irrelevant, or no longer relevant” materials from search results upon request by EU citizens, the US search giant has expressed a desire to alert users to when such results have been altered.

Google’s plan to flag censored search results will likely be similar to how the company notifies users that links have been removed due to a copyright takedown request. The search giant aims to place such notifications at the bottom of pages that would have contained links that have been erased in order to alert users of the change, reports The Guardian.

The company also plans to include statistics regarding “right to be forgotten” link removal requests in its biannual transparency report.

Google did not immediately respond to our request for comment.

Last month’s landmark decision by the European Court of Justice (ECJ) held that European residents have the "right to be forgotten"—to make Internet search engines remove links that contain information deemed incomplete or inaccurate. The plaintiff in the case said that this right was violated by Google's display of a 1998 story involving a forced property sale he used to pay off personal debts.

Since the ruling, Google has offered a new Web form enabling Europeans to submit similar requests for removal. After providing the form two weeks back, Google has been inundated with over 41,000 requests to take down sensitive search results, reports The Guardian. As we’ve previously described, such information-removal requests will be processed by humans rather than algorithms, on a case-by-case basis.

Google has set up an advisory committee to provide recommendations regarding how to proceed in the wake of the ECJ’s ruling, which includes technology big wigs like Google’s executive chairman Eric Schmidt and Wikipedia's founder Jimmy Wales. Wales has been a vocal critic of the ECJ ruling.

In an interview with TechCrunch, Wales described "the right to be forgotten" as a "terrible danger." Wales characterized the ruling as providing "a ‘right’ in Europe to censor some information that you don’t like… In the case of truthful, non-defamatory information obtained legally, I think there is no possibility of any defensible 'right' to censor what other people are saying."