okay this is another one that on first read all kinds of warning bells are going off. I haven't done the deep dive yet, will go look at the blog and do some Googling to check for plagiarism - but I am nearly certain this is not the original work of the post author. Even if we pretend it is original work, this would not be submittable because it is a factual article and no sources are cited for all the facts presented. In this case, there aren't even any sources cited for the images, which are plainly not the original work of the post author. Again, if you see an article that seems "professionally written", a fact based article with the kind of polished images you would typically see in a professional publication that pays for stock images, and the article does not cite sources for the facts presented and/or sources for the images... this is an almost 100% certain dead giveaway that the article is plagiarized. It seems "professionally written"... because it IS professionally written! By a professional writer! Published in an actual professional publication! I will eat my shoe if this is the original work of the post author.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
I think it's original. Author has made many similiar posts
Even if it is original as far as the Curie thing goes it would need to have sources cited for all the factual information - I didn't actually dig around to prove or disprove plagiarism here because the post wasn't properly cited in the first place.