VroniPlag Wiki


31.200Seiten in
diesem Wiki
Add New Page
Add New Page Diskussion4

A critical discussion of the publication by Nasrullah Memon, Uffe Kock Wiil, Pir Abdul Rasool Qureshi and Panagiotis Karampelas: Exploring the Evolution of Terrorist NetworksBearbeiten

in U.K. Wiil (ed.), Counterterrorism and Open Source Intelligence, Lecture Notes in Social Networks 2, 413-427, Springer-Verlag/Wien 2011 →ISBN 978-3-7091-0387-6 →Download


The analysis presented here (as of 5 February, 2014), including all documented findings of plagiarism, is available for →download.


The pages 413-426 of the paper have been analyzed. Page 427 contains only part of the bibliography and has been excluded:


Clicking on the respective page number in the table above leads to the documentation of the text parallels on the corresponding page.

Pages in light grey contain no documented plagiarism. On pages coloured in dark blue between 0% and 50% of the text is plagiarized.


The following chart illustrates the amount and the distribution of the findings of text parallels. The colours show the type of plagiarism diagnosed:

  • red="Verschleierung": the source of the text parallel is not given, the copied text will be somewhat modified.

Nm5 col 1a.png

Prominent findings of plagiarismBearbeiten

  • Fragment 419 02: About half a page is taken from an unnamed source with only minor adjustments apart from the substitution of "terrorists" for "academic colleagues" and correspondingly "foot-soldier" for "assistant professor" and "cell leader" for "department chairperson".


  • Currently there are 6 reviewed fragments documented that are considered to be violations of citation rules. For 5 of them there is no reference given to the source used („Verschleierungen“ and „Komplettplagiate“). For 1 fragments the source is given, but the extent of the used text is not made clear („Bauernopfer“).
  • The publication has 14 pages that have been analyzed. On a total of 2 of these pages violations of citation rules have been documented. This represents a percentage of 14.3%. The 14 analyzed pages break down with respect to the amount of text parallels encountered as follows:
Percentage text parallels Number of pages
No text parallels documented 12
0%-50% text parallels 2
50%-75% text parallels 0
75%-100% text parallels 0
From these statistics an extrapolation of the amount of text of the publication under investigation that has been documented as problematic can be estimated (conservatively) as about 6% of the main part of the publication.


The paper is to a large degree identical to the publication Wiil et al. (2010b) (retracted) by three of the authors of the paper. In comparison to this earlier publication, only the introduction has been extended, a short section at the end of chapter 4 and the section 3.3 have been added. The rest of the publication is a verbatim copy of the previous paper with only very minor adjustments. More than 75% of the text is identical to text in the 2010 article and so are 5 of 6 figures and one table.

In addition, much of the section 3.3 can already be found in Memon et al.(2007b).

The following chart illustrates the amount of duplicated text. The colours show two sources of duplicated text:

Nm5 col 1b.png

Relevant LinksBearbeiten


Aufgabe: Fragmentieren

Aufgabe: Sichten

Aufgabe: Schützen (nur Administratoren)

Bearbeitung vorerst abgeschlossen:

Auch bei Fandom

Zufälliges Wiki