Best Blackhat Forum

This might be an isolated case, but I've got a tip for everyone who's thinking that Copyscape shares the same eye with Google in terms of spotting Plagiarism. Google is way advanced in terms of spotting article sources. In this quick case study, I did not receive a penalty from Google whatsoever, but there's a huge possibility that Google can track what Copyscape can't.

I downloaded Expired Article Hunter for the first time the other day. The app scraped articles in the dog niche and with my copyscape API connected, it returned no results (which means it's 100% unique, or the site is already un-indexed).

I wanted to test this out before using it for pillar content (yes, pillar). I fixed the article manually in Grammarly and made some improvements to make it read-worthy and valuable. The idea I had was to use Hubpages and see if I can bypass their strict proofreading.

1. I made a well-structured and attractive hub out of the article.

2. I did another Plagiarism check on Grammarly and Copyscape, this time in Copyscape website itself just to make sure. 100% Unique. No duplicate results. I sent my hub.

3. Within 24 hours I received an email from them that they have unpublished my article because of detected duplication. They also advised me to make changes.

4. I replied to their e-mail and defended that the content is unique and I find the duplication to be untrue. I said that the duplicated parts might just be snippets of my research (I asked this because I want to make sure that the suspected parts aren't just snippets).

I requested for the site URL. They have replied after 24 hours with 2 URLs.


Just in case there are factors which explain why it wasn't detected, I made a Copyscape copied text comparison instead of a URL comparison. It turns out 60% of the article is a duplicate of the link they provided. If you play innocent and take a good look at it, the paragraphs were blatantly duplicated.

== CONCLUSION ==

Copyscape, being a reputable (and perhaps most trusted) plagiarism checker, can't always detect duplicates. I don't know what Hubpages' system is for checking duplicates, but I'm very sure that Google can top that.

We don't know what Google does to its database of cached pages. I also think Big G is playing little in the game of detecting duplicates, but they have an even advanced algorithm for dealing with this... or will have that system in the future.

Expired Article Hunter is a powerful tool for scraping articles, but these articles aren't foolproof. Not to Big G, at least. If you want to use it, use it to combine content altogether and spin it for content other than your pillar. Who knows, Google may be doing the same process Expired Article Hunter does to check for related content from history and see if it's a duplicate? I don't see this to be a sandbox issue at the moment, since anyone can just leave their old domain and take their content with them. However, I recommend that you use expired and unoriginal articles in moderation.

BE SAFE.
May the Force be With You.

That's just hubspot. Their internal algo is different than what Google is doing.

Also there is a huge myth regarding the duplicate content. Basically, I just ignore it. Yes i wont outrank the source but also YES i will get content on google.
If combined with my own articles = authority.

Every authority site is doing this. They all started by simply copying content and posting on their site.

(12-22-2015 07:56 PM)aKinaKus Wrote: [ -> ]That's just hubspot. Their internal algo is different than what Google is doing.

Also there is a huge myth regarding the duplicate content. Basically, I just ignore it. Yes i wont outrank the source but also YES i will get content on google.
If combined with my own articles = authority.

Every authority site is doing this. They all started by simply copying content and posting on their site.

I think I would agree with you, only if you're referring to curation which most Authority sites does. But actually copying the content without linking back to source is a different story. But just like what I said, it's not a sandbox issue at the moment. Anyone can let their domains expire and take their content with them, so it's hard for Google to sandbox that.

If Hubpages detects duplicates that Copyscape can't, then perhaps Google will (if not is) work on this in the future.

The other issue with services such as Copyscape, is if the content is newer or the site the content is from is obscure, they may not have indexed it to even know the article(s) you're copying even exist. So they may show the content as unique when it's really not. I believe Copyscape simply looks for a chain of consecutive words (such as 3 or more) which exists elsewhere.

Speaking of article spinning tools, it wouldn't surprise me in the least if Google was looking for footprints of spun articles coming from these tools - such as common word replacements, consistent poor grammar, etc... For example, Spin ReWriter unfortunately sometimes suggests words with the wrong suffix, or plural when the replacement word should be singular, or phrases that are grammatically incorrect. They also have some misspelled words in their word dictionary. All Google would have to do is be on the lookout for these words/phrases to identify that an article has been spun using that particular service.

Automated article spinners also tend to suggest the same replacement words for a given word or phrase, so that too could become a "footprint" of sorts.

I don't really see the benefit of trying to hunt down expired articles. If you're able to find these articles yourself, what is stopping any other company trying to hunt down duplicate content from doing so as well?

(12-23-2015 10:18 PM)moonbeam Wrote: [ -> ]I don't really see the benefit of trying to hunt down expired articles. If you're able to find these articles yourself, what is stopping any other company trying to hunt down duplicate content from doing so as well?

I personally used EAH not for my own content but for monetizing a different purpose. I would say that it's a very helpful tool. However, EAH says in its sales page that you have no need to write content. Since the websites where it's from is deindexed, most people think that expired content is safe to use. I completely agree with you, and perhaps they're working on finding duplicates from cache or archives as well (or perhaps in the future). Thus I gave everyone a warning tip. :)

Thanks for this cool info pal. Were looking for this...

In addition to copyscape etc.. I generally take 5-10 random sentences from any content I purchase, slap it in double quotes (Ala: "MY sentence, would be this" ) and run google querys on it.

To date this has turned up several hundred plagiarized articles that copyscape missed.

Copyscape is a piece of shit.

I purchased Expired Article Hunter earlier this year and never used it. I believe in modifying articles for uniqueness anyway.