Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Plagiarismdetect


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was speedy delete as a combination of a user test and a copyright violation. I searched for several parts of this article, and was unsurprised, given the article title (which matches the name of a web site that purportedly provides a plagiarism detection service that uses search engines), to find that they had been lifted wholesale, word-for-word, from various published articles and papers, sometimes written by the authors cited, sometimes not. Wikipedia is clearly being abused for some form of test. What the exact form of the test is matters not, really. Whatever the purpose of uploading this content here was, it clearly wasn't to contribute an encyclopaedia article to Wikipedia. Uncle G (talk) 20:51, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

Plagiarismdetect

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Apparently an essay, fails WP:V and WP:NOR, title makes me wonder if this is a hoax Mister Senseless&trade; (Speak - Contributions) 18:44, 26 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete It's an essay, not encyclopedic. --Cocomonkilla (talk) (contrib) 18:59, 26 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete Don't really agree with most of what's been said so far. It seems to me that it could be a good faith attempt.  The title is very suspicous but that could be a simple editing error - it makes no sense otherwise.  I don't think WP:NOR applies and I see no evidence of any POV pushing.  WP:V is more difficult, it does give references but they are incomplete, so difficult to check up.  I have tried to find them on Google scholar (which is nowhere near 100% definitive) and only one out of the first four refs gets a (possible) hit.  Suspicous, but not definitive grounds for deletion, and in any case, references for such a subject are easy to come by so the article could, in principle, be fixed.  However, what the article actually seems to be about is bioethanol, on which we already have an excellent mature article.  This article is lightweight by comparison and completely non-wiki house style.  I say delete per WP:CFORK and point the author to the existing article which he/she may be able to improve.  Sp in ni  ng  Spark  19:17, 26 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Strong delete — Soapboxing and blatant POV-pushing. I also have no clue as to why the title is called as such. MuZemike  ( talk ) 20:09, 26 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete Considering that this is an essay on ethanol, the fact that this essay has such a title makes me suspicious that this is indeed plagiarism. Also it falls WP:NOTOR, WP:NPOV, WP:SOAP and WP:NOTWEBHOST as Wikipedia is not the place to post personal essays. Doc StrangeMailbox Logbook 20:17, 26 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete. It definitely fails WP:OR and, as others have said, if it was cleaned up it would be renamed Bioethanol at which point it is redundant anyway.  Unusual? Quite  TalkQu  20:40, 26 October 2008 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.