Skip to main content
Academia

Return to Question

Post Closed as "Duplicate" by Bryan Krause♦, Nobody, Poidah, Azor Ahai -him-, gman
added 15 characters in body
Source Link
mavavilj
mavavilj
  • 751
  • 5
  • 12

This is a problem that I figured lately. Say that you reference a text that references other texts.

How far must a new reference check that the earlier references are "accurate""accurate in information"? Is it possible that "lousy referencing" leads to "webs" of referencing that "blurs" some of the more original results there due to ambiguous referencing?

When does one know that one can rely on a reference?

This is a problem that I figured lately. Say that you reference a text that references other texts.

How far must a new reference check that the earlier references are "accurate"? Is it possible that "lousy referencing" leads to "webs" of referencing that "blurs" some of the more original results there due to ambiguous referencing?

When does one know that one can rely on a reference?

This is a problem that I figured lately. Say that you reference a text that references other texts.

How far must a new reference check that the earlier references are "accurate in information"? Is it possible that "lousy referencing" leads to "webs" of referencing that "blurs" some of the more original results there due to ambiguous referencing?

When does one know that one can rely on a reference?

Source Link
mavavilj
mavavilj
  • 751
  • 5
  • 12

Referencing references that reference references? How deep do you need to check for "accuracy"?

This is a problem that I figured lately. Say that you reference a text that references other texts.

How far must a new reference check that the earlier references are "accurate"? Is it possible that "lousy referencing" leads to "webs" of referencing that "blurs" some of the more original results there due to ambiguous referencing?

When does one know that one can rely on a reference?