A plagiarism check is not a percentage. It is a report several pages long — a ranked list of what your document matched, your text marked up passage by passage, and a settings block saying what was excluded from the count. Nepali students are almost always handed the number and never the pages, which is why so many end up rewriting text that was never a problem.
We run the check, send you the report itself, and go through the flagged passages with you: which are correctly quoted, which are bibliographic matches doing exactly what a reference list should do, which are standard definitions your discipline cannot avoid, and which genuinely need rewriting before you submit. On a well-referenced draft the honest answer is frequently that nothing needs doing.
We are an independent academic support service. We are not a university, not affiliated with one, and not a reseller of any detection platform — we run checks and issue the resulting reports. We do not sell a way around a detector, we do not promise a similarity figure, and any service quoting you a guaranteed percentage is describing an output it does not control.
Similarity and AI writing indicator reports come with every delivery, and we run them on work you wrote yourself too. You get the reports and the explanation, never a bare figure.
We are an independent academic support service, not a university and not a reseller of any detection platform. We run checks and issue the resulting reports; we do not sell access to a detection tool, and we do not sell a way around one.
Two documents can report the same similarity index and be in completely different positions. A 24% spread across forty correctly cited sources, none contributing more than a percent, is what a properly referenced literature review looks like. A 12% where a single source contributes 11% is one paragraph lifted from one paper, and it is the second document that gets referred to a conduct panel.
The figure also depends heavily on settings that were chosen by whoever ran the check. A report configured to count quotations and the reference list reads far higher than the same submission with both excluded, and neither number is more correct than the other — they are answers to different questions. When a supervisor says your similarity is too high, the first thing worth establishing is what the report was set to exclude.
This is why we send the report rather than the score, and why we will not quote you a target percentage. The useful output of a check is a list of passages sorted into what is fine and what is not, and that list is often much shorter than the headline figure suggests.
A similarity check finds text matching its database. It cannot tell whether an idea was taken without credit, whether a passage was translated from Nepali or another language before being written up, or whether a citation actually supports the claim attached to it. A clean report is not a clearance, and students who treat it as one are relying on a tool to answer a question it was never asked.
It also cannot tell you anything about AI-generated text. The AI writing indicator, where an institution produces one, is a separate score with separate behaviour — a document can show 4% similarity and still be referred on it. Watching only the similarity number stopped being sufficient some time ago.
And the report is evidence, not a judgement. A human being interprets it, and that human being is your supervisor or your department's committee. What puts you in a strong position is being able to explain your own report before anyone asks you to.
Send the document, and the report you were given if you already have one, with your deadline and your department's threshold if it has published one. We run the check, then read the marked-up document rather than the summary, and return a passage-by-passage classification against your own text.
For anything in the group that genuinely needs work, rewriting means rebuilding the sentence from the idea with the source closed, then citing it — paraphrased material still needs a citation, which is the misunderstanding behind a surprising share of conduct queries. We do not run text through paraphrasing tools; their output is generative, carries its own signature on the AI indicator, and frequently no longer says what you meant.
Then we re-check after the rewriting, because the only way to know a fix worked is to see the second report. That second run is included rather than billed as a new job.
There is no national threshold. Departments set their own and they differ widely — some TU-affiliated campuses work to around 20%, some KU programmes are stricter, and some supervisors judge the report rather than the number. Ask your department for its written limit, because a figure a senior passed down two batches ago is not a policy.
No, and treat anyone who promises it with suspicion. A properly referenced academic document always matches something — your reference list, standard definitions, the names of instruments and Acts, and anything you have correctly quoted. The goal is a report that explains itself, not a zero.
Our checks do not add your document to the repository your university submits against, so your own final submission will not match against the draft you sent us. Your work stays confidential and is never shared with your college.
Yes, and a large share of what we check is work we had no part in writing. You get the report, the classification of every flagged passage, and an honest answer on whether anything needs doing — which is often nothing.
Usually not. A bibliography matches every other document citing the same sources, which is exactly what it should do. Many departments exclude the reference list from the score, and where yours does not, the report shows plainly that the match is bibliographic.
No — that is a separate score with separate behaviour. Where your institution's configuration produces an AI writing indicator we report it alongside similarity, but the two are measured differently and a low figure on one says nothing about the other.
Usually the same day for an assignment-length document. Send the file and your deadline on WhatsApp and we will tell you honestly whether the timeline works before you commit to anything.
100%. Your identity and academic work stay completely private and are never shared with your college or anyone else. We use secure, encrypted communication.
Message us on WhatsApp at +977 9768768340 with your assignment brief and deadline, and we'll reply with a transparent quote — usually within a couple of hours.